logo Sign In

It's official... — Page 8

Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Warbler
Bush is no Lincoln.


Ok I can agree with you there. Hes not even close. I was just making an example.
Author
Time
Jimbo, it is good to see that you are trying to fight the good fight, but at some point you have to realized that you simply can't convince these people of anything.

For the record, nobody said that Bush is the perfect president, but at least he is trying. He is doing things rather than just going on and on about a "plan" that he can't really explain.

Kerry once said that he wouldn't know what needed to be done until he got to the whitehouse (and they say Bush is arrogant) and that Bush might have screwed it up too bad to fix. And at the end of that paragraph he said. "I have a plan."

Serioulsly. Funny stuff, no?

Even if Bush did have ulterior motives for going into Iraq (as if liberation of opressed people is sinsiter) there is no way in the bowels of heck, or the spice mines of Kessel that John F. Kerry should be the president. If you truly hate Bush, then just vote for Nader, please.

4

Author
Time
I found the quote. This came from an audio-bite

"I will do what the generals believe we need to do without having any chilling effect as the President put in place by firing General Shinseki. And I'll have to wait until January 20th. I don't know what I'm going to find on January 20th, the way the President is going. If the President just does more of the same every day and it continues to deteriorate, I may be handed Lebanon, figuratively speaking. Now, I just don't know. I can't tell you. What I'll tell you is, I have a plan. "

Funny. He doesn't know what he will find. It may be another figurative Lebanon (whatever that means) but he has a plan!!

4

Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Regicidal_Maniac
Quote

Originally posted by: jimbo
Quote

Originally posted by: RRS-1980
Ok, let's run this proggy I got from a fellow Linux user....


...applet loading....

Jimbo's Analysis by Cybernetic Know-how Artificial Scientific Simulation
JACKASS(tm)


[simulation started]


jimbo
Jedi Knight
Posts: 1961
Joined: Sep 2003

I forgot to mention another flip flop Kerry made: he wants to improve our relationship with Euro countries. Why the hell we care about their oppenion? (sp?) Our commander and chief is going to nuke France and that's why I respect him - its a great stratigery. He knows his job.
Now excuse me, I'm going to nudie bar.

[/simulation terminated]





I don't remember ever saying it.


This whole exchange would have to be my favourite post/counterpost I've ever read on these forums.

Well done to RRS-1980 for his great sense of humour and to jimbo for being such a good sport.

That made my morning.


Man, u should have seen the giant arguments over PT-OT fitting together between me, Shimraa, & Jimbo; those or the old Nile arguments. THOSE are good stuff
(Not to take a thing away from RRS's genious )



Quote

Originally posted by: RRS-1980
C'mon guys, this whole discussion with jimbo is pointless. He's just as stubborn as Osama's goat.

He's still young and naive. In his dreams he wants to become somebody like his alter-ego (Al Bundy) with an option to work as Dubya's bodyguard (I'll bet he'd take a bullet aimed for "W" without a blink). His personality was shaped by both his parents an the neighbourhood he grew up and by FOX NEWS.

There is no way we could change his views at this point of his life. Some people - especially young people - need to stick to few "stable" things in life, some sort of axioms that found the basis of their thinking. Proving they're wrong would destroy these "foundations", it would destroy their present image of the world and literally shake their psyche.
Think of a stalwart religious person - or about a fanatic, if that's easier to imagine - if we'd be able to prove that their god does not exist, it would destroy all their beliefs, policies, philosophy etc. Short trip to suicide, paranoia or total stagnation in their life - take your pick.

Therefore jimbo is not defending Bush Jr, he's defending his world, the world he closed himself inside.


*StarTrooper3000 owes me 3000 Euro for this thorough analysis*


LMAO, *pays 3000 Euro, plus 500 tip* OMG, u made my evening! lmao...



Ok, uhhh, where in the world did u pull that analogy from? Lincoln-Bush is no comparison. Lincoln was great due to his ideals & such. He stood for what the union stood for; plus, he did not have all the entangling alliances that America deals with these days, nor the temptation of oil. His fame just came from the stances he took on the dispute between north and south. I wouldn't compare Bush & Lincoln...
EDIT: Ooops, I guess I didn't read the entire page before I wrote this post. I thought it was coming into the discussion of Lincoln doing better than Bush. Lol.
I just hate stupid people.

GO JETS!!!!

Petition signer # 34,865
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Jimbo, it is good to see that you are trying to fight the good fight, but at some point you have to realized that you simply can't convince these people of anything.


And vice versa.

The 'good fight', you crack me up Chaltab seriously, nah I'm just kidding you're alright.
"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." - Goering.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." - Goebbels.

"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - Orwell.
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Jimbo, it is good to see that you are trying to fight the good fight, but at some point you have to realized that you simply can't convince these people of anything.

For the record, nobody said that Bush is the perfect president, but at least he is trying. He is doing things rather than just going on and on about a "plan" that he can't really explain.

Kerry once said that he wouldn't know what needed to be done until he got to the whitehouse (and they say Bush is arrogant) and that Bush might have screwed it up too bad to fix. And at the end of that paragraph he said. "I have a plan."

Serioulsly. Funny stuff, no?

Even if Bush did have ulterior motives for going into Iraq (as if liberation of opressed people is sinsiter) there is no way in the bowels of heck, or the spice mines of Kessel that John F. Kerry should be the president. If you truly hate Bush, then just vote for Nader, please.


Id definutly take Nader over Kerry anyday. Thats not saying much considering how much I hate John Kerry.
Author
Time
Jimbo, I fail to understand how you could seriously say that you would accept Nader as your President, even if it was just for dramatic effect (about how much you hate Kerry), but Nader is further left than Kerry, and that has been one of your principle quibbles. Kerry's flopping aside, you really havent attacked anything other than his quasi-liberal stances on things.

I cant argue that we are a Republic, but I think its necessary to acknowledge that we still run about calling ourselves a Democracy. Deliver the Freedom of Democracy, etc., etc. Its a moot point.
Like I said in my post, im not calling anyone a theif. I just think its sketch. One of the most heated results in our history. Its interesting that the rift hasnt been closed, not even a little. The nation is still solidly divided, damn near 50/50. I think this is problematic. No matter who wins there will be a myriad of "I told you so's" along with even more backlash in 2008.
"You don't own space, so stop actin' like you do."
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Regicidal_Maniac
Quote

Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
Jimbo, it is good to see that you are trying to fight the good fight, but at some point you have to realized that you simply can't convince these people of anything.


And vice versa.

The 'good fight', you crack me up Chaltab seriously, nah I'm just kidding you're alright.


Well. At least somebody thinks I'm funny.

4

Author
Time
im sad to say but the USA is not a democratic country...
"The ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
Qui-Gon Jinn (R.I.P.)
Author
Time
The USA was never set up as a pure democracy. It is a Republic first and foremost.

4

Author
Time
If giving people around the world freedom means helping them set up democratic government, can one conclude that we in America are not free? At least, not in the sense that, say, the people in Afghanistan are now? If the ideal situation in one of a pure democracy, why do we not maintain the ideals we wish to deliver to the world?

P.S. Rhetorical Questions

" Nothing brings more pain than to much pleasure,
Nothing more bondage than too much liberty."
B. Franklin
"You don't own space, so stop actin' like you do."
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: motti_soL
im sad to say but the USA is not a democratic country...


Try to avoid all the politicalities on this post and clean it up as much as I can.

It isn't a democracy, but it's not that "sad"; it's just the ways the government acts in the US, and the way the laws and the constitution were written make it a republic, not a democracy. The UK is not a democracy, it's a parlamentary kingdom, Spain is not a democracy, yet these countries and the USof A are not a democracy in the dictionary meaning of democracy, but if you look into it, well, there's a lot of democracy fundaments there, such as free elections and free speech, even though there is a electoral college and a patriotic act.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
A pure democracy wouldn't work. a 100% democracy would mean that everytime a government decision needed to me made, a national election would have to be held. Government would just be too slow. And just remember that just because the majority say we should do 'x', does always mean that 'x' is the right thing to do.


p.s. I believe we need to reform the electorial college system.
Author
Time
I agree with you Warbler. Reform is necessary to keep value in individual votes. I like the fact that in Colorado they will be voting on a new system for Colorado's electorial votes. The system they would like is one where the votes are given on the basis of the majority vote. That is, if you get half the majority vote in Colorado, you get half the electorial votes. I think this is a much more logical way to do things. It would balance out the democracy vs. republic problems, and also be a more accurate representation of the majority vote.

Ive heard that there is a large movement against this being on the ballot for Colorado. Its a bipartisan plan, or its touted as such. Mostly Republicans are nay-saying its effectiveness at this point. Im not making an evaluation of either party. However, I cant understand being opposed to better representation of the people's desires.
The only fault I see is, if every state doesnt do this. Some states that do will be considered negligible. Politicians will still go after the big pulls on electorial votes. But if every state were to do this, I dont see where any problem would arise.

Forgive me if thats all not very clear.
"You don't own space, so stop actin' like you do."
Author
Time
Communism works in theory. Human nature just doesn't allow it to. Greedy individuals get too much power and things get jacked up.

I know I’ve made some very poor decisions recently.

Author
Time
Human nature keeps us from a number of great things. Most significant, it seperates us from all other life. A fatal mistake in the grand scheme I think.
"You don't own space, so stop actin' like you do."
Author
Time
EDIT: Screw it... it's not even worth discussing anymore.
For as much as some people claim to hate what Star Wars has become, they sure seem incapable of shutting up about it.
Author
Time
Apart from the electoral college thing and the choice of not to vote, which I strongly disagree, there should be a national voting system in the US. It is possible to do so, in Brazil we have electronic voting since 1996, it works the same everywhere, it's easy to use, fast, and error-proof. We get the results of an election, down to the last vote, in 6, 7 hours; depending on the city it takes only 1 or 2 hours after the election is over. Why can't the same thing be used in the USofA, at least in the presidential election, a national, integrated eletronic system. I mean, the laws that rule a persidential election should be federal laws...
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
The same reason America doesn't switch to the metric system, doesn't drive on the left side of the rode.

Were just stubborn. And there is that little detail about how much it would cost to change things like that.

4

Author
Time
The metric system!!! Useless, I think it makes sense for a world economic power to use a different system of weight and measure than just about everyone else. Sorry, thats really sarcastic. But I think this is just silliness. Not that I think it should be changed, like, IT NEEDS to be changed...thats silly too.
Yeah, I think we are gradually moving over to electronic voting in most states. The problem IS cost, like Chaltab said. Im sure that after everyone is on electronic ballot casting, a national system isnt far off.
"You don't own space, so stop actin' like you do."
Author
Time
Why don't we convert over to a total electronic system?

Well, I could lean to the right and accuse liberals of using the butterfly ballot as an excuse to "interpret" ballots (with their dimpled and hanging chads) in their favor.

But, why should I do that, when I could just show you this:

Black Voters 'Afraid' of Electronic Voting Machines, Activist Says
By Marc Morano
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
September 30, 2004

Miami (CNSNews.com) - An African-American civil rights spokeswoman said on Wednesday that the new computerized voting machines "terrify" her, and that blacks are "afraid of machines like that."

Joanne Bland, the director and co-founder of the National Voting Rights Museum and Institute in Selma, Ala., told CNSNews.com on Wednesday that the new computerized voting machines are going to intimidate black voters in Florida and elsewhere and suppress their vote in the November presidential election because many blacks are not "technologically savvy."

"The computers really terrify me. The electronic voting -- the new machines -- I think it will turn off a segment in my community, particularly the elderly. We are not as technically savvy, and we are afraid of machines like that, and they (African-Americans) probably won't go [to the polls] and they probably won't ask for assistance, said Bland, who spent the last week in Florida.

"It is going to turn them off totally and I want that to stop," said Bland, who also serves as a spokeswoman for the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Public Accuracy, which predicts that "several million voters" may be "deprived of voting rights again" in 2004.

When asked if she preferred low-tech punch-card ballots that produced the controversial hanging chads in Florida in 2000, Bland responded, "Now that was low technology to who? People that have been privileged to learn technology? There have been lots of changes in the United States, but if you look at the statistics, our biggest block of voters would be between 40 and 80, so when did those people have access to any kind of technology?"

As an 11-year-old in 1965, Bland took part in the Selma-to-Montgomery voting rights march with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. She has just concluded a speaking tour on the history of the civil rights movement in the Miami area.

"I got the hell out of there Saturday, and I would suggest you do, too. Until we get rid of those Bushes (President George W. Bush and his brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush), we're going to have a problem in Florida," Bland said.

GOP political operatives were quick to denounce Bland's comments.

African-American GOP consultant Tara Setmayer, who has worked on Florida congressional campaigns, called Bland's remarks "insulting" to black Americans.

"I think it's insulting to imply that African-Americans are unable to comprehend or assimilate modern-day technology," Setmayer said.

"As a registered voter in Florida, I am familiar with these touch screen voting machines,and they're very easy to understand, very voter-friendly," Setmayer told CNSNews.com. "Her claim is absurd," she added.

Syd Dinerstein, the chairman of Republican Party of Palm Beach County, also denounced Bland's comments.

"If there was ever proof positive that the black community needs a different set of leaders, statements like [Bland's] are exactly it," Dinerstein told CNSNews.com .

"I wish the Democrats thought as highly of the black community as Republicans do. We trust black parents to pick the right schools for their children, the Democrats don't. We trust black people to make informed electoral choices, the Democrats don't," Dinerstein said.

"It is sad that the soft bigotry of low expectations is at the core of the fundamental principles of the Democratic Party," he added.

Republican consultant and former political and government affairs director of the African American Republican Leadership Council Kevin Martin also rejected the idea that blacks can't grasp computerized voting.

"What Bland is trying to say is voters down there [in Florida] are dumb, they are not educating themselves. She is saying that African-Americans-- when it comes to voting -- are intellectually inferior," Martin told CNSNews.com.

"You have touch screens in grocery stores, at [state run motor vehicle offices] and African-Americans seem to have no problem using those," he added.

'Voter intimidation' by Republicans

On Wednesday, the eve of the first presidential debate between Sen. John F. Kerry and President George W. Bush at the University of Miami, the NAACP and People for the American Way announced the results of a new study entitled "The Long Shadow of Jim Crow: Voter Intimidation and Suppression in America."

The report alleges that the Republican Party is attempting to systematically suppress the voting rights of African-Americans.

Ralph G. Neas, president of People for the American Way, said, "Although voter intimidation has not historically been confined to a single political party, we are increasingly concerned about recent incidents indicating that Republican officials may be planning to challenge voters this year based on race."

Neas said, "There is more than one way to deprive people of their right to vote, from systematic and technical problems to inadequate voter education to illegal actions by public officials."

Martin, however, challenged the new report.

"I am sick and tired of hearing rhetoric about corruption. Show me some evidence. Name a government official involved in suppressing the black vote," Martin said.

"They can't [name officials] because it's nothing more than red herrings to feed to the black community to try to scare them so the Democrats can get 90 percent of the vote and people like Julian Bond, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and these groups can feel they have the right to sit at the table with Democrats like Kerry," Martin added.

Dinerstein completely dismissed any allegations of GOP vote suppression.

"In the [2000 presidential] election, not a single black person was deprived of their right to vote, but a significant number of the men and women in our service overseas were deprived of their right to vote by the Democratic Party," Dinerstein said, referring to the controversy over disqualified absentee ballots cast by members of the military.

Setmayer also rejected the new study from People for the American Way and the NAACP.

"I think it's a desperate attempt at trying to mobilize the black vote, because if you look historically at the areas in Florida where we have had the most voter fraud -- or suppression, as they call it -- [it has] been in the Democratic districts.

"It's an absurd claim," Setmayer said, considering that the election supervisors all have been Democrats.

"And they are taking that approach because they have a weak candidate. Kerry is a weak candidate because he has no rapport with the black community," she added.

Setmayer said Kerry's announcement on Wednesday that Jesse Jackson had officially joined his campaign was spurred by recent polls showing that Kerry's support is "slipping" in the African-American community."

A new Pew Research Center poll shows African American voters support for Bush has doubled to 12 percent from 6 percent, while Kerry's support has dropped 10 points since August.

Bland said it's too bad that black voters give such overwhelming support to the Democratic Party.

"One of our problems is we are classified as Democrats -- that whole block of African-American voters. The largest portion of us will more than likely vote Democrat, and that makes us not a party in the game
Author
Time
"Ooohh.... scary machine."

I think electronic voting machines are a good thing. Have we forgotten last election in Florida yet? My God!

I know I’ve made some very poor decisions recently.

Author
Time
I've actually heard a few things on the controversy over electronic voting, but it didnt have to deal with people being to dumb to use it. I've read good things about it from people with disabilities actually being able to vote secretly and not need 3 other people in the booth with them while they vote. Ive read that senior citizens are able to use it, so basically information contrary to the above article.

but on the other hand ive also heard complaints as far as the votes being more easily abled to be compromised or 'discarded'. And i know they had some problems with them in my area during the primarys but they said it was because the people officiating the voting didnt know what was going on and stuff was configured wrong and stuff like that, basically they attributed it to not being ready to implement it (not that the systems arent ready, but the people doing the implementing)


Darth Simon
Why Anakin really turned to the dark side:
"Anakin, You're father I am" - Yoda
"No. No. That's not true! That's impossible!" - Anakin

0100111001101001011011100110101001100001

*touchy people disclaimer*
some or all of the above comments are partially exaggerated to convey a point, none of the comments are meant as personal attacks on anyone mentioned or reference in the above post
Author
Time
I take a triumph the dog attitude towards what type of ballot

"Who gives a shit"
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Hal 9000
"Ooohh.... scary machine."

I think electronic voting machines are a good thing. Have we forgotten last election in Florida yet? My God!
National studies on the issue demonstrated ballot-spoilage rates across the country range between 2-3 percent of total ballots cast. Florida's rate in 2000 was 3 percent. In 1996 it was 2.5 percent. --from The 2000 Election: Where's the Disenfranchisement?
It was the closeness of the vote in Florida that triggered the Democrats to demand the recount, and started the mess.

Where I live (not in Florida), we use the butterfly ballot. From my personal experience, there is no flippin' way that people, even the elderly, could NOT get a proper bunch. You've got an inch-long stylus that goes into a hole with your ballot about 1/2 an inch below. The only possible way, and this was suggested, is if people were trying to punch their ballots with ballpoint pens, rather than the provided stylus.