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 > Ashcroft Resigning?

Ashcroft Resigning?
Thread Tools
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 08:40 AM
 
It's only a tiny blurb on the Druge Report, but I'll tell you something; I haven't been this hopeful about politics in a long time. Can we get a chorus of "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead" going, folks?
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
moki
Ambrosia - el Presidente
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 09:21 AM
 
It'll be interesting to see -- I actually hope Bush makes a number of changes in his new administration, but given his record, I'm doubtful he will.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
     
Timo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 09:58 AM
 
Bush would be dumb like a fox if he swung, post-election, to the center, and tossed out the kooks. I'm sure he's thinking about his legacy at this point: in the short term, he'll get more done, and in the long term, he'll smell (somewhat) sweeter.
     
typoon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Tollbooth Capital of the US
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 09:58 AM
 
I heard that if Ashcroft does resign he is looking at possibly asking Rudy to be Attorney General. THAT would be AWESOME!!! I really Like Rudy. He was a Great DA in NY and a Great Mayor as well and would do a GREAT job if chosen as Attorney General of the US.
"Evil is Powerless If the Good are Unafraid." -Ronald Reagan

Apple and Intel, the dawning of a NEW era.
     
Millennium  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 10:44 AM
 
Originally posted by moki:
It'll be interesting to see -- I actually hope Bush makes a number of changes in his new administration, but given his record, I'm doubtful he will.
It doesn't look like he'll have much of a choice. Although it's quite possible to "recommend" that someone resign, it isn't really possible to do the opposite: "recommend" that a person not resign. If people go, then someone has to fill their positions. And at least in Ashcroft's case, it would be very difficult to do worse.

When people say "Anybody But Bush", my response is "Anyone? Even Perroutka?" I can't do that with Ashcroft, though, because he's already the Perroutka-analogue. It makes me wonder what he was doing identifying with Republicans anyway; he'd fit much better in the so-called Constitution Party.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
PBG4 User
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Deer Crossing, CT
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 10:47 AM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
It's only a tiny blurb on the Druge Report, but I'll tell you something; I haven't been this hopeful about politics in a long time. Can we get a chorus of "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead" going, folks?
All we can do is hope. Ashcroft is a loony!
20" iMac G5! :D AND MacBook 1.83GHz!
Canon Digital Rebel Kit + 75 - 300mm lens. Yum Yum! :D
Check out my OS X Musical Scales program
     
MilkmanDan
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: My Powerbook, in Japan!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 10:49 AM
 
As a dem, having him replaced would be nice. I mean, his singing alone is reason enough.
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 11:06 AM
 
It would be nice if Bush took steps towards unifying the country. Getting Ashcroft to resign would be a small step, but it would be in the right direction. Given that some 48% of the country is probably fairly unhappy with the Republican-controlled Senate, House, and Presidency, it would be in the Republicans' best interest to move more towards the center.

I'll never be a Republican in the forseeable future, but I'll have a lot more respect for them if they at least make an attempt at representing a larger portion of people in this country.

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
davesimondotcom
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Landlockinated
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 11:29 AM
 
I love how there is all this talk about how Bush needs to "unite the country" from folks who are not afraid to call him evil and compare him to an unnamed German from the early 20th Century with a funny mustache.

Unite the nation by coming back into the fold, folks. Instead of demonizing your political opponents, explain why you disagree.

Instead of dismissing the people who voted for Bush as "stupid, uneducated, Red State lunatic right-wing Jesus freaks," why not accept that thinking people can disagree. Someone voting for Bush isn't an idiot, they just have different opinions. As long as the left continues to think in terms of everyone disagreeing with them either being intellectually inferior or a religious zealot, they will continue to lose elections in America.

I understand why people would vote for John Kerry. I just disagree with them. That doesn't make them wrong or me right. It just means we have different ideas. And ideas is where things get done. Bickering and name-calling from either side leads to "two Americas" - but it doesn't lead to "uniting the country."

Now with that said, if Ashcroft is done, it wouldn't surprise me. He's been hated and derided ever since he was nominated. Simply because he has faith in his own religion. I am of the opinion that he wasn't a great AG, but he wasn't doing his job differently because of his faith. I am also of the opinion that he was a hell of a lot better than Janet Reno.

Prediction time: the next A.G. will be....former Montana AG and Governor Marc Racicot. A very sharp guy who was the most popular Governor Montana has ever had. And was more popular than the second most popular Governor during that time period - some guy from Texas who has since gotten a promotion.
[ sig removed - image host changed it to a big ad picture ]
     
Agasthya
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 11:34 AM
 
Originally posted by davesimondotcom:
Unite the nation by coming back into the fold, folks. Instead of demonizing your political opponents, explain why you disagree.
I think about 7 million people did when they protested the war the night before it started and it was dismissed by Bush as nothing more than a "focus group."
     
Timo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 11:35 AM
 
Originally posted by davesimondotcom:
I love how there is all this talk about how Bush needs to "unite the country" from folks who are not afraid to call him evil and compare him to an unnamed German from the early 20th Century with a funny mustache.
Um, who are you talking about?
     
Spliffdaddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon line
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 11:44 AM
 
Dubya just got re-elected. I don't see how a case could be made that he needs to change his staff. If anything, it's apparent that Americans are happy with the status quo. Four more for Ashcroft.
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:01 PM
 
I and a lot of people like me are jaded by Bush's actions in his first term. Now it's a trust issue - I feel like I can't trust Bush as far as I can throw him, while he probably doesn't trust the liberals in the country to cut him some slack if he goes more moderate.

Well, I'll just say right now that while I disagree with Bush on most of the issues, most importantly the war in Iraq, I am willing to give him my respect if he can at least make an honest effort at making this country more moderate and uniting people.

I do think that some of the polarization is an illusion, caused by too restrictive of a two-party system. I was just talking to a Bush supporter who turns out to have almost the same ideas on government as I do, but his priorities are just in a different order. We're almost the same yet to an outside observer we're opposites. Then, of course, this illusion of polarization leads to people actually becoming polarized.

As I said, Ashcroft gone would be a step in the right direction. Right now my main fear is that the US is turning into a theocracy.

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:07 PM
 
Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Dubya just got re-elected. I don't see how a case could be made that he needs to change his staff. If anything, it's apparent that Americans are happy with the status quo. Four more for Ashcroft.
Yeah keep Ashcroft. You deserve him.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
typoon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Tollbooth Capital of the US
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:14 PM
 
Originally posted by davesimondotcom:
I love how there is all this talk about how Bush needs to "unite the country" from folks who are not afraid to call him evil and compare him to an unnamed German from the early 20th Century with a funny mustache.

Unite the nation by coming back into the fold, folks. Instead of demonizing your political opponents, explain why you disagree.

Instead of dismissing the people who voted for Bush as "stupid, uneducated, Red State lunatic right-wing Jesus freaks," why not accept that thinking people can disagree. Someone voting for Bush isn't an idiot, they just have different opinions. As long as the left continues to think in terms of everyone disagreeing with them either being intellectually inferior or a religious zealot, they will continue to lose elections in America.

I understand why people would vote for John Kerry. I just disagree with them. That doesn't make them wrong or me right. It just means we have different ideas. And ideas is where things get done. Bickering and name-calling from either side leads to "two Americas" - but it doesn't lead to "uniting the country."

Now with that said, if Ashcroft is done, it wouldn't surprise me. He's been hated and derided ever since he was nominated. Simply because he has faith in his own religion. I am of the opinion that he wasn't a great AG, but he wasn't doing his job differently because of his faith. I am also of the opinion that he was a hell of a lot better than Janet Reno.

Prediction time: the next A.G. will be....former Montana AG and Governor Marc Racicot. A very sharp guy who was the most popular Governor Montana has ever had. And was more popular than the second most popular Governor during that time period - some guy from Texas who has since gotten a promotion.
Well put . The Dems talk about "needing unity" Would a Democrat President have been told to do the same? What's with all the people hating people who have faith who are in office?

Bush now has a "mandate." He should run the country as such. It's time for him to take the gloves off fighting these terrorists for one thing. The next thing he needs to do is to tighten up the borders between Mexico. Those 2 things should be a priority.
"Evil is Powerless If the Good are Unafraid." -Ronald Reagan

Apple and Intel, the dawning of a NEW era.
     
typoon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Tollbooth Capital of the US
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:21 PM
 
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
I and a lot of people like me are jaded by Bush's actions in his first term. Now it's a trust issue - I feel like I can't trust Bush as far as I can throw him, while he probably doesn't trust the liberals in the country to cut him some slack if he goes more moderate.

Well, I'll just say right now that while I disagree with Bush on most of the issues, most importantly the war in Iraq, I am willing to give him my respect if he can at least make an honest effort at making this country more moderate and uniting people.

I do think that some of the polarization is an illusion, caused by too restrictive of a two-party system. I was just talking to a Bush supporter who turns out to have almost the same ideas on government as I do, but his priorities are just in a different order. We're almost the same yet to an outside observer we're opposites. Then, of course, this illusion of polarization leads to people actually becoming polarized.

As I said, Ashcroft gone would be a step in the right direction. Right now my main fear is that the US is turning into a theocracy.
Interesting. That was what I thought about John Kerry. I didn't trust him as far as I could throw him. Also to me when he spoke he sounded like a pompus rich person who tried to make himself look like a regular guy. I would also agree about his handling of Iraq. I think that is in part because people want him to fight it as a more "sensitive" war. We have gone out of our way to try and lessen the amount of innocent casualties but in the process have increased the casualties our troops. We need to fight this war on terroism like a war.

Why are you scared of the U.S. Turning into a Theocracy? Because the President has his religion and is not scared about showing it? Why should he not be allowed to show his faith?
"Evil is Powerless If the Good are Unafraid." -Ronald Reagan

Apple and Intel, the dawning of a NEW era.
     
Agasthya
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:28 PM
 
Originally posted by typoon:
Why are you scared of the U.S. Turning into a Theocracy? Because the President has his religion and is not scared about showing it? Why should he not be allowed to show his faith?
The morality of his religion will cloud his judgement on issues such as stem cell research.
     
Spliffdaddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon line
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:29 PM
 
As long as the Democrats despise religious voters - the Democrats will continue to lose.

Maybe 5% of the population are avidly anti-religious.

MOST Americans hold some sort of religious values.
     
Millennium  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:29 PM
 
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
It would be nice if Bush took steps towards unifying the country. Getting Ashcroft to resign would be a small step, but it would be in the right direction.
Only a small step? Ashcroft is the one who originally wrote the PATRIOT Act. The man may be the single biggest traitor in that whole administration to everything this country stands for.

Bush isn't the brightest bulb in the box, but the fact is that by himself he's mostly harmless. It's his cabinet -particularly Ashcroft and Rumsfeld- who are truly dangerous, and if both of them leave then the improvement will be vast.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
typoon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Tollbooth Capital of the US
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 12:50 PM
 
Originally posted by Agasthya:
The morality of his religion will cloud his judgement on issues such as stem cell research.
Yes but he has NOT stopped stem cell research just the Gov't funding of stem cell research from unborn fetus' because to him that is descration of life. There are many other ways to get Stem cells which he should support. EG. Stem Cells from the Umbilical cord which would work just as well. He also has not stopped Private funding of Stem Cell Research.
"Evil is Powerless If the Good are Unafraid." -Ronald Reagan

Apple and Intel, the dawning of a NEW era.
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 01:06 PM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
Only a small step? Ashcroft is the one who originally wrote the PATRIOT Act. The man may be the single biggest traitor in that whole administration to everything this country stands for.

Bush isn't the brightest bulb in the box, but the fact is that by himself he's mostly harmless. It's his cabinet -particularly Ashcroft and Rumsfeld- who are truly dangerous, and if both of them leave then the improvement will be vast.
Okay, big step. It wouldn't change our foreign policy as much, though, but I'd still be happy.

Now we wait to see if/when Ashcroft resigns, and if he does, who Bush gets to replace him.

Pat Robertson?

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
davesimondotcom
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Landlockinated
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 01:37 PM
 
Originally posted by Agasthya:
I think about 7 million people did when they protested the war the night before it started and it was dismissed by Bush as nothing more than a "focus group."
And 55+ million voted for the guy and are dismissed as the stupid ignorant religious freaks from the red states.

He didn't dismiss those people, he disagreed with them. If 7 million and 1 people had said the opposite of those people, would you say that he did the right thing?
[ sig removed - image host changed it to a big ad picture ]
     
SimeyTheLimey
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 01:47 PM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
Only a small step? Ashcroft is the one who originally wrote the PATRIOT Act.
Don't be mesmerized by a the name of a demonized celebrity. Laws are written and Government is run mostly by people you have never heard of. The Patriot Act was a grab bag of proposals that had been bouncing around official Washington for years.
     
Millennium  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 02:15 PM
 
Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Don't be mesmerized by a the name of a demonized celebrity. Laws are written and Government is run mostly by people you have never heard of. The Patriot Act was a grab bag of proposals that had been bouncing around official Washington for years.
If you want another example, I could point out that whole ridiculous indicent with draping the statue.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
SimeyTheLimey
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 4, 2004, 02:21 PM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
If you want another example, I could point out that whole ridiculous indicent with draping the statue.
And I could counter it because I have not only seen the statue, I know people who know the story of how the TV backdrop was put in front of it. They assure me (and they have no reason to lie to me) that it had nothing to do with the AG. It didn't even really have anything to do with the statutes. It had to do with a whopping red "EXIT" sign behind the podium.
     
Millennium  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 08:20 AM
 
Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
And I could counter it because I have not only seen the statue, I know people who know the story of how the TV backdrop was put in front of it. They assure me (and they have no reason to lie to me) that it had nothing to do with the AG. It didn't even really have anything to do with the statutes. It had to do with a whopping red "EXIT" sign behind the podium.
Why did Ashcroft himself say it was because of the statue's unclothed state, then? He had no reason to lie about that, particularly when he had to have known that he'd hurt his public image with what he said.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
chris v
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Sar Chasm
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 08:24 AM
 
He's probably just clearing the way for his Supreme Court appointment. Chief Justice Ashcroft.

When a true genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift.
     
Powerbook
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: München, Deutschland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 08:58 AM
 
Originally posted by Timo:
Um, who are you talking about?
He might think of Reichspr�sident Hindenburg. Not sure though.

PB.
Aut Caesar aut nihil.
     
Millennium  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 09:07 AM
 
Originally posted by chris v:
He's probably just clearing the way for his Supreme Court appointment. Chief Justice Ashcroft.
Ouch. I'm forced to admit, this is a possibility that I had not considered.

Nevertheless, I don't think it's terribly likely. Ashcroft wasn't exactly the Bush Administration's first choice for Attorney General, and if they didn't want him there I'd doubt they want him in the Supreme Court.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 09:10 AM
 
Originally posted by typoon:
Stem Cells from the Umbilical cord which would work just as well.
Wrong.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
SimeyTheLimey
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 09:22 AM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
Why did Ashcroft himself say it was because of the statue's unclothed state, then? He had no reason to lie about that, particularly when he had to have known that he'd hurt his public image with what he said.
Please find the quote where he said it did. I don't recall him ever saying that, but I do recall a lot of speculation. My source was very close to him at the time. She assured me he had nothing to do with it. I have no reason to think my friend would lie to me.

There is also something of a misconception out there about what the drape in fact is. The set up is that there is a hall with a stage at one end. Behind the stage is an odd kind of corridor. The statutes are up against the wall of the corridor about ten feet behind and perpendicular to the lectern.

The "drape" isn't like a cloth specifically covering the statutes. It's a whopping great blue backdrop that covers the whole corridor area. It basically separates the stage from the corridor. That was apparently the idea, and the idea wasn't Ashcroft's. Or so I am told.

Incidentally, the hall we are talking about has a lot of nekkid people painted on it. So do other parts of the Justice Building. None of them have been covered up. The paintings are murals painted during the depression by WPA workers and they are kind of classical with a heavy 1930s modernist/art deco touch. It's like Flash Gordon meets Michaelangelo. If you are ever in DC you should see if the public tours are running. It's quite impressive.
     
Millennium  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 10:32 AM
 
Originally posted by Logic:
Wrong.
Why not? Exactly what do embryonic stem cells have that umbilical or even somatic stem cells do not? Recent studies have shown that these stem cells have more potential than was originally believed.

Not that it matters. It's possible to harvest embryonic stem cells in a nonlethal manner. We know this, because it's common for embryos to lose a few stem cells in nature, and yet they still survive. Were we to develop a technique to replicate this, we could clear up all of the moral ambiguity that exists right now. Not only that, but each cell line would have a living person corresponding to it, which could in turn provide a map of the results of that line's genome; the usefulness of this cannot be underestimated.

But the fact is, not only are we not developing this technique, we're not even trying to develop it right now. We could clear up all of the moral controversy, but as a species it seems we just don't care about morality enough to do that. That fact alone, I take as proof enough that we as a species are not ready for this research.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
OldManMac
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: I don't know anymore!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 10:58 AM
 
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
Okay, big step. It wouldn't change our foreign policy as much, though, but I'd still be happy.

Now we wait to see if/when Ashcroft resigns, and if he does, who Bush gets to replace him.

Pat Robertson?
Senator McCain was on Leno last night, and stated that he thought Joe Lieberman would make an excellent attorney general. He even looked into the camera and said something to the effect of, "Mr. President, are you listening?"
Why is there always money for war, but none for education?
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:01 AM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
Why not? Exactly what do embryonic stem cells have that umbilical or even somatic stem cells do not? Recent studies have shown that these stem cells have more potential than was originally believed.

Not that it matters. It's possible to harvest embryonic stem cells in a nonlethal manner. We know this, because it's common for embryos to lose a few stem cells in nature, and yet they still survive. Were we to develop a technique to replicate this, we could clear up all of the moral ambiguity that exists right now. Not only that, but each cell line would have a living person corresponding to it, which could in turn provide a map of the results of that line's genome; the usefulness of this cannot be underestimated.

But the fact is, not only are we not developing this technique, we're not even trying to develop it right now. We could clear up all of the moral controversy, but as a species it seems we just don't care about morality enough to do that. That fact alone, I take as proof enough that we as a species are not ready for this research.
Stem cells from the umbilical cord have already differentiated a couple of times and have been marked for future development. Meaning that they don't have the capacity to develop into whatever cell there is in the body. Only embryonic stem cells have that capacity. The embryonic stem cell is the Holy Grail of molecular biology and as a result in medicine. The embryonic stem cell can become whatever cell there is in the body. The umbilical cord stem cells cannot. And the more we limit what cells we can use and what cells we cannot use the longer time it will take we can see being solved by the use of stem cells. If at all.

The only thing holding it back at this point is the fear of cloning and the ethics revolving around that as well as the American "Christian" lobby that prevents cells that will either be discarded or kept frozen forever to be used. The current president will cause a backlash for US science and will give others the edge in this field. If the US loses out on the great potential this has it will have a severe effect on your science community as well as economics. European and Asian(most likely Japanese) Biomed companies will benefit from this. And the US will lose out on an enormous amount of capital.

That a few powerful lobbyists in the US make the US not ready for this is just sad. But it will probably benefit us here in Europe so I thank everyone that voted for Bush to give us this advantage.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
chris v
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Sar Chasm
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:06 AM
 
Originally posted by KarlG:
Senator McCain was on Leno last night, and stated that he thought Joe Lieberman would make an excellent attorney general. He even looked into the camera and said something to the effect of, "Mr. President, are you listening?"
The answer to that question would probably be "No."

So far, whenever Bush has been presented with the choice for either a centrist or far-right approach, he's chosen the far-right path. Why would anybody think that with a "mandate" and no need to concern himself with popularity any longer that he'd suddenly start tacking the other way? I, for one, am not holding my breath.

When a true genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift.
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:11 AM
 
BTW, why do you guys think he will aim more to the centre this time around? He doesn't have to worry about any re-election, the Republicans are in complete control over US politics. What makes you think he won't head for the far right of the spectrum? That way he and the Republican will force the Democrats to move more to the right and the Republican ideology will win.

I suspect we will see one or two in his cabinet that make up for a likely candidate 2008 but the rest will be the likes of Ashcroft/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz. If I'm wrong I would be very happy, but unfortunately I only see the US go further to the ultra right side of the spectrum.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
SimeyTheLimey
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alexandria, VA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:17 AM
 
Originally posted by KarlG:
Senator McCain was on Leno last night, and stated that he thought Joe Lieberman would make an excellent attorney general. He even looked into the camera and said something to the effect of, "Mr. President, are you listening?"
No way. Governor Rell is, AFAIK, a Republican. Lieberman is a loyal party man. He isn't going to give up his seat in the Senate so that a Republican can be appointed to take it.
     
mo
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Columbia, MO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:25 AM
 
In my opinion, the best choice among those who realistically could be named to replace Ashcroft is already working for the administration: John Danforth. He would've been an excellent choice the first time around, for that matter.

(But maybe the country has had enough of former Missouri senators in the AG office.)
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:45 AM
 
Originally posted by Logic:

I suspect we will see one or two in his cabinet that make up for a likely candidate 2008 but the rest will be the likes of Ashcroft/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz. If I'm wrong I would be very happy, but unfortunately I only see the US go further to the ultra right side of the spectrum.
Personally, I don't see that we've "gone farther right", but that Europe, Canada, and other parts of the world have gone farther Left and are becoming more and more Socialist (with some exceptions such as Australia, which seems to be moving back to the Right). The Proletarian ideology that a person need not strive to succeed is attractive to many, as is the desire to cast off many responsibilities and leave them to the gov't to handle. To me, and many others, that's just not acceptable.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:50 AM
 
Originally posted by MacNStein:
Personally, I don't see that we've "gone farther right", but that Europe, Canada, and other parts of the world have gone farther Left and are becoming more and more Socialist (with some exceptions such as Australia, which seems to be moving back to the Right). The Proletarian ideology that a person need not strive to succeed is attractive to many, as is the desire to cast off many responsibilities and leave them to the gov't to handle. To me, and many others, that's just not acceptable.
Please tell me how Europe, Canada and other parts of the world(though I'm most interested in Europe) have gone further left.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 11:52 AM
 
Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
No way. Governor Rell is, AFAIK, a Republican. Lieberman is a loyal party man. He isn't going to give up his seat in the Senate so that a Republican can be appointed to take it.
That's another point. How many Democrat Senators are going to be offered cabinet poistions, in a seeming show of bi-partisanship by the President, only to have their seats given to Republicans to further widen the gulf in the Senate? Surely, the Dems wouldn't be so stupid as to fall for such an easy ploy. Bush only needs 60 votes in the Senate to place anyone he wants in the SCOTUS.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 12:29 PM
 
Originally posted by Logic:
Please tell me how Europe, Canada and other parts of the world(though I'm most interested in Europe) have gone further left.
The socializing of healthcare and transportation
Banning of firearms
Hikes in taxes and cannibalizing of the upper class (while "top out of sight" citizens are untouched)
Socializing of utilities
Gov't takeovers of needed industries

"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 12:32 PM
 
Originally posted by MacNStein:
The socializing of healthcare and transportation
Banning of firearms
Hikes in taxes and cannibalizing of the upper class (while "top out of sight" citizens are untouched)
Socializing of utilities
Gov't takeovers of needed industries

There's been no socialising of healthcare and transportation. That happened long ago. The trend now is to private as much as possible of that.

Firearms aren't banned.

Hikes in taxes? Where did you get that from? Taxes have been lowered if anything recently.

Socialising of utilities? Please elaborate.

Gov't takeovoers? Examples please?

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 01:06 PM
 
Originally posted by Logic:
There's been no socialising of healthcare and transportation. That happened long ago. The trend now is to private as much as possible of that.

Firearms aren't banned.

Hikes in taxes? Where did you get that from? Taxes have been lowered if anything recently.

Socialising of utilities? Please elaborate.

Gov't takeovoers? Examples please?
Wow, I can buy a handgun in London or Paris? With a minimal background check? Really?

Europe loves it's VAT? Eh?

Does the government run the electric, water, natural gas industries?

Who owns and runs the bus lines? Train lines? Most of the Euro airlines?

Yeah... Europe moving to the Right by leaps and bounds... heh.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 01:12 PM
 
Originally posted by MacNStein:
Wow, I can buy a handgun in London or Paris? With a minimal background check? Really?
Not without a very strict background check. In the northern countries you are allowed to have weapons as long as you go through certain criteria. But you said banned.

Europe loves it's VAT? Eh?
The VAT is getting less and not increased but this has nothing to do with your original argument.

Does the government run the electric, water, natural gas industries?
In most European country they do not.

Who owns and runs the bus lines? Train lines? Most of the Euro airlines?
Former Government/City that have been or are being privatised. Also varies from country to country.

Yeah... Europe moving to the Right by leaps and bounds... heh.
They are actually. But since you obviously have no idea about anything in Europe you won't see it.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 01:27 PM
 
Originally posted by Logic:
Not without a very strict background check. In the northern countries you are allowed to have weapons as long as you go through certain criteria. But you said banned.

The VAT is getting less and not increased but this has nothing to do with your original argument.

In most European country they do not.

Former Government/City that have been or are being privatised. Also varies from country to country.

They are actually. But since you obviously have no idea about anything in Europe you won't see it.
Why do I even bother? You know what I said is correct, but you still want to argue. I talk to people who live in those countries, especially Italy, France, Germany, Sweden, they're good and dear friends of mine, but they're telling me how things are getting worse, and much more socialized/Left. Who AM I supposed to believe?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Logic
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The northernmost capital of the world
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 01:30 PM
 
Originally posted by MacNStein:
Why do I even bother? You know what I said is correct, but you still want to argue. I talk to people who live in those countries, especially Italy, France, Germany, Sweden, they're good and dear friends of mine, but they're telling me how things are getting worse, and much more socialized/Left. Who AM I supposed to believe?
Then they are telling you lies.

Nothing of what you have said so far is true.

"If Bush says we hate freedom, let him tell us why we didn't attack Sweden, for example. OBL 29th oct
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 01:33 PM
 
Originally posted by Logic:
Then they are telling you lies.

Nothing of what you have said so far is true.
Or nothing you've said is. I know you WANt it to be true, but that doesn't mean it is.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 01:36 PM
 
Originally posted by MacNStein:
Personally, I don't see that we've "gone farther right", but that Europe, Canada, and other parts of the world have gone farther Left and are becoming more and more Socialist
You really have no idea what you're talking about.

Europe has not moved to the left. Its done the exact opposite! Wake up!
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 5, 2004, 01:38 PM
 
Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
You really have no idea what you're talking about.

Europe has not gone left. It's done the exact opposite! Wake up!
So, for the last 40 years, it's done the exact opposite? Or, you talking about some last ditch efforts over the last few years to try and save your economies?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
 
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 03:21 AM.
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.,