Debate

[Gemfire]

Where in this thread has anyone said anything about Americans being stupid or that America sucks?

No, No, No, I worded that wrong. I'm talking about people you may see in pubs bashing the U.S. and people like that in general, I did not mean to make it sound as if there was some in this thread, i havent seen any of that so far. Sorry for the mistake.

edit: Does that clear it up any, tk?

edit2: I have no qualms with people bashing Bush, as I think the man is a TERRIBLE president.

[bloodzombie]

Anyone gonna see the Vice Presidents duel it out? Or will nobody care?

I can't wait.


gemfire, most of those people just do that shit to get people pissed off. if you give them any attention, they already won.

[Troll King]

No, No, No, I worded that wrong. I'm talking about people you may see in pubs bashing the U.S. and people like that in general, I did not mean to make it sound as if there was some in this thread, i havent seen any of that so far. Sorry for the mistake.

edit: Does that clear it up any, tk?

edit2: I have no qualms with people bashing Bush, as I think the man is a TERRIBLE president.

But that's my point. It's in this thread that people are saying non-Americans shouldn't speak. They say that they don't bring any points but any points they do make are dismissed because of an alleged anti-American bias, which I find to be an all too encompassing, not to mention, convenient, excuse.

[Gemfire]

But that's my point. It's in this thread that people are saying non-Americans shouldn't speak. They say that they don't bring any points but any points they do make are dismissed because of an alleged anti-American bias, which I find to be an all too encompassing, not to mention, convenient, excuse.

I stated earlier that I dont midn listening to another perspective of a story or issue. How else does one learn? All I stated is the only ones I DONT listen to and think should stuff it are the ones doing what I posted earlier. Thanks be to god that noone on these forums is doing that as of now.

[froedrick]

If the ESEA can stop all you bastards from using "teh" and horribly misusing there, their, and they're, I'm all for it.

I agree, the "No Child Left Behind" Act (as it's come to be known) sounds fantastic on the surface. But the fact of the matter is that it's a flashy nickname thrown on a bill that doesn't quite cut it. As "bleeding heart liberal" as it sounds, it's just simply asking too much of an already overburdened education system, with the payout being far too little. The law was passed in January 2002, and by February, 20 states out of 50 were asking the federal government for changes in the law or more money, and an additional six states were studying the costs. That's half the states in the union, folks. Not a good statistic.

A good idea, yes, and the payoff is great in the long run. Like a lot of things enacted by this administration, though, the implementation leaves a lot to be desired.

Thanks for clearing that up for me conc. I got that information on it from www.whitehouse.gov and I wasn't entirely sure if it was an actual good program or not (the idea behind it seemed good) so that's why I said 'Don't quote me on this'. It's nice to see that you and Beez actually know stuff about this kind of stuff. Where are you guys putting your votes (curious)?

Tk, I think pj misunderstood what I was trying to say. "

don't want such an awesome place to become shit.

If everything around here is going to shit, I have yet to notice it

What I am saying is that at this rate if Bush stays in office the economy will be so bad in ten years, that yes some things are most certainly going to be shit in the country. I mean where's the logic behind, "The economy is struggling...I KNOW! More tax breaks so that people are too busy thinking they're getting money to pay attention to the real problem."

Conc, I'm gonna look for other things that might have been good (but I'm in the school library, so it might not come until tomorrow).

[bloodzombie]

Bush's absolute rape of the environment alone is enough to make me vote against him. I can't see how anyone with a conscience can look at what he's done and think he's the right man to create a future for the generations to come.

I would consider voting to support a third party, but Nader's a jackass and it's just too important to remove Bush.

Overall, I like Kerry, and I'd feel much better with him as a president than I would Bush

[Gemfire]

What is it, 15 years of environmental laws?

Anyone else besides me watch the VP debate?

[Squeezer]

Enviornment Schminviornment, it's not like we need trees neways
Like I said, Bush hasn't done all good, but he has done some.

[Liquid Blue]

Enviornment Schminviornment, it's not like we need trees neways
Like I said, Bush hasn't done all good, but he has done some.

Until you actually back up your posts and tell us in detail what " good he has done", then please stop saying that.

[Bioture]

just saw the VP debate. it was far less amusing as cheney was smarter than edwards and had more experience. He had less convincing facts, which isn't really his fault.

[za gophar]

i was under the impression that edwards won

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

I don't think that Edwards won--a stalemate if not a win for Cheney.

But let's not forget that Cheney is a man who came into power basically by word of mouth--he's not exactly a politically savvy guy. And as afraid of Bush running the country as I am, I'm even more afraid of Cheney running it.

If you want a decent read about Cheney's rise to power, Rolling Stone had a decent historical article about him a couple months ago. It'll definitely make you think about where he's from and who he's looking out for. Not that I take Rolling Stone to be the be-all, end-all of journalistic reporting, but it's interesting.

PS - Anyone note how bad Cheney is about speaking on TV? He was covering his lapel mic with his hands quite a few times.

[bloodzombie]

I was kinda curious how other people saw it. I think cheney had the edge in the first half and edwards picked up pretty good in the second half. Cheney did a good job of being the calm older wise man which, by contrast, made edwards look like a young exciteable kid.

I'm with conc.. no clear winner, or a possible edge in Cheney's favor.

[froedrick]

I don't think that Edwards won--a stalemate if not a win for Cheney.

PS - Anyone note how bad Cheney is about speaking on TV? He was covering his lapel mic with his hands quite a few times.

I thought It was more of a draw, as they were both spewing more bullshit then I ever thought I would have flying at me from a tv. Cheney sat there and in his first answer to a qeustion said (not in selective wording either) Iraq had dealings with osama. But Edwards kind of backed down on it. I was like wtf you idiot. But When cheney brought up Edwards and kerrys record, it was pretty good he threw cheneys right back in his face. And he certainly handled the flip flop issue better then cheney did. But honestly, I thought that Kerry voted to give Bush the power to go to war, and Bush said he'd only use it as a last resort. So really he was doing exactly what he's saying now. Unless that's just more bullshit from him (I'm not sure). They mentioned the no child left behind thing too conc, and I was happy to see they fell 26 billion short the amount of money they were supposed to be giving out, because it shows you know a lot about this stuff. I also liked how Edwards started off about the 3 trillion dollar surplus (projected) and how it was changed to a 3 trillion dollar defecit. I think the reason it was a tie was because, Cheney continued to attack their records and stuck to one point But I think edwards held his own and got some key issues in the mix too.


Conc who you voting for!

[bloodzombie]

And he certainly handled the flip flop issue better then cheney did. But honestly, I thought that Kerry voted to give Bush the power to go to war, and Bush said he'd only use it as a last resort. So really he was doing exactly what he's saying now. Unless that's just more bullshit from him (I'm not sure).

That's pretty much the way I see it, but it's a hard position to defend politically because simple is better. When you see the Bush commercial where kerry says "I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it", it just looks bad and it took kerry way too long to voice what he meant by that. Bother Kerry and Edwards did a pretty good job of facing that down in the debates, but they probably should've addressed that sooner and made more clear their reasons for voting the way they did.

At least that's how I feel, I'm sure they have people much smarter than me working on this stuff, but seriously a lot of voters don't do a lot of reading and stuff, they just see the commercials and bush definitely won the soundbite battle.