Jump to content

WE ARE FUCKED


rubbish heap

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well im a gun toting, animal killing :burn: , fishing off my ass, graff writing, college educated minority liberal that was really surprised at last nights result. but really thinking about it, it should not be a real surprise. 1) the typical american is only concerned with what effects them personally. 2) in the south the gay marriage issues were huge even with some liberal friends of mine. 3) i hate to say it but karl rove (scumbag) is a genius with use of the media. 4) the bin laden tape nuff said, reminded americans that the job was not done and bush should have a chance to finish what he has got us into. 5) next TTTTTTTTAAAAAAAAAXXXXXXXXXSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!! here in the deep south the so called tax and spend liberal= satan. 6) The thing that drives me crazy is the fear of terrorism. DC NY PA were the ones that got hit on 9-11 they all went for Kerry and the rest of the country that has not been affected vote for this dumd asssssssssss!!!!! :shook: :huh2: :hatred:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are missing out on the randi rhodes show where she's talking about what I'm thinking. That these damn Diebold voting computers are fucking black boxes that sent the massive democratic vote into a black hole.

I usually don't make generalizations but I'm sick of ignorant rednecks and their manipulative masters who take advantage of their trust because he's a "christian".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by heavyLox@Nov 2 2004, 10:16 PM

your anger is misdirected, fuck bush and fuck the idiots whop think hes the man ofr the job of pres. Id be happier with flava flav.

 

 

Flava Flav would rule in the white house..Let's thank middle america for sticking us with a jackass for president...Dumb ass hicks.. :hatred:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well i feel sorry for you guys, im glad i live in england to say the least. saying that our primeminister licks bushes arse so were not much better off!

i watched this program last night about a load of american judawhatever christians (the ones that ar to do with bush) and came to the conclusion (yet again) that america has got a LOT of nutters livin there. these lot were fuckin obsessed loonies, it reminded me of nazi germany!! get the fuck outta there is all i can say!!

 

oh yeah free rob black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poop Man Bob---

 

I think I finally understand the problem here. You see, from my point of view, Bush DID govern from the middle, just as much as he could without pissing off people like me. So the difficulty here is that you see Bush as being on the far right. He's not, not at all. He's sort of a right-centrist. He would implement left-wing measures like the assault weapons ban, but if he did, he would get extreme political heat from the right.

 

I see him as being a potential threat FROM THE LEFT. He could choose to further impliment the Patriot Act (which from my point of view, is a LEFTIST measure.) I understand that from your point of view, this sounds like lunacy. That's because (I think) that your political point of view is far to the left of mine.

 

Sort of like this:

 

Poop Man.....Nader...Kerry....Bush................................KaBar..

 

A weak analogy maybe, but still probably valid. I do not see leftist tendencies as "progressive," as if the past is "recessive (and therefore bad)" and the future somehow needs to be changed all around and "improved" to meet a formula conceived of by the left--and anyone who opposes all these changes is therefore "not progressive." I do not see the social changes we have undergone in the last thirty years as uniformly positive. Many of the so-called "advances" are not advances at all. They are part of the destruction of normal society, and a large part of why American culture is perceived as being so negative by much of the rest of the world.

 

In my opinion, our country and our culture is self-destructing, like a stately and beautiful old building that is under attack by vandals. Every day, another window broken, another door jimmied, another fifty feet of copper wiring stolen. Eventually, this nation will be completely unliveable, because of the refusal of people to follow rules, to become educated, to work for a living, to save their money, to be frugal, to prepare for the future, to raise and educate their children in an atmosphere of loving discipline. "Civic duty" is a phrase many people regard with contempt. "Military service" has been reduced to "a way to get college money."

 

We will get the society and government which we deserve.

 

Look at the map of the Electoral votes. All those "red" states in the center of the country contain a slight majority of people who are FED UP with the deterioration of normal, decent life.

 

I'm sure you disagree, and you have your own reasons for doing so. I don't doubt that your rebuttal will cleverly stand my post on it's head, but the truth is there if you can see it. My feeling is that you cannot, or maybe will not. I'm already thinking "It's going to be Hillary running in 2008--another god damned disaster for the U.S."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BROWNer

wow, it's good to see so many people involved in these political threads

these days. i hope all of you that are feeling disenfranchised and pissed right

off don't roll over now and just hum along like nothing can be done. you gotta

keep up this momentum and mobilise against these monsters of shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by KaBar2@Nov 4 2004, 07:53 PM

Poop Man Bob---

 

I think I finally understand the problem here.  You see, from my point of view, Bush DID govern from the middle, just as much as he could without pissing off people like me.  So the difficulty here is that you see Bush as being on the far right.  He's not, not at all.  He's sort of a right-centrist.  He would implement left-wing measures like the assault weapons ban, but if he did, he would get extreme political heat from the right.

 

in this respect it's all subjective, what you consider the middle is influenced by your own views, which others happen to consider very conservative. and why do you continue to bring up the weapons ban as an example of leftist policy? if you look at the vast majority of the bush administration social policies, they aren't anything close to left, and aren't smack in the center either; they're conservative.

 

 

I see him as being a potential threat FROM THE LEFT.  He could choose to further impliment the Patriot Act (which from my point of view, is a LEFTIST measure.)  I understand that from your point of view, this sounds like lunacy.  That's because (I think) that your political point of view is far to the left of mine.

 

Sort of like this:

 

Poop Man.....Nader...Kerry....Bush................................KaBar..

 

A weak analogy maybe, but still probably valid.

 

you can't possibly claim that bush is the center of the spectrum framed by you and PMB. this implies bush sides with conservative policy and liberal policy an equal proportion of the time, which is simply not the case. again, this depends on what you consider conservative and liberal. so think about it this way: from what is 'popularly considered' liberal and conservative, to which side does bush tend? you'll find the majority of the country disagrees with your statement that bush represents a threat from the left. which leaves something to be said about your own interpretation of liberal and conservative.

 

 

I do not see leftist tendencies as "progressive," as if the past is "recessive (and therefore bad)" and the future somehow needs to be changed all around and "improved" to meet a formula conceived of by the left--and anyone who opposes all these changes is therefore "not progressive."  I do not see the social changes we have undergone in the last thirty years as uniformly positive.  Many of the so-called "advances" are not advances at all.  They are part of the destruction of normal society, and a large part of why American culture is perceived as being so negative by much of the rest of the world.

 

the general idea of leftist tendencies, at least to my understanding, is to bring as many people as possible to as high a degree of social benefit as is possible. basically, maximum quality of life improvement for the maximum amount of people possible. this is why the "middle class" is so often invoked.

an understanding of the concept of social responsibility is necessary to appreciate this goal, i would think. of course the social changes we've undergone in the last thirty years won't be regarded as uniformly positive, because they are targeted at a goal that doesn't serve all interests equally, especially not the interests of those at the top of the economic spectrum. however, for the vast majority, these changes are positive. it's not a destruction of normal society, rather a means of incorporating more people into the realm of what is normal society. an exclusive society will never be "normal society."

so yes, in a sense, people who oppose these types of changes are "not progressive," in that they are disagreeing with the progressive goal of expanding the wellbeing of the majority.

 

 

In my opinion, our country and our culture is self-destructing, like a stately and beautiful old building that is under attack by vandals.  Every day, another window broken, another door jimmied, another fifty feet of copper wiring stolen.  Eventually, this nation will be completely unliveable, because of the refusal of people to follow rules, to become educated, to work for a living, to save their money, to be frugal, to prepare for the future, to raise and educate their children in an atmosphere of loving discipline.  "Civic duty" is a phrase many people regard with contempt.  "Military service" has been reduced to "a way to get college money."

 

what doesn't help achieve this is perpetuating a sense of social isolationism. "citizens in name only, 'ostensible citizens' united by little else except the possession of a credit card and a password to the internet."

this is a testament to "white flight," people want the situation to improve but run from the problem.

 

 

 

Look at the map of the Electoral votes.  All those "red" states in the center of the country contain a slight majority of people who are FED UP with the deterioration of normal, decent life.

 

you act as though the country just voted for a different president. "fed up" with what? are you forgetting that bush has been president for the last four years?

 

 

I'm sure you disagree, and you have your own reasons for doing so.  I don't doubt that your rebuttal will cleverly stand my post on it's head, but the truth is there if you can see it.  My feeling is that you cannot, or maybe will not.  I'm already thinking "It's going to be Hillary running in 2008--another god damned disaster for the U.S."

 

don't really know what to say to this, seems like a fundamental difference in ideology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Fundamental difference in ideology"---isn't that what I said too?

 

The whole point of my post to Poop Man was that the reason we have so much difficulty communicating is that FROM MY POINT OF VIEW (not "the commonly accepted point of view," not "the viewpoint advocated by the media", not even "the common Republican point of view." MY point of view.) Mr. Bush is not very conservative. He and the neo-cons are spending tax money like there's no tomorrow. They are borrowing billions from the Chinese and anybody else that will lend them money (they are selling Treasury bonds on the market, and the Chinese are snapping them up---this, essentially, is "borrowing" money.)

 

Despite the fact that the government is trillions of dollars in the red, they continue to spend money, both for national defense and the war against terrorism and in Iraq, and also domestically. There may be no choice about it (now) but that doesn't change the fact that the government is running a gigantic deficit.

 

The terrorist threat didn't develop overnight. It has been years in the making. I recently read an article that said modern terrorism began with the seizure of the American Embassy in Tehran, Iran in 1979-1980. I think that is possible.

 

The words "FED UP" don't just refer to the last four years. They more refer to the last thirty years. It's a long, long trend of deterioration. It does not bode well for the future. The average American, by a slight majority, is unhappy about this deterioration and is feeling alienated about it. White flight was the result of integration being forced on people who did not want it. I'm not advocating it, just explaining it. Since it's 100% okay for minority people to move into a previously all-white neighborhood (and I agree that it is) it is also okay for those people who disagree to move away. And they did. By the millions, and more so up north than down South..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you voted for Bush why? Ok, the gun issue, that's right.

 

The fucking Democrats are more fiscally responsible than Bush (or any other Republican leader that we've had in my lifetime.)

 

I understand Kerry voted for the Patriot Act, but besides him I don't know any liberal who would advocate diminished civil liberties. I see this as we are all succeptible to social pressure. The only liberties any liberal that I know would like to see diminished are corporate liberties.

 

Some of what you speak of sounds alot like the Unibomber. Here is something to think about, time marches on. We can't go back, we have to progress, and use what we have to cure the ills of the world, not destroy it. Did that beautiful old house of which you speak serve any purpose, in terms of the grand scale of time. No, have you seen Rome. Go outside and look around you, I'm sure there is a tree or something out there, and that, to me, is infinately more beautiful and useful to the world sthan some old house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BROWNer

modern terrorism did not start with the american embassy in tehran

(unless you can only conceive that terrorism is used by a few fringe

islamic individuals and various other fringe groups scattered about the world and

that's it). that is a completely false assertion that has zero legitimacy

under any coherent objective analysis of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BROWNer

in some ways yes, but that is only one aspect of terrorism. under the basic definition provided by the cia(which i think most people can agree with), terrorism is 'the use of violence for political ends'.

the problem will never be solved if we don't condemn ALL forms

of terrorism, not just terrorism by 'them'. you know, it would bode well for the future to uphold elementary moral standards about such things and consider a more candid approach to what and why things arer the way they are.

btw, symbols, are you who i think you are??? if so, congrats on crew status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest imported_Tesseract

Jusy cause i know that some nerds wanna know...Captain Nemo from 12.000 leagues under the sea is the first apperance of the 'terrorist' as we know him nowdays

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...