Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
nature
climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
As I've now had a chance to digest the last week I've been able to get over most of most of my sadness. I suppose as we watch Bush RAPE the environment my sadness for that will return. Oh well.
That said, I have to say I couldn't agree with TheHip more. Bin Laden is quite pleased that Bush will spend spend spend to get him - or appear to be trying to. Bush wants bin laden running around. Why? Because it keeps those 59 million scared idiots that voted for Bush in fear. Bin Laden is terrorizing 59 million in America from a cave half way around the planet. I find that commical. Bin Laden knows that with Bush in power he will continue to bleed this country of finances - remember he just told us that is his plan. The bottom line is simple - as long as we contine to fight terrorism there will always be terrorism. You are pretty much an idiot if you think we have the power to eradicate it with force.
Now that Shrub can run his regime for four more years I do think there are some very legitimate questions that must be asked. We deserve answers.
1) When will we be leaving Iraq? Is it OK with you (Jody,etc.) if Americans are still dieing over there in four years? Is there an exit strategy? Every day it looks more and more like Vietnam. At what point is enough enough?
2) Is it going to be OK with Amerca if we have to start the draft for this? Syria and Iran are next and we KNOW Iran has WMDs. Do we really have the military power to commit somewhere else? That certinaly seems like the plan.
Bush isn't my president. He's getting the same treatment from me that Clinton got from his anti-fans. No support. There's little doubt in my mind that Bush will continue to screw up. You can defend him if you want but I'll just laugh. Bottom line is, sh#t is really screwed up, it can't be denied and yet Shrub doesn't look concerned. I'm not sure what kind of healing we'll see over the next four years. I see an even more divided country in four years. I see no hope for healing. Oh, but once it starts do let me know - wouldn't want to miss it!
So... get ready cuz in four years we get.... Hillary!!! My mother, a hardcore republican, even said she'd vote for hillary - she wants to see Hillary. Her comments were hillarious - "The men can't do it right, time for the women to get the job done". A group of women so pissed they will cross party lines. Look the f*#k out!
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
Many more people hate Hillary than love her. God I hope she doesn't run!
|
|
Dave
Mountain climber
Fresno
|
|
"We will likely have troops in Iraq for twenty years as a base for the middle east.
The Syrians, Iranians and to a lesser extent the Saudi's are all on notice to view the world differently since 9/11."
And we're wondering why Al Qaeda has declared Jihad.
|
|
nature
climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
fattrad - more specifically - when do the body bags stop coming home as they are now? Next year, two years, four years? I understand your answer but it doesn't really address the point of my question.
When, in your opinion, will we see these elections in Iraq? I'd like answers simply because at that time passes it'll be noted. They say next year but I'd be suprised to see elections in Iraq before Hillary gets elected.
As far as more hating than loving - it didn't seem to matter in New York. Oh, and Bush got elected and I'd have to say the same applies.
|
|
nature
climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
Dave - they did? Now I need to be scared, huh? ;-)
OK - side note- I can't edit the above post of mine. (the response to fattrad). It gives me an unauthorized edit error and redirects me to the home page.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
"As far as more hating than loving - it didn't seem to matter in New York."
But New York isn't one of the places Dems need to worry about.
Look, I like Hillary, but I also want someone who will win. To do so, he/she will have to appeal to voters outside of the northeast, select midwest states, or the West Coast. Remember all the women who scorned Hillary after the "Tammy Wynette" comment 12 years ago? A lot of women, including Dems like my Mom, instantly disliked her. They won't vote for her. Plus, she will be easily labeled as a northeast liberal for her health care proposal, and we all know how well northeast liberals have fared lately in presidential elections. It's just not a good thing for a presidential candidate to have so many negatives right from the get-go. Republicans will be chomping at the bit to tear apart a Clinton candidacy.
|
|
nature
climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
"It's just not a good thing for a presidential candidate to have so many negatives right from the get-go"
It didn't seem to matter with Bush.
You are probably right - I'm not that hot on Hillary and her chances of getting to the white house. Just stirring the pot with that one really. Bottom line is this country will be so divided in four years, if body bags are still coming home from Iraq, if we start drafting, if we get into other confilcts we can't get out of, if the country continues to go broke - you can bet on a huge extreme swing the other way.
Heck, I doubt the Democrats can get their sh#t together in four years. They sure flopped this last election.
The best part about full Republican control - you can't blame anything on the Democrats for a long time to come. The f*#k up is all theirs. hehe...
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
Yes, and I'm energized to start helping the Dems campaign for Congress in 2006. The American people are about to experience a hard, conservative government, and it won't be pretty. We won't even be getting some of the benefits of right-wing govt., such as fiscal discipline.
|
|
nature
climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
dirtbag - I don't know what i have the energy to want to be involved with helping the democrates take back any power. All the power to ya, bro.
I think I'll just work on my dual-citizenship, go climbing, and watch Bush kill people and f*#k sh#t up.
|
|
poop_tube
Trad climber
Irvine, CA
|
|
They got money for war but can't feed the poor.
-Tupac Shakur
|
|
poop_tube
Trad climber
Irvine, CA
|
|
and why the hell did he raise national park fees?
|
|
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
face it dudes, the dems are now a permanent minority. Hillary is the republican dream, setting them up for another 8 years. Dems need to focus on the possible, maintaining a filibuster minority in the Senate and using committees, law suits and grass roots to make trouble for specific republicans and causes. They can also use the environment, health care and social issues to keep a strong minority from further dissipating. Especially the environment, which a bi-partican majority of americans give a big sh#t about, despite W's disingenuousness.
I agree that W can and will do nothing right in my book. He's lost any credibility and I do honestly believe he's a shitty person.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
Well, we almost ousted a sitting war-time President who only a year ago had a 60% job approval rating. With a different messenger(s) and a more refined message I think we can get them. Remember how the Republicans must've felt in 1992 after the Dems sweep? Look what happened to the Republicans in 94 after the Dems indulged in some of the more liberal tendencies of its party.
|
|
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
I'm willing to be an optimistic progressive, the problem is that what W did last term was so far to the right, and they still love him.
I mean these people f*#king adore the putz and say things like "well, I don't like the deficits, and I don't like what's happening in Iraq, and I don't like how he's cut education and I don't like his environmental policies, but he prays!".
I think that the democrats lost in 94 because this country is not a progressive place. America has traditionally been pretty conservative, with the New Deal, the Great Society and Clinton being rare but notable exceptions.
That said, I hope you're right.
|
|
Dave
Mountain climber
Fresno
|
|
Why not moderate the voices a bit? There's a reason I wouldn't vote for Hillary and didn't vote for Kerry. I don't like socialism. Moderates (such as myself) will swing to the left if voices of sanity are nominated, I would think. That's how Clinton got elected.
|
|
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
but that's kind of my point Dave, what is "socialism" as most of the "center" voters are defining it? Kerry did not run on a liberal fiscal platform, he talked of retaining tax cuts for middle class etc . . . Compared to the liberalism of the past, [read Roosevelt, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter] the "new liberals" are not very far to the left, despite Rove's media attacks. The real distinction is "social/moral" issues and I don't see the Dems giving in on those anytime soon.
I know Kerry's health care proposal was bulloxed by many conservatives, but we do have 45,000,000 uninsured people in this country and health care is NOT that good. If you can pay out of pocket it is, but all of us have had to fight with insurance companies way too often. I don't know how anyone can be happy with this system. And it really isn't trial lawyers, that's just a W pet peeve.
|
|
Dave
Mountain climber
Fresno
|
|
I don't want to start something all over again - but his economics didn't work. Shrub's don't either. That's the problem. None of these idiots can fix the deficit and other problems (healthcare) without raising taxes or seriously cutting SS/Medicare/military spending. No one has the balls to do that.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
You're right, of course.
|
|
dufas
Trad climber
san francisco
|
|
can't and don't want to argue with you Dave, you are of course right in that neither were very honest about their budget plans.
|
|
nature
climber
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
Dave, you are totally right about the deficit - none of them can fix it. Why is that? Where does all our money go? How is it that what's suppose to be the most prosporous country in the world is going broke? It takes a lot of money to stick our noses in places where people are resistant. bin Ladens plan is working. Thank you Shrub.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!