Politics Domestic President Bush - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:President:Bush:
Results 601 - 750 of 2024   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2017/11/18 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/18   

2004/10/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34255 Activity:insanely high
10/20   Hey conservatives- take back your own party please.  A bit of history:
        http://www.theocracywatch.org/taking_over.htm
        \_ You must not be familiar with the extensive Christian origins
           of this nation.
           \_ They were mostly deists.  The current regime are fundamentalists.
              \_ Patently false.  Stop reading these atheist internet sites, they
                 are bogus.
              \_ Patently false.  Stop reading these atheist internet sites,
                 they are bogus.
                 \_ Patently false. Stop reading these Christian internet
                    sites, they are bogus.
                    \_ I'm not going to bother to get into this.  If one
                       reads their original writings and speeches their
                       Christianity is obvious, unless you are stupid.
                       \_ Most of them, but not all of them. Jefferson
                          was not.
                          \_ Indeed a great number of them, but the separation
                             of church and state was more than an offhand
                             comment to them.  Remember what they were rebelling
                             against: King George and the COE.  Royalty and
                             theocracy.  Two things our current George seems
                             perfectly happy to bring back.  I for one don't
                             want to see revolution in my lifetime.  I'd much
                             rather see the fucker go peacefully in this
                             election. --scotsman
                             p.s. It's good to see you as blissfully ignorant
                             as ever mr. black.
                             \_ I am amused that professed lovers of
                                democracy start muttering about revolution
                                under their breath as soon as an election
                                or 3 doesn't go their way.  Make up your mind
                                is the tyranny of {the majority|electoral
                                college|etc} good or bad?  I don't know what
                                Bush truly wants to do in his heart of hearts
                                (probably party or something) but the office
                                of the POTUS is a moderating kind of chair
                                to sit in.  The bigger the chair, the less
                                important are the psychological particulars of
                                the ass sitting on it.  No one is
                                complaining about Nancy Pelosi and her brand
                                of Bay Area liberal insanity, although she is
                                very influential in the DNC right now.  If you
                                think Bush wants to bring royalty back in the
                                US, you ve gone off the deep end, sorry.
                                I mean this makes LeRouchies sound reasonable.
                                  -- ilyas
                                \_ Ilya, I'm talking about history and vague
                                   worries when I talk about revolution.  Our
                                   democracy is far from healthy.  The tyranny
                                   of the majority is really the tyranny of
                                   less than a plurality of, oh, 30%?  And by
                                   royalty, we've had this discussion before.
                                   It's not direct governmental plutocracy.
                                   It's handing over power, tax refunds, and
                                   a blind eye to institutions and individuals
                                   who could give a shit about the public.  If
                                   that's what the subplurality of 30% really
                                   want, let alone a majority of the public,
                                   then, yes, I worry. --scotsman
                                \_ (a) Saying "all Bush opponents are talking
                                   about revolution" equates to "all
                                   conservatives are right wing religious
                                   nutcake loonies."  (b) POTUS itself may
                                   eclipse individual personalities, but it
                                   _is_ a tremendously powerful office,
                                   especially when combined with a disciplined
                                   and determined crew, as now.  (c) Who
                                   says nobody's complaining about Pelosi?
                                   She's part of the reason voters are being
                                   forced to choose "less worse" instead of
                                   "better" this year.  -John
                                   \_ re: (a) I was talking about Ben in
                                      particular.  re: (c) Maybe people are,
                                      but I haven't heard anything, and
                                      certainly nothing compared to the volume
                                      of low grade bile directed at Bush.
                                        -- ilyas
                                        \_ (a) be more specific, (c) a lot of
                                           SF residents have loads of low
                                           grade bile for her from when she
                                           was a supervisor.  -John
                                \_ BushCo is interested in maintaining power,
                                   moreso than any other Pres. since LBJ.
                                   The more petty and ridiculous tricks are
                                   pulled by both sides, the less moral high
                                   ground there is to go around, and the
                                   more both sides sound wholely corrupt and
                                   powermongering.  That BushCo has players
                                   who excel at the game while the Dems seem
                                   be playing the Washington Generals merely
                                   stokes the flames against the Pres.
                                \_ That's because a whole lot of these
                                   "professed lovers of democracy" are
                                   actually thinking, "I'm smarter than
                                   everyone else.  I should be in charge."
                                   They're fine as long as everyone else
                                   agrees with them, but if some people
                                   think differently, they must be stupid
                                   and wrong and therefore should not
                                   have a vote.
                                   \_ I am, I should, they are.  Well, most
                                      of them, anyway.  -John
                                   \_ No, Mr. Leek.  It's not some elitist
                                      tendency.  It's a compassionate, dare
                                      I say Christian (raised Lutheran over
                                      here), drive in me that actually cares
                                      about the people and the country.  Did
                                      I claim anyone should "not vote"?  I
                                      would love to see election day made a
                                      national holiday so no one would have an
                                      excuse not to.  I would love to have been
                                      required to take civics in high school
                                      or even jr. high.  If our voter turnout
                                      even began to approach that of some other
                                      countries, I think you'd be greatly
                                      dismayed at how out of touch you are.
                                      In the meantime, I'd suggest that rather
                                      than be insulting, you actually put your
                                      arguments forward in good faith.
                                      --scotsman
                                      \_ I actually not sure how to
                                         respond to this mix of oddness.
                                         I agree that people should take
                                         civics in school, along with
                                         economics.  I'm not sure where
                                         you get the idea that I don't
                                         care about the country or the
                                         people.  I'm not even sure what
                                         \_ I didn't say you don't.  Read what
                                            you said.  See how it's directly
                                            insulting.  Read what I said.
                                            Realize I was talking about myself
                                            in defence of charges of a super-
                                            iority conflict. --scotsman
                                         you're saying I'm out of touch
                                         with.  All I'm saying is that the
                                         road to hell is paved with good
                                         intentions.  I think you're
                                         making assumptions about my
                                         political positions that you know
                                         nothing about.  (And what's with
                                         telling me you were raised
                                         Lutheran?  Am I supposed to care?
                                         Did you know Paolo was rasied
                                         Catholic? So what?  He's still
                                         Paolo.)
                 \_ How delightfully low on signal.  Drop trou and produce
                    debunk (and not from some fundie site) or eat crow.
2004/10/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:34251 Activity:very high
10/20   The snobbery of the elite liberals continues:
        http://csua.org/u/9km
        \_ I wonder what kind of ketchup they serve in the White House?
           \_ Maybe W ketchup. Supposedly bush supporters put out their
              own brand of ketchup because "You don't support Kerry, why
              should your ketchup". I mangled that, but it was something
              similar.
        \_ *shrug*  It's not like the left side of the theater has a monopoly
           on elite snobbery.
        \_ It's sounds to me more like Mrs. Heinz-Kerry has never had what
           I would define as "a real job."
           \_ What are you talking about?
              \_ A woman worth $1 billion that she inherited should not
                 be talking about who has or has not had a "real job".
                 \_ Are you saying she does not have a real job?
                    \_ Yes, and never has.
                       \_ Have you done any research into her previous job
                          history?
                          \_ I am sure she worked at Wendy's and did
                             tricks to come up with the last $100 of rent
                             money. She's basically a billionaire
                             philanthropist. She's never had to work.
                             \_ I take that as a no.  Please stop talking
                                out of your ass next time.
                                \_ I think this is particularly ironic,
                                   considering Teresa Heinz later apologized
                                   for not knowing Laura Bush worked as a
                                   librarian and a teacher.
                                   \_ There is no irony.  I'm the same person
                                      who posted that fact at the bottom
                                      of the thread, and the same person
                                      who's been responding to you.
                                      \_ Oddly enough, I'm not "you" nor any
                                         of the other posters on this sub-
                                         thread.
                                         \_ Too bad it doesn't change my point.
                                            \_ I was merely pointing out an
                                               incorrect assumption on your
                                               part.
                                               \_ Like, duh!
                                   \_ Hey, even I knew that, and I don't
                                      pay attention to this kind of stuff
                                      and don't care. -- ilyas
           \_ Not sure what Teresa Heinz's job history may be, but she is
              snobbish and a bitch.  So says my brother, who know the Heinzes
              and roomed with Chris Heinz in college.  I think most people
              will say that the W's make better house guests and dinner
              companions, but I don't know what relevance that has to the
              election.
              \_ Instead of "snobbish and a bitch", how about:  knows what
                 she feels and will tell you honestly about it instead of
                 backstabbing with gossip?
                 \_ I don't imagine that my brother has been backstabbed
                    by her.  I do know that he has been snubbed by her for
                    not being worthy.  Perhaps you've had a different
                    experience with her.  Care to share?
                    \_ No, I do not have any second-hand experiences from
                       a brother to relate.  I do trust these interviews, where
                       her personality leaks out, more than what your brother
                       says, obviously.
                       \_ You'll understand that I trust my brother's personal
                          experiences more than what I can infer from some
                          staged and prepped interviews.
                          \_ Sure, you can believe your brother, since it's
                             your right to believe what you want to believe.
                             \_ I'm glad you approve.  And I'll be happy to
                                extend to you the same privilege of believing
                                whatever you want to believe.
                                \_ It's an inherent right.  No one is extending
                                   anyone anything.  Duh.
                                   \_ As you wish.  I'll go back to watching
                                      interviews to see if I can infer more
                                      about my politicians from them.
                                      \_ Note I did not posit any request to
                                         you for you to say "as you wish".
                                         I would urge you to evalute interviews
                                         on a case by case basis as well,
                                         instead of implying that they're
                                         all less useful than stories from
                                         your older brother.
                                         \_ Let me see...  On one hand, I have
                                            my brother, who roomed with Chris
                                            freshman year, still exchanges
                                            occasional emails with him, and
                                            has met Teresa several times over
                                            the course of a year of living
                                            with her son.  On the other hand,
                                            I can study Teresa under the
                                            artificial condition of a staged
                                            interview, where she was no doubt
                                            on guard to try to present a good
                                            image of herself, and where she
                                            was likely prepped by handlers
                                            on how to answer the interview
                                            questions and on how to conduct
                                            herself.  Tough choice.
                                            \_ I don't believe we are
                                               covering any new ground.
                                               I've said my piece, you've
                                               said yours.
                                               said yours.  If we were on
                                               O'Reilly, this is where he'd
                                               say, "Now we let the viewers
                                               decide".
                                               \_ Tell you what... I'll ask
                                                  Chris if his mom is a snob
                                                  when I see him at my bro's
                                                  wedding next spring.  Would
                                                  that be a definitive enough
                                                  answer for you?  Or will
                                                  you still cling to your
                                                  interview inferences?
                                                  \_ Probably won't help, but
                                                     thanks.  I think what
                                                     could help more are highly
                                                     descriptive stories
                                                     (rather than just the
                                                     concluding label of "snob"
                                                     or "bitch") from which
                                                     people can make their own
                                                     judgments.
                                                     \_ I'll just note that
                                                        it's interesting to
                                                        see how your position
                                                        has shifted over the
                                                        length of this thread.
                                                        \_ Please state in
                                                           one sentence what
                                                           has shifted.
                                                           Please think about
                                                           this sentence
                                                           carefully before
                                                           you post.  Thanks.
                                                           \_ Nope, I can't do
                                                              it in one
                                                              sentence.  Why
                                                              this silly
                                                              requirement?
                    \_ instead of "snubbed by her for not being worthy", how
                       about:  she didn't want to hang out with your brother
                       but wanted to hang out with someone else instead?
                       \_ Oh you were there too!  That must have been a
                          crowded dorm room.
                          \_ Clearly I am suggesting a reasonable alternative
                             to your brother's interpretation of what
                             happened; and clearly everyone understands that
                             your brother was there and I was not; and clearly
                             everyone *should* understand there is weight in
                             both positions.
              \_ Alex Kerry (John's daughter) doesn't like her either.
                 \_ John Kerry married an ice-queen!  He's clearly unfit to be
                    commander in chief!
                    \_ I don't know that the nicest and most friendly people
                       also make the best presidents.  However, attempts to
                       buff up Teresa Heinz's character clearly implies that
                       some people do think so.
                    \_ She's a South African Republican bitch. The fact
                       that she and Kerry have a lot in common
                       (apparently) is scary and worth noting.
                       \_ I thought we had gotten beyond denigrating people for
                          where they came from.
        \_ The conservative spin machine goes into overdrive.  Determining
           there is an insult where there is not:  "Well, you know, I don't
           know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in
           her eye, which is good. But I don't know that she's ever had a real
           job -- I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her
           validation comes from important things, but different things. I'm
           older, and my validation of what I do is a little bit bigger --
           because I'm older, and I've had different experiences."
           \_ Actually it's just annoying because she's stupid.  I never
              thought it was an insult, but I usually figure that you
              should keep your yap shut if you don't know what you're
              talking about.
              \_ But apparently you think it's ok to be president of the
                 United States if you don't know what you're talking about.
                 amazing.
                 \_ Did I say I was a Bush supporter?  You're an idiot.
              \_ "stupid"... from what do you gather this?  "snobbery"...
                 from what do you gather that?  I smell Limbaugher.
                 \_ To state that you don't know anything about someone
                    and then go on to postulate about what kind of jobs
                    they've held in the past is, well, stupid.  The
                    assumptions she makes about said jobs is snobbish.
                    \_ You are really reading into this too much.
                       Bang!
                       You've just been spun by the conservative spin machine.
                       \_ Umm.. the quote is directly above this post.
                          Which part of is has been spun by the
                          "conservative spin machine?"
                          \_ *All* of the quote above.  Taken in context, it
                             is not an attack on Laura Bush.
                             If you don't know what the "conservative spin
                             machine" is, recall "sensitive war on terror"
                             and Dubya having said the same thing.
                             \_ Wow, you have some reading problems don't
                                you.  As I said above, I never thought it
                                was an insult, or an attack, on Laura
                                Bush.  It's just stupid.
                                \_ Nah, I just think THK got used by the
                                   Republican spin machine.  I don't think
                                   what she said was stupid.
                       \_ The AP is a conservative spin machine!  Call out
                          the tin-foil corps!
              \_ What she said makes sense to me.
                 She should realize that Republicans are evil when it comes
                 to taking quotes out of context.
                 It's not stupid not to realize this.
              \_ Some people just seem to have a real skill for pedial-oral
                 insertion.
                 insertion. [ don't change this, make your own joke ]
        \_ And the Bush folks miss the point:
           'Karen Hughes, an adviser to President Bush, criticized Heinz
            Kerry's remarks as "indicative of an unfortunate mind-set that
            seeks to divide women based on who works at home and who works
            outside the home."'
           So even Karen Hughes seems to think that Laura Bush has always been
           a stay-at-home mom.
           \_ Republican - spin - machine.
              I doubt Karen Hughes really thinks that.
              On a note of fairness, Teresa Heinz-Kerry issued a press release
              apologizing for not having known that Laura Bush was a
              teacher and librarian.  I doubt Heinz-Kerry didn't know that.
              Democratic - unspin - machine.
              \_ Which sounds more likely?:
                 THK knew Laura Bush's history and decided to talk smack about
                 it in the face of logic.   -OR-
                 THK was uninformed but talked out her ass anyway
                 \_ I'm putting my money on the latter.  THK is very proud
                    of her record as "opinionated" and "outspoken."  In
                    other words, she proud of her ability to talk out her
                    ***.
2004/10/19-21 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34241 Activity:high Edit_by:auto
10/19   Sorry, I get confused.  LATimes is liberal or conservative?
        Anyway, according to them, the CIA is delaying a 9/11 report that
        points fingers and names names until after the election:
        http://csua.org/u/9k9
        Text of article can be found at:
        http://www.theregular.org/node/209
        \_ LA Slimes is in the same vein as NYT.
           \_ whoo how clever!  yeah they're pretty liberal.
              for your incredibly conservative dose of southern
              california news go read the OC register - danh
        \_ All of LA Times, NY Times, and Washington Post offer good, mostly
           objective reporting.  ABC News and NBC News as well.  CNN tilts
           to whatever the current administration is to maintain "access".
           CBS News screwed up on memo-gate, but they also offer good, mostly
           objective reporting.
           Fox News shows an American flag in the upper-left part of the screen
           to show that they support America, implying that the other stations
           do not, or have a "liberal agenda".
        \_ Hi, I've created a toy web site that will hopefully be a bit of
           insightful: <DEAD>slantcheck.org<DEAD>
           I already bought the domain names, I'm looking for a place
           to host it. If you would like to help please email me.     -kchang
                    \- if you become the number one hit for
                       google(chang,slant) you may be able to make
                       money ... maybe as a p0rn tunneler or something --psb
        \_ Wow, that's amazing.  I didn't know the report was already done.
           I heard the reason for the delay was that it was too big to finish
           before the election.
           Also, the article is an op-ed column; it is not a news piece.
           And here's the news piece, one day later:
           http://csua.org/u/9kr (Yahoo!)
           In it it says the official reason for the delay is ... the report
           is still a draft!
           \_ "Congressional officials said they were told that the CIA
               inspector general's office had completed the report in July"
              Now who do you believe?  I'm waiting for a CIA leak.
2004/10/19-20 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34234 Activity:nil
10/19   Fun quiz as of 5:45PM, match the following headlines with the
        stations. Don't cheat boys and girls!
        1 "Poll: Bush Lead Over Kerry Widens"
        2 "Poll: Bush Hits 50 Percent. Bush Passes Critical Number But
                First-Time voters Could Help Kerry"
        3 "Bush Kerry Deadlocked"
        4 "Bush Holds Narrow Lead In <station>Poll"
        A MSNBC    B Fox    C CBS     D ABC News
        \_ Educated guess: 1 B, 2 D, 3 A
        \_ NBC has em tied among likely voters.
        \_ NBC/WSJ has em tied among likely voters.
2004/10/19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34223 Activity:very high
10/19   http://csua.org/u/9jt - Text of Gore's speech last night.  I dare
        anyone who plans to vote for Bush to read it from start to finish.
        \_ I saw a few minutes of it on the tube.  It was painful.  I felt
           bad for him.  He needs help.  Losing in 2000 broke him in some
           deeply fundamental way.
        \_ This thing is huge.  I recommend reading it from the last page, and
           stopping when you're bored.
           \_ Reading is hard, let's go shopping!
        \_ Why, so I can remember why I didn't vote for Gore 4 years ago?
        \_ I dare anyone who voted for Gore in 2000 to read it from start
           to finish and not think, "We almost elected a tin-foil hat
           guy!"
           \_ I couldn't vote for Gore in 2000.  If you don't think the
              current executive branch is run by a bunch of neocon loons
              I'd like some of what you are smoking.  If you think Bush
              has a clearer view of reality than Gore, then you've been
              shooting up as well.  Please provide examples from the speech
              of "tin-foil hat" thinking.
              \_ Example: The central elements of Bush's political - as
                 opposed to religious - belief system are plain to see:
                 The "public interest" is a dangerous myth according to
                 Bush's ideology - a fiction created by the hated
                 "liberals" who use the notion of "public interest" as an
                 excuse to take away from the wealthy and powerful what
                 they believe is their due. Therefore, government of by
                 and for the people, is bad - except when government can
                 help members of his coalition.
                 \_ This would be tin-hat fodder if not for the Orwellian
                    named Clear Air Act and the Healthy Forests Act.  There is
                    no need for conspiracy theories anymore; it's all out in
                    the open, and the heads of state just don't care if you
                    know it.  Ask Kenneth "Kenny Boy" Lay.
                    \_ Al Gore speaks, Alcoa goes up.  Tin shortage on the
                       rise!
                       \_ Partisan Blinders, Activate!  Form of: An ostritch!
2017/11/18 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/18   

2004/10/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34217 Activity:high
10/18   funny propaganda posters:
        http://homepage.mac.com/leperous/PhotoAlbum1.html
        \_ work-safe?
           \_ Yes.
        \_ Actually, the lame thing about this is that the NSA and DOE are
           still producing lots of these sort of posters.  There are a
           couple in every building here at LLNL, and a lot of them are
           WAY funnier.  (Because they're real.) -jrleek
                \_ where do i get a palm beach retired jewish democrats
                   for buchanan bumper sticker? -  danh
                   \_ huh?
                      \_ obGoogle "butterfly ballot."
           \_ jrleek, I DARE you to print these posters and put them
              around your office/cube till the election is over.
              \_ Why would I do that?  Those posters are retarded.  I dare
                 YOU to put up a big sign on your door that says, "I AM
                 STOOPID" -jrleek
           \_ jrleek, wouldn't your above comment be considered questionable
              and unpatriotic in your work environment?
              \_ Only if you're a dumb liberal with an axe to grind.  No
                 one else cares. -jrleek
          \_ it would be funnier if one of those Up Yours Bush posters
             were posted by a dissent while everyone else ignores it
             because they're so used to seeing them.
2004/10/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/Gay, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34195 Activity:kinda low
10/18   For the guy who claimed that the majority of geeks lean left...
        still waiting for the url backing that up. -- ilyas
        \_ I don't think anyone has specifically surveyed "geeks," ilyas,
           so you're probably not going to get an url from him.  But I believe
           there have been surveys showing that the more educated a person is,
           the more likely they are to be center/left leaning.  Geek doesn't
           necessarily correlate with "more educated," I admit.
           \_ Actually, I heard it's more of a bell shape -- the richest
              and poorest tend to vote DNC, the middle tends to vote RNC.
              Similarly, for education, high school dropouts and grad students
              for DNC, the rest for RNC. -- ilyas
              \_ I thought I said education, not income level, but whatever.
                 \_ Reading comprehension >>> you.a
                 \_ Reading comprehension >>> you
                    \_ I got what he said.  I just don't know why he started
                       talking about income level, because that is not what
                       we were talking about.
              \_ 2000 election
                 No HS degree:  +20% Gore
                 HS degree:      +1% Bush
                 Some college:   +6% Bush
                 College grad:   +6% Bush
                 Post-grad deg:  +8% Gore
                 Just goes to show, a little education makes you smart enough
                 to watch O'Reilly and think you're smarter than those damn
                 tax-you-to-death, government-handout, eternal victim, take
                 no personal initiative / responsibility liberal elite.
           \_ This left-right thing needs a lot more defining.  There are
              anti-abortionists who support gun control and pro-choicers who
              oppose gay marriage.  If you're talking pro-DNC or pro-RNC, I
              think ilyas has answered well above.
        \_ saved by the Jargon File
           http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/politics.html
           I have found much evidence to support the JF's claim that many
           geeks (hackers, whatever) tend to be libertarian leaning. I
           think framing this discusion in terms of right/left is really a
           bad way to look at it right now in our current politcal climate
           where even the repub pres is not really a conservative by
           most definitions.                    - rory
           \_ I ll buy that geeks tend to lean libertarian, because that
              actually matches my (anecdotal) experience fairly closely.
                -- ilyas
           \_ Hey, if someone told me:
              Liberal Democrat        = more freedom, more government
              Conservative Republican = less freedom, less government
              Libertarian             = more freedom, less government
              ... I'd go libertarian every time.  It's not that complicated:
              "Duh, hey, I'm a libertarian, I'm fucking 1337!  Go away tax-and-
              spend liberals, go away nazi pro-lifers."
              The key criticism with libertarianism is that the U.S. is still
              a two-party country, and well, there are a lot of libertarian
              geeks, and who wants to hang out with the nerds?
              \_ If Bush is anything to go by, Conservative Republican =
                 less freedom, more government.
                 \_ exactly my point. Bush is not a conservative Republican
                    by the traditional def.
                    \_ It seems that once the Republicans became the dominant
                       party, after years of playing the underdog, they realized
                       that they didn't hate this government stuff all as much
                       as they thought they did.  Spending is much easier to
                       support when it benefits you directly.
                       \_ its easy to say you want to shrink govt when you
                          disagree w/ the people running it.
              \_ THAT is the "key criticism" of libertarianism?
                 \_ Okay, let's just say "An important criticism".
                    Then you can tell me what the key one is.
                    \_ libertarianism appeals to nerds (esp mathematically
                       minded ones) because it is based on a supposedly
                       objective series of rules and says that, if left to
                       their own, these rules will naturally and justly
                       govern people. The key criticism of it is that these
                       rules are not as natural as people think... they are
                       based on societies and social order, etc. ie, people
                       say, "hands off, let the market regulate"... but
                       the fact is you cant have good markets w/out good
                       gov'ts.                  - rory
                       \_ I wonder sometimes where 'good governments' come
                          from.  Lately, I've been leaning towards 'good
                          culture' as the wellspring of 'good
                          government.' -- ilyas
                          \_ why is that any easier to define?
                             \_ It's not.  But I am not sure good government
                                can spontaneously happen if the culture is
                                not ready for it.  Introducing a representative
                                republic in Dark Ages Europe would have done
                                no good.  To respond to rory, you are thinking
                                of anarcho-capitalism (which I admit I find
                                appealing, I just don't see how it would work).
                                Libertarianism has inherent tensions because
                                it generally dislikes government but
                                acknowledges its necessity (i.e. it's not a
                                'terse' belief system like A-C). -- ilyas
                       \_ gawd, if libertarianism is this complicated, I can
                          understand why it's not popular.  I would much prefer
                          it if it were described just as "more freedom, less
                          government".  Otherwise I'd just settle with
                          calling myself a small-government Democrat or
                          personal-freedom Republican.  (Yeah, silly, but not
                          as bad as objectivist Libertarian.)
                          \_ Can I still have the FDA, fire departments,
                             health inspections of restaurants, product
                             safety commissions, etc., or will I just have
                             to gamble with my life and hope for the best
                             anytime I eat something, buy a new product,
                             buy prescription drugs, or need emergency
                             services?
                             \_ It will be just like ebay ratings! You go with
                                the ones with good feedback. Sure, sometimes
                                someone decides to screw over a few thousand
                                or million people and then move to Turkey, but
                                think of the freedom!
2004/10/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34186 Activity:very high
10/17   A Bush debate bounce?  WTF?  http://www.pollingreport.com
        \_ I call it the Team America: World Police bounce.
         \_ so is it a pro-Bush movie? Trey Parker/Matt Stone pro-Bush?
            \_ I think I read that it's less anti-republican than
               anti-democrat.  But niether Bush nor Kerry appear in the
               film.
            \_ I think both sides got bashed very fairly and accurately.
               The important difference is who can laugh at themselves or not.
            \_ Trey and Matt hate conservatives, but they REALLY hate liberals.
               The movie is pro-Bush.
               \_ Trey and Matt, like Vice magazine, are WAY past their sell-by
                  date.  Nihilism is so 2000.
               \_ Who do they like then?
                  \_ Who cares?  They don't.  They just want to trivialize
                     anyone who genuinely cares about anything (c.f. South Park
                     episode about Mormons).  They are aggressive nihilists.
                     And yes, I guess I just don't "get it."
                  \_ Trey and Matt are libertarian.
                     \_ Trey and Matt are system-buckers.  They like to get
                        a rise, and modern liberals are easy to get a rise
                        out of with a minimum of effort.  It's easy to lampoon
                        the Right, but it's hard to tell if the Right gets it
                        sometimes.
        \_ All your election are belong to Rove.
           \_ All your electronic ballot are delivered to Rove by Diebold.
2004/10/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34178 Activity:very high
10/14   So I watched Outfoxed and thought it was really cool, until
        the last bit of the film when it creditted http://moveon.org. Now
        I know it's just another damned left wingnut propaganda film.
        \_ I heard O'Reilly likes phone sex is this true?
        \_ you are teh gay:w
        \_ So, truth is entirely dependent on where it comes from?
          \_ truth is closer when you have a non-biased party observing
             and reporting. While Foxed is not Fair and Balanced, neither
             is Outfoxed, which is supported by a biased party
             \_ You are an idiot.
                \_ well? are you going to explain why he's an idiot?
                   \_ he disagrees with the correct political thought.  he
                      is an idiot.
                      \_ oh, come on.  anyone who can actually watch
                         that entire documentary, and then just think
                         it's partisan because of something they saw
                         in the credits is living in a fucking cave.
                         the whole thread is probably just a troll
                         by someone who's bored and doesn't care
                         one way or the other, but you are still a moron.
        \_ excellent documentary. It got me thinking about the shows
           they broadcast and how they fit into the executives' agenda.
           Take the show Cops for example. It repeatedly shows you that
           blacks and hispanics are bad drug dealers. Look at their
           kids show. Buffy. The OC. Whitie good. Minorities bad.
           If you have more examples please respond to this thread. ok thx.
           \_ Um.  There is a reason there are a lot of blacks and hispanics
              on Cops.  Media bias, however, ain't it. -- ilyas
              \_ There are more total numbers of white criminals than black
                 and hispanic criminals.
                 \_ In major urban areas - no.
           \_ Yes and if you want to do the same analysis of other stations
              you'll find similar results in regards to both racial profiling
              in TV shows going back decades before Fox existed to today and
              news reporting that fits into the executives agenda.
           \_ Not that I'm defending Fox, but Buffy was on the WB. And what
              about shows like Friends and Will and Grace? Those are supposed
              to take place in NYC, yet there were no non-white major
              characters. As a person-of-color, I find that far more offensive
              than the OC (which is supposed to take place in the white part
              of Orange County) or even Cops.
        \_ there are no unbaised and neutral sources.  all sources,
           all reporting, all documentaries are biased.  the
           intelligent person understands this.
           \_ You are correct insofar as no human being can be completely
              without bias or opinion.  However, it is the purpose of
              journalism to report facts (also known as news).  When all of
              the relevant facts are provided, the general public can make
              informed opinions about the matter.  Calm and objective editing
              is the key.  Fox completely lacks this.  Other news orgs simply
              slip every once in a while.  Cf. the documentary "Control Room,"
              a rather objective look at Al Jazeera's coverage of the sack
              of Baghdad.
        \_ big evil corporation from Rupert Murdock and Sinclair support
           Bush and broadcast anti-Kerry materials. Don't the Democrats
           have friends in mass media?
           \_ Sinclair owns roughly 1/4 of the stations.  The other 3/4 are
              anti-Bush & pro-Kerry.  Watch the nightly news to see.
              \_ You're full of shit. Give some examples of this bias.
2004/10/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34171 Activity:nil
10/16   Super Rich Step Into Political Vacuum
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38722-2004Oct16.html
2004/10/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34165 Activity:nil
10/15   Michael Moore made tons of money from his anti-Bush documentaries.
        How much did he donate to the Kerry campaign?
2004/10/15-18 [ERROR, uid:34161, category id '18005#9.15375' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34161 Activity:very high
10/14   Michael Dell and Jim Barksdale endorse Bush. I hope their
        companies die die die. Buy a Dell computer, support the Bush Dynasty.
        http://www.fortune.com/fortune/fastforward/0,15704,724369,00.html
        \_ What did you expect? Dell Computer is based in Texas.
        \_ A big business endorsing a Republican?  Shocking!!  My last computer
           was a new Dell, and my next one will be one too.
        \_ Are you going to swear to kill them and their families now?
           \_ no, I'm not a gun/NRA fanatical Republican, like the ones that
              planned, masterminded, and proceeded w/ the assassination of JFK
              \_ Cool, you not only have nothing to say, you proceed to tin
                 foil the whole place.  I love it.  Carry on, Comrade!
              \_ nice threadjack, but maybe i should reserve this comment for
                 later
              \_ jfk was killed in retaliation for bay of pigs. Besides,
                 jfk should never have been president anyway, his dad
                 cheated and had dead people vote which prevented the
                 rightfully elected man, Nixon, from taking office.
                 \_ How's that tin foil suit treating you?
                        \_ Its a joke. Kids these days.
                    \_ The bay of pigs part is tin foil.  The latter part is
                       accepted by a great many as true and has a high
                       probability of being true.  Careful where you spray
                       the tinfoil.  Some things are actually true or are
                       at least a reasonably thing to think even if you
                       personally disagree or don't want them to be.
                       \_ Regardless of its truth (or whether Kennedy really
                          would not have won without Illinois), I find it
                          amusing that this is STANDARD freeper talking point
                          that is supposed nullify massive Republican vote
                          shenanigans.
                          \_ Dems do it every year where they control the
                             polls.  Reps do it where they control the polls.
                             To say one side or the other is always angelic
                             and the other side is always satanic is simply
                             naive, childish and koolaid drinkerish.
                             \_ I don't give a shit which side is defrauding
                                voters.  ANYONE caught doing this, REGARDLESS
                                of party affiliation should be spending time
                                in prison, with their patron organization
                                getting the living shit sued out of it.  Making
                                this into a partisan issue EITHER WAY rather
                                misses the point.
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34152 Activity:very high
10/15   Most interesting "Doonesbury discovers URLs" yet:
        http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm
        (Source URL for Dubya's hometown paper endorsing Kerry)
        \_ Seriously, stop posting this crap. If you continue to
           do this I'll change your links to porn sites.
           \_ I find it kind of interesting.  It's not blatantly offensive and
              could lead to a nice little flamewar so why should you censor it?
              -!op
        \_ Fascinating piece on the responses the paper has received on this:
           http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial40.htm
           \_ We are on the road to civil war.  If Bush wins this election,
              I am buying an AK-47 and training in its use, and moving to
              a  low population-density state in anticipation of the coming
              apocalypse.
           \_ If you actually read all the letters they got, they ran at
              least 4:1 in support.
                \_ That's not fair! People who support Bush are much, much
                   less likely to possess the ability to write a letter.
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34150 Activity:nil
10/15   http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/naes/index.htm
        Strong support for Dubya and dislike of Kerry on this survey of
        servicemen and women and their families.  Note the strength of support
        when the breakdown is given for the soldiers only (not including
        family members).
        \_ I applaud the strenght and resolve our armed forces have in
           implementing free market reforms in Iraq.  Do they realize
           Paul Bremer thinks implementing a flat tax and reduction of
           tariffs are his main accomplishments in Iraq?  - danh
        \_ Military personnel in a non-draft military tend to be Republican.
           They also tend to favor strong military action over diplomatic
           solutions and sanctions.  Cf. military personnel support for
           Reagan over Carter.  On the other hand, would someone please explain
           to me how a survey of 655 service personnel accurately reflects
           trends in a military that now has over 200 times that number on
           duty in Iraq?
           \_ If your complaint is that they also need a survey for boots
              on the ground folks in Iraq, then it's warranted.  ... but, I
              don't see military higher-ups authorizing pansy election surveys
              while they're trying to fix Iraq.
              \_ I'm sorry, I just don't get the methodology that says that
                 the opinions of 655 people translates into an accurate picture
                 of all military personnel.  How does this work?
                 \_ Like any other poll, it's basic statistics.  You may wish
                    to consult the concepts of "sampling" and "margin of
                    error."  This is how any poll works.  That said, selecting
                    a representative sample is very difficult, and lots of
                    polling organizations get it wrong - even good ones.
                    c.f. Gallup's accuracy issues of late.
                    \_ Right, so I read up on Annenberg's methodology and the
                       basic stats page below.  My question then is how
                       accurately this reflects the views of the boots on the
                       ground, whether the same results hold true for
                       reservists currently on duty, and what questions were
                       asked, since the specific wording of the questions
                       could influence the results.  Kudos to the motd for
                       helping me to get a grip on this.
                       \_ Note your points were already brought up ...
                          three replies before your post.
           \_ How do polls of non-military citizens of 600-1200 meaningfully
              represent *millions* of people in a state if you're unwilling
              to allow the same 600+ to represent ~130k?
              \_ Sorry, not trying to be a troll, but genuinely curious. How
                 does this actually work?
                 \_ You may find this link helpful.  And oh yeah, obGoogle.
                    http://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c040607a.asp
                    \_ thank you!
        \_ Is this the part where we're supposed to call them stupid and
           uneducated and braindwashed?
           \_ This is the part where we talk about yermom.
2004/10/15-16 [ERROR, uid:34149, category id '18005#6.81' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34149 Activity:nil 50%like:30258
10/15   Interesting poll analysis. Why the same poll can give you
        different numbers, depending on how you choose to look at it:
        http://www.newspolls.org/story.php?story_id=33
2004/10/15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34144 Activity:nil
10/15   Richard Cohen of Washington Post gives GW Bush up for dead in
        campaign for President
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34164-2004Oct14.html
        \_ Read section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
           \_ Freeper boy!  When'd they teach you about that constitution
              thang?  Wow!  Clever clever.  -John
2004/10/14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34136 Activity:nil
10/14   Robert A. George, Real Conservative, on why he is not voting for Bush:
        http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi%3D20041025%26s%3Dgeorge102504a
        (registration required, try BugMeNot)
2004/10/14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34129 Activity:very high
10/14   Did anyone catch Bush saying "You know, it's pointless/unreliable/
        whatever to quote outside... oh, never mind. Let me quote blablabla".
        That was so funny. His notes have to be prepared by someone else.

[contentless wind removed]
        \_ BUSH: In all due respect, I'm not so sure it's credible to quote
           leading news organizations about -- oh, never mind. Anyway, let me
           quote the Lewin report.  [http://csua.org/u/9he]
           \_ They repeated my claims that Saddam had WMD, so you can see how
              unreliable the mainstream press is.
                \_ i do find it amusing that bush keeps critisizing kerry
                   for believing his iraq lies
                   \_ He believed me, now he doesn't.  He's a flip-flopper.
                      We need a president who has the courage to believe his
                      own lies in the face of overwhelming evidence.
                      \_ Thank you! I couldn't have said it better myself!
              \_ They were not lies.  Every Senator, Congressman, President
                 Clinton, his staff, Dems, Reps, everyone, repeated the
                 exact accusations at one time or another.  That you have
                 a selective memory on this issue indicates self-delusion.
                 \_ Wow, you know what everyone in the world said. You must
                    have a super big brain. Funny, I remember posting in
                    the motd that SH probably did not have any WMD. My
                    memory must be faulty. As for the self-delusional
                    charge, please look up the psychological term
                    "projection." Here is what Barbara Lee really had
                    to say about SH and WMD:
                    http://www.counterpunch.org/lee0930.html
                    I defy you to find one quote where she claimed that
                    he had them.
        \_ Yes, I laughed out loud.  "not so sure it's credible to quote
           leading news organizations about -- oh, never mind".

[contentless wind removed]
\_ i'm sorry, but 'wc -l /etc/motd.public' still shows more than 0
   \_ Yah, sorry -- it tends to grow and repopulate at a rate which is hard
      to keep up with.
2004/10/14 [Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34120 Activity:very high
10/14   Summary: Private corporations + interest in outcome +
        broadcast in public medium = conflict of interest.
        My prediction for news coverage-- a total repeat of 2000,
        Fox will again declare Bush as the winner many hours before
        the election's officially over. "We report, you comply."
        \_ Hopefully they'll do it early enough that more Repubs won't vote.
        \_ I sent my professor the above and he said "In Europe we
           learn this in primary school :-).  [Granted, my two main
           teachers were communists.]"
            \_ Media here don't make any claims to being objective.  It can
               get irritating, but hey, there are plenty of reasonably
               balanced sources of information to choose from.  -John
               \_ I don't mind the bias here but I wish the media would
                  stop pretending to be objective when they're not.  I'm
                  ok with yellow rag journalism.  They should just be honest
                  that they aren't objective and let the readers decide.
                  \_ Well, even when they are pretty direct about having a
                     political agenda/bias (or rather, not giving a rat's ass
                     about trying to appear objective) the ultra holier-than-
                     thou attitude of a lot of Euro papers and TV news can be
                     pretty abrasive after a while.  -John
           Earth to ilyas the communist born but turned to ultra left
           wing nut, what do you have to say about the original
           statement on conflict of interest, and what do you have to
           say about my professor's comment?                    -op
           \_ [ actually I changed my mind.  I won't even dignify this
              phrasing with a reply. -- ilyas ]
              \_ so, you're as suprised as the rest of us to see yourself
                 called an "ultra-left wingnut?"  who knew?
                 \_ Earth to poster: read the thread again from the beginning.
        \_ Wow, you've figured out that all media outlets are biased in one
           way or another.  Congrats.
                \_ you're right.  the difference is i think MOST media
                   outlets try to be balanced and fair.  foxnews and co.
                   don't give a fuck.
                   \_ A bias you share is invisible.  Conservatives tend to
                      find a lot of liberal publications (time.com is a good
                      example) pretty grating, but I bet you don't notice,
                      since it all seems reasonable to you. -- ilyas
                      \_ I think the bias in several popular mainstream
                         media outlets, like drudge, fox, wsj opinion
                         page, those fucks at the media research center,
                         is pretty NON invisible and far greater than
                         any secret jewish conspiracy at the nytimes.
                      find a lot of liberal publications (time.com is a good
                      example) pretty grating, but I bet you don't notice,
                      since it all seems reasonable to you. -- ilyas
                         \_ Look, I don't want to argue this again.
                            I ll just paste something laughable from
                            Reuters next time it comes up.  What's your
                            response to the LA times "we ll dig dirt on
                            Arnie but not Davis" thing? -- ilyas
                      \_ And liberals tend to find a lot of conservative
                         publications (time.com is a good example) pretty
                         grating.
                         \_ I think Time is pretty mainstream but is definitely
                            'small-c' conservative in that it doesn't like to
                            rock the boat very much.
                            \_ I also agree that Time is mainstream, siding
                               with the current administration a little,
                               Democrat or Republican.
                               Democrat or Republican.  CNN is like this too,
                               but one increment more.
                               I also find Krauthammer's essays in Time pretty
                               damn stupid, but then again I think the same
                               thing about Safire.
                               \-if you are writing in the motd, i assume you
                                 have an SAT above 1000. why are you reading
                                 TIME? krauthammer is a human-cockroach cross
                                 breed.
2004/10/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34111 Activity:very high
10/13   As of 10/13, 8:45PM, Kerry seems to be leading the polls
        with the exception of http://freerepublic.com, a republican dominant
        troll site with a lot of Bush fanatics (Kerry, Bush):
        http://cbsnews.com     84.79%
        http://cnn.com         (no longer available for some reason)
        http://foxnews.com     63%, 36%
        http://latimes.com     96.7%
        http://msnbc.com       74%, 26%
        http://freerepublic.com        2%, 72% (republican site)
        \_ You need to be registered to vote on http://freerepublic.com.
           Frankly, I'm too scared to register.
        \_ As I repeat for the third time, "thanks" goes to the DNC e-mail
           spam.  If you're on the e-mail list, it tells you go go vote online
           among other things.
           spam.  If you're on the e-mail list, it tells you to go vote online
           among other things.  After the embarrassment that was the first
           debate, Democrats got really enthusiastic about online voting.
           \_ Same thing happens on the RNC email list.
        \_ Calling freerepublic a "republican site" is a little misleading.
           It's a site for wingnuts like the guy who in an earlier motd post
           referred to the republicans as being too socialist.
           \_ Only in Bay Area does espousing the political beliefs of the
              Founders earn classification as a "wingnut".
              \_ Only in your diseased mind does freeper frothing reflect
                 the political beliefs of the Founders.
                 \_ You know, I find it amazing how frequently freerepublic
                    shows up as a dead horse to be kicked on the motd.  Truly,
                    have you no better things to do than kick them over and
                    over again to make yourself feel better?  I don't kick
                    Michael Moore, or Rush Limbaugh I just ignore them.
                    On an unrelated note, I love how when meyers et al bitch and
                    moan about how the republican congress is protectionist,
                    and spendy, and passing pork bills, that's considered
                    legidimate criticism.  While at the same time
                    if some freeper calls them socialist (they are probably
                    complaining about the same things) he is a wingnut.
                    You people are amazing. -- ilyas
                    \- does anybody remember who used to keep saying
                       "the pentagon (procurement) is the last bastion of
                       stalinism?" --psb
2004/10/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34107 Activity:high
10/13   When is the debate?
        \_ NOW, MORON
        \_ GWB is a lot more calm, composed, and articulate
           than ever before. I'm very very impressed.
           Kerry-- waaaay too much negativity. It's looking
           ugly...
           \_ How 'bout "waaay too much reality"..
                \_ Freedom is on the march, assholes!!!!!!!!!!!
                   \_ MARS, BITCHES!!!
        \_ a very well scripted debate, with a lot of cooperation between
           Bob the moderator and GWB. I wonder what's in it for Bob.
        \_ sorry but this debate is unfair. It's so obvious that the
           moderator is on the Republican side.
2004/10/13 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34103 Activity:nil
10/13   Long post on What Bush Admin Has Done moved to
        /csua/tmp/whatbushhasdone for the curious.  I understand what you're
        saying, and I think it's important.  I don't think it needs to crowd
        an already overflowing motd.
2004/10/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34099 Activity:high
10/12   Given that Bush is so inarticulate and stupid, how in the
        world did Al Gore lose 4 years ago?
        \_ the media decided to leave the "GORE SIGH" on endless
           repeat. - danh
        \_ because he's very "likeable" and "personable" in person. or
           so they say.
        \_ Gore isn't as uber as Kerry.  People thought you could have a dumb
           leader at the top and talented lieutenants running the show.
           With small government, people thought this was possible.
           How much brains does it take to cut taxes and ignore the deficit?
           By the way, Gore won the popular vote by over 500,000 votes.
           \_ My midwestern aunt and uncle had this exact view.  They told me
              a story about Gore making a speech to a local union in which
              he mentioned his mother singing him a particular union song to
              him in his cradle, and the song wasn't actually penned until the
              70s (or thereabouts).  They thought Gore was untrustworthy, and
              Bush was stupid but "the president can't make any bad decisions,
              he just has to be a good man".
                \_ all right did your midwestern relatives actually
                   SEE AND HEAR gore saying this?  or are they repeating
                   what they heard from the media?  gore used to joke
                   that the lady who was a DNC delegate 13 times (she's 88)
                   used to sing him to sleep with the union label as
                   a lullaby.  it's obviously a JOKE, who would seriously
                   sing that song as a lullaby to a baby?  i don't know
                   why the media never got it.  i think gore never
                   adequately explained his joke because it seems too
                   retarded to have to explain humor to living breathing
                   human beings.  that's why i really doubt your relatives
                   heard gore say those exact words, you can dig up tapes
                   of Gore speaking to teamsters, he tells the joke,
                   they all laugh, because he is just joking about his
                   deep democractic union roots, he's not being serious.
                   oreilly joked about being totally high on the jon
                   stewart show last night, when are you going to report
                   him to the ATF? - danh
                   \_ I believe they told me it the info came from a friend.
                      I should also note that I was a Dean guy before
                      supporting Kerry, and that this aunt and uncle are
                      perhaps the nicest, smartest, and wittiest relatives
                      I have.  I'm 25 and they're still sending me bday cards,
                      and I'm going to thank them for it in a letter that
                      probably includes the post above about the last 4 years
                      of Bush.
              \_ I hope voters find a solid, noble core in Kerry, like
                 what's described in the Washington Post article on him
                 today.  Gore had all the best intentions, but you can't
                 help but wonder if there was something to the latent Big
                 Mac attack he developed after he lost the election.
                 \_ God, this is such rotten revisionism.  Gore had a solid,
                    noble core, and the GOP repetition campaign ("He said
                    he invented the Internet!" "He says they based Love
                    Story on him and Tipper!"  "He's not honest!") and his
                    own advisers ("Press the attack!"  "Beat up on Bush!")
                    killed the campaign.  So the man ate a few burgers and
                    grew a beard after being outplayed by loudmouths and
                    anti-intellectuals.  What's more human than that?
                    You want a candidate who was brilliant but an awful
                    people person, look no further than Bill Bradley.
                    \_ By the measure of 9/11, IMO Gore would have done an
                       excellent job had Osama struck on his watch.  I'm just
                       trying to describe some intangible that led Dubya
                       voters to vote for Dubya instead of Gore.
        \_ Because Gore didn't just beat Bush in the debate, he beat him up.
           Americans hate bullies.  That's why it looks so bad when Bush cuts
           off the moderators.
        \_ Gore was stiff and boring and unlikeable. Kerry, while a bit of
           a blue blood, is much more personable. -Nader voter in 2000
2004/10/13 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34094 Activity:very high
10/13   Does the president get "patted down" or have to walk through a
        metal detector anywhere he goes here in America?
        \_ That's no sock in the President's flight suit!
        \_ "What do you think?" because that's a really dumb question.  What,
           he's going to carry a bomb on an airplane and blow himself up?  They
           need to protect Dick Cheney from him?  Can you think of a single
           scenario in which he would need to be patted down?
           \_ Actually, Bush needs to be protected from Cheney, as do we all:
              http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4041
           \_ This argument is just plain stupid. By this reasoning, then
              we shouldn't pat anyone down at the airport.
              \_ Are you really this fuck-stupid?
                \_ He's not, but you are apparently.
                   \_ Please.  He's extrapolating a conclusion based on the
                      absurdly false premise that the office of the president
                      is somehow logically equivalent to everyone else.  This
                      is categorically untrue, and your inability to see this
                      only confirms my first opinion: that you're fuck-stupid.
                   \_ actually you are.
                      \_ no... YOU are
                         \_ wdyha?
                            \_ wdYha???
                                \_ ED!
                                   \_ BUD DAY!
           \_ You're dumb.
              \_ Am I?  OK, give me one good reason to pat down the president.
                 \_ If it's because you/others believe he's more moral than us
                    or because he more than anyone should know not to break a
                    law, that's nonsense because neither he (nor any other
                    person) is. if it's because he's constantly surrounded by
                    secret service officers, then fine, that makes more sense.
                 \_ Dude.  Seriously.  1) he's a republican.  2) he's texan.
                 \_ He loses the election and wants to take congress with him,
                    are you really this stupid?
                    \_ Now _that's_ a Ludlum premise if I've ever heard one:
                       "Silence gripped the Senate as the ousted President
                        lifted the ticking device above his head. 'My God!'
                        someone suddenly cried, 'the President has a bomb!'"
        \_ Why doesn't everyone stop name-calling and just attach explanations
           with their responses. Are we in 3rd-grade still?
           \_ dood UR teh gay
        \_ Excellent question to ask. If he gets
           special treatments, then maybe a terrorist could hire a Bush
           double, have him board airforce one, then have him hijack
           the plane to crash into the Bush mansion.
           \_ How do we know he hasn't already been replaced by a double?
                \_ Because a double would have a noticeable bulge on his
                   back where the battery pack goes.
2004/10/13 [ERROR, uid:34089, category id '18005#5.98625' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34089 Activity:nil
10/13   Checking the Facts [for tonight's debate] in Advance:
        Paul Krugman    http://csua.org/u/9g5
2004/10/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34083 Activity:nil
10/12   Garry Trudeau puts up another long, broken link.  Someone needs to
        introduce this guy to the concept of a URL shortener. Here's the link
        from today:
        http://csua.org/u/9g3
        \_ seems he is struggling to realize he might rather have a blog
           than a comic strip
2004/10/13 [ERROR, uid:34077, category id '18005#7.78125' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34077 Activity:nil
10/12   Democrats spending ~2X the money than Republicans on the
        election. Something's wrong:
        http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/12/news/economy/election_ads
        \_ What happens to campaign funds that they don't spend?
           \_ It goes to Bud Day.
              \_ This theme is incredibly lame, but I can't stop laughing.
2004/10/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:34076 Activity:nil
10/12   Bud Day and Senator Edwards both like lawsuits:
        http://www.classact-lawsuit.com/index.htm
2004/10/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34067 Activity:high
10/12   Bud Day's biography.  http://csua.org/u/9fv
        \_ GW Bush's biography.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush
           \_ I don't think anyone can argue that W was a war hero of any
              stripe.  I also don't think anyone can argue that Bud Day was
              anything but heroic.  I hope that we will think on Day's
              service to his country before we choose to deride him.
              \_ He's a great soldier.  That doesn't make him any more
                 more qualified to talk politics though.
                 \_ Argue against his position, then, but respect the man.
                    It's uncalled for and childish to play silly games like
                    changing his name to "Bad Day".  He had a bad day when
                    he was captured by the Vietcons.  He had a bad 6 years
                    when he was a POW.  I wonder what was the worst day ever
                    suffered by Mr. "Bad Day".
                    \_ It's uncalled for and childish to keep deleting
                       other people's posts and keeping yours.  If you
                       can't learn to respect other people's posts,
                       stop whining when other people mess with yours.
                    \_ Being a hero is not something to be mocked for, but it
                       doesn't grant you immunity from being mocked for other
                       reasons.
                       \_ I guess we disagree then.  I don't mock those whom
                          I respect, no matter how vehemently we may disagree.
                          I would think that Bud Day is worthy of great
                          respect.  He has earned that privilege.
                    \_ Just going out on a limb here, but I don't think that
                       Mr. "Bad Day" is making fun of Bud Day.  I think he's
                       making fun of the op.
                       \_ Who knows what the intentions of Mr. "Bad Day" were?
                          Only the man himself.  However, there are ways to
                          make fun of the op without at the same time
                          belittling Bud Day.  Deriding Bud Day and letting
                          that pass unchallenged diminishes all of us.
                          \_ did you go to boarding school in Connecticut?
                          \_ Yeesh, what a pompous windbag.
                             \_ And you wonder why veterans tend to vote
                                Republican?
                                \_ No, I don't -- it has nothing to do
                                   with this discussion.
                                   \_ No, you wouldn't think so.  That's why
                                      veterans vote Republican.
                                      \_ No, actually, it's probably not. No
                                         cookie for you!
                                \_ Bud Day isn't a pompous windbag.  pp is.
                                   Your inability to distinguish between the
                                   two is part of what makes you a pompous
                                   windbag.
        \_ The man's a hero and former POW.  Many heroes and POWs thought
           the antiwar movement was a betrayal of the troops.  Many heroes
           and former POWs also joined the antiwar movement.  The real
           villains in all of this were the ones who stood silent.
        \_ So which of his actions were worthy of the MOH? He survived a
           bunch of torture and wounds. I've read stories on some site about
           WWII citations that sounded far more incredible than this. Other
           than undertaking an escape from certain torture/possible death,
           the dangers are not of his own choice. It's like the difference
           between a guy escaping a burning building versus a guy running
           inside to rescue somebody. In any case his arguments seem one-
           sided and unconvincing.
           \_ Don't go there.  Questioning how much someone suffered/risked to
              earn their medals is unseemly.  How much have you bled for your
              country?
              \_ Oh, I see.  So its okay to question Kerry's medals, but not
                 this guy's medals.  Seems logical.
                 \_ I'm a Kerry contributer. -pp
                 \- I think it is reasonable to trade off between "character
                    issues" and policy preference when it comes to a political
                    candidate. e.g. it seems reasonable to hold Clinton's
                    infidelity against him, but not fair to pin Vince Foster's
                    suicide on him. I can reasonably see a veteran not being
                    able to forgive Kerry for his "betrayal" after he returned
                    from Vietnam. I personally think this is more than offset
                    by Bush's avoiding service, his avoiding responsibility
                    for stuff like Abu Graib, his disregard for frankness and
                    the truth, but then again I am not a verteran who may feel
                    the betrayal far more viscerally than I would. However,
                    while his post-service conduct may be a fair issue, the
                    swiftboat stuff is just a sleazy smear. --psb
2004/10/12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34057 Activity:nil
10/12   How much do you want to bet that the CIA has one more bullet
        left in its belt to go against Bush? Valerie Plame???
        http://csua.org/u/9fi
        \_ It's difficult for me to say whether there is a vendetta like the
           article says, there is a genuine urge to publish accurate
           intelligence briefs that can't be spun by Dubya, or some
           combination of this
2004/10/12 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34053 Activity:insanely high
10/12   Heh, Teresa Heintz pays 15% in taxes.  Hehehe.  Where's the outrage?
                       \_ Heinz
        \_ Outrage at the Republican-written tax system?  There's plenty.
        \_ Our tax system favors the uber-rich.  She's uber-rich.  So is
           John Kerry.  So are Bush and Cheney, although not quite to the
           same degree.  They're all rich fucking bastards and getting more
           rich by the minute.  This election is all about "pick your favorite
           rich bastard."  I'll take the one that seems like he can actually
           think coherently, thanks.
           \_ also, Teresa Heintz is the *recipient* of the outrageous Bush
              tax cuts.  Bush is the source.  He'd be a bastard even if he
              paid his fair share.
              \_ Heinz and Kerry put their money into tax shelters.  So raising
                 their marginal rate won't help anything.  Kerry's whining is
                 nothing more than class warfare.
                 \_ Whining is not equal to warfare. Except to an idiot
                    libertarian serial overexaggerator.
           \_ Bush has ~$10M.  Kerry/Heinz have ~$1000M.  Two orders of
              magnitude make quite a difference.
              \_ So the rich are EVIIIIIIILLLL if you disagree with them?
                 \_ I don't see any problem with people being rich.  Just
                    pointing out that Heinz/Kerry are two orders of magnitude
                    more rich than Bush.  Saying they're all the same is
                    ridiculous.
                    \_ You have no idea how rich bush actually is..
           \_ You don't *have* to vote for either of them. Vote for psb!
        \_ That's why there's a need to remove the tax break for rich!
           \_ No.  We should all be paying no more than Mrs. Heinz.
                \_ Her 17% is more than you make in your lifetime!
        \_ Haven't you noticed?  The Dem motto is "High taxes for everyone!
           (but me!)"  Also See "Kennedy"
        \_ Nader in 2004!  The only candidate with an established history of
           being *for* the common man and working hard *against* large
           corporations!  -Nader'04
           \_ To quote James Carville, I wouldn't piss down Nader's neck if his
                             \_ AKA Gollum.
                                \_ Huh?
                                   \_ Carville looks like he was beaten with
                                      the ugly stick.
                                      \_ That's rich coming from a FAT SYSADMIN!
                                         \_ You have no idea who posted this.
                                            \_ Doesn't matter.  FAT SYSADMINS
                                               are the STANDARD!
              chest was on fire.
           \_ Not to meantion against the common mans' jobs at said large
              corporations!
        \_ 8 out of 10 richest Congressmen are democrats.  What a surprise.
           The party of the little people indeed.
           \_ Your wealth does not make you for or against a particular class,
              your positions do.  Remind me again which party is in favor of
              taxing dividend income, the Head Start program, socialized
              medicine, and raising the minimum wage.
              \_ However, it is easier to generous with your wealth when you
                 already have so much of it.  Given great wealth, I would
                 hope that most of us would be decent enough to want to give
                 back to society, through either private donation or greater
                 taxation.  The problem is that most of us aren't blessed
                 with great wealth, and those incremental dollars that may
                 not mean much to a Kennedy or a Pelosi might be more
                 meaningful to us.
           \_ sourceP
              \_ #t
              \_ Not the previous poster, and from a highly unreliable
                 source, but http://vikingphoenix.com/public/docs/50rich.txt .
                 7 of top 10 richest member of congress are Democrats, and
                 I am too lazy to filter for just house members.
                 \_ And Kerry's money is actually his wife's as per their
                    prenup. So, it's actually 6-4.
                    \_ I think it's silly to argue over which party have more
                       wealthy members in the Congress.  However, I am a fan
                       of fairness and honesty.  If you use the above-posted
                       list, and you drop Kerry from the number 1 spot, then
                       you end up with 3 tied for the 10th spot, 1 R and 2 D's.
                       So the tally would be 8D-4R.  I suppose that's still
                       better than 7D-3R.
2004/10/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34044 Activity:high
10/12   Anyone have an opinion on Austin Texas?  Preferably someone that
        has actually been there, and not "Bush and Texas suck!".
        \_ My older brother got his laptop stolen out of his rental car there
           while he was eating lunch.
           \_ He left his laptop sitting open on a seat with a sign that said
              "Steal me, my owner is stupid".  Austin sucks!
              \_ Actually it was in his trunk.
                 \_ Shit happens everywhere. BTW, I think the other day you
                    have mentioned this happened in San Antonio.
                    \_ Just reporting a data point.  Chill.
        \_ It's not a bad city. I drove through it and spent 3 days there.
           Austin would be the only city that I'd consider living in, in TX,
           and the biggest reason I wouldn't want to live there is that
           it's land-locked.
           \_ seconded.  it's the only livable place in texas for several
              reasons.  the weather is less hellish than typical texas weather,
              and the culture is not so monolithically texan.  The UT area
              of austin looks amazingly like berkeley.
              \_ I had a gf out there.  The city has a lot of very nice lakes,
                 so if you just need water, its very nice.  I would have
                 considered moving out there.
        \_ I have many, many coworkers who went to UT Austin. They all
           liked it a lot. Most did say it was the only place in Texas
           they would live. The majority went there for grad school and
           were not originally from Texas. Only one of them was from CA,
           though. I feel Californians have higher standards. Still, the
           guy from CA ended up settling there. Most of my coworkers have
           since left Austin, but talk highly of it. Me, I've never been.
        \_ Flew out of Austin yesterday (first visit since junior high).
           I was pretty impressed. Like other posters noted, it's by far the
           best place to live in Texas. Big tech industry, great university
           as the core of the town, really educated population, big live music
           scene. Probably as liberal as you'll get in Texas. It's probably
           the closest you'll get to Silicon Valley culture outside of
           Silicon Valley (although I don't think it's a whole lot like
           Berkeley, maybe more like Rockridge).
        \_ I once came up with the big 4 reasons to relocate to TX, when I
           considered it several years ago.  My 4 reasons were: 1. no state
           income tax, 2. concealed carry, 3. open containers in cars, and
           4. women with big hair.  Texas might have sissified in recent
           years, so I don't know how many of the reasons may still apply.
2004/10/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34036 Activity:high
10/11   Congress just passed a bill to hand out $14.5 billion to people
        who *choose* to live in the path of hurricanes.  ilyas, and other
        motd libertarians or other social regressives, how do you feel
        about being "forced at gunpoint" to pay for these handouts? -meyers
        \_ What about the $120 billion for people who "choose" to live on
           top of our oil?  Where's the outrage?
           \_ Consider it evening the scorecard for Kosovo.  At least this
              time we are fighting for the right side (against militant
              Islam as opposed to for it).
        \_ California has earthquakes, Washington state has volcano, other
           states has tornados, etc.  Heck, we should all move to a
           state without any natural disasters.
           \_ what, and create a state with 'man-made' disasters?
              \_ NYC has terrorist attacks.
           \_ That volcano ain't nothin'. We should create some more disasters
              on the west coast to keep things fair with the fed relief funds.
              \_ CA already tossed it out of office.
        \_ You're all missing the point.  We hear whining about giving
           handouts to people who *choose* to be poor, but now we have
           a republican congress just giving federal money away.  Where's
           the outrage about not letting the free market fix this problem??
           There are numerous insurance companies which could be making
           big money here (insuring against disasters, not in paying out
           claims, of course) -meyers
           \_ I disagree with giving fed disaster relief, and pretty much
              all subsidies of any kind.  Calling this a 'republican congress'
              because RNC has a slim majority is more than a little misleading.
              I am neither republican nor a conservative.  I try my best to
              game a system where the two major parties are basically centrist,
              and I don't like either.  I do tend to dislike the modern DNC
              more than the modern RNC, but that's DNC's fault.  On a
              slightly unrelated note, I am glad you found something else
              to talk about.  Thoughtful liberals and thoughtful libertarians
              tend to agree on social ills (it's 'bad' that people able and
              willing to work don't get enough to eat, etc).  However, liberals
              are more impatient, they are willing to prod society in what they
              feel is 'the right direction' with a bayonet, if necessary.
              Libertarians are deeply suspicious of bayonets (and certainties
              of what 'the right direction' is), so much so that they are
              willing to put up with a lot of social ills to avoid said
              bayonets. -- ilyas
              \_ unless said bayonets are used by the government to murder
                 innocent people who are wrongly conviced of a crime.
                 apparently that doesn't even count as a social ill
                 for libertarians.
                 \_ I don't see how the old legal dilemma about the proportion
                    of innocents hanging in the gallows vs the guilty prowling
                    the streets (and where I happen to think a reasonable
                    solution lies) have to do with libertarians.  Everyone has
                    to solve this problem.  Libertarian opinions on proper
                    solutions differ, just as liberal and conservative opinions.
                    You are a troll.  Come back with an actual point. -- ilyas
           \_ Which is.. exactly what they do in florida.  insurance companies
              and hurricanes have a long colorful history.
           \_ Yes it's rediculous, there is plenty of discord on
              conservative sites.
              \_ You just overwrote someone.  I know there are insurance
                 companies in Florida.  Where's the outrage about govt
                 messing with their market?? -meyers
                 \_ The same place the rest of your black 'n' white red
                    herring strawman went.  In the trash.  Try again with
                    new bait.
        \_ 14.5B for disaster recovery is nothing compared to the shameless
           giveaways to the special interests, such as the $160B farm bill
           signed in 2002. Even The Economist commented: "The real explanation
           for America's farm idiocy is electoral". Divide that by the number
           of tax payers. This is on average how much is being taken from you
           for farm subsidies.
           \_ As if I wouldn't pay for it at the super market or every time I
              eat out.  I prefer paying that way but since aggressive income
              tax schedules are sucking my income in half I'm ok if some of
              that money goes to making my life better in some other way.
        \_ It is plain and simple vote buying by the Republican Party, no
           more and no less. Perfectly legal and how pork barrel politics
           works.
2004/10/10-12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34022 Activity:very high
10/10   RIP Christopher Reeve.  http://www.drudgereport.com
        \_ Does anyone else feel dirty getting this from http://drudgereport.com?
           It's like hearing about it from Joan Rivers.
           \_ Yeah, but it has quite literally just been released.  I saw
              a ticker on ABC to this effect.  Damn.
           \_ No.
           \_ You feel 'dirty' getting news from a link re-posting service?
              Whatever....
        \_ Stem cell research might have saved his life.
           \_ Yeah.  As it is, it's probably better this way for him and
              others in the same position.  Admirable guy.  -John
           \_ Thank you for politicizing a celebrity's death.  Thanks a lot.
              \_ He was very outspoken and political on this subject.  I doubt
                 he would mind this.  If it gets people atually talking about
                 it..
           \_ *LAUGH*  Yes, if only we had spent a few billions on stem cell
              research in the last 3 years, Reeves might be alive today!
              Hahahahahhaa, what a crock.  Yes, they were on the cutting edge
              of useful real world success when the evil Bush stopped the
              Federal funding of harvesting the unborn.   Riiiiight.
              \_ So you're aware that the stem cell lines were coming from
                 extra embryos left over from artificial insemination?  That
                 such embryos would be thrown out anyway?
                 \_ So you're aware that private research is totally unimpeded,
                    and that all Bush did was not spend federal funds on new
            lines, right?  And why hadn't those embryos been thrown out?
            \_ Ending federal funding is as good as killing the research
                       dead.
                       \_ If there was something there then it would be very
                          profitable for private companies to spend their own
                          money on it.  They spend billions on new drugs.
                                \_ Corporations are risk averse and slow to
                                   change.  Most really pioneering research
                                   remains solely funded by the gov't.  Drug
                                   research is a rare exception.
                          They spend billions on new drugs.
                          They can spend billions on something with an even
                          high profit margin *if* there was something to it.
                          \_ Sure, just like they spent billions developing
                             the ARPANET before it was profitable. And just
                             like they developed the transistor as a spinoff
                             from the Apollo program, leading to the modern
                             computer.
                             \_ Yes and there's still Federal money going into
                                this.  They simply can't butcher more unborn
                                for the vague hope something will come of it.
                                Not with Federal money.
                                \_ SINCE YOU ARE NOT LISTENING, MAYBE YELLING
                                   WILL HELP.  THE STEM CELL LINES COME FROM
                                   EMBRYOS OTHERWISE USED FOR ARTIFICIAL
                                   INSEMINATION.  NOT FROM ABORTIONS.  IF
                                   YOU CAN'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE, YOU ARE BLIND.
        \_ Here it is from Yahoo news:
           http://csua.org/u/9en
        \_ Rest in peace, Superman.  *salute* -- ilyas
        \_ Aye, R.I.P..  Superman lives in us.  -- alice
        \_ movies actually used to be good.  what happened?
2004/10/9-11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34009 Activity:nil
10/9    http://www.ucomics.com/rallcom ("Bush is stupid" comic)
        \_ Everyone who thinks Bush is stupid already reads this.  This is
           like telling us to read http://johnkerry.com for honest candidate
           and policy evaluations.
2004/10/9-11 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34008 Activity:high
10/9    Conservatives control the House, the Senate, the President, and two
        Supreme Court Justices.  How do they still manage to come off as the
        victims of some huge liberal media conspiracy?
        \_ The control of the media by foreign liberal elements is well
           documented.
           http://csua.org/u/9eg
        \_ In case you didn't notice, members of the House, Senate, Presidency,
           and Supreme Court neither write newspaper articles, nor do they
           read the network news on the air every night.
           \_ OP knows.  He's just a troll.
        \_ A little piece of news for you - most Congressional Republicans
           are not conservative.  The conservatives embody a relatively
           small minority of the Congressional Republicans.
           \_ So true. Most Congressional Republicans are part of the New
              World Order Illuminati/Masonic conspiracy to kill our unborn
              children, take away our guns and sell us into bondage to the UN.
2004/10/9 [Health, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34006 Activity:very high
10/9    Does *anyone*  believe Bush's lie about drugs from Canada?  I'm sure
        there are morons in St. Louis who believe that Bush is protecting
        them from Evil Canadian drugs, but does anyone on the motd actually
        not see this as a shameless giveaway to the drug companies?
        \_ Bush told a bald faced lie: ..
           Bush told the truth: .
        \_ I laughed at loud when Dubya said he was against Canada-imported
           drugs to protect us from dangerous drugs.
           The true answer, obviously, is that cheaper Canadian drugs
           would impact U.S. drug company profits significantly, and
           Republicans are wont to take actions that reduce profits from
           U.S. companies in any business, since they believe, supportably,
           that this is un-American.
           It's what my O'Reilly-loving younger brother says:
           Of course the Republicans know the real reasons and they are plenty
           good, but it's necessary to play the political game.
           \_ Speaking of whom, I saw Bill on the Daily Show, and my respect
              for him actually went from none to grudging.  He's a smart guy,
              and I really can't wait for him to quit Fox and write a book
              about his experiences there; I think he knows he's being paid
              to be an actor on (nearly) state-supported TV.
           \_ No you moron.  The real issue is that as soon as we start
              importing drugs en masse from Canada, Canada will stop getting
              drugs from pharmaceuticals companies for the current price, and
              there will be a single worldwide price.
        \_ Right, blame the evil drug companies when in fact the US taxpayer
           subsizdizes the worlds (eg. Canada and Europe's) drug consumption.
        \_ The world is better of without those Candians. -G.W.B.
           \_ Yes, your HS brother represents all Republicans.  Can I quote my
              19 year old half sister for the Democrats?  BTW, what is Kerry's
              plan for Iran?
2004/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34003 Activity:high
10/9    All of Karzai's opponents boycott the election and cite fraud.
        http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1216608.htm
        No wonder Bush is taking credit-- that's how democracy works in
        Bush country.
        \_ Republican-sponsored vote fraud:  Good enough for America,
           good enough for Afghanistan!
           \_ I could tell you that an imperfect election process is better
              than dictatorship but I suspect you'd disagree.  I'm already
              walking the IHBT line by even responding.
              \_ It's that simple, isn't it? Either you're for an imperfect
                 election process or you're for the Taliban. What about
                 taking the time to hold a reasonable election?
        \_ Is this from the same ABC that put their left wing bias on paper
           and published it?  Try a URL from a reliable source.
           \_ Which, the Australian Broadcast Corporation (this) or the
              American Broadcast Corporation?  'Cos I got both.
              http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=151668
2004/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34000 Activity:very high
10/8    Bush was asked to name three mistakes he's made. He can't
        name one. He's had the hardest job in the world for almost
        four years and he cannot name a single mistake. Is he
        the Second Coming of the Messiah?
        \_ Actually, as much as I loathe bush, I thought his answer was
           pretty clever.  He claimed his biggest mistakes were various
           appointments who he didn't want to embarass on TV.  Of course
           I'm positive that
           1) he didn't think of that himself and
           2) it's Rove's message to anyone who might consider showing
              disloyalty to the chimp in chief that they are about to
              become Bush's biggest mistake.
           What would any of you have said (assuming you had actally drunk
           the neocon kool-aid and wouldn't way the war)?
           \_ There aren't any "neocons" on the motd.  It's a made-up phrase
              to sound like "neo nazi".
        \_ you are Bush's adviser.  What would you advise him?
        \_ Republicans just don't apologize.  This makes them dumb AND evil.
        \_ Haha, this is one of those classic annoying interview questions.
           Bush spent most of his answer defending the Iraq war so I guess
           that was one of his mistakes.
           \_ Wrong war, wrong place, wrong time!
        \_ Other than Ashcroft, I can't think of a single mistake.
        \_ Again with O'Reilley on the Daily Show:  Bill pointed out that
           these people (Bush, et. al.) are highly insulated and get a lot
           of sycophantry; couple that with an almost maniacal belief in
           everything they say and do, and what you have is a President who
           very literally cannot see the mistakes he's made.
           \_ All Republicans are stupid/evil drones straight to the top.
              All Democrats are enlightened and good people who sensitive to
              the needs of terrorists and others around the world.  Seriously,
              the question was an obvious setup straight from the DNC fax
              machine.  It would have been blitheringly stupid of any
              candidate to name 3 mistakes.  It would be front page news the
              next day and he'd get beat over the head forever.  What about
              John Kerry?  Was voting for unilateral disarmament in the 80s
              a mistake?  Was voting against the first Gulf War *after* the
              UN had passed a war resolution a mistake?  Was making shit up
              about Vietnam war crimes a mistake?  Has John Kerry ever made
              a mistake?  Please name 3.
        \_ _Bush_ hasn't made any mistakes because he doesn't make any
           real decisions (except in what to say when the reception dies to
           his remote control during a debate).  And he's not qualified to
           comment on Cheney's mistakes... so what's he gonna say?
2004/10/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33995 Activity:insanely high
10/8    As of 10/8, 8:39PM, polls ask who you think won the
        second debate (Bush, Kerry, [undecided]):
        http://cbsnews.com (11.51%, 88.10%)
        http://cnn.com (16%, 82%, 2%)
        http://foxnews.com (30%, 70%)
        http://msnbc.com (27%, 73%)
        http://freerepublic.com (95%, 1%)
        \_ "Poll: Bush, Kerry tie in 2nd debate", an article from CNN.
           So what's up. CNN becoming conservative and trying to save face?
        \_ Thanks to the DNC e-mail spam, I guess.
           \_ Check http://freerepublic.com for all the "FREEP THE MSNBC POLL"
              posts.  The difference is that the freepers (and Chris
              Matthews, apparently) actually think an online poll
              means something.  The lefty swampers are trying to show
              just how FUCKING POINTLESS these online polls are.  --scotsman
              \_ There's about 150 freepers vs. the tens of thousands of Dems
                 on the DNC mailing list.  This has been said many times before
                 on the motd: freepers are not conservatives or Republicans and
                 all clear thinking people disavow them in the same way you
                 should disavow nuts like Michael Moore and the democratic
                 http://underground.com
              \_ You've been trolled scotsman! HAHA   -!person who posted it
                 \_ Actually, no.  I know who posted it, and I'm just
                    explaining how I see the poll slamming, not flaming
                    them.  And unless there's a freeper manifesto you
                    can point me to that says that they're trying to
                    make a mockery of the polls (I can point you to
                    plenty on the left), then I stand by my point. --scotsman
                    \_ Thank god we have geniuses like yourself to
                       point out the absurdity. Please, let me
                       express my unwavering gratitude. Thank
                       you!  P.S., don't you find it slightly unusual
                       that you have worked yourself up into a frenzy
                       about this.
                       \_ No more so than any other criticism of journalism
                          in this country..  Are you happy with the state
                          of affairs?  Do you like bankrupted localities?
                          Do you like soldiers being killed and wounded
                          in a preemptive war against a non-threat?  Do you
                          like all of this wrapped up in a pretty media
                          package?  You mock my anger?  I mock your complacency
                          and cowardice (sign your damn name, mr. black).
                          --scotsman
                           \_ RACIST!!!
                              \_ RAPIST!!!
                                 \_ PAPIST!!!
                                    \_ TRAPPIST!!!
                                       \_ PRIAPIST!!!
2004/10/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33993 Activity:insanely high
10/8    Holy SHIT Bush is actually doing pretty well, did he rehearse or
        something? In addition, he's taking notes!!! He didn't do that
        last time. SHIT.
        \_ They gave him back his cocaine.
        \_ Uh, well?  Maybe on the "internets."  Did you see his Dean Scream
           moment?
           \_ *SCOWL*
        \_ Kerry mistakes so far, add if you wish:
           1) "I'm a lawyer too" (most ppl hate lawyers)
              \_ I don't think this was a mistake
                 \_ First thing we do is kill all the lawyers.
           2) "Join me to defeat ppl who make over $200,000"
              (bad bad bad, they control YOUR life)
          \_ my combined income is, in fact, over $200,000. I don't
             like Bush, but I like my nice house and I enjoy co-owning
             my Piper Arrow. That is why I'm voting for Bush.
             \_ hmm, so you are really dying for that $2000 taxcut you get
                with bush huh with your $200k income?
                "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of
                 government. It can only exist until the voters
                 discover that they can vote themselves money from the
                 public treasure. From that moment on the majority
                 always votes for the candidates promising the most
                 money from the public treasury, with the result that a
                 democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy
                 followed by a dictatorship."
                 \_ I'm glad you believe that! Now take a history lesson
                 \_ My wallet isn't your public treasure, thanks.  I'm not
                    the piper guy.
                    \_ Some money has to come out of someone's wallet for
                       the "public treasure".  You just don't want it to be
                       you, because it's not *fair* to tax people more just
                       because they can afford more.  So horribly unfair.
                        \_ Ever hear of equality? I know its a new and
                           radical concept, but perhaps you might want
                           to consider it. If all citizens are equal
                           then they should all pay an equal percentage
                           of their income as taxes. Why should I have
                           have to pay a higher tax rate just b/c my
                           income is higher, when all I did was study
                           hard, work late nights to get to a better
                           job, and mr. pot smoking slacker english
                           major drank his way through school and
                           now can't get a job and expects me to pay
                           more so that he can live off of my hard
                           work. That is BS.
                           \_ What if that English major wins the lottery,
                              inherits money, or happens to get a good job
                              through nepotism? What if I worked hard like
                              you did and yet make less money through
                              choice or bad luck? I am all for a flat tax,
                              but your argument is stupid. Some rich
                              people work hard. Some don't. Same as the poor.
                              \_ In general, barring lottery winners etc.
                                 people getting paid more are doing more
                                 economically valuable work. If you make
                                 less money through choice then why do you
                                 want others to make up the difference?
                                 And let's say in theory we do the same type
                                 of work, but you work half as hard and get
                                 half the income. Why should your tax rate
                                 be different for the year?
                                 \_ Easily answered: "gimme! gimme! gimme!"
           \_ simple numbers game, piss off 2% of the populus and curry the
              favor of 98%, that doesn't make sense to you?
                \_ no but under Kerry I'll have to pay a LOT more tax. No thx.
                        \_ Someone has to pay for all of this invading, you're
                           just going back to the Clinton levels
                           \_ Which were too high.
           3) "Bush's [nonexisting] lumber company"
                \_ Bush DOES have timber company...
                   http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx@DocID=265
                   \_ good find.
******************* Partisan Tools Below This Line *********************
                    \_ Is it partisan to say Bush sounded even stupider in the
                       second debate?
                       \- it's not partisan, it is foolish. --psb
                          \_ Are you saying it is foolish because Bush did not
                             sound even stupider; or because the statement
                             invites scorn; or both?
                             \_ Did you even watch the debate last night?
        \_ Bush started strong but he is fading fast
           \_ Did you watch the same debate?  Wishful thinking?  Faint hope?
              \_ That was the way it went in the first debate, too.
                 \_ And you didn't notice any difference between his first and
                    last night's efforts?  Ok.... whatever.....
        \_ Bush creamed Kerry this time.
           \_ Dubya was even more stupid this time.  You don't become less
              wrong by yelling it louder.
              \_ Would you like the pink or the blue kool aid?
           \_ apparently that's not how people outside of California
              think. My officemate from Indiana (very pro Bush) shouts
              loudly when 1) he feels that he has a strong point
              2) when he doesn't want to hear from you again.
              People outside of California seem to have different
              social protocols, and shouting works for them.
              \_ your co-worker from Indiana is pretty stupid
                \_ that may be so, but people like him are
                   all over the United States, voting for Bush.
                   \_ True.  And liberals all across the U.S. are asking
                      "Why isn't Kerry whooping this chimp?"
                      \_ I know why, and you should too, if you have been
                         paying attention. -- ilyas
                         \-My opinion on the two people at the top of
                           the ticket is well known but i have to say that
                           Melman fellow from BUSHCO is 100x better than
                           mary beth cahill. it was sort of sad that charlie
                           rose basically gave the bush campiagn a lot more
                           free airtime to "clarify" [and it was well done]
                           than kerry's spokespeson. it was lame of kerry
                           co to let bushco go last and get a lot more time.
                           they need to be more ruthless on "details" like
                           this. --psb
                           \_ Charlie Rose?  Who watched *that*?
                         \_ Yes, I know why.  People are dumb.  Dubya and his
                            handlers know how to talk to dumb people, as he is
                            himself:  dumb.  Granted there are smart
                            Republicans out there, but they don't form the
                            majority of those voting for Dubya.
                            Clinton:  "When people think, Democrats win."
                            \_ I'm voting for Dubya and I'm dumb!  Woot!  We
                               is all jus' whitey craker red neck hiks on thiz
                               side uh da ile!  You just keep telling yourself
                               that if it makes you feel better about last
                               night.  I prefer to always assume my opposition
                               is not moronic and not take things for granted
                               like you do with your weak labelling.
                            \_ when people start thinking, we'll democratize
                               both parties so that party bosses don't control
                               every political position where one party
                               controls a safe majority.
                            \_ When people who profess to care actually
                               bother to vote then Democrats would win,
                               too.
                               \_ Isn't the DNC asking for volunteers to
                                  take an hour or two to make get-out-the-vote
                                  phone calls on election day?  I think if
                                  you do have spare time, this could make
                                  a big difference.
                                  \_ The election is done.  Everyone already
                                     know who they'll vote for.  Everyone who
                                     is going to show is already going to show.
                                     The only thing we don't yet know is which
                                     polls are more accurate than others.
                                     Anyway, when I see "political call" show
                                     on my caller ID, I don't pick up.  I
                                     doubt any apathetic person would either.
2004/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33982 Activity:high
10/8    Bush was secretly wired during the debate
        http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/08/bulge/index.html
        \_ It was a personal Holtzmann shield.
           \_ too much risk of nukular explosion in case of lasgun usage.
        \_ I believe he was wearing something, but I'm curious-- why didn't
           they position the bulge lower, in the small of his back?  I can fit
           an ipod or even a thin novel just above my belt with very little
           visibility, and that's not even wearing a jacket.
           \_ Transmission distance. This proves liberals are smarter: Kerry's
              magic cheat pen with wireless receiver and handwriting-
              recognizing transmitter had a wider operating range.
        \_ so...let's suppose that Bush *was* secretly connected to some
           wireless device during the debate.  Do you really think that
           they couldn't use something more compact?  It just doesn't add up.
           And where is the wire going to his ear?  most cameras were pointed
           at his head, and that wire would surely be visible.
           \_ It could be a receiver/transmitter with a tiny earpiece you can't
              see.  Look at websites for spy stuff, we can assume that Bush
              has access to the best.
              \_ Right.  Let's assume he has access to the best.  Does that
                 really include a bulky rectangular thing worn on the back
                 under one's shirt?
                 \_ Well, if you wanted to be super-cool you'd use encryption,
                    spread-spectrum, and transmit constantly so it just looks
                    like background noise.  That all requires more electronics
                    and battery power.  To top it off, they might not have
                    wanted to bother with some custom design, and chose to go
                    with something 'off the shelf' that may not have been
                    optimized for size.
                    \_ here's something off-the-shelf:
                    http://www.thespystore.com/covertcommunicationequipment.htm
                       I don't see any reason why spread spectrum or encryption
                       would take more space or batteries.  this is just
                       what 10 seconds with google turned up.  I'm positive
                       that if Karl Rove really wanted to beam spread spectrum,
                       encrypted signals into W's ear, no giant battery
                       pack would be needed. One wonders how many kids are
                       cheating their way through school with these things,
                       though.
                       \_ Both encryption and spread-spectrum require extra
                          chips, and cen be fairly demanding (several watts)
                          depending on what encryption or DSS you use.
                          Continuous transmission (to look like background)
                          would up the power requirements a lot.  Thing of a
                          cell phone operating continuously, with more
                          complicated signal processing and you get a sense of
                          the power requirements.  CDMA uses DSS but it's only
                          spread over (I think) 1.5MHz.  You'd want a much
                          wider spread for being sneaky.
                    \_ Alcoa is up today.
                       \_ Heh. -- ulysses
              \_ Let's assume GWB had access to Star Trek Tech(c).  There was
                 obviously no one feeding him lines through it.
                 \_ 'Obviously'?  How do you figure that?
                    \_ Did you *see* the debate?
           \_ Read the article.  Their expert seems to be saying that this is
              both plausible and technically possible to do wirelessly. Given
              how poorly Bush did in the debate, however, I'd almost believe
              that someone hacked the feed.
        \_ Yes, I go to Salon for all my non-partisan information.  Could
           you use something less biased like the http://democraticrepublic.com
           or http://www.johnkerry.com next time?  Thanks!
                \_ Not everything http://salon.com or http://drudgereport.com reports is
                   a lie.
                   \_ Salon: Abu Ghraib scandal, Drudge: Monica Lewinsky
        \_ Liberals, trying to outstupid stupid.  They might win.
        \_ Couldn't somebody just start blasting the debate with broad-spectrum
           whitenoise (or move up and down through the frequencies until Bush
           looks pained)?  Or what about a cell-phone killing EMP?
           \_ Broad-spectrum white noise would work, but it would disable every
              wireless device in the room. (Did the moderator have an
              earpiece?  Did somme backstage techs?)  Shifting frequency would
              not jam it if it uses spread-spectrum.  An EMP would fry the
              cameras.
        \_ So no one has mentioned the fact that Bush wears body armor when
           he's in public (at the insistence of the Secret Service)?  It
           appears that Salon is doing spin in a response to the video showing
           Kerry violating the rules of the 1st debate.  See
           http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm for a link to the video.
           \_ Don't delete my mocking or I'll delete your post.
           \_ KERRY BROUGHT A MAGIC DEBATE-WINNING PEN!  HE CHEATED!!!
            \_ i thought it was a magic penis
                 \_ "I'll take 'The Penis Mightier', Alex."
           \_ Personally, I think he was packing heat. Probably that pearl
              handled revolver that they took off Saddam Hussein when he
              was captured.
           \_ 1. If he wore body armor because the secret service required it,
                 you would not know about it.  Making that info public just
                 tells potential assassins to go for a head shot.
              2. Presidential candidates are also given a SS detail, so both
                 Bush and Kerry would be wearing it.  Any shots of a Kerry
                 bulge?
              3. Body armor is BULKY and HOT.  You would see it much more
                 clearly, and the Bush team would not be asking for 70 degree
                 room temperatures.
                 \_ all three of these "arguments" are weak as hell. #3 is
                    true of some armor but not of the light-duty armor
                    plates that are thin and flexible. i find it
                    instructive about your cognitive abilities that you
                    make arguments which rely on the assumption that you
                    know everything there is to know (about, for example,
                    body armor). #1 is a really shitty argument and doesn't
                    hold up to any sort of logical scrutiny. compare to
                    "if bush had a bodyguard, you wouldn't know about it."
                    #2 assumes that all security details have the same
                    threat model. to sum up, you're a fucking idiot. --aaron
                 \_ you suck --aaron
                    \_ Is this what Google Millionaires do with their spare
                       time?  Send some of that green my way, aaron, and I
                       guarantee I'll have more fun with it.
              \_ I know that facts carry less weight than your from-the-ass
                 speculation, but here's at least one reference:
                 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26143
                 "The concealed body armor currently worn by George W. Bush,
                 the Secret Service and many law-enforcement folks..."
                 Hackworth is not exactly a Bush partisan.
                 \_ WorldNetDaily is a piece of shit.
                    \_ Then read the same commentary at:
                       http://www.hackworth.com/21jan02.html
                       And find out who Hackworth is before dismissing him.  Dumbass.
                 \_ just a technical point.  If you wear body armor that
                    doesn't have bulky plates, it won't protect you against
                    assault rifle rounds.  It's mainly for pistols.
                    Hackworth should know better.
2004/10/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33969 Activity:very high
10/7    maybe he's lying, but Bush claims no draft while he's president:
        http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/10/20041005-6.html
        \_ there won't be a draft because draftees are useless or have
           negative value to the modern US military.  it takes a few *years*
           to train a new recruit to be useful on the high-tech battlefield.
           by the time they managed to draft and train a million slackers,
           whatever event they were drafted for would be long over.  modern
           warfare is so fast now that when war breaks out there is no time
           to build up anything.  it's a bring-whatcha-got kinda thing now.
           thus, the idea that there will be a draft for anything short of
           a mass invasion by a foreign nation (which we know can't happen)
           is simply daft.
        \_ Kerry wants more troops sent in.. so more likelyhood of draft
                \_ not necessarily US troops.
                \_ not necessarily US troops.   likelihood _/
        \_ "as long as I am President, there will be no draft" -Dubya, Tuesday
           \_ Read... My... Lips.
           \_ I believe Dubya says this because he thinks the current Iraq
              plan (currently deployed U.S. troops + Iraqi National Guard)
              can work.  He'll probably say his commanders on the ground said
              Samarra was the example of this.
        \_ And we can trust everything Bush says, because he is so honest
           and straightforward with the American people. Not to mention
           having such great judgement.
           \_ I think he's a lying sack of shit.  I also think he's not
              going to restart the draft unless there is a really major
              attack on American soil. -op
              \_ I want to play devil's advocate:  If there is a terror
              \_ I want to play devil's advocate:  Say there is a terror
                 attack on American soil that does not do significant damage
                 to the economy/stock market and business infrastructure,
                 Dubya may still implement the draft, while a whole lot of
                 people may think it wasn't a "really major attack" but won't
                 say anything because they'll be accused of being traitors.
                 Then we go after Iran even though it was al Qaeda that did it,
                 because you know, this is the post-9/11 world and if America
                 shows weakness or uncertainty, the world will drift toward
                 tragedy.  SERVICE GUARANTEES CITIZENSHIP!
                 How do we like dem apples?
                 \_ Do you buy your tinfoil hat off the rack or do you get
                    them custom made?
                    \_ Homemade from only the finest heavy-duty Alcoa foil.
                    \_ How _much_ do you think this differs from what happened
                       with Iraq, justification 9/11?  Except I can definitely
                       say Iran is a much greater threat today, than Iraq to
                       U.S. national security before we invaded.
                       \_ The rest of us carry state information.  Perhaps
                          you don't.
                          \_ I make a solid devil's advocate case.
                             I can't say much for what you provided.
                             \_ If you're making a devil's advocate claim,
                                then the question of tinfoil hat is justified.
                                \_ So says you without any meaningful
                                   indication of why, even after three posts.
           \_ Yup, just like when he said he wouldn't do any nation building.
              \_ I'm a uniter, not a divider.
                 We must be humble.
                 \_ We mut have a strong but humble foreign policy.
2004/10/7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33968 Activity:very high
10/4    What personal gain does Soros have for not electing Bush
        (did Bush turn down Soro's contract or something? If anything
        Soros has a lot of gain from Bush's tax cut for the super
        wealthy). And did http://factcheck.com/georgesoros.com help undecided
        voters determine which way to vote?
        \_ Soros is rich enough that he can go with his conscience, which
           he never did when he was younger. He is an example of someone
           who can afford to be a liberal.
           \_ among the other plantation owners
           \_ What a hypocrite.  Okay, I'll go with my conscience when I become
              super-rich someday.
              super-rich some day.
        \_ Maybe Soros sees how BushCo is royally fucking up this country and
           wants to use his power and influence to do something about it?
           Did you actually read the speech? Maybe it's hard for Bush supporters
           to imagine someone doing something without gaining from it financially?
        \_ Maybe he has witnessed fascism in his lifetime and doesn't
           want to see it again.  Maybe he doesn't like the idea of the
           plutocracy which will result from the Bush tax agenda.  Maybe
           he sees that serfdom is a bad idea.
        \_ Soros is concerned about the drift toward totalitarianism
           in this country. He grew up in a Soviet block state so
           he knows the dangers.
           \_ You know, most ex-Soviet block folks are not on the DNC
              side...  Equating Bush et al with fascism is like equating
              Cheney with the neocons -- stupid. -- ilyas
                \_ You'll have to explain this one in more detail, tou've lost me.
              \_ You'll have to explain this one in more detail, you've lost me.
                 \_ Pronoun dereference error.  -- ilyas
           \_ I've definitely had issues with the man who destroyed the Thai
                 \_ Not true.  I beat him to the punch.  Fascism is governement
                    working hand in hand with industry.  The bush administration
                    is replete with examples of cronyism, favoritism,
                    deregulation (read lawlessness).  All fascist tendencies.
                    \_ This is incoherent. -- ilyas
              \_ First of all totalitarianism is not the same thing as fascism.
                 Are you deliberately trying to change the topic by Godwin'ing
                 it? Secondly, do you honestly believe that George Soros is
                 "stupid?" He seems pretty brilliant to me.
                 \_ I wasn't the first to bring up fascism in this thread.
                    I ve never met Soros, so I can't comment on how 'stupid'
                    he is.  I think being concerned about totalitarianism is
                    always healthy.  Thinking that Bush is a dangerous lunatic
                    like we had 60ish years ago is ... overreacting.
                    Bush is not a dangerous lunatic, he is a frat boy.
                    I ve heard so many shrill comparisons of Bush and
                    that short german guy that I have a hard time taking
                    these sorts of discussions seriously anymore.  Having
                    said that, is anyone willing to give a thoughtful
                    argument for how the US politics are in imminent danger
                    of sliding into something unsavory if Bush is reelected?
                      -- ilyas
                    \_ Bush has eroded civil liberties, more than any
                       president in my lifetime. This concerns me. And I
                       certainly did not bring up facism. I think you are
                       responding to the wrong entry. Just because
                       totalitarianism took one historical path (by
                       following a lunatic) once in history 60 years
                       ago does not mean that there are not other ways
                       to it. Read up on the history of Mussolini, Pinochet,
                       Franco and Peron for more germane historical
                       examples.
                       \_ Yeah, that concerns me too.  However, compare to
                          Roosevelt during WWII (specifically internment and
                          press restrictions). -- ilyas
                          \_ Or WWI, which was even more severe, with the
                             alien sedition act. But the problem with these
                             comparisons is that during WWI and WWII we were
                             fighting a state actor and had a clearly
                             defined goal and endpoint to the civil
                             liberty restrictions. Today, we are fighting
                             "terror" something so ill defined that it
                             will never be defeated. And to top it off,
                             Bush used a war that he chose to get into
                             as an excuse to further the crackdown on
                             civil liberties. Combine these and you start
                             to see a dangerous precedent, especially
                             compared to historical actors who have
                             done similar things.
                             \_ Yes, that's true.  Though one wonders how
                                these restrictions managed to steamroll
                                their way into law.  It's not like the
                                POTUS can randomly rewrite laws without
                                some help (or at least inaction) from other
                                branches.  I am less concerned with Bush
                                specifically, and more concerned with the
                                government machine which makes the
                                crackdown not only possible but a reality.
                                The office of the POTUS doesn't have enough
                                power to be a worry in and of itself.
                                  -- ilyas
                                \_ Don't underestimate the power of
                                   demagoguery combined with an enraged
                                   populace. Though I suppose the biggest
                                   threat has passed for the moment. What
                                   about after the next 9/11? And there
                                   will be a next one.
           \_ I've definitely had issues with the man who destroyed the Thai
              economy for fun and profit preaching about high-minded politics
              but I am mostly over it.
        \_ Is he heavily invested in dollars?  Could he be afraid
           "4 MORE YEARS!" will result in the dollar losing value?
           \_ warren buffet also likes kerry, and he has like a 19 billion
                bet on the dollar falling.
2004/10/6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33963 Activity:nil
10/6    Where have all the MOTD conservatives gone?  Are you guys just
        licking your wounds at this point, or what?  Now that you've been
        proven wrong about just about everything, are you just going to take
        it and vote for Bush anyway?
2004/10/6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33949 Activity:moderate
10/6    If you look in the transcript of last night's debate, Cheney said
        the following:  (from http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004b.html
        "...They know that if you go, for example, to http://factcheck.com (sic),
        an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania,
        you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton."
        Try it.  go wo http://www.factcheck.com  oops.
        I wonder exactly how this happened.
        \_ Here's the story:
           http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12901-2004Oct6.html
        \_ whois http://factcheck.com:
        Registrant:       (I bet it's an offshore Halliburton subsidiary)
         Name Administration Inc. (BVI)
         Box 10518 A.P.O.
         Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands B.W.I.
        \_ this is already all over the blogs
        \_ It now redirects to Location: http://www.georgesoros.com
           "George Soros, the billionaire investor and philanthropist, is
            beginning a nationwide tour this week to talk about how the war
            in Iraq is making America less safe -- and why President Bush
            should not be re-elected." How wierd..
            should not be re-elected." How weird..
        \_ slate claims Soros took advantage of Cheney's blunder and bought
           up http://factcheck.com.
           http://slate.msn.com/id/2107809
           Is this even possible? Could the domain name propagation even
           happen that fast?
           \_ It's more likely someone already owned the domain and put in
              a redirect.
                \_ slate has corrected the article to state this.
2004/10/6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33945 Activity:nil
10/4    "if you compare the language used to describe Jeffords to the
        language used to describe Zell Miller [after the Democrat's
        pro-Bush speech at Republican convention],
        you will know almost everything you need to know about the
        modern media."
        Remembrance of Contracts Past
        http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/691zjgqk.asp
        \_ Except Jeffords is right, and Miller is wrong.
           \_ I know nothing of Jeffords, but Miller tried to challenge
              his interviewer to a duel.  Now THAT'S news.
              \_ Honk if you demand satisfaction!
2004/10/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33943 Activity:nil
10/4    This seems a bit...unfair.
        http://tinyurl.com/45qwp
        \_ fairness is when you're in kindergarten and a kid steals
           your candy bar and you cry and the teacher spanks that kid.
           GWB wasn't born with the gift of logic and speech, is that
           fair? Cheney wasn't born with nice hair and nice white
           teeth, is that fair? Get real you hippies and liberals,
           there is no such a thing as fairness in the real world.
           \_ Everyone look at the cynical heartless Republican!
        \_ Not really.  Networks are supposed to give equal air time to
           political ads from the two parties leading up to the election,
           so the speech probably won't be carried on network TV.
2004/10/4-6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33917 Activity:low
10/4    Apparently Michael Moore was offered the fraudulent Killian memos
        during the making of F9/11 and decided to pass on them.  So who was
        shopping these things around, and why did Dan Rather take something
        that Michael Moore wouldn't even touch?
        http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000097.html
        \_ Michael Moore *claims* he was offered the memos.  Thanks.
        \_ (1) Some liberal.  (2) Moore sees a trap; Rather sees a scoop.
        \_ Sure smacks of Karl Rove hiding a bug in his own office only to
           find it and pin it on the opponent.
           \_ As much as some liberals think of Rove as Emperor Palpitine,
              I believe there is no credible evidence that he goes beyond
              misrepresentation to Watergate-level stuff.
              \_ I don't think the Killian memos were Rove. A tactic that
                 subtle just doesn't seem like his style. Rove treats
                 politics like an FPS videogame. Find a simple attack that
                 works and just keeping doing it until it doesn't work anymore.
                 At least that's what I've gathered so far... -- ulysses
              \_ If the Killian memos were Rove, how would this compare to
                 Watergate?  Illegality here would be hard to prove.  I
                 suppose Bush could sue for slander, but why bother?
2004/10/4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33908 Activity:high
10/4    Still think the draft is just a rumor?  Check out HR163 and S89 at
        http://thomas.loc.gov
        \_ Direct link, for the lazy: http://csua.org/u/9bc
        \_ Old news.  A bunch of Democrats suggested we resart the draft.
           What I don't understand is why Kerry now seems to want to pin
           this goofiness on Bush. Don't worry about it, it won't go
           anywhere.
           \_ Regardless of reality, it is becoming a campaign issue.  "Don't
              worry, be happy" isn't a very good way to deal with it.
              \_ So let me get this straight... a bunch of democrats want
                 to restart the draft, and the campaign issue is "Bush will
                 reinstitute the draft"!?  Do you have brain siphilis?
                 reinstitute the draft"!?  Do you have brain syphilis?
                 \_ http://www.blatanttruth.org/draft.php
                    \_ So now we backed off from the credible *.gov link
                       (which implicated democrats) into some fly-by-night
                       left wing freep show which implicated Bush with
                       t0p-s3kr3t d0cz!!~!```11  You are pathetic.
                       \_ News flash: the Dems were lodging protest legislation
                          designed to point out the class inequalities in the
                          current SS.  BushCo is looking to start up a Skills
                          Draft.
                    \_ This is a retarded link.  None the less, it's old
                       news.  The draft was never "stopped" you know, the
                       Selective Service still exists, and I see no reason
                       it shouldn't be updated with the rest of the
                       military.  Call me when that democrat bill goes
                       though.
           \_ Not just Democrats, dude. Chuck Nagel is a Republican from
              Nebraska.
              \_ Virtually all are Democrats.  One Republican doesn't
                 prove anything.
              \_ Here's the sponsor list.  Where's Chuck?
                 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR00163:@@@P
                 \_ Surely you can type "Chuck Nagel draft" into google
                    all by yourself.
           \_ Whoops, it's apparently protest legislation:
              http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/07/rangel.draft
              More likely to affect us here at CSUA is the Skills Draft:
              http://csua.org/u/9bf (sfgate)
              Sorry about the confusion. -op
              \_ Skills draft?  I don't think the typical sodan's el8 linux
                 hax0r skillz are draft quality.
                 \_ Spent any amount of time with GI Joe lately? The ability
                    to use a computer is in high demand in the army these days.
                    \_ Because knowing is half the battle!
        \_ Special Skills Draft:
           Putting your Counter-Strike skillz to the ultimate test!
2004/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33898 Activity:moderate
10/1    A dimwit conservative is asking questions and is waiting to be flamed.
        Can we find all the falacies in these statements and mass mail them
        to Bush supporters?
        http://forums.go.com/abcnews/thread?threadID=8246
        \_ Republican: stupid/evil, Democrat: smart/good.
           If he's so dim, why don't you have the answers at the tip of your
           fingers?  You shouldn't need help and research to find flaws in
           such obvious crap.  Right?
           \_ No, you have got it backwards. Democrats: evil/stupid,
              Republicans: smart/good. Just ask Rush!
2004/10/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33879 Activity:moderate
10/1    So what do Kerry supporters think of the whole "draft is coming"
        misinformation campaign?
        \_ The Bush Administration has reinstated the draft as a "backdoor"
           draft already.  People whose terms of duty in the military are being
           required to continue to serve.  Reservists are being shipped out.
           Reservists, by and large, signed up thinking that they would only be
           used in the direst of dangers to the US.  Bush's using them like
           normal combat troops, for which they are untrained, unready, and
           unfit.
           \_ While this may be a legitimate concern (though what I've read
              doesn't support this entirely), that wasn't my question.  I'm
              referring to MTV's "Rock the Vote" and emails going around saying
              that Bush will reinstate the draft after the election.
              \_ So what do you think, as a Bush supporter, of the RNC mailers
                 going around Arkansas saying the Democrats want to ban the
                 bible?
           \_ No matter who's in the white house, if the president decides to
              "Stay the course" or increase our commitment, there will have
              to be a draft as our "volunteer with an asterisk" army is
              starting to really show the strain and lack of manpower:
              http://www.d-n-i.net/lind/lind_9_24_04.htm
                       -nweaver
              \_ This link is so biased and ill-informed, it's almsot useless.
                 The national guard and the reserves are military units with
                 expectations and training commensurate with soldiers in the
                 US Army, because, well, they ARE in the army.  The whole
                 article seems to miss this basic point.  Enlisting in the
                 Gaurd or the reserves with the expectation that you won't be
                 sent into combat is just fucking stupid.  THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE
                 THERE FOR.
                    \_ Considering that William S Lind is politically VERY
                       conservative and militarily brilliant (after all,
                       he literally wrote the book on Maneuver Warfare, which
                       became the basis for Marine Corps tactical doctrine),
                       he is probably one of the best commentators on this
                       whole mess. -nweaver
                       \_ If he's one of the best, then field as a whole must
                          suck.  The article is couched in phrases that go a
                          long way toward undermining its credibility.
                          Perhaps this brilliant man has a better article
                          which you can reference to make your point.
                 \_ There's no problem with calling up the reserves.  The
                    problem is with calling up the reserves for multiple tours
                    of duty which they're NOT for.  And calling up the IRR
                    (individual ready reserve) which is a system whereby an
                    enlisted soldier can be called to serve AFTER the term of
                    their enlistment expires.  The IRR is intended only to
                    cover emergency mobilizations, not a long-term elective
                    war planned a year in advance.  How would you like it if
                    you served your term in the army and they call you up YEARS
                    afterwards and order you to return.  Wouldn't it feel like
                    a draft to you?
                    \_ Unfortunately, the link does a poor job articulating
                       this, instead focusing on sensational comparisons to
                       Soviet Infantry regiments, and silly statements
                       such as: "Most Guardsmen enlisted expecting to help
                       their neighbors in natural disasters" as if this has
                       any relevance.  When you sign up, the contract is
                       pretty clearly stated: it's NOT about natural
                       disasters or repairing roads four miles from your
                       home; it's about going to war as unit of the US
                       Military WHEREVER and HOWEVER the US Military sees
                       fit.  It's a crime that the tours are being extended
                       the way they are, but at least find a more objective
                       link to make your point.
        \_ I think the draft is coming, no matter who wins the election.
           There is a severe manpower shortage. We have not activated
           the IRR since Vietnam and when we did, the draft followed
           the next year. -Vet
2004/10/1 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33878 Activity:moderate
10/1    fuck you narrow minded liberals who have to resort to selectively
        nuking when you can't make intelligent counter arguments. Expect
        more mass deletion from now on.
        \_ I can counter-argue anything you'd like, but if you ask me to debate
           20 points with you, I'll just give you the finger.  FWIW I did not
           nuke your "debate". -dgies
        \_ why don't we outsource the nuking of motd the same way GWB
           outsourced killing bin Laden to Afghan warlords?
           \_ You mean they'll ask for lots of $100 bills and then let the motd
              escape?
2004/10/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33869 Activity:nil
9/30    <DEAD>www.democrats.org/support/kerry.html?dsc=NETHAM1<DEAD>
        I'm drafting a chain letter asking people to donate just $10.00,
        do you guys have suggestions?
        \_ Chain letters are evil.  Are you trying to help Bush?
2004/9/30-10/1 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33865 Activity:very high
9/30    this is the url i give to my relatives who tell me they
        are voting for bush:
        http://www.newyorker.com/online/slideshows/pop/?040510onslpo_prison
        \_ http://csua.org/u/9a4 is better. - danh
        \_ Yeah, Bush is responsible for that. It's just the same as
           Saddam cutting off their hands, and rape. After all they
           are prisoners, right?
           \_ true conservatives should be angry bush hired guys dumb
              enough to take those photos on their digital cameras and
              and attach them to email to their buddies back home.
              and attach them to email to their buddies back home. - danh
           \_ shit rolls downhill.  Bush has hired a cabinet of people who
              show consistent, deliberate contempt for the Geneva convention,
              and for basic American ideas of human rights and justice
              (ashcroft, Rumsfeld, etc.).  This is why my mother in law
              who voted for Reagan twice, voted for Bush Sr.(in 88, not
              in 92), and voted for Bob Dole is actually giving money
              to the Kerry campaign.  All this in spite of her hating Kerry
              and never having given to a political campaign before ever.
              You can keep telling yourself that swing voters are too dumb
              to understand things like the Geneva convention, but you're
              wrong.
                \_ Well put.  -John
                \_ Bravo, and thank you for speaking up.
              \_ Your mother is deeply concerned about the Geneva Convention
                 and is going to change her life long (R) voting pattern
                 because some goof balls put underwear on some guy's heads?
                 This is unbelievable.
                 \_ This is a ridiculous response. "Political activism is
                    dumb, sheeple! Don't stand up for your values!" Fuck you.
                    \_ Strawman.  Political activism is not dumb.  Your
                       'story' about your mother is.  Try again.
                       \_ Nice reading comprehension, guys, it's "mother in
                          law", not mother.
                          \_ Ad hominen.  It isn't relavent if it was your
                                \_ hominem
                             mother or your spouses mother.  Try again.
2004/9/30-10/1 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33864 Activity:low
9/30    Does the president get live input during the debate? or
        do they have everything in their head?
        \_ why do you think bush continues to say "um"?
        \_ No.  Yes.
2004/9/30-10/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Recreation/Media] UID:33862 Activity:moderate
9/30    NUCULAR!  NUCULAR!
        \_ Has anybody seen sweat?
        \_ Stop picking on Jimmy Carter!  The man is out of office for almost
           a quarter century and is ~80 years old.  Let his speach errors die.
           Enough abusing the ex-President.
           \_ Assuming you're not being ironic, have you considered that they
              might be picking on the Chimp-In-Chief?
              \_ Don't you mean Commander-In-Chimp (a-la Simpsons)?
                 \_ I've seen that Simpsons and was NOT referencing it.
                    Chimp-In-Chief is Bush perjorative which *may* derive from
                    the Simpsons, or maybe just from Bush's appearance and
                    percieved intelligence.
                    \_ I see you've put a lot of thought into your
                       dehumanization of the opposition.  Carry on. -- ilyas
2004/9/30-10/1 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33856 Activity:high
9/30    Poll, I predict that in today's debate:
        Kerry will mess up, 4 more years of Bush: .
        Bush will do great, 4 more years of Bush: ..
        Kerry will finally have a position, 4 more years of Bush: .
        Bush will mess up, 4 more years of Bush: .
        \_ Kerry is getting is ass kicked as of 6:39 PM PST. Its
           great.
           \_ yeah what are you talking about?  bush is floundering
              big time. - danh
              \_ I'm watching channel 7. Bush is doing great.
                 Just one example: Kerry trots out the Global
                 Test wrt US pre-emptive action, gets his ass
                 kicked on it. He also got schooled on Iran
                 NK issue and the whole more sanctions and
                 diplomancy bullshit.
                 \_ i guess this must be a case of liberal vs conservative.
                    from my viewpoint bush is doing awful. - danh
                    \_ I think this a motd troll.  Even the freepers can't
                       find nice things to say about this Bush performance.
                       Anyway, it doesn't really matter what happens now -
                       it's all in how its reported by Pravda.
                        \_ I'm not a troll. Bush did well.
                           He basically said America First,
                           the world be damned. Kerry said
                           America First but only if the
                           Euro-peons say its okay and btw
                           I went to Vietnam. I'm more
                           libertarian than conservative.
                           [ why was this deleted? ]
                           \_ Er, not to get all freepy on you, but Bush got
                              pwned.  I think you're delusional.
                              \_ You live in a leftist echo chamber.  Stop
                                 reading Bab's website for news and info.
           \_ Which debate are you watching?
           \_ you're not watching the one on fox news where they swap
              bush and kerry's voices, are you...?
2004/9/29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33829 Activity:high 69%like:33823
9/28    Best Bush 2000 flashback ever.  Bush would "use the power of
        persuasian" to lower oil prices.
        http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/062800wh-bush.html
        \_ Bush did convince the Saudis to open the spigot, you know.
           Problem is it's still not enough.
           \_ You missed the best line in the article though:
              Asked why the Clinton administration had not been able to use
              the power of personal persuasion, Mr. Bush said: "The
              fundamental question is, 'Will I be a successful president
              when it comes to foreign policy?' "
        \_ I can believe people get so uppity about oil prices.  $2 a
           gallon is really freaking cheap.  The evidence is that people
           are driving around in cars much bigger than they could
           possiably need.  All those people commuting to work in F-250s
           like to whine about oil prices, but they are just making it
           really obvious that oil is dirt cheap. -jrleek
           \_ Not to mention Mercedes sedans that look small but get less than
              20MPG on highway.
              \_ Why single out Mercedes? All of the major manufacturers are
                 guilty of this, with their blind horsepower quests of the
                 last five years or so.  And the cars have all been
                 generally getting bigger - its just that they look
                 small next to the other behemoths on the road.  Compare
                 a modern Accord, for instance, with one from even
                 five years ago.
                 \_ But even a low-end C-Class, which looks pretty compact,
                    gets less than 20MPG on highway.  Anyway, people only pick
                    on SUVs but not these deceiving cars.  My SUV has better
                    mileage than that.
                    \_ According to fueleconomy.gov you are incorrect. C-class
                       gets ~26MPG.
                       \_ And that's the 2.6L V6.  The 3.2L V6 gets 27 hwy,
                          and the tiny C230 Kompressor that he's complaining
                          about specs at 30, almost identical to all other
                          cars in its class.  He's just a hater.
           \_ It may be cheap relative to other things, but it's expensive
              historically speaking.  If salt went up to $5/lb, it would still
              be dirt-cheap for food purposes, but people would rightly
              ask "WTF?"
              \_ It's cheap historically too, if you adjust for inflation.
           \_ Wow, jrleek and I agree on something.  That said, our economy
              is fairly dependent upon cheap oil.  Adjustment will be
              painful.
              \_ And who are you, mystery man?
                 \_ Who knows?  The shadow knows!
              \_ One of the annoying things (to me) in this election is
                 that niether Bush nor Kerry has a realistic energy
                 policy. -jrleek
2004/9/29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33823 Activity:nil 69%like:33829
9/28    Best Bush flashback ever.  From 2000 election,
        "Bush Would Use the Power of Persuasian to Raise Oil Supply"
        http://www.nytimes.com/library/politics/camp/062800wh-bush.html
        \_ Bush did convince the Saudis to open the spigot, you know.
           Problem is it's still not enough.
2004/9/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33816 Activity:kinda low
9/28    This is great.  Crawford, Texas newspaper that endorsed Bush in 2000
        endorses Kerry.
        http://news.iconoclast-texas.com/web/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm
        And of course, the inevitable "Why does Crawford, Texas hate America?"
        \_ cuz they like shooting illegals in the back as they run?
2004/9/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33809 Activity:high
9/28    To all the "beat a chimp" people:  It's been frequently quoted that
        Dubya has never lost a debate.
        \_ It's not like he's had dozens of debates under his belt ... I think
           it's hard for his opponents to perform in Bush's reality distortion
           field.
        \_ good point.  I think I'm listening to the liberals too much.
        \- I am pretty sure Kerry never has either, right? That is how
           they both got this far. It is the battle of the two middle aged
           heavyweights, for the boxing crown!
           \_  Putin could kick both their asses in a fight.
               \_ He could probably kick their asses in a debate, too.
2004/9/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33808 Activity:kinda low
9/28    I still can't quite comprehend how the majority of people want to
        vote for BushCo given everything he has done in the past 4
        years. But come to think of it, if they are dumb enough to
        believe everything that's coming out of BushCo's mouth, then
        they probably deserve 4 more years of BushCo.
        \_ Beware the person who believes that all who disagree with him are
           dumb.
        \_ The problem is, for the rest of us with a triple-digit IQ, we get
           stuck with 4 more years of BushCo as well.
                \_ Too bad the there aren't enough of the triple-digit IQ
                   voters as shown by the polls.
        \_ Maybe you are the idiot?
           \_ Maybe you ALL are homosexuals. -- Rainier Wolfcastle
        \_ A majority does not. Only one poll has Bush at +50% and all the good
           ones have it tied:
           http://www.pollingreport.com
           My prediction: Kerry by 7 points and the Senate to the Democrats.
           \_ http://www.electoral-vote.com shows 14 states tied or nearly tied, using
              *many* polls.  They are:
              Pennsylvania Michigan Washington New Jersey New Mexico Missouri
              Iowa Nevada Oregon Minnesota Maine Florida Maryland New Hampshire
              Every single one shows an increasing Bush trend. see them for
              yourself:
              http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/pennsylvania.html
              \_ This trend line is a joke. Look at it yourself. Bush
                 is obviously trending down here.
              http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/michigan.html
              \_ Bush still loses.
              http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/washington.html
              \_ One outlier does not make a trend.
              http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/new-jersey.html
              http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/new-mexico.html
              http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/missouri.html
              http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/iowa.html
              http://http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/nevada.html
              http://http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/oregon.html
              http://http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/minnesota.html
              http://http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/maine.html
              \_ No Bush trend here.
              http://http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/florida.html
              \_ This is an increasing Bush trend? You need to have
                 your eyes checked.
                 \_ I am reminded of "Band structure in Germanium, my ass"
                    \_ That writeup kicked ass.  Reminds me of the good
                       old physics 7abc days. -- ilyas
          http://http://www.shartwell.freeserve.co.uk/humor-site/germanium-humor.htm
              http://http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/maryland.html
              http://http://www.electoral-vote.com/states/new-hampshire.html
              \_ Read Zogby, The Christian Science Monitor and The
                 Economist polls. The problem with electoral vote is
                 that they throw in the obviously cooked Gallup numbers.
                 Electoral vote is biased and the guy even admits it.
                 You need to look at unbiased pollsters like the CSM.
                 What is your prediction? Let's see who is right on Nov 2.
                 I really don't mind you being self deluded, just don't
                 cry how the election was fixed on Nov 3. Things will
                 be clearer after the first debate.
        \_ Do you think Bush lied about WMDs, or do you think the CIA screwed
           up and Bush acted on the best available intelligence?  Do you think
           the war was illegal, or that the U.S. enforced the "serious
           consequences" clause of a UN resolution and showed the world that
           not complying when WMDs are concerned is not tolerated?  Do you
           think Bush is a fool who alienated our allies unnecessarily; or do
           you think he is always acting to protect America no matter what
           anyone else thinks, domestic or foreign, while relying on the best
           advice of his cabinet?  Do you think he is a reckless deficit-
           spender, or do you think when he says tax cuts are coming, they are?
           Do you think Bush went into Iraq without a well-thought-out plan to
           win the peace against advice from the Army chief of staff who was
           fired because he disagreed (and happened to be right); or do you
           think they already understand this and are trying their best to
           leave Iraq stable, and domestic dissent and public criticism both
           aids the enemy and hurts the morale of soldiers in the field?
           \_ I think that we should elect Bush President For Life and
              incarcerate and re-educate anyone who says anything bad about
              him until the War on Terrah is over. Which will be never.
                                   \_ Tear
              \_ I'm just trying to show how a lot of people can still vote
                 for BushCo given everything that's happened.  IMO, they're
                 all wrong, though, so I agree with your sarcasm.
2004/9/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33803 Activity:nil
9/28    Has there been any election year in the US where no voting was
        conducted because there was only one presidential candidate?
        \_ Yes, Bush/Ashcroft 2008 -- They got 99% of the vote after
           suspending the constitution.
2004/9/28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33800 Activity:very high
9/28    What happened to the color of Kerry's skin?  He's orange!
        http://graphics.jsonline.com/graphics/news/img/sep04/kerry1092704.jpg
        \_ pic?  Are you sure you aren't thinking of Carter?  Now HE'S
           looking like he had too many carrots.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1096306030421_91715230/?hub=CTVNewsAt11
        \_ Hee, hee.  It looks like someone dipped him in tanning oil.
        \_ Makeup? bad lighting?
        \_ Now we can choose between Orangity Orange, and Lemony Yellow!
        \_ Photoshop
2004/9/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33746 Activity:nil
9/24    http://www.steveclemons.com/GOPMailer.htm
        Vote Bush, or the terrorists^W satanists have won!
2004/9/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33728 Activity:very high
9/23    Not trying to incite another flame war but what are some of the
        advantages for voting Bush? I live in S Cal and I see a lot of
        pro-Bush stickers on cars. What is Bush good for and why do ppl
        want to vote for him? ok thx
        \_ We are voting for Bush because we are eEEeeeEEEVvvvVvvvIIIllLLLLlL
           Republicans!  What more did you need to know?  --E.R.
        \_This is dumber than ilyas. - tom
        \_ Pure. Flame. Bait.
          \_ no really, let's hear it from the other side. Lots of people
             are voting for Bush and I want to know what they have to gain
             by doing so. It's good to understand the psychie of your
             enemies so that you can crush them.
             \_ he's not Kerry
             \_ I suspect most Bush voters honestly believe he's better for
                the country.  I know that's incomprehensible to you, but
                Bush voters don't live in the same world you do.
                \_ obviously they believe he's better, but why?
                \_ I think some voters believe he might be worse for the
                   country but he's better for them.  So they vote for him.
                   \_ The same could be said of "some voters" for Kerry.  So?
             \_ Bush is for anti-gay, pro-God, anti-abortion, pro-gun,
                pro-America, anti-terror, anti-tax voters! Kerry = the reverse.
                \_ pro-corporation, anti-littleguy.
                   \_ anti-trial lawyer, neutral-littleguy.
                      \_ trial lawyers gave more money to Bush than Gore.
                         \_ URL?
                            \_ Here's the breakdown by industry for Kerry:
       http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/indus.asp?id=N00000245&cycle=2004
                               and here it is for Bush:
       http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/indus.asp?id=N00008072&cycle=2004
                               They don't break it down by type of lawyer,
                               but the above poster appears to be incorrect.
                               \_ If they don't break it down by type of
                                  lawyer, how does this make it appear the
                                  above poster is incorrect?  And where's your
                                  Gore data?
                                  \_ you are one lazy ass motherfucker.
                  http://www.opensecrets.org/2000elect/indus/AllCands.htm
                                     You're right about Gore, though.  I somehow
                                     read "Kerry" instead of Gore.
        \_ If you make enough money, he has lowered your taxes a lot.
           \_ He's going to bankrupt social security by giving big business
              all these tax breaks which was his plan all along. Transfer
              money from the middle and lower classes to the haves and have
              more's.
              \_ Yeah, hence the haves and have more's probably vote for him.
              \_ SS isn't funded by business taxes.  Try again.
                 \_ No, but the business tax breaks are funded by the
                    SS trust fund.
        \_ He's protecting us from the likes of Cat Stevens.
           \_ YOU'RE NEXT DAVID BOWIE@!@@@@!!!
              \_ Well, he did write that song "I'm Afraid of Americans."
                 OFF TO GITMO WITH HIM!!!!!1!
        \_ I was expecting more intellectual responses, like "Bush's tax
           has made X percent improvements in this and that sectors" but
           it's obvious that there are no pro-Bush advocates on motd.
           \_ We keep getting censored. I am not sure why. Nothing
              inflammatory. Maybe that's why.
              \_ that's dissapointing.  could you put it in a seperate file?
           \_ It's a troll.  Read the motd everyday and you'll easily figure
              it out.  The real question is why would anyone think a man like
              Kerry who did *nothing* with his *19 years* in the Senate is
              magically going to fix the world as President.
              \_ He broke the BCCI scandal which lead to the Iran-Contra
                 affair. Republicans like you still can't forgive him
                 for proving that Reagan was a lying scumbag like
                 the rest of them. He is a great muckracking Senator,
                 and has done lots of other stuff in his 19 years.
                 And you a lying FUD throwing sociopath, just like the
                 rest of the "power at all costs" Republicans.
        \_ You live in OC, d00d.  I'm in West L.A. and I see mostly Kerry
           stickers.
           \_ i've been seeing a lot of stickers too and wish i could get
              a "i drive this piece of crap and will be cancelling out your
              vote for bush" but more succinctly put bumper sticker
              \_ You're both in CA.  Your vote is meaningless.
2004/9/23 [ERROR, uid:33723, category id '18005#4.3125' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33723 Activity:nil
9/23    CBS apology on TANG memos received significantly more media
        coverage than NYT apology on WMD coverage:
        http://mediamatters.org/items/200409230005
        \_ This is election season.  There's more coverage of everything.
2004/9/23 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33720 Activity:very high
9/23    Ladies and Gentleman, Irony is officially Alive.  Apparently,
        "60 Minutes II" ran the Bush TANG memo story by preempting a story
        about the forged Niger Uranium documents. [why was the last line of
        this description deleted?]
        http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6073449/site/newsweek
        \_ I apologize for brutally hijacking a motd thread, but gwbush
           is the original master of irony.  An example:

     James Harding (Financial Times): Mr. President, I want to return to
     the question of torture. What we've learned from these memos this
     week is that the Department of Justice lawyers and the Pentagon
     lawyers have essentially worked out a way that US officials can
     torture detainees without running afoul of the law. So when you say
     you want the US to adhere to international and US laws, that's not
     very comforting. This is a moral question: Is torture ever
     justified?

     President Bush: Look, I'm going to say it one more time. ...Maybe I
     can be more clear. The instructions went out to our people to
     adhere to law. That ought to comfort you. We're a nation of law. We
     adhere to laws. We have laws on the books. You might look at these laws,
     and that might provide comfort for you. And those were the
     instructions...from me to the government. - danh
     \_ Yeah, and? The law also allows for people to kill others given the
        right political circumstances.
        By your logic:
        Soldiers, they kill people, that's bad.
        But they were following law, so people who make the law are bad.
        Therefore The US Government is bad.
        But wait a minute, all governments allow people to be killed for
        political reasons.
        Therefore government is bad in general.
        We should do away with government because killing people should never
        be justified.
        \_ wow.  this is too stupid even for ilyas.  -tom
           \_ If the alternative is to be smart like you, tom, I d rather
              stay an idiot forever. -- ilyas
              \_ you're doing a good job.  -tom
                 \_ I think we should pass a law that basically sanctions
                    torture solely for tom, either that or ship him off
                    to Afghanistan. I'd think that would get unanimous
                    consent from both the House and the Senate.
                    \_ I think we should pass a law not only allowing
                       tom and ilyas to get married, but forcing them to.
                       Then we could have a whole reality TV show around
                       the happy couple.
                       \_ I think tom's peculiar brand of bulldog yapping
                          is exclusive to the safety of the Internet.  I
                          would be very surprised if he was like this face to
                          face.  -- ilyas
                          \_ I'm not sure what you mean by "like this." tom
                             is just as opinionated in real life, but it
                             doesn't come off quite the same way. Do you talk
                             so much about your weapons and about punching
                             people in the face so much in real life? If so,
                             I bet you get laughed at. A lot.
                             \_ I don't remember ever mentioning 'my
                                weapons' on the motd.  I think I mentioned
                                punches to the face once, maybe twice.  I have
                                never threatened anyone with violence.  By
                                'like this,' I mean that tom comes across as
                                stuck in ad hominem mode about 90% of the time.
                                I mean I have to wonder about his mental
                                health sometimes, he seems really angry, all
                                the time.  -- ilyas
        \_ Way to miss the point.
        \_ i am aware that torture happens in all wars, it's just a fact
           of war.  the bush administratoin is doing a spectacularly
           bad job of lying about it and pretending they had absolutely
           no idea this was happening.  we're suppoesd to be the
           good guys.  if you want to turn into aaron, go read
           http://www.nybooks.com/articles/17430 - danh
2004/9/22 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:33701 Activity:nil
9/22    The story about forged documents that 60 Minutes should have run:
        http://csua.org/u/95x (MSNBC)
2004/9/21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33660 Activity:low
9/21    Burkett explains how he obtained memos:  http://csua.org/u/951
        After he received the documents in Houston, Burkett said, he drove
        home, stopping on the way at a Kinko's shop in Waco to copy the six
        memos. In the parking lot outside, he said, he burned the ones he had
        been given and the envelope they were in. Ramirez was worried about
        leaving forensic evidence on them that might lead back to her, Burkett
        said, acknowledging that the story sounded fantastic. "This is going
        to sound like some damn sci-fi movie," he said. -USA Today
        Another story:  http://csua.org/u/952 (Post)
        \_ Sci-fi movie?  Shouldn't he have said suspense movie if that's
           really his recollection?
        \_ Never fear, the kosers are now searching Texas for Lucy Ramirezes,
           and they've even found a few.  This proves that a Lucy Ramirez does
           exist, and therefore the memos are legit.  http://csua.org/u/94w
2004/9/21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33654 Activity:moderate
9/21    One day after I post about how Dubya is going to send more troops
        to Iraq to crush the insurgents, Paul Krugman of the NY Times expresses
        his opinion on this:
        http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/21/opinion/21krugman.html?hp
        \_ csuamotd/csuamotd doesn't work any more.
           What happen?
           \_try csuacsua/csuacsua
           \_ Some one set us up the password change.
                \_ use mine! dykewhore / dykewhore - danh
                   \_ danh must have changed the password in an attempt to
                      monopolize the free password market with his popular
                      dykewhore brand name!
                \_ I am just trying to prevent your brain be polluted with
                   liberal biased media.
2004/9/21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33652 Activity:insanely high
9/21    What would we do without the true believers at dailykos?  These guys
        are just as wacky as the freepers!  http://csua.org/u/94w
        \_ I agree.  "Hunter" sounds like a freeper, but he's a liberal.
           The characteristic in common is that the typical freeper and
           Hunter here just won't acknowledge central weaknesses in their
           position.  E.g., for this dailykos guy, it's
           http://csua.org/u/94h (the Post comparison of memos), and the Post's
           reporting that all existing Texas Air National Guard memos have
           reporting that all 100+ existing Texas Air National Guard memos have
           been in fixed-width font, except these four from Burkett.
           http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18982-2004Sep13.html
           -liberal
           \_ Not to mention that the signatures on the comparison memos
              aren't even remotely similar.
        \_ This is really embarassing, and it just goes on and on!
        \_ They are just as whacky as Freepers because they point out
           that Freepers are liars and extremists? Whatever.
           \_ You don't think that "The right-wing are liars.  They have
              been liars.  They will continue to be liars.  It is part and
              parcel of modern "movement" conservatism." sounds just like
              a freeper, but with right-wing instead of left wing?  Not to
              mention such great explanations as: "Does it remain possible
              that Killian re-typed them at a later date, and that his
              inexpertise as a typist is responsible for the differences
              between those docs and official TANG docs? Certainly."  It's
              POSSIBLE, but it's pretty freakin' unlikely, don't cha
              think?  You know, on the same level of possibilty as the
              plot of "The Day After Tomorrow."
              \_ The modern right wing movement is based on extremist and
                 easily disproven religious BS like creationism and the
                 Virgin Birth. It is extremism to point out this obvious
                 fact? The guy could be more tactful, but the truth is
                 the Religious Right's entire worldview is based on
                 fantasy.
                 \_ "Easily Disproven?"  Go ahead.  Prove to me that
                     virgin birth is impossible, and creationism isn't
                     true.  Or heck, why not just go straight for it and
                     prove there is no God?
                     \_ If you continue to believe that the world was
                        created in seven days in the face of all the
                        evidence from the fields of biology, geology,
                        physics and astronomy, then there is no hope
                        for you and I will not waste my time. Take
                        a science class sometime. The existence or
                        non-existence of God is tangential to what
                        any particular sect or cult believes in. Oh,
                        I agree with you on the memos, btw.
                        \_ it was reformed in 7 days, not created
                        \_ You need to study up on your Christianity.  In
                           the Hebrew in the bible it doesn't say "7 days"
                           it says "7 periods of time" which could mean
                           ANYTHING.  People who literally believe 7 days
                           are probably idiots.  Although, if you can't
                           prove the non-existence of God, ANYTHING
                           becomes possible, and 7 day creation is just as
                           logical as anything else.  Anyway, the point
                           was that the people you're calling wackos are
                           using the same argument as the people you're
                           defending.  You mock the belifs of one and not
                           the other, although they use the same argument
                           style to back up their conclusions.  "You can't
                           prove it's NOT true!"
                           \_ that's ridiculous.  There is physical evidence
                              which supports the Big Bang and evolution.
                              There is no evidence to support the creationist
                              view except some book that some wack jobs wrote,
                              and there are portions, like the Great Flood,
                              which are directly contradicted by all the
                              physical evidence as well as simple logic.
                              Shit, I've been trolled.  -tom
                           \_ Why are they idiots? I say you're an idiot for
                              believing in your version. The early bible
                              stories are all ripoffs of old Babylonian etc.
                              mythology anyway. So you really believe the
                              Bible is some kind of elaborate metaphorical
                              construct that could mean ANYTHING? Or do you
                              simply apply that to things science disagrees
                              with?
                              \_ ripoff?  nah, I would say they have the
                                 same origin.  afterall, abraham was a
                                 babylonian, being from ur.  different
                                 books of the bible are written in very
                                 different manner, so yes, parts of it
                                 could be metaphorical and other parts
                                 not.
                                 could be allegorical and other parts
                                 not.  Jesus used parables all the time.
                                 (ref. "dict ur")
                           \_ "7 day creation is just as logical as anything
                              else." No. It is not logical to believe something
                              in the face of overwhelming evidence to the
                              contrary. It might be conceivable, but it is
                              not logical.
                        \_ You've convinced *me* there's no God.  Would you
                           please sign your name so I'll know who to thank
                           for completely changing my world-view?
2004/9/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33647 Activity:very high
9/20    Novak suggests Bush may withdraw almost immediately from Iraq if
        reelected, regardless of consequences:
        http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak20.html
        \_ How about Bush sending 100K more troops there with the aim of
           crushing all insurgent havens while still training up the Iraqi
           national guard / police / Army and hoping it gets down in four
           years?
           national guard / police / Army and hoping it gets done in four
           years?  If he's going to do a job, he's going to try to do it
           right as soon as the election is over.  Otherwise he'll just
           look like a flip-flopper by abandoning democracy in Iraq.
           And, this also puts a lot of people ready to go into Iran.
           If you ask me, this is what Bush will do.  Heck, we might send
           200K more troops there by that logic.
           \_ Only if people like you join up to make up the 100k
              troop deficit. Time to put your mon-, lives where your
              mouth is.... Thought so.
              \_ Don't you think this is what Dubya was pulling back all
                 the troops from Europe / S Korea for?
        \_ Bob Novak, mouthpiece of the regime and supreme douchebag.
2004/9/20 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33645 Activity:moderate
9/20    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/20/eveningnews/main644664.shtml
        Burkett: "I also insisted when I sat down with your staff in the
        first face-to-face session, before I gave up any documents, I wanted
        to know what you were gonna do with them. And I insisted they be
        authenticated."
        The failure of CBS News to do just that, to properly, fully scrutinize
        the documents and their source, led to our airing the documents when we
        should not have done so. It was a mistake. CBS News deeply regrets it.
        \_ Then how come Burkett didn't provide CBS the original doc to be
           authenticated?
           \_ It's their fault for not insisting on it if they didn't get it.
              They aren't babies.  They are adults with a professional
              responsibility to the public and special Constitutional
              protections.
           \_ The failure of CBS News to do just that ...
        \_ What a complete disgrace.  The democrats and their media
           sycophants have sunk so low.
           sycophants have sunk so low.  Their behavior completely
           vindicates Zell Miller.
           \_ wherefore art thou trollio?
              \_ "Uh!  It says a bad thing about my media whores!  You must
                  be an evil trooooolll!!!  No content reply required!"
                  \_ so you're saying you aren't a troll?  If you meant
                     every word of what you wrote, then more power to you.
2004/9/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33635 Activity:kinda low
9/20    CBS recants.  http://csua.org/u/94g
        I hope all the defenders of the authenticity of the Killian memo
        have the intellectual integrity to admit they were misled.  I can
        understand the impulse to defend all things anti-W.  But when the
        subject is unworthy, the defense ultimately hurts more than it helps.
        \_ What, I've been saying all along that at least one was probably
           a fake or transcribed.  You must be talking about those sodans
           posting the http://dailykos.com links, right?  Anyway, for those who STILL
           think they're authentic copies, here's a side-by-side comparison of
           real vs. fake. -liberal   http://csua.org/u/94h  (Post)
           \_ I wish the defenders of the memo would be at least honest
              enough to admit their faith in their authenticity was
              unjustified.  I'm a Salon reader, and they defended the
              memos when they came out.  I don't think they've mentioned
              CBS's apology except in passing.
           \_ I never said they were real, I just said that they were not
              produced with MS Word. I still stand by that. -real liberal
              \_ you sound like how dubya wants to portray kerry.
                 -"fake" liberal
                 \_ I guess I don't follow.
                    \_ yer dodging the substantive question and trying to have
                       it both ways.
                       \_ Which is what this whole debacle is anyway.  I like
                          how the secretary saying "I didn't type that memo,
                          but I typed others with the same sentiment" quickly
                          was shortened to "I didn't type that memo."
              \_ Are you the "That is correct" guy in the following motd
                 posts?  Quoting...
                          \_ Are you saying that the specific memo talked
                             about in the URL is not fake?
                             \_ That is correct. If you create a document
                                using a font with a typewriter and then
                                reproduce it 30 years later using a computer,
                                they should look very much alike.  That is
                                the whole point of having a font.
                 And then later in the same thread, (more quoting)
                          \_ Look, I just proved that it was not produced
                             with a computer. What else could have created it?
                 \_ In response to: "At least one of the memos is MS Word
                    generated." Admit it, you were wrong about the MS Word
                    bit. That was all I was contending, which is obvious
                    if you read the whole thing:
                    http://csua.org/u/94j
                    \_ It looks like you started arguing against MS Word
                       generation and then broadened your claim when you
                       said "That is correct" to the question "Are you saying
                       that the specific memo...is not fake?".  How else would
                       you interpret "That is correct" to "is not fake"?
                       \_ I do wish people would be honest enough to admit
                          they backed the wrong horse. - !pp
                       \_ If you misinterpreted it, then I am sorry. I
                          should have been more clear. But if I had intended
                          to proclaim them genuine I would have done so
                          in the start. I just knew that the LGF claims
                          were bogus.
                          \_ "Are you saying that the specific memo... is not
                             fake?"  "That is correct."
                    \_ I was the liberal who wrote "At least one ... MS Word
                       generated".  Later on I wrote that I read the dailykos
                       stuff (completely) and this created reasonable doubt
                       on MS Word.  Later on, I wrote that, even with
                       reasonable doubt, the preponderance of evidence was
                       still at least one or more memos were transcribed or
                       fake.  (especially with the Post finding that all
                       verified memos didn't use proportional font, see the
                       URL nearby topic header for example)
                    \_ Ah, the "raised 'e'" nonsense.  The scans in the .pdf
                       are so bad that it looks like an aliasing problem.
                       They were scanned-in faxes stored at low resolution.
                       The raised 'e's look sharper than the surrounding text
                       which would suggest imaging problems rather than a
                       typewriter.
           \_ I never cared either way but I had a problem with faulty
              logic being applied to "prove" they were fake.
              \_ What are some of the examples of faulty logic?  Were the
                 defenders of the memo logically more correct?
              \_ CBS has more credibility to lose than freepers.
        \_ Why doesn't someone (CBS?) just find a reputable lab and run
           forensics on the original document, and see whether the ink on the
           document is laser toner, inkjet ink, or typewriter ribbon ink.  Or
           just see if the paper itself is today's paper or 1972 GI paper.
           \_ CBS never had access to the original documents.
           \_ CBS is airing an interview tonight with Burkett, who passed
              the documents to CBS.  Burkett will say he misled CBS.  Don't
              know where Burkett will say he got them from.
              \_ 'So when Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather
                 that a riot was beginning, he took water and washed his hands
                 before the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this man's blood;
                 see to it yourselves." '
                 \_ This is incredibly lame, even for soda motd.
                    \_ But hey, Gibson made Pilate out to be the
                       good guy, misled by the eeeeeeevil Jews!  If Mad Max
                       says it, it must be true!
                       \_ Um, no, that's not what he did.
                 \_ Yep.  Rather and CBS is blameless in all this.  Crucify
                    Burkett.
                    \_ Between blameless and the crucifixion quote, the truth
                       is found somewhere in the middle.
        \_ "There are some people who will argue whether the flames are blue
           or green when the real issue is that their arse is on fire."
           The memo was a fake.  The facts outlined in the memo were not.
           \_ As much as Rather would like the only fire to be Bush-related,
              an equally legitimate fire is the memos probably being fake.
              \_ In fact, it looks like controversy over the memos will
                 make it difficult to talk legitimately about Bush's
                 National Guard non-service.
           \_ If the memos were false, how do you know their claims are true?
              The 30-year memories of an addled 86-yr. old?  The claims of a
              partisan Democrat?
              \_ Yes, but she's a spry 86-year old.
              \_ Why won't Bush simply sign his Form 180 and put this
                 controversy to rest?
2004/9/20 [ERROR, uid:33634, category id '18005#16.7297' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33634 Activity:kinda low
9/20    I like how some Republicans are honest and not just chanters of "Four
        more years!":
        http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/20/bush.monday.ap/index.html
        "The fact is, a crisp, sharp analysis of our policies is required.
        We didn't do that in Vietnam, and we saw 11 years of casualties mount
        to the point where we finally lost," said Sen. Chuck Hagel ...
        \_ Bush should've been out on his ear this election.  He shouldn't
           be re-elected, and even most Republicans agree.  The Dems
           should've had it in the bag, but the screwed it up.
           -conservative
           \_ Don't conservatives usually know how to spell the word?
              \_ we dont need no fancy book-learnin
        \_ Do you only believe what Repubs say when they disagree with Bush?
           \_ No.  I also don't believe Democrats when they're being stupid.-op
        \_ Bush has support because this is a campaign about America and
           Americans. America is great because of great Americans. Americans
           are good, strong people. They support a strong America. The American
           people are good people of Faith. We believe in our kids, and in our
           young men and women in the armed forces. Americans support our
           troops. George W. Bush understands Americans, and knows the value
           of maintaining strong communities that are the heart of America.
           His opponent may not share these American values. His opponent may
           stand up there and complain about America, and tell you Americans
           are wrong. Well that's for Americans to decide. There's an old
           Texas saying, it went "America: the land of the brave". Or was
           that the home of the brave. And the free. Because this is about
           freedom. Thank you.
           \_ Brilliant summation of the Bush argument style. It's so hard
              to believe people lap this up.
              \_ People lap this up because they are STUPID DOGS.  They need
                 a FEARLESS SOCIALIST PARTY TO TAKE CARE OF THEM AND SHOW THEM
                 THE WAY!  Save us Berkeley liberals!  Save America!
                 \_ That's right! Those evil socialist communist terrorist
                    homosexuals think they're so damn SMART! We don't need
                    their droning pompous WHINING! Real Americans know a Real
                    American President when they see one! Oh and here, have
                    some free conservative prescription drugs!
            \_ Agreed, however this is simply Nationalism which can be
               very dangerous in the wrong hands.  I would give examples
               but don't want to be mistaken as a troll.
            \_ Dude, bring a napkin, you are getting your liberal jizz all
                 over the motd.
                 \_ I'm surprised you can speak with your mouth wrapped around
                    Cheney's dick.
                    \_ Is this some sort of liberal overcompensation for the
                       Clinton fiasco(s)?  Kind of like how the DNC convention
                       looked like a military junta because they were accused
                       of being anti-military wimps for so long they had to
                       lurch too far the other way?
                    \_ Boys, boys, please!  This is not http://freerepublic.com!
                    \_ It's easy when the dick is so BIG and TAX FREE!
2004/9/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33621 Activity:high
9/18    Defend private property from illegal invasion, get shot by the
        FBI
        Federal agents surround ranch in Douglas, Arizona
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1218545/posts
        \_ from one of the freeper posts a bit down on the page:
           "I remember that we held our noses 4 years ago. The pubbies told us
           to give him a gop House and Senate and we'd get what we wanted. We
           held up our end of the deal. This year, I'm not holding my nose."
           Hah! you fuckers are losing your base.  It continues to amaze
           me how the same people who claim to be radical opponents of
           excessive government power can support the Ashcroft justice
           department.
           \_ As much as reality may upset you, gun toting freeper yahoos
              are not the (R) base.  Someone who refers to them as "The
              pubbies" clearly sees himself not as the base but outside the
              party and needing to be bought.  Carry on.
           \_ Generalizations accomplish very little - there are statists
              in both parties.  Exactly which provisions or actions by
              Ashcroft are you upset about?  I never heard
              outcries from the left about Clinton's 1995 anti-terror act,
              of which the Patriot Act simply ties up the loose ends.
              \_ Explain this to us less tinfoil-oriented types.
              \_ Because Clinton:good, Bush:evil.  Very straight forward.
2004/9/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33615 Activity:low
9/18    Relax, fat sysadmins.  You're not nearly as fat as these people:
        http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/dimtext/kjn/people/heaviest.htm
        \_ don't get too relaxed.  you are probably as dumb as this:
           http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/browse
        \_ What about skinny sysadmins?  Why are we always left out?
2004/9/17-18 [ERROR, uid:33598, category id '18005#5.48425' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33598 Activity:low
9/17    About the girl with the ripped sign.  The blog suggests it's really the
        guy's son who's staging it (with of course no data).  I just heard an
        interview with the guy and he absolutely denies that.  In fact he says
        his two older sons are in the military.
        pic still here: http://csua.org/u/934
        \_ The guy's a real estate salesman with political aspirations.  He's
           run for local offices 4 times, failing every time.  Don't you think
           it's a bit too much of a coincidence that for 3 different election
           cycles he's been able to get the same story into the national press?
           \_ No coincidence, but no conspiracy either.  He attends some
              rallies for the opponent with a sign for his candidate.  That's
              it.  His comments were that he's had many union families come up
              to him and tell him "good job, glad to have you here".
        \_ And here's the audio for free of the interview:
           http://www.glennbeck.com/news/09172004-2.shtml
        \_ Nice.  This incident happened in Huntington, W. Va.  In another
           story, someone fired a gun into the Republian party HQ there:
           http://www.herald-dispatch.com/2004/September/08/LNtop1.htm
           \_ You're going to have to work harder to convince me there's
              sinister intent behind a stray bullet in West Virginia.
              \_ Both of you losers:  The bullet was through the center of a
                 sign saying "Marriage - One Man, One Woman".
                 They took down the sign and then started snapping photos.
                 \_ Probably staged.
                 \_ The article said it was a pellet gun.  What bullet?
                    \_ Are you illiterate?
                       \_ Did you read the article?
2004/9/17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33597 Activity:high
9/17    2^10 dead soldiers in Iraq .. GO BUSH! FOUR MORE YEARS!
        I know he can make it 2^20 with a just a bit more time
        \_ You are inferring nukular detonation in a city center of a Western
           nation, right?
           \_ No, I was thinking more battlefield nukes on the plains
              of Iran. Not to mention a good exchange in Korea.
           \_ I think he was implying, not inferring.
2004/9/17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33591 Activity:high 50%like:33592
9/17    What is wrong with George W. Bush.  Ridiculous!!1!
        http://csua.org/u/93e
        \_ So Kerry looks like a moron, and Bush looks like a pediophile.
           \_ A ped-i-o-phile?  What's that?
              \_ apparently a typo. get over it.
                 \_ rediculous!!!
2004/9/17 [ERROR, uid:33584, category id '18005#8.03066' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33584 Activity:high 100%like:33610
9/16    Classy.
        http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/040916/480/wvrs10309162250&e=2&ncid=1756
        \_ are you talking about this family of morons?
           link:csua.org/u/939 - danh
        \_ I think this is part of Kerry's campaign to look "strong."
        \_ The guy is a union thug.  Union members commonly attack protestors
           at political rallies.
        \_ The guy who did it is a union thug.  Union members commonly attack
           protestors at political rallies.
           \_ The guy is his SON.
              \_ No it isn't.  The blog is unsupported and refuted by the guy
                 himself (see above).  How much of a tinfoil hat nut are you?
           \_ Who is, the guy holding the kid?
        \_ http://csua.org/u/934
           \_ This guy is a fraud.  Read this entry:
              http://csua.org/u/935
              \_ Um, yeah that's conclusive.  Not.
              \_ I don't know that this means he's a fraud, just that he
                 likes to cause trouble.  Considering this seemed to be
                 standard operating procedure for dems at the RNC, it
                 hardly bothers me.
        \_ So what about Young Republican shown on ABC news kicking the
           female protester when she was down?  Where's your outrage now?
              http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004_09_12_atrios_archive.html#109542699935507535
           \_ That bitch deserved it for embarrassing our Commander In Chief
              that way. Too bad she didn't end up in the hospital.
        \_ Dumb asshole subjecting his little girl to that stuff, standing
           around at an airport antagonizing people. That girl is what, 5?
           "I'm a victim!"
           \_ Didn't see it but it sounds scummy.  But ripping the sign out of
              the hands of a 3-year-old child?!?!?
              \_ Read the above URL.  It seems to be staged.
                 \_ That blog is less evidence than the CBS memos.
2004/9/15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Computer/SW/Apps] UID:33538 Activity:high
9/15    http://www.electoral-vote.com
        Has nice popups per state which shows currently numbers and the way
        each state voted in 2000, gives details on how the numbers are
        gathered, compiled, and generated.  Excel spreadsheet and xml is
        available free from the site.  Updated once per day in the morning.
        \_ woah! bush wins!  I guess we don't have to have an election now,
           since the compueter and the polls tell us who should be president.
           \_ you're a moron.
        \_ This is a great site.  It was posted on the motd a while ago and
           I've been following it for a few weeks.  Every time a state poll is
           conducted the thing jumps around.
2004/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33534 Activity:nil
9/14    AP Uses Fake SEAL to Back Kerry, Slam Bush
        MSM caught lying again.
        http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1214014/posts?page=1,50
        \_ See, there's no point in censoring you when you post laughable
           crap from http://freerepublic.com.  Let me see if I can find a Mother
           Jones link to keep you similarly entertained.
           Here you go: http://csua.org/u/91i
           Repubs gerrymander San Diego district! pimp for Military-
           Industrial Complex!  All liars and crooks!
           \_ Well freerepublic broke the false ANG story.  Authentiseal
              says this guys muslim name and original name do not
              exist in their database.  Believe what you want, the guy
              or AP author lied.  SEALs take frauds very seriously.
                \_ so why haven't they beaten up jesse ventura? - danh
                   \_ visit their sites.
        \_ So, the guy may or may not be a SEAL, but, the evidence is
           inconclusive.  He claims to have changed his name since he
           served, and as it says in the SEAL response, if he's changed
           his name the search is meaningless.  -motd conservitive
2004/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33533 Activity:nil
9/14    Killian's secretary talks to DRUDGE
        http://www.drudgereport.com/bushtang.htm
        "I typed memos that had this information in them, but I did not type
        these memos. ... The information in these memos is correct." ...
        Knox speculated as to how she thought the forgeries were created
        saying, "My guess is that someone in the outfit got hold of the real
        ones and discussed it with a former Army person." ...
        Knox told the DRUDGE REPORT that she did not vote for Bush in 2000
        because he is 'unqualified' for the job, and does not intend to vote
        for him in 2004, either. ...
        "Bush was not the only person of privilege who had a spot in the Guard.
        Senator [Lloyd] Bensen's nephew was in headquarters. There was a big
        jewelery store, Gordons. Their son was in the Guard. The owner of
        Batelstein's, a posh department store in the area, his son was in.
        The other kids couldn't get in like that. Hugh Roy Cullen's grandson
        was also in. He was a big oil man."
        Knox, however, did have some kind words about then Lt. Bush. "[Bush]
        was always pleasant and gentlemanly to me," she said. "I never noticed
        him not being respectful. I thought he was a nice young man and that he
        must have had very nice parents to produce a son as nice as he seemed
        to be." ...
        Ms. Knox states emphatically that she is not acting for political
        motives, and has no formal relationship with any political party. She
        says she just wants to set the record straight.
        \_ I don't think I buy that some Army person got ahold of the
           originals are rewrote them.  That doesn't really make sense.
           Seems more likely to me that some Kerry supporters just wrote
           them, and since the info was true, the forgeries loosely
           corrospond with what she actually wrote 30 yrs ago.
2004/9/14 [Recreation/Media, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33528 Activity:nil
9/14    WaPo defends CBS and Killian memo.  Not.  http://csua.org/u/91e
2004/9/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33515 Activity:high
9/13    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18982-2004Sep13.html
        Of more than 100 records made available by the 147th Group and the
        Texas Air National Guard, none used the proportional spacing
        techniques characteristic of the CBS documents. Nor did they use a
        superscripted "th" in expressions such as "147th Group" and or
        "111th Fighter Intercept Squadron."
        [There is reasonable doubt, but the preponderance of evidence is that
        one or more memos are either fake or transcribed -- also, the
        authenticity of the memos is independent of whether the events
        described occurred or not. -liberal]
        \_ Your last sentence there is probably the most interesting.  To
           be frank, I'm pretty sure that Bush got special treatment.
           Kerry did to, so no real biggie there.  However, none of
           that justifies pathetic forgeries. -conservative
           \_ Kerry was a really smart Yale guy who leveraged that and his
              connections into becoming a swift boat captain.
           \_ Kerry was a smart, accomplished Yale guy who leveraged that and
              his connections into becoming a swift boat captain.
              Dubya was a frat president jokester at Yale with below-average
              or average grades who leveraged his connections into getting
              OUT of the war into the Texas Air National Guard.
              This should be supremely obvious to everyone, regardless of
              political viewpoint.
2004/9/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33509 Activity:very high
9/13    Right Wing Nutjob Bloggers schooled by dailykos:
        http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603
        \_ You know, I think both candidates are pretty much poor in this
           election, and I'd really like to think of myself as neutral in
           all the mudslinging. But Kerry supporters trying to pass this off
           as a legit memo is just irrational. Through this fantastic series
           of coincidences - some backwater base buys this super expensive
           typewriter to write memos, and some guy whose family says he could
           barely type uses proportional spacing in his memos, and the word
           wrapping and font just happen to be identical to what MS Word does
           on the default settings, etc. etc. ... sheesh. It's fake. Deal with
           it. Save your breath for an issue where you might have some
           legitimacy.
           \_ Yeah, go back to your hole, ya left-wing bleeding heart wannabe
              independent. If the memo was real you'd be all over it like a
              dog in heat trying to hump a dead tree stump. Fact is that the
              memo was from the Kerry campaign. Fact is that it was a blatant
              attempt by the Kerry folks to retaliate to swiftboat. Fact is
              that they failed miserably and now CBS and the Kerry boys have
              egg over all their collective faces because Kerry doesn't know
              how to hide his trail.
              \_ Speaking of slimy political maneuvering:
                 http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=politicsNews&storyID=6224278
              \_ Did you read the article?  They refute every argument against
                 the memo's legitimacy.  Better get in a few more quick "just
                 give it up"s before your whole argument falls apart.
                 \_ Like I said, save your breath. "Falls apart". Hah. Would
                    you be willing to bet a Kerry presidency on those memos
                    being legitimate?
           \_ While the line wrapping is exact, the font is not, according
              to that http://dailykos.com URL.
              Also, the http://dailykos.com consensus now seems to be the IBM
              Executive typewriter, not the Selectric Composer.  The former
              is common; the latter is expensive and not.
              http://dailykos.com people are trying to get their hands on an
              Executive now.
              \_ Anyone know, how did line wrapping work on these electric
                 typewriters? Did people just guess where to hit the
                 carriage return or was there some better indication to avoid
                 going over the margin?
                 \_ I owned one a selectric--you could set mechanical tabs
                    which would either stop the carriage and not let you type
                    any more, or on some models do a CR/LF for you.  -John
                 The spacing is the most suspicious, including the centered
                 header on another memo (although it is actually not centered
                 but shifted over to the right by 1 tab).
        \_ This link unsatifactorily addresses two, yes only two, of
           the inconsistencies found in the memo.  The blog contains
           only information found earlier on the 'right wing nutjob'
           websites.  Another example, one of the Gen. referred to
           had retired 18 months prior to the memo.  There are 10
           or 15 more discrepancies.  So, try again.
        \_ As ex-Army, http://dailykos.com should realize that the abbreviations
           used in the memos reveal they were written by someone who was
           never in the military. He should know what a Form 180 is, and
           which candidates have and have NOT signed it.
2004/9/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, ERROR, uid:33507, category id '18005#26.1328' has no name! , ] UID:33507 Activity:high
9/13    http://tinyurl.com/3wyfy (story.news.yahoo.com)
        fucking little bush.
        \- things like the steel trarrifs were not "flipflops" they were
           far worse. that particular case was cynical vote mongering ...
           burying principle for electorial votes. in re: flipflopping
           over changing circumstances, as JM Keynes said: "When the facts
           change, I change my mind -- What do you do, sir?" Another good
           Keynes quote: "Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite
           exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves
           of some defunct economist." --psb
           \_ Also note that changing your mind based on changing facts is
              different from denying facts while making your decision, then
              changing your mind when your polls drop.
           \_ If America shows uncertainty and weakness in this decade, the
              world will drift toward tragedy. -GW Bush
           \_ cf. letting the ban on assault weapons lapse to gain the NRA
              endorsement.  "I support the ban," the President said.
              \_ "I would sign it if Congress passes it" is not the same
                 as "I support it."
                 \_ http://csua.org/u/90v (NYTimes article, abstract.)
                    He vowed to support the ban on assault weapons.
                    \_ yes, he vowed that, and then he didn't do anything to
                       support it.  Do you think Tom Delay would be saying
                       "it'll never come up for a vote" if Bush supported the
                       ban?  Don't be obtuse. -tom
                       \_ Speaking of obtuse, tom, my point is that GWB vowed
                          to support the ban on asssault weapons, has not
                          publicly reversed himself on that position, and yet
                          still won't push his fellow repubs to bring the
                          matter to a vote.  In other words, he's pimping
                          for votes.
2004/9/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33506 Activity:nil
9/13    This is incredible.  The press is now fabricating anti-Bush
        stories repeatedly.  First false "Clinton booing" at a rally,
        then the blatantly fake CBS documents, now this.
        AP stands by its story about anti-Bush SEAL
        http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40427
        \_ Well, not to meantion that's just a stupid think to print in
           the first place.
        \_ Your "blatantly fake" claim about the CBS documents isn't any more
           true the more you say it.  We have no way of knowing, and to claim
           you do is foolish.  As for the Clinton booing, the reporter made
           the report.  The recording of the speech doesn't have the booing.
           That doesn't mean there weren't people booing away from the mics...
           I'm not saying anybody booed, but i'd be surprised if no one did.
           Now I'll look for your new outrage on something OTHER than world
           net daily.
           \_ A cursory glance at the evidence concerning the memos shows
              they are false.  I can recreate the memos with Microsoft
              Word, overlay them, and they match perfectly.
              Your media sources have now resorted to fabricating lies in
              order to win a political campaign.  What a pathetic disgrace.
              \_ And you can do the same with a late 60's model IBM Selectric
                 Typewriter.  And CBS has not shown itself in any way as anti-
                 Bush.
                 \_ No, it's theorized that you could, with a lot of work,
                    produce something kinda similar to what Word does
                    automatically.  Getting that that type of letter
                    spacing out of a seletric involved pulling a
                    little lever everytime you wanted the letters closer
                    together.  Almost no one ever did this.  It also
                    probably wouldn't be in the Word font either.
                    And what about the super scripts?  They're DEFINATLY
                    done Word style.  And what about the lack of page
                    indentations from the typewriter head and the
                    lack of cloth fibers from the Selectric's cloth
                    ribbon?  Have you ever used a typewriter?  You don't
                    seem to know anything about them.
                    \_ Some of the lines in the Killian memo were centered,
                       right?  I learned to type on an old typewriter, and
                       it's a pain to center a line.  And that's with a fixed
                       width font.  I imagine it's pretty painful trying to
                       center a proportional-spaced line on a typewriter.
                       In fact, how *do* you do that?  Does the alleged
                       typewriter have some special lever or switch to do it?
                       \_ I haven't seen the one with the centered line.
                          \_ for example, link:csua.org/u/90s
                 \_ Has anyone done this experiment?  Get the correct period
                    typewriter (I assume there must a functional one some-
                    where) and try to reproduce the letter?  It'd be
                    instructive to see how much of a task it would be.
                    \_ There is one thing about the memos that a period
                       typewriter at all, and that is to make the super-
                       script 'th' in 4th:
                       http://tinyurl.com/qqe6 (suntimes.com)
                       Also as the article says, Times New Roman was not
                       licensed for use by anyone other than the Times of
                       London till the 80s so it is not possible for a
                       60s era typewriter to produce the memo in question.
                       \_ False. IBM was using it since the 50s.
                          \_ URL please.
        \_ You are right, it is "incredible." Your source has no
           credibility, neither do you.
        \_ Courier's vanquisher was Times New Roman, designed in
           1931 by Stanley Morison, Typographical Advisor to the
           Monotype Corporation, with the assistance of draughtsman
           Victor Lardent... (Ironically, at the same time
           IBM invited Frutiger to adapt Univers for the Selectric
           Typewriter, they asked Morison to do the same with Times New Roman.)
           [edited to retain point but remove unnecessary verbosity]
2004/9/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, ERROR, uid:33505, category id '18005#7.99559' has no name! , ] UID:33505 Activity:nil
9/13    At least one of the memos is MS Word generated.  Look here:
        http://csua.org/u/90r (blog, and downloadable Word doc)
        You will find the Word doc was created using all the default settings,
        with word wrapping occurring precisely where they do in the CBS News
        documents.  Don't be a dumb liberal. -smart liberal
        \_ Don't be a tool:
           http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603
           At least one of them could not have been generated by
           a computer, with the funny "e"s moving up and
           down the middle of various words. -real liberal, not fake "liberal"
           \_ You need to acknowledge that at least one document (the one
              discussed in the URL) is probably fake.
        \_ In the original CBS document, some letters "float" above or
           below the baseline. For example, in the original document,
           lowercase 'e' is very frequently -- but not always -- above the
           baseline. Look at the word "interference", or even "me".
           Typewriters do this; computers don't. Granted, if you are
           comparing a lowercase 'e' that is only 10 or 12 pixels high
           with another lowercase 'e' that is only 10 or 12 pixels high,
           you're not going to see such subtleties. That doesn't prove the
           differences aren't there; it just proves you're an idiot, for
           making them each 12 pixels high and then saying "see, they
           almost match!"
           \_ Are you saying that the specific memo talked about in the URL
              is not fake?
              \_ That is correct. If you create a document using a font
                 with a typewriter and then reproduce it 30 years later
                 using a computer, they should look very much alike.
                 That is the whole point of having a font.
                 \_ I will only believe this if someone can come up with
                    a 1972 typewriter that outputs MS Word Times New Roman 12pt
                    exactly as in 19-May-1972.doc.
                    Please provide URL when you find evidence of this, and
                    exactly this.
                    Or ... if you can find a verified National Guard-related
                    document also from 1972 that shows the same style as
                    19-May-1972.doc.
2004/9/12-13 [ERROR, uid:33480, category id '18005#3.5' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33480 Activity:high
9/12    Why is the story surrounding fake ANG memos presented by CBS
        and 60 minutes not receiving more coverage? The story has
        huge implications.
        \_ It was front page news on CNN for two days. You'll probably see more
           once they get a better idea who produced them. What more do you
           want?
        \_ There is no left wing media bias.  Please ignore fake memos and
           swift boat vets behind the curtains.  Thank you.  You shall be
           escorted from the building by security.  Have a nice day.
        \_ Yeah, I am sure they are real. Makes perfect since he got an
           honorable discharge. Afterwards, he threw his medals over
           the White House fence as well.
           \_ If they aren't real, then the white house should come out and
              say it.  That they haven't should tell you alot.
              \_ What?  No it doesn't.  It's supposedly a secret memo this
                 guy wrote and hid.  How would Bush know if it was a
                 forgery or not better than anyone else?  He never would
                 have seen the document before.  Dang, I think I've been
                 trolled.
                 \_ Hid?  They came up in FOIA requests.
                    \_ URL for this claim?
                       \_ Sorry I was wrong.  They were supposedly from
                          Killian's personal files, but they are marked
                          "for record".  As FOIA requests in regards to
                          this matter are all funneled through the white
                          house, we won't know until the presidency changes
                          hands.
2004/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33474 Activity:high
9/11    Hi soda losers.  I had my panties in a bunch worrying about Dubya
        ruling for the next four years, but I'm now in the middle of Cat's
        Cradle (book) and learning to not worry so much.  Thanks, bye!
        "There's nothing there!"
        \_ Why is the GWB censor afraid of the truth? Oh, yeah, he's
           a liar, a cheat, and an idiot.
2004/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33472 Activity:very high
9/11    Happy 9/11 Anniversary! Or, maybe not so happy, I don't know...
        \_
          \
        "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that
        says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'"
        [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]

        "I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time
        on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."
        [President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
        \_ I am glad you like to edit his speeches because he is so
           difficult to understand.
        \_ You do realize his sentiments simply reflected pretty much that
           of the American public, at the time.  Taking quotes out of context
           won't make a bush voter vote kerry.
2004/9/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33456 Activity:kinda low
9/10    New poll shows Bush stomping Kerry.  I guess people like it when they
        know where someone stands.
     http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/bush_campaign_poll_040909
.html
        \_ Dubya delivered a good speech, but it's aaaaa-llll baloney.
           Take it from me. -smart liberal
        \_ No, the *new* poll has Bush with a two point lead. Do you really
           only check the poll that Rush tells you to look at?
           http://www.pollingreport.com/wh2004.htm
           Has a survey of all the pollsters.
2004/9/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33447 Activity:very high
9/9     So CBS and 60 Minutes are so set on bringing down Bush they
        usef fraudulent documents!?? This is crazy.
        \_ The white house released their own copies and have not denied
           their authenticity.  You're pretty damn quick to jump on noise.
        \_ at least describe what you are trolling with.
           here i'll help you out
           http://www.powerlineblog.com
           http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40376
           \_ You know, I think they are fakes. -liberal
              \_ I think you are a fake.
                 \_ But the blog sounds so real.  We're all D00M3D!! -liberal
        \_ DAMN THAT LIBERAL MEDIA!!!
        \_ Proportional fonts notwithstanding, all military documents
           require the date be in caps.
        \_ The documents are real.
           \_ Have you ever served? Do you not know military protocol in regards
              to writing the date in only capitalized? It is like when armchair
              warriors do not know what Zulu time is. Format is always Zulu Time,
              Day, Month CAPITALIZED, year.
                \_ Is military protocal ALWAYS followed?  Even in things like
                   slapdash memos?  The existence of a regulation != 100%
                   compliance with it.  Not saying it's not a forgery, but
                   you should be a bit more precise (especially with badly
                   formatted motd posts.)  -John
        \_ Could the documents be transcriptions?
        \_ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9967-2004Sep9.html
           See, even the Post agrees.  Wah, I don't want Dubya to win. -liberal
           \_ Well no, that is not what that article says. Reread it.
              \_ It says the Post's experts say it's fake, and CBS won't
                 reveal its experts and that CBS checked it with Killian's
                 Republican, Bush-loving superior, but the guy isn't
                 returning calls!
        \_ The pdf's presented by CBS are obviously fakes.  One can overlay
           a Microsoft Word version and they match perfectly.  The
           question now is the motive and culprit.  This story first
           broke on http://freerepublic.com, BTW.
           \_ Please provide one in /csua/tmp.  I believe you, but I want
              to see what you've created.
              \_ Look here
                 http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog
        \_ I am not convinced either way (yet), reading all this neat
           stuff about the history of fonts is fun, your liberal friends
           have posted responses
           http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/9/10/34914/1603 - danh
                 \_ Thanks.  That pretty much seals it for that particular
                    memo, at least, in that it's not an original 1970s
                    copy.  The only possible explanation, for that memo at
                    least and perhaps the others, was that it was forged or
                    transcribed. -liberal
        \_ Whee! More media circus of irrelevant bullshit.
        \_ Call me paranoid but what if the Bush people are secretly the
           source of the forged documents? having this stuff come out and
           slathered all over the press and then proven to be fake is really
           benefitting Bush, because now he can still say he served his time
           etc, but also say "look at the dirty tricks the Democrats are up
           to!" so it just makes the Democrats look evil AND stupid.
           \_ Guilty as charged! -democrat
2004/9/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33435 Activity:high
9/9     http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&e=3&u=/nm/20040909
pl_nm/campaign_sticker_dc
        Why are they angry? They are the same as hitler. The comparison
        is perfectly valid.
        \_ http://csua.org/u/8yy
        \_ This is a blatant lie
           "MoveOn.org, an independent liberal group, briefly aired
           advertisements that featured a photograph of Hitler transforming
           into Bush's image. "
           The bush/hitler ad was one of hundreds of entries in a contest
           *run* by http://moveon.org.  It lost, was never even a finalist, and
           never aired.
        \_ Please note that the Dems came out immediately to denounce the
           sticker.  Who in the RNC denounced the purple heart bandaids?
2004/9/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33412 Activity:high
9/7     Hmmm apparently the Japanese word for Poop needle is Kancho!
        http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=popvox&id=414&page=12
        (Guy #2)
        http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=popvox&id=379&page=17
        This one's about organ donataion.  The first and third ladies are
        pretty funny.
        http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=popvox&id=367&page=18
        Best one yet!  First lady wants to be Bush's "Monica Lewinsky!"
2004/9/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33404 Activity:very high
9/7     Kerry cosponsored bill banning gun he waves
        http://www.drudgereport.com/dncg.htm
        \_ a waste of a great gun :(
        \_ MacGyver wised up and became Colonel O'Neal
        \_ pistol grips on shotguns are way less accurate then
           regular grips, they should let the twinks keep them
           \_ it could help in close, urban situations where accuracy
              of one shot isn't the primary concern.
             \_ most experts agree, pistol grips should be removed
                cuz they suck in urban situations
               \_ how bout for full auto shotguns
        \_ TWO MILLION JOBS LOST! $9 BILLION "UNACCOUNTED FOR" IN IRAQ!
           A UNILATERAL WAR BASED ON COOKED INTELLIGENCE! SHUT THE FUCK
           UP YOU ASS! I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK! FUCK YOU!!!!!!!111!! --aaron
           \_ Amen.  There's not really enough "stfu, u teh gay" in US
              politics right now; in addition to agreeing wholeheartedly
              with Mr. Smith, I welcome this move to introduce better form
              into the political debating process.  -John
              \_ You are cruel, John. -- ilyas
           \_ I would like to note at this point that I just gave my
              largest donation to date to the DCCC and DFA, and I now feel
              much better. Thank you for your concern! --aaron
              \_ lose one for the flipper!  Let me tell you my impression
                 \_ you really should stop posting this "quip" unless you're
                    trying to sound totally inane.
                 of Kerry.  I was watching him on a book interview on CSPAN.
                 He was asked what books he was reading or would
                 recommend.  He stammered on for 3-4 minutes and
                 effectively said nothing.  He stated one childrens book
                 he had read and something about the importance of the
                 Bible.  The rest of his response was nuanced evasive
                 nonsense about what types of books, how many... on and on.
                 He could of named 5 books in 30 seconds and been done with
                 it; instead he was afraid to define himeself. Someone
                 with this type of personality does not make an
                 effective executive, especially during national crises.
                 \_ Let me tell you my impression of GW Bush.  I was watching
                    him read _My Pet Goat_ for seven minutes after he learned
                    of the 2nd tower being attacked.  He knows how to delegate
                    authority -- someone else was taking care of it, so he
                    doesn't have to worry about it himself.
                    didn't have to worry about immediate action himself.
                 \_ That wouldn't define him. naming a few books with
                    no explanation?  I don't buy that about effective
                    exectutives. Bush wasn't a particularly effective
                    executive. (And I doubt he could give a fast and direct
                    answer to that question anyway). Bush had both houses of
                    Congress Republican. This thing about strong
                    leadership is some kind of folklore. Simple folks love
                    to think that down home backwoods wisdom always beats
                    fancy book learnin'. If something can't be stated in
                    a simple sentence they don't want to hear it. The
                    real world isn't black and white and involves nuanced
                    decision-making. People base the whole image of Bush
                    on "he invaded Iraq => strong!" That decision had
                    many consequences and many of us think it was wrong
                    at that time, and inadequately planned. His economic
                    policy is sustained by record-busting deficit spending.
                    Bush's only other executive experience was the company
                    he ran into the ground. NCLB act a funding disaster,
                    and a bizarre thing in principle from a traditional
                    conservative standpoint (taxing billions from the
                    states, then handing it back to them on a restricted
                    and problematic basis). Industry-coddling energy,
                    environmental, and medicare policies.
                http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/top10_lies
                http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/top10_flipflops
                http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/specialinterests
                     You guys keep saying "Kerry is nothing but not Bush".
                     The reason this is somewhat true is that's pretty
                     much what we want. Bush on the other hand is nothing
                     but "invade the middle east".
                    \_ This is bigotry.  You are speaking of people you
                       have no familiarity with.  You think you are
                       smarter than everyone else, and thus, entitled
                       to tell them how they should live and what they
                       should believe.  Inside every leftist is a
                       tyrant.  So are so vain you can't even see
                       yourself for what you are.
                       \_ You're saying I have no familiarity with "simple
                          people"? I can't even respond to this because
                          you don't even make an argument here. You're
                          simply lashing out with incoherent bile. My
                          point with that was to criticize the idea, which
                          certainly exists, that intelligence and nuanced
                          thinking is unneeded and even undesirable in leaders.
                          I see this notion in the popular mythology. You
                          should look up what bigotry means. And inside
                          every rightist is a coke-sniffing pedophile.
                          \_ Your use of the work "simple people" is
                             telling.
                             \_ what does it tell?

                                \_ It's usually considered derogatory and
                                   belittling when you call someone "simple".
                                   \_ It's an abstract group of people. It
                                      should only offend people who consider
                                      themselves simple, but then they wouldn't
                                      think it's derogatory. Or maybe they hold
                                      the "dumb is wise" view, in which case I
                                      I heartily belittle them.
                    \_ For your criticism to be relevant it is incumbent
                       on you, or anyone, to propose a cogent alternative
                       foreign policy paradigm.  No such policy was ever
                       proposed, all you and left could offer was
                       appeasement.
                       \_ appeasement of what?  Saddam did not have WMDs and
                          was not attacking anyone.  Letting countries run
                          their own business is not "appeasement."  -tom
                       \_ False. Alternative paradigms were loudly proposed.
                          You can even look it up and read about it, if you
                          choose. I can't objectively prove such alternatives
                          could be as cogent as "invade". It would be pointless
                          to go into that whole argument right now, I think we
                          both know what's been said.
                          \_ Where?  What? By who? Here is concise
                             explanation of that which you speak:  appeasement,
                             cede sovreignty to the UN.
                             cede sovreignty to the UN.  You want
                             "nuance" terrorists, its rediculous.
                             \_ false again. a U.N. vote != ceding sovereignty.
                                appeasement applies to giving in under threat.
                                and the saddam <=> terrorism relevance is
                                primarily a concoction.
                     \_ So I can sum up your position as: you want
                        entitlements from the government?  You believe you
                        have a ordained right to a job, free health care
                        and other free gov't services?  Right?
                        \_ No, you can't, because I didn't say that. I'm not
                           a libertarian though, so basically the gist of
                           that is true for most people. Here's another case
                           where a little "nuance" might let you acknowledge
                           that there are more possibilities than pure
                           libertarian versus full-on communism. I don't know
                           anybody talking about "right to a job" and you use
                           that as a straw man because you have no argument.
           \_ The other 50% of the country would like to keep the country as it
              is and away from the likes of you. C'est la vie.
        \_ There is no pistol grip on that shotgun. You are no gun owner or
           you would know that.
           \_ The deal is that the language of the bill defines "pistol
              grip" broadly:  "... grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other
              characteristic that can function as a grip"
              \_ That shotgun still does not have a pistol grip, even
                 by that definition.
                 \_ According to that bill, this counts as a pistol grip.
                    http://www.gunslocal.com/gunimages/1385.jpg
                    This is the one he was presented with:
                  http://www.berettaweb.com/semi%20auto%20shotgun/A300.htm
                 \_ (a) Yes, it's not 'really' a pistol grip
                    (b) As guy above says, the language of the bill was stupid
                        enough where yes, it was considered a pistol grip.
                    (c) I have yet to hear an effective argument from the
                        gun control crowd about how these regulations involving
                        pistol grips and 'assault-looking' weapons do anything
                        other than piss off gun owners.  It's the stupidest
                        thing I ever heard.  If you want to ban automatics, I
                        could see the argument for that (I don't agree, but I
                        understand it).  If you want to ban scary looking
                        weapons you are an idiot or a fretting soccer mommy.
                          -- ilyas
                        \_ Obviously somebody thought pistol-gripped semi-
                           automatic shotguns were not meant to hunt game,
                           but whose sole purpose was to kill people.
                           Note that the bill is for a renewal of an assault
                           weapons ban on AK-47s, AR-15s, and military sniper
                           rifles, and is not only for aforementioned shotguns,
                           as some might infer.
                           \_ Ok, I don't understand that.  Why are
                              pistol-gripped things bad for hunting game?
                              Is this because Elmer Fudd doesn't use a pistol
                              grip?  Take a handgun.  Very few people hunt with
                              handguns, they are generally for 'killing people'
                              (and going to the range, but no one seems to
                              bring that up).
                              So what?  Why is this bannable?  Hunting rifles
                              kill people just as well.  I guess I don't see the
                              thought process at all.  Also, what's a
                              'military sniper rifle' and how is it different
                              from a hunting rifle with a scope? -- ilyas
                              \_ Let me summarize the "answer" for you.
                                 For many liberals, it's "How many guns
                                 can I outlaw?".  For many conservatives, it's
                                 "How many guns can I leave legal?"
                                 There's your answer.
                                 BTW, a Dragunov is one of the named illegal
                                 sniper rifles, and is obviously military-
                                 grade; a hunting rifle with a scope is a
                                 hunting rifle with a scope (with less
                                 penetrating rounds, less accuracy when you
                                 take your run of the mill hunting rifle, and
                                 not necessarily semi-automatic or automatic).
                                 Pistols are for "killing people", but are
                                 strongly associated with self-defense, unlike
                                 assault rifles.  Semi-auto shotguns with
                                 pistol grip make you think of semi-auto
                                 shotguns used by police, except they use them
                                 to take out bad guys.
                                 \_ I am a liberal, and I am anti-gun control.
                                    I believe that this is more consistent
                                    with the pinciples of liberalism than
                                    being pro-gun control.  Personally,
                                    I find hunting to be excruciatingly dull
                                    and I suck at target shooting and live in
                                    a safe area, so I have no guns, but
                                    I support the rights of others to have
                                    whatever guns they want.
                                 \_ This is where I point out I know more about
                                    guns than you.  A run of the mill remington
                                    700 with a 'decent' scope will have:
                                    (a) more penetration than the dragunov
                                        (308 is a bigger round)
                                    (b) larger effective range (900 yards vs
                                        400 yards)
                                    (c) better accuracy than the dragunov
                                        (dragunov is semiauto, and not that
                                        well made, the remington uses the nice
                                        mauser bolt-action).
                                    By any reasonable standard, a remington 700
                                    is a deadlier rifle than the dragunov, yet
                                    the dragunovs are the ones that are outlawed
                                    because of the 'scary grips.'  That things
                                    are 'associated with' or 'make you think
                                    of something' is a dumb (and scary)
                                    argument for outlawing anything.  I realize
                                    you may not necessarily hold the position
                                    you are presenting -- I am
                                    attacking it, not you.  I was hoping for
                                    a defense of 'how many guns can I outlaw?'
                                      -- ilyas
                                    \_ semi-auto vs. bolt action, clip ammo.
                                       I dunno, I think it's reasonable to
                                       think the Dragunov can be deadlier vs.
                                       multiple targets. I don't know too much
                                       about guns though... are pistol grips
                                       so useless? Why then are they on all the
                                       military rifles? --otherperson
                                       \_ Against multiple people you use a
                                          sprayer, not a frigging sniper rifle.
                                          Sniper rifle = single kills.  Pistol
                                          grips are on military rifles because
                                          they are comfy.  Of course comfy
                                          grips make it easier to 'kill people.'
                                          *sigh* -- ilyas
                                          \_ Well, actually, no.  You don't use
                                             a  sprayer, you practice...you
                                             know...accuracy?  So you hit what
                                             you shoot at when you pull the
                                             trigger?  1-3 seconds of full
                                             auto on most assault rifles is
                                             really only useful for
                                             suppression and making lots of
                                             noise.
                                          \_ I have to admit that when I'm
                                             killing people, I look for as
                                             much comfort as possible.
                                             That's why I use a
                                             Dragunov<tm>. -geordan
                           \_ also maybe it makes it easier to identify the
                              real assault weapons, if you ban lookalikes,
                              that might possibly be modified?
2004/9/7 [ERROR, uid:33401, category id '18005#4.8325' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33401 Activity:nil
9/7     What does history suggest when the polls have the election
        tied on Sept 1 and again one week after the end of the
        Republican convention?
        http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm
2004/9/7 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33395 Activity:nil
9/7     NYT on Kerry's prospects.  http://csua.org/u/8y4
        \_ ob article from a paper that wants Dubya to go down. -liberal
           (even though it's less inaccurate than "Kerry is toast!")
           \_ Have you read the article?
              \_ Yeah, just pointing out that the NY Times does want Dubya out
                 \_ That might matter on the editorial page, but it has
                    no effect on the news reporting.
                    \_ ... if the NY Times didn't let their personal opinions
                       affect their news reporting.  This is the point of
                       contention.  I guess I'm not arguing for or against on
                       that point, but I'll wait and see.
                       \_ I predict that President Bush will win California!
                          \_ LANDSLIDE IS THE STANDARD!
        \_ In every election except one since the 1930's, the Gallup poll
           leader at the start of September has won the election.  Margin
           changes, intermediate lead changes, but in every presidential
           except the 1960 one the September leader ended up winning the
           election.  The only exception is Kennedy 1960, when he was behind
           46% vs 47% and won with 50.1% of the final vote.  This doesn't
           mean that Kerry is doomed, since this is a very unusual election,
           but he clearly has history against him.
           \_ Never before has the convention occured just before Sep 1.
              Did you even read the article???
              \_ Quoth me: "...since this is a very unusual election..."
                 Apparently I have read the article. -pp
                 \_ Your reading comprehension skills are poor then.
                    \_ Methinks your wishful thinking is showing.
        \_ Of course, just because it isn't on the editorial page doesn't mean
           that it doesn't read like an editorial.  I find little news in it.
           And look at the sources for the quotes:
           Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democratic Network
           Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster
           Joe Lockhart, a senior Kerry adviser
           David R. Gergen, a veteran adviser of the Nixon, Ford, Reagan and
             Clinton White Houses.
2004/9/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33376 Activity:high 57%like:30994
9/6     USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll:  No bounce for Bush among registered voters,
        Bush with 7% lead among "likely voters".  http://csua.org/u/8xs
        Poll conducted Sep 3-5.  (Time and Newsweek were several days earlier.)
        Was there a Beslan effect?
        \_ Well, the problem (if you are a democrat) is that people are voting
           against bush, and not for kerry. Traditionally this has been a
           sign of a weak candidate. If you take a look at elections like the
           76 or 80 elections people voted for the alternative, not against
           the establishment. The 92 elections might well be described as
           against the establishment, but it also had a sizable 3rd party
           presence (sizable in terms of hype, movement, and somewhat of
           a spoiler) in Ross Perot which offered an alternative for the
           conservative basis (somewhat like Nader in 2000, but more so).
           conservative base (somewhat like Nader in 2000, but more so).
           In the 2000 election people who voted for Bush actually liked
           Bush (neocons, religious conservatives, general hawks, etc.) vs.
           people who voted for Gore didn't particularly find Gore appealing
           (people liked Clinton, so in essence Gore was supposed to be
           Clinton 3rd term like Bush Sr. was Reagan 3rd term). They voted
           for him because they didn't like Bush.
           \_ I think this time you're going to see a lot more non-likely
              turnout.  A _lot_ more.
              \_ No, you're not.  Outside your hyper active political we-hate-
                 Bush bubble, the Bush haters I know are the standard non-
                 voters who whine a lot and saw F9/11, but they'll be too
                 busy or traffic was too high or there was a show on that
                 night or they had a date.  History doesn't back your theory.
                 The number of people voting vs. registered vs. legal to
                 register people is at an all time low and continue to sink.
                 \_ Wrong.  In 2000, there were 9.5 million more votes cast
                    than in 1996, a 2% increase relative to eligible voters.
                    http://www.fairvote.org/turnout.  -tom
2004/9/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33364 Activity:high
9/5     Four more wars!
        http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_09/004635.php
        \_ What font is that, and why do liberals seem to like it?
        \_ This is depressing.
           \_ Yeah, I can't believe this hack has any readers.
              \_ "I disagree with someone, therefore they must be a hack"
              \_ Yeah, that too.
                \_ why do you keep replying to yourself?  - danh
                   \_ Uhm, there's at least 3 participants in this thread.
                      You're not as clever as you think you are.
2004/9/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33360 Activity:nil
9/5     sfgate at spin control.  http://csua.org/u/8xd
        "While som early polls show that Bush may have gained from the
        convention..."  Or "Early polls...showed Bush getting as much as an
        8-point bounce.  A Washington Post/ABC News poll...with Bush just
        barely ahead of Kerry 48 to 47 percent" and no more mention of the
        big bounce.  Well done!
2004/9/5 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Immigration, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33356 Activity:nil
9/4     A sagging economy, endless violence in Iraq, record high oil prices,
                                                     \- not "record high" [yet]
                                                        oil prices were higher
                                                        in early 80s. --psb
        a bad employment picture, an uncertain future, and everybody in the
        world hates us, yet the Democrats are now BEHIND in the polls? WTF?
        What the hell happened? How can the Dems lose both in 2000 and now
        it looks like 2004? Are you guys cursed?
        \_ Perhaps a belief that, as bad as things are, the Democrats
           would have made an even greater mess, and better days are ahead.
        \_ 3% GDP growth and 5.4 % unemployment is a sagging economy?Contrast
           that with Carter's double digit inflation, interest rates, and
           unemployment.  Oil prices will be ~30-35$ per barrel by November.
           Also, maybe this has something to do with it:
           Boy who begged for water was bayoneted
           http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1207663/posts
2004/9/4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33353 Activity:nil
9/4     Frances comes. Bush will declare Florida a disaster area, pump lots
        of Federal fundings, and Florida will vote for Bush. Four more years.
        That, is my prediction.
        \_ This proves it -- Satan is on the side of Bush (he sent the
           unholy hurricane as an election aid).
        \_ Even with Florida voting Republican, the electoral college is
           still roughly split 50-50 according to
           http://www.electoral-vote.com To win this election, all things
           being equal, it would be enough for Kerry to win in one or two swing
           states like Colorado, Iowa, Arkansas, Pennsylvania and maybe Arizona
           or Missouri most of which are split roughtly 50-50 right now.
           Though, I think you are probably right about Florida. If I was
           JFK.v2, I'd ignore it from now on and concentrate on the states I
           have mentioned above.
2004/9/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33338 Activity:high
9/3     Sigh.  Big bounce for Bush.  http://csua.org/u/8x3 . Yes, I know.
        It's unreliable.  It's pre-debates.  It'll disappear.  It still sucks.
        \_ Its also an outlier with the other polls, and it was done mostly
           *during* the convention...
           \_ Yes, it still sucks.  Did they do the same poll during the
              Democratic convention?
           \_ How can it be an outlier when it's the only reputable poll taken
              during the convention?  It can only be an outlier if there are
              other reputable polls taken during the convention which show
              a small lead or none.
              Do not easily dismiss the Ah-nold and Giulani effect.
              Do not easily dismiss the Ah-nold and Giulani effect, and the
              fact that Dubya delivered a speech that sounds very good.
              \_ Zogby, through 9/2: Bush 46, Kerry 44
                 American Research Group, through 9/1: Bush 48, Kerry 47
                 \_ I found the URL for you:  http://csua.org/u/8x4
                    Hard to tell who's right, since Zogby leans a little left
                    and IMO Time leans a little right, and one day can make
                    a difference (especially with the Chechens).  I'd wait for
                    more polls, but Dubya definitely has his "We got a bounce!"
                    line, unless Time comes out saying they goofed, which I
                    doubt will happen.
                    \_ Apparently even the Bush people are saying this poll is
                       an outlier, although it seems most of the data was
                       gathered before Bush's actual speech.  Its actually the
                       media which is currently doing the "Bush GODDA BOUNCE!"
                       dance.
                       \_ Well, Time is.  I think the news media would have
                          no problem saying "Tiny Bounce For Bush!  Race still
                          deadlocked!"
                          \- did the idea futures mkts move of bush v kerry?
                             \_ Tradesports has him as a 57/43 favorite now,
                                where it was even right after the Democratic
                                convention. It was 57/43 about six weeks ago,
                                just before the Democratic convention, so they
                                cancelled each other out essentially.
        \_ Not that big really, since he was +2% by that same poll a week
           ago. So it was an eight point bounce and that poll has a margin
           of error of +/- 4%. So the move was less than the total
           margin of error. Or am I confused about my statistics here?
2004/9/3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33334 Activity:nil
9/3     I'm kind of glad Bush was President 2000-2004.  We needed to be total
        assholes to lock up the U.S., and Republicans are good at that.
        (Democrats aren't as practiced at being assholes.)  Now the Democrats
        can take over for 2004-2008 and restore good relations with our
        neighbors (who were right about Iraq after all), say it was all a bad
        Bush dream, and peel back some of the really bad civil rights
        violations and unnecessary security precautions.
        \_ Lock WHAT up? Innocent US citizens? They haven't locked down
           SHIT, least of all our port facilities. --aaron
        \_ Well, ONE good thing Bush did is inspire me to give money to the
           Democratic party for the first time.
2004/9/3 [ERROR, uid:33324, category id '18005#3.3325' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33324 Activity:very high
9/3     Loved this AP headline:
        "Bush Glosses Over Complex Facts In Speech"
        http://csua.org/u/8ws
        \_ In other late breaking news, things continue to fall due to
           gravity.
           \_ Heh, exactly.
        \_ Nope, no bias there.
           \_ So now the FACTS are partisan? You keep sucking the "liberal
              media" shit out of a tube, we'll keep living in reality.
           \_ Hey, at least it provides a tiny smidge of balance against the
              raw Leader-Worship the networks engaged in after the speech.
              They were comparing him to Churchill!
        \_ Our President is a dumbass, and he has acknowledged this.
2004/9/2 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33312 Activity:nil
9/2     http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/2004-09-01-moore_x.htm
        Michael Moore:  ... I would like to hear [GWB] say tonight, "I'm sorry.
        There never were weapons of mass destruction and there never was a
        connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. There was no imminent
        threat, our lives were not in danger, no missiles were going to hit
        Cleveland." (The next sentence regarding oil was stupid.)
        ... The other thing I would like to hear tonight is: Why haven't you
        caught Osama bin Laden? You've had three years to find him. The man
        killed nearly 3,000 people here on our soil.
        \_ The Village Voice told me that BushCo already caught bin Laden a
           long time ago and is waiting for some key moment to let us know.
           \_ The eve before the election?
        \_ To deny that Iraq, along with Iran, Syria, and Lybia, were the
           largest state sponsors of terror over the past 30 years is
           patently false.  Two are down, two more to go.
           \_ Who's denying Iran, Syria, and Lybia [sic] are the largest
              state sponsors of terror?
2004/9/2 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33290 Activity:very high
9/2     I figured the motd socialists would be out in force insulting the
        Republicans this week during the RNC convention.  You've got more
        fresh speeches and material to work from right now than any other
        time since 2000.  I'm disappointed you can't even make something
        up or take something out of context to get snarky and cute about.
        \_ Go stick your head in a pig.  To quote a whole lot of people on
           the motd from the last convention, who watches the damn things?
           They're just scripted television commercials.
           \_ This would fly except y'all get so hot n bothered and spend
              so much time digging up other old quotes and speeches.  Sorry,
              no dice on this reply.
        \_ Many of my friends are depressed because they have this sinking
           feeling (strictly gut-based) that Bush is going to win.  One
           is talking about retiring to his Tuscan villa for the next 4
           years.
           \_ Can we get them to promise in writing that they'll leave?  I
              thought it was really funny 4 years ago when a number of
              celebs were recorded promising to leave the country if
              Bush won, but mysteriously none did...
              \_ Is there a list out there of all of the celebs that promised
                 to go away?  I only know of one guy who actually did and he
                 isn't a major public celeb (some artist/writer) and already
                 had a place in France anyway.
                 \_ http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/leave.htm
           \_ Sad, isn't it?  That Bush can have 4 years with absolutely no
              meaningful accomplishments other than looking good standing in
              the rubble of the WTC, and yet he seems to have the momentum.
              \_ Isn't it just as sad that Kerry had 20 years in the Senate
                 and his claim to fame was marrying a rich widow and being
                 a war hero despite a handful of medals he might or might not
                 have thrown away?
                 \_ Its certainly better than what we got now.  His tax cuts
                    haven't worked and his war was a disaster.  In the words
                    of Donald Trump, "I'm sorry, but you're FIRED!"
                    \_ His tax cuts have been working.  Do you have a job?  Do
                       you know anyone who wants a job and doesn't?  The war
                       was the best fought war in the history of the planet.
                       We lost more soldiers on each beach on DDay than we
                       have in a year+ in Iraq.  Are you trolling or simply
                       ignorant of basic historic facts?
                       \_ The best fought war in the history of the planet?
                          The war that found not a single WMD and has created
                          a virtual jihadist factory?
                          \_ We took over a country in record time with fewer
                             deaths than seen on our highways in a few weeks.
                             Yeah, it was a poorly fought war.  You're an uber
                             military genius.  Were you one of the scumbags
                             that was hoping it would turn into a vietnam style
                             quagmire with body bags coming home by the
                             hundreds every week?
                       \_ Hmm... so you're bragging by saying we've lost fewer
                          soldiers in a war aginst a militarily inferior foe
                          than in one of the biggest battles in the largest war
                          ever, against a foe our technological equal?
                          I guess by your logic, Bay of Pigs was a resounding
                          success because we only lost a few hundred people.
                          \_ The Nazis were our technological superiors, btw.
                             \_ No they weren't (except for tanks). -- ilyas
                             And your comparison to the Bay of Pigs is silly
                             because maybe you didn't notice but we won in
                             Iraq but the Cuban nationals lost in Cuba.  They
                             weren't American soliders.  This isn't even
                             apples to oranges but more like celery sticks to
                             Ford pickup trucks.  At least get your very basic
                             history correct before you step up to bat.
                    \_ What do you mean?  I'm saving $30k just from personal
                       tax cuts and gobs more if you count in estate tax
                       changes.
                       \_ Then you're far better off than the larger chunk of
                          us, and probably were not hurting from it before...
                          Tell us.  How many new jobs have you created?
                          \_ Me personally?  I grew my group from 12 to 17
                             people in the last 2 years.  Before that I
                             started a company that went from 3 (the founders)
                             to 23 at its peak.  Hurting?  Why did it have
                             to hurt for me to appreciate keeping more of
                             the money I earn?
                             \_ YOUR anecdote trumps all statistics!  The
                                economy is roaring like never before!  Bush
                                has created millions of jobs!...oh wait, right,
                                he'll likely be the first president since
                                Hoover to have negative job growth...maybe them
                                pesky tax cuts aren't working out so well.
                                \_ He was asked how many job he created, he
                                   answered and then you attack him for
                                   answering!  BWHAHAHAHAHA!  YOU SO FUNNY!
                                \_ The recession started at the end of the
                                   Clinton years.  The troubles in high tech
                                   (and certainly in the telecom space where
                                   I play) now comes from over investment
                                   during the boom years.  Blame runaway
                                   optimism in the 90's if you want to assign
                                   blame.  The price of getting drunk is the
                                   hangover.
                                   \_ Uh huh.  I seem to recall Clinton pulling
                                      us out of a similar recession in 92 quite
                                      capably.  Then again, he didn't go
                                      starting some useless disaster of a war
                                      either.  Sorry, you're still FIRED!
                                      \_ According to the National Bureau of
                                         Economic Reserach, that recession
                                         went from 7/1990 to 3/1991.  It ended
                                         well before the start of the Clinton
                                         terms.  They also said the current
                                         recession was from 3/2000 to 11/2001.
                                         This started 3 months after the start
                                         of the GWB presidency, but it's still
                                         hard to pin it on him since it started
                                         only 3 months into his watch.  Please
                                         try to base your argument on data
                                         instead of urban myths and silly
                                         catch phrases.
                                         \_ Facts just trip us up and get in
                                            the way of our partisan frothing
                                            and mewling.  --wannabe motd lib
           \_ Is this the first presidential election your friends have
              voted in? This convention back and forth is typical.
              \_ Late 30's, not likely their first election.  Kerry can't
                 win this election; Bush can lose it.  It doesn't seem like
                 Bush will lose.
                 \_ Still too close to call, exactly the wrong time to give
                    up hope. Kick your friends in the ass for me.
                    \_ Not really.  Unless Bush rapes a nun on national TV,
                       the whole thing is done.
                       \_ In your dreams. It is not even close to finished.
                          It isn't even halftime yet. Do you even bother
                          to look at polls or do you just figure you can
                          predict the future better than the experts?
        \_ http://hosted.ap.org/photos/R/RNC18709020300-big.jpg
           http://hosted.ap.org/photos/R/RNC18809020300-big.jpg
           A picture speaks a thousand words.
           \_ All I can say about Zell Miller is: YEEEEEAAAAARGHHHHHHH!!!!!
              \_ Really?  'Cos "sell-out" and "collaborator" are what I'd
                 say about the man.  Mind you, that pic doesn't exactly
                 catch him in his best light: you know, a smoky back room....
                 \_ Just curious, did you feel the same way when the Senate
                    briefly changed hands when whats his face switched to
                    voting (D) from (R) a few months after he was elected
                    using (R) funds?  Or were you cheering like a partisan
                    hypocrite?
                    \_ The difference there is Jeffords actually followed his
                       conscience instead of hanging onto a misnomer like Zell
                       does.  Also, he didn't "vote (D)".  He tossed his vote
                       to the (D)'s for organizing the Senate and to give them
                       the majority and changed his affiliation to (I).  He
                       didn't necessarily vote with them on their bills.  In
                       fact, looking at what little that session did, his
                       switch didn't really do all that much.
                       \_ Jeffords was called a traitor, etc, by the (R) side.
                          He did the one thing which fucked the (R) for that
                          entire time period.  Voting however afterwards
                          doesn't matter as there are many in both parties who
                          cross lines for various things.  In this case, he
                          fucked his party so he could get the chairmanship
                          of a dairy committee he wanted to control for his
                          dairy state.  So short sighted and stupid he now has
                          nothing and his state got fucked twice over.  What an
                          idiot.  Anyway, as I said, you thought it was a-ok
                          for a (R) to turn coat but it is treason of the
                          highest order when a (D) does it.  Hypocrite.  At
                          least try to be honest with your rationalizations.
                 \_ Nah, I just meant he had some serious Howard Dean moments
                    last night.  First he chewed the scenery up with that
                    speech ("unleash rage" was the headline that the AP had).
                    Then he goes on Hardball and keeps challenging Chris
                    Matthews to a duel!
                    \_ Well, maybe he was having a Ted Koppel moment (TK
                       challenged Jon Stewart to a duel on The Daily Show).
                    \_ It doesn't matter how it played to some motd/Bay Area
                       leftists.  It matters that a Democrat Senator got on TV
                       and said his country was more important than his party
                       and that his party was fucked.
2004/9/2 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33289 Activity:insanely high
9/2     It takes a republican to put Elaine Chao, the first Asian American
        women in the U.S. Cabinet:
        http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/01/gop.main/index.html
        \_ more like, she had to marry a republican senator first.
           \_ Republicans are oppressing her with their big white penises?
           \_ http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/chao-bio.html
                \_ I am sure she's very capable herself, but that alone
                   isn't usually enough.
           \_ that is right.  Chinese communities knows Elaine Chao for years.
              and, if she never married to a powerful senator, she would never
              gotten where she is now.  Further, I hate her policies, and
              that alone is good enough for me to discredit her despite she
              belongs to the same ethnic tribe as I.
              \_ That's fine.  There are lots of Irish politians I don't
                 support.  I think race based support for anyone is
                 stupid.
        \_ I don't think the gwbush administration is racist.  I think
           they just hate poor people.
        \_ I hate those racist republicans!  We need more equal
           opportunity supporters like John Kerry and his all-white
           all-the-time campaign!
           \_ Yeah, like the way GWB has more non-whites in his administration
              at any level than Clinton did in 8 years and Kerry has on his
              staff now.  But don't let facts trip you up on the way to the
              next meeting of the proletariat, comrade!
              \_ You respond to obvious sarcasm by pretending it is an
                 honest statement. Boy are you stupid.
                 \_ Hi fool!  I was joining in on the sarcasm fun.  Thanks
                    for adding your idiocy to the motd.  We didn't have
                    enough stupid people here already.  Everyone understood
                    and let it be.  How'd you get so stupid?
           \_ But wait, say the Republicans, we're not racist. We put Colin
              Powell and Condi Rice in positions of power (where we can
              veto them immediately if they get uppity).  See? How can an
              Administration with token blacks possibly be oppressing blacks?
              Oh, that's right, by cutting valuable social services that help
              to redress more than 228 years of discrimination and outright
              oppression.
              \_ By putting people on the public dole, we lift them up and give
                 them incentive to do better from one generation to the next.
                 Er uh, yeah.  Right.  Have you ever been on the dole?  It is
                 the most anti-incentive thing I ever experienced.
                 \_ Except that the programs Bush has cut haven't only been
                    the welfare checks.  He's also cut housing subsidies,
                    funding for pre-school education, and tons of counseling
                    services.  If it was welfare alone, I'd be right there
                    with you, but when you take away the means to improve,
                    that's just wrong.
                    \_ Then you'd be unique among the left who think welfare
                       reform is the ultimate evil.
                       \_ Untrue.  See "Clinton and welfare reform."
                          (And if you're going to restore, restore it all.)
              \_ BWAHAHAHAHA!
              \_ Hey, can I have some of that?  My people were totally oppressed
                 for longer than yours. -- ilyas
                 \_ Than mine? I'm a Danish-Irish-Pole; my Danish ancestors
                    were oppressing my Irish and Polish ancestors before
                    Columbus was ever born.
                 \_ Wait, ilya, I missed the part where Russian Jews were
                    brought over in ships to do forced labor for their entire
                    lives on cotton plantations, and then "freed" only to face
                    official government policies of segregation and
                    discrimination for 100 years.
                    \_ Dude!  You had ships?  We wish we had ships.  We had to
                       go to Egypt and Babylon ON FOOT, UPHILL BOTH WAYS,
                       long before your ancestors even knew what slavery was.
                         -- ilyas
                       \_ This conversation has reached epic stupidity.
                          You don't think Jews have ever been SEGREGATED?
                       \_ You miss the point.  American government policy and
                          its people supported slavery and, later, "Jim Crow."
                          American government policy had nothing to do with
                          the oppression of the Jews - if anything, we helped
                          to save what was left of them with WWII.  The plight
                          of the African-American is a uniquely American
                          responsibility.
                          \_ The plight?  1) stop using crack, 2) stop shooting
                             your neighbors, 3) send your kids to school, 4)
                             install some values in your children, 5) stop
                             listening to music that glorifies thuggish street
                             life and says all women are whores and property.
                             That would be a good start.  You know, that whole
                             self responsibility thing.  Maybe we need a
                             Federal entitlement program to encourage more
                             self responsbility?
                          \_ I'm the guy who wrote the bit about tokens, and
                             even I can tell you straight up that American
                             government policy at several points had plenty
                             to do with the oppression of the Jews. We nearly
                             didn't even get involved in WWII because of
                             anti-semitism.  Look, both Jews and African
                             Americans have suffered. Cutting support to one
                             because the other's not getting a leg up is
                             just plain stupid and spiteful.
                             \_ I repeat, WHERE'S MY PIECE OF THE PIE!?
                                My ancestors suffered, damn it!  Gimme gimme
                                gimme! -- ilyas
                                \_ I blame the Jews.
                                   \_ And why not?  Everyone else does.  The
                                      weak always make good targets.
                          \_ Um, alright you should dig up the American
                             government and its people (who were around at
                             the time) and get them to pay up.  See, the rest
                             of the world has gotten past the feudal concept
                             of familial inheritance of legal responsibilities.
                             Maybe you should too. -- ilyas
                             \_ Do you support increasing the estate tax?
                                \_ jesus fucking batshit. why don't you
                                   spill some blood in the sharktank while
                                   you're at it?
                                \_ Do you support sending people to prison for
                                   what their 4x great grand parents did?
                             \_ Hey, it's not regressive to see that the
                                current social situation in the ghetto is a
                                direct result of both that "peculiar
                                institution" and Reagan's policy of cutting
                                assistance and enrichment programs, as
                                continued by the current administration.
                                \_ It may not be regressive, but it is BS.
                                   The "great society" did not increase
                                   the speed of blacks entering the
                                   middle class, it DECREASED the speed.
                                   Furthermore, prior to the great
                                   society, ghettos were pretty safe.  Now
                                   no one lets their kids walk down the
                                   street in the ghetto.  Woohoo!  Did we
                                   ever get a great society from LBJ!
                                   \_ Your claims are ludicrous.  Please back
                                      them up.
                                      \_ Yours is more so.  How does flooding
                                         an area with government cash encourage
                                         anyone to do better with their life?
                                         Please back up the claim that the
                                         ghettos are a result of Reagan's
                                         policies and slavery.  There were
                                         shitty ghettos and crime long before
                                         Reagan was around.
                                         \_ And yet another fallacy: throwing
                                            money at the problem does nothing.
                                            Spending money to improve schools
                                            (read: not on vouchers), provide
                                            retraining, educate children
                                            through Head Start and other
                                            pre-school programs, and provide
                                            drug-, health-, and job-counseling
                                            decreases crime and social welfare.
                                            \_ Spending money intelligently
                                               works.  Throwing money at a
                                               problem, by it's very nature,
                                               does not solve problems.  The
                                               schools are fucked because
                                               parents won't take responsibility
                                               for their kids in your nanny
                                               state and the teachers unions
                                               are all about the teachers
                                               unions and couldn't give a fuck
                                               about the kids.
                                         \_ I notice you have not provided
                                            the evidence. Perhaps because
                                            it does not exist?
                                            \_ I notice you have not provided
                                               the evidence.  Perhaps because
                                               it does not exist?  See how we
                                               can both play that game?  You
                                               made a stupid statement.  I
                                               challenged it.  Then you try to
                                               back your statement by saying I
                                               didn't back mine when you have
                                               provided no backing for your
                                               earlier statement.  That turkey
                                               doesn't fly.  Your debate fu
                                               is WEAK!
                                               \_ This is the first time you
                                                  have requested evidence.
                                                  I can provide plenty of it.
                                                  \_ It isn't but thats ok.
                                                     You're doing your best
                                                     and for that I think you
                                                     have earned a social
                                                     promotion to the next
                                                     level so we don't damage
                                                     your self esteem.
                             \_ Corporations live forever and can write
                                contracts far outlasting the life of their
                                signees. I think they can be held responsible
                                for their actions 150 years ago.
                                \_ Sue them.
                                   \_ Change the law so I can.
                                      \_ BWHAHAHAHA!!!  SO FUNNY!  Poor baby!
                                         You are such a victim!  What exactly
                                         are you going to sue them for and who?
                                         \_ There are plenty of corporations
                                            that benefitted from slave labor
                                            and could be sued. For economic
                                            damages of course, what else do
                                            you sue a corporation for? Are you
                                            this ignorant and rude in person?
                                            \_ I asked you to name them and
                                               what you'd sue them for since
                                               you weren't damaged by it.  Are
                                               you this obtuse in person?
                                               \_ A very quick google gives:
                          http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/03/26/slavery.reparations
                          http://www.millionsforreparations.com/lawsuit-ww.html
                                                  I think you can make an
                                                  economic argument that
                                                  the descendants have the
                                                  right to sue. We already
                                                  return solen art to the
                                                  decendants of the victims.

                                                  But the law would have to
                                                  be changed to make this
                                                  possible.
                       \_ Tell us about the legality of the sacking of Jericho
                          and the displacement of the Canaanites, ilya.
                          \_ Without the Infinity Trident we're defenseless
                             against the Five Jew Bankers!
                             \_ John is that you?
                             \_ Where's the magic spear and shield?!  I must
                                have the ring else all hope is lost!
                             \_ You idiot!  We made up the Five Jew Bankers!
                                \_ http://internationaljewishconspiracy.com
                                   (Relax, it's a satirical site, not racist.)
        \_ How did a conversation on Elaine The Asian And The Big White Penises
           become so intellectual?
           \_ Where exactly did it become intellectual?
        \_ I agree that the claims that the Republicans are racist are
           silly and
           counter-productive. It is not surprising that the Republicans are
           the first to put an Asian woman into the cabinet though. There is
           a great J. K. Galbraith quote about how it is the fate of American
           politics that the party that is not believed to embody a particular
           quality is the one that actually has to put it into practice. Just
           like how the Democrats are the party that actually has sensible,
           business- and growth-friendly economic policies. The Republicans
           don't need to have these, because everyone assumes that their
           policies are economically sound. The first Black or Female U. S.
           President will be a Republican.  - (one of many) motd liberal
           \_ thank god, there are people on motd has non-volitile memory.
           \_ last week we caught a Jewish spy, for some reason, we don't have
              the cox report and all that witch hunt.  Racism at work...
           (if the motd-format God would like to come bless me, I would
            be appreciative, otherwise sorry about the formatting)
                \_ I would except those other morons put their crap in the
                   middle making me uncertain who is writing the parenthetic.
                                --motd formatd
        \_ Chacellor Chang-lin Tien would have been another asian in the
           cabinet but the big China stealing nuclear secrets brouhaha made
           it impossible.
           \_ Tien was from Taiwan, not Mainland China.
                \_ it doesn't matter.  wenholee is from taiwan too.
                   incidentally, so it elaine chao.
        \_ Elaine Chao's chinese name means Little Orchid.
        \_ Does it ever occur to you guys that Lincoln was a Republican?
           \_ Somewhat clever troll, or didn't pay attention in U.S.
              History. Which one are you?
              \_ Are you saying Lincoln was a Democrat?
              \_ Yeah, Lincoln didn't want to ENSLAVE Americans, otherwise
                 he would be a Republican!
        \_ CSUA has its own Elaine
2004/9/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33273 Activity:insanely high
9/1     Anyone else catch Arnie praising Nixon?  High-larious!
        \_ yeah so you were all alive back in 1968 and wanted Humphrey
           don't you know anything about history, I'm talking the complete
           story not just Watergate.
        \_ In the draft of the speech, it was Hitler, but they softened it
           a bit in the rewrite.
           \_ I guess you are part of the 30% who disapprove of Arnold
              in this state.
        \_ Of course.  He didn't slip it in secretly.  And the talking heads
           commented on it afterwards.  What about it?  What Nixon did would
           not even get mention today.  What happens commonly today and is
           dismissed by the media and public would yield prison terms during
           Nixon's era.
           \_ You mean it wouldn't matter if a Republican did it. Or have you
              forgotten that a blowjob in the Oval Office seems to be more
              impeachable than leaking the identity of a CIA agent?
              \_ Um, no.  Perjury and suborning perjury.  Not a blowjob.
                 \_ Yeah wow, lets have THIS argument again.  Woohoo.  You've
                    heard of the Nixon tape where he tells Chuck Colson to
                    BLOW PEOPLE UP, right?
                    \_ I'm not the above poster, but what does blowing
                       people up have to do with blowing people in the
                       oval office?
                 \_ Lying about getting a blowjob ... How many politicians
                    tell the truth about affairs unless confronted directly
                    with incontravertable evidence?
                    \_ Sheesh.  This is such a lame attempt at
                       justification.  He was under oath in front of a
                       grand jury.  Lying to a grand jury is not ok no
                       matter who you are.
                       \_ Note that it appears to be ok to lie to Congress
                          (Reagan, Bush Sr), the SEC (Bush Jr), and to fuck
                          your employees even if you're married (Gingrich).
                          Don't be a democrat.
                       \_ And the earth is round and the sky is blue. All
                          true, but not the issue.  The man should not have
                          been questioned about an infidelity in front of a
                          Grand Jury to begin with.
                          \_ The case was a SEXUAL HARRASSMENT CASE.
                             \_ which was THROWN OUT for being MERITLESS
                             \_ Nope. Sorry. It was in the context of the
                                Whitewater probe, remember?
                                \_ And you remember this?
                                   "Having an affair with an intern is not a
                                   federal crime, but lying about it, or asking
                                   others to do so, is. And that's why
                                   Whitewater special prosecutor Kenneth
                                   Starr's inquiry has expanded to include it.
                                   Allegations so far involve possible perjury,
                                   suborning perjury and obstruction of
                                   justice."
                                   http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/multimedia/timeline/9809/starr.report/cnn.content/starr.legal
                        \_ and then there's lying in front of grand jury
                           compared to lying about WMD's infrot of everyone.WTG!
        \_ Nixon was an effective president, a crook, but a pretty good
            president.          -liberal
           \_ So its okay to be a criminal, as long as you are an effective
              criminal?
              \_ Isn't that what all the Clinton lovers taught us?
                 \_ If lying under oath about your infidelity is wrong, I don't
                    want to be right!
                    \_ So you think infidelity is ok?  Does your wife/gf know
                       you think that way?
           \_ Nixon started out with great intentions and fell into paranoia
              and dirty tricks.  By the end, he was up to his neck in ethical
              and legal violations, and the only thing he could think about
              was trying to save his own ass.
                \_ if Nixon rose from the dead, I'd vote for him
                   instead of gwbush.
                   \_ Oh no!  Zombie Nixon!
                      http://www.filibustercartoons.com/store_tshirts.php
        \_ yeah so you were all alive back in 1968 and wanted Humphrey
           don't you know anything about history, I'm talking the complete
           story not just Watergate.
           \_ Put your drivel at the bottom like everybody else.  Ok tnx.
        \_ In the draft of the speech, it was Hitler, but they softened it
           a bit in the rewrite.
           \_ I guess you are part of the 30% who disapprove of Arnold
              in this state.
              \_ I haven't taken part in this thread at all yet, but while
                 I had once approved of Ah-nold prior to his speech, I now
                 disapprove and this probably won't change.  "If you still
                 support George W. Bush, you're still stupid."
              \_ Sheesh, just trying to inject a bit of humor into this
                 landmine filled motd "debate"
           \_ Put your drivel at the bottom like everybody else.  Ok tnx.
           \_ Yeah because you can win any debate by just comparing the other
              guy to Hitler.  This is brilliant!  Now I have the key to
              winning any debate on any topic!  Thank you motd!
        \_ What did Ah-nold actually say?
           \_ "I finally arrived here in 1968. I had empty pockets, but I was
              full of dreams. The presidential campaign was in full swing. I
              remember watching the Nixon and Humphrey presidential race on
              TV. A friend who spoke German and English, translated for me. I
              heard Humphrey saying things that sounded like socialism which
              is what I had just left. But then I heard Nixon speak. He was
              talking about free enterprise, getting government off your back,
              lowering taxes, and strengthening the military. Listening to
              Nixon speak sounded more like a breath of fresh air."
              \_ What's really great is that Nixon NEVER DEBATED Humphrey...
                 \_ Ah-nold never said he watched them debate.
                    \_ He has in the past, and it's what he implied.  Listen
                       to the speech rather than just reading the transcript.
                       http://www.walrusmagazine.com/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1951245&mode=nested&tid=1
              \_ See, I don't see what's so bad about this.  I probably
                 wouldn't have said it, but saying he liked what Nixon
                 said about economics in his campaign speech is hardly a
                 big deal to me.
                 \- also see:
                    home.lbl.gov:8080/~psb/Articles/Politics/NixonObit-HST.txt
                    \_ so, how is Nixon different from Dubya and friends, other
                       than getting caught? -lame troll #69
2004/8/31 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33259 Activity:nil
8/31    Frances ready to strike US!
        http://csua.org/u/8um [sfgate.com]
        \_ Don't you mean Freedom?
2004/8/31 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33253 Activity:high
8/31    Michael Moore learns not to rant and plays it cool at GOP Convention.
        His column is actually well written, IMO.
        http://csua.org/u/8uj (Washington Post)
        http://csua.org/u/8uk (official USA Today column)
        \_ It's not bad.  Aside from the bad statistics he uses to justify
           him is own far-left views, he's right.  Most republicans aren't
           far right.  What he's missing is that not being far right
           doesn't make them far left either.
           \_ Yes, you're so clever. I'm sure Michael Moore doesn't
              understand false dichotomies. Go play in the street.
              \_ This response was needlessly agressive, perhaps to make
                 up for the fact that it doesn't actually say anything.
                 Anyway, yes, I assume Moore knows what a false dichotomy
                 is.  However, understanding it doesn't mmake you immune
                 to using them.  This RINO concept in this column is
                 basically one big false dichotomy.
                 \_ I'm not the "you're so clever" guy, but Moore is just
                    saying there are the small-government Republicans with more
                    liberal views on social policy (Ah-nold), and there are the
                    Republicans who are conservative in the social policy
                    sense.  Moore is saying this latter group is not a
                    reflection of America.
                    \_ Fair enough.  Although Moore also annoyed me with his
                       useless straw-man arguments.
                       \_ ... which were?  Granted Moore didn't write anything
                          about how Dubya and friends have a clear, precise,
                        \_ i guess you're right, "shoot them all" is clear,
                           and consistent... not too precise though
                          and consistent policy on terrror, whereas Kerry and
                          friends do not.  Is that what you're annoyed about?
                          \_ An example "I asked whether women should have
                             equal rights, including the same pay as
                             men." Name a promient republican who would say
                             no to this.  I can't think of any. Do you
                             think Rice makes less than Powell?
                             \_ ugh, Michael Moore.  Can we just stop talking
                                about this guy?  How about this - we'll stop
                                talking about Moore and you guys stop talking
                                about Hannity, O'Reilly, and Coulter. --liberal
                                \_ w00t!  Deal!  Although it should really
                                   go the other way.  I'll stop talking
                                   about Moore, and you stop talkint about
                                   how stupid O'Reilly, Coulter, etc. are.
                             \_ Moore is talking about the religious right and
                                the associated traditional family structure.
                                Not a straw man.  But yeah, I do think it's a
                                stretch -- he would make a stronger case just
                                to stay with pro-lifers.
                                \_ It IS a straw man.  Being pro-family is
                                   not pro-opressing women. Saying women
                                   should take care of the babies they have
                                   is not the same as saying women who work
                                   shouldn't get a paycheck. That's just
                                   dumb, and I've NEVER heard anyone even
                                   suggest it.  Even the Bible is against
                                   that.
                                   \_ No, I say Moore makes a weak argument,
                                      but I still say it's not a straw man.
                                      What's a straw man?  "Name a prominent
                                      republican who would say [they favor
                                      policies that would create a situation
                                      where women earn 0.75 cents to the
                                      dollar]."  Even if a prominent Republican
                                      did favor this, they would never say so.
                                      What's a straw man?  "saying women who
                                      work shouldn't get a paycheck".  No one
                                      says that or thinks that, period.
                                      Moore:  weak, completely unsupported
                                              argument on women's pay.
                                      You:  straw-man king.
                                      \_ Sheesh. Sorry for the hyperbole.
                                         No one says or thinks women
                                         should get paid less for equal
                                         work either.
                                   \_ The Bible says that women should be
                                      obedient to their husbands and their
                                      fathers, not that they should have
                                      equal rights.
                                      \_ The Bible also says, in the same
                                         way, that children should honor
                                         their parents.  Saying that means
                                         women should have equal rights is
                                         a mis-interpretation of scripture.
           \_ You're either with us or against us!
        \_ MM'08!
        \_ Funny how he says, "we New Yorkers" when he's always tried to play
           up his whole everyman Flint, MI angle in the past.
           \_ Meh.  He grew up there, worked in the SFBA for a time, and is now
              a New Yorker.  He's probably qualified to talk casually about any
              of those places.
              \_ What?  He moved?? FLIP FLOP!!!
2004/8/31 [Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33240 Activity:insanely high
8/31    Bush makes Garrison Keiller go nutzoid:
                 \_ psb was certainly not in the "republican:evil
                    democrat:good" camp 4 years ago. This is another one of
                    gwb's achievements. - psb #37 fan
        http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/979
        \_ I enjoyed that. Thanks. --aaron.
           \- A good example of irony is the flourishing of political
              rhetoric [in english anyway] set off by the rise of
              the Chimp-in-Charge --psb
              \_ HAIL GREAT EDUCATOR PSB!  REPUBLICAN:EVIL!  DEMOCRAT:GOOD!
                 \_ psb was certainly not in the "republican:evil
                    democrat:good" camp 4 years ago. This is another one of
                    gwb's achievements. - psb #37 fan
           \_ Keillor is a great writer.  Even if you like Bush you should
              check this out - definitely in the great tradition of the
              American polemic a la Mark Twain.
        \_ Waaaa!  I liked it better when MY party were the gerrymandering
           fear mongers!  What happened to Democrat victimhood, and
           Democrats being the ones taking all the bribes?  Davis, 'O
           Davis, where art thou?
           \_ Garrison Keiller is most definitely not a Californian, so why are
              you blabbering about Davis?  Trying to start another Arnold flame
              war?  I've got news for you - Davis lost.  We've moved on to
              Swift Boat.
              \_ Sheesh.  Did you notice the whole post was about Democrat
                 things of the past?  I was making fun of Keiller's
                 article by pointing out that everything he accuses the
                 Republicans of are things the Democrats are famous for.
                 And I used things from Democrats past. Since I'm
                 posting on a forum that almost exclusively read by
                 Californians, I thought it fine to invoke the name of a
                 California democrat famous for the things Keiller attacks
                 Bush for.
                 \_ So you think the playground mentality justifies something?
                    "But he did it first!" does not qualify as a moral stance.
                    \_ Umm... no.  I'm not saying that what I think the
                       Republicans are doing is GOOD.  I'm just saying
                       it's funny to watch the pot call the kettle black.
           \_ Fear-mongers?  When were the Dems the fear-mongers?
              \_ Certainly my whole life.  "Hole in the Ozone! Global
                 Warming! Return of Jim Crow Laws! Vouchers cause racism!
                 etc. etc."
                 \_ Yeah that's the same as preemptive invasion. Die painfully.
2004/8/30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33233 Activity:nil
8/30    Another claim about his past Kerry can't seem to get straight:
        http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=merron/040830
        (Kerry claims to have run in, and finished, the Boston Marathon "in
        '80, something like that" -- but there's no official record of his
        feat, and his campaign did not provide further details despite
        repeated inquiries.)
        \_ What an important issue.  Send this to Lehrer so he can bring
           it up in the debates.
           \_ I heard Kerry eats French cheese!
        \_ I've climbed Mt. Tam but you won't find that documented anyplace.
           If I ran for office I wouldn't bother trying to document it either.
           \_ Climbing Mt. Tam doesn't usually have a sign up to get on the
              mountain unlike running in a marathon.
        \_ He was probably on a secret CIA / Seal mission at the time, that's
           why.
2004/8/30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33221 Activity:high
8/30    I was in Oregon yesterday on the way to the airport.  Some old guy
        in a station wagon in front of me had written a note in Sharpie and
        taped it to his back window:
        "If you still support George W. Bush, you're still stupid."
        \_ In 2000 it wasn't so much a matter of stupid as gullible.  Now it's
           stupid.
           \_ I'm sorry but, Gore?  Come ON!
              \_ A smart man with no soul who would bring in a cabinet largely
                 from the Clinton administration, or an affable man with no
                 brain who would bring in a cabinet largely from the Reagan
                 administration.
                 \_ Cthulu/Yog Sotthoth '00!
                    \_ Why vote for a lesser evil?  Bush/Cheney '04!
              \_ I'm sorry but, Bush?  Come ON!
2004/8/30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33216 Activity:high
8/30    Looking at the latest http://pollingreport.com numbers, our boy's back!
        \_ huh? how are those polling numbers any different than we've seen
           for the last couple months?  What are you talking about?
        \_ Wow.  A tie!  You mean it hasn't been tied before?  Horrors!
           \_ The polling looked a lot bleaker for bush even around the
              beginning of the month.
              \_ Anyone who thinks this election isn't going to come down to
                 the wire is smoking some serious drugs. [restored]
                 \_ Anyone who thinks it's better to go into the debates 5
                    points down rather than even is also smoking some serious
                    drugs.
                    \_ who's 5 points down?  Are we talking about the same
                       polls?  some polls have bush ahead by margin that's
                       in the noise, and some have kerry ahead by a margin
                       that's in the noise.  just what the fuck are you
                       talking about?
                       \_ He's on crack or he's only been reading the
                          questionable polls like Zogby or Rasmussen.
                          Good polls like Fox or Gallup have consistently shown
                          a dead heat for quite awhile.
                          \_ Time with leaners 8/5 has Bush down for 7.  Even
                             Fox 8/4 has Bush down for 5.  NPR 8/24, Bush -5.
                             Democracy Corps 8/5, Bush -7.  Zogby 8/14, Bush
                             -7.
                             \_ Are those likely or registered numbers?  A lot
                                of people get confused and compare the two
                                sets.
        \_ Our?
2004/8/29-30 [ERROR, uid:33215, category id '18005#8.21625' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33215 Activity:very high
8/29    Dan Rather, corporate media whore, boosting GWB:
        http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/29/opinion/main639222.shtml
        \_ Damn liberal media.
           \_ so, that makes General Electric a liberal company?
              \_ Well, they own a media company, don't they? Must be liberal!
           \_ what mainstream media are consider "conservative" then?
              \_ Fox News
        \_ Sorry but what idiot reads Dan Rather's opinion
           pieces?  Stick to the colored pie charts in USA Today.
           \_ Dude, Dan Rather rocks!  I still remember how he called
              California the 'Big Burrito' on live coverage of the 2000
              elections.  A guy that dumb had to do a LOT of sexual favors
              for Satan to make it this big. -- ilyas
              \_ what about his "bush is storming through the south and
                 midwest like a tornado through a trailer park" line?
                 that at least made me snicker.
              \_ Dan Rather, sucking dick for Satan.  Thank you, ilyas, I
                 think we have a new bumper sticker.
2004/8/26 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33158 Activity:insanely high
8/26    Why is there still this misconception?  Wouldn't everyone be better
        served if at the least the truth is known?  Quoting from below:
                           \_ "Your media"?  Anyway, some major news
                              organizations (NYT included, I think) did a full
                              manual recount of the state and showed that under
                              most recount rules if there had been a full
                              recount Gore would have won Florida.  Of course
                              this happened several months after the Supes
                              appointed GWB, so by then it was a moot point and
                              it didn't get a lot of press.
                              \_ Actually, you are exactly wrong.  The study
                                 you referred to (done by the National Opinion
                                 Research Center, commissioned by NYT, CNN,
                                 etc.) showed that Bush would have won by
                                 493 votes had there been a recount.  And, no,
                                 it didn't get a lot of play in the media.
                                 http://csua.org/u/2b5
                                 \_ Good article and thank you. Your single
                                    statement from it is exactly true but
                                    the article says a great deal more. I
                                    suggest people read it. -- ulysses
                              \_ This NORC???
               http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/CarolASThompson/NORC.htm
        \_ Rehashing the recounts is pretty pointless, I'll agree.  But the
           larger concern is Florida's continued registrar shenanigans.
           \_ There is a lot of anger over the recount that is unjustified,
              given the above link.  We can argue over politics, but I hope
              we can all agree there should be more civility in our
              argument.  These kinds of misconception make civility impossible.
        \_ The misconception about how the votes went down in Fl'2k is still
           being perpetrated because the more you tell the big lie, the more
           people will believe it and get mad because they won't do their own
           research into the truth which is that in all the ways the votes
           were being counted and recounted, Gore lost, no one was appointed
           President and it pisses off the left to no end.  Had Gore only won
           his own home state, it wouldn't have mattered what happened in Fl
           anyway.
           \_ You are precisely a victim of the kind of propaganda you decry.
              Read the NORC link above.
              \_ I read it before posting, thanks.  What next?  You're going
                 to tell me that there was a huge conspiracy across Florida
                 between Jeb Bush, the police, and the dog catcher's union to
                 prevent blacks from voting?
                 \_ I would sincerely hope that a Cal CS student would know
                    what precision of measurement is. The above link very
                    clearly shows that Bush won under some methods of
                    counting and Gore under others. Which you still deny,
                    even though the evidence is right in front of your face.
                    You are either 1) insane, 2) lying or 3) unable to
                    read and comprehend English at a 12th grade level.
                    I suspect #1, actually.
                    \_ Gore did not win under any method that was actually
                       being proposed to count ballots.  He won only under
                       a method that neither side suggested which was
                       fabricated by the media counters so people like you
                       could claim there was bizarre circumstance under which
                       Gore won.  Bush won under all the ways the votes were
                       being counted.  By the courts.  Not by the media who
                       was making up more ways to do it, although Bush won
                       under some of those methods as well.
                       \_ This is false as well. By the standards set
                          by the Florida Supreme Court: "one in which there
                          is a clear indication of the intent of the voter"
                          Gore would have won, due to the overvotes that both
                          marked him clearly and had his name written in.
                          This was what the State of Florida law required,
                          but the US Supreme Court ruled that there was not
                          enough time to conduct this recount. Remember that
                          the Bush team did everything it could, both
                          legally and illegally, to delay that recount.
                         http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html
                          Just admit that the vote was "tied" by any
                          reasonable interpretation of the results. In
                          our legal system, "ties" go to the courts to
                          adjudicate. This one belonged in the Florida
                          State Supreme Court, but in a maneuver so suspect
                          that even they claimed that it was not precedent
                          setting, the USSC took it away from them. That's
                          \_ Would you have preferred the method of the
                             1876 election?  Then Bush would have won.
                          the breaks, I say, but it is Constitutionally
                          suspect and the reason there remains a cloud
                          over the results. The Bush Administration from
                          the very start believed that they didn't have
                          to answer to the rule of law. Thanks for
                          reminding me all all that, btw, I am going to
                          donate another $100 to the John Kerry campaign.
                          \_ A Federal election is a state court issue..
                             huh!?  Read article 2 and Amend. 14, the
                             implication is obvious.  The legislature has
                             plenary, manifest authority over the choice of
                             electors - period!  What provision of
                             Federal or Fl. state stature talks about
                             'ties go to the courts' - that statement
                             tells me you have no understanding of
                             the law or intent of the Const. authors.
                             This has been discussed an nasaeum, the
                             decision was 7-2 and Bush won under every
                             possible scenario except the bizarre one you
                             promote.  If one extrapolated these absurd
                             scenarios far enough you could probably make
                             Buchanan win too - he should have sued!!!
                    \_ I would say that the article showed that Gore would
                       have won under the most permissive interpretation of
                       ballots, and Bush under more generally accepted
                       methods of interpretation.
                       \_ Are you the same guy that claims that "in all the
                          way the votes were being counted and recounted
                          Gore lost"?
                          \_ Nope.  I'm the Gore-would-have-won-under-the-
                             most-permissive-interpretation-and-Bush-
                             everything-else guy.  The in-all-ways guy is
                             someone else.
2004/8/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:33142 Activity:high
8/25    Dear god, I agree with the Nazis about something:
        "Schoep, who's from Litchfield, Minnesota, says the National
         Socialists are protesting the "corrupt dictatorship" of
         President Bush."
        \_ I hate Illinois Nazis. And the ones from Minnesota too.
                \_ Calling all party members in the tri-state area
                        \_ I've always loved you!
        \_ So, in other words, the Nazis agree with Jewish liberals. There's
           irony for you.
           \_ Self destruction is a common trait among Jewish liberals.  I
              believe it has something to do with a cultural sense of self-
              hatred.  "They're always trying to kill us so we must be bad
              people".  Something like that.
           \_ I met a Jewish Nazi skinhead once. I kid you not. At a Chateau
              Party. I am still trying to figure that one out.
              \_ that's still not as ironic as the black white supremacist.
              \_ Well maybe he kid you.
                 \_ I hope so. He was hanging out with another azzhole wearing
                    a "Screwdriver" t-shirt, so I don't think so, but maybe
                    it was all some kind of sophisticated joke that I
                    didn't get.
           \_ I'm Jewish?  That's news to me! -op
              \_ You're not sure if you're Jewish?
              \_ *shrug* All I'm saying is that lots of Jewish liberals hate
                 Bush, too.
        \_ Nazis.  I hate these guys.
2004/8/25 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33135 Activity:high
8/25    Does anyone know what Kerry's polling margin over Bush is in
        CA, NY, or IL?  What Bush's margin over Kerry is in TX?  I know,
        "huge" or "double digit".  Anything more specific?
        \_ Insurmountable!
        \_ 18% in NY, 13% in IL, 12% in CA
           \- we are on our way to a landslide victory for Dubya in California.
              See URL below. -troll
              \_ heh, too bad you didn't actually read the content in the
                 link.  Train harder, grasshopper.
        \_ http://www.electoral-vote.com
           \_ Thanks.  This is exactly what I am looking for.
2004/8/25 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:33126 Activity:nil
8/24    More garbage from the State Department, a waste of taxpayer money.
        Islamic Influence Runs Deep in American Culture
        http://csua.org/u/8ra
2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33123 Activity:nil
8/24    It could be worse, he could have claimed he was in Cambodia a week
        before he really was:
        http://thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1704
        \_ There is still zero evidence Kerry was ever in Cambodia.  And
           despite the media blitz stating otherwise two of Kerry's purple
           hearts continue to have gaping holes as wide as the Mekong
           Delta itself.
2004/8/24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33100 Activity:very high
8/24    IMO, Dubya has been looking pretty tired/beat up recently.  Take note
        of how he looks the next time you see him on TV.
        http://csua.org/u/8qo (Yahoo! News)
        \_ He's supposedly on heavy anti-depressants and psychoactives..
           \_ LIAR!! If he were, he'd look happier.
        \_ I keep seeing photos of Bush like this one with halos / sunbursts
           behind his head- is this intentional?  Were other presidents
           photographed in this way?
           \_ The AP thinks it's cute when it runs photos like that:
              http://www.drizzten.com/blargchives/000576.html
           \_ The halo is just a very common way of shooting portraits.  I
              don't know about the sunbursts.
              \_ I've never seen anyone, especially a politician, photographed
                 this way.  I'd be very surprised to see Clinton in this pose.
                 Or do I just never notice it because the guys were never so
                 overtly Christian?
           \_ Yes, it's intentional, and yes it's a Christian sainthood
              motif. Bush also sprinkles his speeches with coded phrases
              that are grounded in biblical language.
2004/8/23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33085 Activity:nil
8/23    http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/23/news/election_models/index.htm?cnn=yes
        models predict the election result
        \_ "Despite an embarrassing failure in their forecasting four years
           ago ..."
2004/8/23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33076 Activity:nil
8/23    Old, but summarized:  Florida felon can't-vote list includes
        highly disproportionate number of black voters, but only 50 Hispanic
        names, in a state where 1 in 5 residents is Hispanic.  ("Hispanic
        names" is a superset of Cuban, which votes heavily GOP).  Total
        size of list is 50,000 names.
        http://billmon.org/archives/001601.html
2004/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33034 Activity:high
8/20    The Vietnam thread below is almost interesting except the
        participants are speaking past each other.  Anyway, what Kerry
        or Bush or anyone else did or didn't do in Vietnam really isn't
        important to me as a voter.  Bush went AWOL and Kerry faked his
        own records.  They're both losers and better off not relying on
        their 30+ year old stories there.  I want to hear what Kerry did
        for the country in 19 years as a Senator and Bush in his first
        term as President and detailed plans of what each intends to do
        in the next 4 years.  And really, as far as security of the country
        goes, ask yourself this one, "If foreigners could vote in our
        elections, who would Osama bin Laden, Castro, Chavez, Chirac, and
        other America haters vote for?"
        \_ An idiot who's demonstrated his willingness to financially and
           diplomatically ruin the US?
           \_ Hussein, too?
              \_ Hussein always wins 100% of the vote, so obviously he voted
                 for himself.
        \_ In SOVIET CUBA, politicians vote for YOU!
        \_ You ask too much. WDYHA?
        \_ I like how you try to claim both Bush and Kerry's Vietnam
           experiances are the same.  Ok, we all know about Bush and the AWOL
           accusations and how the documentation pretty well supports that.
           But Kerry lieing about his records?  Well let's see his is accused
           by a doctor who claims to have treated him on the front although
           there is NO documentation to support that.  The same docotor
           somehow remembers minor details about an insignificant wound someone
           recieived in a war zone 30 years ago.  Then there is the guy
           claming Kerry doesn't deserve his Bronze Star because there was
           no combat going on in the incident.  Well, let's look closer shall
           we?  That same accuser RECIEVED A BRONZE STAR FOR THE EXACT SAME
           INCIDENT.  Oh and the "who would america haters vote for" bit is
           classic.  Especially lumping bin Landen (now what ever happened
           to him anyway) with the rest.  And Castro?  Please, are you that
           stuck in the 60s?  Oh and why don't you care about domestic
           policies as well?
           \_ Sheesh, why do people keep saying the documentation supports
              that Bush was AWOL?  There's NO documentation to support
              that.  There's just a suspicion that some documents claimed
              missing really exist and haven't been released that might
              support that Bush was AWOL.
              \_ Documentation doesn't support that he went AWOL, but there's
                 scant documentation that he was where he was supposed to be.
                 That all documentation has not been found leads some (myself
                 included) to believe there's a coverup, but it is also
                 plausible that he did serve and the papers have been lost.
                 \_ And that's cool.  I don't mind if you have your
                    suspicious, heaven knows I have mine.  Just don't try
                    to upgrade your suspicions to fact in public debate
                    with out evidence.  Thank you.
                    \_ So if all the evidence supports Bush and is against
                    Kerry we still have a man who got out of going to
                    Vietnam versus a man who volunteered to go when he
                    could have avoided service.
        \_ I think its clear that terrorists fear Bush much more than
           probably anyone else. The problem is that so do many Americans.
           I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, but I'm sure Muslim terrorists were
           very afraid of Hitler, too. He was a dangerous man. Bush is
           likewise a dangerous man. He'll attack the terrorists, but what
           will he sacrifice in the process?
           \_ Have you read 'Inside an Al-Qaeda Hard Drive' in "The Atlantic"?
              It had emails from Osama in 2001 basically talking about how he
              wanted to get more publicity and that by attacking the US he
              hoped the US would end up in a quagmire which would result in
              more Muslims joining his cause and the US military too occupied
              to flex it's muscle in other parts of the world.  Kinda sounds
              like GWB gave him just what he wanted, doesn't it?
2004/8/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32998 Activity:very high
8/18    Play if you want.  (Hurry, Bush's people will have a response tomorrow
                            morning!)
        13-term House representative Bereuter will be discredited in what way?
        [blah blah]
        \_ Eh, forget it.  I noticed http://cnn.com has some responses already.
           They are:  political vendetta, entitled to his opinion.  I also
           missed one, which is:  Dismissing him as small fry.  There's also
           another approach, which is to attack one or more weaker elements
           of his letter, which is probably what they'll do tomorrow morning
           (something like "we are achieving peace, just as with the
           disbandment of the Sadr militia") -op
        \_ Why does he need to be discredited?  All he's saying is that with
           20/20 hindsight, the world was better with Hussein in power than
           with him out of power.  I think Bereuter says loud and clear all
           on his own what he believes.  No need to discredit him.
           \_ there have been other consequences to that war besides
                (in_power? hussein iraq)
           \_ The big deal is, with hindsight, Dubya still says going
              to war against Iraq was the right thing to do.  This Republican
              (also vice-chair of the House Intelligence Committee between
              2001-2004) has said in hindsight after reviewing all the
              data, it was a mistake.
2004/8/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32990 Activity:very high
8/18    http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/18/congressman.iraq/index.html
        GOP lawmaker: Iraq war a 'mistake'
        ... Rep. Doug Bereuter of Nebraska, who until earlier this month was
        the vice chairman of the House Intelligence Committee -- a panel that
        reviewed much of the evidence the administration cited before going to
        war: ... "I've reached the conclusion, retrospectively, now that the
        inadequate intelligence and faulty conclusions are being revealed, that
        all things being considered, it was a mistake to launch that military
        action, especially without a broad and engaged international coalition
        ... Left unresolved for now is whether intelligence was intentionally
        misconstrued to justify military action"
        \_ Hey, what's in the "..." sections?  I hate when partial quotes are
           posted.  Now I've got to go read the whole thing to find out what
           he really said.  Motd bits aren't that expensive.  Just post it
           next time.
        \_ Oh gee.. Another politician who doesn't march lock-and-step!
           \_ Well, he was vice-chairman of the House Intelligence Committee
              from 2001-2004.
              He's going to catch a lot of hell, even though he's retiring.
              What I'm really curious about is how Dubya's people will do it.
              <SARCASM>He really needs to be made an example of.</SARCASM>
              -liberal
              \_ Are you serious?  He needs to be make an example of for stating
                 an obvious truth?
              \_ Are you serious?  He needs to be make an example of for
                 stating an obvious truth?  [formatd]
                 \_ For breaking party ranks:
                    Loyalty > "making the right decision" > "truth"
                    If it was such an obvious truth that it was a mistake, Bush
                    wouldn't still be saying it was the right decision anyway.
                    \_ Independent thought!  Horrors!
        \_ Another entry for the "No shit sherlock" file.
        \_ Why isn't this on http://freerepublic.com yet?  They're usually pretty
           fast.
           \_ it is.
              \_ Wow, you're right.  I see the freeper responses are:  he's
                 Kerry's toady; disunity shows weakness, encouraging
                 terrorists; France/Germany/Russia had financial incentives
                 for not joining a coalition; just what is this Asian
                 Foundation he's joining; he lives in a city of liberals.
2004/8/16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32930 Activity:high
8/16    Washington Post columnist:  "Who's the Flip-Flopper?"
        http://csua.org/u/8m1
        "Bush would not negotiate with North Korea. He did. Flip-flop.
        Bush told the United Nations to butt out of Iraq. Now he wants it in.
        Flip-flop. ...
        But it is the areas in which Bush's convictions have not changed that
        are the most troubling, and this includes a religiosity that comforts
        him in his intellectual inertness and granite-like beliefs that are
        impervious to logic, such as his tax policy and his relentless march
        to war in Iraq."
        \_ In a nonpartisan spirit, I'd just like to mention how
           the timing of this sort of thing mirrors simple playground
           politics: "you're wishy-washy!" (wait wait wait) "no YOU are!"
           (*bell rings*) "damn."
           \_ Your characterization is significantly more cynical than
              "non-partisan".
           \_ In a nonpartisan spirit, I'd just like to mention how GW Bush
              is perhaps the most inarticulate U.S. President of the last
              century.
              Now here's the partisan spin by press secretary McClellan:
              "... just shows even the most straightforward and plain-spoken
              people misspeak.  But the American people know this president
              speaks with clarity and conviction, and the terrorists know by
              his actions he means it."
              \_ Is our children learning?
              \_ "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
                  and our people, and neither do we."
              \_ "Karen is with us, a West Texas girl, just like me!"
        \_ Either you or this columnist should really quote where it's clear
           that "Bush would not negotiate with NK"
           \_ I'll assume you're serious about this, and I won't need to quote.
              The Bush administration's whole stink was that Clinton negotiated
              and appeased; Bush would not, and would only expect NK to back
              down without any guarantee of foreign aid.  Bush realized that
              he couldn't count on South Korea to side with him on an
              aggressive posture, and in the mean time, NK had probably built
              one or two nukes.  Bush negotiated.
2004/8/16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32918 Activity:high 80%like:32924
8/15    Why does Bush refuse to release his military records?
        \_ yermom's record is she's a slut
           \_ yer reaching.
        \_ Maybe he's waiting until a few days before election to make the best
           use of it.  That is, if there's nothing wrong with his records.
           \_ if Nixon had immediately released the tapes, even with editing
              for "national security interests", chances are that he could
              have survived Watergate.  But instead, he delayed and temporized
              encouraging the belief (which just happened to be true anyway)
              that there was a coverup.
              \_ But nowadays, the media are compliant lapdogs.  Just look at
                 formerly hallowed institution of the WaPo, who brought down
                 Nixon.  Now they have to run apologies after the fact for
                 their lazy and dishonest WMD reporting.  So its in Bush's
                 best interest just to sit on anything he has that's
                 embarrassing, because the media will quickly get bored and
                 return to Bennifer or Laci Peterson or whatever else sells
                 papers and increases ratings.
                 \_ And Kerry's as well for his records but no one asks for
                    those from a man who is running solely on his 4 months
                    of duty on a swiftboat.
2004/8/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32907 Activity:very high
8/14    Norman Podhoretz, "World War IV: How it Started, What it Means, and
        Why We Have to Win". http://www.commentarymagazine.com/podhoretz.htm
        The reason I post this is not because I believe or disbelieve his
        historical world view.  The reason to read this is to get an all-in-one
        -place summary of every terrorist attack going back to the 70s.  I
        found the number of attacks shocking.  I knew about each one but I have
        never seen them together like this.
        \_ Good article, a few serious errors though (ex.: Khomeini's
           motivation to not have the Soviet embassy stormed--USSR was not
           a major sponsor of the Shah.)  Also, he makes a common mistake--
           "sneers and jeers" are not directed at the Bush speech use of
           "good" and "evil", but rather at ham-fisted and faulty (and
           dishonest and ineffective) response to these.  -John
        \_  You haven't read the 9/11 commission report, have you?  read it.
            everything in your article is covered in much greater detail, and
            without the partisan noise.  Pundits love to trash the 9/11
            report because if people actually read stuff like that they'd
            be out of a job(which they should be.)
            ok, i retract my attack on your article; it's actually pretty
            interesting.  Everyone should still read the 9/11 report.
            \_ I didn't read the report, true.  Is there a historical summary
               of events section?  It's not my article.  I'm just posting for
               the historical summary part.  I don't accept or deny the rest
               of it.  -op
               \_ read it. seriously.  All the pundits are trying to spin it
                  as being useless because it doens't trash the politician
                  they hate(be it clinton or bush), but just sticks to the
                  facts.  It gives all the historical background on the
                  attacks in your article, all kinds of background info
                  on al qaeda, lots of relevant information on how the structure
                  of our government is or isn't set up to deal with terrorism,
                  and some basic American history that everyone should
                  know but probably most people don't.  And that's just from
                  the first five chapters i've read so far.  It also gives
                  a blow-by-blow narrative of *exactly* what happened on 9-11-01
                  that I don't think you'll find anywhere else.
                  http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911
        \_ Good article, thank you. -- ilyas
        \_ [ troll gone ]
        \_ "What Clarke for all practical purposes did--both at the hearings
           and in his hot-off-the-press book, Against All Enemies--was to blame
           Bush, who had been in office for a mere eight months when the attack
           occurred, while exonerating Clinton, who had spent eight long years
           doing little of any significance in response to the series of
           terrorist assaults on American targets in various parts of the world
           that were launched on his watch."
           Clarke did blame Bush, but the rest is flat-out wrong.  You guys
           should all know this when you read it.

It's so sad that Americans still don't get it.  What
           happened to
2004/8/12 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32863 Activity:high
8/12    So can anyone tell me where the political wingnuts on the motd came
        from?  I don't remember anyone so nutty when I was involved
        in the CSUA (97-01).
        \_ I think we somehow gave an account to a pissed off
           re-entry veteran student. - danh
        \_ Young people are generally apathetic about politics. My theory
           is that as the posters to the motd grew older, they became
           more interested in politics. As to why they are so nutty,
           your theory is as good as mine.
        \_ I think the nutty stuff is mostly trolls from people who have
           boring jobs with nothing to do most of the day- and the recent
           increase is just from post-dot-com-bust-shitty-job-market. From
           97-01, people had too much to do. From 01-02, nobody was employed.
           Now, people are employed, but don't do anything.
           \_ two words: graduate school.
           \_ So you think Freeperguy just keeps track of the latest freeps
              so that he can troll the rest of us?
        \_ http://FreeRepublic.com.  Fox News.  Not really liking poor people.
           That's all you need to create a right-wing "wingnut".
           Liberal media.  Michael Moore.  Not really liking rich people.
           That's all you need to create a left-wing "wingnut".
           \_ This kind of Red-State/Blue-State thinking is the whole problem.
              Reducing people to abstractions doesn't teach you anything about
              them.  The computer science solution to problems is not always
              the correct one.
              \_ agreed.  i think the average "red state" or "blue state"
                 person would be horrified by most of the socialist/communist
                 lefists and ayn rand rightwingers that prevail on both
                 sides of the political spectrum among geeks.
              \_ Hey, someone asked how wingnuts came about, I gave an answer.
                 Of course there are a lot of non-wingnut left and
                 right-wingers.  Hell, my "I will kill Michael Moore if I
                 ever see him" younger brother who watches O'Reilly all the
                 time managed to get his hands on my copy of Starship Troopers
                 (book not movie):  He nows says he's joining the Army as
                 long as Kerry isn't elected.
                 \_ Your brother sounds like he really needs a CSUA account.
                 \_ Rent him the DVD. See if he gets the satire.
                    \_ He saw that movie 10-20 times already.  Apparently
                       he likes both.
        \_ Politics have gotten far more acrimonious since the 2000 Election.
           This election cycle has simply built upon that.
        \_ Labelling people as a wingnut if they don't agree with you.
           \_ Ha.  No.
2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32843 Activity:nil
8/11    Is George W. Bush a satanic mass-murderer?
        http://csua.org/u/8k8
2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32838 Activity:nil
8/11    "Afghanistan's interim president, Hamid Karzai, faced questions
        during a news conference ... about the legitimacy of that
        election in light of reports that many voters have registered
        multiple times and may try to vote more than once. 'This is an
        exercise in democracy. Let them exercise it twice!' Karzai
        said. 'We cannot be perfect.'"
        http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040811_1192.html
        \_ "Karzai later hastened to add that voters will have their hands
           marked in ink that will be difficult to remove in an effort to
           prevent them from voting more than once."
           Oh boy, Taliban targets!
2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32834 Activity:very high
8/11    Wouldn't even Republicans agree that any administration that purposely
        leaks classified info (in the latest case, the identity of a Al Queda
        operative working for us) for political gain, endangering this
        country's security in the process, should be removed? Isn't this on the
        level of Nixon's crimes, if not greater?
        \_ Wouldn't even Democrats agree that any administration that
           purposely sold nuclear secrets to China in exchange for campaign
           money, endangering this country's security in the process, should
           be removed?  Isn't this far above the level of Nixon's crimes, if
           not far far greater?
           \_ Yeah, if such a thing actually happened, it would be. But since
              it is only a fiction of some paranoid loons imagination, I
              not going to worry about it too much. Forget your tinfoil hat?
           \_ Which Clinton administration official admitted that this
              happened?  Condi Rice actually ADMITTED the name was leaked by
              the Bush admin
        \_ It's minor compared to what Nixon and Reagan administrations did.
           Nixon used the CIA to counter the FBI investigating his reelection
           committee's illegal activities. Reagan sold arms to an enemy state
           to fund an illegal war. This said, what Bush's admin did was just
           really stupid, not illegal. The Valerie Plame thing was illegal.
           \_ Nixon/Reagan stuff was clearly wrong ... but did it give aid
              and comfort to a foreign enemy we are at war with?  Scale vs.
              direct effect.
           \_ Why no recrimination for Clinton buying arms from Iran to give
              to the KLA?  So having another Soviet satellite state in
              our hemisphere would have been a good thing?
              \_ 1) Because after nearly 20 years, attempts of normalization
                 of relations with (supposively moderate) Iran through
                 economic mean is not a totally bad idea.
                 \_ The arms tranfers were illicit, just like those in
                    Iran-Contra.
                    \_ Sigh. Context has no meaning to you. -EOT-
                 2) The US Congress had outlawed the sales. Both El Salvador
                 and Nicaragua were economically, politically, and militarily
                 incapable of threatening the US.
                 \_ So a Soviet controlled Central America would have
                    been no problem during the 1980's?
                    \_ The US told these nations "our way or the highway."
                       They took the highway and Cold Warriors struck back.
                       If the US had tried to fix the oppressive (pro-US)
                       regimes, socialism wouldn't have taken root.
              \_ I had never even heard of this charge before. Are you sure
                 it is not one of those "who killed Vince Foster" type
                 Clinton-hater legend?
        \_ SHUT UP! SHUT UP! SHUT UP! - Bill O'Reilly
           \_ He only says that to people repeating liberal nonsense after
              they've had their turn.
        \_ Only 40% of Americans believe the Bush administration would be
              \_ And when encouraging people not to speak out about the war.
                 And when the son of a man killed on 9/11 tries to point out
                 that the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.
        \_ Only 38% of Americans believe the Bush administration would be
           capable of that.
           http://i.timeinc.net/time/covers/1101040816/poll/images/poll_2.gif
        \_ No, it's only incompetence that led to the al Qaeda operative's name
           being leaked to the press at an inappropriate time.  Who exactly
           leaked it?  Tom Ridge says he doesn't know.  Rice implies the name
           was purposely released by the administration to press.
           http://csua.org/u/8jx
           \_ It's worse than that. The guy had flipped and was giving the
              Pakistanis viable intelligence, plus feeding Al-Quada trash.
              Knowing that someone had been found drove Al-Quada back
              underground instead of into the hands of authorities.
              \_ I'm just talking about the motive, not the results (which
                 are as severe as you say).  I say incompetence, not politics.
2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:32832 Activity:high
8/11    Kerry states he was in Cambodia multiple times, and compares
        himself to Martin Sheen in Apocalypse Now.  Nevermind
        Kerry's swift boat was 50' long.
        http://instapundit.com/archives/017129.php
        \_ Why do you read Instapundit? The guy has been so wrong so
           many times and he never admits or corrects his mistakes.
        \_ http://www.falloutshelternews.com/BushHitlerLinks.html
           \_ Hitler? Ok.
        \_ Tet 1969 would actually fit his story perfectly. We started
           bombing Cambodia in March 1969, I am sure we sent in some
           guys undercover to do recon just before that. Did Nixon
           make some speech like that during Tet?
           \_ Tet was Jan of 1968.
              \_ Tet is every year. It is a Vietnamese holiday similar
                 to Christmas or Chinese New Year.
                 \_ Oh, a wiseguy, eh?
                    \_ I am just telling you the truth. You can't handle
                       the truth!
2004/8/11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32830 Activity:very high
8/11    George W. Bush sucker-punches a rugby opponent at Yale (photo)
        "George Bush delivers illegal, but gratifying right hook to opposing
        ball carrier."  http://csua.org/u/8jv
        \_ Clinton puffs and cheats.  So?  People still love him.
           \_ It must be nice living in your own reality.
        \_ Yeah he played rough rugby in school.  He should be impeached!
           \_ Punching the guy with the ball == "rough rugby".  HA HA!
        \_ Worse than that, he claims that he played Varsity rugby for
           Yale for four years, when there is no such thing. And he only
           played Rugby at all for one year. He can't remember every single
           exact detail from his life 30 years ago, he is a lying scumbag
           that cannot be trusted with the Presidency!!!
           \_ He only claimed one year, but it was still a lie, yes. Not
              as consequential as lying us into an illegitimate invasion
              and destroying America's soft power/credibility. LOACFAG.
                \_ At least it wasn't lying about getting blowjobs in the
                   oral, err, oval office.
           \_ What about his claims to have played rugby with Mulan Rouge in
              Cambodia!?!
2004/8/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32801 Activity:high
8/10    Bush:  "My opponent hasn't answered the question of whether knowing
        what we know now, he would have supported going into Iraq."
        Kerry:  "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the
        authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to
        have but I would have used that authority effectively."
        \_  Kerry challenged Bush to answer some questions of his own --
            why he rushed to war without a plan for the peace, why he used
            faulty intelligence, why he misled Americans about how he would
            go to war and why he had not brought other countries to the table.
            "There are four not hypothetical questions like the president's,
            real questions that matter to Americans and I hope you'll get
            the answers to those questions, because the American people
            deserve them," he told reporters.
            \_ Have you stopped beating your wife?  The American people
               deserve to know the answer to this real question.
            \_ The charge that Bush had no plan to win the peace is legitimate
               but the charge that Bush relied on intelligence agencies
               implies that Bush should have become fluent in Arabic, Farsi,
               and Pashto, handed the presidency to Cheney, and went off and
               gathered his own intelligence.
               \_ No, it just requires that he was willing to search out and
                  listen to people who disagreed with the *false* phoney
                  consensus presented by Wolfowitz and Tenant. He could
                  have found them with Google, or by talking to the numerous
                  CIA career agents who quit in protest to the hyping of
                  the intel. The fact that he either does not have people
                  in his inner circle willing to tell him what he doesn't
                  want to hear or that he ignores them speaks volumes about
                  his competence and ability to lead the nation.
                  \_ So when the President, who already suffers information
                     bombardment, gets info from the guys he is supposed to
                     rely on to give him info, he should dismiss them and
                     read blogs he found from google to create our foreign
                     policy?  This is a joke, right?  IHBT?
                     \_ He has surrounded himself with yesmen and ideologues
                        and doesn't even read a newspaper. Even after they
                        failed him, he has not shaken up his cabinet. He
                        demonstrates a fundamental inability to think
                        critically. Stop deleting this. If you can't reply,
                        just nuke the thread.
                        \_ What newspaper?  According to the wall, the mass
                           media is all dog food and we should get our news
                           from blogs.  If he shook up his cabinet like Tenet
                           getting the axe, you'd just be here saying like you
                           have before that he was blaming his subordinates for
                           what he is resonsible for and he should resign, not
                           leave the buck at his subordinate's desks.  There is
                           just no making some people happy.  You hate the guy
                           and that's ok but don't try to hide it behind that
                           sort of noise.  Just be upfront about it.  It's ok.
                           [and no i didn't delete anything, get over it. my
                            reply is there.  you havent posted anything that
                            isnt trivial to reply to.]
                           \_ Nope, if he shook up his cabinet, I would have
                              some respect for him. At least he would have
                              admitted to himself that there was a problem.
                              As it is, he claims that he makes no mistakes.
                              He is an arrogant boob and should be trusted
                              with the kind of power he has. As for what
                              newspaper, how about the Christian Science
                              Monitor? How about the WSJ? How about
                              anything at all??? And what *I* said was that
                              Bush should fire Cheney, Wolfowitz and the
                              neocon cabal, apologize to the nation, apologize
                              to the UN and apologize to France and Germany.
                              Hell, if he did all that, I would probably
                              vote for him. But since I post anonymously,
                              you are to be forgiven for confusing me with
                              some other "Bush hater."
                              \_ So you think the WSJ, CSM, etc, have better
                                 access to information than the FBI, CIA, and
                                 other multi billion dollar funded intelligence
                                 agencies?!  Ooookeeey....  Why should anyone
                                 apologise to anyone?  For what exactly?
                                 \_ For leading the nation to war under
                                    false pretenses. It is okay to make
                                    mistakes. It is not okay to make mistakes,
                                    pretend like you never did it, and not
                                    fix the problem that led to the mistake.
                                    At least the CSM isn't a bubble filled
                                    with people who all agree with each other.
                                    Perhaps you didn't notice that a bunch
                                    of CIA analysts quit in protest over the
                                    poor handling of the intel, as well as
                                    half the British cabinet. I suspect Bush
                                    didn't notice. Here is a bunch of great
                                    stuff from conservative commentators
                                    agreeing with me, that Bush will never
                                    see, because, sadly, he doesn't read
                                    anything except from his bubble world:
                http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/18/bush/index.html

                                    \_ Which false pretenses?  WMD was not the
                                       only reason to go in.  And has been
                                       posted and censored many times before,
                                       the intelligence agencies in this and
                                       many other countries all believed Iraq
                                       had large stock piles of WMD.  Clinton,
                                       Gore, Kerry, Albright, and many others
                                       are on record as saying they believed
                                       he has had WMD for years.  Why did none
                                       of them fire all their people and go
                                       read a blog or the CSM?  Robert Novak,
                                       1 elected official and 1 random paper
                                       is hardly "a bunch of great stuff from
                                       conservative commentators".  It's some
                                       stuff from 3 sources.  I don't consider
                                       Novak a conservative, btw.
                                       \_ "Iraq has ties to al Qaeda"
                                          "Iraq can mobilize chemical and
                                          biological weapons within 45 minutes"
                                          "Saddam kicked out the UN inspectors"
                                          And could this be considered a flip
                                          flop?  Then: " It costs a lot to
                                          fight this war.  We have spent more
                                          than a billion dollars a month
                                          -- over $30 million a day -- and
                                          we must be prepared for future
                                          operations."  Now: they plan on
                                          putting off their funding requests
                                          until after the election, then have
                                          to ask for $50B emergency
                                          authorization...
                                       \_ WMD was certainly one of the major,
                                          if not the major justification given
                                          to the American people. And they are
                                          not there. No, your one 10 year old
                                          sarin shell does not count. It does
                                          not really matter that much who else
                                          made the same error, since the
                                          decision to go to war was with Mr.
                                          Bush, but it mitigates it somewhat
                                          He still needs to say mea culpa
                                          somehow. Which he has not.
                                          \_ But they had Weapons of Mass
                                             Destruction-related program
                                             activities!
        \_ By "I would have voted for the authority", did Kerry mean he would
           have voted for going into Iraq today knowing that there is no WMD
           anyway?
           \_ I believe he has said that he looked at voting for war powers
              as giving the president a new tool for handling the situation,
              but that he thought it would be used as a credible threat and
              possibly a banner to rally allies behind rather than us diving
              in with a pitiable coalition.
              \_ Nuance!  So really he meant to show the world (again) that the
                 US is a paper tiger that makes threats but never backs them up
                 in modern times.  Good plan.  That'll scare em!  That and his
                 fighting a more 'sensitive war against terrorism' (his words)
                 will keep the world safe!  I'm voting for Kerry this fall for
                 sure!  --Osama
                 \_ That's not how I read it. I read it as: I would have fought
                    a war againt Iraq, but I would have listended to Shinsheki
                    and gotten 300k troops like he requested, not taunted him,
                    called him a coward and a traitor and run him out of
                    Washington.
                    \_ That's not what he said.  Anyway, even if that *is* what
                       he said or meant, 300k troops would do what exactly for
                       us in Iraq right now and the last year?  Make more
                       targets?  Make the Iraqi people even more upset about
                       the even larger force sitting on their territory?  We
                       have more than enough fire power to genocide the entire
                       country.  Lack of troops is not the problem.
                       \_ Tell that to the generals who have said otherwise.
                          The big problem is our military is trained to go
                          in, destroy quickly, and leave.  We are not trained
                          for peacekeeping missions, let alone nation building.
                          Bush's biggest failure in Iraq was not taking this
                          into account and alienating our allies who have a
                          better track record in this area.
                       \_ Shinseki was canned for saying we didn't have enough
                          troops.  Now Bush says, "If the military asks for
                          more, I'll give it to them".  The military doesn't
                          ask.  Get it now?  (just google for shinseki fired)
2004/8/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32772 Activity:moderate
8/8     I despise Bush, and will certainly not vote for him in november,
        but IMHO Bush's recent speech at the UNITY conference was the best of
        his presidency.  Definitely worth viewing.  Go to http://www.cspan.org
        and click on "Pres. Bush Remarks at UNITY Conference"
        He actually manages not sound like a dumbass or a right-wing nut for
        over half an hour.  Particularly impressive in front of an openly
        hostile audience.
        \_ 1/2 hour out of 4 years just doesn't cut it.
        \_ Erm, wasn't this the speech where the audience was laughing at him,
           mostly to do with his answer to the question about Indian
           sovereignty?  Something like "sovereignty is well ... sovereignty,
           and if you have sovereignty you are sovereign."
           \_ I said "over half an hour."   There were still some dumbass parts
              during the q&a session.  OTOH the fact that they got him to
              publicly come out against legacies in admissions is pretty
              funny.
              \_ Without legacies how would the next generation of politicians
                 like Al Gore get into school?  We know he isn't smart enough
                 to get in on his own.
2004/8/6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32737 Activity:insanely high
8/6     Whoever posted that Norman Mailer dialogue -- It is actually a
        decent read. It shows Mailer excercising more subtilty of judgement
                                                      \_ how subtle!
        than I thought him capable of.
        \_ The observation about Rumsfeld was something that resonated with
           me immediately. -- ulysses
           \_ 1. Donald Rumsfeld is a mammal.
              2. Donald Rumsfeld fights ALL the time.
              3. The purpose of Donald Rumsfeld is to flip out and kill people.
        \_ Anybody still have the link?
           \_ http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/rnc/9574
              Now just don't say I never did you anything. -- ulysses
        \_ Oh yea, perpetual America hater and 60's leftist ingrate.
           Cause celebre for Jack Henry Abbott and Mumia.  I can't
           wait for these 60's leftovers to die off.
           It's as though they didn't do enough damage to the country
           in the 60's.
           \_ you miss the day when you don't have to share anything
              with colored people, don't you?
              \_ The south was solidly democrat in the 60's and
                 70's.  Right back at ya!
           I counted the word 'feel' 12 times in that article -
           appropriate or what?
2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32729 Activity:nil
8/7     Didn't Bush snub CA a while back? How supportive do you think Arnie
        is going to be? Should he pull a few punches to try and
        negotiate or is he better off going 'all out' so that Bush 'owes us'.
        I don't like Bush, but you have to give him credit that he's pretty
        damn good at returning favors to his buddies...
2004/8/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32709 Activity:nil
8/5     I just ran the numbers again, and I was wrong.  Even if Bush wins
        Florida, I have Bush leading Kerry a little on electoral votes, before
        counting seven medium states in a dead heat.
2004/8/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32700 Activity:nil
8/4     http://barlow.typepad.com/barlowfriendz/2004/07/dancing_in_the_.html
        Come dance with John Perry Barlow in Manhattan
2004/8/4 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32686 Activity:nil
8/4     I've seen it claimed on the motd that Sandy Berger has been
        cleared and that Bush has military documents he can release but
        hasn't. I've asked for links substantiating both these claims,
        but have not receieved a single response.  Not even a blog link.
        Can I conclude that these are silly lies now?
        \_ Christ, just quit bitching and google.
           http://members.aol.com/forvets/htomr.htm
           \_ Oooookay... so I knew this.  But I thought the claim was
              that Bush's records of 72-73 were MISSING....
              \_ I believe the beef that AP has with the Bush records is that
                 he didn't grant them the rights to the records, he requested
                 his own copy and then forwarded them with the wax stamp
                 unsealed, so to speak.
        \_ I do not think Bush has released all possible military records
        \_ Dewd, there are a lot of unverified claims on soda, and some
           posts that debunk them and tell you exactly why.  Berger has been
           cleared of obstructing the 9/11 commission by 9/11 commission
           representatives; the Archives people are still deciding what to do
           about Berger violating Archives policy on notetaking and removing
           classified photocopies.
           http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/10235294p-11155782c.html
           \_ Thank you, I wasn't able to find that link.
        \_ Kerry has not released all of his military records.
           \_ Yeah, so what we have is:
              Bush claims he has released all relevant records.  It can perhaps
              never be verified that he did or did not.
              Kerry has said he has released all military records, but from
              press reports, reviews by superior officers were not made
              available (unclear why).
              \_ and medical records related to his medals.
2004/8/4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:32679 Activity:nil
8/4     Did you know, Powell re-confirms Bush did the right thing?
        http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/21/231135.shtml
        \_  Everyone thinks  Bush did the right thing, unless you
        are a commie scum bastard
        \_ then, Bush must has done the right thing!
2004/8/3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:32664 Activity:nil
8/3     To the guy who claimed Bush can release some gaurd duty records by
        signing something, do you have a reputable link for that?  It's
        the first I've heard of it.
2017/11/18 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/18   
Results 601 - 750 of 2024   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:President:Bush:
.