The Politics Thread - Read the First Post

[maudmac]

Not surprising. Barely even interesting.



It cracks me up the way Republicans still spit out the word "liberal" as an insult. I blame Reagan for that one. I wish I could say that I'm interested to see what Edwards (and Kerry) will have to say in the coming months, but I'm not. I don't really care. They aren't Bush/Cheney and that's all that matters to me.

---

i wasn't sniffing your spicy brains

[The Smee]

I just thought that I'd mention this little thing I found.



http://www.bushgame.com



It's seriously worth your time playing through.

This has been a message brought to you by SmeeCorp.

[Gatito Grande]

Have any of you seen this article in the latest Vanity Fair? It's fascinating (and, needless to say, scaaaaaaary!)---I really recommend it.



GG Favorite line: in 2000, as daughter Jenna was undergoing an emergency appendectomy in Texas, Dubya left on vacation in Florida! When asked about her, he said that if she wasn't up (post-op) to joining him in Fla, "she could stay home and clean her room." Yessirree, it's Bush Family Values in action! I have to admit, I'll never look at the Bush Twins the same again: who wouldn't want to go get drunk and embarrass an *sshole father like that? Out

[kpmuse]

Down For The Count

by Cam Lindquist



I know that politics isn’t the most popular topic with everybody. In fact, I have been trying very hard to stay away from the whole “gay marriage” issue for a while. After all, every queen and his ex-boyfriend are blogging about it… Not to mention that even the straight media is giving front-page coverage to the right wing movement to amend the Constitution.

But today I think we need to take a few moments to ponder all of this. First to congratulate ourselves because after months of campaigning the GLBT community and friends have caused enough of a racket to keep the really right wing Republicans from gathering enough votes to make this an issue. Those senatorial zealots could only muster up 48 of the 60 votes needed to take this “constitutional amendment” past the arguing-about-it stage. So I say good job, especially to the HRC and other political organizations, which worked so tirelessly. And kudos to the friends of our community who supported us. Don’t forget to write your senator and thank him or her for not allowing the Constitution to be used as a weapon of oppression against anyone. After all, if they can restrict one group who will be next!



But what is next? We have marriage in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. Other cities in our nation are battling out this great injustice that makes GLBT people second-class citizens. We have so far successfully blocked this amendment that would have undone all our hard work. So where do we go from here?



We go backwards folks. That’s right; we look and see how this happened. It was one thing when the people in power simply let us be, but this president is aggressively anti-gay. He doesn’t just oppose gay marriage and civil unions; he doesn’t even support including our people in the wording of hate crime laws. How, if you are a minority, can you be left out of that??? So our dear leader will hand down a harsher sentence to someone who kills an African American woman because she is black, but not if she is a lesbian. Why does it matter why someone hates a victim? If the crime is purely motivated by hate shouldn’t we, as a nation, say something about that? Shouldn’t we find it unacceptable?



We cannot survive another regime with Bush at the helm. It is exhausting. We are constantly watching our backs and wondering when the leader of our country will attack us again. Apparently the war in Iraq he started in order to boost his popularity after 9/11 isn’t enough for him. Apparently he needs more Americans than our brave soldiers who are dying for his campaign to suffer at his hand. He wants GLBT people too. Is no one safe from his selfish, political whims?



I am here to tell you, whether you agree with me or not, that we NEED John Kerry. Not because he is the solution – he is Bush Lite and not by much. But we won’t get into that today! We need him because we need a freaking break and time to regroup. Time for the rest of middle America to realize what life can be like with a leader who isn’t always trying to make war, both inside and outside the homeland. He is merely a transition guy so we can get back on the right track.



And most importantly, we need to vote -- all of us, and not just in the presidential elections. The people you put in local and state offices today are the ones who run for federal offices tomorrow. We need to recruit voters -- lots of them. Everyone you know. You think I am kidding, but I am not! Because, my friends, your darling President was not elected by popular vote, his opponent was. I know you have heard this before. But when the vote is so close the Electoral College can do whatever they damn well please. I know a lot of people are complaining about “the system” and how the “Electoral College” is outdated and unfair because it overrides popular vote. I have to say that though you are correct, it doesn’t matter.



Things should have never gotten to that point to begin with. Anyone who could have voted and didn’t should be ashamed. And if you voted for Nader… well while I support your right to vote for whomever you please, I beg you to use your vote more wisely this November. Nader is a pawn, a decoy, and a wasted vote; your vote is not a protest against Kerry and Bush. Your vote for Nader is a waste of the energy it took to get there. Because November is the grand finale, the big finish, and the moment of truth.



I realize that everyone doesn’t agree with me on each and every point. Maybe you don’t agree with a thing I have said. But you should agree with this: This nation is lacking and needs to change. Don’t believe me? Take a few hours out of your day and a few dollars out of your pocket and go see Fahrenheit 9/11. Bring a notebook if you want and check the facts. You will be impressed. Even I, the anti-Bush, found some of what he said so appalling, so self-serving, and so anti-American I wondered if the documentary wasn’t hyped up. It is not. And you can’t justify what he says by saying it was taken out of context… It just won’t cut it.



We must make a serious effort -- a commitment of time and money to make a change for the better in this nation of ours. We must vote in people who believe in equality, in not being the global bully, who are looking for a budget that will be a budget and not a trillion dollar line of freaking credit. And it isn’t enough to put it all on a new president because it starts with your city council, your state legislators, you senators and representatives in congress, your governor and lieutenant governor.



Because here we stand, my fellow GLBT friends, amidst a very small battle in a very big war; and we aren’t winning the war yet! You can bet no matter what CNN says, those who oppose us will not be giving up because their amendment fell to the congressional floor. No sir and no ma’am they will think of something else, something harder hitting and much more devious! They will find a loophole in any law that grants us protection or equality under the law. So we cannot become lax or complacent in our ways or it will be our end in this struggle.



I know I may be perceived as militant and angry, and that is because I am. I am angry that I pay taxes in a country where I am not yet an equal citizen. I wasn’t born someplace else. I am not putting in my time or proving my loyalty to the USA because I come from a far off land. I was born in King County, in the Great State of Washington. I was born in the Emerald City my friends, and we aren’t talking OZ; we are talking Seattle, Washington, USA! I deserve the exact same rights as each and every other person in this nation. And I won’t settle. I won’t continue to put revenue into a country that looks at me like a second-class citizen, a slave to fill a position… not without a fight! Neither should you.



We need to have an awakening like the African Americans did in the 60’s. Just because things have always been this way doesn’t mean that is right, just, or correct. We need to realize that they can’t throw their version of Judao-Christian values in our face and call it law anymore. That they cannot use “morals,” the Bible, or God to oppress anyone. Because long gone are the days of the Old Testament when God sent people out to take other countries and make them slaves.



You may not work their fields, you may not keep their house, and you may not nurse their children, but don’t be fooled; a second-class citizen is no better than an enslaved or indentured individual. You live in a country that forces you to work just as hard as everyone else, pay just as much in taxes, and abide by all the same laws but without giving you equal benefits. If that doesn’t make you mad… what will it take?



www.365gay.com/people/Lindquist/071904lindquist.htm

[Gatito Grande]

[The following really oughta be on the Gay Politics Thread, but it's here because I'm responding to the post above]

Quote:

---

We need to have an awakening like the African Americans did in the 60’s.



Because long gone are the days of the Old Testament when God sent people out to take other countries and make them slaves.



You may not work their fields, you may not keep their house, and you may not nurse their children, but don’t be fooled; a second-class citizen is no better than an enslaved or indentured individual.

---

{cringe!}



Um, OK. At the risk of sticking my political neck out there: we need to be very careful using this kind of language. Citing general principles of "all are created equal" or "no taxation w/o equal representation" or demanding our human rights is one thing. Directly citing the struggles of African Americans against slavery, and for civil rights is another.



Rightly or wrongly, this kind of "this equals that" talk needlessly pisses off a lot of African-Americans, especially those who are Evangelical Christians. If we just state our case---"Why shouldn't we have equal rights?" or "Why should we be victims of hate crimes?"---straight people of good will, black *and* white, will make the connection themselves to human rights struggles of the past. But if we LGBTs (*unless* we are black, speaking within our own community) go out of our way to make these comparisons, we will only stir up the ire of those who see one obvious difference between our two communities: black people have never had the option of The Closet (as unpleasant an option as that is). (The history of chattel slavery and Jim Crow are pretty obvious differences as well).



To those of us LGBTs who are supporters and/or students of the African-American Civil Rights Movement, the inspiration that movement provides---the soaring rhetoric, the amazing array of strategies and tactics developed, the methods of bridge-building to wider communities---constantly uplifts our hearts and minds in our own struggle . . . as well it should. But that doesn't mean we either can or should draw a picture of ourselves as "the logical next-step of civil rights progress." Our struggle is our own. However, what we can do, is build coalitions to the African-American community: when, where and how indicated by the natural bridge-builders here, African-American LGBTs.



GG And good googly-moogly, do we ever have a common cause Right Here, Right Now, in getting rid of our common curse: mo'fo' Dubya! Out

[maudmac]

Ah...such a hot, hot issue. This "Are gay rights civil rights?" issue. Coretta Scott King, Julian Bond, and many others have made themselves clear on the issue. Coretta Scott King: "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice. But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people."



But there are also many prominent black leaders and veterans of the Civil Rights Movement who disagree vehemently.



On the one hand, of course it's a different struggle - gays and lesbians haven't been enslaved, denied the right to vote, etc. On the other hand, bigotry is bigotry and the fact is that we do not have full rights - for no reason whatsoever other than irrational prejudice.



I care not for what an evangelical Christian might have to say about the morality of homosexuality, whether they be black or white. They, both black and white, would be well-served to recall that the Bible was used to justify and condone slavery, laws against inter-racial marriage, and segregation.



This is an issue I'm dealing with right now, having recently received a letter from my Representative in response to my mail asking for his support in blocking the FMA. He tells me that he supports the FMA. He says, "In deciding how I would vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment, I must balance the argument that a federal amendment is unnecessary against my personal beliefs and the beliefs of the overwhelming majority of my constituents." He is black. I cannot help but wonder if he's aware of the fact that George Wallace's personal beliefs and the beliefs of the overwhelming majority of his constituents put him in the schoolhouse door, and led him to declare "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever!"



Would it be acceptable for me to say that my personal beliefs will not allow me to vote for a black man as my Representative? I could very well believe it's immoral, I could pluck something from the Bible to support my position. I could gesture toward many others who agree with me. Would that make my bigotry more acceptable, somehow less evil? No. It would not.



So why is intolerance tolerated from people who are devoutly religious? Why is intolerance toward one minority more acceptable when it comes from another minority? By that logic, it should be perfectly acceptable for GLBTs to be racist.



I think a lot of people, across the board, all over the world, people of every race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, class, nation, etc., would benefit from reflecting on MLK's words - Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

---

i wasn't sniffing your spicy brains

[darkmagicwillow]

Electronic vote fraud in Texas is going to be a piece of cake. Here's a quote from the New York Times investigation:

“Here in Texas, where early voting lasts maybe two weeks or so, I’ve learned that the poll workers take the machines home with them at night. Imagine the opportunity, in the comfort and privacy of your home, to ’upgrade’ the software on these machines. The tamper-resistance measures they take (special tape or numbered tie-wrap seals) can be easily gotten around if you’ve got the time and privacy to work on it. Some election officials require that their poll workers pass basic background checks (i.e., they have no felony convictions), but that’s hardly reassuring.“

---

So why is intolerance tolerated from people who are devoutly religious?

---

Religious irrationality is tolerated to an absurd degree in many areas of our life where similar views expressed without religious sanction would be considered rude, intolerant, or simply insane. I was talking to an acquintance this week who told me about having prophetic dreams and hearing voices of angels/God. His church thinks it's wonderful; I'm worried that he might be coming down with schizophrenia.

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

Edited by: darkmagicwillow at: 7/19/04 5:24 pm

[Kieli]

Quote:

---

Rightly or wrongly, this kind of "this equals that" talk needlessly pisses off a lot of African-Americans, especially those who are Evangelical Christians. If we just state our case---"Why shouldn't we have equal rights?" or "Why should we be victims of hate crimes?"---straight people of good will, black *and* white, will make the connection themselves to human rights struggles of the past. But if we LGBTs (*unless* we are black, speaking within our own community) go out of our way to make these comparisons, we will only stir up the ire of those who see one obvious difference between our two communities: black people have never had the option of The Closet (as unpleasant an option as that is). (The history of chattel slavery and Jim Crow are pretty obvious differences as well).

---

Speaking as a black lesbian, I agree with this assessment only to a point....it seems that only the radical fundamentalist Christian blacks seem to have a problem with the analogy posited. I, for one, do not and agree with the poster making said analogy. Although, I'm also the one who posited the Hitler/Nazism analogy to what Dubya is doing now and people had a shit fit. People often close their eyes and ears to the truth, to what is in front of them that they refuse nor wish to see or hear. And many light skinned blacks had their own closets...they could either pass for white (as many did) or suffer the indignities of being black. Many of my relatives chose to pass b/c they chose to take advantage of the opportunities it afforded them. To be honest, I doubt I could blame them.



No matter how one poses this question someone is going to get brassed off. The evangelistical African American community has made it pretty clear that they won't be swayed so no matter how you couch it, I doubt we'll get through to them. I think it requires something more....unorthodox.

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

[The Angry Lion]

Im glad to see ppl are raising issues about the governator, im surprised tho noones mentioned the girly men thing. Ha ha ha arnie, , girly must mean that theyre soft and maybe, maybe gay :O girly men, sheesh Im sorry they dont pump iron and own five humvees like you man



Somehow I think even Mary Carey wouldve made a better Governor

My Country is the World. My Coutrymen Mankind-Thomas Paine

[Gatito Grande]

Hi Kieli! (I was kinda hopin' to hear from you. Hello to you, too, Holley ).



Not too far from where I live in Michigan, are several large congregations of Black Evangelical Christians . . . who are also LGBT (I sincerely doubt any of them would have trouble w/ the "civil rights analogy" but, as a white person, I would still wait for them to bring it up).



My point (and I'll make this brief, as it really could go either on the Gay Politics thread, or the Scarier Religion & Homosexuality thread) is merely that "Black Evangelical Christian" is NOT synonymous w/ "anti-gay (marriage)."* Those who are not *explicitly* against us could be for us, and we should try our best to show the sensitivity that could persuade African-Americans, including Christians, to support our cause (at least for civil marriage---eventually, maybe religious marriage too).



I really love what Coretta Scott King and (esp.) John Lewis have said in support of us, and would much rather hear them make civil rights analogies than (whom I presume is) the melanin-deprived "Cam Lindquist."



GG Your Congressional Representative sucks, Holley (as does mine, of the completely-hopeless white Republican variety ). If I were you, I'd write him back quoting some of the Civil Rights heroes mentioned. Out



*Neither is just plain ol' "Evangelical Christian," thinking of the MCC and "open and affirming" congregations of several Evangelical denominations.



+NB, Kieli: I was wondering whether you (or someone else) might make an analogy between The Closet and passing! I think, however, if you think of "black" in a quasi-literal sense, my point still holds (although, conversely, I think the evidence is also pretty strong that certain members of the LGBT family physically couldn't hide in The Closet if their lives depended on it . . . and sometimes it did. )

[Kieli]

Quote:

---

+NB, Kieli: I was wondering whether you (or someone else) might make an analogy between The Closet and passing! I think, however, if you think of "black" in a quasi-literal sense, my point still holds (although, conversely, I think the evidence is also pretty strong that certain members of the LGBT family physically couldn't hide in The Closet if their lives depended on it . . . and sometimes it did.)

---

I don't think there is a quasi-literal sense in which to view this. Either you're black or you aren't; either you're gay or you aren't. Those two things should not imply that one group has any more claim to "civil rights" or the civil rights struggle than anyone else. To imply such a thing is ludicrous. I simply don't agree that we should not view our struggle as the "logical next step of civil rights progress". Until EVERYONE has the same rights as everyone else and until there are no exceptions, we cannot view this as simply our struggle. What is going on at the present will also affect our future, and by using our I mean everyone and anyone: those of different religious affiliations, those of differing skin colours, those whose sexual preferences vary. Once we allow our government to take that step towards discrimination and segregation, to go down that road to Hell paved with good intentions, the Pandora's box that will be opened might be hard as hell to close. How is that not similar to blacks' struggle for freedom in the 60's? Sure, the circumstances surrounding the protests differ but the underlying premise remains the same: freedom to live as we wish and to be recognized as humans worthy of ALL of the rights secured for us in the US Constitution.

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

[Warduke]

From Yahoo...

Quote:

---

Bush Urges Blacks Not to Back Democrats



By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer





DETROIT - President Bush tried on Friday to sow doubts about Democrats' commitment to black Americans and told black voters "there is an alternative this year" — him.       



At the same time, Bush acknowledged, "Listen, the Republican Party has got a lot of work to do. I understand that."



Bush's speech to the Urban League, his third since becoming president, came as a new poll showed overwhelming support for John Kerry among black voters. The poll also showed black voters have yet to entirely warm up to the presumptive Democratic nominee.



The president suggested perhaps the Democratic Party had started taking black voters for granted.



"I know plenty of politicians assume they have your vote," he said. "But did they earn it, and do they deserve it?"



Bush drew applause each time he ticked off one of his questions to the group: "Is it a good thing for the African-American community to be represented mainly by one political party?"



"Have the traditional solutions of the Democrat Party truly served the African-American people?"



"There is an alternative this year," Bush said. "Take a look at my agenda."



The speech, coupled with the announcement of an unusual partnership with a special-interest group to nurture minority businesses, was as an election-year bid to use government resources to reach out to black voters. It also served as a slap at the NAACP, a group Bush snubbed last week because he believes it has been hostile to him.



Friday's was Bush's 16th trip as president to Michigan, a state he lost in 2000, and his second in 10 days. He scheduled another for July 30, the day after the end of the Democratic convention.



Bush said his administration was stronger for the presence of black officials including Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites).



He did not mention his opposition to affirmative action in a case that touched off opposition in Michigan and nationwide.



In January 2003, Bush asserted that a program of racial preferences for minority applicants at the University of Michigan was "divisive, unfair and impossible to square with the Constitution." He took a position against the program in a Supreme Court case and did it on the birthday of civil rights hero Martin Luther King Jr.



Under the new initiative announced Friday, the administration will seek to expand business ownership among minorities by creating one-stop centers for business training, counseling, financing and contracting.



Bush's Commerce Department, Small Business Administration and other government entities will pool resources to help the Urban League's local offices help minority entrepreneurs.



Blacks supported Democrat Al Gore over Bush by a 9-1 margin in the 2000 election, and the poll released this week by BET/CBS News showed their backing for Kerry is almost as strong.



Nine out of 10 black adults surveyed believed the Iraq war was not worth the cost in lives or money, and the same proportion believed the country is headed in the wrong direction.



Blacks constituted 10 percent of the electorate in 2000. Bush has sporadically sought to shore up his standing with the group through public appearances. On July 1, he staged an elaborate ceremony in the East Room to mark former President Johnson's signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.



The BET/CBS poll showed Bush's image still suffers among black voters for the 2000 election recount in Florida. More than four in five blacks believe Bush did not legitimately win the election, and two-thirds think deliberate attempts were made to prevent black voters' ballots from being counted, the survey found.



A Republican state lawmaker in Michigan stoked those resentments this month when he said the GOP would fare poorly in this year's elections if it failed to "suppress the Detroit vote."



State Rep. John Pappageorge, of Troy, Mich., said this week he had used "a bad choice of words" but said his remark shouldn't be construed as racist. He apologized "if I have given offense in any way to my colleagues in Detroit or anywhere."



Kerry, the Massachusetts senator, addressed the Urban League on Thursday. His spokesman said Bush has a "failing record on African-American opportunity."



"Simply giving a speech will not erase the fact that George Bush has pursued policies that have failed to provide economic opportunity to all Americans and have negatively impacted African-Americans," Kerry campaign spokesman Phil Singer said.

---

---

Firefox: One Browser To Rule Them All.

[maudmac]

This is pretty funny. It takes some swipes at both Bush and Kerry.



www.jibjab.com/

---

i wasn't sniffing your spicy brains

[xita]

I love that holley, played it a lot of times now!

- - - - - - - - - - -
"Trust is a risk masquerading as a promise."

[Kieli]

After viewing the rather lengthy Democratic National Convention coverage on CNN last night, can I just say that I am totally in love with Hillary Clinton? Bill and Hillary made the most rousing, well-thought out speeches, IMHO. Granted, some of the facts are a bit dubious but, as far as galvanizing the Democratic Party, I think they both did the best job. I can't wait to see the Republican Party rebuttal to Jimmy Carter's very tasteful but very pointed comments. That man is still an excellent statesman.



Regarding Bush asking blacks not to vote Democrat, I say that takes a lot of brass balls for him to say this considering he blew off the NAACP twice before. *shakes her head at the abject stupidity* The audacity is astounding but not out of character. He really shouldn't even be running a little league team, much less a country.

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

Edited by: Kieli  at: 7/27/04 6:36 am

[darkmagicwillow]

Hurry up and watch it, as it's not going to be around much longer due to the ire of Woody Guthrie's publisher.

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

[Gatito Grande]

Yeah, really loved:



*Al Gore's "[If you voted for Bush] Didja get what you voted for?"



*Jimmy Carter's (para.) "You can't lead while you mislead."



*Rev. Alston's moving personal testimony of being w/ Kerry under fire in 'Nam.



*While truthfully, I've never thought much of Hilary as a public speaker, she does embody the Anger at the Present , and Hope for the Future.



*The Billster: nobody does it better! (all quotes paraphrased from memory) "We cannot kill, jail or occupy all our adversaries. We need to fight terrorists, but we also need allies to share the burden, and reduce terrorism." Joking about his own tax cut. Drawing distinctions: "If you believe in _[assorted idiocy]_, vote Republican. But if you have a different view, vote for Kerry and the Democrats." "Strength and wisdom are NOT opposing values!" "They [Republicans] need a divided America; we don't." Pointing out how Dubya, Cheney, or he could have gone to 'Nam, but didn't. Kerry could have avoided it, but said "Send me." (and all the "Send Me" repititions, culminating in "Send John Kerry!")



GG Favorite (CNN) headline of the night (occuring just prior to Larry King's interview of Hilary): "Coming next: Hilary on Teresa"--- I'd have paid to see that! (And if those rumors about Hilary are true . . . ) Out



ETA: "And we have gay friends in the Red States!"



{waves to Holley }



Do think that, someday, Barack Obama can win in 'Bama?

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 7/27/04 8:50 pm

[Gatito Grande]

Sorry to consecutively post, but hey---





IMHO, John Kerry gave an AWESOME acceptance speech!



Direct, inspiring, and w/ plenty o' zingers (all para. from memory):



"I will never mislead America into war"

"I will never send young American soldiers into war, without a plan to win the peace"

"I will have a Vice-President who doesn't have secret meetings w/ polluters, a Secretary of Defense who does not ignore the advice of the generals, and an Attorney General who protects the Constitution!"

[Speaking to Dubya]"Let's not politicize our most precious document, the Constitution" (that's a reference to the FMA, folks )

And my personal fave:"Never again will our energy policy be captive to the Saudi Royal Family!" (Hello, Michael Moore! )



Yeah, maybe it was a little "wrapped in the flag" for my tastes but, as we're reminded by everybody so often, "we are a nation at war." If JK has to wrap himself in the flag to get us OUT of this furkin' war, then so be it.



GG How soon is Election Day? Ready to boot Dubya already! Out

[thx1123]

Regarding Bush asking blacks not to vote Democrat, I say that takes a lot of brass balls for him to say this considering he blew off the NAACP twice before. *shakes her head at the abject stupidity* The audacity is astounding but not out of character. He really shouldn't even be running a little league team, much less a country.

So the NAACP speaks for all blacks????



Bush going to the NAACP makes as much sense as Joe Lieberman speaking at an Aryan Nation Rally.



they compared him to Hitler,the Taliban.Called conservatives racists.



I got news for the NAACP,they only matter in that they help the democrats pander to blacks.



They tell blacks that the drug abuse,poverty, crime and shattered families has nothing to do with the break down of the black family but it is all rich white elite and stupid brainless white red neck fault.



I worked in a majority black middle school school and i had young black kids accuse their peers who got good grades of trying to "be white".They told me when i tried to get them do their homework during my after school program that they did not need an education they would be rappers or play sports.that working any other kinds job was for suckas.



they do not get this message from whites but rather from the thugs who call themselves rappers.





They call Bush unreasonable but anyone who disagrees with them is labeled a racist or a self hating uncle tom.



I will not vote for bush.I am a libertarian,but if I were Bush I would have told them to take their invitation to speak and shove it.



Bush speaks to black groups,just not wants that are intent on using past evils as an excuse and a crutch.



I have came up on employers who will not hire me because of my mental illness and/or drug use.I could whine about being oppressed but I keep knocking at the barriers they put up until I hammer them down.I do it by working twice as hard and well as the others.Is this fair.No,but it is life.You will always come across bigots,the president of the NAACP is one of them but who can either be a victim or spit back in their face.



the NAACP has abandoned Pastor Kings vision.



They have no problem with their children being judged on the color of their skin as long as it is favorable.If being judged by their skin gets them 20 points on a college application:fine.



The man who led me to the Lord is black.He was right when he said blacks are still slaves.To the NAACP and the democratic party.



libertarians don't give a rats bootie about your skin.But we are still labeled as rascist conservatives.



Liberals don't think blacks can succeed without affirmative action and then pandering to them.That is racist in my view.



I am giving my opinion.In my view though what I state is fact but i understand others do not see this as fact.In fact since it is fact "in my view" it is opinion



Tabby

[Gatito Grande]

Priorities, Tabby:



*Did the NAACP get us---via lies---into a criminally idiotic war?



*Did the NAACP say "Let American oil companies set energy and pollution policy . . . and profit off the American taxpayer in [the Land of the Criminally Idiotic War]"?



*Did the NAACP say "F__ the Constitution: ship 'em all to Guantanamo, let Jeeeezus sort 'em out"?



*Did the NAACP turn a large Federal Budget Surplus, into a humongous Federal Budget Deficit---by way of giving huge tax cuts ("in time of war") to the wealthiest one percent?



*Did the NAACP propose the mo'fo' Federal Marriage (Discrimination) Amendment???



No??? Then I don't want to hear *boo* about a group---any group--- who is opposing motherf*ckin' Dubya, until motherf*ckin' Dubya's sorry *ss is back in Texas where he belongs!



GG Have I got this right? It is a fact that this is my opinion of the facts. Face the facts: it is my opinion that George Walker Bush is, in fact, the greatest threat to peace and democracy in this country since the Arms Race/Joseph McCarthy of the 1950s. As long as he is President, bashing anything else (the *NAACP*, f' Chrissakes?) amounts to rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic. In my opinion. Out

[thx1123]

<

.



You did not adreess one point I made.You attacked Bush.Which is the only thing the Dems can do.



they will not talk abot how their solution to the income gap s to spread the misery.Hey,lets bring the richdown to the poor's level.



they will nt talk about the cycle of dependency and despair that they have the poor trapped in.



They will not talk how reintroducing the capital gains tax will make it harder for the lower classes to pull themselves out of poverty.And that s what it will take.They must pull themselves up out of poverty.Unlike other conservatives I have no problems with helping them pull themselves out of poverty but all the demcrats can do with their hand outs s make them dependent on the dems to make things a little more tolerable.



As far as Bush lying,that is false.He received bad inteeligence.Just as that great conservative John F JFK did during the bay of pigs.The British and American comission said there was no evidence of deliberate attempts by Bush or Blair to mislead.Kerry got the exact same intelligence Bush did and said Saddam was a threat.But of course he did not lie becuase he is a democrat.It is okay for democrats to lie under oath,obstrct justice(like Bill) commit war crimes(Kerry admitted to participating in war crimes).But A republican,or any other conservative cannot get away with losing his temper and telling a two faced politican to fo F himself.





I cannot wait till the VP debate.Chaney is going to rip the pretty boy amubulance chaser a new butt hole when it comes time to talk foreign policy.edwards and Keery's foreign policy will be duck and cover.



i will agree with Kerry we need to get the national gaurd and reserves home.After he tucks tail and runs in Iraq we will need them to help fill the body bags after the terrorists hit again.



I don't give a rats ass if the EU likes us.I care about if the terrorisrs respect the threat we represent to their continued breathing.



Jimmy Carter is a nice guy.That is why the iranians ceased the hostages.I would love a wrld where conflict is solved by the leaders having a cartoon trivia contest.That is not the wrld we live in.



in the war on terror nice guys finish last.SOB's who are not afraid to do what s nessecary regardless if others dissaprove do.The terrorist crawled out of a sewer.If we have to climb into that sewr to eliminate them.(preferably with terminal intensity)so be it.





I am not happy with Bush.I will vote Libertarian and will not vote for Bush but I will not vote for a traitor who comes home after receiving minor injuries and slanders his brothers in arms.To say I hate the war fine.But he reinforced the false notions that a majority of troops over there were babykillers and worse.



I hate Bush's stance on gay marriage,on medicare and how he has bloated the federal goverment but being able to marry Ryan will not do me a hell of a lt of good if terroisst blow up plant vogtle or the savanah river plant or even the local mall and I am dead.



if Leiberman had won the dem nod I would have gladly

vted for him.he is a good moderate.



Benedict arnold showed bravery in batte on behalf of his country.I would not vote for hinm if he were alive.





But feel free to bash Bush.as it was pointed out that is your right.I enjoy my ideas being challenged.I now consider myself socially liberal becuase of the feedback from this group but my post was on one thing.Whether or not Bush was right to give the NAACP the bird so to speak.yes.

Quote:

---

As long as he is President, bashing anything else (the *NAACP*, f' Chrissakes?) amounts to rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic. In my opinion. Out

---

i am not bashing the NAACP.e are robaly very nice people but they are about playing the victim and blaming whites.I am criticizing them.



they are intolerant.any black who dares to go against them is labledan uncle tom.If you cloned Jesse,Al Sharpton and the entire NAACP executiv board a hundred times you could still not erase the facts that they are poor shadows of the blacks they villify,Clreance,Consi,Mr.Powell JC Watts(who I hopes runs for president in 08) are the example younf people regardless of race should be patterning themselves after.



Also are you ordering me to shut my mouth unless I bash Bush????



Hey,I stood up in front of a young republicans group and praised Clinton's handling of Kosovo even though I was shouted down.





I will vote for the libertarian canidate in my effort to vote for someone who is a true conservative but believes in living and letting live on social issues.



However,I would rather have Bush than Kerry.I can fight Bush on the Marriage ammendment and raising the minmum wage but I will not see Keery endanger us by kissing up to the europeans and reversing the damage clinton did to the economic boom created by Ronald Reagan.



I can tell you why I believe Reagan created the Clinton boom.Name one policy that Bill enacted that created the boom.



I can see it now,becuase of the tax cuts the economy recovers and if Kerry is elected he will claim the credit.



then when he starts redistributing wealth ans spreading the misery and the economy goes into the crapper like it did 6 months before Bush was elected he can blame the Republicans.



And yes you are right.What the supreme court did in2000 was terrible they upheld the rule of law.



they let the rule of law get in the way of Gore Stealing an election he lost fair and sqaure.



And as ar as the people getting removed from the voting records in dade county.The election cheif is a democrat.



And why were ya'll not interested in over/under count in north Florida,Georgia,Idaho,DC,Kentucky.



Is it every vote should count or every liberal vote should count.





I am attacking ideas i do not agree wth.It is not my intention to attack any indvidual on ths list.However,I beleve beliefs are fair game.I would love it if you attacked my ideas instead of just bashing Bush.I will not vote for him.



The law was followed.There was a machine recoun.Machines make mstakes,but they do not have opinions.



Tabby

Edited by: thx1123 at: 7/30/04 10:20 pm

[emma peel]

Here's a link to the September issue of Esquire magazine with a verrrry long article by Ron Reagan about George W. Bush. I thought it was fascinating. The title is "The Case Against George W. Bush."

www.esquire.com/features/...gan_1.html

[urnofosiris]

Interesting indeed.

Quote:

---

The far-right wing of the country—nearly one third of us by some estimates—continues to regard all who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid (liberals, rationalists, Europeans, et cetera) as agents of Satan. Bush could show up on video canoodling with Paris Hilton and still bank their vote. Right-wing talking heads continue painting anyone who fails to genuflect deeply enough as a "hater," and therefore a nut job, probably a crypto-Islamist car bomber. But these protestations have taken on a hysterical, almost comically desperate tone.

---

hater or a basher, he will be considered one too now, a radical, jealous of GWB for managing to become president after his daddy when he, RRjr., didn´t. (I wrote this before I had read the final paragraph of his article, am I psychic or what) I am sure there will be many such easy ways to dismiss his criticism without having to bother to reply to the points he makes. It is easier to ignore or dismiss them than counter them.



Oh oh, this is a good one too:

Quote:

---

During his campaign for the presidency, Mr. Bush pledged a more "humble" foreign policy. "I would take the use of force very seriously," he said. "I would be guarded in my approach." Other countries would resent us "if we're an arrogant nation." He sniffed at the notion of "nation building." "Our military is meant to fight and win wars. . . . And when it gets overextended, morale drops."

---

Well that was not lying certainly, just a matter of interpretation.



The rest are all baseless accusations of course. Poor George was just a victim of bad intelligence. He had no way of possibly knowing or suspecting that just maybe Iraq did not posses all these weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam was not having tea with Bin Laden every morning. No, just bad intelligence, he cannot be held accountable in any way. If next time bad intelligence starts a world war, well, that is just too bad for the rest of the world. George can´t help it, he just did not know any better.

Quote:

---

More serious by an order of magnitude was the administration's dishonesty concerning pre-9/11 terror warnings. As questions first arose about the country's lack of preparedness in the face of terrorist assault, Condoleezza Rice was dispatched to the pundit arenas to assure the nation that "no one could have imagined terrorists using aircraft as weapons." In fact, terrorism experts had warned repeatedly of just such a calamity. In June 2001, CIA director George Tenet sent Rice an intelligence report warning that "it is highly likely that a significant Al Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks." Two intelligence briefings given to Bush in the summer of 2001 specifically connected Al Qaeda to the imminent danger of hijacked planes being used as weapons. According to The New York Times, after the second of these briefings, titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside United States," was delivered to the president at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, in August, Bush "broke off from work early and spent most of the day fishing." This was the briefing Dr. Rice dismissed as "historical" in her testimony before the 9/11 Commission.

---

Well and I guess that was not a case of bad intelligence, but rather a case of bad timing. Those fish just would not wait around for him.

Quote:

---

We can choose, as a bumper sticker I spotted in Seattle put it, SOMEONE ELSE FOR PRESIDENT.

---

I would if I could, I´d even vote for Reagan sr. or Bush sr. if they were the other guy now and I really really did not like them either.

Edited by: DrG at: 7/31/04 1:09 am

[Diebrock]

Quote:

---

in the war on terror nice guys finish last.SOB's who are not afraid to do what s nessecary regardless if others dissaprove do.The terrorist crawled out of a sewer.If we have to climb into that sewr to eliminate them.(preferably with terminal intensity)so be it.

---

Well, congrats! Here's one of the most powerful photos I have seen that shows with what dedication you have followed the terrorists into the sewer.



That was their husband and father by the way.

truthout.org/imgs.art_01/3.p2_061404.jpg

_________________

Independence is my happiness, and I view things as they are, without regard to place or person; my country is the world, and my religion is to do good.

I've kissed her best friend. I've reached into her best friend's pocket and fished around for keys. And I gave her best friend my number. I must be doing something totally, totally wrong... - TBSOL by Dreams

[justin]

Quote:

---

As far as Bush lying,that is false.He received bad inteeligence

---

Bad inteligence which he had a lot of people telling him was bad.

Quote:

---

.But of course he did not lie becuase he is a democrat.It is okay for democrats to lie under oath,obstrct justice(like Bill)

---

Clinton was impeached for his actions. So far Bush hasn't faced any consequences for his.

Quote:

---

commit war crimes(Kerry admitted to participating in war crimes)

---

I'd say one of the worst war crimes you could commit is starting one without a reasonable cause.

Quote:

---

i will agree with Kerry we need to get the national gaurd and reserves home.After he tucks tail and runs in Iraq we will need them to help fill the body bags after the terrorists hit again.

---

So pulling out of Iraq will cause an increase of terrorist activity? Personally I can't see how occupying Iraq is stopping international terrorism. It certainly didn't help Spain.

Quote:

---

I don't give a rats ass if the EU likes us.I care about if the terrorisrs respect the threat we represent to their continued breathing.

---

So you don't think the way to deal with the threat of international terrorism is though international cooperation. "A hand is made of five fingers, a fist is the same five fingers united."



We'll achiece much more through unity than isolationalism. Certainly attacking other countries because they won't take part in your war isn't the way to go.

Quote:

---

Jimmy Carter is a nice guy.That is why the iranians ceased the hostages.I would love a wrld where conflict is solved by the leaders having a cartoon trivia contest.That is not the wrld we live in.

---

Maybe rather than thinking about the world we live in you should consider the world you want to live in. Do you really want to live in a world where cruelty is rewarded with power?

Quote:

---

in the war on terror nice guys finish last.SOB's who are not afraid to do what s nessecary regardless if others dissaprove do.The terrorist crawled out of a sewer.If we have to climb into that sewr to eliminate them.(preferably with terminal intensity)so be it.

---

So if we act like the terrorists and kill enough people then we will put an end to terrorism? The strategy of terrorism haven't exactly worked for the terrorists, so why should it work any better for us, in fighting against terrorists.



Israel has done just what you suggested and yet the PLA still exists.

Quote:

---

I am not happy with Bush.I will vote Libertarian and will not vote for Bush but I will not vote for a traitor who comes home after receiving minor injuries

---

At least he did actually go to Vietnam, and has actually witnessed what war is like. Bush can't make that claim.

Quote:

---

but I will not see Keery endanger us by kissing up to the europeans

---

As one of those Europeans, I find this comment interesting. Will taking a stance which isn't openly beligerent to Europe really endanger the US?

Quote:

---

reversing the damage clinton did to the economic boom created by Ronald Reagan.

---

I think you misspoke there. Or do you really think that Kerry will reverse any damage Clinton did to the economy, i.e. that he will help the economy.

Quote:

---

And yes you are right.What the supreme court did in2000 was terrible they upheld the rule of law.



they let the rule of law get in the way of Gore Stealing an election he lost fair and sqaure.

---

An election he lost by getting more votes.

Quote:

---

The law was followed.

---

In the election between Nixon and JFK there was a dispute over the results for one of the states. Even though JFK had won regardless of what happened in this state the supreme court held up the results in order to investigate this, citing that it was important that not only should the law be followed, but it should be seen to be followed. Meaning there any doubts about the results would be damaging to the electorial system.



The courts didn't follow this level of diligence in 2000 and IMHO this was a mistake.

Quote:

---

There was a machine recoun.Machines make mstakes,but they do not have opinions.

---

The first law of machines



Garbage in, Garbage out

"VOOM"?!? Mate, this bird wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it! 'E's bleedin' demised! - The Parrot Sketch

[thx1123]

I am sorry for the rants.





let me try this again.whether you agree with Bush or not it made no sense for him to go to the NAACP convention.they do not share his vision.Although I do not think the NAACP would beat bush and throw him in the back of a trunk like aryan Nation would do Leiberman the comparison is valid.



Their world veiws are light years apart and unless one is willing to completely abandon their worldveiw for the others,little that is constructive could happen.





As for the EU.I have nothing against the individual members.After spending half of my childhood in England or Germany,not seeing my dad for months at a time so the people of western europe would not become soviet satellites I felt betrayed that they would not support us.



I believed Bush.i believed if we did not go into Iraq we could expect a mushroom cloud over New York or a cuople thousand dead from Anthrax.





I do not condone the killing of innocents and the scar those idiots in the prison made on the service my dad served honorably for 20 years makes me sick.



My point,and if I was not ranting it would have been clearer is that when it comes to dealing with the terrorists themselves we must be ruthless.



The Isrealias problem is their ruthlessness is not focused.



if they have to take out innocents to take out terrorists,so be it.



this allows the terrorists to sell the conflict as jews vs palenstinians instead of Jews vs crazy murdering thugs.



when we took out a car full of terrorists with a hellfire missle fired by a predator drone with no innocent deaths that is the way to go.



it is the harder path but we must work to isolate the terrorists from the innocents they hide behind and elminate them,If we can take them alive great.that has helped us greatly,but if not we must take them out.



I want a world where my dad never had to drop a young veitnameese boy who killed three US soliders with a greanade hid in his shoeshine kit.



I want a world where I did not ave to go to illinois to bury my cousin who was killed in afghanistan 6 months before he was to retire.



the trouble is i don't know how to get it.



tabby

[justin]

Quote:

---

As for the EU.I have nothing against the individual members.After spending half of my childhood in England or Germany,not seeing my dad for months at a time so the people of western europe would not become soviet satellites I felt betrayed that they would not support us.



I believed Bush.i believed if we did not go into Iraq we could expect a mushroom cloud over New York or a cuople thousand dead from Anthrax.

---

Maybe you did believe this, the thing is lot's of people didn't, including those countries that refused to help with the war.



Was it really a betrayal when America couldn't show that there was a threat that warranted an invasion?

Quote:

---

My point,and if I was not ranting it would have been clearer is that when it comes to dealing with the terrorists themselves we must be ruthless.



The Isrealias problem is their ruthlessness is not focused.



if they have to take out innocents to take out terrorists,so be it.

---

The problem is every innocent who gets caught up in the cross fire has parents, brothers, sisters, children. All of whom you're pushing towards taking arms and doing to you what you just did to them.



Violence just leads to violence.

Quote:

---

it is the harder path but we must work to isolate the terrorists from the innocents they hide behind and elminate them,If we can take them alive great.that has helped us greatly,but if not we must take them out.

---

The hardest way is to try and figure out why people resort to terrorism and to remove those causes.

Quote:

---

I want a world where my dad never had to drop a young veitnameese boy who killed three US soliders with a greanade hid in his shoeshine kit.



I want a world where I did not ave to go to illinois to bury my cousin who was killed in afghanistan 6 months before he was to retire.

---

I think everyone here wants that

Quote:

---

the trouble is i don't know how to get it.

---

Neither do I

"VOOM"?!? Mate, this bird wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it! 'E's bleedin' demised! - The Parrot Sketch

[darkmagicwillow]

---

Jimmy Carter is a nice guy.That is why the iranians ceased[sic] the hostages.I would love a wrld where conflict is solved by the leaders having a cartoon trivia contest.That is not the wrld we live in.

---

If that's your understanding of recent history, you don't have a clue about what the world we live in is like.



The Iranian revolutionaries took hostages in the American embassy in Iran because that's where the CIA organized the overthrow of their democratically elected government in 1953, replacing it with a police state that lasted for the next 26 years. In thanks for his promotion from constitutional monarch to despot, the Shah signed away 100% of the revenues from Iranian oil to Western oil companies. The Iranians thought the Americans were different from the British who invaded their country in 1941, but the US showed them that we were the same in 1953. What Iranians demanded in return for freeing the hostages was the Shah returned to face trial and an apology from the US for overthrowing their government in 1953 and a promise not to do it again.



The hostage crisis had nothing to do with Jimmy Carter being a nice guy. If he was a nice guy, he would have given them what they wanted instead of going forward with Operation Eagle Claw, and a nice guy wouldn't have used military advisors and supplies to help to the Afghan rebels fighting the USSR like Carter did either. Reagan wasn't going to apply more military force than Carter did in Eagle Claw, but he did take office after Iraq's invasion of Iran and he might have taken a more direct and underhanded approach as well (the October Surprise).

---

And yes you are right.What the supreme court did in2000 was terrible they upheld the rule of law.



they let the rule of law get in the way of Gore Stealing an election he lost fair and sqaure.

---

Jeb Bush's administration purging over 60,000 blacks from the voting rolls is difficult to call "fair and square" by an interpretation of the term. At least there's some hope of a fair election next year as he was stopped his latest purge list from going into effect this November a couple of weeks ago, and I and many others working to prevent unreliable and insecure voting machines from being put in place for November.

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

Edited by: darkmagicwillow at: 7/31/04 10:55 am

[thx1123]

Quote:

---

The hardest way is to try and figure out why people resort to terrorism and to remove those causes

---

Why some people resort to terrorism.



The root cause of terrorism is hatred.



Some people are driven to terrorism by the misdeeds of others and if we could elminate the reasons they turn to terrorism that is a great victory.But there will always be those who seek causes to justify and hide their hate.



If he were not terrorizing us for crimes against Islam,he would be terrorizing somebody else.



Unfrtunately I know a lot of former klansmen.



they say they no longer hate blacks.Now they hate gays becuase gays choose to be perverts.And if they did not hate gays they would find someone else to hate.



I agree we need to adress why the gentle school teacher chooses to drive up to a Isrealia checkpoint and blow himself and Isrealias and remove those reasons.But the bottom line is you will always have hateful people without regrd for human life.They are the ones that must be eliminated.If we can do it by jailing them for life.Great.If not we must use terminal intesity.



Was the invasion of Iraq nessecary? Probaly not.



Was it a good thing.It can be.If we stay the course and help the Iraqi's sit up a stable goverment.If we can help the Iraqi's remove the resons gentle school teachers blow themselves up to kill others.Yes.



Whether you like the fact we are over there the fact is we are.



If we withdrawl and leave chaos over there like we did in Afghanistan,we will reap the whirlwind.



Any retreat,emboldens those who hate us becuase it gives them someone to hate.



We need to figure out why the teacher hates us,but I know why at least some terrorists hate s.Becuase they can.



Tabby

[Jimmi Magnus]

Tabby, you really need to read Why do people hate america?

Branded sexist, labelled racist.

Want it clearer? Check the mirror.