Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > At what point do we fight. All out.

At what point do we fight. All out. (Page 2)
Thread Tools
MinM
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2006, 11:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by goMac
So what makes an election and a revolution different?
Logic?

revolution |ˌrevəˈloō sh ən|
noun
1 a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system.


Elections bring about change by vote, not by force.
     
goMac
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2006, 11:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin
AGAIN we aren't OVERTHROWING anyone

"To bring about the downfall or destruction of, especially by force or concerted action: a plot to overthrow the government."
But you ARE. An election either keeps the current government in power or overthrows it forcefully.
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
goMac
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2006, 11:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by MinM
Logic?

revolution |ˌrevəˈloō sh ən|
noun
1 a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system.


Elections bring about change by vote, not by force.
An election is a force.
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2006, 11:38 PM
 
goMac give it up. You aren't making a point.

No one is using FORCE to do it. It is done willingly.

You are getting rather obnoxious now. AKA it's no longer "cute"
     
MinM
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 25, 2006, 11:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by goMac
An election is a force.
Ehhhhhhhh...no.
     
goMac
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 12:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
The Palestinian Authority (There is no Palestine, unless you consider it to be Gaza) is not democracy in action: it's tyranny with an affinity for elections.

Elections in the USA do not bring in a new government per se: the government remains that of a constitutional republic, governed by the Constitution of the United States of America. All your vote does is change your representatives in their various offices.
Not usually in the US. The US is pretty steady in our democracy. Places like Spain, Russia, and Palestine are not. An election COULD change the government from a constitutional republic. That said, in the US that's never happened. It has in other democratic countries.
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
goMac
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 12:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin
No one is using FORCE to do it. It is done willingly.

You are getting rather obnoxious now. AKA it's no longer "cute"
Huh? It doesn't matter whether the outgoing President wants to go or not. It is forced on him. (Forced? Gee... there is that word again...)
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 12:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by MinM
Ehhhhhhhh...no.
It's obvious he isn't going to give up. He understands full well what is going on. But is just arguing to be doing so.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 12:16 AM
 
The 2000 election will forever regarded as "stolen" by Democrats and "rightfully won" by Republicans. Even independently-run recounts by left-leaning newspapers (after the fact, of course) concluded that Bush did indeed win Florida. Blah blah blah...

I would vote for Joe Lieberman over John McCain
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 12:20 AM
 
Double Post
     
cpt kangarooski
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 01:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54
The 2000 election will forever regarded as "stolen" by Democrats and "rightfully won" by Republicans. Even independently-run recounts by left-leaning newspapers (after the fact, of course) concluded that Bush did indeed win Florida. Blah blah blah...
Actually, they tend to split, depending on the standards used in the count. However, other irregularities, e.g. butterfly ballots, which might be incorrect as to what the voter meant regardless of counting method, the nonvoting felon list errors, etc. indisputably played a role. It's impossible to say which candidate would have won, if the election had taken place in an entirely fair and proper way, with accurate counting. Thus, Democrats can justifiably feel that Gore ought to have won, and Republicans can justifiably feel that Bush won legitimately.

It's not all that relevant now, of course, except that elections in the US still suffer from significant flaws in their implementation. The 2000 debacle made that clear and the problems still haven't been properly taken care of.
--
This and all my other posts are hereby in the public domain. I am a lawyer. But I'm not your lawyer, and this isn't legal advice.
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 01:51 AM
 
Sorry cpt, there was no justifiable reason to act the way they did. None.

It was embarrassing to our country.

The same crap started during the second election too.


Some people are just sore losers.

And the fact is, Bush won by more of a margin the second time around, than Clinton did EITHER times should tell you it was of no mistake.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 02:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin
And the fact is, Bush won by more of a margin the second time around, than Clinton did EITHER times should tell you it was of no mistake.
Or it could tell you that Bush did a good job of scaring people while he was in office and John Kerry helped greatly by being John Kerry.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 02:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
Or it could tell you that Bush did a good job of scaring people while he was in office and John Kerry helped greatly by being John Kerry.
You COULD say that. But it wouldn't be very accurate.

I don't think Bush is the one that scared people.

I also don't think it was Bush that was screaming "DRAFT!!!" either.

But I do agree with the Dems thinking Kerry had a chance is laughable.

Had it been Edwards/Kerry instead of Kerry/Edwards Bush may have not been in office right now.
     
cpt kangarooski
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 02:18 AM
 
Kevin--
Well, like I said, no one can argue that there were irregularities in the 2000 election. Maybe they affected the ultimate outcome, maybe they didn't. But it does make the outcome questionable, whichever side you're on. Democrats who think that Bush would not have won if the election had been above board are as justified in their opinion as Republicans who think that he would have under those circumstances. I don't think anyone supports having such a poorly-run election, however, regardless of who might win, unless they're not fans of democracy.

As for embarrassment, two things. First, that's very much not relevant. If Democrats are right, then there's been a serious problem. If they're wrong, it doesn't really matter much. I think that the US has no reason to be embarrassed about proper elections, and every reason to be embarrassed about flawed ones. It's not really a partisan issue. Second, even if he was elected legitimately -- and that's something we'll really never know, because it goes beyond counting procedures -- Bush has been a far greater embarrassment to the US than the election fiasco ever was. He has been really bad for our reputation abroad, and it's that reputation that you're invoking.

The 2004 election, btw, is irrelevant when discussing matters relating to the 2000 election. The future doesn't influence the past, and we can't know whether people would have voted the same in 2000 as they did in 2004.
--
This and all my other posts are hereby in the public domain. I am a lawyer. But I'm not your lawyer, and this isn't legal advice.
     
aberdeenwriter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 02:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin
You COULD say that. But it wouldn't be very accurate.

I don't think Bush is the one that scared people.

I also don't think it was Bush that was screaming "DRAFT!!!" either.

But I do agree with the Dems thinking Kerry had a chance is laughable.

Had it been Edwards/Kerry instead of Kerry/Edwards Bush may have not been in office right now.
Just think. If you hadn't educated me I might be over there on THAT side being bitter...STILL!

I offer thanks to you and Spliffdaddy and ebuddy and Simey and vmarks and MacNStein and others for helping me see the light!
Consider these posts as my way of introducing you to yourself.

Proud "SMACKDOWN!!" and "Golden Troll" Award Winner.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 02:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by aberdeenwriter
Just think. If you hadn't educated me I might be over there on THAT side being bitter...STILL!

I offer thanks to you and Spliffdaddy and ebuddy and Simey and vmarks and MacNStein and others for helping me see the light!
Guess this kind of debunks my former "these arguments don't make a difference" perspective.
     
Y3a
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA - Just outside DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 09:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Moderator
1. Fact: It was stolen. ('00)
So why did all those accountantsand reporters- newspaper funded BTW, go to FLA, examine the ballots and state otherwise? Bush WON by all uniformed sets of standards used.


Originally Posted by Moderator
2. Fear of "Mushroom Clouds" and "Homos" can do a lot for a party's turnout.
So can a BJ in the Oval Office, or AlGores Dynamic and trustworthy blatherings.


Originally Posted by Moderator
3. If the pendulum swings right and gets lodged there due to the force of a secretive, authoritative contolling government, does that mean that's what the American people want?
how many layers of tinfoil you got on yer head?


Put a period and move on. your side lost, because you have a minority political viewpoint.
Cindy Sheehan will help you guys this time! LOL
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 09:42 AM
 
The timing of this thread makes me suspect that Moderator must've been marinating in Louis Farrakhan's rant yesterday on C-SPAN.
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 09:46 AM
 
Marinated by a racist.
Rich indeed.
     
Moderator  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NYNY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 10:32 AM
 
No never saw any rant. I'm just shocked that there isn't more outrage. I do view view people Splif as the enemy..Kevin appears to be a bit more thoughtful...though I still shortcurcuit when I try to rationalize why one would pump one's fist in celebration when that person's civil right has just been erased. I'm confused by the state of the current GOP in that I don't understand where all of the traditional republicans have gone. The guys who used to be weary of big government. The guys who would have flipped the fcuk out when they discovered that there is a massive data mining operation underway in the country, operated by its most secretive agency, that is targetting us!

There was a time not very long ago when this would have appauled people. But people have somehow been conditioned to it. All of the sudden it doesn't seem like a big deal. But it is a big deal....this is America! Having your corrospondence secretly recorded and stored with no oversight is a big deal! Embarking on the most disastrous foreign adventure since Vietnam is a big deal!

There are so many more...but we're used to it..or otherwise distracted. We are compromising our personal values to accomodate this administration if we allow them to spy on us without so much as a wimper. Its pathetic and it shocks me.

Couple years ago. Outrage at Total Information Awareness. Now..eh...ot so bad? This is the pattern. Where does it end? Do you think Cheney has the sense to know?
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 10:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Moderator
I'm serious. The ultra conservative wing of this part has taken over the United States government.
How so?

Religious fundamentalism is seeping into the governement,
in what manner?

the country is despised by the world (secular and fundamental),
But everyone despises everyone right? The arrangements we make with others or the arrangements they make with us are generally strictly capitalist ventures. The painful fact of the matter is that there are no true "friends" anymore. This is not exclusively the US' fault. We've put our necks on the line and any time you do this, you lay yourself out there for scrutiny. It's a heavy crown if you will.

our government is invading countries,
...to change the face of the Middle East. We also have been invaded remember?

torturing POWs,
While indefensible an action, name for me a country who hasn't? This is human nature, not US nature and certainly not because of an "evil right-wing Administration".

lying to us all,
Not the WMD bit again. They had WMD. We know they had them. Saddam threatened to use them. Saddam thumbed his nose at 14 UN resolutions, with final warning of "severe consequences" after 12 years. He was actively pursuing an arms race with Iran. Something had to be done and the UN ideal of more economic sanctions was only serving to starve the Iraqi poor to death.

spying on us all.
No one cares what you do Moderator. If you're making international phone calls to known terrorist individual and groups, as an American I'm asking you to kindly knock it off or my government will spy on you and take you away. They would do this with my full support.

Anyone of us could be swept up off the street and hauled away secretly and without due process.
Now this is a little dramatic don't you think?

Mega corporations are paying for and controlling US policy.
Maybe so, but I fail to see where this was any different historically, under other administrations, during more "free times".

Dissenters are publicly destroyed.
...and yet you continue typing. They've not gotten to your computer yet.

War profiteering used to be shameful, now its patriotic.
Explain war profiteering. Is this when you make an arrangement with a known dictator to exchange Oil for Food?

Anyone halfway moderate is a commie liberal.
I"m halfway moderate, openly critical of this Administration and yet I've not been spied on, removed, destroyed, nor have I ever been called a commie lib.

Socially we are moving backward.
What does this even mean???

Abortion is dead..
Here we mourn the regulation of an archaic practice.

even if its a 13 year old girl who's been raped.
Thankfully, 13 year old rape victims seeking abortions constitutes .000001% of abortions performed.

Gay adoption will be outlawed.
Why do you say this?

Science is being undermined by the government.
Calling for critical analysis of over-hyped, disingenuous, outright fallacious, and dogmatic suppositions sold as "science" for nothing more than to proselytize naturalism is not undermining science.

Fear is abound..Hatred is everywhere...
I'll say! To the point where some should be wearing a straight jacket.

And half the country is cheering this on.
I'm not sure where you're getting the "cheering on" bit. The polls I see on this Administration aren't really indicating cheering of any sort.

What is the left dies. What if this is a revolution that may not be undone for 100 years. Look at Iran. Iran was a modern, well educated, liberal society before the revolution. They moved backward and have continued to move backward for 30 years. What if that is what is happening here.
Iran is on the precipice of greatness, but they are hamstrung by fascism. They will realize it soon enough. They will do so with our reluctant help. Now, if you render the US in Iran's likeness, it is possible you are not to be reasoned with. I'm hoping for a sign that you are. In realizing that the US gives a voice to all who reside here including you feverishly typing in NYNY. I notice we don't have too many Chinese posters, not many Iranian posters, etc...

People saw that revolution coming. The same arguments were used. They blamed the secularists for destroying a culture of values. Its what we hear all the time. I'd always thought the good guys would win but...what happens if we don't?
I'm not sure I know what "good guys" you're referring to. Give me your list of 5 good guys and lets really take a look at them. Are they really progressive? Are they really peaceful? Are they really productive?

I am ashamed of this country's direction. I am fearful. I am sorry that the United States I thought I lived in is dead. If we love this country shouldn't we do something about it?
I'm not sure your theory of black helicopters with Jesus painted on the side makes for a marketable ideal to start this revolution.

At what point do we stand up and fight. I'm not talking about bickering on forums.
Yes, but this bickering is what solidifies ideals. If you show a severe ineptitude in here, then your cause will likely fail out there. You're going to need something more substantive than "I hate my country" and "I hate Bush" to make your point. You can blame Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan for making sure no one will listen to this dribble anymore.

I'm talking about getting involved. Resisting. Volunteering for a moderate candidate in your area.
Something tells me you're anything, but moderate my friend. What type of candidate would you support?

Actively fighting, whatever it takes.
I'm in!!!

The balance has swung and if the right keeps its majority in '06, it may be over.
it's over either way brother. This is human nature on the decline my man, not the US exclusively. Some call it Globalism, I call it... well I call it when I see it.

What happens if this is a revolution and the fundamentalists do win?
Fundamentalist? Fight? March? Quit your job to save the country?

Do you fight back? Do you march? Do you quit your job and dedicate yourself to saving the country? Do you just move away, give up on what America once was, and try to enjoy your life where you can?
I say move away if you're truly this disenfranchised. Seriously. Where would you go?

Where exactly is the Event Horizon here. At what point is this right wing domination no longer a temporary cyclical thing. What if its permanent, how would we know? Has it happened already?
I'd say it's probably cyclical though I'm not sure it's possible to find a candidate who meets your criteria here in the US. They don't get voted in. I don't see many people overall who agree with what you're saying above either so as far as assembling en masse to riot and fight the establishment, you may want to start packing.

The right has looked at everything as a "war" war on terrorism, war in iraq, culture war, war on christmas. Everything is a war because wars stir passion.
Okay, as long as we're throwing out blankets of sweeping generalization here showing anything, but logic, reason, and substantive data to back partisan paranoia; The left has looked at everything as I hate Bush, Bush must go, and anything but Bush.

But for many of us logic and reason rule..at the expense of passion.
Yet ironically the only thing I see in this very post is passion. I see no logic and reason. You're callng for a fight against religious fundamentalism because you can't make an international phone call to a known terrorist.

As a result, the values of reason, equality, fairness, freedom (in the real sense) are being wiped out by passionate extremistis.
How so? There's nothing extremist about regulating abortion. The fact that you can return to the clinic for multiple abortions propogating a lifestyle of unfettered sexual intercourse with nameless, faceless many is destructive to the very culture you're giving a ulogy for. STDs, AIDS, depression, unwed single mothers, and families at poverty level are all the result of irresponsible sex. Period. I'm not sure a good guy is one who turns the other cheek on this madness. You may say it's ridiculous to declare war on this aspect of our society, I think it's madness not to. Who gets trampled in this policy? Children. Families. Culture.

The ultra right has declared war on us, and they've waged it with a passion. We've laughed at them, not believing that such extremism could take hold in a free society. Well its happening. This isn't funny anymore. This is a civil war. We need to protect this country.
Take up arms then brother. All I can say is that if you are able to make your way out of NYNY and into the Midwest, it'd behoove you to make absolutely sure you're a flawless marksman by then.

So at what point to we recognize that this is our purpose? Anyone out there who is appauled and afraid at the direction this country has gonbe in in the last 6 years needs to do his or her part to push back now. The media's not doing it. The Denmocrats aren't doing it. Who the fcuk's going to do it? We have to, and it has to be now.
This is a paid statement sponsored by Denmocrats for a free, err fcuked up society.

'06 and '08 are our final chances. or its over.
Ghandi for PRESIDENT!!!
ebuddy
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 11:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by Moderator
I do view view people Splif as the enemy.... though I still shortcurcuit when I try to rationalize why one would pump one's fist in celebration when that person's civil right has just been erased.
As far as I'm concerned, Spliff's not anyone's enemy. He's just a Team Player, that's all. He's rooting for the his team, and against the other team. Issues like civil liberties don't really matter -- it's the game that does.
     
Spliffdaddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon line
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 11:31 AM
 
If it makes anyone feel better, you can pretend I'm your enemy.

That way, you don't have to worry about getting hurt - like you would with a real enemy.

The hillbilly threat is still real, tho.
     
Nicko
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cairo
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 01:00 PM
 
I'd say apart from material wealth, there isn't much difference between Iran and the US right now....
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 01:14 PM
 
I'd like to take a moment to congratulate ebuddy on two things
1. Excellent post
2. Unbelievable amount of quotes
     
aberdeenwriter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 01:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Jawbone54
Guess this kind of debunks my former "these arguments don't make a difference" perspective.
Yes. After this horse got to the P/L water trough it chose to take a drink.

Whinny!
Consider these posts as my way of introducing you to yourself.

Proud "SMACKDOWN!!" and "Golden Troll" Award Winner.
     
aberdeenwriter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 01:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by f1000
The timing of this thread makes me suspect that Moderator must've been marinating in Louis Farrakhan's rant yesterday on C-SPAN.
Damn! Missed that.
Consider these posts as my way of introducing you to yourself.

Proud "SMACKDOWN!!" and "Golden Troll" Award Winner.
     
Moderator  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NYNY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 05:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dork.
Issues like civil liberties don't really matter -- it's the game that does.
Not for me. I don't have a team. I'd support a GOP candidate just as soon as I'd support a Dem...probably sooner if it weren't for the fact that I feel a moral and patriotic duty to do what I can to:

A) restore balance to congress...I never imagined that a GOP congress would be so neglectful in their responsibility to keep the Executive in proper check.

B) demand that the administration take some responsibility for their failed policies, excessive secrecy, irresponsible use of executive power, and general incompetence.
     
Sky Captain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 26, 2006, 06:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Nicko
I'd say apart from material wealth, there isn't much difference between Iran and the US right now....

You mean like the U.S. FORCING women to cover up.
And women NOT having the right to vote?


I've been to Africa twice. I'll take living here anyday.
Africa is one big stinking cesspool.
I've met quite a few Kenyans who feel the same.
     
smacintush
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 06:52 AM
 
Moderator, your post is what I would consider paranoid, fatalist and immature. You don't seem to have much of a grasp of history or how our form of republic actually works.

The right and left in this country are not opposites that need to do battle. They are not even two sides of the same coin. They are on the same side of the coin pretending to be in opposition to each other. We all want the same things we just differ on how to get there. The left has oppressed Americans too just in ways that they feel are important.

Our society will shift when it's time. Nothing is over, nothing is lost forever. It'll be OK. The world works in cycles, we have been to the "left" for so long that it is natural that those who value certain views be scared. Many feel that their whole world is threatened just as the far right did during the 60's. America didn't end at the hands of the "dirty hippies" and "commies" and it won't
end with the "neo-con fascists" either.

Take a breath. Relax. Have a beer. Have two. Vote for who you like. Be as politically active as you feel you need to be but worrying yourself in the way you seem to be is completely unnecessary and unhealthy.

But to answer your OP question directly. Deciding when to fight this fight is the same as any other fight. When it comes to you and forces you to fight, then you fight. Initiating a war over a perceived threat is one if the things you are angry about is it not?
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 09:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin
Sorry cpt, there was no justifiable reason to act the way they did. None.

It was embarrassing to our country.
The fact we don't have consistent, fail-proof election procedures across the whole country is "embarrassing to our country" as well. If we in the US are supposed to be the paragon of Democracy we claim to be for the rest of the world why is it we have so many problems with questionable election results? Why can't we run an almost flawless election where every person's vote is counted and all the votes are counted accurately.

I know this goes against the states rights agenda but I would like to see a nation-wide standard for voter registration and voting procedures. Whether you are in Kalamazoo or Kennebunkport the voter registration/ID card and voting machine technology should be the same. And the technology should be something robust like a touch-screen interface that provides a paper receipt to the voter.

Anyone here object to having national standards implemented for national elections? (The states could use differing voting practices for local or state elections but would be forced to use the national standard for national elections.)
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 09:49 AM
 
Hey if you want to say the voting system needs to be better I agree!
But to say the President cheated, or this elections were any different is being dishonest
     
dcmacdaddy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 09:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin
Hey if you want to say the voting system needs to be better I agree!
But to say the President cheated, or this elections were any different is being dishonest
Put the projector away, Zimphy. I did not say, or imply, or mean to imply "the President cheated, or this elections were any different is being dishonest".

You know me. I have no problem being direct. If I wanted to say any of those things I would have come out and said so in a nice, clear declarative sentence. So, please stop trying to put words in my mouth. My post was about embarrassing election practices in this country and nothing else.

But, you didn't answer my question. Would you "object to having national standards implemented for national elections?"
One should never stop striving for clarity of thought and precision of expression.
I would prefer my humanity sullied with the tarnish of science rather than the gloss of religion.
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 09:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy
Put the projector away, Zimphy. I did not say, or imply, or mean to imply "the President cheated, or this elections were any different is being dishonest".
I didn't say you did! I was speaking IN CONTEXT of this thread. (AKA others in here did)
But, you didn't answer my question. Would you "object to having national standards implemented for national elections?"
Nope not at all.

As long as we stick with it And not poo poo it when "Their guy" doesn't win. Like they did in Florida. (The Dems were the ones that approved said voting procedures)
     
aberdeenwriter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 10:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy
If it makes anyone feel better, you can pretend I'm your enemy.

That way, you don't have to worry about getting hurt - like you would with a real enemy.

The hillbilly threat is still real, tho.
Somehow I missed this gem til now!
Consider these posts as my way of introducing you to yourself.

Proud "SMACKDOWN!!" and "Golden Troll" Award Winner.
     
Kr0nos
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the dancefloor, doing the boogaloo…
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 10:43 AM
 
It's funny how many people speak of revolution, but are even too scared to ignore property rights.

Like yeah, I'm not afraid to take a bullet, but I'm too scared to occupy residences and wind up in prison.

Face it, – politics are dead. And so are revolutions. The right has been successful in catering to the lowest common denominators (selfishness, apathy) and has/is shaping the world according to its ideals.

Moderator, you seem like a great guy. If you are worried about civil liberties, just do as you please, and make sure to back up people wherever they might be wrongfully persecuted for exercising their liberties, and if in peril yourself, – kill indiscriminately.
( Last edited by Kr0nos; Feb 27, 2006 at 02:11 PM. )

If I change my way of living, and if I pave my streets with good times, will the mountain keep on giving…
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 10:43 AM
 
Considering that it's a national election affecting the federal government, I wouldn't oppose a standard for national elections. I'd probably have some questions as to the manner in which it's established, but it seems like a good idea.
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 02:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin
goMac give it up. You aren't making a point.

No one is using FORCE to do it. It is done willingly.

You are getting rather obnoxious now. AKA it's no longer "cute"
goMac has actually made an extraordinarily good point, and I'm astonished that noone else is commending him for it. Instead I see you trying to drown his point with your rather childish one-liners. A serious question: Have you got on your computer a file with generic oneliners stored, from which you copy-paste them?


The democratic system of having elections for parliament and government every four years makes violent revolutions unnecessary, because the societies have the possibility to organize, formulate and elect a completely new platform peacefully, ie. a sanctionied way of conducting a peaceful revolution.

That's why representative democracies are generally more stable, since they have embraced change, while dictatorships tend to oppress their societies if they want change until a violent revolution brings about the change, where a new dictatorship governs until the societies want change so that the government again oppresses their people until a violent revolution brings about the change...

Taliesin
     
aberdeenwriter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 02:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin
goMac has actually made an extraordinarily good point, and I'm astonished that noone else is commending him for it. Instead I see you trying to drown his point with your rather childish one-liners. A serious question: Have you got on your computer a file with generic oneliners stored, from which you copy-paste them?


The democratic system of having elections for parliament and government every four years makes violent revolutions unnecessary, because the societies have the possibility to organize, formulate and elect a completely new platform peacefully, ie. a sanctionied way of conducting a peaceful revolution.

That's why representative democracies are generally more stable, since they have embraced change, while dictatorships tend to oppress their societies if they want change until a violent revolution brings about the change, where a new dictatorship governs until the societies want change so that the government again oppresses their people until a violent revolution brings about the change...

Taliesin
Taliesin, it appears your knowledge of democratic governments could use some updating.

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/article...democracy.html

Or maybe you already knew this information?

As far as goMac, he didn't bother to consult the internet before clumsily trying to make what was a feeble point. However, your coming to his rescue was sweet.
Consider these posts as my way of introducing you to yourself.

Proud "SMACKDOWN!!" and "Golden Troll" Award Winner.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 02:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by aberdeenwriter
Taliesin, it appears your knowledge of democratic governments could use some updating.

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/article...democracy.html

Or maybe you already knew this information?
The point of that article is that democracy is not necessarily tied to any particular social policy — only the right to vote. What part of the article did Taliesin fail to consider?
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
aberdeenwriter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 02:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
The point of that article is that democracy is not necessarily tied to any particular social policy — only the right to vote. What part of the article did Taliesin fail to consider?
Strange world!
Consider these posts as my way of introducing you to yourself.

Proud "SMACKDOWN!!" and "Golden Troll" Award Winner.
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 04:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by aberdeenwriter
Taliesin, it appears your knowledge of democratic governments could use some updating.

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/article...democracy.html

Or maybe you already knew this information?
That article is a good one, and it makes a very good point. Democracy without a liberal constitutionalism is not a desirable goal.

Considering this, one can relook at history and the world and identify the ex-colonies of Britain, for example the US, Australia, most of the asian countries... as being in better political and economical shape than other ex-colonies.

The reason is that Britain's empire emphasised the rule of law and constitution and helped develop the necessary institutions and traditions, despite being undemocratic, while for example France's and Spain's empires didn't do such things.

The US-government would do good to reshape its foreign policy and instead of pushing for democracy, should promote liberal constitutionalism, the rule of law and good governance. The rest will, if God will, come naturally, namely economic success and eventually representative democracy.

Taliesin
     
iLikebeer
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: /OV DRK 142006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2006, 10:28 PM
 
Moderator, if what you say is as bad as you think it might be, you've just been tagged by the NSA as someone to watch and one of the 1st to be taken in the event of an uprising or if the leaders of the people behind the party deem people like you a threat. I'll just say that when they change the name of sex education to the Junior Anti-Sex League, I'm buying every hiking book I can find.

Heh, either the database shares my sentiments, or I just can't see the last 3 posts after mine.
( Last edited by iLikebeer; Feb 28, 2006 at 02:13 AM. )
     
aberdeenwriter
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 28, 2006, 12:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin
That article is a good one, and it makes a very good point. Democracy without a liberal constitutionalism is not a desirable goal.

Considering this, one can relook at history and the world and identify the ex-colonies of Britain, for example the US, Australia, most of the asian countries... as being in better political and economical shape than other ex-colonies.

The reason is that Britain's empire emphasised the rule of law and constitution and helped develop the necessary institutions and traditions, despite being undemocratic, while for example France's and Spain's empires didn't do such things.

The US-government would do good to reshape its foreign policy and instead of pushing for democracy, should promote liberal constitutionalism, the rule of law and good governance. The rest will, if God will, come naturally, namely economic success and eventually representative democracy.

Taliesin
I believe the US is busy behind the scenes in Iraq doing exactly what you suggest.
Consider these posts as my way of introducing you to yourself.

Proud "SMACKDOWN!!" and "Golden Troll" Award Winner.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 28, 2006, 01:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy
Since a lot of the lefties live in cities which have legislated away their right to bear arms - I'd say it would be quick and decisive war.

You seem to forget that the current government represents the will of the people.

I lived through 8 years of horror during the Clinton years, and I survived it quite well. So, suck it up, it all works in cycles.
The Clinton years were the worst in history. Carter was almost as bad. i can't believe I voted for Carter. My favorite president was Regan. I liked the first Bush some, this Bush is too moderate for my taste.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 28, 2006, 01:51 AM
 
Where is my post?
     
Moderator  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NYNY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 28, 2006, 01:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by iLikebeer
Moderator, if what you say is as bad as you think it might be, you've just been tagged by the NSA as someone to watch and one of the 1st to be taken in the event of an uprising or if the leaders of the people behind the party deem people like you a threat.

I'm sure I'm already on the list. I emailed a guy in Iran a few months back when I stumbled across his blog...unrelated to politics it was actually about music..but I figured that got me on the watch list. Hey fellas!

Pretty ridiculous. Why people accept this, especially those GOPers that used to be anti Big Brother, pro privacy..is beyond me. Now the Democrats are the small government pro privacy party, how the tables have turned.
     
Moderator  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: NYNY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 28, 2006, 01:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by iLikebeer
Moderator, if what you say is as bad as you think it might be, you've just been tagged by the NSA as someone to watch and one of the 1st to be taken in the event of an uprising or if the leaders of the people behind the party deem people like you a threat.

I'm sure I'm already on the list. I emailed a guy in Iran a few months back when I stumbled across his blog...unrelated to politics it was actually about music..but I figured that got me on the watch list. Hey fellas!

Pretty ridiculous. Why people accept this, especially those GOPers that used to be anti Big Brother, pro privacy..is beyond me. Now the Democrats are the small government pro privacy party, how the tables have turned.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 28, 2006, 05:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Buckaroo
The Clinton years were the worst in history. Carter was almost as bad. i can't believe I voted for Carter. My favorite president was Regan. I liked the first Bush some, this Bush is too moderate for my taste.

Moderate? How do you figure? Socially? Economically? Foreign policy?
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:06 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,