Politics Domestic Election - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:Election:
Results 151 - 300 of 1431   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2024/12/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/24   

2004/7/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32583 Activity:nil
7/29     John Kerry will rip off your head and shit down your neck.
2004/7/29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32568 Activity:nil
7/29    Hmmm...so CNN, the "evil liberal network," immediately followed up
        Edwards speech with 15 minutes of Ralph Reed basically saying whatever
        he felt like.  How likely do you think it is that they'll give us 15
        minutes of Howard Dean after Cheney's speech during the RNC...I'm not
        laying any bets...
        \_ You get hours every night.  15 minutes?  Pshaw!  If only we
           could get 15 free minutes a month instead of each 4 years.
           \_ Heh.  You haven't watched any of the convention coverage have
              you?  CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the lot have been an
              embarrassment.  C-SPAN is the standard.  Now here's the part
              where you call C-SPAN an evilllllll socialist plot, or perhaps
              a tool of the international Jewish conspiracy.
2004/7/29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32567 Activity:high
7/29    What was wrong with the links about the anti Kerry vets and
        the failure of diplomacy in the Iran nukes thing?  Please restore
        what you destroyed for no reason.
        \_ eat shit, wiseass
        \_ Criticisms of our New Fearless Leader will not be tolerated.
2004/7/29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32560 Activity:insanely high
7/29    'Hanoi John' Gets Unwelcome Reception From Veterans
        http://csua.org/u/8dk
        \_ it's my buddies at the MRC! http://csua.org/u/8dl
        \_ Do you mean 'cbsnews'?  Is it the part of the article where
           it talks about Kerry going sailing with his Vietnam buddies?
           Or is it the part of your link that you failed to wrap around
           correctly?  A secret code, Lassie?  Tell us!  Give us your
           insight, mighty Socrates!  -John
           \_ somebody deleted the shortened URL.  Its ok.
        \_ you deleted the fact i pointed out the Media Research Council
           is behind this link, fucking coward.
           \_ I think you overestimate your importance.  The whole thread
              was deleted so I reposted the link.
        \_ Hmm, some veterans don't like Kerry, but some do.  It's not too
           hard to find groups of vets who don't like 'Riyadh George',
2004/7/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32557 Activity:nil
7/28    Hi, I'm John Edwards and I want to give you money from the
        US treasury so you will vote for me.  I want to encourage
        racial unity by discriminating against whites and asians!
        Hope is on the way!
        \- I am also a fully evolved human, not a semi-simian
        meatpuppet nor an evil cyborg operating out of a hidden
        secret base.
        \_ versus you would only get money from the US treasury if
           I make more than $200,000 a year?
        \_ w00t!  w00t!  hurray!
2004/7/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32553 Activity:insanely high
7/28    Since the convention began, so far I haven't seen Kerry tough or
        decisive, as much as Bill, Al, Barack, or Teresa like to say so.
        Every time they bring up his wartime duty, I think of his coming
        back a brooding Vietnam vet, today past his prime, somewhat
        flabbergasted he managed the Democratic nomination.  With Dubya as
        his (arguably) pathetic adversary, he has yet to demonstrate
        toughness or decisiveness to me. -a liberal
        \_ Conservative point of view: I was soooo glad Dean lost the race.
           Kerry is one of the only people on the planet Bush could have
           beat.  You guys went with the boring old guard nothing guy and
           now you're stuck trying to fluff his ancient Vietnam record into
           a Presidency.  With 19 years in the Senate, how come his short
           time in Vietnam is the only thing we ever hear about?  Because
           he didn't do jack for 19 years in the Senate.  Can someone name
           a major piece of legislation with his name on it or the really
           bad piece of legislation he lead the fight to burying?  Kerry
           is a nobody.  All the talk from the left is anti-Bush, not
           pro-Kerry because Kerry has nothing going for him.  Dean worried
           me because he had brains, passion, and balls.  If you had kept
           Dean and he learned to tone it down slightly you'd probably get
           8 years.  Now you only get another shot at it in '08 with that
           silly woman of all people.
           \_ It's too bad the MOTD is anonymous, since this is almost
              certainly the same guy who was saying Dean is unelectable back
              in January.  -tom
           \_ *sigh* I agree with your analysis completely.  -another liberal
           \_ Well, I supported Dean but I'm not convinced about the win/lose
              situation. Dean was a wildcard, with his grassroots funding and
              anti-Washington talk he could energize lots of people. But seeing
              Dean get destroyed by the concerted attacks in the primaries it's
              reasonable to think that Kerry would be safer. After all, they
              take for granted that the "energized" voters will transfer to
              Kerry anyway (a somewhat dangerous assumption... by November the
              generic Bush-bashing angle may get old and then you're left with
              a guy who like Gore doesn't seem different enough).  Dean would
              have been a wildcard since his talk about repealing tax cuts and
              the antiwar stuff was easy to attack in soundbites, and required
              multiple-sentence explanations that only satisfy intellectuals.
              The dem party is not comfortable with a clear antiwar message.
              They're mostly avoiding the topic now. Things are pretty much
              as people predicted before the primaries.  -moderate
              \_ The 'safe' choice is usually a bad choice in politics.  It
                 really means useless boring autocrat like Kerry who can
                 only get elected if his weak opposition royally fucks up
                 their own campaign.  The left had a few other decent choices
                 as well but for some reason beyond me chose this useless
                 knucklehead.  He's going to get his head handed to him.  This
                 is going to be sad.   Dean didn't just energize the party
                 base.  Those people mostly always vote anyway.  He was able
                 to touch the common man.  The only common man Kerry has ever
                 interacted with was serving his lunch.  --conservative
                 \_ what other choices? i mean, I think Kucinich was a good
                    candidate for what he is, but he's too left for even Dems.
                    Clark and Edwards, who knows. Edwards feels generic to me.
                    Clark was... mysterious and didn't deliver a message.
                    Anyway Kerry is better than Gore. It won't be a landslide.
        \_ He hasn't been at the convention all week, jackass.
           \_ You know, you're right.  Regardless, I still feel the same
              way ... moron. -op
        \_ Not that it will really matter in the popularity contest that
           will decide the outcome, but he's actually got a sage and
           decent voting record in the Senate.  I respect him for that,
           and hope that the goofily handsome veteran/antiwar activisit
           photos will get him into office so he can do the right thing
           there.
           \_ To put it another way, Kerry may have brains, but does he
              \_ yeah, landed on the aircraft carrier in Jumpsuite helps.
                 That scene on TV is a much credible yardstick to judge a
                 person than decades of voting record.
              have guts?  Bush may not surpass Kerry on brains, but he appears
              to have guts (roll eyes). -op
              \_ yeah, landed on the aircraft carrier in Jumpsuite helps.
                 That scene on TV is a much credible yardstick to judge a
                 person than decades of voting record.
              \_ I'd only modify your comments to change "guts" to "balls".
                 Going into a poorly justified war that has "ulterior motive"
                 written all over it isn't so much brave as brazen.
                 \_ Nah, I think Bush really thought Saddam had WMDs, and
                    \_ that is what you think.  it is more like he think
                       Saddam is a bad person and wanted to settle the old
                       score.  We all know he had WMD.  He *USED* against
                       Iranian with our blessing.
                    even if he didn't, it was a good idea to take him out now,
                    since he had used WMDs in the past and could give them
                    to al Qaeda at some point -- the consequences of that
                    too dire (hence, why Bush keeps saying "it was the
                    right decision", after all). -op
                    \_ that is what you think.  it is more like he think
                       Saddam is a bad person and wanted to settle the old
                       score.  We all know he had WMD.  He *USED* against
                       Iranian with our blessing.
                    \_ Bush thinks all his decisions are the right decisions.
                       That's one of the benefits of having no connection with
                       reality.
                       \_ duh, everyone always thinks their decisions are the
                          right ones.  you got into berkeley?
                       \_ And of course, when it's the wrong decision it's
                          *always* somebody else's fault.  I mean, geez,
                          accountability is a hard word to spell.
        \_ so how many Vietcongs has Kerry killed?
           \_ 1 unarmed surrendering vietcong, 60+ unarmed women & children
              \_ Lying sack of shit. One armed with an RPG who had just
                 pointed it at his boat. Why do you GOP trolls lie
                 constantly about things easily disproven?
                 \_ Dude, I'm pretty sure that was what we refer to as a
                    "joke."  Look it up in the dictionary.  Learn the
                    meaning any maybe you won't come off as such a jerk.
                 \_ Yeah!  That bastard!  It was way more than 1 surrendering
                    and 60 women and children.  After all, he told congress
                    he committed atrocities on a grand scale, the same as any
                    American in Vietnam.  It *had* to be more than 61 innocent
                    murders.  Give the man his full credit for being the
                    butcher he is.  I mean strong leader with nuance and the
                    correct amount of French left liberal east cost elitism.
            \_ yeah but the 60 unarmed women were most likely supplying
               the VC military, so... GO KERRY!
             \_ this is true , sadly, he was runner-scumming in a speed
                boat shooting blindly into villages
        \_ This is a contentless thread. You are basing a discussion on the
           pop culture soundbite images of these people. Idiotic.
           \_ What is the purpose of the the Democratic National Convention
              this year, other than to make people believe/vote for Kerry?
              The thread is to show one person's reaction. -op
              \_ I just hope it makes people stop saying "i don't think
                 he's got any plan".  If you wanted to see his plan, you
                 could read his website or go to hear him speak, but that's
                 too much trouble for the huge majority of people.  We're
                 media driven so these conventions are still necessary.
                 --scotsman
                 \_ To put it another way, it wouldn't hurt if Kerry were
                    more charismatic, and I use that term in its purest sense.
                    -op
                    \_ no one gives a shit what you think.
                       \_ or you either.  carry on.
                    \_ Until he announced Edwards as running mate, you would
                       have no way of knowing whether he's charismatic or not
                       because you'd never get more than a 10 second sound
                       byte.  I urge you not to get stuck with single source
                       media.  If you really want to get a sense for a
                       candidate, watch them on the floor on cspan.  Watch
                       their speeches in their entirety.  If you haven't done
                       anything like that, don't make up your mind on things
                       like that -scotsman
                       \_ Until he announced Edwards?  WTF does that have to
                          do with anything?  Everyone has been calling him
                          Lurch for a year and not because of the physical
                          resemblance.
                       \_ To put it another way, it wouldn't hurt if Kerry
                          could make a speech to Americans as well as he
                          gives a Senate speech. -op
                          \_ Like I said, go to a rally if you really want
                             to know.  Or at the very least wait until you've
                             seen his speech tomorrow.  The words you're
                             choosing here parrot what I've heard all over
                             the media.  If you haven't made the effort to
                             look, don't make up your mind. --scotsman
                             \_ I didn't but a friend who is very anti-GWB
                                went to Kerry's appearance locally and walked
                                out early.  You decide.
                             \_ I've read all the newspapers, seen all the
                                news, still hold out hope that the media
                                opinion doesn't end up as fact, and hope he
                                doesn't flub it Thursday night.  Anyway,
                                even though I got off topic, my main point
                                was that, between all the Democrats spouting
                                the party line of Kerry as "decisive and
                                tough", and the mass media labeling him as
                                an intellectual, and from all I've read and
                                seen, I tend to stay with the latter. -op
                 \_ There isn't enough red, white, and blue crap at this dem
                    convention. I don't see enough American flags. They must
                    indeed hate America. Seriously, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, did
                    you watch her? I have the feeling she might personally
                    kill the election for Kerry. Does she think Americans can
                    identify with that weirdo feminist-environmentalist
                    hippie talk?
                    \_ Worked for the people cheering her on.  Ask a woman.
                       Ask 20. As for the environment, a large majority of
                       the population of this country count the environment
                       as a major concern.
                        \_ I went to the Central Valley one time and saw this
                           beat up truck with a bumper sticker that says
                           "fuck the environment, give me a job." I believe
                           an even larger number of population cares about
                           economy than the stupid environment.
                           \_ You might believe that, but polls show that
                              you are wrong.
                              \_ What polls?
                           \_ And economy versus environment is a glaring
                              false dichotomy.
                       \_ Well so do I but watching her speak was painful.
                          Talk about lacking charisma. She was dour, rather
                          boring, and took too long to get to the point.
                          She also had an almost accusative tone, like she
                          was criticizing all of America and not just Bush.
                          And focussed a lot on America's duty to the world.
                          I can imagine some Berkeley hippies liking her
                          but the mainstream isn't going to be enthusiastic.
                          She reinforces negative popular perceptions.
                          \_ English as a 3rd or 4th language..  Besides, she's
                             not on the ballot.
                             \_ It isn't an ESL problem.  She's a weirdo and
                                it shows.
                             \_ As his wife she is part of Kerry's image.
                                \_ Yes and as such I see her as very brave.
                                   She's gonna take more shit than Hillary
                                   ever had to.
                                   \_ It isn't bravery when you're completely
                                      apathetic.  What does she have to be
                                      afraid of anyway?  She's worth $600m
                                      of inherited money.  She doesn't and
                                      doesn't have to give a shit what
                                      anyone thinks about her. It isn't
                                      bravery in the face of adversity.  There
                                      is no adversity in her life.
                          \_ My dour, accusative, critical mom loved her;
                             she now thinks Hillary is too political.
        \_ I have actually seen him speak in person and he is much more
           charismatic in person than on TV. Having said that, I agree
           with you in part, he is not a forceful personaliy, more of
           a thoughtful and careful one. That is who I personally prefer
           with his hand on the nuclear trigger anyway. He does not come
           across as weak or soft in any way, more patrician or senatorial.
           \_ is that why I can picture Kerry wearing a wreath and toga
              and motioning for another beer?  I'm not kidding!  Can't you
              picture this too?
              \_ Wasn't he in Skull & Bones too?  Makes me wonder, what their
                 parties looked like.  "Bring me ano-thah bee-ah, pledge
                 Dub-yah."  -John
              \_ Yes, actually I can. And it made me laugh to think about it.
                 Thanks!
        \_ Kerry is oh so boring. I want Howard Dean back. YEEEEEHAAAA!!!!!!!
2004/7/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32538 Activity:nil
7/28    Why Does Dubya choose a ranch and then play vacation?
        I have literally a dozen photos of him relaxing at a golf course or
        his ranch.
        \_ Are you trying to claim Kerry does not do this?
           \_ At least Kerry can ride a mountain bike without falling.
              \_ But not a regular bike or a pair of skis.  Whatever.  If
                 this is the basis upon which you cast your vote for President
                 of the United States of American, please do yourself and the
                 rest of us a favor and stay home.  --apathetic to both sides
           \_ Not to the really weird extent Bush does.  The guy
              has not been criss-crossing the country playing vacation.
              \_ Uhm, yeah.  How many votes has Kerry missed because he was
                 either on vacation or was out campaigning?  How many of
                 senate intelligence committee meetings on terrorism for the
                 same reasons?  There are a zillion Kerry-on-vacation photos
                 out there.  Your buddy, Drudge, even didn't a full page of
                 them with some typical cutesy headline.  You're blinded by
                 your own partisanship.  --apathetic to both sides
2004/7/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32533 Activity:nil
7/28    Kerry Toured Shuttle That Supplies Space Station He Voted
        Against.  See all the pics
        http://www.rnc.org/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=4477
2004/7/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32525 Activity:very high
7/28    Why does Kerry choose a sport/activity and then play dressup?
        I have literally a dozen photos of him dressed up in different
        costumes.
        \_ Kerry's basically an android.  He's just trying to use camouflage
           to blend in with the humans.
        \_ Why do you collect so many Kerry photos? Do you have a Kerry fetish?
           \_ That's his business and knowing that doesn't answer his
              question.
        \_ He likes trying new things?
           \_ Maybe he should try showing at a Senate vote or an intelligence
              committee meeting sometime....
        \_ http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc8.htm
        \_ would you like some gwbush in a kimono pictures
           \_ would you settle for Putin in a kimono?
              http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=167
           \_ I'd like to see Bush in a cheerleader uniform.
              \_ http://www.funnycelebpics.com/items/39.gif
                 http://zhongwen.com/bush/w-cheer.gif
           \_ Real ones? Yeah, I would.
        \_ Are you trying to claim Bush does not do this?
           \_ At least Bush can throw a strike over home plate.
           \_ Not to the really weird extent Kerry does.  The guy
              has been criss-crossing the country playing dress up.
              \_ Let's see, I see Bush in a flight suit, Bush in a
                 Kimono, Bush in a tanker jacket, Bush as a cheerleader...
                 \_ Flight suit: he should be in a jet without one?
                    Kimono: do as the Romans (or Japanese) do.
                    Cheerleader: duh, photoshop.
        \_ At least Kerry doesn't need to "stuff"
   http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushflightsuitstuff.htm
           \_ He's just trying to appeal to gay voters.
2004/7/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32513 Activity:nil
7/27    will vote for Hillary in 2008 if Kerry doesnt win. = republican
        \_ why?
        \_ hahahhahahahhahaa
2004/7/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32506 Activity:insanely high
7/27    Watch kerry get booed at the Sox game and he is unable to throw
        a baseball across the plate from half way to the mound.
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1178385/posts?page=1137#1137
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1178385/posts?page=1169#1169
        Usually I wouldn't be so petty but it is hilarious!
        \_ Hrm.  He got it to the plate.  The catcher is a local reservist
           returned from stints in Iraq and Afghanistan.  This take on the
           event is petty and sad. --scotsman
        \_ Fuck you.
        \_ You know, if you want the canidates to drop their pants and measure
           their erect penises to figure out who to vote for, you should just
           ask and stop hiding behind this facade of watching their physical
           feats to figure who is more "manly" and who is the "girlie-man."
        \_ Kerry in space suit looks like a Sperm cell, at nasa
        \_ Yeah, because throwing a baseball is a more important qualification
           for a President than forming coherent sentences and using valid
           English words.
           \_ Don't misunderestimate Bush.
        \_ Five words:  Dubya as a monkey .jpgs.
        \_ I'd vote for Ashcroft if he were to run because he can sing really
           really well (watch F911! It converted me to a Republican) and
           he actually looks good on television.
                \_ second that, if he weren't a politician he'd make a pretty
                   decent singer/actor.
           \_ Nonetheless, his looks and the signing ability weren't enough
              to defeat a DEAD opponent in 2000 Missouri election for senate.
        \_ Bush threw a pitch once before a game.  Catcher told him
           not to bounce the pitch or else the crowd would boo him.
           Bush threw a strike to the plate.
           \_ George W. Bush was president of his fraternity at Yale.  What
              do you expect?
           \_ This comment and the one above re: Ashcroft are a very good
              approximation of the level of analysis we're going to see of
              this election from the TV news.
              \_ Who takes TV news seriously?  Hey, who even watches it?
                 \_ Sadly, quite a lot of people.
           \_ Dubya had another bike accident yesterday.
              \_ Let's mail some more pretzels to the White House.
              \_ Uh, yeah, and Kerry has had a bike fall and a ski wreck he
                 blamed on some poor bastard from his security detail.  Does
                 that make them both stupid and incompetent or does it make
                 Bush stupid while Kerry is athletic?
        \_ My love is bigger than your love, Sing it.
2004/7/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32498 Activity:very high
7/26    So does anyone find it kinda pathetic that the Iraqi TV stations are
        giving more coverage to the conventions than our own network TV
        stations?  This is a bi-partisan thing, BTW - the RNC is going to get
        just as shafted as the DNC.
        \_ The conventions are just partisan wank-fests anyway.  That's why the
           US networks aren't covering them much.  The Iraqis just don't know
           any better.
           \_ oh!  Your penis is so big and truth free!
              \_ No one mentioned Ann Coulter.
        \_ I don't see it as getting shafted.  I'm a political junky but
           there's no way in hell I'd waste 5 seconds of my life watching any
           moment of either convention.  If something truly interesting
           happens, it'll get rebroadcast a zillion times, downloadable off
           the net, etc, etc.  Conventions?  Pshaw!
           \_ You should watch the really good speakers from both sides
              in real time. Clinton, McCain, okay maybe there are only two.
           \_ Bill Clinton is a talented speaker so I watched him. I think
              Howard Dean might be interesting. That's about it. Kerry and
              Edwards themselves bore me to death and so do all the pubs.
              \_ You should watch William Buckley Jr. and Dinesh D'Souza.
                 Both extraordinary speakers.
2024/12/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/24   

2004/7/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:32497 Activity:insanely high
7/26    And here's why Kerry isn't polling up 15 and isn't going to win.
        Clinton was right, "it's the economy, stupid",
        "Consumer confidence hits two-year high"
        http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040727/D843769O0.html
        \_ Well, the Dems have been hammering Bush on the economy for at least
           the last year, cherry-picking stats to talk down the economy even as
           it's been recovering.  Now that the economy is in robust recovery,
           they've lost that point and look a bit silly.  On top of that they
           said that Bush's tax plan would ruin our economy.  Tax receipts in
           June were the highest for the month of June since 2000, so not only
           is the economy rolling, but the federal budget is doing well too.
           \_ ha we are like 30 trillion in debt up to our assholes, so doomed
              \_ Thanks to FDR, LBJ, and leftists.  [formatd on all this]
                \_ i am reasonably sure this country did not have huge
                   trade and budget deficits until the early 80s,
                   after someone ramped up spending while simultaneously
                   slashing government revenues.  are you still pissed
                   about that new deal thing?
                 \_ Whoa.  So how long have you and reality been divorced?
                    \_ 30 trillion?  I'd love to see the URL for _that_!
                       \_ Here's a guy who says we are 52 Trillion in debt,
                          counting unfunded pension and Social Security
                          liability:
                          http://www.fulcruminquiry.com/article76.htm
                          The Economist says that it is only $10.5 B though.
                          You can come up with almost any number for a
                          liability 75 years from now though.
                          \_ 10.5 B or 10.5 T ?
              \_ Learn to indent.  Yes, the fed. gov't needs to cut spending.
                 But the point is that tax receipts are now higher than in 2000
                 (well, we'll see if we're in a trend).  That puts us in a
                 great position to pay down some debt.  Unless of course Kerry
                 gets his way and (1) gets universal health care and (2)
                 relaxes restrictions on the immigration of people with AIDS.
                 \_ Both fears are bogus.  If we established universal
                    healthcare (which Kerry has not even proposed) we could
                    fund it with all the money employers are now spending on
                    for-profit HMOs.  Listing restrictions on immigration of
                    AIDS patients would not change immingration restrictions in
                    general.  We would not be flooded with diseased poor
                    Africans because we are not flooded with poor Africans
                    right now.
                    \_ HMO money goes from corps to HMOs to give health care
                       to employees.  Universal HC as you describe it would
                       take money from corps to the government to give HC
                       to everyone.  That guarantees fewer dollars per person
                       and therefore lesser health care.  No thanks.
                       \_ No, not really. See Canada vs. US health care
                          spending. Single payer appears to be a more
                          efficient way of allocating resources. You can
                          get better overall health care with fewer dollars
                          spent. That is what I believe, anyway.
                       \_ Oh, I see.  You've got yours so screw everybody else.
                          \_ So you're in favor of helping those in need at
                             the expense of others?  Ok, how about this: would
                             you be willing to lower your GPA from 4.0 to 3.0
                             so 3 other people can raise theirs from 1.7 to 2.0
                             and not get kicked out of school?  Didn't think
                             so.  You got yours and screw everyone else.
                             \_ yes, I am for providing help to students
                                to help them learn better, and hence improve
                                their GPA.
                                \_ Great.  What classes will you be taking
                                   next semester?  (Assuming you normally
                                   would pull up the curve, of course.)
                          \_ This is bankrupting Europe and it would
                             bankrupt us. Do you want to provide free
                             health care for all of Mexico?
                             \_ It is not bankrupting Europe. Who told you
                                such nonesense. Canada is doing better than
                                ever and they have single payer healthcare.
                                \_ I wonder how many people who waxes
                                   rhapsodic about the Canadian healthcare
                                   system ever had to rely on it.  My
                                   grandfather was covered under the Canadian
                                   system, and he was given the choice of
                                   either wasting away slowly and painfully
                                   while waiting > 1 year for back surgery or
                                   paying his own way in the US.
                             \_ Oh, trolling for anti-immigrant sentiment now
                                eh?
                                \_ No. It is the immigrants that are
                                   bankrupting Europe and they will also
                                   bankrupt the US if we adopt the same
                                   policies.
                                   \_ Uhm, they're not immigrants until they've
                                      left their country of origin, dumbass.
                                      \_ Huh?
                                   \_ really?  so how come we are still the
                                      most powerful country in the world
                                      after these centuries of immigration?
                                      \_ Because we don't provide free
                                         universal health care and other
                                         socialistic perks. Immigration is
                                         great. Giving money away to
                                         anyone who wants some is not.
                                \_ No. Criticizing ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is not
                                   anti-immigrant sentiment.  When will you
                                   knee-jerk lefties learn that?
                             \_ According to the Economist,  immigrants are
                                a net win for Spain because they're supporting
                                the pension system which is strained because
                                Spainiards of the past few decades decided to
                                have fewer children.
                                \_ Net win? There are other variables than
                                   budget numbers. This idea of needing to
                                   bring in a bunch of people to support the
                                   welfare apparatus is complete bullshit. If
                                   they structured the system properly, instead
                                   of setting up a ridiculous Ponzi scheme,
                                   then they would have a long term solution.
                                \_ These incoming immigrants are having
                                   more children of their own. Who will
                                   support them?
                    \_ I'm pretty sure I've heard John Kerry say that everyone
                       should be covered by the same insurance that members of
                       congress have.
                \_ how does universal health care in europe and other countries
                   work from the doctor's point of view. do they have to be
                   part of the system?  can they set their own rates?
                   \_ They do not have to be and many are not. You pay
                      cash. Doctor's salaries are low overall and there is
                      a shortage of doctors. Hospitals import immigrant
                      doctors from, say, Russia and pay them low wages.
                      They accept it because otherwise they get sent back.
        \_ Well, there really are two economise in America today. The rich
           are doing very well, fueld by tax cuts, but middle income and
           lower middle class sorts are seeing lower real wages and actual
           overall tax increases, since the states have raised taxes so much.
           So I am not so sure that the Republican line is going to play
           too well with the Wal-Mart voter. Also, the leading indicators
           are looking pretty bad according to these guys:
           http://www.businesscycle.com
           \_ Today the party announced that the chocorat is being increased to
              25 grams.
        \_ That a good economy benefits the incumbent is an accepted fact,
           but I think Bush has bigger problems.  In fact, I see the
           population throwing out Bush as it stands up on its feet after 9/11.
           \_ I see the prolitariat throwing off the shackles of
              capitalism after they realize the evils of tax cuts.
2004/7/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32496 Activity:very high
7/26    "Poll shows support for Kerry weakens on issues and attributes"
        http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/kerry_poll_040726.html
        Not a good sign since the lead up to the convention is supposed to be
        a big boost time for a candidate, not a time they *lose* ground.  He
        should be up 15 points right now to win in November.
        \_ When did you stop beating your wife?
           \_ You're off topic.  This isn't a wife beating post.
        \_ So you haven't read any of the poll data about how polarized the
           electorate is?  No one is going to be 15 points up in this election,
           ever.  November will all come down to razor thin margins and (most
           likely) Diebold and Florida Elections Authority intervention.
           \_ So you're already preparing the propaganda for a loss in advance?
              \_ Head.  Hole.  Ground.
2004/7/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32491 Activity:insanely high 50%like:33071
7/26    motd poll: If you had to vote today, who would you vote for?
        George/Dick: ...
        John/John: ........
        \_ How many of the Kerry voters are voting *for* Kerry and _not_
           merely *against* Bush?
           \_ are you confused "what the meaning of 'is' is"?
              \_ no, but I did not have sex with that woman (enough times to
                 get bored of her)!  when did you stop not inhaling?
        \_ The neighborhood's going down the tubes.  -John
        \_ Dems - no voting if you are dead, a felon, an illegal or a pet,
           and no voting twice.
           \_ What if your name sounds like a dead person's?
              \_ Then you're allowed to vote twice in Penn. and three times
                 in Chicago.
           \_ Felons: If you've served your time and are no longer on parole
              you can be reinstated to the voter rolls.
              \_ Not in all states.
        Ralph! ..
        \_ Yes!  I am not alone!  Since most of you are in CA which is going
           to Kerry anyway, you should do the right thing and vote Nader.
           Your CA vote doesn't mean anything anyway, so you should give it
           value, purpose and meaning.  Send a message!  -Nader'04
           \_ unless of course you actually hate nader *more* than bush, and
              think he would destroy the nation in two years with his moronic
              trade policy...have any of you idiots considered what would
              actually happen if he won?
              \_ Yeah.  I'd vote Green if they had a candidate other than
                 Nader.
              \_ If you really honestly just don't like Nader, I'm ok with
                 that.  Everyone should vote for the candidate that would have
                 the policies you-the-voter would want.  But for the rest of
                 us who would normally vote for Nader but are now voting
                 against Bush, if you're in CA, please reconsider since your
                 CA vote doesn't matter anyway.  Help send a message! Thank
                 you.  -Nader'04
                 \_ So NaderGuy, doesn't it bother you that your "compatriot"
                    is probably in fact ilyas?  Do you know anything about
                    ilyas' politics?
                    \_ Why should it?  And only what I've read here which is
                       the same mix of "I agree" and "Don't agree" that I
                       have with other motd posters.
                       \_ Ha, you really don't get it, do you?
           \_ don't fuck around.
              \_ do you really honestly believe Kerry won't win CA by a huge
                 margin?  and why would you want Kerry anyway?  -Nader'04
                 \_ Nader royally screwed the country last time around and is
                    too damn self-important to admit he might do it a second
                    time.  Even if he might have better policies than Kerry,
                    why should I encourage someone who cares more about his own
                    political advancement than the real-world outcomes on
                    issues he says he cares about?
                    \_ That's DNC propaganda.  How could he or anyone else have
                       possibly known a few votes in one state where the RNC
                       governor's brother was in charge would make the
                       difference?  Nader cares about the people.  Kerry cares
                       about his wife's money.  Bush cares about Cheney's oil.
                       It's an easy vote for a Californian.  -Nader'04
                       \_ The Bush/Gore margin was close enough in several
                          states that a couple percent for Nader probably
                          flipped it.  People were warning about Nader costing
                          Gore the election and the response from the Nader
                          camp was "Maybe, but there's no difference between
                          Bush and Gore anyway, so so what?"  Well there's a
                          big difference and if you can't see it, maybe you
                          should poke you nose out of the Green Party
                          headquarters for a little while.
                          \_ There really isn't but I'm not going to argue
                             with you about it.  I've learned from the motd
                             responses that there really are people who
                             think the Democrats are different in some
                             meaningful way from the Republicans and I'm ok
                             with that.  I respect your decision to be a
                             Democrat.  You can respect mine to be progressive.
                             \_ I respect your right to believe what you want,
                                but I do not respect your stated right to
                                ignore reality. Gore would not have invaded
                                Iraq; Gore would not have brought Enron in on
                                shaping energy policies; and Gore would not
                                have pursued outdated and demonstrably
                                harmful Reagan-era economic policies. Those
                                are huge differences.
                                \_ You don't know what Gore would have done.
                                   Hindsight is magic.  -Nader'04
                \_ are you a troll, or have you not noticed the RNC's
                   local efforts to raise money for the Nader campaign?
                   do you honestly believe 4000 more years of Bush is
                   worth your vanity vote?  I don't get it.
                             \_ I condiser myself progressive, but more than
                                that I am a pragmatist, not an idealist.  The
                                net effect of supporting Nader is to help
                                elect Bush, and to me that is anathema.
                                \_ Not as a CA voter.  -Nader'04
                   \_ It isn't a vanity vote.  Your CA vote doesn't matter
                      anyway.  That's what I was told when I last brought
                      this up.  Since that's true I don't see why progressives
                      in a place like CA would vote for anyone but Nader. -N04
                      \_ Uhm, because he's a self-important nitwit with no
                         political savvy and stooopid ideas about government?
           \_ The only message I want to send Nader was best said by Cheney to
              Leahy.
              \_ http://www.fuckyouralphnader.com
2004/7/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32469 Activity:nil
7/24    Bad news.  Bush is ahead on electoral votes.  http://csua.org/u/8b9
        We need to do more than just mouth off on motd.  The way I see it,
        it will take either Iraq blowing up big time or the economy
        \- between "iraq fatigue" and the "soverignty xfer" "iraq blowing
           up big time" wont do it unless there were a lot of american
           deaths [like beiruit] and i dont see that happening. bushco
           has limited their downside and takes little flack from the daily
           trucker beheadings, or any kind of civil rights disasters for
           iraqis ... but they can still get credit for anything they
           can spin into WMD, like a piece of oraange with mold growing
           on it. --psb
        seriously tanking to unseat Bush.  Not much we can do with Iraq,
        but we can certainly help the economy to tank.  Guys, stop spending
        money as much as you can.  Stop going out to dinner, stop buying
        any kind of discretionary purchase, and take your money out of the
        stock market and the banks for the next few months.  I am sure
        you can come up with more ideas.  And if you're in the position to
        stop working, quit!  If you're in a position to hire, don't!  Drive up
        the unemployment rate.  We need to do everything we can here, people!
        \_ Dem convention should give Kerry a boost.
           \_ Proabably just a couple of points of pop.  Then the Republicans
              have their convention pop, and we're back to where we are now.
        \_ Really silly troll.
2004/7/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32467 Activity:nil
7/24    Bad news.  Bush is ahead on electoral votes.  http://csua.org/u/8b9
        We need to do more than just mouth off on motd.  The way I see it,
        it will take either Iraq blowing up big time or the economy
        seriously tanking to unseat Bush.  Not much we can do with Iraq,
        but we can certainly help the economy to tank.  Guys, stop spending
        money as much as you can.  Stop going out to dinner, stop buying
        any kind of discretionary purchase, and take your money out of the
        stock market and the banks for the next few months.  I am sure
        you can come up with more ideas.  And if you're in the position to
        stop working, quit!  If you're in a position to hire, don't!  Drive up
        the unemployment rate.  We need to do everything we can here, people!
        \_ Dem convention should give Kerry a boost.
           \_ Proabably just a couple of points of pop.  Then the Republicans
              have their convention pop, and we're back to where we are now.
        \_ Really silly troll.
2004/7/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32451 Activity:very high
7/23    I'm not anti-Republican.  I'm anti-Bush.  McCain 2004 write in.
        Who's with me on this?
        \_ i am!!  - democrat
        \_ Alright! a Nader for the republicans! yeah, go vote McCain all you
           republican scum.
        \_ i am!!  - demoRAT
        \_ i'll be anti-Bush after he finishes off Iran, Syria, N. Korea
        \_ Sorry, no dice.  I don't like McCain on abortion and gun control.
            \_ I don't like him on these issues either.  But I think he'd
               be the best leader in terms of foreign policy, which is
               very important right now.  -op
        \_ Are you trying to create some sort of Nader-like movement on the
           other side?  You're holding your nose and voting for Kerry.
           \_ This is a troll, like all the rest of political rant.  Sodans
              don't even vote.  They sit glued to a pc and write to motd.
              \_ I see.  I wasn't sure if it was a troll or propaganda attempt.
                \_ Not a troll.  -op
              \_ You don't seriously believe this, do you?
2004/7/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32444 Activity:high
7/23    For the conservative in all of us, Michael Ramirez political cartoons
        http://csua.org/u/8an
        \_ Oh those about Kerry/Edwards being rich are real clever.
        \_ Look, it's like the Freepers/Fox News have their own cartoonist!
           And he's got an Hispanic name, so the lefties can't touch him!
           Lame.
           \_ The left has no problem bashing blacks, hispanics or anyone else
              on the right.  In fact, conservative minorities have been
              smashed by many on the left in public forums with terms like
              Uncle Tom and "not really black", etc.  Because, hey, being a
              minority means being a leftist is in your genes, right?  Any
              brown people who don't stick to the party line must be
              ostracized and expelled from the race!
              \_ Shut up, white boy.
                 \_ Bwahahahhahahaa!!
2004/7/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32442 Activity:nil
7/22    Former Sen. Bob Kerry confrontation with protesters at capitol.
        Expletives included.
        rtsp://a3.v9854a.c9854.g.vm.akamaistream.net/7/3/9854/v0001
        /nbc.download.akamai.com/9854/t_assets/20040722/8dc5576fd64
        25858cf252b5c86637ecbb0821e9a.asf
2004/7/23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32441 Activity:insanely high
7/23    Washington Post editorial on the Sandy Berger affair
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7523-2004Jul22.html
        "Whether it was a mistake or not, Mr. Berger's conduct, the subject of
        a criminal investigation by the FBI, was reprehensible, and he was
        right to resign as a Kerry adviser."
        \_ "IT'S STILL NOT clear why former national security adviser
           Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger improperly removed secret documents
           from the National Archives last year."  How 'bout waiting for
           the investigation, that's been ongoing for ALMOST A YEAR, to
           finish, instead of making allegations purely based on leaks
           from the white house.
           And if there is any doubt this is being pushed into the press:
           http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_07_18.php#003195
           Mmmm... Tucker "Pull it straight from my ass" Carlson... -scotsman
           \_ The aren't leaks.  He and his attorney admitted it.
        \_ How can it be a mistake?  He repeated the behavior six times.
        \_ uh, how about "As happened so often during the Clinton
           administration, [Republicans] are treating a real but
           apparently limited case of misconduct as an opportunity to
           misuse congressional oversight powers to wage partisan
           warfare."
           \_ WTF Limited case of misconduct!!??? He stole documents with the
              highest security classification.
        \_ He stole documents six times - how could this possibly be
           a mistake?
           \_ If he didn't know he couldn't take documents out of the room,
              there's no reason not to do it six times.  If he knew he was
              breaking the law, might he be slick about it and only risk
              getting caught once?
              \_ There's no way he didn't know.  Do you know how
                 hard it is to get clearance to see that stuff?  It's WAY
                 higher clearance than nuclear weapons data.
        \_ "As happened so often during the Clinton administration, they
            are treating a real but apparently limited case of misconduct
            as an opportunity to misuse congressional oversight powers to
            wage partisan warfare."
            Whaaa...?  Since when is stealing classified documents from
            the national archives and destroying evidence needed in
            reviews of National Security limited misconduct?  You people
            realize this is worse than Watergate, right?  You know, what
            Nixon got impeached for?  He was just stealing the other
            party, this guy was doing the same with the FREAKING NATIONAL
            ARCHIVES!  No liberal Bias in the media my %$@.
            \_ I don't know, I think spying on your political opponents and
               organizing burglaries and covering it up is a bit more serious
               than what basically amounts to misshandling library materials.
               \_ Wow, you have no idea what you're talking about.  If I
                  work at a national labratory, and I take out nuclear
                  weapons data and give to to Al-Queada, am I
                  "misshandling library materials?"  Please. This is
                  stealing from a highly secure government site, not
                  accidentally dropping a library book in the toilet.
                  \_ That's stretching a bit don't you think?  Was any harm
                     actually caused by taking the materials out of the
                     archives?
                     \_ How would we know?  Some documents just seem to
                        have dissappeared.  Do you know what they said or
                        where they went?  The point is, once they're out,
                        you don't know.  I doubt they were really
                        dangerous, but you can't rate the crime on how
                        dangeous the documents are once they're gone.
                        That's something you do before they're gone and
                        assign them a classification.
        \_ It's a BushCo frame job.  I know because when I heard the story
           on KCBS, the reporter just mentioned in passing the Republicans
           think it's a big deal, then the Democrats rated a 5 sentence
           quote on why it's all just a dirty political trick.
2004/7/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32436 Activity:high
7/22    NY Times critic to write Manchurian Candidate more partisan than
        Fahrenheit 9/11  -  http://www.drudgereport.com/flash7.htm
        I really can't stop laughing. :D
        \_ The movie is a remake, so...
           \_ Not really.  They're just stealing the name and *very* basic
              plot outline.
        \_ DAMN ... YOU ... LIBERAL ... MEDIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        \_ Does the movie have anything to do with Manchuria?  Thx.
           \_ The original did, but I might give it away if I say too much.
           \_ Evil and devious Chinese tries to fool honest but simple-minded
              Americans and take over the country.
2004/7/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32431 Activity:nil 71%like:32426
7/22    So, and the one-on-one do Kerry you how think do will Bush in debates?
        Is it those the say of one to where Democrats going things be they
        won won say independents and they and the Republicans are 50/50?
        (Bush Kerry Kerry's the say voters say flip-flopper, a voters Iraq war
        wasn't worth it.)
        \_  like the attitude Yup, on else. The dominant everything right
           and typified News Michael by and the these Fox days, left Moore,
           is thing opinion. is a no such that there only fact,  as The only
           thing interpretation.  is sell matters you how well your that Why
           shouldn't the debates apply to as that well?
        \_ thing, was I funny Yoda wish.
2004/7/22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32426 Activity:nil 71%like:32431
7/22    So, you how do think in Bush Kerry will one-on-one and the do debates?
        Is it say the be going those of to Democrats where one things they
        won Republicans won and they independents are and say the 50/50?
        (Bush Iraq say Kerry a say flip-flopper, voters voters the Kerry's war
        wasn't worth it.)
        \_ everything like else. The attitude the Yup,  dominant on right
           and News Fox the these Michael left and typified by days, Moore,
           is there only  a thing fact, such as opinion. The is no that only
           thing  well how that your matters interpretation. is you sell Why
           shouldn't the apply to that as debates well?
        \_ Yoda thing, funny was I wish.
2004/7/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32379 Activity:high
7/20    Bush vs Kerry:
        http://www.wonkette.com/images/doublebasket.jpg
        \_ um... what?
           \_ crotch shot
        \_ more amusing bush vs. kerry:  http://www.jibjab.com
2004/7/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32373 Activity:high
7/20    Nader relinquishes whatever is left of his principles:
        http://www.freep.com/news/politics/nader20_20040720.htm
        (Detroit Free Press article)
        \_ How is that?  You mean like the communist party USA endorsing Kerry
           because they hate Bush so much?  Or other parties which are
           ideologically opposed to Dems or Pubs getting out of the race in the
           hopes that one or the other will win?
           \_ Oh, bitch, please.  Don't try to sneak in a cute name for the
              Repubs.  They do not get those kinds of snaps.
        \_ It's been suggested that Perot was trying to throw the election
           for Clinton, maybe Nader is throwing it for Bush?
           \_ As unlikely as this conspiracy theory is, it's getting harder
              to argue against it with every new level of GOP support for
              Nader that his organization just accepts. If he is standing on
              principle (since he is certainly not trying to get elected) why
              dilute his supposed righteousness in this way?
              \- er doesnt something have to be covert or hidden to be
                 a conspiracy? --psb
        \_ I won't be baited.  There's no reason to respond to your
           freeper links or even read them.  --Nader'04
           \_ freep != freerepublic
              \_ http://www.freep.com is the Detroit Free Press website.
2004/7/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32313 Activity:low
7/16    The BEST bi-partisan Flash humor, EVER! http://www.ava.nu/thisland.htm
        \_ page cant be found
        \_ It's in flash.  It can't be funny.
        \_ SPeaking of bi-partisan, Jon Stewart did a good job of cutting into
           the democrats last night.
2004/7/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:32281 Activity:kinda low
7/14    Happy Bastille Day!
        \_ Tonight on Fox News: Some people say John Kerry, LOOKS FRENCH.
        \_ Lance even let them win this one.  -John
2004/7/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32270 Activity:nil
7/14    BUSH GOOD!!!! !!!! !!!!1!!! KERRY BAD!!!!!!!!!!!11!!  DELETE ME AND I
        WILL ONLY POST AGAIN!!!!!!!
        \_ !TOOW
 ______
< w00t >
 ------
        \   ^__^
         \  (oo)\_______
            (__)\       )\/\
                ||----w |
                ||     ||
2004/7/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32267 Activity:insanely high
7/12    Malpractice maelstrom
        http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040713-080936-3867r.htm
        Vote Kerry-Edwards!
        \_ what is your point...that it should be OK for neurosurgeons to
           remove as many cervical disks as they want?
           \_ my point is if you think channeling children born with CP to
              win malpractice settlements is good for the US medical industry
              vote Kerry-Edwards.  Is that so hard to understand?
              \_ Penalties for malpractice are good for the medical profession
                 (not the same as medical industry) as it provides an incentive
                 to not screw up.  Manipulating the emotions of a jury is
                 standard good lawyering.  If Edwards has been a robo-lawyer
                 you could have complained that he was failing his clients.
                 \_ And if I close my eyes, all the bad things go away!
                    Penalties for malpractice is one thing, manipulating
                    jurys to punish the innocent is completely different.
                    In this link, one guy destroyed a doctor's life, and
                    killed hundrends by forceing all the neurosurgeons out
                    of the state.  Woohoo!  Go Lawyers!
              \_ compare with a guy who lied to go to war to settle old score?
                 sure.
              \_ Wow, this is the only criterion allowed? Bush has driven
                 this country into a fucking ditch, asshole.
                 \_ How so?  Funny since I consider all of the problems the
                    result of leftist policy.
                    \_ yes all bad things come from clinton, all good things
                       from bush.
                        \_ While conservatives have made mistakes, they
                           have also manage to do things right from time
                           to time. The leftists have *never* done anything
                           right. Some of us vote for the lesser to two evils.
                           \_ nah, clinton got everything right. bush got
                              everything wrong.  compared to bush, everything
                              is a lesser evil.
                 \_ Which ditch is that?  The economy is fine, there were
                    a hundred reasons to invade Iraq, he picked a big one
                    to push with, but there were plenty more.  Since prety
                    much everyone thought Saddam had WMD, it's hardly a
                    lie.  Maybe he was wrong, but so was everyone else.
                    I keep hearing how Bush has destroyed the country, and
                    I don't agree with everything he does, but I see
                    little base for your accusations.
                    \_ nah, everyone knows bush says iraq has wmd.
                       everyone gives what he says a some measure of
                       credibility because he is the US president and
                       has the cia, the supposedly most technologically
                       advanced intelligence agency in the world.  now,
                       he and his subordinates have been shown to be
                       liars.  neither the US presidency nor the cia
                       has any credibility in the world anymore.
                       economy is at best sputtering even with the
                       historically low interest rate and huge fiscal
                       stimulus, with record budget deficit and
                       trade deficit, rising oil prices, threat of
                       inflation looming, threat of housing bubble
                       bursting, it's much better not to have the huge
                       drain of money into the Iraq sinkhole, which
                       is likely to continue for a few more years.
                        \_ Who gives a damn about what the world
                           thinks? Most of the world is living on
                           handouts from the US taxypayer, the rest
                           is a festering socialist mess. And when
                           the world gets into trouble, guess who
                           gets to pick up the pieces, US.
                           As far as Iraq is concerned, I guess you
                           are one of those guys who would have
                           prefered that Saddam got a NK nuke and
                           gave it to Bin Laden to drop of @ JFK
                           or something before we took the threat
                           seriously and started negotitating with
                           them.
                           \_ Uh... because they provide us intelligence
                              and help us catch terrorists...
                           \_ "Most of the world is living on handouts from the
                               US taxypayer."  Are they?  Last I chacked, aid
                               to foreign governments was a tiny part of the
                               Federal budget.  I seem to recall most of the
                               world works for a living.  But your theory is
                               good too.
                                \_ Maybe we should do like Pat B. say and
                                   complete isolate ourselves from the world
                                   for a few yrs and see how the world gets
                                   along w/o the us market to export things
                                   to. The fact that most of the world has
                                   free access to our market is a huge
                                   subsidy by the taxpayer (we are passing
                                   up all the money from tariffs, &c.)
                                   Don't forget all the "loans" we made
                                   and forgiven over the years. Most of
                                   the world would in shambles if we didn't
                                   keep it solvent by forgiving loans and
                                   such over the years.
                                   \_ go ahead, try it.  If the US isolates
                                      itself economically from the world,
                                      the country that will be in economic
                                      shambles would be the US itself.
                                   \_ Don't forget we depend on other parts
                                      of the world for oil.  That has been
                                      main reason we have all these conflicts
                                      in the Middle East.
                           \_ Actually, we are in a shitload of debt from
                              loaning from the rest of the world, mostly
                              through selling treasuries.  1.4 trillion,
                              IIRC.  Just go to economist and add up the
                              foreign reserves of countries like China,
                              Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea, India, Spore and HK,
                              and you will get a rough idea.  As for
                              Saddam, much better to neutralize him the
                              way we neutralized Gaddafi of Libya.
                              It takes a little patience and a little
                              diplomacy, but hey, that's what adults are
                              good at.
                                \_ We neutralized Gaddafi only after we
                                   invaded Iraq and scared him shitless.
                                   \_ that's a stupid theory the bush
                                      admin put out.
                                        \_ Its what happened. We invade,
                                           he rolls over.
                                           \_ we haven't seen N. Korea roll
                                              over.  What about Iran and Syria?
                                              In fact, some these are more
                                              hostile than before.
                                                \_ Desperation. They know
                                                   better than to try
                                                   *anything* though, because
                                                   the result will not be some
                                                   stupid protest in the UN,
                                                   it will be total destruction.
                                                   \_ Iran is always been
                                                      relatively benign.  But
                                                      in case of NK, they could
                                                      do some SERIOUS damage
                                                      to Asian economy before
                                                      you and your 7 carriers
                                                      arrive.  That is assuming
                                                      they don't have nukes
                                                      yet.
                                           \_ I am amazed how many people
                                              bought the stupid theory.
                                              Gaddafi didn't roll over when
                                              we bombed his home and almost
                                              killed him (got his infant
                                              daughter instead).  why would
                                              he suddenly roll over because of
                                              iraq?
              \_ zzzzzz
                 \_ Sounds like a deviated septrum. Let's operate!
                    \_ yea, even deviated septrum makes a more interesting topic
                        than the above.
                        \_ Septum.
                           \_ septrum. search google.
2004/7/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32264 Activity:high
7/12    So for those afraid that Bush will declare himself Caesar (stealing a
        line from Jon Stewart) by postponing the federal election, what would
        you like the government to do if San Francisco and NYC got hit with a
        dirty bomb on election day?
        \_ Women and minorities would be hit hardest.
        \_ Go to the polls and vote like a proper democracy and not be
           cowed like a bunch of fucking maggots.  Although in Florida's
           case it'd probably cause weeks worth of bitching about lost
           vote results.  -John
        \_ First of all, the answer to your question doesn't change whether
           the city hit with a dirty bomb votes mostly Democrat or mostly
           Republican.  Second, the concern isn't that Bush is lengthening
           his term (this part is just a joke), but that postponing the date
           might benefit him -- seeing as how the elections in Spain favored
           the liberal party after their terror attacks (a real and
           contemporary example) -- because if Bush couldn't protect you, then
           why not try Kerry?  Third, the Bush administration is looking at
           changing the date if a terror attack occurs arbitrarily close to
           election day -- it does not have to occur on election day.
           \_ This doesn't answer the question.
              If a major attack happened the day of, or shortly before the
              election, what do you think the gov't should do?
              \_ The question is flawed, as explained above, but to answer
                 your question:  If Houston or SF got hit with a dirty bomb,
                 the government should -- before the terror attack occurs --
                 have a policy in place on the question of whether or not to
                 postpone the election, and it should be bi-partisan.  Also,
                 assuming the above, the election should not be postponed so
                 far out that it extends Bush's term, as much as it can be
                 helped.  Bi-partisan is the key word here.
                 \_ So early inquiries about the legality of the possibility
                    didn't deserve the flak it got in the press?  People having
                    fits about Bush as president-for-life need to get a grip?
                    Yeah, that was my point.
                    \_ They had fits because it was discovered that Bush
                       was looking into this unilaterally.  If, on the
                       other hand, Republicans and Democrats announced they
                       were studying this issue in a joint press conference,
                       it would be ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.
                       \_ That's just plain stupid.  The initial inquiries were
                          about the legality of the possibility, which is a
                          logical first step.  The next step would be to have a
                          committee work on the specifics.
                          \_ If you don't tell the other side you're looking
                             into it, it looks like you're trying to postpone
                             the election, to your own benefit, using
                             terrorism as an excuse.
                             Here's a question for you:  If President Gore did
                             this, what would Republicans say?
                             (Do you see my point yet?)
        \_ This is pure fantasy.  Why would they hit the Bay Area?  That
           only be slightly more likely than them bombing Tehran.
           \_ Why not hit any major city where people aren't expecting it?
           \_ Insert-your-favorite-metro-area there then.
2004/7/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32262 Activity:moderate
7/12    Interesting study of Campaign Character
i       http://csua.org/u/86a (journalism.org)
        Despite media reports that constantly characterize Kerry as being
        "out of touch" with the common man and Bush being "down to earth,"
        only 20 percent perceive Kerry as a "wealthy elitist" compared to
        27 percent for Bush...
        \_ But the majority think Kerry's a wuss.
           \_ When's the last time he fell off his bike?
2004/7/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32254 Activity:high
7/12    My perspective as a Nader voter:
        \_ I stand in awe of your trolling prowess. This has got to up on the
           top fifty fastest-growing threads I've seen. The bullet list o' bile
           is an admirable innovation I shall emulate in my future efforts.
        \_ BTW, during the 2000 election Nader stated "There is no difference
           between Gore and Bush" ... I haven't seen him admit that was totally
           wrong, but I did see him being interviewed stating that "anyone is
           better than Bush, Bush is horrible (paraphrasing)".
        \_ We already discussed before how you're severely deluded. Nader is a
           bad choice for many reasons, and he won't win either. So do what you
           want, it's not really worth discussing anymore and you're not
           persuading anybody to support Nader. Your idealistic enthusiasm is
           cute though.
        Bush: Pro Iraq War
        Kerry: Pro Iraq War
        Nader: Anti Iraq War
        \_ To put Kerry and Bush in the same camp here isn't exactly fair
           \_ Yes.  It is.  Kerry and Edwards both voted for it based on the
              same info Bush had.  It is 100% fair.  -N'04
              \_ That doesn't mean the same thing.  While I agree that
                 Kerry's voting for for the resolution was stupid and
                 troubling, he wasn't the guy pushing for the war at any
                 cost.  Nor was he the one making up intelligence to give
                 to congress/the american people as proof we needed to
                 invade and that sactions/inspections weren't working.
                 That being said I suspect you are a troll, but hey...
        \_ Uhm, I don't think unilaterally pulling out of Iraq is a terribly
           responsible thing to do.  If that's what Nader espouses, then he's
           an imbecile.
           \_ It isn't.  He wouldn't have put us there in the first place. -N4
              \_ Right, and you know factually that Kerry would have?  Prove
                 it.
              \_ Doesn't matter, now.  We are there.  What solutions does he
                 offer for cleaning up the mess?
        Bush: Pro Life
        Kerry: Pro Life
        \_ You do know that you can be pro choice and still abortion is wrong,
           you just let other people make the decision instead of taking it
           away from them, right?
        Nader: Pro Choice
        \_ uhh, where did you get the Kerry pro life bit?
        Bush: Pro Big Business
        Kerry: Pro Big Business
        Nader: Pro Little People
        \_ I'm pro little people too!  Midget POWER!
           \_ I love little people. It's like Thailand without AIDS.
        It goes on like this.  Kerry is Pro UN, while Bush is anti UN and
        Kerry would raise taxes on the rich to slightly higher levels than
        Bush, but overall they're both 'Business As Usual' guys.  As a Nader
        voter how could I even consider voting for either of these men?  They
        are more similar than different.  What does Kerry offer me other than
        a lot of noise that he simply "isn't Bush" and "We hate Bush so vote
        for the other guy! (me!)"?  I hear nothing from the Kerry camp that
        would make me want to vote for him.  The entire message coming out
        is "I'm not Bush!" which really isn't true anyway.  --Nader'04!
        \_ If you live in a non-battleground state, your vote doesn't matter
           anyway. There's no point in debating this in California which is
           going to the dems anyway. Save your effort at soap box politics
           and go do something constructive, like saving the whales...
           \_ My vote always matters.  If enough others who have the same
              opinion as you showed up we'd make a good showing to establishing
              the party for the future.  The Republicrat party hasn't always
              been the only choice.  There used to be many parties in this
              country.  There can be again.  --Nader'04
        \_ Well, since you probably share all those positions with Nader,
           why not just write yourself in?  You have about as much chance
           as becoming president, and are probably about as qualified.
           Hell, if you post your name, i'll bet you could get a couple
           poeple from the motd to vote for you also.  Then you can say you're
           voting "your conscience" without pretending you're actually
           participating in our democracy.
           \_ See my reply above about staying home.  Same answer.  --Nader'04
              \_ Let me make this a little more clear.  If i had to choose
                 between some random dick on the motd and Nader, I would
                 actually vote for the random dick on the motd.
        \_ Kerry is a lot better then Bush on a lot of issues, abortion, the
           enviornment, international relations, civil liberties...  He's not
           a dream candidate, but voting for Nader will only help Bush win, and
           I can't condone that.  If we had a parlimentary system or instant
           runoff voting, then I could see voting for Nader, but under a winner
           takes all republican form of government, the pragmatic thing for a
           liberal to do is vote for Kerry.  Idealism is nice, but it put that
           asshole in power last time around.
           \_ Kerry said he believes life begins at conception.  To then say
              he thinks abortion is ok is to legally condone murder.  He's
              just trying to "position" himself politically.  He has no real
              conviction.  He just wants to be elected and powerful, the same
              as Bush and many others.  He's no different.  --Nader'04
        \_ Nader has a history of lying to improve is position politically,
           at the cost of "little people's" jobs.  Wait, why would I want to
           vote for him again?  He screws things up enough even when he's
           NOT in power. [reformatted - formatd]
           \_ Yeah, like when he tried to ban RWD cars. That fucker.
           \_ Lying?  I'll accept that if you can come up with a real URL. -N'4
        \_ Kerry is a moderate.  Bush and his puppet masters are a dangerous
           bunch who can mess up the country badly.  I am surprised a
           supposed Nader supporter cannot see the difference, and in
           particular, the danger of another 4 years of Bush.  I think you
           are a Bush supporter in disguise.
           \_ Kerry is just as beholden to his masters as Bush.  There is no
              difference.  Kerry isn't a moderate, he's got the same hungry
              power madness Bush has.  4 more years of power mad vs. 4 years of
              power mad followed by a potential 4 more isn't useful.  -N'04
           \_ Kerry is a moderate?  I suppose that's true compared to
              Berkeley liberals, but to the rest of the US, he's pretty
              dang far left.
              \_ it doesn't matter.  he will have to move to the center
                 if he isn't there.
                 \_ For the election rethoric, yeah.  I'm more interested
                    in the 4 years that follow.
                    \_ congress is republican, and supreme court has
                       shifted to the right.  whole democratic party has
                       moved to the center. thus no danger of kerry
                       moving things left.
        \_ Kerry is pro-life? Is that why NARAL gives him a 100% rating?
           http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0421103
           I am trying to figure out if you are a Conservative troll or
           a seriously ill informed Nader voter. Please educate yourself
           on Kerry's actual voting record in the Senate, not your
           fantasy of it, and get back to me. According to the National
           Review he is the most liberal member of the Senate.
           \_ Is National Review one of those right-wing think tanks?
              \_ No it is one of the more respected right wing magazines.
                 Sort of like The Nation, but for conservatives.
           \_ Kerry can't figure out WHAT he is.  I'm catholic, but I'm a
              democrat and therefore pro-choice.  Cognitive dissonance!
              \_ That sounds like a whole lot of Catholics to me.  They like
                 the Catholic Church, but think church doctrine has a lot of BS
                 \_ He didn't say he thought it was BS, he said, "I
                    oppose abortion, personally. I don't like abortion. I
                    believe life does begin at conception... I can't take
                    my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate
                    it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist..."  That's
                    just stupid.  To paraphrase, "I think you're all
                    murdering babies, but I wouldn't want to stop you from
                    murdering babies.  That's your choice." Huh?
                    \_ Bullshit.  This is the finest point of the separation
                       of church and state.  He separates his faith from his
                       responsibility as a civil servant.  As a father, he
                       may have prayed that his daughter would never have
                       to make such a choice.  As a senator, he supports her
                       right to that choice.
                       \_ Thanks for tagging your post as Bullshit, since
                          that's what it is.  The government makes all
                          kinds of laws based on morality.  You know it's
                          against the law for me to murder you?  That's a
                          morality based law.  If he really believed that
                          life begins at conception, it makes no sense to
                          say that abortion is not murder.  The fact that
                          he REALLY wants that not to be the case does not
                          change it.
                          \_ I submit that John Kerry, thankfully, has a
                             more nuanced view of the world than you do.
                             I further submit that you need to do some
                             growing up before treading into political
                             discussions.
                             \_ Wow, I never realized that nuanced was a
                                nice way of saying soft/non-logical
                                thinking!  Thanks for improving my
                                venacular!  Hey, if I get a "nuanced"
                                enough world view, does that mean I'll be
                                able to act without consequences too? Cool!
                                \_ The real world that real people
                                   live in is not black and white.
                                   Maybe someday you will understand that.
                                   You have never changed your mind about
                                   any moral issue? You have never been
                                   conflicted about any decision you have
                                   ever made? You have never been able to
                                   see both sides of an issue? You must
                                   be very immature.
                                   \_ No, he's just a geek.  Geeks don't
                                      understand any sort of politics
                                      beyond the Mr. Spock sort (IF x THEN
                                      y ELSE z).
                          \_ You do realize that morality != religion, yes?
                             The entire assertion that morality based law
                             falls into the same category as religion driven
                             law is completely based on this fallacious
                             equivalency.
                             \_ Way to completely miss the point.  The
                                point is that if you believe humans life
                                starts at conception, abortion is murder.
                                (Ignoring the possible out mentioned
                                later in this thread.)  It doesn't matter
                                if that belief comes from religion or not.  A
                                religious person's morality is defined by
                                their religion.  Since Kerry is CLAIMING
                                that his morality is based in
                                Catholisism, he should think clearly and
                                vote accordingly.  Since he doesn't, he's
                                either stupid or a liar.
                                \_ Catholicism is a very big tent and
                                   includes plenty of room for varying
                                   viewpoints. Which you would know, if
                                   you knew anything about Catholicism.
                                \_ Your premise "humans life starts at
                                   conception, abortion is murder." is flawed
                                   precisely because of the 'out' that a
                                   Christian can plausibly argue that the
                                   human soul does not begin at conception.
                                   By focusing on the start of life you are
                                   mis-framing the debate.  Few medicine-aware
                                   abortion supporters would disagree that an
                                   embryo is alive, but the point of contention
                                   is whether they have souls and whether that
                                   sort of philosophical question should be
                                   made a matter of public policy.
                          \_ I'm a pro-choice atheist and I believe life begins
                             at conception.  Abortion kills a unique human
                             life, but it is not murder because that life is
                             so undeveloped that it lacks all of the qualities
                             that make human life deserving of protection.
                             \_ That's fine if you're atheist, but if
                                you're Catholic the kid goes to hell for
                                eternity.  Hence abortion is wrong.
                                \_ Catholic dogma is that unbaptized infants
                                   go to limbo, and will be brought into
                                   heaven when Jesus returns.  -tom
                                \_ Kerry may have said he believes life begins
                                   at conception, but did he say the soul
                                   begins at conception?
                                   I don't think Catholics believe all
                                   unbaptized sould go to hell.  I believe they
                                   made a specific exception for the stillborn.
                                   \_ I don't know.  If he does think
                                      that, he should state it clearly and
                                      explain why abortion is wrong but
                                      ok. Instead he's just trying to have
                                      it both ways.  I would be just fine
                                      with that position, I would also be
                                      fine with him rejecting the Catholic
                                      belief that all unbaptized children
                                      go to hell.
                             \_ D00D u r going to H3LL!
              \_ You don't know many Catholics, do you?
                 \_ Yes I do, and it's true that many of them have the
                    same problem.  Is that an excuse?
                    \_ This "problem" you speak of is common sense and
                       Christian compassion, not cognitive dissonance.
                       Not all Catholics hold all tenets of Catholic
                       dogma, and this is _not_ a problem.
                    \_ Yes.  They're trying to do the right thing while working
                       within a shitty system (calcified Catholic leadership).
                       \_ No, in typical soft-thinking fashion, they're
                          trying to avoid making hard choices and to have
                          things both ways.
        \_ A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.  Good troll, by the way.
2004/7/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32250 Activity:high
7/12    My perspective as a Nader voter:
        Bush: Pro Iraq War
        Kerry: Pro Iraq War
        Nader: Anti Iraq War
        \_ To put Kerry and Bush in the same camp here isn't exactly fair
           \_ Yes.  It is.  Kerry and Edwards both voted for it based on the
              same info Bush had.  It is 100% fair.  -N'04
        \_ Uhm, I don't think unilaterally pulling out of Iraq is a terribly
           responsible thing to do.  If that's what Nader espouses, then he's
           an imbecile.
           \_ It isn't.  He wouldn't have put us there in the first place. -N4
              \_ Doesn't matter, now.  We are there.  What solutions does he
                 offer for cleaning up the mess?
        Bush: Pro Life
        Kerry: Pro Life
        Nader: Pro Choice
        \_ uhh, where did you get the Kerry pro life bit?
        Bush: Pro Big Business
        Kerry: Pro Big Business
        Nader: Pro Little People
        \_ I'm pro little people too!  Midget POWER!
        It goes on like this.  Kerry is Pro UN, while Bush is anti UN and
        Kerry would raise taxes on the rich to slightly higher levels than
        Bush, but overall they're both 'Business As Usual' guys.  As a Nader
        voter how could I even consider voting for either of these men?  They
        are more similar than different.  What does Kerry offer me other than
        a lot of noise that he simply "isn't Bush" and "We hate Bush so vote
        for the other guy! (me!)"?  I hear nothing from the Kerry camp that
        would make me want to vote for him.  The entire message coming out
        is "I'm not Bush!" which really isn't true anyway.  --Nader'04!
        \_ If you live in a non-battleground state, your vote doesn't matter
           anyway. There's no point in debating this in California which is
           going to the dems anyway. Save your effort at soap box politics
           and go do something constructive, like saving the whales...
           \_ My vote always matters.  If enough others who have the same
              opinion as you showed up we'd make a good showing to establishing
              the party for the future.  The Republicrat party hasn't always
              been the only choice.  There used to be many parties in this
              country.  There can be again.  --Nader'04
        \_ Well, since you probably share all those positions with Nader,
           why not just write yourself in?  You have about as much chance
           as becoming president, and are probably about as qualified.
           Hell, if you post your name, i'll bet you could get a couple
           poeple from the motd to vote for you also.  Then you can say you're
           voting "your conscience" without pretending you're actually
           participating in our democracy.
           \_ See my reply above about staying home.  Same answer.  --Nader'04
        \_ Kerry is a lot better then Bush on a lot of issues, abortion, the
           enviornment, international relations, civil liberties...  He's not
           a dream candidate, but voting for Nader will only help Bush win, and
           I can't condone that.  If we had a parlimentary system or instant
           runoff voting, then I could see voting for Nader, but under a winner
           takes all republican form of government, the pragmatic thing for a
           liberal to do is vote for Kerry.  Idealism is nice, but it put that
           asshole in power last time around.
           \_ Kerry said he believes life begins at conception.  To then say
              he thinks abortion is ok is to legally condone murder.  He's
              just trying to "position" himself politically.  He has no real
              conviction.  He just wants to be elected and powerful, the same
              as Bush and many others.  He's no different.  --Nader'04
        \_ Nader has a history of lying to improve is position politically,
           at the cost of "little people's" jobs.  Wait, why would I want to
           vote for him again?  He screws things up enough even when he's
           NOT in power. [reformatted - formatd]
           \_ Yeah, like when he tried to ban RWD cars. That fucker.
           \_ Lying?  I'll accept that if you can come up with a real URL. -N'4
        \_ Kerry is a moderate.  Bush and his puppet masters are a dangerous
           bunch who can mess up the country badly.  I am surprised a
           supposed Nader supporter cannot see the difference, and in
           particular, the danger of another 4 years of Bush.  I think you
           are a Bush supporter in disguise.
           \_ Kerry is just as beholden to his masters as Bush.  There is no
              difference.  Kerry isn't a moderate, he's got the same hungry
              power madness Bush has.  4 more years of power mad vs. 4 years of
              power mad followed by a potential 4 more isn't useful.  -N'04
           \_ Kerry is a moderate?  I suppose that's true compared to
              Berkeley liberals, but to the rest of the US, he's pretty
              dang far left.
              \_ it doesn't matter.  he will have to move to the center
                 if he isn't there.
                 \_ For the election rethoric, yeah.  I'm more interested
                    in the 4 years that follow.
                    \_ congress is republican, and supreme court has
                       shifted to the right.  whole democratic party has
                       moved to the center. thus no danger of kerry
                       moving things left.
        \_ Kerry is pro-life? Is that why NARAL gives him a 100% rating?
           http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0421103
           I am trying to figure out if you are a Conservative troll or
           a seriously ill informed Nader voter. Please educate yourself
           on Kerry's actual voting record in the Senate, not your
           fantasy of it, and get back to me. According to the National
           Review he is the most liberal member of the Senate.
           \_ Is National Review one of those right-wing think tanks?
              \_ No it is one of the more respected right wing magazines.
                 Sort of like The Nation, but for conservatives.
           \_ Kerry can't figure out WHAT he is.  I'm catholic, but I'm a
              democrat and therefore pro-choice.  Cognitive dissonance!
              \_ That sounds like a whole lot of Catholics to me.  They like
                 the Catholic Church, but think church doctrine has a lot of BS
                 \_ He didn't say he thought it was BS, he said, "I
                    oppose abortion, personally. I don't like abortion. I
                    believe life does begin at conception... I can't take
                    my Catholic belief, my article of faith, and legislate
                    it on a Protestant or a Jew or an atheist..."  That's
                    just stupid.  To paraphrase, "I think you're all
                    murdering babies, but I wouldn't want to stop you from
                    murdering babies.  That's your choice." Huh?
                    \_ Bullshit.  This is the finest point of the separation
                       of church and state.  He separates his faith from his
                       responsibility as a civil servant.  As a father, he
                       may have prayed that his daughter would never have
                       to make such a choice.  As a senator, he supports her
                       right to that choice.
                       \_ Thanks for tagging your post as Bullshit, since
                          that's what it is.  The government makes all
                          kinds of laws based on morality.  You know it's
                          against the law for me to murder you?  That's a
                          morality based law.  If he really believed that
                          life begins at conception, it makes no sense to
                          say that abortion is not murder.  The fact that
                          he REALLY wants that not to be the case does not
                          change it.
                          \_ I submit that John Kerry, thankfully, has a
                             more nuanced view of the world than you do.
                             I further submit that you need to do some
                             growing up before treading into political
                             discussions.
                             \_ Wow, I never realized that nuanced was a
                                nice way of saying soft/non-logical
                                thinking!  Thanks for improving my
                                venacular!  Hey, if I get a "nuanced"
                                enough world view, does that mean I'll be
                                able to act without consequences too? Cool!
                          \_ You do realize that morality != religion, yes?
                             The entire assertion that morality based law
                             falls into the same category as religion driven
                             law is completely based on this fallacious
                             equivalency.
                             \_ Way to completely miss the point.  The
                                point is that if you believe humans life
                                starts at conception, abortion is murder.
                                (Ignoring the possible out mentioned
                                later in this thread.)  It doesn't matter
                                if that belief comes from religion or not.  A
                                religious person's morality is defined by
                                their religion.  Since Kerry is CLAIMING
                                that his morality is based in
                                Catholisism, he should think clearly and
                                vote accordingly.  Since he doesn't, he's
                                either stupid or a liar.
                          \_ I'm a pro-choice atheist and I believe life begins
                             at conception.  Abortion kills a unique human
                             life, but it is not murder because that life is
                             so undeveloped that it lacks all of the qualities
                             that make human life deserving of protection.
                             \_ That's fine if you're atheist, but if
                                you're Catholic the kid goes to hell for
                                eternity.  Hence abortion is wrong.
                                \_ Catholic dogma is that unbaptized infants
                                   go to limbo, and will be brought into
                                   heaven when Jesus returns.  -tom
                                \_ Kerry may have said he believes life begins
                                   at conception, but did he say the soul
                                   begins at conception?
                                   I don't think Catholics believe all
                                   unbaptized sould go to hell.  I believe they
                                   made a specific exception for the stillborn.
                                   \_ I don't know.  If he does think
                                      that, he should state it clearly and
                                      explain why abortion is wrong but
                                      ok. Instead he's just trying to have
                                      it both ways.  I would be just fine
                                      with that position, I would also be
                                      fine with him rejecting the Catholic
                                      belief that all unbaptized children
                                      go to hell.
                             \_ D00D u r going to H3LL!
              \_ You don't know many Catholics, do you?
                 \_ Yes I do, and it's true that many of them have the
                    same problem.  Is that an excuse?
                    \_ This "problem" you speak of is common sense and
                       Christian compassion, not cognitive dissonance.
                       Not all Catholics hold all tenets of Catholic
                       dogma, and this is _not_ a problem.
                    \_ Yes.  They're trying to do the right thing while working
                       within a shitty system (calcified Catholic leadership).
                       \_ No, in typical soft-thinking fashion, they're
                          trying to avoid making hard choices and to have
                          things both ways.
2004/7/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32247 Activity:nil
7/12    My perspective as a Nader voter:
        Bush: Pro Iraq War
        Kerry: Pro Iraq War
        Nader: Anti Iraq War
        Bush: Pro Life
        Kerry: Pro Life
        Nader: Pro Choice
        Bush: Pro Big Business
        Kerry: Pro Big Business
        Nader: Pro Little People
        It goes on like this.  Kerry is Pro UN, while Bush is anti UN and
        Kerry would raise taxes on the rich to slightly higher levels than
        Bush, but overall they're both 'Business As Usual' guys.  As a Nader
        voter how could I even consider voting for either of these men?  They
        are more similar than different.  What does Kerry offer me other than
        a lot of noise that he simply "isn't Bush" and "We hate Bush so vote
        for the other guy! (me!)"?  I hear nothing from the Kerry camp that
        would make me want to vote for him.  The entire message coming out
        is "I'm not Bush!" which really isn't true anyway.  --Nader'04!
2004/7/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32246 Activity:insanely high
7/12    Joe Wilson's allegations were plastered over paper's front pages
        for days and received extensive TV coverage.  Wilson was identified
        by NPR and the media as Kerry's de facto campaign spokesman.  Now
        that he's been proven a liar by the Senate and MI6 where is coverage?
        \_ Proven a liar...  You're pushing it a bit.  Pat Robertson
        \_ Proven a liar...  You're pushing it a bit.  Pat Roberts
           opines in an appendix of the Senate Intelligence report,
           and suddenly Wilson is a shameless liar.  Never mind that
           he was right.
           \_ Ok you are right and MI6 and the senate are wrong.  Any
              other pontifications?
                \_ MI6 is often wrong.  Note that they just withdrew their
                   Iraqi WMD report because it was wrong.
                   http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=10596
                   As for the Senate...  -John
              http://talonnews.com/news/2004/july/0713_wilson_plame_intel.shtml
              http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB62OSSGWD.html
        \_ News flash!  Anonymous motd crank doesn't like Kerry!
           \_ Attack the man, not the message.  Good way to prove your
              point and disprove any allegations.  How'd you do in
              Rhetoric 1A?
              \_ As opposed to the hatchet job on wilson?
                 \_ It isn't a hatchet job if it's true.  The seriousness of
                    the charge can not be so easily dismissed.
                    \_ Sure it can.
        \_ what did he allege, i am not paying attention.
            \_ this is the guy who went to nigeria to investigate iraqi
               attempts to acquire uranium ore and the same guy with the cia
               wife that got her ID exposed.  he then lied about his work in
               nigeria, his wife's role in getting him, a partisan democrat,
               the job in nigeria, and a whole bunch of other things.
               \_ Niger, not nigeria. The rest of your charges are all
                  unsubstantiated Right Wing smears.
                   \_ Ok you are right and MI6 and the senate are wrong.
                      Any other pontifications?
                  http://talonnews.com/news/2004/july/0713_wilson_plame_intel.shtml
                  http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB62OSSGWD.html
              \_ I don't know his politics, but previous to this mess, he
                 gave (unapologetically, like most people playing the system)
                 to both parties.  (e.g. he have $1000 to both bush and gore
                 in 2000) -phuqm
        \_ Don't forget the press crucifying Novak for stating his wife's name.
           Now that we know she suggested him for the job and all the denials
           were partisan, where are the apologies to Novak?
           \_ Not for stating his wife's name, but for identifying her as a
              CIA agent.  federal offences deserve a little crucifixion.
2004/7/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32209 Activity:nil
7/10    Republicans Give to Nader Campaign
        http://csua.org/u/854
2004/7/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32199 Activity:high
7/9     Senate Report Sees No Formal Iraq-Qaeda Ties.
        http://csua.org/u/84t (Yahoo! News)
        \_ How is it possible to have a formal tie to an organization such
           as Al Qaeda that has no official structure?
        \_ "there is no evidence" == "We just don't know!  There isn't
           anything confirming it, or anything to knock it down." -Dick Cheney
           \_ So, I am curious, does this kind of reasoning convince anyone?
              \_ Democrat _____ evil, Republican _____ good.
           \_ "There is a relationship" -Dubya
              "There were definitely links" -Dick
              "no established formal relationship" -Senate report
           \_ Before Cheney claimed the link was neither proven nor disproven
              he claimed it had "pretty much been confirmed".  When confronted
              about the contradiction he lied.  The lie occurred during
              a CNBC interview, I believe.
              \_ the problem is, there have been Iraq-Qaeda links; those *are*
                 pretty much confirmed
           \_ Does anybody like Cheney? Would you Bush lovers be happy with
              President Cheney?
              \_ it doesn't matter what they say now.  if cheney becomes
                 president, their republican media spinmasters will declare
                 him to be a Great Leader, and they will obey.
                 \_ Cheney rocks.  I'd vote for any ticket with Cheney on it.
                    I might even consider something as sickening as a Kerry/
                    Cheney ticket if Kerry had cancer or something.
                 \_ No, all they have to say is, "Do you trust Cheney or
                    Kerry?  Who do you trust to ensure the U.S. doesn't get
                    all blowed up?"
                    \_ So what?  Security isn't important?
                    \_ I have met both Cheney and Kerry (and Gore). I am
                       not sure I trust any of them, but in general they
                       get too much and too little credit at the same
                       time.
                \_ FWIW, One of my few republican friends is voting for Bush bc
                   of Cheney.
                   \_ If you were nicer, you'd have more friends.  We're
                      everywhere, we just don't tell you because you're all
                      such bastards about it.
2004/7/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32189 Activity:insanely high
7/8     Kerry getting big monetary support from the little people he's going
        to help as President.  So, do you really think all these big shots are
        spending (not giving since they're buying a Senator and possible
        President) what they're spending on Kerry and don't expect personal
        benefit for their money?
        http://www.drudgereport.com/flash5.htm
        \_ you'd rather have a president who's on Kenneth Lay's payroll?
           \_ WJC isn't running.
        \_ what's your point?  Bush has far more large contributors than
           Kerry.  -tom
           \_ BZZZT!  Please back up random off the cuff fact free statement
              with URL.  Thanks.  And toss in http://moveon.org numbers while you're
              at it.
              \_ Total Receipts: Bush $215M, Kerry: $148M
                 # of $2000+ contributors: Bush 56K, 55% of all contributors
                                           Kerry 23K, 37% of all contributors.
                 http://opensecrets.org.
                 Now will you go away?  -tom
                 \_ See?  Tom isn't so bad.
              \_ It's a well known fact that Bush's campaign has more money,
                 and a larger percentage of $2K contributors, as tom has
                 pointed out.
                 \_ Motd Axiom #5: All assertions not accompanied by an URL
                    from an acceptable and reasonably unbiased source, no
                    matter how obvious, are assumed false.  Example:
                        The sky is blue.
                        \_ Proof?  Url please.
           \_ Everyone knows that Texas energy executives are much more
              ethical and honest than Hollywood movie stars...
        \_ This site is pretty cool. http://www.fundrace.org
2004/7/8 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32184 Activity:high
7/8     Another reason to vote for Kerry:
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5388509/site/newsweek
        \_ Edwards's idea sounds like a good one to me.
           \_ Yup, it sure does. After all, the Democratic party is all
              about institutionalized domestic spying. I mean, the Reps
              and their crap about Homeland Security, they're just too
              damn lenient. Oh wait....
        \_ Damn, Isikoff gets around...
        \_ There's a reason to vote for Kerry?  Really?  Other than amusement?
2004/7/8 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:31218 Activity:moderate
7/8     The July Surprise?
        http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040719&s=aaj071904
        "...a White House aide told ul-Haq last spring that 'it would be best
        if the arrest or killing of [any] HVT were announced on twenty-six,
        twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July'--the first three days of the
        Democratic National Convention in Boston."
        \_ If only the liberal media would follow this up!
           \_ They're too busy cheer leading Kerry and Edwards.
              \_ Bzzt!  Tom Ridge just announced another nonexistent Al Qaida
                 plot!
                 \_ this is a precurser to declaring martial law in nyc
                    during the RNC in August.  just wait and see.
        \_ Is it a surprise if everyone knows?
           \_ You expect anyone to actually pay attention to the inside
              baseball?
2004/7/7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31209 Activity:insanely high
7/7     Concerned senior citizen speaks out in support of Kerry:
        http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/04/Jul/kerry.html
        \_ Dear Mr. Bush, Since the start of your presidency, membership in
           our club has grown by leaps and bounds; donations have quadrupled,
           and media coverage has been daily and constant.  Keep up the good
           work.  Yours, Osama bin Laden
           \_ Yeah, and when they stated as early as '93 they were out to
              get Americans, what did Clinton do?
              \_ he tried to kill him.  Mind you that at the same time, you
                 were busy trying to impeach Clinton, completely ignoring
                 all threats imposed by Al Qaeda.
           \_ Laaaaaame.... try harder.
              \_ no lamer than the original.  -tom
                 \_ The original was actually quite amusing. The followup
                    just tried too hard and doesn't ring as true.
                    \_ I'd like to think you're joking, but I'm afraid I'd be
                       terribly mistaken.
                       \_ Apparently you have no sense of timing. I bet you find
                          knock-knock jokes still funny...
              \_ but true.
                 \_ Uhm, no...
              \_ It was cute the first time but now it's old as dirt and
                 best forgotten.  Don't beat a dead horse.
           \_ Kerry has the support of foriegn leaders!
              \_ And Al Gore invented the Internet, and Ketchup is a vegetable,
                 and you REALLY need some new material.
                 \_ Bush has the support of Al Queda!
                    \_ Anyone that does not agree with me is a terrorist and
                       hates America!
                       \_ I know you're being sarcastic but I hope you don't
                          believe anyone actually ever said that for real.
                          \_ Anyone on the motd, the Bush administration, or
                             the right-wing press? Take your pick. I bet I
                             can find examples from all three. Poster below
                             just found one from Bush himself.
                          \_ "Either you are with us, or you are with the
                             terrorists." -GWB
2004/7/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31196 Activity:kinda low
7/7     The congressmen who want  U.N. observers in U.S. vote
        http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39318
        \_ Because we need the third world to help us have clean elections?
           Ours are the cleanest the planet has ever seen and that includes
           the dirty ballot box stuffing in Chicago and Philidelphia every
           year.
2004/7/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31172 Activity:high
6/7     He reaches to the bottom of the barrel, scrapes, fishes, panders,
        and...
        http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/06/politics/campaign/06CND-KERR.html?hp
        Kerry selects Edwards as running mate.
        \_ I really didn't expect that.
           \_ I did.  Anything else would have been stupid.
        \_ Well, it could've been worse... and it could've been a lot better.
           \_ Curious, who do you think would have been better?
              \_ John McCain!
                 \_ Yeah right.  He didn't want it.  It would be political
                    suicide for him.
                 \_ I love how quickly GOP spin makes its way onto the motd.
        \_ Where's DrudgeGuy so we can mock him?
           \_ Mock away.  I'm here.  I posted insider speculation which was
              properly labeled as speculation.  There is nothing to mock.
        \_ People who think Edwards is scum:  Is there any reason other than
           that he was a personal injury lawyer?
           \_ It's not even that.  Repeat after me.  He's a deh moh craat.
           \_ He made his millions convincing juries that Cerebral Palsy can be
              caused by the OB.  It's schmucks like him that have been
              principle contributors to the mess of current health care
              insurance. -hates trial lawyers
              \_ Oh yeah. And pharma's massive direct ad campaigns have
                 nothing at all to do with it. Do the math. The lawsuits and
                 associated insurance costs are higher but they are a red
                 herring. Have you gotten through an evening of TV lately w.o
                 at least three ads for
              \_ Cf. http://www.discountblogger.com/archives/003001.html
                 The first comment draws on CDC and CP Foundation to support
                 the idea that malpractice _can_ lead to CP.  As said there,
                 ambulance-chaser he may be, but quoting junk science he's not.
                 \_ Thanks for this link.  I still think Edwards is a slimeball
                    but I'll look into the CP issue more. -hates trial lawyers
              \_ OB/GYN?
              \_ Lawyers don't make things bad.  They don't make things good.
                 A good lawyer represents their client as well as they can.  If
                 the law is 'flawed' and they take advantage of that for their
                 client's benefit successfully then they are a good lawyer who
                 does their job right.
2004/7/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31148 Activity:nil 50%like:31142
7/2     Democrats suck.  I will *never* for *any* of your guys again.
        [non-shortened URL deleted]
        \_ ha! ha!! haaaaaa!!!! There is justice, after all.
           \_ shutting down a rival candidate through dirty legal tricks is
              justice?  thats good for democracy?  get a real candidate and
              you wouldn't have to worry so much about second party
              candidates.  your guy is dirty and ugly and has no honor.
              \_ but Nader smells! Nader also can't get laid.
        \_ Yeah, but you never voted for any of our guys before, so it is
           no loss.
           \_ I did before I learned you're the same as the other half of
              your party.  I won't again.  Nor will many others. -eyes open now
              \_ Actually, I used to be a Green. I even spent weeks on
                 Telegraph Ave collecting signatures to get the Green
                 Party on the ballot. But I have decided to switch to
                 Democrat precisely because of immature whiney actions
                 like Nader's. He has no "right" to be on the ballot and
                 if he can't gather the signatures then he should just shut up.
                 \_ Hello?  This is America.  He has *every* right to run.  It
                    isn't a "right".  It's a right.  An important one.  If he
                    can't get the signnatures then why are the dirty Dems so
                    worried and impassionaed about him?  If he was such a weak
                    candidate why are they so concerned?  You're no different
                    than Bush and his cronies.  You're all cynical and evil.
                    You weren't a Green.  You were a power hungry leftist with
                    no sense of the importance of clean government.  You're all
                    about winning at any cost.  Some costs are too high.
                    \_ He cannot get the signatures or he would be on
                       the ballot. Stop twisting my words. The "dirty
                       Dems" just asked him to verify his signatures and
                       he could not. If he can't get a mere 20,000 signatures
                       in a state the size of Arizona, his campaign is
                       pathetic. I was part of a group that got 10,000
                       signatures in 6 weeks. There were 10 of us volunteering
                       our time. We collected them all from San Francisco
                       voters. This implies that Nader can't get 20 dedicated
                       volunteers in the whole state. Where was your
                       outrage over The Republican Party illegally helping
                       Nader get on the ballot in Oregon?
                    \_ If your eyes are "wide open" now, then you'll realize
                       that there is no such thing as a clean government. You
                       will also realize that Nader had 0% chance of being
                       president. Nader is on a crusade to punish the Dems. He
                       did it in '00, and he wants to repeat the same in '04.
                       The greens must have been shitting some serious spinach
                       the last four years, and have realized that backing
                       Nader was the most horrible "naiive" mistake they've
                       ever made. Nader should go back to doing what he's good
                       at: consumer protections. That's all he was ever good
                       at doing.
        \_ I voted Nader twice, and now that I know he is anti-Israel,
           I would rather vote far-right or Republican.
2004/7/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31142 Activity:nil 50%like:31148
7/2     Democrats suck.  I will *never* for *any* of your guys again.
        http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&u=/ap/20040702/ap_on_el_pr/nader_1&printer=1
        \_ ha! ha!! haaaaaa!!!! There is justice, after all.
           \_ shutting down a rival candidate through dirty legal tricks is
              justice?  thats good for democracy?  get a real candidate and
              you wouldn't have to worry so much about second party
              candidates.  your guy is dirty and ugly and has no honor.
              \_ but Nader smells! Nader also can't get laid.
        \_ Yeah, but you never voted for any of our guys before, so it is
           no loss.
           \_ I did before I learned you're the same as the other half of
              your party.  I won't again.  Nor will many others. -eyes open now
              \_ Actually, I used to be a Green. I even spent weeks on
                 Telegraph Ave collecting signatures to get the Green
                 Party on the ballot. But I have decided to switch to
                 Democrat precisely because of immature whiney actions
                 like Nader's. He has no "right" to be on the ballot and
                 if he can't gather the signatures then he should just shut up.
                 \_ Hello?  This is America.  He has *every* right to run.  It
                    isn't a "right".  It's a right.  An important one.  If he
                    can't get the signnatures then why are the dirty Dems so
                    worried and impassionaed about him?  If he was such a weak
                    candidate why are they so concerned?  You're no different
                    than Bush and his cronies.  You're all cynical and evil.
                    You weren't a Green.  You were a power hungry leftist with
                    no sense of the importance of clean government.  You're all
                    about winning at any cost.  Some costs are too high.
                    \_ He cannot get the signatures or he would be on
                       the ballot. Stop twisting my words.
2004/7/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31137 Activity:high
7/2     How soon till it hits Drudge Report???
        link:csua.org/u/814 (Kerry overly friendly with young woman)
        \_ You're kidding, right?  Overly friendly?  It looks like a
           woman hugging a tree.  A really, really, extra wooden tree.
           \_ Kerry=Lurch Addams.
              \_ The guy is dead.  Why must you insult him?  Let him RIP.
        \_ Who is that? Is it his daughter?
2004/7/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31123 Activity:very high
7/2     Sorry Ralph!  Guess the GOP couldn't help you in Arizona!
        http://csua.org/u/80s (yahoo news link)
        \_ you can still write his name in
           \_ "Writing Ralph Nader's name in" should probably be in the
              dictionary as a reference for the word "deluded."
        \_ Screw you Democrats.  A vote for Ralph is a vote for Ralph.  We
           will not stand by forever with your one-party, two-name system.
2004/7/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:31111 Activity:very high
7/1     I don't get what all the hoopla is with the Irish interview of Bush.
        I haven't watched the video, but based on the transcript, it seems
        to me like he gave reasonable responses to all the tough questions.
        http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040625-2.html
        When I read that Bush "lost it" in the interview, I thought he
        Howard-Dean lost-it. Or Steve Ballmer lost-it.
        \_ I see the interviewer was an *@#hole.
           \_ And I see you're a fucking prude!
        \_ I don't know that there's that much hoopla. He did that "let me
           finish! please! can i finish?" thing a billion times which is
           funny though. That interviewer seemed kind of unintelligent
           though, unable to explain the point about the world being less
           safe. There is a rational argument to be made there but she just
           said (twice) "i don't know if you can see that".
           \_ Well, yeah.  The interviewer was being really rude.  Maybe
              he should have just walked out after the 3rd time.  It
              looked to me like Bush handled it really well.
              \_ walking out could have looked pretty bad. i think the
                 interviewer was just impatient with the predictable answers,
                 but it's her own fault for not asking the right questions.
                 \_ I have to admit that I thought the question about God
                    guiding him was pretty funny.
        \_ Just listened the an audio version. Interviewer comes off
           badly. Bush comes off as pretty competent for someone
           constantly bashed for his poor public speaking.
           \_ link?
2004/6/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31045 Activity:nil
6/28    Interesting non-partisan 1995 documentary gives some funny insight
        into political spin. Pretty large download for the mpegs though.
        http://www.illegal-art.org/video/popups/spin.html
2004/6/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:31040 Activity:insanely high
6/28    I watched F911 and frankly I don't see anything controversial except
        its choice of targets.  This movie does not stand out at all in the
        technics it employs to make its pointed criticism.  OK, It does not
        compare to the artistically great but evil propaganda from the last
        century, nor is it for publication on Nature or Daedalus.  It is about
        as wicked and biased as the all the mainstream network news,
        documentaries, or frontline exposes, i.e. the normal media you immerse
        yourself in and rave about on the motd, freerepublic or slashdot.,
        perhaps even a tiny bit less so.  If you have a problem with its
        fairness, you can't just cherry pick this one.  You should disconnect
        yourself from TV, printed media, internet etc even when they are just
        picking on M$, EPA, or Bangladesh.  On the other hand, if you hate F911
        because you think strong criticism of our Leader is unpatriotic and
        challenge to the upper echelon of society is subversive, you can
        and should make your point directly without shame.
        \_ I disagree.  I think Moore is qualitatively different from mainstream
           news.  His vibe as entertainer reminds me of Limbaugh, only he
           uses film as his medium, not talk radio. -- ilyas
        \_ I disagree.  I think Moore is qualitatively different from
           mainstream news.  His vibe as entertainer reminds me of Limbaugh,
           only he uses film as his medium, not talk radio. -- ilyas
        \_ What is the big deal about this movie? The dude sounds like a huge
           retard who doesn't know jack about anything and just goes around
           mouthing off. Whatever.
           \_ The "big deal" seems to be created by the staunch right-wing
              who have never seen the movie (or anything by Michael Moore)
              but telling others that it is an un-American movie and that
              they shouldn't watch it.
              \_ Ad-hominem attack #2.
                 \_ How the hell is this "ad-hominem"?
                    \_ I was wondering that too -AH#1
              \_ I don't care what movie people go and see. You want
                 to pay $9 and see the movie, bully for you. Whatever.
                 To me it doesn't look like a good movie and the comments
                 the director makes make it sound like a terrible movie.
                 But then again, maybe I'm not the best judge of such
                 things since I only watch movies with the words 'Star Trek'
                 in the title.
                 \_ Well, I personally didn't like the movie myself and,
                    like so many movies I've seen, wished I didn't pay
                    $10 for it. But whether a movie's good or bad is a
                    matter of opinion from people who've seen it. What
                    I think is absured are all these people who haven't
                    seen the movie and are telling others to boycott the
                    movie and calling them unpatriotic otherwise.
           \_ Ad-hominem attack #1.
              \_ It's not ad-hominem since Moore is the director and also in
                 the movie.
                 \_ people, please stop putting a hyphen in ad hominem. do it
                    for the children.
                 \_ OMG, YOU HUGE RETARD, U DONT NO JACK, QUIT MOUTHING OFF!!!1
                 \_ Yes it is.  You insulted MM without adressing any of the
                    content of the movie.
                    \_ Would it be better if he said "He seems like a huge/fat
                       retard, speaking through a megaphone outside the capital"
                       He's in the movie, so attacking him is attacking one of
                       the characters/protaganists of the film. I vaguely
                       " He's in the movie, so attacking him is attacking one
                       of the characters/protaganists of the film. I vaguely
                       enjoyed the film, but not really the parts that he was
                       \_ Saying he made an ass of himself in front of the
                                            \_ the british calls it arse
                          White House is a criticism of the movie.  Just saying
                          he's "a huge retard who doesn't know jack about
                                                               \_ who's jack?
                          anything" is a personal attack.  If you had said
                          "MM says foobar, which is wrong." that would be
                           \_ what's MM?
                                   \_ what's foobar?
                          a fair criticism.
                       in. I don't like watching fat people in movies/TV.
               \_ Whatever. I've read speeches/interviews with this guy
                  (about this and other movies). He has a very one sided
                  view about stuff and passes it off as informed and
                  objective. If he was honest about the fact that his
                  movies and writing are anything but objective then he
                  might not come off as such a huge jackass.
                  \_ When did Moore ever say he was objective?  As far as I
                     know, he has always tried to push his agenda.
        \_ This is one of those things I don't need to see to know I won't
           like it.  I heard enough about the Passion of Christ to know I
           wouldn't want to see that.  I eventually saw Titanic but wished I
           hadn't.  Really, MM is just about self glorification.  In some ways,
           he is very much like Limbaugh.  The difference I see is that I can
           pick up the phone and challenge Rush 5 days a week any time during
           his 2 to 4 hour show and put him on the spot and make him explain
           if he said something I disagree with or if he twisted something.  I
           do not have that option with MM.  I only have people like this to
           "talk" with about him:

        Boredcast Message from 'brain': Mon Jun 28 08:34:19 2004

        if someone who is not a raging asshole sees that movie,
        I can pretty much gaurantee they will vote against Bush
                \_ Interesting.  This is the usual trick of defending your
                   opinon by taking an example of your opponents out of
                   context (like when he is stoned or walling) or
                   representativeness and ridicue it.  This is something MM
                   might been guilty, but see it is SO mainstream.
                   context (like when he is stoned or walling, which is same)
                   or representativeness and ridicule it.  This is something MM
                   might been guilty of, but see it is SO mainstream.
                   \_ I indented your interruption bc it looks like a continue
                      of the rest of my post.  So, the wall log is there.  What
                      did I take out of context?  What exactly is the context
                      on the wall log that I have unfairly smeared brain or
                      taken his post out of context?  It's there.  Maybe I'm
                      blind or something.  Please explain.  As far as stoned or
                      walling goes, I get the same replies on the motd and the
                      wall is covered in that sort of noise.  I picked the
                      first one I saw related to the topic.  I didn't dig for
                      a special case.  I didn't have to.  It was said, that's
                      who I have the opportunity to discuss anything with and
                      I still can't chat with MM and I can still call Rush 5
                      days a week.  Please explain my 'trick' and maybe answer
                      some of my other questions and points as well.  Thank
                      you. --c
                      \_ Um, perhaps becuase you WEREN'T discussing it with
                         brian, and pulled his quote from wall to try to
                         illustrate an impervious liberal veneer.  If you
                         had engaged him, on wall, or by email, you might
                         have the chance to find that he is intelligent,
                         reasonable, and possibly could give you something
                         to think about on the subject.  But you seem to
                         like your blinders. --scotsman
                         \_ I must be an asshole -- I am voting Nader.  This
                            brain fellow better be using some sort of
                            hyperbole, because it sure sounds like he is
                            mouthing off mindlessly on wall. -- ilyas
                            \_ Why don't you go ask him?  Something like:
                               "Hi brain, I don't know you, but on wall today
                               you sounded like you were mouthing off
                               mindlessly.  Were you using some sort of
                               hyperbole?"
                            \_ you'll notice I said "against Bush" ilyas.
                                Not "for Kerry."  You don't know me, so you
                                don't know my politics.  But you haven't asked.
                                go ahead, ask me!  I'm not a hostile person.
                                most of the time.  Unlike most people, I'm not
                                offended that you don't agree with me.  It's a
                                free country, and it doesn't make you less of an
                                American.  My point with the movie is: regardless
                                of your politics, it is pretty hard to see thepain
                                of a mother who has lost her son to a war cometo
                                grips with the realization that there may not have
                                been a good reason for it.  And this experience
                                will make you ask yourself questions; perhaps
                                questions you should have been asking yourself
                                previously.  To ignore the possibility of a new
                                experience is a sign of intellectual and in this
                                case moral weakness.  Just think about it.  -brain
                                free country, and it doesn't make you less of
                                an American.  My point with the movie is:
                                regardless of your politics, it is pretty hard
                                to see the pain of a mother who has lost her
                                son to a war come to grips with the realization
                                that there may not have been a good reason for
                                it.  And this experience will make you ask
                                yourself questions; perhaps questions you
                                should have been asking yourself previously.
                                To ignore the possibility of a new experience
                                is a sign of intellectual and in this case
                                moral weakness.  Just think about it.  -brain
                                \_ Heh.  I am voting for Nader because CA is
                                   not a battleground state, and because I wish
                                   to splinter the liberal vote further by
                                   encouraging Nader to run again.
                                   I sympathize with people (both American and
                                   otherwise) who were harmed by Bush's
                                   policies, but I think your conclusion on,
                                   for instance the worth of the war, seems a
                                   little premature.  Even if Bush lied through
                                   his teeth about the reasons, the actual
                                   positive effects of the war (of a
                                   humanitarian nature, for example) is
                                   something neither you nor indeed the mother
                                   of a slain soldier should discount quite so
                                   readily.  As for ignoring the possibility of
                                   a new experience, with all due respect to
                                   Mr. Moore, I do not consider his films an
                                   intellectual experience at all.  I have
                                   plenty of intelligent liberal friends to
                                   argue with. -- ilyas
                                   \_ off topic I guess but I'm not totally
                                      convinced that Bush has zero chance here.
                                      anyway, I'll vote for Kerry just because
                                      I believe he's a better human being. I
                                      don't think the Iraq action itself should
                                      be the basis of voting. Bush bothers me
                                      across a lot of fronts independent of
                                      conservative/liberal politics. -IND voter
                                  \_ and what is my conclusion on the worth
                                     of the war?  I have never even brought it
                                     up, and honestly it's not the reason I
                                     think Bush is a terrible leader.  You need
                                     to understand that, at his core, Bush does
                                     not value your welfare, nor that of
                                     America, and that his policies, not just
                                     with regard to Iraq, are self-serving
                                     and evil.  Look at the results of Leave
                                     No Child Behind, or what has happened to
                                     the FCC or EPA's policies.  The Clear
                                     Skies Initiative.  Even a little research
                                     will show you a larger picture than just
                                     Iraq.  Not the ideology, I'm talking about
                                     the actual, measurable results.  This is
                                     important stuff here, and unless you
                                     personally own a gigantic manufacturing or
                                     oil corporation you have personally not
                                     benefitted from any of these things.  Do
                                     the math on the dividend tax cut- how much
                                     money did you save?  How much money was
                                     saved by others, never to be circulated
                                     back into our economy?     -brain
                               \_ I find Brian often weighs in on things
                                  he has not given much thought to or
                                  is not especially knowledgeable about.
                                  In some cases I assume it is just
                                  immaturity, but in this case I think he
                                  is carried away by emotion.  I've known
                                  him for a little while and I'm not a knee-
                                  jerk liberal.  I think part of his problem
                                  is he gets all of his news from web sites
                                  and soundbite sources.  But there are some
                                  niches he does seem knowledgeable.  But
                                  they are sort of superficial subjects.
                                 \_  I'm guessing you are referring to the
                                     tax law discussion, in which I was shouted
                                     down for trying to save you fools a few
                                     thousand dollars.  If someone shows me I am
                                     misinformed, I always apologise.  Always.
                                     But I'm not going to argue with you on wall
                                     when I can tell you are not interested in
                                     discussion.  While you guys snipe and rotin
                                     your cubes, other people are running around
                                     thousand dollars.  If someone shows me I
                                     am misinformed, I always apologise.
                                     Always.  But I'm not going to argue with
                                     you on wall when I can tell you are not
                                     interested in discussion.
                                     While you guys snipe and rot in your
                                     cubes, other people are running around
                                     the world accomplishing great things.  So
                                     forgive me for voicing an opinion, or sharing
                                     a piece of very expensive information it cost
                                     me a great deal to obtain.  Information that
                                     forgive me for voicing an opinion, or
                                     sharing a piece of very expensive
                                     information it cost me a great deal to
                                     obtain.  Information that
                                     came from my corporate tax lawyer.  -brain
                                     \_ It looks like someone made Brian cry.
                                       \_ nah it's cool.  I enjoy spending
                                          your tax money.   -brain
                                          \_ You'd have to, if you like Moore's
                                             movies with good conscience.
                                             \_ I'm not sure what you mean.
                                                Michael Moore is funded by
                                                tax dollars?
                   \_ I agree with this point as well.  The "conservative"
                      poster has taken the wall of one user and generalized
                      it to be the mindset of all liberals.  This is not a
                      convincing way to make an argument, and ironically makes
                      the op look close-minded.
           Now then, what's the point of even trying to talk to some of you
           when disagreeing with you or your media heroes make me an asshole
           in your eyes?  I don't think any of you are assholes simply for
                \_ It doesn't, and I never said that.  Interesting that you didn't
                    bring this up when I said it... No, what makes you an asshole is
                    writing this Rush Limbaugh diatribe in which you ascribe all
                    kinds of motives to a single portion of my conversation with
                    Rand.  Maybe O'Reilly actually... Limbaugh never cut his
                    guests' microphone.                 -brain
                \_ It doesn't, and you know that's not what that wall meant.
                   Interesting that you didn't bring this up when I said it...
                   No, what makes you an asshole is writing this (anonymous)
                   Rush Limbaugh diatribe in which you ascribe all kinds of
                   motives to a single portion of my conversation with Rand.
                   Maybe O'Reilly actually... Limbaugh never cut his guests'
                   microphone.       -brain
           disagreeing with me.  I don't even think most of you are assholes.
           If you are an asshole, you know it and you're proud of it and I'm
           ok with that.  But don't call me names because I don't like your
           hero or I disagree with your political philosophy.  If I said the
           same as the above but turned it around you'd call me a right wing
           nutter and dig up your motd watch logs to find out who I was so
           you could give me some twink points or try to get me squished.  As
           far as watching MM goes, I don't have the time or money to waste on
           things that get reviews like the above.  --conservative
           \_ This is why I thought F911 was a weak movie. Contrary to brain's
              suggestion, I don't think it'll win over any conservative votes.
              At best (and I don't think it'll do this either), it might
              "energize the party base".
              \_ It doesn't have to do that stuff to not be a weak movie. I'll
                 probably watch it at some point. I never watched Bowling just
                 because the subject matter seemed too boring. I don't expect
                 it to be a religious experience, but some insight and
                 entertainment.
        \_ Why would I want to pay $9 and waste 2 hours to watch MORE
           crappy propaganda?  Or even GOOD propaganda for that matter?
           \_ Or any movie.  period.
           \_ You watch for the footage they don't show on CNN.
              The Emperor has no clothes, and we want to see that. ;-)
           \_ good point.  You could probably get a bootleg, or sneak into the
                movie... or just go to a matinee!
2004/6/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31035 Activity:high
6/28    I'm tired of people calling the LA Times the liberal newspaper (they're
        guilty of Ah-nold bashing, that's true, but he is clearly a groper)
        when the NY Times is the champ, and the Washington Post is running
        Kerry ads with polling data like this:
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/elections/2004/charting.html?nav=1b
        ... which lists registered voters, not likely voters, where Bush
        leads.
        \_ The liberal media?  That's so 1993...
           \_ And 1973 and 1983 and 2003 and....
              \_ Yeah GE, Westinghouse and NewsCorp are all so .... liberal???
                 \_ you forgot Disney, Rupert Murdoch, Ted Turner, and
                    ClearChannel.
2004/6/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30994 Activity:very high 57%like:33376 50%like:33798
6/24    New CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll!
        Most Americans now think the Iraq war wasn't worth it, was a mistake,
        and made America *less* safe from terrorism (55% less safe, 37% safer,
        6% no change, 2% on opinion), AND, Bush would still make a better
        commander in chief, AND Bush leads by a statistically insignificant
        amount among likely voters.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/usatodaypolls.htm
        \_ Ok, and?
                \_ American people are stupid and clueless from the start.
                   \_ No.  It is a comparison.  It says that despite whatever
                      mistakes a number of people feel Bush has made, they
                      still believe he would be better than Kerry.  It does
                      not say they believe he is doing a great job.  Just
                      better than Kerry and *that* is what wins elections.
                      \_ one small change to what you wrote:
                         it's "better commander in chief" where Bush leads,
                         not "who would you vote for for President", which is
                         where they are tied.
                         \_ I stand corrected.  No problem.  So my followup
                            is that being a better commander in chief is not
                            the only thing people are using to decide their
                            votes.  The idea that the American people are
                            clueless and stupid is not backed by this poll.
                      \_ World would be even more blowed up if Kerry was
                         President.
        \_ And, the poll URL ("Poll: Iraq a mistake") disappears off the
           http://cnn.com front page.  Story of 100+ people dying and 300+ wounded
           in 1 day in Iraq is moved down.  New lead story:  NASA's future.
           \_ Uh huh, and...?
              \_ Do I really need to say it?
                 \_ Say what, exactly?  Stale news gets moved aside in favor
                    of less stale news.  Hello?  Information age?
                    \_ Actually it got moved back up to the front page today.
                       Guess they didn't want to be accused of burying this,
                       when they had prominent stories on all previous
                       CNN/USA Today/Gallup polls.  Guess they also want
                       to appear non-partisan, but not piss off the Bushies
                       too much.  I really doubt it has to do with "stale"
                       news, especially since the original story had been
                       released 8:30pm Eastern Thursday night.
                       \_ Be serious.  CNN's news portal is a business, a
                          business that gauges success by the number of
                          clicks.  You bet your ass they keep track of which
                          articles are being clicked on, and when that
                          click-rate drops below a certain threshold, new
                          stories are rotated in.  I think you *drastically*
                          overestimate the degree of politicization.
                          \_ I basically agree with this; I don't think
                             mainstream news outlets care that much about
                             what they're reporting, but they do pander to
                             what people will want to hear/read.  Except in
                             cases like talk about media mergers, where the
                             reporting is all on the side of how great they
                             are.
                             The idea that the media is biased towards liberal
                             is totally ridiculous, but I don't buy into
                             the vast right wing media conspiracy either.  -tom
           \_ this is exactly why I don't understand people kept saying that
              news media has a liberal bias.  At least for TV media, if
              anything, the bias seems favors republicans.
              \_ How is splashing the death of 100 Iraqis across CNN, when
                 8000 Americans die daily of cancer, heart disease, and
                 doctor error, not liberal bias?
                 \_ Are you trolling?  Or are you really that dense?
                    \_ If you don't have a real response, just don't say
                       anything.  Leave space for those who have a response.
                       You're wasting precious bits.
                       \_ I agree with op.  You are trolling, dewd.
                          \_ Hey "dewd", that was my first entry on this
                             thread.  I didn't post the part about 8000 vs 100
                             dying.  So at best it is 2:2.  And there's still
                             no reaponse of any note.  This is all bullshit
                             meta-response.
                       \_ OK, on the off chance you're not trolling...
                          It's not liberal bias because the job of the news
                          media is only to report stories that are newsworthy.
                          100 people dying in Iraq in a single day is a news
                          event.  8000 people dying of heart disease and cancer
                          is an everyday event, and hence not news.  Is it
                          right wing bias for the news to not report the
                          hundreds of Americans killed by handgun violence
                          everyday?  No it's not.  Individual events might be
                          news, but a general trend is not.
                          \_ Soldiers returning from Iraq are much more
                             terrified of Iraq portrayed in the news here
                             in this country, than they are there patrolling
                             the streets.  Are the thousands of construction
                             projects carried out by our soldiers (patching
                             homes, re-opening schools, delivering supplies,
                             etc. covered by our news media day to day? They
                             are not, thus combined with continuous reports
                             of casualties, we get results from "polls" where
                             Americans ask "[Why are we there?]" We're there
                             *nation* *building*.  When you clear a nest of
                             hornets, you're going to get stung many times.
                             This is the greatness of America, we are strong
                             and rich because this is one of the last nations
                             not drowning in corruption.  Any of the soliders
                             are worth 100 times any CSUAer myself included.
                             So splashing a statistically insignificant
                             number of deaths, and not reporting the
                             thousands of good things that happen every day
                             is liberal bias, IMHO.
                             \_ That's not liberal bias for the reasons
                                outlined above.  100 Iraqis dying in a single
                                day is unusual, and hence, newsworthy.  Things
                                being rebuilt in Iraq is an everyday occurance
                                and hence not newsworthy.
                                \_ An everyday un-reported occurrence.
                                \_ An everyday un-reported occurrence.  When
                                   things like thousands of positive daily
                                   news events go un-reported, and deaths
                                   and casualties lead the news nightly,
                                   then "polls" become worthless.
                                   \_ "If it bleeds, it leads" has been the
                                      motto of news editors for as long as I
                                      can remember.  If you want news of the
                                      Army's good deeds read Stars and Stripes.
                                      As for the worth of polls, they tell us
                                      what the public thinks, not what is the
                                      true state of the world.
                             \_ I don't think people have a problem with the
                                current "Why are we there?" (nation building),
                                but "we shouldn't have been there in the first
                                place."  Myself included, there are many
                                who are, and were against our involvement, but
                                aren't screaming to bring the trooops home NOW
                 \_ "100+ Iraqis die in single day of attacks; meanwhile,
                    8,000 Americans died of cancer, heart diseases, doctor
                    error.  Fair and balanced, from Fox News!"
2004/6/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30990 Activity:high
6/24    http://www.pvponline.com
        Online idiots hate Captain America!  (In the news section)
        \_ Heh, when I play online and people have idiotic sound-bite names
           (Bush sux, etc.) I just start team-killing.  Much more fun that way.
2004/6/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30987 Activity:moderate
6/23    http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Voter-Drive-Felons.html
        Kerry campaign gives Felons a new chance to scout the area for
        houses to rob and children to rape.
        \_ Why do you hate Kerry?
        \_ The felons already had the chance to scout the area.  This just
           gives them an excuse to be at some mother's door with a clipboard
           in hand gathering personal information from people.  It's still
           woefully stupid.  I prefer to think Kerry's people are so blinded
           by hate and ambition they would do anything to win rather than
           they are outright evil which is what you imply.
           thunk that our guys aren't all raping murderous bastards?  This
           WAPO story must be a lie.
2004/6/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30986 Activity:insanely high
6/24    You know the release of interrogation memos a couple days ago?
        Notice they did not include any State Department letters, ones that
        argue against Ashcroft and the Justice Department's legal conclusions?
        The Washington Post got one of the State Dept letters.  Guess who
        also gets bashed?  Boalt Law Professor John Yoo.  If you read to the
        end of the article, you'll also find that the military intelligence
        officers at Guantanamo who were supposed to be doing the abusing
        complained and ultimately reversed the policy.
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A759-2004Jun23.html
           \_ Bush/Cheney 2004!
              \_ Yeah! Bush/Cheney! http://www.georgewbush.org
        \_ Why do you hate Ashcroft?
           \_ Bush/Cheney 2004!
        \_ Holy shit!  You mean our soliders aare actually good guys and thus
           the half dozen knuckle draggers in Abu Graib are an aberation and
           not taking their orders straight from Dubya?  Would ever woulda
           not taking their orders straight from Dubya?  Who ever woulda
           thunk that our guys aren't all raping murderous bastards?  This
           WAPO story must be a lie.
2004/6/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30983 Activity:high
6/23    http://tinyurl.com/3yfaq (news.yahoo.com)
        Holy shit!  How do *I* get into the parties they're attending?!
        \_ I have invites...who wants them.
        \_ marry Jeri Ryan
                 \_ Is this the same one who played Seven Of Nine?
                    That dude is strange if he's married to Seven
                    Of Nine and wants to go the xxx clubs.
                    \_ this story wouldn't get nearly the attention that
                       it has if it weren't the same Jeri Ryan
        \_ He's a Republican who went to sex clubs.  Is this some bizarre
           conservative cross-pollination from Britain?  What's next, Jesse
           Helmes found dead of autoerotic asphyxiation?
        \_ He's a tried and true RINO.
        \_ His name is Jack Ryan and he's running for office?  That's too
           funny.
           \_ Tom Clancy fans might get confused and vote for him. Maybe
              that is his angle.
        \_ Why do you hate sex?
2004/6/21 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30938 Activity:very high
6/21    Nader taps Camejo to be running mate:
        http://csua.org/u/7ul (Reuters)
        It will break my heart if Bush wins CA because of this.
        \_ you and a lot of other people.
           http://www.dontvoteralph.net/start.htm
           http://www.fuckyouralphnader.com
           \_ All of them hard core Democrats.  Their opinions have no value
              to Nader supporters.  See my reply below.
              \_ What about http://repentantnadervoter.com.
                 I used to be a Green and I voted Nader in 96 and 2000.
                 I left the party, joined the Democrats and gave Kerry
                 money because of Nader's bull headedness. This should
                 concern you.
                 \_ I also voted for Nader in 2000, and have also given several
                    hundred dollars first to Dean, and now to Kerry.
        \_ We've been over this.  Nader voters do not *owe* Kerry or the
           Democrats their votes or support.  We are in a different party.
           We don't like your guy any more or less than we like the other
           guy.  If Nader wasn't running, most of us would stay home or vote
           for a different second party candidate.
           \_ I think it is your duty as a reasonable and moral human
              being to get out of the house on election day and vote
              for the candidate most likely to beat Bush.
           \_ I'm sorry, did you miss the part where I don't care what you
              do? I'm much more concerned with those people who actually
              might think a Green vote would make a difference now.
              \_ Exactly. If you can honestly say "Nader or nobody" then
                 the Dems, the GOP and me don't care a rat's ass about you. The
                 problem is, contrary to their rhetoric, a great deal of
                 Naderites *would* have otherwise have voted for Gore and are
                 getting ready to do the same thing *again*. They are between
                 3 and 6%, depending on who you ask. -- ulysses
                 \_ Hey you guys, leave Nader alone.  I am voting for him.
                    He is doing a lot of good for this country.  Heh. -- ilyas
                    \_ Ilya, you know I respect you, but I'm having trouble
                       controlling the boot of death right now. --erikred
                 \_ We've been over this.  If another guy runs who they like
                    better then they should vote for that guy.  If the choice
                    was GWB or Stalin, you'd be voting for GWB but not because
                    you like Bush but because Stalin would be so much worse.
                    The same is true of the Nader voters.  Some would vote for
                    Kerry if their candidate wasn't available but not because
                    they wanted to as a preference, only because they feel
                    the alternative is further from their own beliefs.  I don't
                    see how voting for the lesser of evils is healthy for
                    Democracy.  It is a good thing that Nader is there for us.
                    If Bush wins with Nader running, then Democracy wins, even
                    if that might have been the difference and Kerry loses.
                    I would happily vote for Bush over Stalin.  I would vote
                    for Kerry over Bush *if* I bothered to show which I am
                    unlikely to do for Kerry.  My preference is Nader and if
                    that means Bush wins and Kerry loses because Nader "stole"
                    votes from Kerry, then so be it.  They weren't his in the
                    first place if they're going to someone else.  I think some
                    of you are so blinded by your anti-Bush rhetoric that you
                    can't see or acknowledge that other people who share some
                    of your beliefs don't share all of them.  We are the other
                    party in this country, not a third party.  --Nader'04!
                    \_ No, democracy does not win in a scenario of 3 parties,
                       where 1 guy gets 40 percent and the other two get 30.
                       without runoff voting, you may very well have the
                       situation of most people disliking the choice. The way
                       our political system works, the place for building the
                       coalitions and hearing minor candidates is in the
                       party primaries. I would prefer runoff voting but this
                       is reality. In many ways the democrats and republicans
                       both suck, but they are what pan out from our political
                       process. Why can't the Greens win even a single congress
                       seat?
                       \_ If we had 3 parties that might be true.  We have 1
                          party and are working hard to make a second.  Vote
                          Nader in 04 for Democracy!  And how exactly is it
                          that minor candidates are heard in primaries?  The
                          primary system is for the Demopublicans.  It is not
                          an official part of the Constitution.  And why should
                          I want to hear about 'minor candidates' from the
                          major party anyway?  I want to hear from the 'minor
                          party' which never happens to any degree because the
                          press won't report on them.  Why won't the press
                          report on them?  Because they don't get enough votes.
                          Why not?  Because the people don't know enough about
                          them.  Why is that?  Because the press won't report
                          on them enough.  Hmmm....
                          \_ Ah so the evil press is why not one single
                             congressional district can elect a green. Actually
                             in the primary both Kucinich and Dean offered
                             similar rhetoric to Nader. Both got a bit of
                             support but failed to win the primaries. They
                             got tons of coverage. They couldn't win over the
                             mainstream. I'd say that was a pretty fair war
                             of ideas. This country's policies ultimately
                             come from Congress and you can't just sweep in
                             at the top in some ultra-liberal coup.
                             \_ Barbara Lee qualifies as a pretty radical
                                member of Congress.
                                \_ a democrat... point?
                    \_ Healthy democracy also implies 'compromise.'
                       \_ But not endless capitulation.  Compromise means both
                          sides give something up.  If all Nader supporters
                          voted for Kerry what exactly would we get that we
                          wouldn't have gotten if Kerry won without us?  Nada.
                          \_ Kerry is much more liberal than Gore.
                   \_ I'm sorry, but this "democracy works" arguement is so
                      fucked up. In short, i am hoping you live in California
                      instead of some other battleground state, as your vote
                      wouldn't of made a difference anyway.
2004/6/19-20 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30918 Activity:very high
6/18    Stuff like this always confuses me.  Why do activists always
        preach to the choir?  Shouldn't liberals demonstrate and put of
        flyers in, say, Bakersfield?  Where they might actually be able
        to find people who don't agree with them?  (And therefore convert
        them)
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/06/19/DDG7R781041.DTL
        \_ ok, now i'm confused.  I thought you morons believed that
           liberals control all the media.  doesn't that mean we have a
           *much* better way of telling the world about our evil agenda,
           which we force on the world every day?
           \_ hi troll!  people in bakersfield don't read your newspapers
              or watch your tv news anchors.  mostly, they either ignore it,
              shake their fists at it, or laugh at it.  so, if you want to
              preach to the unconverted you have to go to them.  bye troll!
              \_ so they don't watch any tv news or read any newspapers
                 in your world?  well, if that's true, why are you so
                 concerned about the Liberal Media Conspiracy?  What harm
                 is it doing if no one ouside of the Evil Liberal cities
                 like Jew York actualy watch the Commie News Network?
                 Why not come up with a self-consistent set of paranoid
                 delusions?
                 \_ You score 2 points for selectively choosing which part
                    of my post to reply to and at the same time putting words
                    in my mouth.  I never said they don't witness your
                    media's drivel.  Go re-read what I said and respond to
                    that and we can try again, troll.
                 \_ The great thing about the Liberal Media Conspiracy is
                    that it provides a convenient bogeyman that can never
                    be voted out of office.
                    \_ So I went over to http://nytimes.com today to check out the
                       apparently rather vicious review of Bill Clinton's new
                       book.  And what do I see on their site if not an advert
                       from the Kerry campaign asking for 50 bucks.  I've never
                       seen any republican campaigns advertise there.  Why do
                       you suppose that would be? -- ilyas
                       \_ We know that anyone who might donate to Bush is
                          obviously either evil or stupid and all those
                          red necks and hicks can't read anyway so it would
                          be stupid to advertise in the NYT.  The Republicans
                          only collect money during Church services I'm told.
        \_ Because if liberals actually did that they'd realize how futile
           and naive their "cause" is. Reality bites.
           \_ Yeah, right.  It's obviously soooo much better to be an apathetic
              cynical 'realist' like you.  Get serious.
        \_ For the same reason they scream and protest when some knuckle
           draggers take some silly pictures of naked Iraqi dudes but don't
           say a peep about honest to god genocide in other countries.
2004/6/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30844 Activity:very high
6/16    Did any of you convert from: Liberal to Conservative or
        Conservative to Liberal?
        \_ libertatian to liberal
           \_ what's the url for the libertatians?  sounds interesting!
        \_ Highschool: conservative ->
           Berkeley: "I don't want your fucking fliers" ->
           Post-collegiate: Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft/PatriotAct/ReligiousRight
                scares me silly.
        \_ High School: Conservative/Republican (especially on foreign
           diplomacy) -> College: Libertarian (minus Lyndon) -> post-college:
           Liberal.
        \_ High School: Far Left -> College: Liberal -> post-college: Moderate
           to Liberal.  My HS was the time of Newt Gingrinch et al.  In college
           I decided I had nothing in common with the BAMN and ISO, etc.
           My political movements have mostly been due to exposure to political
           archetypes.
           \_ you just described my experience exactly.
        \_ liberal --> conservative
           \_ what made you convert?
              \_ going to berkeley.
                 \_ There seemed to be a pattern in the early 90s: enter
                    doe-eyed and open-minded; get blasted by liberal profs
                    and rabid Young Republicans; exit moderate as long as you
                    don't touch my money.
                    \_ I only met 1 YR and he annoyed me.  --doe-eyed->consrv
                    \_ Berkeley Republicans are very amusing - they have this
                       whole "Help!  Help!  I'm being repressed!  Now you
                       see the violence inherent in the system!" thing going
                       on, but they are without fail upper-middle class white
                       kids with plenty of prospects, inside connections,
                       and money from daddy.
                       \_ Way to label!  Good smear!  How many have you met?
        \_ high school: blank.  berkeley: heard it all.  post-cal: conservative
2004/6/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30841 Activity:insanely high
6/16    Time magazine this week:
        http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101040621/faith_poll/3.html
        Does President Bush's religious faith make him a strong leader?
        Bush supporters:   85% yes
        Arch liberal Kerry supporters:  15% yes
        If the presidential election were held today, for whom would you vote?
        Bush:   49%
        Arch liberal Kerry:  48%
        \_ The Reagan bump rears its ugly head.  Wonder how long it will last.
           Now, where are all those people that were saying polls mean nothing
           at this point?  Can I get a repeat, please?  Or do they only
           mean nothing at this point when your guy is behind?
           \_ Polls mean nothing until after the GOP convention.  Dukakis
              had a similar lead in June, see where it got him.
           \_ Reagan bump?  How can reminding us of Reagan give anyone but
              Kerry a bump?  We all hate Reagan, don't we?
              arch liberal Kerry a bump?  We all hate Reagan, don't we?
              \_ We all hate Reagan? Not according to the media.
                 \_ http://www.ucomics.com/boondocks/2004/06/14
        \_ Kerry's basically off the radar lately. Even negative Bush news is
           better than no news. Kerry's too boring and impersonal to compete.
        \_ Arch liberal Kerry's basically off the radar lately. Even negative
           Bush news is better than no news. Arch liberalKerry's too boring
           and impersonal to compete.
           \_ Bzzzt!  Everything is off the radar lately because the media
              went "REAGAN!  REAGAN!  REAGAN!  OMG WTF!!!!!@#!@#2@!!11!" for
              like a week.  You know things are bad when NPR runs more Reagan
              stories than Fox News.
              \_ Kerry was out of the news before Reagan died.  What has Kerry
                 said or done in the last 2 weeks?  Bush stopped doing fund-
                 raisers in _APRIL_!  Kerry hasn't been doing his job as
                 Senator.  He hasn't been doing much of anything but raising
                 cash.  Between his personal efforts and groups like http://moveon.org
                 Kerry has more money than Bush yet it is never enough for him.
                 \_ Kerry has more money than Bush? Where the fuck did you come
                    from? The amount of money has has pales in comparison to the
                    hundreds of millions that Bush has. That's why you see lots of
                    Bush shit commercial on TV. All he has is money. Give me a
                    fucking break.
                    \_ Yeah, Bush has 5 times as much money on hand as Kerry
                       presently.  However, Kerry is raising money at nearly
                       twice the rate of Bush and just raised something like
                       a record $100 million in 3 months.  So maybe that's
                       what above guy was thinking of.  He's still a dumbass
                       though.  --!the above guy
                       \_  MORON!  ALL DEMOCRATS WANT IS TO TAKE ALL YOUR MONEY
                           AND SODOMIZE YOUR DOG!!!!
              \_ Arch liberal Kerry was out of the news before Reagan died.
                 What has Kerry said or done in the last 2 weeks?  Bush
                 stopped doing fund- raisers in _APRIL_!  Arch liberal Kerry
                 hasn't been doing his job as Senator.  He hasn't been doing
                 much of anything but raising cash.  Between his personal
                 efforts and groups like http://moveon.org Arch liberal Kerry has
                 more money than Bush yet it is never enough for him.
                 \_ Arch liberal Kerry has more money than Bush? Where the
                    fuck did you come from? The amount of money has has pales
                    in comparison to the hundreds of millions that Bush has.
                    That's why you see lots of Bush shit commercial on TV. All
                    he has is money. Give me a fucking break.
                    \_ Yeah, Bush has 5 times as much money on hand as arch
                       liberal Kerry presently.  However, arch liberal Kerry
                       is raising money at nearly twice the rate of Bush and
                       just raised something like a record $100 million in 3
                       months.  So maybe that's what above guy was thinking
                       of.  He's still a dumbass though.  --!the above guy
                       \_ I am sorry for being a dumbass.  However, I can do
                          math.  Kerry+moveon.org $$$ >>> Bush $$$.
                          \_ what about Kerry+moveon vs. Bush + his PACs?
                             I've seen no evidence that Kerry and related
                             groups have more money than Bush and related
                             groups.  -tom
                 \_ Quite amusing to hear a Bush supporter complain about
                    how much money Kerry is rasing. Bush is the most
                    venal presidency in history, bar none. Kerry isn't
                    even close. Kerry took last week off in respect to
                    the country and President Reagan, that is why you
                    haven't heard much from him. He did not campaign
                    or fundraise in that time.
                          math.  Arch liberal Kerry+moveon.org $$$ >>> Bush$$$.
                          \_ what about arch liberal Kerry+moveon vs. Bush +
                             his PACs?  I've seen no evidence that arch
                             liberal Kerry and related groups have more money
                             than Bush and related groups.  -tom
                             \_ What about it?  Arch liberal Kerry+others >>
                                Bush + others.  You haven't seen it?  Have you
                                *looked*?
                 \_ Quite amusing to hear a Bush supporter complain about how
                    much money arch liberal Kerry is rasing. Bush is the most
                    venal presidency in history, bar none. Kerry isn't even
                    close. Arch liberal Kerry took last week off in respect to
                    the country and President Reagan, that is why you haven't
                    heard much from him. He did not campaign or fundraise in
                    that time.
                    \_ I'm not complaining.  I'm stating a fact.  If he is
                       raising more money then he has earned it in some way.
                       No one is giving anyone money for nothing.
           \_ Kerry said that Dubya shouldn't have asked the Pope to
              influence Roman Catholic leaders in the U.S. on the abortion
                       \_ Earned it == awarding government contracts for it.
                          Your adding of "arch liberal" in front of every
                          mention of Kerry is simply childish.
           \_ Arch liberal Kerry said that Dubya shouldn't have asked the Pope
              to influence Roman Catholic leaders in the U.S. on the abortion
              and same-sex marriage issues.
              \_ Ok, and?  You posted this for some reason?
        \_ I don't believe the second survey.  The 'undecided' number is never
           that low.
           \_ The polls are really meaningless until after the conventions, if
              you ask me.
              \_ Or really after a few debates.  But it gives us something to
                 talk about in the mean time.
        \_ Vietcong and Sandinista Vets for Kerry!!
        \_ Vietcong and Sandinista Vets for Arch Liberal Kerry!!
           \_ And Cuba and our friends in NK, too.
              \_"Either you're with us or you're a godless commie" -GWB
                 \_ URL?  The Vietcong, Sandinistas, Cubans and NKans have all
                    come out in favor of Kerry.  thanks for playing.
                    come out in favor of arch liberal Kerry.  thanks for
                    playing.
        \_ Still too close to call in all the polls.
        \_ Too soon, padawan.  The election isn't for another 4.5 months.
           Expect the ratcheting of campaign volume in early September and
           full-court blitz by middle of October.  Those are the numbers that
           will tell the story.
           \_ If you checked the URL, "Master" jedi, you would see that
              only one question deals with who will win between Kerry and
              Bush.  The focus of the survey is on religious views between
              Kerry and Bush supporters.
           \_ If you checked the URL, "Master" jedi, you would see that only
              one question deals with who will win between arch liberal Kerry
              and Bush.  The focus of the survey is on religious views between
              arch liberal Kerry and Bush supporters.
              \_ So Bush supporters are conservative and arch liberal arch
                 liberal Kerry's supporters are God-less.  We knew that.  If
                 that was the only reason to post this, there was no reason to
                 post this.
2004/6/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:30817 Activity:insanely high
6/12    Fox News gives positive review to "Fahrenheit 9/11."  Damn liberal
        media!
        http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122680,00.html
        \_ Damn liberal movie critics!  Damn liberal movie goers! Damn liberal
           movie renters!  Who else did I miss?
           \_ Damn liberal movie directors! Damn liberal movie distributors!
              Damn liberal people in damn liberal documentaries!
              \_ "Damn hippies" -S. Crothers. You forgot that. -- ulysses
        \_ It's called "Fair & Balanced".  Fox isn't a conservative news
           outlet.  They do shit like this all the time, you just ignore it
           in favor of the other stuff you don't agree with.
           \_ Sorry, I call bullshit.  Editorial policy drives bias no matter
              how much is done to prevent it - hence rightward tilt in WSJ
              articles or leftward tilt in NYTimes articles.  Truly
              "objective" reporting is an impossible fantasy, and striving
              for it usually does more to obscure the truth than to reveal
              it (i.e. "White House reports sky is green; some Democrats
              disagree").  Fox reporting oozes bias.
              \_ objective "reporting" a fantasy? ok, sure.  reporting is
                 crap anyway.  the only media model i'll accept is a combination
                 of original source material, like cspan, with a moderated
                 comment forum, like slashdot.  until we go to that model,
                 the press will continue to undermine, not bolster our
                 democracy.
                 \_ HAHAHA! moderated comment forum! jeezus. And CSPAN isn't
                    original source material, it's politicians blabbing.
              \_ Let me guess, you think CNN, MSNBC, ABC,CBS, LAT, are
                 all centrist sources of information?
                 \_ They are corporate sources of information.  They will
                    print whatever they thinks makes money.  Let me guess,
                    you buy into the "liberal media" myth?
                    \_ LAT, NYT, WP do not apply -- these newspapers are
                       driven at least equally by personalities as well as
                       corporate profit.  TV stations, it's debatable either
                       way.
                    \_ Let me guess, you buy into your own "corporate media"
                       myth?  The newsrooms and editors are predominately
                       liberal.  Why is that so hard to understand?
                       \_ well, they are (1) corporations and (2) media,
                          therefore: corporate media.  What, you think they
                          do this for free?
                          \_ Since they control all information and they're
                             mostly liberal, there is no competition so they
                             can charge for their own version of the news.
                             Only very recently has more centrist news been
                             available which in the last ~5 years has over
                             taken their leftist competitors in TV viewship,
                             and radio listenership.  AFAIK the newspapers are
                             still left controlled.  I'm not aware of any mass
                             market printed news that isn't left biased.
                       \_ It's not hard to understand, it's just untrue.
                          \_ Uh, whatever.  That's been checked a few times
                             over the years.  You're simply ignorant or lying.
                             Don't bother coming here with one liner bullshit.
                             \_ I bow to your superior 3-liner lying ignorance.
                       \_ Sure, most reporters are liberal. Most owners
                          are conservative. They kind of balance each
                          other out, but when push comes to shove the
                          owner fires the liberal reporter.
                          \_ Reporters don't get fired unless they fake stories
                             and even then it takes dozens of stories and years
                             to come out.  The owners are not vetting stories
                             and you know it.  The editors who are mostly on
                             the left do it.  How far do you think a reporter
                             would get in the typical newsroom if he was known
                             to be a registered Republican?  His career would
                             be dead and you know it.  It does not balance out
                             in any way in the general case.
           \_ "Fox isn't a conservative news outlet."
              So if you compare Fox to CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS, would you
              say Fox is the "least liberal" of the aforementioned stations?
              \_ Good try.  I would say CNN and the others are losing ratings
                 share to Fox because they cater to the left, not the center
                 where most people, by definition, live.
                 \_ Are you insane?  Are we watching the same stations?
                    The same CNN that ran like a gajillion fawning non-news
                    reports about Reagan last week?  THAT is a liberal media
                    outlet?  I'd like some of what you're smoking, if you don't
                    mind.
                    \_ Reagan is not a good example.  Every station wanted
                       to out-do the other in pro-Reagan coverage; now he's
                       dead, the liberals don't want to appear as if they
                       are dancing on his grave.
                       \_ Nice dodge.  I suppose the coverage of the run-up
                          to the Iraq war isn't a good example either, or
                          anything else substantial?  Nope, the boogeyman of
                          the Liberal Media is still out there, never to be
                          defeated!
                          \_ Hey, all I said was that Reagan was not a good
                             example.
                          \_ Pre-war, everyone but whatshername in Ber/Oak was
                             in favor of it.  We didn't instantly find 100 tons
                             of WMD (until it recently started showing up in
                             other countries) so that makes them sycophants?
                             How many times have you seen Kerry described as
                             "arch-liberal, John Kerry, jr. Senator from Mass,
                             under Ted Kennedy"?  Never.  How many times have
                             you seen, "arch-conservative so-n-so, Senator from
                             xyz"?  All the fucking time because anyone who
                             isn't a Democrat has a 50/50 chance of being
                             tagged as an arch conservative.  Or better yet,
                             extreme or ultra conservative.  You will *never*
                             see an extreme ultra arch leftist like Kerry
                             described that way.
                 \_ You are confusing cause and effect.  Fox *is* a
                    conservative news outlet -- whether the cause is corporate
                    profit, a vast right-wing conspiracy, the little green
                    men in your pants, or all of the above -- the effect
                    is still the same.
                    \_ Fox provides left, right and center.  You only see the
                       right because you're blinded to how left the left
                       really is.  Left looks normal to you so only the right
                       stands out for you.
                       \_ Wow, you really need to look in the mirror and think
                          about this statement. The center, as defined in this
                          country is somewhere between the democrats and the
                          republicans, and most mainstream media outlets run
                          stories that give voice to both of the major parties.
                          Those newspapers that endorse candidates endorse both
                          republicans and democrats. In other words, they are
                          centrist, at least to those not blinded by their
                          right-wing prejudice. Fox news aligns itself with
                          the extreme right wing of the republican party, and
                          doesn't give any voice to the opposition. They only
                          look "normal" to extremists like you.
           \_ Once William Hung's CD sold 100k copies, everything, including
              this, is possible. -- Coming soon -- flying pigs and hell
              freezing over.
              \_ I have to admit that I bought 99,998 of them.  He bought one
                 for his mom and this drunk dude picked up the other copy.
                 \_ thank you, NERFAMC
2004/6/12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30765 Activity:nil
6/11    Clinton >> Carter > Kerry. -dem. What's the republican take?
        Or maybe Clinton > Carter >> Kerry ?
2004/6/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30693 Activity:high
6/9     How does one get rm -W to work?
        \_ I've been giving money to the Kerry campaign as well as the
           DNC and http://moveon.org, but we won't know if it worked until november,
           will we?
           \_ In the amount of your tax refund?
           \_ So... rm -W removes movey from your pocket and gives it to
              the Democratic party?
2004/6/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30683 Activity:high
6/8     Why doesn't Zogby have Bush winning California?
        http://www.zogby.com/News/ReadNews.dbm?ID=833
        \_ Yeah, well he doesn't have Kerry winning Alaska either, but you'd
           have to smoke a solid pound of Matanuska Thunderfuck to think
           Kerry has a chance of winning Alaska.  And no one gives a shit,
           which is really the point.
        \_ He's only considering states that are close, like Washington and
           Oregon.  Bush has a whelk's chance in hell of winning California,
           so he's not even considering it.  The same goes with Texas, except
           in the opposite sense.  Notice that his poll is only conducted
           in certain states at the moment:
           http://www.zogby.com/features/features.dbm?ID=212
        \_ Zogby is trying way too hard.  Reputation go down. -a libural
        \_ Why don't we just let Zogby decide months in advance who the next
           President will be and save all that money and time on the whole
           election process, debates, etc?  Since we know for a fact that
           Zogby can accurately predict elections with 100% accuracy, we no
           longer have need for the election process, right?
2004/6/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:30651 Activity:high
6/7     Hey, http://latimes.com has a neat Flash map where you can click on states
        to assign electoral votes to Bush/Kerry.  It looks like if Kerry loses
        Florida, he won't have a chance.  If he wins Florida, he can't lose
        too many battleground states.  Click on the map on the bottom right.
        It plays music when you hit 270 votes, though, so turn off your sound.
        I actually got it to 269-269, and something interesting pops up.
        \_ Ah, Florida, where election reform has gone... nowhere.
           \_ Sure it has!  The Florida legislature banned recounts!  Oh...
              right...
        \_ Kerry could win with Ohio, too.
           \_ True, I didn't notice all the undecideds in Ohio.
           \_ You guys dont have a clue about OH. It's gun country, thus Bush's.
              \_ They can dream.  Don't take that away from them.  They have
                 so little else.
        \_ Lets face it, its all gonna end up in front of the Supreme Court
           again anyway...
           \_ What, before or after Dubya takes California in a landslide?
              \_ Its thinking like yours that will destabilize California for
                 years to come!
                 \_ Why do you hate California?
              \_ They said the recall campaign would never get enough names.
                 Then they said the recall campaign would never kick out
                 Davis.  Then they said even if Davis gets kicked out, a
                 Republican wouldn't win, especially with 2 big names splitting
                 the Republican vote.  Then they said even if the Republicans
                 do win, it won't be Arnold, he's an actor, a Nazi, and not
                 very smart.
                 \_ The stupidity of the California Bush-landslide guy speaks
                    for itself.
                    \_ It does?  I'm too dense to see it.  Please explain in a
                       few sentences using short words so a moron like me can
                       understand why it is impossible and as you say stupid
                       to think Bush can win CA.  Thanks in advance for
                       supplying any data, URLs, or facts to explain to me and
                       others who might question your profound logic.
                       \_ Point 1:
                          "CA Bush-landslide guy" != "Bush-wins-CA guy".
                          First guy == moron
                          Second guy == optimistic (??)
                          \_ Nah, they are both delusional. Bush is behind
                             behind by 12 points in the latest Field Poll
                             (including Nader on the ticket) and his
                             popularity is at an all time low and falling.
                             Why do you bother arguing with an obvious
                             nutter?
                             \_ Because polls go up and down and every which
                                way.  You would have been insane to bet a buck
                                that Kerry was going to be the Dem candidate
                                before his *surprise* win in Iowa.  If you have
                                nothing to say except the other guy is an
                                obvious nutter then say nothing because you're
                                still saying nothing this way, but you're also
                                wasting precious bits.
                       \_ It's not impossible. For example, following the
                          democratic convention, Kerry could start publicly
                          expressing a sexual attraction to prepubescent boys,
                          or an admiration for Osama bin Laden. But,
                          realistically, Gore won california by a huge margin,
                          Kerry leads in the polls here by a huge margin, lots
                          of people are bitter about the energy crisis, and
                          given all of the above Bush will probably spend only
                          a token amount of his time and money campaigning here
                          (as he did in 2000).
                          If you are willing to bet on Bush at odds of less than
                          10 to 1, I'm sure you will find plenty of takers.
                          \_ tradebetx, which provides an online forum for
                             betting on these things has Bush at 8:1 odds
                             in California. For comparison Kerry is at 5:1 in
                             Virginia and North Carolina and 8:1 in Georgia.
                          \_ The only thing that matter is who shows up to the
                             polls.  Bush won't spend any time or money here
                             but neither will Kerry.  CA is just an ATM machine
                             for both parties.  How's it feel to get sucked dry
                             no matter which side of the aisle you're on?
                          \_ Bush I somehow won CA. Not to mention Reagan,
                             Deukmejian, Pete Wilson twice, and Arnold govs.
                             \_ If you can't see how California has changed
                                since Wilson, you aren't paying attention.
                                Arnold is a liberal, married to a Kennedy.
           \_ I think that one side or the other will win decisively enough
              that this will not happen.
              that this will not happen.  This is a Pro Bush website and he
              projects the electoral vote to be Kerry 330, Bush 200:
              http://www.electionprojection.com
              \_ Nononononononononono!
                 You can't say Bush/Kerry will win a state based on job
                 approval ratings ("Is the country headed in the right
                 direction?").  You must ONLY use "Who would you vote for
                 today?" data; and if you want, you can use job approval
                 ratings on undecided votes.  This projection is FUCKING LAME.
                 -libural
              \_ Sigh... I read your link, I'm not sure why, and no it doesn't
                 say 330:200 but if it makes you feel better to pull random
                 numbers (which you got wrong) out of context from 2 weeks ago
                 then sure.  He also says Bush has done worse in the numbers
                 than he is now and he's done better than he is now.  It's a
                 long way from here to November.  The dude can't even figure
                 out how to use PayPal and you think he's got the election
                 all figured out.  Ok, whatever.
                 \_ Did you see where he says Electoral Votes:
                    Bush 201, Kerry 337? It is right at the top.
                    Here is a Pro Kerry site that has it at 332:226
                    http://www.geocities.com/numbers_04
                    If it makes you feel any better, here is another
                    that has Bush winning:
                    http://www.presidentelect.org/e2004.html
                    I personally think that it is "too early to tell."
                 \_ Yes, that is what it says and you are an idiot who
                    is unable to comprehend even simple English. Go to that
                    URL. Look at the top of the page. See where it says
                    Kerry 337 Bush 201? That is the projected electoral
                    outcome. I rounded to the nearest 10 for morons like you.
                    Nice job deleting the rest of my links.
2004/6/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30624 Activity:high
6/5     Doesn't the party out of power usually have a VP chosen by this point
        or am I just delusional?  It seems odd and a bit distracting that
        Kerry doesn't have a running mate yet.  In theory, I thought the
        convention is supposed to be approving both nominees and in theory
        the VP is his own man, not the P's lackey.
        \_ i think the reason the current situation looks odd to you is that
           the presidential nominee is not generally known yet at this point.
           \_ Hmmm, possibly.  I guess they're starting the election cycle
              earlier every time.  Pretty soon they'll start campaigning more
              than 1 election in advance. :)  --op
        \_ Seems normal to me.  He's extending the drama.  And, he's finally
           making headlines with some of his criticisms WHILE not appearing
           anti-American or political AND appearing statesmanlike.
           \_ Heh.  Kerry is not statesmanlike.  Kerry is a drip.
              \_ Shrug, works for me, and even a Republican could say he
                 could be doing a LOT worse.  (Gore? Dukakis? Dean?)
                 \_ "John F. Kerry.  He could be a LOT worse."
                    \_ He would need to be that bad to be worse than Dubya.
                 \_ It would be hard to be doing worse.  He *should* be ahead
                    by 10-15 points in all those so-called battle ground states
                    but is break-even at best.  The economy is improving, the
                    Iraqi situation is calming down, and if there's another
                    serious terrorist act on US soil, Kerry is forced to either
                    'support the President' or get accused of turning a serious
                    security situation into election year politics.  Hosed.
                    \_ If you saw the CBS poll numbers, the Democrats have
                       stayed at 80% support of Kerry for the last couple
                       months.  Republicans supported Bush at 91%, and dropped
                       to 84% in one month.  The small shifts have been from
                       Bush losing Republican support, and the relatively fewer
                       independent voters going with Kerry.  I would have to
                       disagree with you on Kerry's prospects too.  The CIA
                       director just resigned, and there are SCATHING reports
                       coming out about WMD.  Bush will not have this go away
                       by election day.  Iraq situation calming down?  That's
                       a fair opinion, but Rumsfeld also just warned of
                       increased attacks near and after the handover.
                       Terrorist attack handing it to Bush?  Actually, my
                       scenario is Kerry supports the President.  Americans
                       think, "If Bush can't stop terrorism, when this is
                       the only thing the majority of Americans support him
                       for today, then why not give Kerry a chance with a
                       less bull-headed approach to international conflicts?"
                       since, you know, the U.S. only has the UK as a real
                       friend right now.  People might remember when we had a
                       lot of friends like Gulf War I or around 9/11.  People
                       might remember that the majority of Americans only
                       supported attacking Iraq if Bush could get UN support.
           \_ Drama?  There isn't any drama in it.  There aren't even any real
                       \_ If it's the same poll I saw that was registered
                          voters, not likely voters.  Polls at this point are
                          just amusement anyway.  It's a good thing Tenet was
                          forced out.  That allows the admin to say they are
                          fixing the intel problem and takes care of those
                          up-coming scathing reports which is why he resigned
                          anyway.  WMD doesn't have to go anywhere.  If people
                          cared about WMD Bush's numbers would be way lower.
                          They keep finding just enough stuff to hint that
                          there is more there.  Rumfeld warning us in advance
                          that we expect more violence around June 30 helps the
                          admin if there is and helps if there isn't.  If there
                          is, they just say, "see?  we said the desperate
                          terrorists would try to stop a free iraq!" and if
                          nothing happens they will claim the terrorists have
                          been so weakened by the successful campaign to free
                          iraq that they can't do anything to stop it.  I
                          think people understand that terrorism can't be
                          stopped that easily.  Many countries around the
                          world, including the US, have been victims of
                          terrorism for decades and it has been getting worse.
                          The answer for many will be, "Bush kept them from
                          attacking us since 9/11 until now almost 3 years
                          later.  It would've been worse with the other guy!"
                          Look at how many Gore supporters wrote post-9/11
                          they were glad Bush won instead of Gore.  And last
                          on this sub-topic, most Americans don't see our
                          foreign policy as bullheaded, IMO.  This country is
                          full of people with a kick-ass attitude, especially
                          if it isn't their foot that has to go do it and like
                          seeing us blow up other people.  'They all hate us,
                          we know it, we send them all lots of money, they
                          still hate us, fuck em, bomb em'.  People won't
                          remember or care about GW1.  That's for political
                          hacks and dirt diggers doing oppo-research to make
                          hay.  The typical American doesn't think well of the
                          Europeans, the UN, or anything else.  This is an
                          isolationist country at heart.  People are just as
                          likely to remember, or not, that the UN did come to
                          Iraq after we took over and left the moment they lost
                          a few people in one bombing.  That was a UN security
                          foul-up btw.  They ignored their own security people.
                          \_ "Polls at this point are just amusement anyway."
                             You're the one who brought up polls in the first
                             place ("He *should* be ahead ...").  Hello?
                             Tenet's out, but I think the damage will still
                             be significant up to election day.
                             And I remind you again:  The majority of Americans
                             supported an attack only if we could get UN
                             support.  This has been shown poll after poll.
                             You haven't disputed this.
                             \_ I love how people on the motd always
                                assume followup posts that agree with
                                this op on some point must be the op.
                                -jrleek
                             \_ There's a difference between supporting the
                                attack 18 months ago with(out) UN support and
                                seeing the UN dilly dally about and then being
                                where we are now or will be in 6 months during
                                an election.  Current polls are roughly even
                                as to how well Iraq is going and if it was a
                                good idea or not.  In fact, current polls run
                                at about the same level as likely voters from
                                each party, so really all the pro/con Iraq
                                polls are showing is party support for each
                                candidate.  As far as polls themselves go, they
                                *are* only for amusement at this point *but* we
                                have nothing else to use to judge across the
                                nation how each is doing.  It's just mental
                                masturbation but it feels oh so good!
           \_ drama?  There isn't any drama in it.  There aren't even any real
              names floating around.  I think the above is correct that
              election cycles are starting/ending sooner than I'm used to. --op
              \_ If he picks a boring VP candidate now, he'll look stale.
                 He's waiting for the right time where a VP candidate
                 selection would bring the most press, whatever situation
                 that might be.
2004/6/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30588 Activity:high
6/3     I'm not sure which is better, the part about Connerly being part-black,
        CNN's Rhetorical Arsenal, or The Kerry Echo chamber.  Anyway, this is
        how the left looks to the right every day:
        http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110005163
        Oh yeah, there's also some nice polling numbers and a link to the
        Iowa Electronic Markets so you can put your money where your mouth is
        and buy contracts betting that Kerry will win.
        \_ See, why you gotta hate?  I'd rather read Joe Bob Briggs:
           http://www.joebobbriggs.com  At least he's got style.
2004/6/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30548 Activity:high
6/2     The woman in the Drudge-created Kerry intern "scandal" tells her
        story: http://csua.org/u/7ka (new york metro link)
        \_ I was going to say "Yeah, now that she's had plenty of time to
           work out a consistent story."  But she's so supid and vapid,
           and the story's not all that consistent anyhow, it's hard to
           believe it's not real.
           \_ You really are blind, aren't you?  BClinton killed 324 people
              while Hillary took pictures, right?
           \_ The last time a President was fooling around with an intern
              in the White House my stock portfolio was looking a lot better.
              I say "bring it on!"
              \_ If you think there is some correlation between the two
                 you deserve your losses.
                 \_ Maybe a strong market helps the president get head.
                 \_ If you think these are serious comments, you need to
                    watch less Fox News.
                 \_ Why do you hate blowjobs?
                 \_ How else do you think the stocks had risen so high without
                    all the "rise, baby, rise." during those intimate moments
                    in the White House?
                    \_ So, you're saying we should have elected Bob Dole?
                       (He advertised Viagra for a while)
        \_ The Right Wing Hate machine will do and say anything in their
           effort to hold onto power. Does this suprise you in some way?
           \_ RACIST!  Whoops, wrong hate machine. COMMIE!
           \_ Actually, I think its pretty much just the Stupid Lazy
              Reporting Machine.  There's a quote near the end of the article
              which puts it pretty well: "I am struck by the pitiful state
              of political reporting, which is dominated by the unholy
              alliance of opposition research and its latest tool,
              the Internet."
        \_ Can someone send this to Drudge for posting?
2004/6/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30537 Activity:very high
6/1     young MOTDers (and all young Americans): I fear for you:
        http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1228331,00.html
        Summary: THere are two congressional bills, both approved
        and sitting in committee, to reinstate the draft as early
        as June 15, 2005. No college deferment or sanctuary in
        Canada this time.
        \_ Nice way to ignore context.  The draft is *not* being reinstated.
           Maybe if we all vote for Kerry, there won't be another Vietnam
           and we won't need a draft because Kerry's plans for Iraq are just
           like Bush's except they require more troops.
           \_ How is the military going to deal with its manpower shortage?
              I think the draft is coming back no matter who is elected.
              The military is already drawing heavily into the Reserves
              and has even started tapping the IRR. Last time I checked
              there was still a Stop Loss order in effect. That is pretty
              much everything they can do short of a draft.
              \_ We can start by closing bases in former NATO ally countries.
                 Then we can get out of places like Kosovo/Bosnia/Former
                 Yugoslavia.  6-9 months later we can leave Iraq and then
                 Afghanistan.
                 \- there are only a few 1000 troops in bosnia. bush said to
                    the european coalition "we went in together and we'll
                    leave together". mr. resolve has already said the us
                    will be unilaterally pulling out. do you read any news
                    at all or does ti cut into your xbox/ps2 time? try leaving
                    the the news on instead of the p0rn channel in the
                    background. --psb
                    \_ nice personal attack after ignoring the parts of my
                       post that you couldn't refute.  way to go, genius!
                       how many #1 Fans do you have now?  you can't be psb.
                       he just isn't that stupid.
                       \-i lack the ability to explain "why isolantionism
                           is a not a simple choice for the us" in 100words
                           or less. however youir posited a number of facts
                           clearly suggesting you are unaware of the underlying
                           state of affairs which i did answer. yes i am
                           accusing you personally of ignorance. --psb
              \_ Everything?  Why not just pack up in places our troops are
                 doing nothing?  The Soviet Union is dead.  Let's stop
                 pretending we need NATO and NATO bases in Europe.  Why are you
                 so hellbent on expanding the size of the armed forces?  I'm
                 staunchly conservative and I'm honestly shocked that I'm the
                 only one on the heavily liberal motd that would mention this
                 obvious (to me, anyway) option.
        \_ The chances of getting drafted will be small. Do the math.
           The Army only needs, at most, a few hundred thousand troops.
           There are 20M Americans in the 18-23 cohort. So your chances
           of getting drafted couldn't be much more than 1%.
           \_ But those chances are not random: the military is very
              fond of those with computer skills.
              \_ Yeah, but getting drafted for computer skills is better than
                 being drafted to patrol the streets of Iraq.
              \_ But the draft starts with the youngest first, and it's a
                 proven fact that the motd is composed of old farts.
                 \_ Yet another discussion revolving around the time honored
                    geek motto: "If its not happening to me, fuck em."
                    \- the vietnam era draft was much more avoidable for
                       the upper middle class than the brad draft during ww2.
                       congressmen dont want their kids drafted so there will
                       be lots of loopholes if anything like the draft came
                       back ... which it wont. --psb
                       \- if you are interested in "american and the imperial
                          will" [my phrase] read Niall Ferguson's book
                          Colossus http://csua.org/u/7k6 --psb
2004/6/2 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30536 Activity:insanely high
6/1     The Carter doctrine was such an unparalled success Kerry
        wants to do it all over again:
        Kerry's Plan: Ban U.S. Weapons to Stop WMD Threat
        http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/1/220814.shtml
        \_ what a bunch of distorting crap. all bush can do is smear,
           because he can't run on his record. hey, what's the worst
           kerry could do, go to war based on the lies of an iranian
           spy and blow $300bn, our credibility, our int'l goodwill,
           and thousands of lives? yeah, that would suck. --aaron
           \_ So aaron, how is that rabid liberalism working out at google?
              Does google even hire conservatives?
           \_ What Bush has accomplished towards limiting the proliferation
              of WMD is phenomenal; the battle against militant Islam has been
              relocated to the Middle East where our military can kill
              all the jihadis.  What is your policy for shifting foreign
              policy from a Cold War paradigm?  Oh that's
              right you, like all the leftist appeasers, don't have one.
              You rather pay lip service and kick the can down the road for
              someone else to clean up.
              \_ LIAR!
           \_ Nonononono, that's "American credibility around the world has
              been destroyed for generations!!!"  And the official Iraqi $$$
              is currently $120B give or take a few $B.  Not that that's a
              small number on its own but you're so far off from reality that
              your credibility around the world has been destroyed for
              generations!  If you need to lie and make up numbers to make your
              point, you don't have one.  Get it next time, "American
              credibility around the world has been destroyed for generations!"
              Like Partha said on the wall, you must repeat it until it
              becomes the new truth, just like in the old Soviet Russia.
                      \- just out of curiosity are you counting the $700m
                         funded by congress for afgansitan xferred to iraq?
                         also what fraction of the $25bn the administration
                         refused to separately earmark between afgansitan and
                         iraq are you counting? the troop levels are around
                         an order of mag higher in iraq. finally, i mentioned
                         that cheney and the other chieckenhawks should
                         continuously be referred to in that light. finally,
                         the whole idea of the importance of labelling issues
                         is inspired by frank luntz, the chief labeller of the
                         GoP. it seems only reasonable for the demos demos to
                         play the "abortion card" on their apathetic
                         constitutency. surely that is more valid than "if
                         we elected kerry, osama will end up in the lincoln
                         bdrm" --psb
                         \_ On money numbers since the rest is off topic and
                            uninteresting:  I'll grant *all* your numbers.  The
                            $300b is still off by more than a factor of 2 and
                            thus makes the whole message look like the made up
                            bullshit it is.  Get the facts straight first and
                            then try to forcefeed your agenda.
                            \- while i try to be conservative with numbers
                               [i think it is fair to use $200bn, i usually
                               say "cost $100bn, 800 us combat deaths, 25k
                               us casualties, 10k iraqi deaths vs lies on
                               WMD"], does it really matter whether it is
                               $300bn or $200bn? i'm not defensing sloppy use
                               of statistics, but do you really change your
                               mind based on this number?--psb
                \_ if you think Iraq is going to end up costing us less
                   than several trillion or you actually think we are
                   ever 'leaving' Iraq, you are deluded.
                            \_ maybe he is just projecting into the not
                               too distant future for a conservative
                               guestimate of the final total cost?
              \_ Nah, they didn't destroy American credibility, just the
                 dumb and dumber Bush regime credibility.  huh huh.
              \_ yea 120 bn no biggie, just a small fraction of the 400 bn
                 budget deficit.  huh huh.
                 \_ It's Beavis! -- beavis #1 fan
                    \- Butthead said "I am really cool Beavis, but I cannot
                       predict the future." Which makes Butthead smarter than
                       the NeoCons. --psb
              \_ So I am curious what your point is here. Are you claiming
                 that American credibility has been enhanced?
                 \_ My point is that there is no such thing as 'credibility'.
                    In international affairs there is only power and will.
                 \_ I think he's trying to say "... destroyed for generations"
                    is an exaggeration.
                       \- point worth raising ... and that is why BUSH must
                          be voted out. if neither rumsfeld nor BUSH is axed
                          than that essentially gives them a "mandate" in the
                          eyes of the world. --psb
                          \_ Yes, and so what?  Why does it matter what the
                             Europeans think?  They have their goals, the US
                             has other goals.  Sometimes those goals conflict
                             and their rabidly left press kicks us in the
                             teeth for it.  This isn't Europe.
                             \- because if you are trying to get NATO to help
                                out in iraq it matters. --psb
                                \_ NATO?  NATO isn't the world.  NATO is an
                                   alliance of EU/US military powers formed for
                                   the sole purpose of holding back the
                                   Soviets.  I don't think NATO should even
                                   exist.  It's a Cold War relic along with the
                                   rest of the trappings such as huge US bases
                                   in Germany, etc.  Close them down, end NATO.
                                   Who else do we need to care about and why?
                                   \- ok i will try to make this my last
                                      commit: i suppose you are unaware that
                                      bush is going to istanbul at the end
                                      of the month for a nato summit where
                                      nato involvement in iraq will be the
                                      main topic? are you the same person/
                                      idiot asking about europe? that question
                                      i answered. if you want to talk about the
                                      rest of the world, look at 6party talks
                                      w.r.t. north korrea. --psb
                                      \_ I'm aware.  I think it's a mistake.
                                         Just because Bush does it doesn't mean
                                         I'm blindly in favor of it.  Do you
                                         blindly favor anything the opposition
                                         party puts forth or does?  The 6 party
                                         talks have achieved nothing.
                    \_ Clearly he hasn't traveled abroad lately.
                    \_ Time will tell. I suspect you are right, but if
                       America continues on the imperialism and conquest
                       course laid out by the PNAC, he will have been right.
        \_ http://www.bushflash.com/ma.html
2004/5/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:30501 Activity:insanely high
5/30    The road to serfdom
        Is it one of the best books ever written?
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1144892/posts
        \_ Contrict your anus 100 times a day -- Malarkey,
           or effective way?
        \_ could Dianetics really be the Owner's Manual for the Human Mind?
           \_ can I sell mine?  I need a new ipod.
           \_ Scientology were around the UCLA campus one day, with a big
              friendly yellow tend, and attractive young 'volunteer ministers'
              giving out 'stress tests' and so on.  Scientology amuses me so.
                -- ilyas
              \_ I took their personality test.  I think I failed.  They
                 didn't want my money or my soul.
              \_ Yeah, the girl that they post outside the Scientology
                 office in SOMA SF is super cute - until you think about the
                 fact that she's in a cult...
                 \_ So what?  Cult chicks can't put out?  Cult chicks have
                    already proven to be weak willed.  She'll fulfill all
                    your fantasies and do anything you want as long as you
                    promise to consider her cult material.
                    \_ More to the point, cult chicks are programmed to
                       pretend to be willing to put out so that you'll go
                       through the motions of joining the cult.  Be careful
                       when you scam scammers, lest you get scammed.
                       \_ How scammed could I get?  I wanted to get laid with
                          a hot chick who does anal and has a cute friend to
                          join us.  If I get that, what scam is there?  You
                          think they'll empty my wallet while I'm in the
                          bathroom wiping my dick?  What scam?
           \- f hayek has an interesting critique of command economies
              based on price signals but i think anarchy state and utopia
              is more intersting. --psb
              \_ is that a line from the fortune program?  it should be.
                 \- hello does anybody recall who said something like
                    "rousseau believe man was inherently good and his
                    philosophy leads to totalitarianism. hobbes believed
                    man was basically evil and his leads to a theory of
                    freedom." [it's posibble it was voltaire, but pretty
                    sure JJR. it is also possible this isnt a famous line
                    from a book or article but just something someone said
                    that stuck in my head]. ok tnx.
                    \_ Submitting to the Leviathan doesn't strike me as a
                       'theory of freedom.'  Furthermore, it's unclear
                       Rousseau romanticist conception of people necessarily
                       translates into 'people are inherently good.'  The
                       noble savage is still savage, after all.  How Rousseau's
                       writing leads to totalitarianism is a tortured line of
                       reasoning I want to witness for myself. -- ilyas
                       reasoning I want to witness for myself.  It is believed
                       the American Revolution was all but directly inspired by
                       Rousseau, after all. -- ilyas
                       \_ If ilyas and psb fell in a forest,  would there be
                          a sound?
2004/5/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30496 Activity:insanely high
5/29    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A689-2004May29.html
        This article was up the other day.  I'm not sure why it got
        squished, except that it was somewhat informative.  Anyway, Kerry
        makes a few good points, but his understanding of North Korea
        seems glaringly bad. -jrleek
        \_ Kerry has 20 years in the Senate on the Foreign Relations
           Committee.  GWB is a draft dodging crack head.  JFK will save
           us all from the quagmire in Iraq that shrub created and will
           restore American credibility around the world for generations
           to come!  If only he had some real passion like Dean or was a
           decent human being non-partisans could vote for like Edwards,
           he would stand a good chance.
           he would stand a good chance in November.  I'm voting for Nader
           since Kerry is just more of the same.  His Iraq plan is "do more
           of what GWB is doing, do it with more troops and try to get our
           EU and UN allies in there to spread the death around".
           \_ Have you heard any of Kerry's speeches?  He has passion.
              He just has very little press coverage.  If he picks Wes
              Clark as his running mate, they'll have 8 years.
              \_ He has fake passion.  He "speechifies".  He doesn't give
                 speeches.  Artificial pauses and talking loudly an octave
                 lower than your regular voice is not passion.  Clark brings
                 nothing to the ticket.  They both have military experience.
                 They both have foreign policy/diplomacy experience.  What
                 do you think Clark brings to the ticket?  He's from the
                 South?  So are others.  The only reason to put Clark on the
                 ticket is if Kerry's military background isn't doing it
                 for him.  Putting Clark on there would be an admission of
                 weakness in an area Kerry claims is his strength.  I think
                 Kerry and his advisors are smarter than that.
           \_ If you really believe that Kerry is the same as Bush, you
              really owe it to yourself to read the man's speeches and
              get to know his policy ideas.  I think you'll find that
              the differences are stark.
              \_ I seen a few and read a few.  The differences are minimal.
                 My example above was policy in Iraq.  The only difference
                 is that Kerry wants to put more troops in.  The NYT did a
                 write up on this a few days ago and went point by point.
                 There's very little difference.  It's just a matter of
                 degree.   The basic policies are the same.
           \_ Me too... Go nader!
              \_ I'm with you, brother!  Don't let them get you to vote for
                 a lesser man with that stuff about Nader "stealing" votes
                 from Kerry or Gore.  He has the same right to run as any
                 US born citizen, of age, etc, as per the Constitution.  When
                 the Democrats remember that power is not their right, they
                 might get my vote again.  There *are* other options for
                 people with principles.
                 \_ Damn straight, America! Vote your conscience, America!
                    Especially when it draws votes away from the one man
                    who can end the Bush nightmare.
                    This message brought to you by Americans for a New
                    Century.
                    \_ Again, you fail to understand.  We don't see your guy
                       as any different than the other guy.  We want *our*
                       guy in office.  Why is that so hard to understand?  I
                       already understand why you find it hard to accept.  Your
                       party doesn't have a right to power.  I don't want your
                       guy in any more than I want the other guy.  *Both* are
                       nightmares to me and people like me.  It will always
                       be so until you get a real candidate or we get a real
                       multi party system in this country.  My vote is *not*
                       being drawn away from your guy.  You *never* had it.
                       \_ What is it you like about Nader?  Is Larry Elder
                          also ok?
                          \_ For starters, Nader isn't a lying two bit sack
                             of career politician scum like the others.  He
                             has a track record of making good things happen
                             for the people, not just talking about it until
                             after the next election cycle.  I like what he
                             says, he says what he means, and he means to do
                             good for all of us.  What else is there to like
                             about any office holder?
                       \_ I'm not a Democrat.  I don't believe in the Dems.
                          I'm pro-choice, pro-Death Penalty reform, anti-
                          huge deficits and trickle-down economics, pro-
                          campaign finance reform, pro-globalization, pro-
                          Science, and pro-Bill of Rights. I think the current
                          Administration is against everything I believe in,
                          and I know that the only candidate who stands a
                          chance in hell of reversing the course of the
                          current Administration is John Kerry.  That's why
                          I'm voting for him.  If I thought Ralph had a chance,
                          I'd vote for him.  He doesn't, under the current
                          system, so I won't.
                          \_ As long as people like you continue to make it
                             that way it will be that way.  You know this
                             country didn't start out with parties?  You know
                             the parties we have now are not the first parties
                             the country has had?  Parties are not eternal.
                             If you don't like the candidate(s) from one or
                             more of the parties you have the duty and
                             obligation to yourself and your country to vote
                             for the best candidate, not make a game out of
                             it.  Game makers have killed the electoral
                             process.  There is nothing wrong with the process
                             as it stands now except the people voting in it.
                    \_ This is starting to remind me of the perennial write-in
                       candidate for the CSUA presidency, !psb.
                       "Vote John F. !GWB.  End the nightmare and save
                       America!" -- ilyas
                       \_ Like it or not, we live in a system where the person
                          who gets the most electoral votes in a single
                          election wins all.  If you have three candidates,
                          and two of the candidates have more in common with
                          each other than with the third, and yet you split
                          the like-minded vote evenly between them, you're
                          reducing the probability that either of those two
                          candidates will defeat the third candidate. If you
                          don't like the system, reform the system, and then
                          vote for the candidate you truly support with a
                          clear conscience.  If you vote for Nader without
                          reforming the system first, you're simply drawing
                          votes away from Kerry's chances of defeating Bush.
                          If you're going to game the system, have the good
                          sense to make sure the rules support your attempt
                          to game it.  Anything else is simply petulancy.
                          \_ You *still* don't get it.  Your guy is *nothing*
                             like my guy and *everything* like that other guy
                             already in office as far as I'm concerned.  If
                             my guy wasn't running I would stay home, I would
                             not be voting for your guy.  Your guy is useless.
                             You keep talking about how voting for Nader is
                             drawing votes away from Kerry which reduces the
                             odds of defeating Bush.  I don't care which of
                             Bush or Kerry wins.  They are the same to me.  If
                             Nader doesn't win, Bush might as well win as far
                             I'm concerned.  It doesn't matter at that point.
                             Not all of us share your obsession with
                             defeating Bush.  Your party uses all it's
                             constituents like that and rules them with fear.
                             "I know we did nothing for you since the last
                             time you supported us and the many times before
                             that but think how much worse it'll be under the
                             other party!"  Enough!  Give me my country back!
                             \_ I really hope you do an in-depth analysis of
                                Kerry and Bush before you make your final
                                decision on their similarity.  In the mean-
                                time, as I wrote above, you really need to
                                get either Instant Run-off elections or the
                                Parliamentary system set up here if you want
                                a Green vote to be worth anything.
                                \_ Bush: scum.  Kerry: scum.  We don't need a
                                   new system.  We need new candidates and
                                   voters willing to vote for them.  We have
                                   the right people running.  Now we just
                                   need new voters who don't see the
                                   process as some sort of game that needs
                                   to be cynically won.
                          \_ I would recommend all CA libertarians to vote
                             Nader.  Why?  Bush will not carry the state as
                             things stand.  Therefore, a vote for Nader is
                             actually more useful than a vote for Bush, since
                             it will encourage Nader to run again, and splinter
                             the socialist camp.  Once that's done, I would
                             probably advocate voting for Buchanan, or whatever,
                             to similarly splinter the non-libertarian Right.
                               -- ilyas
                             \_  And you believe libertarians would want to vote
                                 for Bush because...?
                                 \_ A libertarian may do a number of things,
                                    some of them counterintuitive.  I think
                                    most libertarians, if they choose to vote
                                    for a major party, will generally take
                                    a republican over a democrat.  In some
                                    sense, that's the fault of the democrats.
                                      -- ilyas
                             \_ In terms of the game, I agree with you.
                                \_ It isn't a game.
           \_ Edwards a decent human being?  Yeah, right.  He's a trial
              attorney.  I've scraped better things off the bottom of my shoe.
              He made his millions convincing juries that doctors were at fault
              for children being born with cerebral palsy.  He later admitted
              that he knew that doctors can't cause CP.
              \_ Nonsense.  He made money giving people fucked up by bad
                 doctors a chance to put those incompetents out of business
                 and get enough money from their insurance to have a chance
                 at a semi-normal life.  He serves the little guy, not evil
                 corporations, criminals, and other scum.  I'd take Edwards
                 over that piece of plastic the Democrats have now any day.
              \__\_ Link?  EITHER OF YOU?
                    \_ Edward's legal battles are a matter of public record.
                       Google and you'll find plenty.
                    \_ "n 1985, a 31-year-old North Carolina lawyer named John
                    \_ "In 1985, a 31-year-old North Carolina lawyer named John
                       Edwards stood before a jury and channeled the words of
                       an unborn baby girl."  From the nytimes:
                       http://csua.org/u/7im
                       \_ Nicely taken out of context of both the article
                          and more importantly, the trial.
                          \_ Out of context?!?  It's the first line of the
                             article!
        \_ I'm curious: who are you planning to vote for, Jim? --darin
           \_ I haven't descided yet.  GWB does a few things that I think,
              are imortant, well.  He does most other things REALLY badly.
              On the other hand, he's honest about what he wants, which
              is nice.  I haven't read much of Kerry's stuff yet, but at
              least he says here that he's not planning to pull out of
              Iraq.  Which is good because that would be really stupid.
              If Kerry promises the rest of the stuff I think is
              important, I may well vote for him.  On the other hand, for
              a self described expert on foriegn policy, that little
              paragraph about NK (which is also quite important to me)
              looks really stupid and naive.  I'll wait for the debates I
              guess. What about you? -jrleek  PS. Oh yeah, I'm nervous
              about ANYONE NK endorses for President.  On the ohter hand,
              if he plays his cards right, that could mean he might be
              able to do some good with them.
              \_ I've been in favor of getting Bush out of office since reading
                 'Scientific Integrity in Policymaking' see
                 http://soda/~darin/sip.pdf for details.
                 \_ The problem with voting against someone is the last time we
                    did that, we got...Jimmy Carter.  Whee.
        \_ Nader > Clinton > Sharpton > Gore > Dean > Edwards > Kerry > McCain
           > Bush > Buchanan.  But I'm voting for Kerry because the ppl above
           him in the chain either aren't running or don't stand a chance.
           \_ Sharpton?  Who?  Buchanan?  What?  Why are these two even on
              the list?  I'd vote for my dog first.  At least he's cute.
2004/5/29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30488 Activity:very high
5/29    My boy Kerry doing business-as-usual in foreign affairs.  Talk with
        a few dictators, prop up a few thugs/allies, ignore human rights,
        and say you're going to get us off middle east oil but have no plan
        to do so like just like the last 7 Presidents.  I love JFK!
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A689-2004May29.html
        \_ Hmm.  a pragmatist with the right goals in mind.  sounds pretty
           damn american to me.  You think the outline is unreasonable?
           \_ Americans are idealists.  America is an idealist country.
              Think about it.
2004/5/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30469 Activity:very high
5/27    How do you figure the recent terror alert was bogus and non descript
        when they released names and photos of 7 people they're looking for?
        Isn't that *exactly* what we should all want from a terror alert?  Or
        did you want something like, "Don't go to the baseball game at the
        stadium this sunday because the following 7 people will destroy it at
        precisely 7:03pm localtime with 5.8kg of WMD materials with composed
        of the following compounds:, x,y,z"?
        \_ It came from Ashcroft, not from the Homeland Security Dept. as
           required by law.  It contained "no new information" according to
           a number of quoted analysts, law enforcement, and legislative
           people.  The BOLO announcement about those 7 was a re-release.
           \_ It came from Ashcroft so we should ignore it and give it no
              value and rag on the admin for it?  Okey, dokey!  Brilliant!
              You keep reading those laws while the rest of us keep an eye out
              for people trying to kill us.
              \_ Way to ignore everything i said.  fucktard.  Tom Ridge
                 came out saying "Uh, asscrack say what?"  BY LAW, these
                 announcements are supposed to come out of the DHS.  DHS
                 people got really huffy after this one, too.
                 \_ fuck tard? Yes, that's a way to win converts.  Poor tom got
                    his toes stepped on so that makes the warning useless?  You
                    are a true genius!  A partisan of the darkest sort.  Win
                    at all costs, huh?
                    \_ Are you changing any behavior because of this
                       announcement?  Is your local police department?
                       This was a purely political play.  You haven't
                       addressed anything I said.
                       \_ If I see one of them which is unlikely I'd report
                          it.  I have better odds of spotting one now that I've
                          seen them and their names than I did if it wasn't
                          announced.  I haven't asked my local PD.  Maybe they
                          are.  Maybe some highway cop will notice when he
                          pulls one over for a traffic stop.  I've addressesed
                          everything you've said.  Until now you've
                          focussed on who made the announcement which is
                          totally pointless.  No one but you or some other
                          ultra partisan hack gives a damn which government
                          flunky holds the press conference.
        \_ Yes, anything less than that is Bush lying to us.  He KNOWS he
           KNEW about 9/11, and he knows about the next terror attack!
           The CIA is reading the terrorists minds!  They used to do that
           to me too, until I got this great hat...
           \_ Did you make it yourself or buy it on the net?  I want them to
              stop putting thoughts into my head, too!
              \_ Hey wait, on second thought how can I trust you not to send
                 me to some fbi run site?  Or how do I even know I can trust
                 myself enough to go to a good site if you're legit?
           \_ My girlfriend works at the FBI and says the people working the
              phone on a night shift really *do* get calls from people
              complaining the FBI put microphones in their teeth and could you
              please tell your extraterrestrials to stop tailing me.
              \_ Man, I wonder if I can get a job there?  That's rad.
                 No, actually if I wanted to meet crazy people, I could
                 just be a bus driver.
                 \_ Only agents get to man the phones at night.  And agents
                    have to work 60-hour weeks.
                    \_ Do they still require a law degree?
                       \_ No.  They require a 4-year degree and prefer you to
                          know another language and have some law-enforcement
                          experience.
                          \_ I watched every episode of CHiPs and Starskey and
                             Hutch when I was a kid.
2004/5/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30459 Activity:high
5/27    Not that it will probably work out that way, but a hypothetical
        Kerry/McCain presidential ticket beats Bush 54-39% in polls.
        http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/26/opinion/polls/main619786.shtml
        \_ Bush is burnt toast, but please don't tell the motd freepers that:
           they might get disheartened and stop posting, which would make my
           days that much less amusing.
           \_ Uhm yeah.  Everyone who doesn't agree with you is a freeper.
              I'm sure you find it easier to smear the opposition with labels
              instead of engage in anything resembling honest debate.  Or you
              can just keep up the smear campaign and preach to the choir.
           \_ d00d, 91% of Republicans supported Bush a month ago.  Now
              only 84% of Republicans support Bush.  You won't be running
              out of Republicans anytime soon.
              \_ In a close race, losing 7% of your constituents in a single
                 month is pretty bad.
              \_ I'm so freaking out!  I need to go back to the freeper site
                 to get a dose!  Or I'll have to visit Rush's site and see
                 him on the 24x7 cam to assure myself I'm ok!  Or I could just
                 chill like the rest of the 'red states' and laugh at how
                 Kerry is *supposed to be up 15 points in all those battle
                 ground states but is either tied or losing.
                 \_ Not according to Zogby.
        \_ Bush/Powell 2004 - Powell/Rice 2008
        \_ Powell + (anybody *other* than Bush/Cheney) would win easily.
        \_ What's all this Powell stuff?  I thought we decided Powell was just
           the token minority on the Bush team and sold out his principles
           when he outright lied to the UN about WMD?  I'm confused.  Who are
           we supposed to hate today?
           \_ Who's smearing the oppostition with labels and not engaging
              in honest debate now?
2004/5/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:30452 Activity:insanely high
5/27    New evidence of a link between Iraq and al Qaeda.
        http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005133
        \_ Mommy, why does the WSJ want me to reigister?
           \_ csuamotd@csua.berkeley.edu
        \_ As if the WSJ editorial page had any fucking credibility.
           \_ Thank you.
           \_ Funny, I find that nothing that disagrees with me has any
              credibility either.
              \_ The WSJ has really gone downhill since Jan or so. Remember
                 the whole Kerry intern disinformation campaign? WSJ was
                 part of it. In general, they have become very partisan.
                 Read The Economist if you want pro Free Market opinions
                 without the Republican Party slant.
                 \_ Yeah.  Anyone remember Vince Foster's suicide note?
                 \_ Kerry was fucking some hot chick.  Nothing wrong with that.
                    He has a life long history of womanizing.  It didn't hurt
                    Clinton any.  Women voted for him in droves.  Kerry should
                    revel in it.  It makes him much more human than his endless
                    drumbeat about his very short Vietnam stay and his endless
                    speachifying.  It isn't disinformation if it's true.  I
                    think it can only help his campaign.
                 \_ Is there any way to get the LA or NY Times w/o the
                    democaratic party slant?
                    \_ Easy: Don't just read the LA/NY Times.  Try BBC, CBC,
                       and some of the east Asian online mags.
                       \_ East asian magizines?  The Korean newspapers I
                          read have plenty of party slant... -jrleek
                    \_ Not really.  Read lots of stuff, read between lines.
                       Apply brain.  Most importantly look for what they
                       *don't* say because that's where they hide their a lot
                       of their bias.  For example, are we still losing 2-5
                       soldiers per day in Iraq?  Is the power and water
                       situation stable?  Are kids going to school?  Are people
                       eating?  How many people there are looking forward to
                       their first real vote in their entire lives?  How many
                       of Sadr's men were killed by anti-Sadr Iraqis?  If
                       Sadr and friends have 10,000 people total, doesn't that
                       mean there are still ~26 million others who haven't
                       taken up arms against us?  Why hasn't the Shia/Sunni
                       war broken out?  Why haven't the Kurds broken away from
                       Turkey?  Why does nothing good ever seem to get reported
                       about anything going on in Iraq?  Is it true that there
                       is nothing at all good happening there?  If it bleeds,
                       it leads.  Welcome to American 'journalism'.
                       \_ Americans want news about how we'll be leaving
                          a nice democracy in Iraq, and no more American
                          deaths.  Americans also want to hear any news about
                          why this won't be coming soon.
                    \_ Christian Science Monitor is a great source, without
                       any discernable partisanship. There is probably no
                       replacement for the Washington Post, alas. The Week
                       is good if you only have time to spend two hrs/week
                       on news. Yeah, if you have time, read everything and
                       make up your own mind, but I don't have time for that.
                       \_ The CSM?  It's run by evil Xtians!  And the WAPO is
                          run by the Moonies!
                          \_ No, the washington post is a decent paper. The
                             washington times is run by the moonies, and it's
                             a total rag.
        \_ If Bush or Condi say something about it, maybe I'll start paying
           attention.  In the mean time, it's just Republican catnip.
           \_ Catnip?  Yes, all registered (R)'s get a free subscription to
              the WSJ.  It's a better written paper than the NYT which has a
              rather poor track record for clean reporting these last few
              years and those are just the ones we know about.
              \_ (1) "The New York Times publicly took itself to task for its
                 pre-Iraq war coverage, admitting it was taken in by spurious
                 information from Iraqi exiles with their own agenda to oust
                 Saddam Hussein." - May 26
                 (2) The WSJ published the name of a juror in the trial
                 against the Tyco exec.  I've read about WSJ's excuse.
                 (3) Republican catnip.  Circumstantial evidence is what
                 circumstantial does.  Look what it did to Bush.  The
                 weight of credibility lies on him now.  I'm going to wait
                 for him to support the next claim, since everyone is now
                 watching him carefully, since he has no one left to blame
                 (already blamed the CIA, already blamed Chalabi, who's left?).
                 \_ Is this that whole thing from the wall about repeating the
                    "American credibility is destroyed for generations!" until
                    it becomes 'truth' Soviet style?  You need to be more
                                        \_^Soviet^Bush
                    consistent if you're going to put over the Big Lie on
                    everyone.  You don't post that crap nearly enough to get
                    the rest of your audience repeating it.
                    \_ Do you have any idea how bad the image of America is
                       overseas right now? Do you ever leave the country?
                       Read polls? I dunno about the generations bit, but
                       Bush has destroyed American credibility overseas.
                       \_ Given that America is as powerful as the next 20
                          countries put together, perhaps a better question is,
                          what credibility do the overseas have with us?
                          \_ Wow, talk about missing the point.
                       \_ Nuke the rest of the world and we won't have any
                          credibility problems.  Fuck the foreigners!
                    \_ Alas, no, I am not the person who posted about
                       credibility earlier.  I am still waiting for you to
                       dispute my points.
2004/5/27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30444 Activity:very high
5/26    Politically motivated threat warnings?
        http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/politics/27terror.html
        "' ... There's no real new intelligence, and a lot of this has been
        out there already,' said one administration official who spoke on
        the condition of anonymity."
        \_ Yet another BushCo conspiracy to destroy American credibility around
           the world for generations to come!  So, if something blew up and
           10,000 people got killed would you be the first one here screaming
           that they didn't warn us?  And then next you'll say they warn us
           too much and you're 'terrorist alert weary'.
           \_ General warnings count for shit, even if something does happen.
              What matters is that they take the right precautions to keep
              security tight.  If they know of a specific threat, then by all
              means warn us and take precautions, but just saying "something
              bad might happen" is no better than fear-mongering.
              \_ Rice got smashed for the last time when they had non specific
                 warnings and they didn't tell the world.  Now they tell the
                 world about non-specific warnings and you bitch about it.
           \_ Well, there's no new information.  They haven't raised the
              threat level.  Why all the sudden warnings?  Don't be such a
              tool.
              \_ Because Memorial Day is traditionally the kickoff for the
                 summer vacation season.  And the suspicion is that there might
                 be an attack during the summer vacation season.  Didn't you
                 see how Condi Rice got hammered for not doing anything after
                 the memo a month before 9/11 with no new or specific
                 information?
                 information? -emarkp
                 \_ But are they doing anything that they wouldn't be doing
                    anyway, besides trying to make big headlines that
                    essentially say, "WATCH OUT!  BAD MUSLIMS!  FEAR!"
                    The Condi threat memo is a nice attempt at a dodge, but
                    doesn't relate to this case at all.
                    \_ Uh, if they were doing anything different, you probably
                       wouldn't know about it.  And how is the threat memo a
                       dodge?  As I read it, the administration is getting
                       criticized for saying anything now, but would get
                       criticized later if they didn't say anything now.
                       -emarkp
                       \_ It's just the "I hate Bush no matter what" contingent
                          on the prowl.  There's no point in talking with them.
                          \_ Read the polls lately?  Looked around?  Bush isn't
                             exactly Mr. Popularity these days.
                             \_ Are you the same person who was whining about
                                lack of substance above?  Either you're here
                                to disucss things seriously or you're here to
                                fuck around, make noise, and tell us all
                                (again) how much you hate Bush.  You can't have
                                it both ways.  And you totally ducked what
                                emarkp had to say.
        \_ Bush's strongest support comes from anti-terrorism.  If there's
           a successful attack and he didn't sound some warning, that will
           take away from his #1 strength.  Can't let that happen.  Wouldn't
           be prudent.
           Raising the terror threat level costs money.  If there's no
           attack, or god-forbid the attack occurs after the threat level
           is lowered, then this again takes away from his #1 strength.
           \_ I have credible evidence that the Administration will attack
              John Kerry in the near future.
              \_ You think they'll send Ashcroft out with a bat to a Kerry
                 campaign stop and whack in his knees?
                 \_ They outsource that type of thing.
                 \_ I have no details of where or when they intend to attack,
                    but I think it's important that the American public be
                    reminded of how serious this is.
                    \_ That ice skater chick survived to get a silver medal.
                       John Kerry will ski again!
2004/5/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30425 Activity:insanely high
5/25    CNN: "Sources: Major terror attack possible this summer"
        Should I change my summer plans?
        \_ yes. they're on to you.
        \_ flee before the motd reports you to the fbi
        \_ It'll be fun to watch Rummy say how terrorists will try to
           influence the November election ala Spain. Vote Bush or the
           terrorists will win!
           \_ You've been alive for at least 6 months, right?  2 seconds after
              the Spanish bombings, *everyone* was saying they'd try to do the
              same thing here.  Where the hell have you been sleeping?
              \_ You misunderstood the remark. I want to hear the Republicans
                 state outright "Vote for Kerry and the terrorists win." There
                 has been lots of talk of the terrorists attacks influencing
                 the election, but no one big has yet politicized them to this
                 point. Fun! Fun! Fun! Feel the dark side!
                 \_ I see.  My misreading.  Nevermind.  Are you also waiting
                    for the Dems to say, "See?  If Kerry/Gore was in office,
                    these things would have never happened because the UN would
                    have been involved!"?
                    \_ Try googling
                       "would have never happened" "UN involvement"
                       and nothing turns up. Of course, I'm sure you feepers
                       and the Office of Information Manipulation will put
                       up a fake Dem website that says "If Kerry/Gore was
                       in office, these things would have never happened
                       because the UN would have been involved!"
                       \_ You understand the difference between the past which
                          would be a google search and the future which is what
                          the word "waiting" means, right?  Now go back and
                          try again after going to http://dictionary.com instead of
                          http://google.com and typing "waiting" into the box.
                    \_ You lose. Everyone already says that. Even Neocons will
                       state, if Gore were in office, Saddam Hussein would
                       still be in power, implying no war on Iraq, therefore
                       no mess in Iraq. Of course, Bush is now pushing the
                       terrorists / Al Quada == Iraq which is now true thanks
                       to the war. Ah, I love self fulfilling prophecies. It
                       makes me feel more an Evangelical Christian!
                       \_ Iraq?  We're talking about terrorism in the USA.  If
                          you were remotely on topic I might lose but since
                          you're off in babble land your post is bit-waste.
2004/5/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30398 Activity:nil
5/24    Hahah.  Beautiful.
        "It's been raining a lot and the topsoil is loose," the spokesman
        said. "You know this president. He likes to go all out. Suffice it
        to say he wasn't whistling show tunes."
        So, the weather in Crawford has been in the 80s and bone dry for
        weeks.  What's so hard about just saying "He fell off his bike."
        \_ Why do you hate America?
        \_ He was riding 17 MILES and he fell at the last one!  I'd like
           to see Kerry do that!
           \_ 17 miles is nothing on a bike in Texas.  -tom
           \- kerry is in pretty good shape. he'd done some long windsurfing
              trips for example --psb
           \_ How totally irrelevent.  It wasn't raining.  Why say it was?
           \_ No, what you'd really like to see is Kerry fall after the
              first mile.  If you're gonna hate, be honest about it.
           \_ Kerry is a stud - I wish he would inseminate my sister.
        \_ Kerry has already fallen off of his bike twice in the past
           month and a half.  He has also had shoulder surgery in the
           past after falling off of a bike.
           \_ clutz
2004/5/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30385 Activity:very high
5/24    Very Presidential, but it was "off the record" so it's ok:
        http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040523-112924-2653r.htm
        \_ you freepers are really reaching for shit now.
                \_ nice imagery, really!
           \_ The more of this silliness they post, the better I feel about
              Kerry's chances of kicking W's ass this November.
              \_ As if I don't hear enough "Bush is a dumb" propoganda
                 from the left.  Guys, this post is dumb, but it's no
                 worse than what I've been hearing from you for the last 4
                 years.
                 \_ "did the training wheels fall off?" is reasonably clever
                    if he came up with it on the spot--dubya would need a
                    committee of speechwriters
                    \_ Are you trying to prove my point?
                       \_ "Did the training wheels fall off?" is a direct
                          reference to Bush's speech a few days before about
                          the Iraq handover.  Printing this without that context
                          is pretty damn disingenuous.  Or perhaps just stupid.
                          --scotsman
                          \_ Ok, I'm not familiar with the speech, so
                             maybe the joke was fairly clever.  Basically,
                             the point still stands. That is, this article
                             is stupid, and so is all the propaganda I
                             hear from the left.  All dumb.
                             \_ on Thrusday Bush made a major speech saying
                                it was times for Iraq to take off the training
                                wheels and have a go at democracy or something.
                             \_ You think this article is propaganda from the
                                left?  Talk about stupid.
                                \_ Hello?  Can you read english?  What
                                   language should I write in so you have
                                   a hope of parsing a simple sentence?
                                   \_ Okay, I'll explain slowly.  Reporting
                                      a comment like this out of context paints
                                      Kerry as petty and mean.  In context, yes
                                      it's still petty, but it makes sense as
                                      a witty political joke and not an off-
                                      hand comment.
                                      For yet more context, check the final
                                      line at
                                      http://csua.org/u/7ff (apnews)
                                      \_ Dude, READ WHAT WAS WRITTEN!
                                         Above I say: "That is, this
                                         article is stupid, and so is all
                                         the propaganda I hear from the
                                         left."  The response is: "You
                                         think this article is propaganda
                                         from the left?"  If you can read
                                         english it is obvious that I felt
                                         this was stupid right-wing
                                         propaganda much LIKE the
                                         propaganda I hear from the left.
                                         That response to my comment MAKES
                                         NO SENSE.  Your further response
                                         AGAIN has NOTHING to do with my
                                         comment. What the CRAP do you
                                         think you're responding to?
                                         \_ Ah, so what we have here is
                                            failure to c'municate.  Your
                                            composition leaves much to be
                                            desired. "just as" instead of
                                            "and so" would have made your
                                            statement much clearer.
                                            desired.
                                            \_ Umm.. right.  Your reading
                                               comprehension could use
                                               some work too.
                                               \_ English discussions are as
                                                  boring as freeper links.
                                                  However, that plank there
                                                  is preventing you from seeing
                                                  my cornea.
                                                  \_ Just keep thinking
                                                     whatever makes you
                                                     feel the most
                                                     self-rightous pally.
2004/5/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30370 Activity:high
5/23    So what do you think about Kerry delaying his nomination until long
        after his tax payer funded nomination?  What would you think if Bush
        did the same thing for the same reason?
        \_ Is this a hypothetical? Because Bush can't...the RNC is after the
           DNC.
           \_ No, it's been all over the news for 2-3 days.  Kerry is
              seriously considering doing this so he can raise more private
              cash.  The RNC *can* delay exactly the same as the DNC if they
              want, but that's beside the point.  I only mention that to put
              it in perspective for the knee-jerkers.
        \_ It's going to be a close election, so Kerry has recently (a)
           tried to talk Nader out of it early and (b) wanted to schedule
           the nomination date the same as Bush, so they are both restricted
           to federal funding at the same time.  Sounds fine to me.
           Kerry isn't the one misusing the material witness provision,
           getting it so wrong on intelligence, and paying in American
           credibility on an undermanned war.  If Bush didn't do any of these
           things, and just extended the nomination to match the Democrats, it
           wouldn't be a big deal to me.
           \_ Kerry is using tax payer dollars to have a party.  The
              convention is supposed to result in a nomination.  If they want
              to move the whole convention back, that's fine but this is
              ridiculous.  Your anti-bush rhetoric has nothing to do with
              this thread's topic.
2004/5/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30354 Activity:insanely high
5/21    More and more pics and videos from Iraq.  Some at the washingtonpost.
        \_ Is there some reason I'd WANT to see more gruesome pictures?
           \_ Why, as explained by a Washington Post editor:
              http://csua.org/u/7ek
              \_ Not compelling to me.
                 \_ Well, now you know, at least.
        \_ Expect ongoing politicizing of the images slowly leaked out
           by the media until the election.  And people wonder
           why the left is accused of treason.
           \_ You should raed the above URL, first.  Then you can come back
              and call the liberal left treasonous.  I don't care.
           \_ You should read the above URL, first.  Then you can come back
              and call the liberal left treasonous.  There's nothing I don't
              like more than an uninformed Bush supporter.
                \_ Uhm, I think we all know bad shit happened to some Iraqis
                   in US custody.  Is it necessary to see all 1000 photos and
                   17 videos spread out over every 3 days between now and the
                   election?  No, it is not.  I mostly support the original
                   revealing of what was going on.  I do not support the
                   politically motivated trickling we're now seeing.
                \_ Well you should care, because the media is trying to
                   recreate Vietnam all over again.  Its disgusting and
                   treasonous.  Please explain to me how I am uninformed.
                   I am waiting to be enlightened, please deign to do so!!!
                   \_ Do you agree with suspending our obligations in the
                      Geneva Conventions?
                      \_ Like this section: "..shall encourage the
                         practice of intellectual, educational, and
                         recreational pursuits, sports and games
                         amongst prisoners"?
                         A combatant is someone in the military
                         service of a country that wears a uniform with
                         a fixed distinctive insignia, openly carries a
                         weapon, obeys the laws of war and answers to a
                         chain of command. American military forces
                         diligently follow these rules. Terrorists that
                         the American military is fighting in Afghanistan
                         and Iraq do not. Even under the Geneva
                         Convention, spies, saboteurs, terrorists and
                         criminals may be tried and punished (up to death).
                         So in conclusion there are no "obligations".
                            \- fine. if there are no obligations than
                               "the media" has no obligations not to
                               publish these. in addition to looking
                               backwards toward the "obligations" how
                               about considering the "repurcussions".
                               do you think it would be better if the
                               non-american press covered this and the
                               us press was silent?
                                 \_ Yes obviously the policies should
                                    be reconsidered but that does not
                                    necessitate invoking Geneva.  What
                                    I am speaking to is the use of this
                                    by the media as a political tool
                                    to bludgeon the President and
                                    by extension the effort in Iraq.  What
                                    will happen is the media will continue
                                    to leak photos until the election in
                                    an effort to recreate Vietnam.  Its
                                    disgusting, transparent, and
                                    treasonous.  I would gladly trade a
                                    Bush loss and Iraq victory.  The Dems have
                                    decided to do anything to win, country
                                    be damned.
                                    \- arent you conflating "the dems" and
                                       "the press". let me ask you this:
                                       if corporations can take out ads
                                       and write checks to parties and
                                       congresspersons, why cant editorial
                                       boards express their opinions?
                                       what change to the status quo are
                                       you recommending. it's not like
                                       BUSH CO is saying "lets wait for the
                                       legal process to work" ... they are
                                       certainly promoting their "few bad
                                       apples" position. you know the 1st
                                       amd doesnt just apply to rep senators
                                       from oaklahoma.
                                       \_ dems = the press.  whats the problem
                                          with that statement?
                                       \_ No problem with editorial boards.
                                          To pretend the media has no
                                          left bias is patently absurd.
                                          So you trot out the totemic evil of
                                          the GOP - the corporations - igoring
                                          the largest constuencies of the Dems,
                                          trial lawyers and unions.  Unlike
                                          the left, I have no delusions about
                                          politicians who 'care' for the little
                                          guy.  I operate from simple principles
                                          extolled by the founders: government
                                          is inherentely evil.
                                          \_I hold it to be self-evident that
                                            you're a fucking idiot.
                                          \_ Lawyers gave more money to Bush
                                             than Gore, and corporations gave
                                             an order of magnitude more money
                                             to republicans than unions gave
                                             to democrats.  -tom
                                             \_ source?  I don't think you
                                                know what you are talking about.
                                                \_ http://opensecrets.org works. Labor
                                                   has given $90m in each of
                                                   the last 2 election cycles.
                                                   Add up the corporate sectors
                                                   and the order of magnitude
                                                   claim holds true.  The site
                                                   groups lawyers and lobyists,
                                                   but on
                   http://www.opensecrets.org/2000elect/sector/AllCands.htm
                                                   his claim again holds true.
                                                   --scotsman
                                                   \_ Then how is it that the
                                                      Bush and Kerry campaigns
                                                      have roughlt the same
                                                      amount of money when you
                                                      add in proxy groups such
                                                      as http://moveon.org?  Got math?
                                            \- making hay out of something like
                                               does BUSH go to his daughters
                                               graduation is silly and probably
                                               deperate partisanship. The AbuG
                                               Show is not a "vast leftwing
                                               conspiracy". Maybe the legit
                                               press has a leftwing bias but
                                               the right uses media as a means
                                               too, eg. the fake press reports.
                                               if you cant tell the difference
                                               between the WP and partisan
                                               hacks, you are simply not use-
                                               ful to talk to. The WP editor
                                               above is hardly Michael Moore.
                                               Why dont you also add "all the
                                               climate scientists are leftwing
                                               freaks, as are development
                                               economists and most law profs."
                                               \_ Well, yes, that would be
                                                  true.  They mostly are.
                        \_ Which is directly opposite of what Rumsfeld has
                            stated this week.  You don't keep up all that well
                            do you...
                            \_ To clarify on what this person just said,
                               Rumsfeld's subordinate said that the Geneva
                               Conventions apply to Iraq (but not Guantanomo).
                               \_ They are bowing to political
                                  expendiency. You can read it
                                  yourself, article 4 is very clear:
                                  http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/91.htm
                   \_ So, have you read the URL yet?
        \_ Why don't all of you understand?  The geneva conventions applies
           to America only to the extent it protects our soldiers, because
           we are the good guys.  Why we are acting on order of God and
           punishing the bad guys, it does not apply to us.
              \_ Not hard core enough to me.
           \_ Why do you bother writing sarcastic nonsense like this?  You're
              not going to get a real response that will further debate in any
              real way.  Does it make you feel good to spit in the wind?  It's
              just you and the echos when you go off all frothy.
2004/5/21 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30349 Activity:high
5/21    Bravo Pelosi! You have more balls than most politicians.
        Fuck Bush!
        \_ all balls , no brains. Her answer on her way to win
           the war on terrorism: "Education"
        \_ On the left, this passes for political rumination.
           \_ On the right, this passes for terrorism.
              \_ wewt!
        \_ Also more money (richest woman in congress).  Also more plastic
           surgery (okay, that's speculation).
           \_ Wait, how many women are there in congress?  And how rich is she?
              \_ This kind of talk puts American lives at risk!
              \_ http://politicalresources.com/You_Asked/Richest.htm
                 Amend that to one of the richest people in congress.
                 \_ what does that have to do with anything?
                    \_ No less than the op.
                       \_ uh, what?
               \_ Lest we omit that 8 of the top richest congresscritters
                  are also Dem.
        \_ "The San Francisco/Boston Democrats led by John Kerry have now
           adopted 'Blame America First' as their official policy," RNC
           Chairman Ed Gillespie said..." Why does Pelosi hate America??
           I'm George Bush, and I approved this message.
2004/5/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30328 Activity:high 60%like:30327
5/20    Kerry divorced and remarried.  Has there ever been a president who
        divorced and remarried?
        \_ Uh... Reagan.
           \_ thanks
        \_ why do you hate us divorcees?
           \_ Divorcees hate America.
           \_ I love BDG! -bdg #3 fan
              \- BUSH was arrested for Drunk Driving. Given that Ted Kennedy
                 will never be elected, has there ever been a president who
                 was arrested for DUI/DWI? --psb
                 \_ AFAIK, Bush is the first president EVER with a criminal
                    record (upon entering office).
                    \_ Bush had the strength of will to go off the bottle,
                       and the leadership to not have to apologize for it.
                       \_ Leadership means never having to say you're sorry?
                          \_ I'm just saying that's what conservatives like
                             about the guy.  What's worse than a Limbaugh /
                             Fox News fan having to apologize to a liberal?
                             With Clinton, and all his "feeling your pain" --
                             well, Republicans think this was all horseshit.
                       \_ Right. Now wonder he choked on that pretzel-- he
                          was drinking O'Doul's.
2004/5/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30327 Activity:nil 60%like:30328
5/20    Kerry is divorced.  Has there ever been a divorced president?
        \_ Uh... Reagan.
           \_ thanks
           \_ divorced someone else  but remarried to Nancy (1st lady)
        \_ i've always wondered the same thing.
2004/5/19-20 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics] UID:30311 Activity:high
5/19    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/040519/234/726q1.html
        Would someone who's older than me please explain Andy Kaufman?
        \_ I'm not older, but I think he's nuts.
        \_ It's a press release, not news.  I think it's a complete hoax.
        \_ http://Snopes.com on the case:
           http://csua.org/u/7dn (Uploaded 5/20)
        \_ Everything I know of Andy Kaufman, I got it from watching Man on
           the Moon.  How accurate is it?
                \_ not sure, but I found him to be a totally annoying
                   opinionated bastard and I don't care if he's dead or alive
           \_ Not completely accurate (but what biopic is?). Kaufman had an
              odder sense of humor than most, but it was wasted on people who
              never understood the absurdity of it. In retrospect (and when it
              was spelt out for people in MotM), people now appreciate his
              brand of humor. Back then though... in terms of today's comics,
              his fame varied between Robin Williams and a half-step above
              Carrottop and Gallagher.
2004/5/18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30275 Activity:high
5/18    http://www.csua.org/u/7c3
        hey ranty conservative poster:  you described this as "Just another
        partisan rant, full of wild assumptions and faulty conclusions."
        Now I'm curious.  What are the wild assumptions?        -!op
        \_ which rant are we supposed to read,
           "You fat fucking fucks need to stop eating so much fatty catby stuff
            You are fat because you don't like baby jesus. Fuck you. That's
            baby jesus says. Fuck you. Also, you fat donut eaters need to keep\
            eating donuts but must learn to shut up. Fuck you,"
            or
            "KEEP EEATING DO-NUTS AND VOTGING DUBAYOU KERREY IT MAKE NO
            DIFFERENCE YOU JBOS STILL WILL COME TO US!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHA YOU
            LOSE FAT AMERICAN!"?
            I just don't know where to start.
        \_ How about the first sentence.
           \_ Yeah, that'd be one of the wild assumptions. -evil conservative
        \_ Phew. I'm a lefty and think the post is farily off mark. -evil lefty
        \_ Phew. I'm a lefty and think the post is fairly off mark. -evil lefty
2004/5/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30257 Activity:high
5/17    Of the remaining six veterans pictured in the photograph,
        "one is deceased and three do not wish to be involved
        in any manner; only two of the 19 are believed to support
        Kerry," the group said in a Monday press release.
        Swift Boat Vets Accuse Kerry of Vietnam Photo Fraud
        http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/17/135458.shtml
        \_ i think we can all agree NEWSMAX is not a credible news source
                \_ Ok then go straight to their site.  But your're right
                   admirals and captains have no credibility.
                   http://www.swiftvets.com/Index2.htm
                \_ if you have some time to blow, the forums
                   on that website are interesting. - danh
        \_ Amusing experiment.  Do a google search for: swift boat kerry
           Look at the links that come up.  http://Newsmax.com, http://cnsnews.com,
           http://nationalreview.com, and http://usvetdsp.com.  This last one is the
           most interesting.  We do a whois and find the administrative
           contact is ted sampley.  We do a google for "Ted Sampley" and
           find this: http://www.miafacts.org/prankster.htm
           He's a shill.  You're being played.  This whole story is
           manufactured.  Repeated enough times until it's "true".
           \_ http://archive.salon.com/opinion/conason/2004/05/04/swift
                \_ So an admiral and the other members are lying that
                   they were Vietnam contemparies of Kerry's?  Go
                   to their website - its the same guy that
                   debated kerry in the '70s.  I think its you who
                   are being played.  They have given several
                   talks at the National Press Club now, all covered
                   by CSPAN.  Either they are lying / frauds or
                   you are full of shit.
                          http://www.swiftvets.com/Index2.htm
                   Of course the media is ignoring them, its to
                   be expected.
                   \_ If you want to keep score, there are scores of vets
                      who have come out in praise of kerry, and a handful
                      that have ties to Bush's PR groups, many of whom were
                      the same names that popped up criticizing McCain's
                      record in the 2000 primary, coming out blasting him.
                      At the same time, even with a reward offered, no one
                      could be scrounged up to praise Bush's record.  You're
                      the one who's clouded, my friend.
                        \_ Bush is not running as a war hero, and doesn't  mention
                           Vietnam is every sentence he utters.  Kerry does.
                           \_ No, Bush is running as being good for national
                              defense by draining the treasury, playing
                              political games with funding requests, starting
                              wars under the name of fighting terror that
                              do more to foster it, and then turning around
                              and attacking Kerry's war record.  Pointing out
                              Bush's dubious war record is just icing.
                                \_ You have no comments about the facts
                                   in the stated  website, choosing instead
                                   to parrot vapid DNC rhetoric.
                                   Why waste your (or my) time writing such
                                   nonsense?
                \_ salon is a left wing rag.  The author of this article's book
                   is described as: the seminal book on the vast right wing
                   conspiracy that attempted to undo democracy by trying to
                   impeach Clinton. The book, of course, is "The Hunting of the
                   President."
                \_ Sampley deserves to be hacked to pieces with a hoe.
                   -son of Vietnam Vet
        \_ You know Swift Boat is a GOP front, right?
           \_ Only the Officer Corp should be allowed to vote.
           \_ part of the vast right wing conspiracy no doubt.
              \_ newsmax and swift boat are quite clearly
                 part of the vast right wing conspiracy
              \_ It's not a conspiracy when it's right out in the open.
           \_ So what are you accusing them of... lying?  17 or 19 don't
              want to be in the picture yet Kerry is widely
              distributing it.
        \_ So, Nam is important again? Can't people stop flip flopping on this?
                \_ John Kerry was in Vietnam!!!!?? I had no idea... he never
                   mentions it!
        \_ Notice that the entire swiftvets site never specifies anything
           wrong or bad that Kerry has done, aside from protest the V. War.
2004/5/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30232 Activity:moderate
5/14    whack jobs of a feather flock together (reform party endorses nader):
        http://www.votenader.org/media_press/index.php?cid=32
        \_ I'm voting for Nader - he rocks.
2004/5/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30222 Activity:insanely high
5/13  Kerry shafts the unemployeed: http://tinyurl.com/35ukj
      \_ you're reaching, troll.
           \_ How precisely is this a troll?  And why are there so many
              polemical attacks on anything criticizing Kerry? -emarkp
        \_ it sure sounds like the republicans tried to frame
           kerry for this.  what do you think emarkp?
            \_ It's easier to just scream "troll!" and walk away then
               actually say anything intelligent to defend the undefendable.
                 \_ I'll defend Kerry:  It's better for him to be out
                    campaigning than for him to be tied up in the senate by
                    political games.
                    \_ Then he should resign his senate seat and let someone do
                       the job instead of getting paid not to be there, and in
                       this case letting legislation that he's ostensibly for
                       fail. -emarkp
                  \_ When you're a manager and a guy who works for you is
                     out interviewing instead of doing his job, you'll be
                     ok with that?  Please ping me when you become a
                     manager.
                \_ the american people are gwbush's manager, do we
                   call for his head every time he appears at a NASCAR
                   game?  ok i do but i am an extreme case.
                       \_ if he's applying for a higher-level position in the
                          same organization?  Of course you support it.  Or
                          do you think the job of a manager is to make sure
                          his staff never advances?  -tom
                          \_ what?  what topic are you replying to?  if this
                             the fucked up motdedit merge 'feature' gone awry?
                             \_ I'm replying to "When you're a manager...".
                                "the american people..." put his post in
                                between.  -tom
                          \_ Sure you can interview for another position in
                             the same organization, but not if it impairs
                             your ability to do the job you're currently
                             holding.
                              \_ The difference is, if one of my employees
                                were interviewing for another job in the
                                organization, I would take that into account
                                in terms of scheduling tasks for him, rather
                                than using the opportunity to play cheap,
                                disingenuous political games.  -tom
                                \_ Do you have proof of "cheap, disingenuous
                                   political games", or is it just a
                                   conspiracy theory?
                                   \_ The Democrats had been pushing for a
                                      vote for weeks, and the Republicans
                                      bring it to a vote when Kerry has a
                                      scheduled campaign stop.  It's not proof
                                      but it's pretty fishy.  Don't make me
                                      dig up the congressional record to
                                      show the Dems tried to get a vote, it's
                                      reasonably well-documented in the news.
                                      \_ In other words, no proof and just a
                                         conspiracy theory.
                                         \_ The proof is prima facie.  -tom
                    \_ the american people are gwbush's manager, do we
                       call for his head every time he appears at a NASCAR
                       game?  ok i do but i am an extreme case.
               \_ It IS kinda trollish.  That title doesn't match the
                 article very well.  A better one would be: "Kerry
                 ironically continues to igonre his senatorial duties,
                 even when his vote is vital to the issues he claims to
                 care about" or some such. -jrleek
              \_ It's a troll because the vote was staged.  The Republicans had
                 plenty of votes to make the bill go down, and Bush had
                 threatened to veto it.  When the GOP leadership learned Kerry
                 would not be present for the vote, they arranged to have some
                 R-senators change their vote so that it would fail by 1 vote.
                 Even if Kerry had magically apeared at the last minute, Bush
                 would still have vetoed it.  A more fair title would be:
                 "Kerry humiliated by staged vote."
                 \_ URL proving this was staged?
                 \_ Ding ding ding. We have a winner.
                    \_ Not until he backs up his bold assertions.
                   \_ It's impossible to prove that the GOP conspired to rig
                      the vote, but the fact that the vote has been put off for
                      weeks and then was suddenly announced just the night
                      before, while Kerry was away, looks a little suspicous.
                      No one can dispute the fact that if Bush vetoed it,
                      Kerry's vote would note have mattered.  Some URLs below:
    Newsday columnist: GOP stacks the vote to make Kerry a loser
    http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists
           ny-vpmcc133799370may13,0,7114735.column?coll=ny-news-columnists
    CNN: Senate rejects jobless benefits extension
    http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/11/kerry.vote

                        \_ So you can't prove a god damned thing.  This is
                           just more "I HATE BUSHCO!" conspiracy theory.
                           Thanks for clarifying that.
                 \_ Wow!  didn't know republicans are so childish.
                    \_ Amazing that you believe this crap without so much as
                       a misquote from some public figure.  No URL.  No
                       nothing.  Oh well.  The moon is made of cheese, too.
               \_ If the Senate had done this and Bush had done that, then
                  it wouldn't have mattered if Kerry voted or not.  If
                  Nasdaq stayed 5000, I would have been rich.  I'm not
                  rich, and the vote lost by 1, Kerry's.
2004/5/12 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30195 Activity:high
5/12    Kerry says first choice for SecDef would be John McCain
        http://tinyurl.com/2kd82         (politics.com, Reuters article)
        \_ Yes but would he be superb?
        \_ that's because he and Kerry are best buds.  It would be funny
           if Kerry got elected and still chose McCain.  I can understand
           why he named Levin, though.  He was real sharp yesterday.
           McCain, Warner, Kennedy -- they all sounded not as bright.
        \_ hmm ... Kerry-McCain sounds mighty good to me.
           \_ How about McCain-Kerry?
2004/5/11 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:30159 Activity:nil
5/11    Kerry ahead by a point in CA.
        http://www.surveyusa.com/2004_Elections/CA040507pressen.pdf
        I hope the Iraq prisoner abuse bounce kicks in soon!
        \_ "surveyusa.com"?
           Try the LA Times:  http://csua.org/u/79b
2004/5/11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30150 Activity:very high
5/10    Why do Republicans only support sodomy when it is nonconsensual?
        http://csua.org/u/793
        \_ NO COOKIE!  Play Again(Y/n)? ___
           \_ This sounds like a troll except it is true - it's hard to find
              a popular conservative who is not defending the tortures.  (Yes,
        \_ Those who do are partisan hacks with no core.  Your link appears to
           be down, BTW.
              it is torture.  Whenever we accuse other countries of doing it we
              always call it torture instead of abuse, hazing, or emotional
              release.  And no, they didn't cut off anything.  On the other
              hand, our arab and muslim allies have been cutting parts of
              prisoner and our goverment has been very supportive.  Amputation
              is a tradtional punishment in Arab and Muslim countries and it
              is not usually used for interrogation, with which torture is
              usually but nonexlusively associated.)
        \_ There's no sin in it if you don't enjoy it.
           \_ Bend over and think of Iraq!
        \_ Those who do are partisan hacks with no core.
        \_ How did you infer this from the article you mentioned?  If you want
           to help pick on Republicans, at least use a better example.
           \_ Inhofe is one of the most outspoken anti-gay activists in
              Congress. I assumed that readers would know that.
        \_ 'Inhofe, who visited Iraq in March, is described on his senatorial
            Web site as a leading conservative voice in the Senate,
            advocating "common sense Oklahoma values including less
            government, less regulation, lower taxes, fiscal responsibility
            and a strong national defense."'
           He's not a Repub, he's a Libertarian.
           \_ never mind the fact that "less government, lower taxes" are
              directly opposed to "strong national defense."  -tom
              \_ bzzzt!  Libertarians are in favor of a strong nation defense.
                 They understand, unlike most leftists, that without a strong
                 military, the long term survival odds for your country are
                 exactly zero.
           \_ No facts!  Anyone not with us is against us!  --JFK
              \_ "If you are not with us you are with the terrorists." -GWB
                 When did JFK say that? Oh, that's right, he didn't.
          \_ He is registered and elected as a republican.  He is a republican
             senator.
        \_ Hey, let's take it easy on "our heroes." They probably don't have
           Skinamax or the Playboy channel, so they are forced to get the
           murderous, terrorist insurgents to act out Oklahoman heterosexual
           fantasies lest the cornfed troops get urges to lather each other
           up in the showers and betray the American God's Laws by thinking
           homoerotic thoughts. Hmm. Let's whip the savages some more Sarge!
           \_ Sweet!  That was so off topic and unrelated to anything in the
              real world yet managed to stereotype and disparage so many
              millions of people you've never met that you really should get
              sort of motd award.  Maybe for Most Racist, Frothing, Thought He
              Was Clever, But Is Really A Drooler Reinforced By Other Motd
              Droolers post of the hour?
              \_ I rool!
2004/5/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30139 Activity:nil
5/10    John Zogby: The Election is Kerry's To Lose
        http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews825.html
        Bush at 46% approval/51% dissapproval
        http://csua.org/u/78r (USA Today link)
        \_ Yes, all us liburals hope Kerry can't be WORSE than Gore.
        \_ Bush can lose the election, but Kerry can't win it.
        \_ Really sad to see that a majority of American's now
           hate America.
2004/5/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30136 Activity:nil
5/10    What does it mean when they say Kerry is a "Boston Brahmin"?
        \_ Means he's one of the richie influential types in Boston,
           kind of like the "princes of Silicon Valley."
           \_ i really don't think any non media pundit freak type
              cares about that label, but i am amused it keeps getting
              repeated, kind of like arguing over vi and emacs in
                the real world
        \_ I haven't heard the term at all.  Is this just a troll to get me
           to say, "Actually, I hear Massachusetts Liberal a lot more"?
        \_ cf. http://slate.msn.com/id/2096401 ("What's a Boston Brahmin?")
2004/5/7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30091 Activity:nil
5/7     Shocking news flash!  Michael Moore is a self-promoting lying scumbag.
        http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=518901
        \_ self-promoting?  sure.  everyone in the industry is.  lying?  The
           crux of his charge is that disney decided not to distribute his
           film because of pressure from politicians.  when he knew about it
           doesn't change the validity of the charge.  scumbag?  i'll leave
           that to people who know him.  Keep in mind that he was already on
           the cannes festival shortlist.
        \_ i can handle one little white lie by mm versus
           well just about 1000 other things going on right now.
           \_ Non sequitur.
        \_ If you read what Mickael Moore really said, that article does a very
           good job at taking stuff out of context to make him sound a lot
           worse that he really is.  Shocking news flash!  The Independent is
           a totally partisan rag!
        \_ You can't really fault a filmmaker for trying to create free
           publicity.  MM is indeed a lying scumbag, so much so that this is
           \_ Yes I can.
           like criticising the devil for smoking (though, i have to admit,
           i still am a bit of a fan), but it is his affinity for dishonesty
           *IN* his movies that is dispicable, not his self-promotion. -phuqm
           \_ Of Satan or Michael Moore? -- ilyas
        \_ shrug, what's wrong with having an agenda to make Disney look bad?
           He didn't lie in this instance.  He just held the news until he
           could exploit it to maximum negative effect.  Seems to me the
           reporter is just swallowing the freeper spin hook, line, and sinker.
2004/5/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic] UID:30074 Activity:very high
5/6     To whoever was suggesting the Branch Davidians were murdered in cold
        blood without provocation, these are the names of the four ATF agents
        killed when they tried to serve a search warrant:
        Conway LeBleu, Todd McKeehan, Robert Williams, Steven Willis
        \_ I'm one (the other?) guy who argued with ilyas. Call me "fascist".
           Now, I've read some conspiracy theories out there purporting that
           a) ATF agents opened fire first and b) the first 3 ATF deaths were
           friendly fire, which forensics supposedly corroborates. Then c)
           pissed off feds try to cover the thing up. I don't really know
           the truth here. The official inquiries don't support that, and if
           that was true then just what they were negotiating about during
           the weeks-long siege. I don't believe the Davidians were meekly
           unresisting. I do think it was a royal fuckup which wasn't
           adequately resolved.
        \_ why did the ATF call a local tv station to come on down
           and film them busting the doors down at le compound?  they
           in the US after WTC I.
           could have just called david koresh to come to the station
           and turn himself in.  instead someone unwisely turned
           it all into a clusterfuck.
        \_ Okay, quit it. You aren't Walter Cronkite. Give it a rest.
           -williamc
        \_ Bullshit, six Davidians also were killed in the initial
           shootout.  It has never been established that the Davidians
           fired first, more likely the ATF.  Koresh used to walk
           around town by himself a few days a week and had gone
           shooting with ATF agents in the past.  It was
           never proven any of their arms were illegal.  And I
           suppose you think Randy Weaver's wife and son also
           had it coming?
           Furthermore, this is the shit the intelligence agencies were
           up to during the '90s, all the while Islamicists were festering
           in the US after WTC I.                  -Mr. Bullshit
           \_ 'more likely the ATF'?  What are you talking about?  Do you
              really have a reasonably legitimate source showing that ATF
              is composed of trigger-happy psychopaths, or is this just
              juvenile anecdotal 'I Hate Mom and Da--err Cops!'?  I find it
              very, very unlikely that federal agents serving a warrant would
              have just started randomly shooting people, "Hey!  That guy is
              ugly! <BLAM!>  That dude is short!  <BLAM-BLAM!>"  Get fucking
              serious.  I find it much more realistic that they tried to serve
              the warrant, were fired upon, and in turn fired back.  People
              do tend to die in shootouts -- it's a proven fact.  Honest!  If
              you can provide even semi-credible sources to back your claims,
              I'll gladly concede the point (and be very pissed off at the
              gross incompetency that my tax dollars are paying for).
              \_ What was the warrant for?  Weren't they entrapped by the Feds
                 into buying an illegal shotgun or something stupid like that?
              \_ Proof that the Feds are a bunch of trigger happy jack boot
                 thugs?  Ruby Ridge.  Concede anything?
           \_ I'm not going to try to debate or defend the ATF raid, but
              someone very smugly said NO federal agents were killed, the
              Davidians never fired a shot, and challenged people to name the
              agents killed if there were any.  -dgies
           \_ what is this davidian thing all about?  it kind of reminds
              me of what we are doing to falluja.
              \_ And why the hell are you guys arguing about it NOW?!  There's
                 a lot more heinous things going on in the world RIGHT NOW.
                 JESUS.
                 \_ You see, son, there's this thing called HISTORY.  Some
                    people are interested in it because it can often provide
                    context to this other thing called the PRESENT.  The two
                    are often very strongly related to each other.  Use a
                    dictionary, you might find it elucidating.
                    \_ Yes, history is important.  However, rehashing idiotic
                       message board arguments from ages ago is not illuminating
                       in any way.  Absolutely nothing I've seen here wasn't
                       run into the ground by every wingnut on every side of
                       the issue 10 years ago, and it didn't help anything then
                       or provide context.  Oh yeah, and as to your cute
                       little dictionary comment, obFuckYou.
                       \_ It educated some people at the time as to the evils
                          the Government can inflict upon the People.  We
                          rehash it (this is the History Lesson part) in an
                          effort to educate those, apparently such as yourself,
                          that the Government still acts like that and it is
                          unacceptable.
2004/5/5 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30013 Activity:very high
5/5     Donna Brzile says Kerry campaign and Democratic party lack diversity;
        only white people in highest policy making positions, while Bush
        campaign says its campaign extensively staffed by minorities at top
        policy and stategy-setting levels. ....  I find this very troubling.
        When did our party become so RichWhiteMale elitist while they were
        putting all these tokens out there for PR?
        http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040504-110932-5540r.htm
        \_ duh? democratic party is white slave owner, mass minority
        slavery. THe whities know what is best for the minorities
        \_ Duh.  Most minorities, recent immigrants, are conservative.
           There's alot of "Fuck you, I already got mine!" mentality;
           we could go on about the "struggling to find identity in a
           new place and thus latching onto conservatism" psychology but
           if you think about it; most immigrants are religious, don't
           want lots of taxes, supportive of the corps that sponsored 'em,
           and not educated in liberal universities.
           \_ Kane has this theory that my formative moment, the moment when
              I became a libertarian, happened when I first entered an
              American supermarket, and saw the wall o' cheese.  Oh and:
              "I got my cheese -- fuck you!" -- ilyas
              \_ Is this satire, or what?
        \_ There was this other JFK....
        \_ I find it quite odd that the Dems are STILL managing to fool
           people into thinking the Dems are in any way "pro-minority."
           They've always treated them like token people to be pushed
           around.
           \_ Actually, they've taken them for granted, and that's almost
              worse.  They need to wake up before some third-party candidate
              sweeps them away.  OTOH, anyone who thinks the GOP is on the
              side of minorities is really not paying attention. If you're
              a member of a minority, your best bet is to have a Dem in the
              White House, but keep pressing for reform; if you're rich and
              you want to stay rich, stick to the GOP.
              \_ The GOP is actually quite good for high-income minority
                 groups (e.g. Chinese and Indians).
                 \_ If you want more money, yes.  If you want civil rights
                    and more Chinese and Indians in politics or positions
                    of real power, no.
                    \_ Affirmative action.  If you (non-privileged minority)
                       care about getting treated fairly by the government
                       and schools, then GOP.
                       \_ If the playing field were already level, I'd agree
                          with you.  Since it is peppered with Old-Boy-
                          Networks, I do not.
                          \_ How is the playing field skewed in favor of
                             the Chinese or the Indian?
                             \_ It's not.  It's skewed in favor of rich white
                                men.
                                \_ Wow, he actually stepped right into it.
                                   You lose, on grounds of having no
                                   connection to reality.
                                   \_ Naw, I lose because I couldn't pass up
                                      an obvious troll.  We all lose because
                                      the playing field is skewed.
                                \_ Then why is affirmative action punishing
                                   Chinese and Indians?  That's the original
                                   question.  Why the Chinese and Indian (and
                                   other successful minority groups) should
                                   vote GOP.
                    \_ We all have defining issues.  As a Chinese parent,
                       mine is affirmative action.  GOP.
              \_ I would think the GOP is good for anyone that pulls
                 their own weight, and does not continuously see all
                 slights as "racism." and thinks a gun owning
                 society is an excellent deterrent to crime, and
                 that babies should not be murdered at the altar of
                 career.
                 \_ You forgot the "I worked hard for my money and deserve
                    to keep it" and "Everyone should be able to accomplish
                    as I have" (both are sort of extensions to the "pull
                    their own weight" slant and both are utter bullshit for
                    a society of more than a small town).
                 \_ But what about people who think the government should stay
                    out of their personal lives?  What about people who think
                    a fetus isn't a baby until it has a brain at least as
                    developed as a slug?
                    \_ You pro-life fascist!  It's not a baby until it has a
                       brain at least as developed as a mouse!  Bastard.
                    \_ You take a poll asking which of them would have liked
                        to have been killed in the womb before birth, and
                        when abortion is exposed as a hypocritical
                        and selfish sham, they are defeated. Society dies
                        quickly when abortion is common.  Since 1973 we
                        have had 40 million babies die in the womb, who
                        will step to bat and say we are better off without
                        them?  Who among us has wished for more friends, or
                        is unmarried and has not wished for a spouse?
                        \_ Asking who would like to have been aborted is a
                           straw-man argument.  You might as well ask who would
                           like to have never been concieved and then use that
                           result to force every women to be pregnant all the
                           time.  I for one think we are better off having
                           40-million fewer babies.  That's 40-million fewer
                           kids born to parents who weren't ready for them.
                           - dgies
                        \_ And who among us is married and wished he were
                           not?
                 \_ In other words, for idealist believers in meritocracy,
                    people who don't understand that the current society
                    still institutionalizes racism, zealots who don't think
                    our current system of justice protects them, and
                    misogynists who want women barefoot, pregnant, and in
                    the kitchen.
                    \_ But now they have careers, and the national birth
                        rate is at an all-time low, so we might not
                        have enough workers in a generation to pay for
                        all the government spending we have deemed critical.
                        \_ 1) It is not the responsibility of women to have
                              more babies to create more potential workers,
                              friends, or mates; if you want a society based
                              on this, then start growing babies in creches.
                           2) Forcing people who are not ready to be parents
                              to have babies will not produce well-adjusted
                              future citizens; you're just going to over-
                              populate lower-income areas and flood the
                              welfare system.  As for adoption, there are
                              thousands of children waiting to be adopted;
                              making more babies for an already over-
                              whelmed system is not going to help.
                    \_ This is why I don't understand why GOPers try to
                       make fun of liberals.  Why bother?  They make fun
                       of themselves by saying inane things like this with
                       a straight face.
                       \_ Hehehe, you so funny, man-who-doesn't-understand-
                          irony.
        \_ The best results are with fundamental theocracy.  Lets start one!
2004/5/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30006 Activity:insanely high
5/4     Some Vietnam vets slam Kerry
        http://csua.org/u/76i
        \_ Now (Iraq torturing) is probably not the best time to doubt claims
           of atrocities committed by US forces in Vietnam.
                \_ Taking photos of nude prisoners is not torture.
                   It is hazing - similar activities take place
                   is fraternities.
                   \_ And this illustrates why all the libruls are just brain
                      dead, if they had any brain to begin with.  Hazing is a
                      priviledge.  Even in America, very few of the incoming
                      students who beg for it would have the honor of getting
                      hazed.  To think the Iraqis are getting it for free,
                      witout even so much as asking for it, should make every
                      American green with jealousy and want to become an Iraqi.
                        \_ yawn, this is the best you can do?  I'd expect
                           more from a high school sophmore.
                \_ Kerry claims everyone in Vietnam did it (except him of
                 course)
                     \_ in all the 4 months Kerry was runner scumming in
                        his speed boat, he managed to kill 1 unarmed vietcong
                        and many innocent civilians
                        \_ How the heck do you know?  I'd like to. Link?
        \_ some guys have a beef with him from 1971, who cares.
        \_ '"I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of
             the U.S. armed forces," said retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann,
             chairman of the organization.'
           My father served in Vietnam and Somalia, and he doesn't think
           W is fit to lick shit off a vet's boots.  So why should you care
           what either of them think?
                \_ Was your father Bush's commander in the Air National
                   Guard?  Some of the signees were Kerry's supervisors
                   in Vietnam.  Did Bush protest against Vietnam and
                   Somalia for political gain?  Nor does Bush portray
                   himself as a war hero, Kerry does.  Consequently
                   the opinion of Kerry's contemporaries is pertinent.
                   \_ One guy questioned one of his three purple hearts.
                      A few other didn't like him because he was anti-
                      war.  That's all they had on him.  Smells partisan
                      to me.
                        \_ How many times does this have to repeated???
                           An overwhelming majority of the veterans are
                           not condemning his participation or medals,
                           but his despicable actions after the war.
                           He was in the vanguard of leftists
                           undermining of the Vietnam war effort.  He
                           and his ilk are why a free Hanoi subsequently
                           fell and the millions fled on rafts.  All
                           of his behavoir is well documented if you
                           would bother to investigate:
                           http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry
                \_ Bush is running as the hero/furer/messiah for 9/11+iraq.
2004/5/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Finance/Investment] UID:30001 Activity:high 88%like:29992
5/4     Economy up, Kerry doomed:
        http://tinyurl.com/2jloj (sfgate.com)
        \_ Yeah, but Bush is a corrupt asshole.  I'd vote for an inanimate
           carbon rod over Bush.
           \_ Did you actually get to SEE the rod?
           \_ In rod we trust.
        \_ Is that why Bush's numbers keep dropping?
           \_ No, that's the effect of the Communist Media.
        \_ http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2004/05/04/rtr1358052.html
        \_ Wow, the economy is picking up after hundreds of billions of
           dollars of stimulus and 2 wars.  But we're turning into a nation
           of burger flippers/Walmart employees and rich CEOs with no one in
           between.
2004/5/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:29994 Activity:very high
5/4     ...Kerry got bad press over throwing
        the medals (and just about every single charge of waffling
        I've seen) because there are plenty of hack journalists more
        than willing to trim stories to fit their talking point du
        jour.  --scotsman
        \_ No, Kerry got bad press because he earned it.
           \_ Just for the record, how.  Can you come up with a story that
              could reasonably be called waffling?  My favorites are the
              ones which take quotes from 20 years apart, or the ones that
              claim he's against noble goal X because he voted against a
              really shitty bill that had a line item about X.  --scotsman
              \_ I voted for the $87B before I voted against it.
                 I won't make Pres. Bush's service an issue.  Oh wait, I will.
                 Hell, just read that right-wing rag Slate:
                 http://slate.msn.com/id/2096540
                 \_ The $87B claim...  This falls squarely under part 2 of
                    my favorites. --scotsman
                    \_ Um no.  That was Kerry saying he VOTED for it before
                       voting against it.  What did he vote for?  An amendment
                       to the bill which would repeal some of the tax cuts.
                       He wants to have it both ways.
                       \_ God forbid someone should see shades of grey in an
                          issue.  I prefer all my politicians to have a black
                          and white view of everything.
                       \_ Yes, it is called the "balanced budget act" and
                          Kerry was voting to follow it. BushCo just wanted
                          to borrow the money, which is irresponsible and
                          reckless. No waffle here, just a Senator trying
                          to do his duty.
                 \_ Bush's service has been an issue since his governor
                    races.  It became more of an issue when he decided
                    to attack Kerry's service.  All I've heard from Kerry
                    on the subject is that they have no place to attack
                    him on it.
                    \_ John Kerry specifically said he wouldn't bring it up.
                       Then he brought it up.  I have seen nothing from Bush
                       about Kerry's vietnam service.  Furthermore, I wish
                       right-wingers would drop it.
                       \_ If not from Bush, it's come from Cheney, Karen
                          Hughes and any number of others.  I bet I could
                          find a Bush quote, though.
                          \_ Kerry has plenty of people to attack Bush for him
                             starting with Ted Kennedy.  It remains the case
                             that Kerry said he wouldn't say it, and then said
                             it.  It wouldn't be a problem if it were only one
                             thing, but this waffling is pervasive.
                             \_ Gotta love all these 100% recycled anti-Gore
                                talking points.  Who needs new ones?!
                                \_ Gotta love your ducking the issue.
                                   \_ That's the point, there's no issue to
                                      duck.  The "Kerry is a waffler" argument
                                      is a tired Republican talking point
                                      that has been around since Clinton in '92.
                                      There is no issue to duck because the
                                      accusation has no basis in facts, only
                                      in out-of-context quotes and creative
                                      use of ellipsis.
                 \_ Hell, why not just point to a freeper page and get it
                    over with.
                    \_ Uh oh, someone posted an example (two actually) and you
                       can't deal with the truth.  Hurts?
                     \_ He voted for the $87B by taking the money out of
                        the tax cuts.  That means he voted against taking
                        the money out of other programs.  That's not a waffle,
                        and claiming so just proves you are a tool and a troll.
                        And Kerry didn't make Bush's record and issue until
                        Bush someone thought he could makes Kerry's record
                        an issue.  That sort of changes things.
                        \_ He voted for an amendment to the bill, and then
                           voted against the bill (the amendment didn't pass).
                           He can't honestly say he voted for it before he
                           voted against it.
              \_ Reasonably called waffling by a troll like you?  No.  I no
                 longer feed trolls, anonymous or named.
2004/5/4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:29992 Activity:high 88%like:30001
5/4     Economy up, Kerry doomed:
        http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/05/04/financial1419EDT0159.DTL&type=printable
        \_ Yeah, but Bush is a corrupt asshole.  I'd vote for an inanimate
           carbon rod over Bush.
           \_ Did you actually get to SEE the rod?
        \_ Is that why Bush's numbers keep dropping?
2004/5/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29975 Activity:insanely high
5/3     Controversial Tillman cartoon (i.e., idjut liburals can draw)
        http://www.ucomics.com/tedrall
        \_ This guy is an idiot, I think most conservatives (and liberals)
           would agree.
           \_ as a liberal, i agree.  however he also can't draw for shit.
              personally even if i *like* someone's message(not that i like
              this guy's message), if they can't draw for shit they have
              not business being on the comics page. Here's a liberal who
              actually knows how to draw:
              http://www.ucomics.com/boondocks
              and another:
              http://www.andysinger.com
              and another:
              http://www.ucomics.com/doonesbury
           \_ agreed. A little tact could have gone a long way. -- liberal
              \_ It's not only tact.  He had the guy saying, "Will I get
                 to kill Arabs?".  This is just plain bad. -another libural
                 \_ Why? He could have joined the CIA, FBI, or Homeland
                    Security in order to fight terrorism. He joined the Army
                    with intent to become a Ranger, who get to play judge,
                    jury, and executioner on people they feel are terrorists.
                    \_ No.  By the time Rangers or regular 11B's are called in,
                       someone else has alreday played judge and jury.  Even
                       Spec Ops guys are usually called in only after the big
                       decisions have been made by some grey-haired guy in an
                       office.
                    \_ No.  Ranger training is geared towards jump missions
                       and taking over air ports and other air related
                       activity.  Anything after that falls under standard
                       special forces training that anyone in the military
                       can get if they're a notch above the cut.
        \_ I don't understand why people have to insult people even
           when they do something cool.  Why make fun of this guy?  Why do
           republicans try to tear down Kerry's Vietnam record?  It's
           petty.  Why did Doonsebury try to make fun of Bush's visit to
           Iraq?  When someone does something cool, let 'em have it.
           Sheesh.
                \_ The point of contention is that he incessantly portrays
                   himself as a Vietnam war hero.  But you can't have it
                   both ways - yes he went and deserves credit but his
                   subsequent actions were despicable, to put it nicely.
                   \_ How is "despicable" putting it nicely? What sort of hate
                      filled vitriol would be "calling it as it is"?
        \_ You know, the above discussion leads me to believe it's not that
           controversial a cartoon -- basically nobody likes it, and they are
           all right.  Re: republicans trying to tear down Kerry's record, I
           think even Limbaugh is giving him due credit.  (When was the last
           time Bush got credit for anything from the other side?  Did he
           truly accomplish nothing?)
           Perhaps Kerry might have gotten a little bad press about that whole
           medal throwing thing, since some people view that as trying to sit
           on two stools at once. -- ilyas
           \_ What should Bush seriously be given credit for? Afghanistan seems
              to be the main thing that most people agreed on. Bush has gotten
              a lot of credit in the press about "leadership" with the 9/11
              stuff, besides the background rumblings about intelligence
              failures, which in the end is true, if the buck stops at the top
              then Bush's administration is responsible for failing to prevent
              9/11, although obviously not from some egregious personal wrong-
              doing. He gets rightfully criticized for foolish political stunts
              like the mission accomplished thing. And you can't expect "the
              other side" to cheer for republican policy items, although he
              is certainly 'given credit' for those. About Iraq, actually I
              felt that a lot of people approved of his tough stance towards
              Saddam, myself included, however this feeling dissipated when I
              watched the subsequent farce unfold.
              \_ Don't forget Lybia.  If you are an economist of a certain
                 stripe you also think "tax cuts cause recovery", so you
                 would probably attribute the recovery to Bush's insistence to
                 cut, cut, cut.  At any rate, it seems pretty clear Bush did
                 some good.  My point is that he gets no credit for the good
                 he did, which is unfortunate.  Actually I think all the
                 anti-Bush bile is having a counterproductive effect (if you
                 want to get Bush out of office).  -- ilyas
                 \_ I tend to think of Lybia in the same way I think of the
                    Berlin Wall coming down: it was in the works, and it was
                    just a matter of time.  For the sitting President to take
                    responsibility for it is rather disingenuous.  And as for
                    Afghanistan, props to Bush for pursuing the removal of the
                    Taliban, and props for finding Karzai, but a bakers-
                    dozen of wtfs for not finishing the Taliban off and for
                    withdrawing all military and most financial support for
                    the new govt.  Seriously, wtf?
                    \_ Libya was in the works?  In what sense?  Do you say the
                       same for Syria which has just started to cooperate? Will
                       you say the same for Iran if there's an uprising and
                       the crazies are kicked out and replaced by some sort of
                       republic/democracy?  The world doesn't get better
                       without people trying to make it better.  Bad people
                       don't just quietly go away.  They need to be threatened
                       or killed to make changes.
                 \_ Libya, not Lybia!
                    \_ I thought it was Libia.
           \_ Very true.  It's not controversial.  It's just bad.  Has anyone
              seen any interviews with Tillman or the like beforehand?  I'd
              be surprised that a story like his slipped past sports journal-
              ists unnoticed.  I'd be very interested to hear Tillman's own
              point of view on why he would enlist.  As for Bush's accomplish-
              ments, the only things I've seen that have approached notability
              are things which later proved to be all lip service and no funds
              (Education, Jobs Training, AIDS Research, Terrorism Funding,
              Military Funding, etc.).  Kerry got bad press over throwing
              the medals (and just about every single charge of waffling
              I've seen) because there are plenty of hack journalists more
              than willing to trim stories to fit their talking point du
              jour.  --scotsman
              \_ No, Kerry got bad press because he earned it.
        \_ Kerry did significantly more than throw his (actually someone
           else's depending on the day of the week) medals over a fence.
           He was in the vanguard of leftists undermining of the Vietnam
           war effort.  He and his ilk are why a free Hanoi subsequently
           fell and the millions fled on rafts.  All of his treasonous
           behavoir is well documented if you would bother to investigate:
           http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry
           \_ "free Hanoi"?  You are a moron.
              \_ thanks for adding so much to an otherwise intelligent
                 discussion.  -!the person you're replying to.
                 \_ huh huh ... you call the above an intelligent
                    discussion?  you are a moron.
2004/4/30-5/1 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13502 Activity:high
4/29    http://csua.org/u/74u Sinclair not to air Nightline's The Fallen
        \_ McCain for 2004.  Please.
           \_ Yar.  It's nice to see someone else saying this.  I've been
              hoping for the past two years that he would pull a coup.
           \_ Please.  John "I hate the 1st amendment" McCain got my vote in
              the Republican primary in 2000, but will never get it again.
              Nightline's name-list is obviously politically motivated--it was
              originally going to only air the names of troops killed since
              Bush announced an end to "major hostilities".
              \_ Why are you so ashamed of the war dead that you want them
                 hidden away?
                 \_ There's a difference between hiding them and not using
                    their deaths to further your own political agenda.  We
                    all know how many have died since it gets announced a
                    zillion times a day on tv and in every newspaper.
                    \_ You would have a point here, except the issue is
                        that Bush is hiding them to further his own political
                        agenda.  Both sides are equally bad, but Bush is
                        the one going against all historical precedent here.
              \_ "I hate the 1st amendment"?  Explain.
                 \_ Regulation of political speech.  McCain-Feingold.  Note
                    that the ads this year are even nastier than before, and
                    the little guy can do even less to get his voice out.
                    \_ Money as speech is a fat fucking lie.
                       \_ You are a fat fucking idiot.
                       \_ Set up a webserver.  Post a blog about a lying
                          politician.  You've most likely gone over the limit
                          and have to register with FEC.  And you can't do this
                          within 90 days of federal election.
                       \_ TV time costs money whether individuals pay or
                          corporations pay.  Are you saying a television spot
                          isn't speech?
                     \_ I support campaign finance reform, and I support
                        the elimination of big money in politics.  Give the
                        candidates a month to campaign, give them all equal
                        broadcast time, and penalize the hell out of them
                        for violating that.  All you're telling me is that
                        John McCain is my boy.
                        \_ Cool, then we'd never be able to get rid of a bad
                           incumbent.
                        \_ That of course guts the 1st amendment.  It also is
                           impossible.  Now we just have groups like http://MoveOn.org
                           slamming Bush's policies, with funding from foreign
                           nationals like George Soros (and I'm sure there are
                           examples on the Republican side of the aisle).
                           \_ No, our boy is an american.
                        \_ McCain-Feingold, does little good and some harm.
                           CFR is compicated and there are real speach issues
                           involved.  Speaking of Soros, his website has a
                           good primer: link:tinyurl.com/2th23 -phuqm
              \_ Source for the end to major hostilities bit?  Also remember
                 Nightline dedicated a show to the names of those who died
                 on 9/11, so this isn't totally out of the blue.
                 \_ Can't find it now.  However, why aren't they doing this on
                    the anniversary of the *beginning* of the war?

        \_ Someone is being nice enough to post a job listing.  If you don't
           like recruiters, fine don't apply for the job.  Just don't try to
           deprive other people of the job opportunity.
        \_ Is there a particular reason you're hiding the name of your
           company?  It may explain why this posting keeps being removed.
           \_ I assume there's the poster, his recruiter, and the company
              the recruiter is recruiting for.  The op may likely not even
              know the name of the company.
              \_ I'm guessing the company might be http://geac.com -!op
                 \_ Not a clue.  I'm the one doing the restores and not the
                    OP.  I just think there might be people looking for
                    jobs.  Call it public service on my part, and I assume
                    the OP's.
           \_ There is no company.  It's a recruiter.  The guy posting gets
              a referral cut.  Evil.
              \_ how do you know?
                 \_ Why would he post a recruiter add on the motd?
                    \_ Who cares?  Even if he does get a cut, that's one more
                       job going to a csua'er.  Better that than no cut, but
                       the job goes to somebody else.  NEPOTISM!
                    \_ He's doing other motd readers a favor?  I've often
                       pointed friends at recruiters with just a "he's looking
                       for X" and no additional information.
                 \_ Because the motd censor is much wiser than the rest of us.
              \_ Yeah, right, like resumes and job applicants are such hot
                 commodities right now.
                 \_ I have recruiters contacting me a couple of times a
                    week for unsolicited job offers these days.
2004/4/26 [Transportation/Car/RoadHogs, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13380 Activity:nil
4/26    Kerry doesn't own an SUV, his family does:
        http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4009850,00.html
        \_ Oooh!  Tell us about Roger Clinton!
        \_ Funny how he both uses his wife as a dodge, by saying it's not
           really *his* car, and sets himself up as a hero for buying
           an American car.  So, is owning a Chevy SUV good or bad Mr.
           Kerry?
        \_ 'Cos when your own candidate is suffering due to a war he created
           and the lies he told, it's best to point to his opponent's car.
           \_ The point here is that Kerry lied about owning the car
              because he didn't want to look bad. He should've just told
              the truth. He is a career politican in the worse sense.
        \_ 1 SUV is less expensive than 80 billion to invade iraq
              \_ unlike Bush?
              \_ Oh Bullpucky. I hate my wife's car and would sell it in
                 a hearbeat if I could, but since she bought it before
                 we were married I just have to put up with it. I am sure
                 with a millionaire wife, she can buy whatever car she
                 likes, with or without her husbands permission. It is not
                 "his" car unless he drives it. Does he drive it?
              \_ This is just sad.  The man's wife's car is about as relevant
                 to this campaign as Laura Bush's formerly liberal ideals.
                 \_ As I pointed out above, I don't care what he drives,
                    but the fact that he's making such pathetic attempts
                    to lie about it.  Not to mention, but since they are
                    married, it IS "his" car.
                    \_ I am pretty sure married people can own property
                       seperately. Am I wrong here?
                       \_ For those who espouse traditional family values
                          as republicans do, marriage is an absolutely form
                          of bondage.  Yes.
                          \_ Don't be an idiot.  It has nothing to do
                             with republicans.  They didn't set up the
                             marriage and divorce laws.
                    \_ When you get married to an independent woman, check
                       back in with us.  Until then, get a life.
                       \_ So says the same sort of idiot that put in place
                          the "divorce means the woman gets half the man's
                          stuff" laws.  According to the law, just
                          property is jointly held.  (Unless they have a
                          prenup that says otherwise.)
                          \_ Which state?  California is a community property
                             state.  How about Massachussetts?  And if you
                             ask me if I support Windows, I'll tell you no,
                             because I own and use a Mac exclusively; my
                             wife's PC is nothing to do with me, despite my
                             community property interest.  This is pure
                             bullshit semantics.
                          \_ You don't know what you are talking about:
                             http://csua.org/u/72l
                             "Separate property is property that each spouse
                              owned before the marriage. Separate property
                              also includes inheritances and gifts (except
                              perhaps gifts between spouses) acquired during
                              marriage. During and after the marriage, each
                              spouse may keep control of his or her separate
                              property." She came into the marriage worth
                              $400M, surely she is able to afford to buy
                              her own seperate car, unless they have
                              comingled their accounts. Do you have any
                              evidence otherwise?
2004/4/23-9/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13359 Activity:kinda low
9/9     http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.com
        \_ republicans critisizing kerry for his war record is pretty
           funny, it makes them seem cranky insane and stupid, keep
           up the good work!
        \_ Go figure. It's registered to some douche bag from Texas.
        \_ agreed.
        \_ It seems JK has gotten many medals in Vietnam, while Bush
           can't even seem to make himself show up in the National Guard.
           I mean what else do you people need?? On one hand, you have this
           rich boy who manages to fuck up everything he gets his hands on,
           and on the other hand you have this dude who actually was in the
           military and has gotten some medals. I don't know about you, that
           is enough for me.
           \_ As the John Kerry camp says every time JK is critized for
              his service: We'll put JK's service record up against the
              other parties' existant or non-existant service records ...
        \_ Bush: hmm, now that I've gotten elected, let's find a good enemy to
           spend all those surplus on. Let's see, China!! the perfect target!
           Until Bin-ladin shitted on his face. You don't hear so much about
           the China threat theory now a days do you? Despite being the 'free'
           media we are led to believe, the government can influence what we
              \_ Taiwan and Iraq are not equivalent at all
              \_ Because WE CAN, so bite me!!
           \_ formatting to fix please, how to set 80 cols?
        \_ Oh the horror... the Bush campaign advertising
           that Kerry is unprincipled and the most liberal Senator in
           Congress.  How about this part of his 'heroic' record
           that the media seems to ignore:
           http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry
           \_ Most liberal?  You make it sound like proposing health care
           reform is worse than being talked into preemptive war, or cutting
           taxes and then telling soldiers that they'll have to take up the
           slack by cutting benefits.  Oh yeah, and if you get wasted over
                \_ He is rated the most liberal by a number of sources,
                   here is but one:
                   http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0204/022704nj1.htm
                   \_ He serves a very liberal area as a senator.  A senator's
                      responsibilities are very different from a president's.
                      I'm more concerned whether he means what he says.  That
                      he will be up front about where things stand.  That he
                      will work with the government rather than try to sell
                      them/us a bill of goods.  That he won't stifle or simply
                      ignore dissent.
                        \_  Well obviously he doesn't mean what he says
                            given he takes every position he can on the same
                            issue.  He has espoused leftist beliefs
                            his entire life - predating any political
                            office.
           there in the desert, we'll make it policy to keep the public from
           seeing your coffin, because we want them to support the war that
           killed you. Or perhaps we'll just talk about the "patriot" act,
                \_ This has been military policy for decades, nothing to
                   do with Bush.
                   \_ It had to do with _a_ Bush.  Policy was set in '91.
                      Hardly "decades". --scotsman
                        \_ Moreover, it was not enforced until 2000.
                           \_ You mistyped 2001.
           the religious dichotomy we've set up, where you're either with us
           or with the terrorists.  How about "free speech zones"?  How about
           DOJ that thinks porn is somehow a priority?  Kerry fought with
           bravery, and yes, heroism, and he came back and was principled
           enough to tell the entire nation that the war he fought was a
           mistake.  Meanwhile, you see fit to assert that war crimes weren't
           happening, that little kids weren't going nuts and killing women
           and children.  Bravo.
                \_ You lost me here.  I reject the structure of your argument.
                   If Kerry wants to wrap himself in the mantle of Vietnam
                   'heroism' you can't be selective.  He should commended
                   for going.  That said receiving a purple heart for a
                   bruise and another for an injury that required what
                   was effectively neosporin is suspicious.  As discussed
                   \_ Um.  Soldiers don't request purple hearts.  The military
                      give medals along their own guidelines.  Try to talk
                      away a silver star.  --scotsman
                        \_ This is besides the point, it is what he did when
                           returned that is the subject of the site.
                           You can read the purple heart forms, one is
                           for a contusion = bruise, the other required
                           topical treatment of an ointment = neosporin.
                   on the site linked his subsequent actions were borderline
                   traitorous and perpetuated numerous myths about
                   the war in Vietnam, some you apparently still buy into.
                   South Vietnam was free and democratic
                   after WWII and after the Treaty of Paris.  I'm not
                   interested in liberal platitudes but would be
                   happy to debate factual statements.  BTW, Bush's
                   circumstance
                   is different as he has never portrayed himself as a
                   hero, but simply as a member of the Air National Guard.
                   \_ This was already answered yesterday, but someone
                      deleted the whole thread soon after the reply.
                      \_ And I actually answered it again, and it was
                         deleted again.
                \_ And since when do libs care about the military.  Clinton,
                   the prototype liberal today, wrote how he 'loathed'
                   the military and everything it stood for.  Why the
                   vacillation?
        \_ go the the FAQ, and scroll down to his excerpted hate mail.
           funny.  It makes the motd look pretty high class.
2004/4/23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13345 Activity:nil
4/23    JOTD:  What's the difference between John Edward and John Edwards?
        \_ who the hell is John Edward?
           \_ A guy who claims to talk to people's dead relatives.  He has a TV
              show "Crossing Over" and is the subject of the South Park episode
              "The Biggest Douche in the Universe"
        \_ One's a big phoney and the other claims he can talk to dead people.
           \_ Sen. Edwards, during a trial on behalf of a dead child's family,
              did claim in front of a jury that he was channelling
              the deceased kid. --elizp, big-time Edwards supporter
              \_ what exactly do you find appealing about Edwards?  Aside
                 from being a young southerner who looks good on TV, he
                 strikes me as some of the worst of what the Democratic
                 party has to offer.
                 \_ (1) Electability (getting a Dem into the White House
                    is about pandering to the South and/or the Midwest;
                    never appreciated this until I moved to Southern
                    Indiana 8 months ago); (2) my lust for class warfare.
                    Were merit & positions my primary determinants, I would've
                    gone for Kerry or Kucinich (and Kerry's still got that
                    doesn't-play-well-with-others-in-the-sandbox problem).
                    But this time I wanna win. --elizp
                 \_ Heh.  I thought that was John Kerry?  Or was it Dean?  Oh
                    I forgot, whichever Democrat is under discussion is the
                    "worst the Democratic party has to offer."  All Democrats
                    are evil.  Heil Bush!
                    \_ actually, I voted for Kerry in the primary, and would
                       have voted for dean had he not dropped out.  I also
                       like Clark.  None of them are protectionists, and
                       all of them have a clear message.  Edwards is an
                       extreme protectionist with, as far as I can tell,
                        \_ Edwards' positions on NAFTA are more moderate
                           than his "two Americas" stump speech suggests.
                           --elizp
                       one clear message "hey, y'all! I'm southern!"
                        \_ His best "clear message" parses the implications
                           of Dubya's tax cuts for the very wealthy: that
                           shifting the tax burden from capital to labor
                           marks an egregious change in national values
                           regarding social opportunity and responsibility.
                           It's a shame that Edwards' class analysis got
                           dumbed down in "two Americas" (which, while
                           resonant, didn't do much to counter his Breck
                           girl image). And I still don't know what Kerry
                           stands for! For more on Edwards & class:
                           http://slate.msn.com/id/2085343.--elizp
                       and to top it all off, he's a fucking trial lawyer.
                       \_ What were Clark's problems?  I thought he should
                          do a better job of not flip-flopping.  I hear
                          some people found him a little creepy.  But I
                          thought he looked good overall.
                 \_ Gotta wonder.  The guy made millions milking malpractice
                    insurance by suckering juries with emotion over science.
                    \_ Yeah, he should have made his millions through
                       securities fraud like GWB
2004/4/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13325 Activity:nil
4/21    http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Kerry-Purple-Hearts.html?hp
        Wow!  Kerry's military records were just stellar!  He may be
        diplomatic and charismatic, but he sure is decisive when fighting
        those vietcongs!
        \_ Explains why the French like him.
        \_ he's a runner scum in a speed boat shooting civilians
2004/4/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13269 Activity:nil
4/18    Saudis want Kerry to win, raise oil prices.. hmm. this
        means I definately will vote for Bush
        \_ I need first learn spelling and gramar also
           \_ Bush no care grammer, Bush everyday man
        \_ Ironic since Republicans were pissed recently about foreigners
           rooting for Kerry and that only Americans should decide our
           President.
           \_ Also ironic since an article on CNN that directly contradicts this
              baseless assertion keeps getting censored:
              http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/19/news/international/election_saudi
              \_ CNN has a new article on the front page where the
                 Administration refutes this.
                 \_ And we all know how this Administration ALWAYS tells the
                    truth.
                    \_ Bush wants to keep oil prices down to keep the economy
                       humming, exerts pressure on Saudi Arabia.  Election
                       effects are a side effect; Saudis fall in line to
                       Bush's strong leadership.  Saudi rep misspeaks when he
                       says the primary purpose is the election.
                       \_ Keep towing that line!
                          \_ Apparently 51% +/- 4% of Americans do, and if
                             this trend holds, Bush will be your President
                             for 2004-2008.
                             \_ If the upcoming election for president
                                were held today, for whom would you
                                vote?
                                John Kerry (D) 49%
                                George W. Bush (R) 45%
                                Undecided 6%
                                Source: Knowledge Networks / Program
                                on International Policy Attitudes
                                \_ Check http://cnn.com and http://washingtonpost.com for
                                   new data, boy-o
                                   \_ that's dated 4/19.
                                      \_ I am surprised to see that.  Anyway,
                                         so are the CNN/USA Today/Gallup and
                                         the Washington Post polls, and
                                         they're much more well known.  The
                                         other one I found on some strange
                                         Canadian site via google.
                                         \_ Looks pretty even to me:
                                            http://www.pollingreport.com
                                            \_ That's because the page is
                                               showing the Zogby data, which
                                               is the only major one that
                                               shows Kerry ahead, and is
                                               also current to 1 week.
                                               Even so, CNN/USA Today/Gallup
                                               and Wash Post > Zogby
                                               http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm
                             \_ What happened to "I predict that Bush will
                                win California and the presidency in a
                                landslide" of three months ago? How's that
                                prediction working out for you?
                          \_ It's "toeing the line".
                       \_ So why not do it 6 months ago? a year ago?
                          http://www.ioga.com/Special/crudeoil_Hist.htm
                       \_ LEADERSHIP STRONG!
2004/4/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13235 Activity:nil
4/16    And the scary part is, he's the smart one:

        "If the Democratic policies had been pursued over the last two or
         three years, the kind of tax increases that both Kerry and Edwards
         have talked about, we would not have had the kind of job growth
         that we've had." -- Vice President Dick Cheney, on http://pogothemonkey.com
        \_ Yep, smarter than you apparently.
        \_ He's right; if we'd had the Kerry/Edwards tax plan, we'd've had
           less hoarding by the rich and more money in the market, meaning
           a significantly higher job growth.
           \_ Huh? Who are you replying to, and what are you trying to say?
                \_ The point is that most people know that the Bush admin is
                   the first since Hoover to lose jobs during the term.  If
                   Cheney claims that that is "job growth" it's comical.
                   \_ And like Hoover they're taking flak for an economy
                      that couldn't possiably be their fault.
                        \_ No one is talking about taking flak for an economy.
                           This is about Cheney believing that job LOSSES is
                           Job GROWTH.  It's really simple.
                      \_ They're responsible for some part of it, and the
                         policies chosen to address it. They can't dodge the
                         deficit.
                         \_ You know the great depressions depth and length
                            is largely due to FDR, right?  Also, Cheney's
                            point is that it would have been worse (if
                            approached in an FDR like fashion.)  Not
                            to meantion, the unemployment rate is pretty
                            friggin' low.
                            \_ But implying that Kerry/Edwards policy == FDR is
                               just flat false, plus referring to "job growth"
                               when jobs were lost is also false.
                               \_ I'm just saying that we've seen "tax in
                                  time of need" style econ, and it don't
                                  fly.  As for job growth, why does Cheney
                                  have to be refering to exaclty the time
                                  from when Bush took office, and not, say
                                  from the depth of the recession?
                                  \_ "tax in time of need" = red herring
                            \_ How did FDR prolong the great depression?
                      \_ "couldn't possiably [sic] be their fault" is extreme
                         and likely incorrect, with the monetary cost of the
                         Iraq war and psychological effect on the nation --
                         and with the increasingly supportable position that
                         the Iraq war was not necessary.
                         \_ Ok "couldn't possibly be their fault in a world
                            where time passes in a linear fashion."
                            \_ I'm sure you're making a point here, but I
                               don't understand what you're trying to say.
                               \_ Sorry, I'm saying: The bad economy
                                  preceeded the Iraq war, and there is no
                                  evidence to show that the economy
                                  was affected by it.
                                  \_ It goes without saying that the Iraq
                                     war had no effect on the economy before
                                     the Iraq war was started.
                                     You are saying there is no evidence
                                     to show that today's economy has been
                                     affected by the Iraq war?
                                     \_ Why do you HATE AMERICA???
2004/4/12 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13142 Activity:moderate
4/12    Kerry makes up his own measure of the economy to criticize Bush:
        http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-04-12-kerry_x.htm
        (Historically, the "Misery Index" is unemployment + inflation.)
        \_ Really people, is it that hard to shorten a freaking URL?
           \_ I prefer not to shorten them.  Please don't delete my URL.
        http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/gobush/2004-04-12-kerry_x.htm
2004/4/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13096 Activity:kinda low 50%like:12375
4/8     John Ashcroft, Work Safe:
        http://www.wonkette.com/images/work%20safe.jpg
        \_ Depends on what resolution you view it at.
        \_ NWS version: http://www.pmbrowser.info/hublog/images/gashcroft.jpg
           \_ what's up with putting urls/img in < > lately?
              \_ There's some RFC that says that URIs are supposed to be
                 enclosed in angle brackets in plaintext media.  It's not a
                 new development; never seen email addresses in angle brackets
                 back in the days of yore?
                 \_ Days of yore meant using !s instead of @s.
                 \_ The suggestion, if that's what it says, is misguided.
                    \_ why?  it lets you put URLs into sentences without having
                       to worry about the punctuation screwing them up. -tom
                       \_ Please provide an example of a URL in a sentence
                          where punctuation screws things up.
                          \_ "Go to link:google.com/."
                          "The requested URL /. was not found on this server."
                              \_ If the terminating period is a representative
                                 example, then I prefer the non < > URLs.
                                 I guess you could say that's just my opinion.
                                 \_ You've also got quotes, commas, slashes,
                                    apostrophes, parentheses and others.  I
                                    do think the astute reader can do just
                                    fine without brackets.
                                    \_ I would go as far to say that only the
                                       class of "moronic" users would have
                                       trouble with non-bracketed URLs, and
                                       actually bracketed URLs might give them
                                       a similar level of problems.  The
                                       class of "moronic" users should
                                       eventually learn not to copy the
                                       terminating period.
                                       \_ How about URLs containing spaces?
                                          \_ Use %20.  (You don't see URLs
                                             with spaces for this reason)
                                       \_ Sometimes people just click on the
                                          link in their email app without first
                                          copying.  So it's up to the email app
                                          to include or exclude the terminating
                                          period.
                                          \_ (1) We are talking about the motd,
                                                 I believe
                                             (2) E-mails apps I've seen ignore
                                                 the period, comma, semi-colon
                                             \_ period is a valid character in
                                                a URL; brackets are not.  What
                                                reason is there to *not* use
                                                brackets?  -tom
                                                \_ IMO, they're superfluous.
                                                   \_ how can it be
                                                      superfluous to separate
                                                      intended URL characters
                                                      from valid characters
                                                      which are not intended to
                                                      be part of the URL?  You
                                                      think email and terminal
                                                      programs should just
                                                      guess which characters
                                                      are part of the URL?
                                                      Why not tell them? -tom
                        E-mail programs I've seen don't have problems _/
                        ignoring trailing punctuation in the URL.
                        \_ you haven't seen them all--I've seen errors of\
                          various kinds, in various programs.  And it's
                           *incorrect* to ignore trailing punctuation; URLs
                           with trailing punctuation are valid.  -tom
                           \_ In this case, I side with the "incorrect"
                              approach being the better one.  It happens
                              all the time with English usage; what's incorrect
                              becomes accepted.  Most text-based e-mail
                              newsletters I've received for several years
                              don't use < > brackets, which lends support
                              to the "widespread practice" argument.
                              In any case, I also found
                              out that Outlook supports < > when the URL
                              has spaces (even though there's an RFC which
                              says space chracters should be encoded as %20
                              in the URL), so that's neat.
                 \_ This is the motd.  We are not subject to RFCs.  We can
                    barely get people to indent.
     Aiee! Chaos! _/|\_ nowhere did I ever say I was trying to get other people
                    |   on the motd to use angle brackets.  I'm only justifying
                  Whee! my own usage.
              \ this is a great thread!                               /       \
              /-----------------------/              motd became ->   \  ^  ^  |
              \--------|                            self-aware and    /\ \__/ /
                       |                            tries to mimic    \ \____/
                       |                            that scene in      \
        /--------------/                              "The Abyss"       \
        |                                                                \
        \-------------------> Follow the magic dancing penis pigeon!      |
                                                                   \_____/
2004/4/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13091 Activity:nil
4/8     Kerry wants to go up in a speed boat up the Tigris in Iraq.
        \_ urlP?  And please don't say drudgereport or something...
2004/4/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13058 Activity:nil
4/7     How does an ugly droopy dog faced guy like Kerry get all these
        women?  http://www.kingpublishing.com/fc/white_house/story2.htm
        \_ In America, first you get the money, then you get the power, then
           you get the women. -- Tony Montoya
           \_ First you get the sugar.
        \_ cuz democrats are sluts and have poor taste
           \_ BUt Kerry's current wife was a Republican until he
              started running for the Oval Office.
           \_ why republicans always gots to be playa hatin'?
              \_ Its not the Republicans, its all the Libertarians on soda
                 that never get any play.
        \_ I can't reach the site, but here's the google cached
           version: link:csua.org/u/6so  It's not related to your
           question at all.
           \_ My link is directly related to my question.  What are you
              talking about?  --op
2004/4/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:13051 Activity:nil
4/6     Hold on to your porn, boys, the gubmint is after it:
        http://csua.org/u/6sk
        \_ Is the fbi still run by repressed gays?
           \_ Did you stop raping your dog yet?
              \_ Are you still Ann Coulter's bitch?
                 \_ Your penis is so LARGE and TAX-FREE!
                    \_ W00t!
                 \_ Yes?
                 \_ Better Ann's bitch than, oh say, Molly Ivins.  Yech!
           \_ Well, it's run by John Ashcroft, so draw your own conclusions.
              \_ Ashcroft is a closet human [restored, fuck censorship!]
                 \_ Ashcroft does not dance for religous reasons.
                    \_ Let's hate the quakers too for the same reason.
                       \_ You don't know many quakers, do you.
                        \_ historically, although the Quakers are pacifists,
                           they have bankrolled some of the most anti-social
                           efforts in American history!
                           \_ urlP
                 \_ Q: Why is Ashcroft against premarital sex?
                    A: Could lead to dancing.
2004/4/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29905 Activity:high
4/6     Wow.  http://Salon.com running an ad for John Kerry for their free day pass.
        Nice work for objective journalists:
        http://images.salon.com/src/pass/kerry/kerry_splash2.html
        \_ when did they ever claim to be objective?
           \_ So why does anyone take them more seriously than freerepublic?
        \_ Uh, that means that Kerry is paying them to run ads.  Did you know
           all the TV networks run ads for whoever pays them money?  It's like
           bribery or something!
           \_ A political ad to donate money to a candiate--while going to an
              article criticizing bush.
2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:12923 Activity:nil
3/29    http://www.fundrace.org/moneyindex.html
        This speaks for itself.
        \_ The little know issue of party fundraising is that the Reps.
           traditionally receive small donations from a large number of
           contributors. Dems on the other hand receive large donations
           from two primary groups - trial lawyers and unions.
2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12922 Activity:nil
3/29    I missed the thread on Kerry and Catholics and all that but I didn't
        see anyone point out that Kerry is really a Jew, not a Catholic so
        it doesn't matter what the Pope or anyone else says about his faith.
        \_ He also is from France and has a history of pretending to be
           Irish to attact voters in Taxachussettes.
2004/3/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12913 Activity:kinda low
3/29    Kerry self-imploding. Haha. 'faith but no deeds' about Bush
        then gets kicked out of Catholic church by Bishop because
        Kerry has no deeds that are Catholic.
        \_ he should quote scripture "remove log from own eye before
           removing spinter from GWBs"
        \_ I'm just waiting for Kerry to say he's a metrosexual
        \_ Who says it's about Bush? It was a scripture quote within a church
           where no funds were collected. The Bush-Cheney campaign is way too
           paranoid. And you obviously have no idea of what the RCC considers
           good deeds. Sigh, Christians. So ignorant of what they stand for,
           so misguided. No wonder your God has spurned you.
           \_ so "current administration" != Bush? during an election?
           yeah right moron. also, I guess the Bishop has no clue
           either, since he's the one that said Kerry can't take
           Communion in the Bishop's entire state.
           \_ he said ""our present national leadership.", that sure
           isn't Bush..
        \_ Kerry's pro-choice stance has been known for years.  The RCC's
           position on abortion has been known for years.  The RCC is trying
           to have an influence on American politics; a Catholic Senator stood
           up against this, and now you're calling this a self-implosion?
           This is a fine show of his moral character, and it stands in sharp
           contrast to Bush's lip-service to the Religious Right.  Faith but
           no works, indeed.
           \_ wow. never believed how blind people are. america is going
              into the dumper soon
              \_ soon?
              \_ Yes, it's amazing that conservative Christians can be duped
                 into thinking Bush is with them when he has as much chance
                 of getting an anti-gay marriage amendment passed as they do
                 of being taken seriously.  The piper leading the blind....
           \_ I am not an expert on theology, but can you be a pro-choice
              catholic? -- ilyas
              \_ http://suewidemark.com/prochoice-catholic.htm
              \_ Most Catholics are pro-life but most Catholics I know are
                 pro-choice. You can disagree with Vatican dogma and not be
                 any less Catholic. I don't know if the same is true of, say,
                 being Seven Day Adventist or Mormon though. -- ulysses
                 \_ But see, I don't understand.  The Pope, according to
                    Catholics, is the divine representative here on this Earth.
                    Questioning his dictates is questioning God.  Wouldn't that
                    make you ... a bad, sinful Catholic? -- ilyas
                    \_ Perhaps, but you'd still be Catholic.  You're only not
                       a Catholic (of your own free will) if the Pope
                       excommunicates you.
                 \_ there are liberal and conservative catholics.
                    Liberal catholics are those who don't really practice
                    Catholicism and are just borrowing the name, like Kerry.
                    \_ So the only true Catholics are the ones who follow
                       Mel Gibson's brand of pre-Vatican II Catholicism?
                       \_ there are a lot of Orthodox Catholics out there.
                          \_ http://godhatesshrimp.com
                             \_ irrelevant
        \_ do you have the URL?
        \_ Do you really think that The Bible belongs to the GOP?
        \_ no, but GWB didn't use scripture to tear down opponent
         like Kerry does, is Kerry above us all? He's perfect in
        his religion. *cough*
        \_ all in all, Kerry said he has freedom of choice, and his
        answere is "f$ck you pope, I can do whatever i want"
        \_ i dunno, he went skiing on Sunday instead of going to mass.
        \_ One thing about Catholics is that they represent a broad spectrum
           of voters. You have gay Catholics, conservative Catholics, etc.
                                \_ aka Priests
                                   \_ isn't that the Epsicopalian bishop?
2004/3/27-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12889 Activity:moderate 92%like:29881
3/27    Massive top level corruption in the UN?  Say it isn't so!
        http://csua.org/u/6m9  http://www.nzherald.co.nz
        \_ [ references to trolls deleted.  The article is not a troll.
             Do not question the troll censor. ]
        \_ yet another right wing conspiracy.  if it were true, it would
           have been covered by reputable news sources instead of just
           the partisan wsj and some nz rag.
           \_ when it turns out to be true, will you stop being a
              blind ass twink?
              \_ no, he'll just deny reality or claim it's a conspiracy again
                 or say it wasn't *really* like that and it's really not so
                 bad and gwb is evil and opposes the un so the un must be good
                 and if only we paid our dues on time things like this wouldn't
                 happen.   or something like that.  i've seen it before.
           \_ partisan?  you're putting the wsj in the same category as the
              nyt and the star?  i'll bet you put your faith in the nyt which
              has had multiple scandals in the last few short years.  anyone
              who would accuse the wsj of making up news needs to get their
              head examined or is a troll.  and that 'nz rag' happens to be
              one of the top notch papers in that part of the world.  what's
              on your reading list, trollboy?
              \_ I read only USA Today and the Daily Mirror.
        \_ I didn't read the link and I don't doubt it.  This is hardly news.
           UN is a bunch of corrupt criminals with diplomatic covers wanting
           to take over America.  Why don't we just get rid of this
           immunity thing the put them in camp X-ray?
           \_ troll harder.
           \_ I think the US media outlets are tanking this story since
              its an election year.
2004/3/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12835 Activity:nil
3/24    Kansas City Kerry - at 1971 meeting where plans to assasinate
        US Senators were discussed.
        http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=6331
        \_ Gave up on the Drudge Report intern rumor, eh?
           I see you found an even more respectable publication
           to follow.
           \_ http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37706
               http://csua.org/u/6l2
2004/3/22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12793 Activity:high
3/22    Walter Cronkite schools Kerry.
        http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E29003%257E2026871,00.html
        \_ Man, I'm conservitive, but I've still always wondered about
           this.
           \_ Those of us who watched Dukakis self-destruct have been
              worried about this for some time.  If only the Dems would
              send John to apprentice under Bill for a while....
2004/3/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12791 Activity:nil
3/21    Kerry Supporters at NYC Peace Protest
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102246/posts?page=1,50
2004/3/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12720 Activity:nil
3/17    John Kerry foreign policy speech.  Who says he's not a leader?
        http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0317.html
        \_ Err.. this is the same guy who a few weeks ago was saying
           Bush was going too far.  Let's flip a coin too see what side
           of the issue he'll be on next!
           \_ Nice use of talking points without reading speech.  Excellent
              job of not thinking for yourself.  Yay!
              \_ Oh, I read the speech.  Mostly it was the usual political
                 crap saying, "When I am president, money will fall from
                 the sky, and [you whoever you are] will have the newest
                 and best of everything!  Don't worry, there will be no
                 problems when _I_ am president!"
                 \_ Nothing like the motd for cynicism, shortsightedness,
                    narrowmindedness, and stupidity!
                    \_ And insults with no point! And blaming everything
                       on the guy you don't like!
2004/3/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12712 Activity:high
3/16    New York Times/CBS poll: 11% think Kerry is a conservative, 12% think
        Bush is a liberal.
       http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/15/opinion/polls/main606465.shtml
        \_ which really means between 12 and 23 percent of those polled are
           ignorant morons.
           \_ Yup. Which is probably the biggest problem. The leader is elected
              based on television personality, and soundbite carpetbombing.
              A truly wise leader would probably bore people, and probably
              would avoid the job and the associated bullshit in the first
              place.
              \_ A truly wise leader isn't a technocrat or paper pusher.  It
                 takes leadership to lead.  Carter != leader.  Reagan = leader.
                 GHB != leader.  BC = leader.  GWB = leader.  Kerry != leader.
                 If personality weren't important we could get a computer to
                 do it.
                 \_ ob: Hitler was a leader too. Having a TV personality isn't
                    a requirement to be an effective leader. It's only a
                    requirement in the USA to manipulate public opinion. China
                    for example doesn't need a dancing figurehead to make
                    forceful national decisions. More to the point, leadership
                    doesn't go hand in hand with wisdom.
                    \_ Not a good troll. You just combine catch/key words and
                       bad formatting.  A lazy troll.
                    \_ I'll feed you the cookie: China is a heavy iron fisted
                       dictatorship that rules by fear and force.  They don't
                       rule at the whim of their populace.  That's a good
                       model that would allow us to have wise but zero
                       charisma leaders.  How about GWB declare martial law,
                       disband the government and do what he thinks is best
                       instead of poll following and wasting his time trying
                       to answer all those annoying reporter questions?  Let's
                       try it for a few years and see if our country ends up
                       doing as well as a nice place like China.
                       \_ what gives you the impression that Bush answers
                          annoying questions from reporters?  His press
                          conferences are 100% scripted.
                          \_ duh, all press conferences are.  what is new about
                             that?  you're right, press conferences are
                             controlled so let's use the Chinese system.
                             \_ I'm just wondering what you're saying.  When
                                does Bush answer "annoying reporter questions",
                                if his press conferences are controlled?
        \_ are u surprised?  lots of the lib. vs con. stuff is nonsense.
           Here is something neither of them would like to admit:  GWB is a lot
           like BC as a president, minus the libido.  The unilateralist
           interventionist PAX Amerika approach was started by BC, not GWB.
           BC = GWB + sex drive.
           \_ UR so KOOL saiing AMERIKA w/a K!!!  hahahahahaha!!!!11
           \_ and that's why I may not be voting for bush this fall.  unlike
              my liberal counterparts i don't froth and hate blindly just
              because there's a (d) near a name nor do I fall in sycophantic
              enthrallment to anyone with an (r).  both BC and GWB are bad for
              the country, just in different ways.  the problem for me is that
              kerry is like BC but stupid and ineffective and elitist.  well
              actually i guess that makes kerry nothing like BC.  -conservative
           \_ The corruption in BC's administration was unparalled in the 20th
              century.  The DNC has returned millions in campaign contribution
              from the Communist PLA.  How many contributions were never
              caught? China has all of our nuclear weapon designs and
              literally thousands of front companies performing industrial
              espionage.  What was Billy Bob's N. Korea policy - send his coke
              head brother there on a tour.Between militarizing the IRS,
              Forest Service, and other agencies, ignoring five or six
              terrorist attacks, Waco, Elian, demoralization of the military,
              etc. etc. BC was the second worst president with a tie for 1st
              between FDR and Wilson.  I remember posting links here in 2000
              describing the 'diversity quilts' and PC other policies
              Clinton's administration was pushing in the CIA.  We know now
              the results of these 'policies'.  William Casey met with BC once
              in the two years he was head of CIA.  On the domestic agenda,
              yes GWB is similar to BC. [motd formatd was here]  [then the real
              motd formatd fixed it for real]
              \_ Whoah. I got sprayed with spittle just reading this onscreen.
                 \_ Why bother posting if you have nothing to say?
              \_ The fact that you think FDR was the worst president ever says
                 a lot about your mindset.
                 \_ Yes and pointing that out says nothing about the poster,
                    or your differing opinions.  Your implied assumption that
                    FDR = good and anti-FDR = insane says you really haven't
                    read your history or studied the long term social costs of
                    FDR's programs or actually the abuse of their growth and
                    continued existence long past their useful life span.
                    \_ Anyone who can't find some good in him has a problem.
                       You don't have to love him, but there must be something
                       you liked.
                       \_ There is 'some' good in everyone, mostly.  That
                          doesn't make them a good president or mean they had
                          good policies, or more specifically in this case mean
                          that their policies were good beyond the time period
                          they were written and should have been kept and
                          expanded into the horror they've become today.
                          \_ So you're blaming FDR because later presidents
                             didn't end his programs when they outlived their
                             usefulness?  How many federal programs come with
                             a sunset provision?
2004/3/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12710 Activity:very high
3/16    This is a perfect example of what I was saying the other day about
        why I don't want my President to be tremendously popular in foreign
        nations.  This doesn't in any way endear me to Kerry or anyone else
        who gets this sort of high praise from foreigners.  Remember, everyone
        has puts their own interests first, yours second, if at all.
        http://daily.nysun.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=NYS/2004/03/15&ID=Ar00104
        \_ shrug, Bush is a moron anyway.  Can't blame them for liking
           the less idiotic candidate.
           \_ Call me when Kerry has an opinion on something.
           \_ Kerry is nothing special.  He's done nothing of note in the
              Senate.  He's an elitist pig and his campaign was only able to
              just pull up even with Bush after 8 months of free Bush bashing
              during the (D)em primaries.  You think his ratings will
              suddenly improve now that Bush is fighting back?  You think
              to know him is to love him and his ratings will somehow go up
              as time goes on?  This election is a referendum on Bush.  He
              could be running against any loser/winner and it wouldn't
              matter.  Kerry's running mate won't matter.  Debates won't
              matter.  In November we'll all find out for real if voters want
              or do not want Bush and his policies.  The desires of foreign
              leaders, their people, the UN, and non-voters are unimportant.
              \_ And when the bill for Iraq pops up again, I'm sure those
                 foreigners will pop in a few hundred million to help cover
                 the tens of billion dollars the US is spending there. Who
                 cares what they think?
                 \_ A few hundred million is *nothing* compared to the 160
                    *billion* we'll have put into Iraq and Afghanistan by
                    this summer.  The price of their 'friendship' is too high.
                    Do the math.
                    \_ foreginers pretty much foot the bill for the entire
                       gulf war one.  this iraq war two is illegal and immoral.
                       US is a very bad friend in asking its allies to support
                       its illegal and immoral war.  it's right to refuse
                       instead of succumbing to us pressures and bribes.
        \_ Yes, because having the world despise Bush has helped the US so much.
           \_ If they loved him it wouldn't matter.  Foreign intelligence
              services (including France, Germany and Russia) are still
              working very closely with ours.  The French have 200 elite
              special forces guys working closely with ours on the Afghanistan
              Pakistan border looking for bin Laden conducting active missions
              and the leaders of other Muslim countries that should hate us
              according to your theories such as Saudi Arabia are working with
              us and actively tracking down and killing terrorists where ever
              they find them.  How exactly would good Bush PR around the
              glone help?
              \_ So the whole Iraq thing doesn't count anymore?
                 \_ What are you talking about?  What do you mean by "doesn't
                    count"?  Huh?  I honestly don't understand what you're
                    getting at.
2004/3/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12709 Activity:nil
3/16    "It--mah' view uh--uh de situashun wuz dat he--he had--we--we recon',
        de best intelligence dat we had and oda' countries had and
        dat--dat we recon'd and we still do not know--we gots'ta know."
        -- Donald Rumsfeld 3/15/04
        \_ I like poking him in the ribs and listening to him squeal. Hey
           inflamed gallbaldder boy, squeal some more!! <poke> <poke>
                \_ You realize that was ashcroft?
                   \_ No, he doesn't; he's an idiot.
        \_ there's that Princeton education talking...
        \_ Then again Saddam's 20,000 strong nuclear weapons program
           discovered after the first Gulf War was a big surprise to...
           Let's hear what Kerry had to say from the Congressional Record:
           "I will be voting to give the President of the United States
           the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm
           Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal
           of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and
           grave threat to our security."
           - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
                \_ Funny, Kerry seems to be the only one to believe that
                   there were WMDs.  Even Bush said (usually), only that
                   they were being "assembled", not that they were
                   stockpiled.
                \_ I don't really care what Kerry said. Maybe he's an idiot
                   and was duped. The point is that the intelligence data
                   did not match the adminstration's talk, and Rummy's
                   comical verbal dancing is the result. It is fact that
                   the administration suppressed contrary intelligence and
                   presented their agenda with certainty before the public,
                   and even invented ridiculous stuff like the niger thing.
                   \_ It is opinion that anything was suppressed.
          "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent
          with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary
          actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile
          strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to
          the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons
          of mass destruction programs."
          - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin,
          Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
          \_ Hahahah 1998. How many chemical weapons have a shelf
             life of 5 years?
             \_ All of them.  Disprove it.  And until we went there we had no
                idea if *new* ones were being made or not.  Scott Ritter said
                the WMD programs were only 90-95% destroyed when they left in
                1998.  That means *not* 100% destroyed and thus still capable
                of making WMD.  Based on Scott Ritter's info alone we had
                reason enough to go in.
                \_ http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15854
                   Yawn. Another lie of yours exposed.
                   \_ alternet?  oh please.  I've seen Ritter say on live TV
                      before it was cool to say there was nothing there that
                      there was something there.  That was before he took $300k
                      in Saddam's blood money, btw.
                       \_There's no need to attack the source, this is the
                         exactly the same type of idiocy that _Time_ or any
                         other "reputable" news magazine would regurgitate.
                         \_ And the DIA and CIA.
                       \_ So you admit that you lied when you said that
                          all chemical agents have a shelf life of 5 years?
                          http://www.fas.org/irp/gulf/cia/960705/73919_01.htm
        \_ You understand that the "uhms" and "ahs" and other pauses and gaps
           are normally cleaned up for *all* politicians and other government
           figures.  By putting them back in you're not making him look stupid
           to educated people who actually understand how the media works.  I'm
           sure this impresses your ignorant friends, though.  Watch CSPAN for
           a few minutes.
           \_ Okay, why don't you assemble it into something intelligent.
              He only stumbled that much because he had no response.
              \_ remove all uhms and ahs.  next!
                 \_ there are no uhms or ahs in the quote, retard.
2004/3/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12702 Activity:nil
3/16    "It--my view of--of the situation was that he--he had--we--we believe,
        the best intelligence that we had and other countries had and
        that--that we believed and we still do not know--we will know."
        -- Donald Rumsfeld 3/15/04
        \_ I like poking him in the ribs and listening to him squeal. Hey
           inflamed gallbaldder boy, squeal some more!! <poke> <poke>
                \_ You realize that was ashcroft?
        \_ there's that Princeton education talking...
        \_ Then again Saddam's 20,000 strong nuclear weapons program
           discovered after the first Gulf War was a big surprise to...
           Let's hear what Kerry had to say from the Congressional Record:
           "I will be voting to give the President of the United States
           the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm
           Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal
           of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and
           grave threat to our security."
           - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
          "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent
          with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary
          actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile
          strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to
          the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons
          of mass destruction programs."
          - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin,
          Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
2004/3/15 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:29870 Activity:nil
3/14    1971: Kerry negotiates with Viet Cong for US surrender...
        from the Congressional Record
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1097828/posts
        \_ Think about how many more US lives we could have saved if
           we'd pulled out four years earlier.
                \_ Tell that to South Vietnam, which was free for 2 years,
                   and the millions of Cambodians slaughtered by Communists.
                   \_ Cambodians?  Cambodians were mostly slaughtered
                      by the Khmer Rouge, which the Vietnamese overthrew
                      not long after South Vietnam was no more.
                        \_ Khmer Rouge were formally known as the
                           Communist Party of Kampuchea.  Saloth Sar and
                           his coterie established their Marxist
                           credentials in Paris and Eastern Europe.
                           North Vietnamese were Communists aligned with
                           the Soviets.
        \_ all patriots need to read the following masterpiece by a blonde hot
           kinky conservative knockout and you will get a hard on exposing
           the true faces of liberals around you --  http://tinyurl.com/2vx63
           \_ Just out of curiousity, does anyone think Ann Coulter is
              anything but psychotic? "Liberals relentlessly oppose the
              military, the Pledge of Allegiance, the flag, and national
              defense..."  Does anyone truly believe any single portion
              of this sentence? -scotsman
           \_ w00t!
2004/3/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12657 Activity:high
3/14    http://www.mediachannel.org/views/dissector/affalert153.shtml goes
        a long way to proving why the media bashes Bush.  Because he's a
        monkey and fucks up everything he touches.
        \_ But Kerry is a lying crook who made more bizarre and corrupt
           votes than Ted Kennedy... funny they never meantion that...
           \_ Kerry is as good and honorable a man as Kennedy and don't you
              forget it!
        \_ d00d, they need Fox in that study
2004/3/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12646 Activity:moderate
3/12    American Research Group: Kerry Increases Lead Over Bush, Democrats more
        united than Republicans:
        http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/presballot
        \_ If I was a foreigner I'd be cheering positive Kerry news, too.
           \_ why?  foreigners cheer for bush.  outsourcing, big trade
              deficit all good for foreigners.
              \_ gee, and here the left has spent 3 years telling us how the
                 rest of the world now hates us because of bush.  which is
                 it?  having your cake and eating it too?  don't be stupid.
                 \_ oh, that's mostly just the nato allies, and some moderate
                    used to be friendly muslim nations.  But India and
                    the east asian nations love bush.  In short, the
                    ones with whom we should have good relationships
                    hate us, while those that take advantage of us love
                    us.  Bush screwed up both politically, and
                    economically.
                    \_ not really.  Which East Asian (i presume you are talking
                       about north east asian countries) you are talking about?
                       Anti-American sentiment is running all time high here
                       in North East Asia.  South Korea's president
                       in North East Asia.  South Korea's president won
                       won election on his tougher stands against Americans
                       (even though it's all election rhetrics).  In short,
                       many countries think Bush is being a big bully, which
                       has a lot of truth in it.
                       \_ there you go.  even s. koreans, who honored the US
                          as an old friend by sending troops to iraq, think
                          the bush gang is a big bully and warmonger.
                          \_ no this is just a case of "what have you done for
                             me lately?"  france is the ultimate example of
                             this.  without the US france wouldn't exist today.
                             how much thanks do we get for that? its just the
                             way the world is.  everyone has their own best
                             interests at heart which makes sense and is the
                             way it should be.  this is totally normal and has
                             nothing to do with who the president is.  if the
                             rest of the world loved our president i'd wonder
                             why and what it was costing *me* and my country
                             so the president can feel popular around the
                             globe.  i'd vote against the residing president
                             on that basis alone.
                             \_ without France, there will be USA today.
                                There are more casuaties on the French side
                                than American soldier during the Revolutionary
                                War.
                                \_ yes and so what?  at what point did we
                                   backstab france?  this has nothing to do
                             on that basis alone.
                                War.
                                   with anything i said.
                             \_ huh?  so you prefer that the rest of the world
                                hate us like say how they hated the
                                soviet union?  that will be proof for you
                                that we have a good president?
                                \_ they didnt hate the soviet union anymore
                                   they ever hated us.  they were just the
                                   other super power and all the little
                                   countries you're so concerned about played
                                   the 2 off each other for most of the 20th
                                   century.  hating us isn't proof we have a
                                   good president, liking us isn't proof we
                                   have a bad president but each is evidence
                                   in that direction.
                                   \_ Complete bullshit. Who loved the Soviet
                                      Union? Pretty much all of Europe admired
                                      the USA and most of the rest of the world
                          the bush gang is a big bully and warmonger.
                             on that basis alone.
                                that we have a good president?
                                   have a bad president but each is evidence
                                   in that direction.
                                      too. The USSR was simply an empire, and
                                      only opportunist dictators found profit
                                      in alliance with it.
                                      \_ no one ever said anyone loved the USSR
                                         where are you getting this shit from?
                                         if youre going to post please try to
                                         read what you're replying to and dont
                                         reply to your own self created straw
                                         man arguments that others never made.
                                   \_ I think you've got the two directions
                                      confusd.  each is evidence of the other
                                      direction.  And no, it wasn't about
                                      playing offthe two superpowers.  It had
                                      always been about supporting the US for
                                      what it respresented.
                 \_ Why are you guys babbling about foreigners?  The link is
                    a poll of AMERICANS.
                    \_ Because, if you read a news paper or read it online,
                       you'd know about Kerry's recent quote about unnamed
                       foreign leaders who are pulling for him.  Of course this
                       was a provable lie, but hey, it's only politics.
2004/3/12 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12638 Activity:low
3/12    Can't his advisors get Kerry to STFU and stop mouthing off?
        http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040312-120719-7926r.htm
        \_ Can't his advisors get Reverend Moon to stop trying to destroy
           our government?
2004/3/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12597 Activity:nil
3/10    "It is Nader's doing, more than anyone else's, that
        the federal bureaucracy includes an Environmental Protection
        Agency, an Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
        and a Consumer Product Safety Commission..." -The New Yorker
        \_ nonono, we were told right here on the motd only a few weeks ago
           that kerry has done far more than nader could ever dream of.
        \_ All he needs now is Slick Willie's charm and an intern scandal
           to prove it!
        \_ Was that praise or criticism?
2004/3/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:29861 Activity:nil
3/8     Ashcroft surgery a success!  Blessings to him and his family.
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42534-2004Mar9?language=printer
        \_ However, giant stick in up ass thought to be inoperable.
2004/3/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, ERROR, uid:12549, category id '18005#15.0625' has no name! , ] UID:12549 Activity:high
3/5     For the Ashcroft haters out there: do you see this as divine
        retribution?  Does he deserve it?  Do you wish him dead?
        http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/389373|top|03-05-2004::17:07|reuters.html
        restored.  leave it to the motd to delete actual real national news
        that has actual real national implications while leaving so much other
        drivel.  way to go!
        \_ http://csua.org/u/6b3
        restored.  leave it to the motd to delete actual real national news
        that has actual real national implications while leaving so much other
        drivel.  way to go!
        \_ if you're NOT a troll, it sounds like you are only capable of the
           same absolutist thought that makes Ashcroft stupid and unpopular.
           And one day your body will fail you as well, and you will wonder
           if you are a bad person.  But don't worry, you are just dumb.
        \_ Nobody "hates" Ashcroft or Rumsfeld or Bush (except a bunch of
           lunatics with whom you won't be able to argue anyway.)  They're
           just scary, incompetent and dishonest to varying degrees, and
           don't belong in charge of large portions of a democratic
           government.  Nice flamebait.  -John
           \_ The whole point of good government is to be robust to idiots.
              Idiots are a problem for any form of government.  (I am not
              necessarily calling any of the above idiots, though, just
              pointing out expecting philosopher-kings at the top is naive).
                -- ilyas
           \_ Idoitic or not is not an issue, nor do I believe Bush and
              his team are incompetent.  They are just a bunch people who
              put ideology over pragmatism, put interest of the few over
              interest of the masses, *AND* lie to the masses so they will
              pay for their agenda, with cash and blood.
        \_ no, yes, yes.
        \_ yes, yes, no.
        \_ no, no, no.
        \_ yes, no, yes
2004/3/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12527 Activity:kinda low
4/3     Nader voters make the difference between Bush & Kerry victory if
        the election were held today.
        http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040304/D813PD7G1.html
        \_ uh oh, Bush just started campaigning today.. that means
           it's over already..
           \_ It ain't till the fat lady sings and she hasn't even
              showed up on stage yet.
              \_ But... but... But then what will all the motd know-it-alls
                 do until August?!?!
             \_ you mean it aint over until the supreme court hands the
                election over.
                \_ Give it a rest.  And format your posts twink.
                   \_ Restore the rightful winner, and we'll talk. And
                      learn how to use commas, buck.
                      \_ Apostrophe's, not comma's.  -John
                      \_ Proof-p
                      \_ oh dear god, we've been over this so many times. no
                         matter how the press counted and recounted after gore
                         lost.  that's your lefty press that was dying to find
                         a story there.  there wasn't one.  move on.
                         \_ K1N6 60R3 15 T3h R1t3f00l w1nn3R!!~!@@@@#!!!!!!
2004/3/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:29857 Activity:very high
3/3     MOTD conservatives:  Which Democratic candidate was the least offensive
        to you?  I'm asking now that the nomination is all but complete so any
        paranoid people can give a straight answer without fear of giving away
        'the secret plan'.
        \_ In Georgia, there was overwhelming Repub and Ind. support for John
           Edwards; that should tell you something.
        \_ Dean was the most acceptible. Clinton was the best; there is no
           way she could have won and such a setback would have shattered the
           democratic party keeping america safe for years.
           \_ I was asking who you liked, not who you think would have lost
              to Bush most easily. --op
                \_ I liked Dean. He was practically a Republican.
        \_ This was answered in depth and is in the archives.  I'm not going
           to restore it for the 15th or so time.
        \_ none of the above.  Can you think of any conservative democrat
           right now?
2004/3/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:29856 Activity:high
3/3     Sigh... Why do I find myself agreeing with a slime like Dick Morris?
        http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/19568.htm
        \_ Liberal, shmiberal.  Kerry voted for the Patriot Act and the
           invasion of Iraq.  He's a moderate.  Get over it.  Now Edwards
           wanted to take from the rich and give to the poor, and he all
           but called for a class war.  You want liberal, that's liberal.
           \_ How dare you bring facts into this debate?
           \_ Uhm yeah except now he says it was all a mistake.  Which is it?
              \_ When did he say that? Btw, Bush said you're an idiot.
        \_ If Edwards, Dean, and Clark pull out all of the stops and campaign
           for Kerry, you can kiss Bush goodbye.  If they go all petty and
           divisive on him, however, it's four more years.
           \_ No.  Once it's over, no one ever gives a shit what the losers
              say about anything.  How about Gephart and the others?  Shit,
              I can't even remeber who they are now.
              \_ I think Edwards would be great to have stumping around the
                 south, possibly as a VP.  Clark, Dean et al have faded from
                 the public eye.
        \_ Because you're an idiot?
           \_ if you have something to say I'd respond to it.
        \_ Sandanistas for Kerry 2004!!
2004/3/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12498 Activity:high
3/3     Political Ghost story,...Creepiest Kerry Flip-Flop Yet
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/10905136/posts
        \_ Our friend the Freeper!  Posts stupid shit, so you don't have to!
                \_ Yea http://opinionjournal.com is a rag... you better stick
                   with the color bar graphs in USA Today.
                   \_ Dude, the wall street journal editorials are one step
                      up from the new york post.  One very small step.
                        \_ Either the event took place, as reported by
                           New Republic, or it didn't, dude.
                           \_ Yeah remember when they repeated the Kerry
                              intern rumors? Sorry their credibility is
                              quickly going down the toilet.
                              \_ Kerry fucked some 23 year old.  So what?
        \_ Posting a FreePer link is lame, but editing that link so's it
           goes nowhere is even lamer.
                \_ fixed
        \_ Thanks for reminding me what a partisan hack GOP outfit the
           WSJ has turned into. I just cancelled my subscription. -ausman
           \_ I'm sure they care.
           \_ The humanity!! Well I you should cancel your subscription
              to the New Republic while you are it because they reported
              it first.
2004/3/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12494 Activity:nil
3/2     Are the 2 parties actually any different, and will Nader really
        threaten the dem candidate?
        part one: http://tinyurl.com/3ffcl
        part two: http://tinyurl.com/3dl6n
        \_ Kind of nice how they can put up graphs and images to illustrate
           their points.
2004/3/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12489 Activity:moderate
3/2     Early reports say Kerry is making a clean sweep today.  Oh well,
        4 more years for GWB.
        \_ Edwards to drop out tomorrow.
           \_ you mean become Vice Presidential Candidate
              \_ no way that vain Boston prig would pick someone who'd
                 upstage him, even if Kerry/Edwards is in the party's
                 best interest
        \_ don't understand what do you mean.  you mean Edward with his
           anti-trade, protectionist platform has better shot at winning
           votes from the undecided?
           \_ ^undecided^undecided and Southerners^
              \_ why Kerry won Ohio?  you would imagine a state lost 250k jobs
                 would find Edwards more appealing.
           \_ Yes.  More than Kerry.  Where have you been?  A lot of people
              in this country lost jobs to NAFTA, overseas outsourcing, often
              paid for with their own tax dollars and they're pissed off.
              \_ why Kerry won Ohio?  you would imagine a state lost 250k jobs
                 would find Edwards more appealing.
                 \_ It's the "Most Electible" vote.
                 \_ duh, it isn't a general election.  they had to vote for
                 even though they create jobs OVERSEAS.  May be tha corporate
                    someone.  and tell me this: how many stayed home?
              \_ just part of globalization, my friend, bite the damn
                 bullet.  USA as a whole has benefited from this trend,
                 it would be foolish to roll back.  My problem with the
                 current system is that we offer tax break to companies
                 even though they create jobs OVERSEAS.  May be the corporate
                 tax code should be rewritten so it only rewards companies
                 that offer jobs within USA border.  This wouldn't stop
                 moving jobs to overseas, but it will stop unnecessary
                 job migration.
                 \_ I don't disagree with you.  I'm just telling you what you
                    already know: there are a bunch of pissed off people out
                    there who are going to vote against pro-global candidates
                    if at all possible.
                 \- why should companies be given tax breaks for job creation
                    again? isnt that just a subsidy to the owners? how about
                    giving tax breaks to people who buy "american cars" or
                    "american shoes".
                    \_ what is considered "American " is no longer clear.
                            \- that is why i quoted "american". i think it
                               was actually a good thing that the developing
                               countries said "fuck you" in cancun. can you
                               imagine india trying to protect "chai" like
                               the french protect champagne? or the mercan-
                               tilism of the RIAA and MSFT? --psb ...
                               \_ In cancun, it's less to do with intellectual
                                  properties right, more to do with government
                                  subsidies on agrecultural product, and
                                  Brazil and India and rest of developing
                                  nation wants to got rid of it.  Besides,
                                  this entire IP fiascal started by USA,
                                  and the rest of the country is just trying
                                  to do the same thing.
                    again? isnt that just a subsidy to the owners? how about
                    giving tax breaks to people who buy "american cars" or
                    "american shoes".
                                 But when the chosen people grew more strong,
                                 The rightful cause at length became the wrong:
                                 The moderate sort of men, thus qualifi'd,
                                 Inclin'd the balance to the better side:
                                                      --john dryden
                       Toyota Camery is made in USA, is that considered
                       an "American" car?  When American product flooding
                       other nations, USA was being a such arrogant asshole
                       saying that this is part of globalization and eventually
                       offer consumer better/cheaper product is best interest
                       for everyone in the long run.   It's kind of funny that
                       other nations start to beat USA with USA's own game and
                       USA start to bitching about it.  I never said the trade
                       rules are fair, but it is HEAVILY favors American
                       corperations that most other nation is actually compete
                       at much of a handicaps.  The irony is that American
                       citizens (aside from wealthy share owners of these
                       corporation) start to loose out, as they too become
                       victims of corporate expoitation.
                       \_ There's no longer any such thing as a USA corporation
                          among the large companies.  They're all
                          multi-nationals which means they're going to screw
                          anyone and everyone they can if it makes them a
                          penny.  When some dumb cunt like 'Carly' at HP says
                          and does some of the evil stupid shit she has, you
                          can be certain that "USA" is the last thing on her
                          mind.
              \_ And just how is Bush and his "outsourcing is good" policy
                 going to appeal to the people who have lost jobs?  You're
                 \_ 1) It's not, 2) Bush never said that.  Some paper pusher
                    knee biters 9 layers deep in the beauracracy said it and
                    were repudiated the next news cycle by the admin.
                    \_ Actually, it was the head of Bush's Council of
                       Economic Advisers, Gregory Mankiw.  And the Bush
                       "repudiation" was a lukewarm "the president is
                        strongly committed to creating jobs here at home"
                       from mouthpiece McClellan.  Not inspiring stuff.
2004/3/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12476 Activity:low
3/1     Kerry Will Abandon War on Terrorism
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/10188396/posts
        \_ "No Such Thread"
           \_ Exactly, he abandoned it.
           \_ Someone decided to modify the link.  It's fixed now.
        \_ I love the way Freeper articles always cite the media's support
           for anything they, the Freepers, find morally corrupt. Nothing
           like media persecution to make young white males feel empowered
           as a misunderstood pseudo-minority.
           \_ why is it always just young white males?  Your stereotype?
              \_ Freepers and serial killers, same demographic.
                 \_ racist
                    \_ Yeah, keep telling yourself that, Whitey.
                       \_ RACIST!!!
                       \_ I'm no Whitey.  Racist!
                          \_ Yeah, keep telling yourself that, Whitey.
                 \_ What resemblance do you see?
2004/2/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12382 Activity:nil
2/24    Kerry fucks over POWs/MIAs from the Village Voice:
        http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0408/schanberg.php
        \_ Damn that right wing conspiracy.  It's even infected the Villiage
           Voice!
2004/2/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12352 Activity:nil
2/22    Who will Cal Deaniacs support now that Dean is out of the race?
        \_ I wasn't a Deaniac, but I think most people will do what I do:
           not necessary get involved in the process, nor donating money, but
           *WILL* do his/her part cast his/her vote to make sure Bush out of
           office.
           \_ oh yeah?  which of the half dozen or so states where your vote
              actually matters are you planning to move to before november?
           \_ No one can get elected without the support of independent voters.
              If you put up some zero like Kerry who has no draw from that
              demographic you're doomed.  Instead of worrying about the other
              guy with that "anyone buy Bush" theme, why don't you support a
              real candidate that you actually like?  Success will follow.
              \_ I'm not the guy above, but there were two candidates who
                 I actually liked, and they've both left the field before
                 I even had a chance to vote.  By super tuesday, it's
                 already become a lesser of evils game.
              \_ So Deaniacs should just go ahead and vote for Dean in the
                 general election no matter what? I'm sure that will work.
                 \_ no, your party already screwed it up by voting for someone
                    based on their belief about his ability to defeat the
                    other guy as opposed to their faith in him as a person.
                    meaning they think they know how independent voters will
                    vote and tried to second guess them by presenting the
                    candidate they believed would get the most (I) voters,
                    but instead ended up with a passionless elitist cog who
                    is going to get his ass handed to him.  as one of those
                    (I) voters you so badly need I assure you that Kerry isn't
                    on my short list.
                    \_ Passionless elitist cog?  are you talking about
                       George Bush, who achieved NOTHING on his own?
                       got into Harvard with 1200 on SAT, using family
                       connection to get him out of Vietnam (serving
                       national guard instead), won presidency by asking
                       his brother perform what I considered as vote
                       fraud.
                        \_ Can you please elaborate on what he 'asked'
                           his brother to do?  Jeb Bush recused himself
                           from the recount.
                        \_ As an (I) I'm totally turned off by your anti-Bush
                           rhetoric.  This is exactly the reason you're going
                           to lose to Bush again.  You attack the other guy
                           but say nothing about why I should vote for your
                           guy.  As an (I) I prefer the evil I know to the
                           unknown but certain evil of your guy.  You don't
                           even like your own guy, so why should I?
                   \_ You don't get it.  Most of the time, people vote
                      *AGAINST* someone than *FOR* someone.  I have no
                      idea who Kerry is, but I know that 1. He is not
                      Bush, and 2. everyone around me who think like me
                      will vote for him.  and that is good enough.  For
                      many of us, nothing can be worse than President Bush
                      right now.
                      \_ And your friends are a fair mix of the general voting
                         public?  I doubt it.  Give people someone to vote
                         *for* and you'll see Bush out of office by a landslide
                         but instead you give us (I) voters no choices.
                    \_ You need to wake up. Everyone is basically an (I). You
                       are obviously liberal, therefore you're stuck with the
                       Democrats. That's the way it is, kid. The conservatives
                       don't all like Bush either. Kerry and Edwards are the
                       candidates the most people are comfortable with. They
                       never act weird like Dean, and have a political history
                       unlike Clark. Sorry the world is too boring for you.
                       If you don't like it, voting for a third party doesn't
                       change anything. It's a lazy way to pretend you actually
                       care while doing nothing. Just stay home.
                       \_ I'm not liberal.  I'm also not conservative.  I am
                          definitely *not* stuck voting for Kerry.  I can stay
                          home or vote for Bush or Nader or anyone else I like.
                          I'm not voting for Kerry if I show up.
              \_ Go away, Naderboy.
                 \_ whatever, wrong call.
              \_ I'm a decline-to-state and I hate Kerry and Dean both as
                 well as Bush. If Clark or Kucinich made it I'd probably
                 vote for them, and perhaps for Edwards. I might vote for
                 Kucinich anyway. I despise Bush, but I'm not voting Kerry
                 to keep Bush out of office.
                 \_ why do you "hate" all those guys?
2004/2/22 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12350 Activity:nil
2/22    It's official.  Ralph Nader is running.
        \_ Read the far far far left debating Nader's presidential bid:
           http://publish.portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/02/281004.shtml
           About the same level of dialog as freerepublic, on the other side.
        \_ God dammit.  I hope he runs off the edge of a cliff.  It's not
           worth another 4 years of BushCo just to have a "viable third party"
           that no one would want in power anyway!
           \_ Actually, it would be great to have a *viable* third party.
              One egotistical asshole running as an idependent in a few states
              and getting about 1% of the vote has no relation whatsoever to
              establishing a viable third party other than making poeple
              mistrust future third party attempts, however.
        \_ Go Ralphie go!  Four more years!
        \_ Whee. I wonder how many states will have <1000 vote margins this
           year? Freeper and Naderboy should go get drunk together.
        \_ When is BushCo going to start donating to Nader's campaign?
2004/2/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12336 Activity:high
2/20    Ralph Nader is 2004!  Go Ralph go!
        \_ That roaring you hear is thousands of Republicans celebrating
           and writing $2000 donations to Ralph's campaign.
           \_ Now if only we Democrats could convince Perot to run again...
        \_ One more monumentally egotistical American.
        \_ http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&edition=us&q=nader
           No decision until Sunday.  Then the lynching begins.
           \_ Lynching?  Fuck you.  He has the same right to run as any
              American born citizen over 35.  He *can't* be 'stealing' votes
              from anyone because they aren't 'owned' by anyone but each
              individual owner and their concious.  You think democracy is
              all about lack of choices to force the election of a lesser evil?
              I hope he runs because this country can really use a third
              party.  The other two have failed us as a nation.
              \_ There's a time to stand for your principles.  There's a time
                 to act like an adult and realize that standing for your
                 principles is going to get you fucked up beyond recognition.
                 This is one of those times.  Kerry != Bush.
              \_ he's not taking about running as a third party, he's talking
                 about running as an independent.
                 \_ yes, and?  so what?  that changes nothing re: what I said.
                    if he gets a measurable chunk of votes under any banner
                    his voice will carry weight for positive change.
                    \_ No, his voice will carry weight for getting Bush
                       reelected.  God you hard lefties are stupid.
              \_ Haha, you like Nader? Why bother with Nader? You could just
                 vote for Kucinich. At least Kucinich is respectable and knows
                 how to talk to a crowd. Why didn't Kucinich win? Whatever the
                 reasons it shows that the public seems to want people like
                 Bush and Kerry. They get what they deserve. Now stoofoo.
                 \_ Nader has a public record of success.  Kucinich?  Whatever.
                    I'm in favor of more political choice, not throwing my vote
                    away on the left most wing of the democrat party.
                    \_ A "public record of success"?  One campaign against
                       a dangerous car, 40 years ago?  Kucinich has been
                       in public office for 25 years.  -tom
                       \_ I actually think the Green Party would have a lot
                          higher chance of success if they chose someone other
                          \- higher chance of success for what?
                          than Nader.  Someone who actually stood a chance of
                          winning.  At this point, Nader support is basically
                          just a cult of personality.  He'd probably do more
                          harm for this country than good.  In my opinion.
                          If they got a better representative, I'd probably
                          vote green, though.  -sax
                       \_ PIRG, Public Citizen, The Foundation for Taxpayer
                          and Consumer Rights were all founded by Nader.
                          Because of Nader we have OSHA, the EPA, the FOIA, the
                          Clean Water Act and The Consumer Product Safety
                          Division. Kucinich isn't even close.
                          \_ Yes, I really enjoyed my college tuition being
                             redirected by a front organization for eco-terrorist
                             causes all under some vague name as CalPIRG
                          \_ which planet are you on?
                             \_ What has Kucinich done, tom?
                                         \_ Look anyone who knows the history
                                            of OSHA and the EPA knows that
                                            Nader's Raiders were instrumental
                                            in getting them passed. Research
                                            them yourself and you will see.
                                \_ http://www.kucinich.us/about.php
                                   The guy was elected to public offices.
                                   Nader wasn't. Nader didn't create those
                                   bloated gov't bodies, because he wasn't in
                                   government. Nader had a long career as a
                                   "consumer watchdog". That has zero relevance
                                   to presidential appeal.
                    \_ That's a laughable comment. Look, the bottom line is
                       that America doesn't want Nader as president. It's
                       obvious. All the posturing and righteous, "outside the
                       system" superiority won't make people vote for him
                       which thankfully is the only way to win. Compromise is
                       part of the process and why there are primaries.
                             \_ What has Kucinich done?
                                \_ He invented the Internet, cured the common
                                   cold, and designed the Mars rover.  If
                                   you're just going to make up
                                   accomplishments, I will, too.
                                   \_ Good thing you didn't sign your name:
                                      http://www.votenader.org/biography.html
                                      http://www.nader.org/enbio.html
                                      http://csua.org/u/63s (US State Dept)
                                   http://www.gleitsman.org/citizen/honoree.html
                                      \_ what, two sites sponsored by Nader,
                                         and one by a self-congratulatory
                                         citizen's group that has Nader
                                         on the same page as such notables
                                         as Mike Farrell (BJ Hunicutt from
                                         MASH) and Jack Kevorkian.  Wow,
                                         that's some creds.
                                         \_ Look anyone who knows the history
                                            of OSHA and the EPA knows that
                                            Nader's Raiders were instrumental
                                            in getting them passed. It is not
                                            my fault you are ignorant.
                    \_ That's a laughable comment.
                                            in getting them passed. Research
                                            them yourself and you will see.
                    \_ That's a laughable comment. Look, the bottom line is
                       that America doesn't want Nader as president. It's
                       obvious. All the posturing and righteous, "outside the
                       system" superiority won't make people vote for him
                       which thankfully is the only way to win. Compromise is
                       part of the process and why there are primaries.
2004/2/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12333 Activity:nil
2/22    The motd Gang of Idiots: Chicom Troll, Peakoil Troll, Pretty Boy,
        Humorless Motd Censor, and now Ralph Nader #1 Fan.  Did I miss
        anyone?
        \_ You forgot the Freeper.
           \_ Strange part is, the only person I know that actively participates
              at http://freerepublic.com simply does so as a troll.  I often wonder
              what the ratio of trolls/true believers is at so-called political
              discussion sites.
           \_ would Freeper be the same person as Mouthpiece-Of-Bush ?
        \_ Hey, conservatives are great fans of Ralph Nader.
2004/2/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12308 Activity:nil
2/18    why does the press keep dropping references to Kerry as a
        "Brahmin"?  yes i know it's a caste in India. Do they
        expect everyone to know this?  Interesting.
        \_ He's a Brahmin? WOW.
           \_ Maybe they just mean Brahmin in the fallout sense of
              the word (i.e. a twoheaded mutant cow).
              \_ And Bush is Chuck Dunton...
        \_ UrlP
        \_ Presumably they are not refering to that Brahmin. Rather the
           "Boston Brahmins".
           \_ What is a "Boston Brahmin"?
                \_ A "Brahmin" is member of a hereditary upper class in
                       \- class != caste --bengali brahmin
                   India.  A "Boston Brahmin" is a member of a hereditary
                        \- India != Hindu --indian hindu
                   upperclass in Boston.  There is no doubt that they meant
                   Boston Brahmin.
                \_ is that a common expression on the east coast?
                   \_ among bostonians i know, yes.
                   \_ Among people who are well-informed, yes.
        \_ Not a Brahmin. You mean Bruin.
        \_ They're just saying he's the typical upper crust elitist east coast
           liberal.  Don't let it bother you.  He's a man of the people.
2004/2/18 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12293 Activity:very high
2/17    So this is the end of Kerry since the primary reason people were
        voting for him was his 'ability to beat Bush'.  Here's the link:
        http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm
        The nation is finally coming to it's senses.  Putting up a dog like
        Kerry for such a lame reason made no more sense than the (R) putting
        up Dole in 96 "because it was his turn".  Voters don't give a man "his
        turn" anymore than they will accept a man because he's has nothing more
        going for him than a claimed ability to beat the opposition.  In fact,
        since that is Kerry's only claim to the nomination it seems to me that
        he actually has no claim at all.  In the end people vote for a man and
        what he stands for.  Since Kerry stands for nothing but himself he
        would have gotten killed in November.  It's better this way.  By the
        convention it'll be Edwards and then there will be two competing men
        and their different philosophies to choose from, not the lesser of
        evils as usual.  This is going to be the best election since the first
        Kennedy/Nixon election.
        \_ At last, the Voice of Reason speaks.  Look, genius:  just a few
           weeks ago, all the professional pundits were convinced that Dean
           was an all but unstopable frontrunner, with Clark as a close runner
           up.  Guess what?  They had zero ability to predict the future
           or the will of the voters.  Not because they're all idiots,
           although many of them are, but because it's basically a next
           to impossible task.  Zogby's personal prediction at this point
           is that no matter what happens, it's going to be very close, and
           damn near impossible to predict, and I sure believe him more than
           some random motd pundit.  After all, he actually predicts things
           for a living, rather than getting some group of partisain
           fans all worked up, as most pundits do for their paycheck (
           except for those who write code for a living.)
           \_ Actually, the media tanked the Dean nomination after the
              allegedly hyper speech after the loss in Iowa.  The liberals
              in the media want to win, and a liberal that is not ashamed
              to talk like a liberal always loses in a landslide. Dean
              gave them an opening to start bad-mouthing him, and they took it.
              In the same way that the Bush talking point of "Gravitas"
              made it's way through all television media in a day, so it
              was with tanking dean.
        \_ Also putting an (R) in front of a tax and spend liberal social
           and fiscal like Arnold doesn't make him a Republican either.
           I wish the Republican party did not sell out McClintock
           in order to secure a "win" with a man totally opposed to every
           Republican ideal.  Congratulations to the Democratic party for
           winning the recall election.
        \_ Your own Rasmussen report seems to think otherwise:
         http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Democratic%20Nomination%20Analysis.htm
2024/12/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/24   
Results 151 - 300 of 1431   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:Election:
.