What If Your Guy Doesn't Win?

[Crimson King II]

What if your guy isn't the President in 2005? What's your take? What do you do?

[pisces2473]

Shrug it off and go on with life...just because the guy I didn't want to win won doesn't mean that my life is automatically going to suck...

Face it people, no matter who wins next week, do we REALLY have it rough? Sure the US was terrorized, but do we have bombs going off daily in our cities, like in Israel? Do we have a dictatorship, like in Cuba? Are people afforded opportunities to do things no matter their background? Are any of us starving, like in Africa?

[Crimson King II]

Actually, I am starving.....

[pisces2473]

Me too...almost break time.

But you know what I mean! Like NO FOOD anywhere in the nation because the government is withholding it as a way to control the people...

[Crimson King II]

Oh.....then, no....I'll be ok.


I think Dennis Miller had the best take on it last night. He's a Bush guy, but he said, "Look, if Kerry wins, I'm gettin' on board the next day, because the world is a crazy place right now and we need to be one with our guys and not the other guys."

[pisces2473]

I like that. :)

[dietzy]

Shrug it off...get ready for 2008....and laugh at the mess Kerry makes. You want him....you can have him! But don't complain on here if he wins and 3 years later your taxes are higher, the economy sucks, he renigs on 80%+ of the promises he is making now, we are still in Iraq, and the terrorists are stronger. And oh the fun we will have with Theresa! Hilary will look like a far right wing republican in comparison to the Johns!

But since logic and rational thinking will prevail...Kerry in the most powerful office in the world will only be a bad nightmarish dream.

I will be curious to see what Kerry will do when he loses. Will he grow a beard and hang out with Gore? Will he stay in politics? Will MA reelect him? Will he be a Political Analyst for CBS? Maybe the newest music sensation? Or maybe partner up with Edwards and go back to chasing ambulances.

[heatherf]

What if my guy doesn't win?

Alcoholic Beverages.

No, just a lot of prayer.

And lots of sex.

[wordsmith]

A sigh, a hope that the next four years aren't too sad and terrifying, and get on with life. What else are you gonna do?

Good point, Jen...even under atrocious leadership, the United States still has it far better than many countries. Not that there aren't people here living in horrid situations, by any means.

[Skyblade]

Originally posted by wordsmith
What else are you gonna do?


Move to Canada?

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by wordsmith
Good point, Jen...even under atrocious leadership, the United States still has it far better than many countries. Not that there aren't people here living in horrid situations, by any means.
Thanks :)

Skyblade, what will moving to Canada solve? I'm sure you'll find fault w/ the govt up there too...nothing's perfect.

[Crimson King II]

Wow....those responses included:

"the mess Kerry makes,"
"sucks,"
"the terrorists are stronger,"
"a bad nightmarish dream,"
"alcoholic beverages,"
"a lot of prayer,"
"hope that the next four years aren't too sad or terrifying"
"atrocious leadership"
and "move to canada"


Something is wrong. And I think you've all got the wrong attitude.


If Kerry wins, even if by some courtroom machinations, on inauguration day, I'll watch the inauguration, I'll listen to his speech, I'll wave goodbye to one leader, thanking him, and I'll welcome another leader, wishing him all the best. I'll encourage congressional leaders and I'll encourage them all to work for the right things...fiscal responsibility, a strong defense, and a bright future. I'll recognize his place among the 43 other individuals who were there on that island, handling the hardest job in the world, protecting the world and his people. I'll stand if the President is in the room, and I'll brim in the presence of the leader of the free world. And if called, in any capacity...I'll serve proudly.

We're not that bad, folks. We will get back to a time when elections aren't in doubt, when we respect our nation again. But first we must be willing, we must recognize history and our place. I liken the times to those after the Lincoln assassination and before Teddy Roosevelt...contested, close elections, very few incumbents winning reelection, and policy tumult everywhere. We'll get America back. We'll get it back....

[pisces2473]

That's really beautiful CK...and I hope you all saw this part of his post:
I'll encourage congressional leaders and I'll encourage them all to work for the right things...fiscal responsibility, a strong defense, and a bright future.

Even if your candidate doesn't win on Tuesday, this is the next best thing. Talk to those who represent your state, speak up on the issues that are close to you.

[Skyblade]

Originally posted by pisces2473

Thanks :)

Skyblade, what will moving to Canada solve? I'm sure you'll find fault w/ the govt up there too...nothing's perfect.

I was just joking around.

[pisces2473]

Okay...well, a lot of people say this and are serious, I just wanna know why they think Canada will be ANY better, that's all.

[Crimson King II]

Thanks Pisces.

I'm not particularly a religious person, but I DO believe that America has been guided by a divine hand to secure freedom and liberty and ensure the march of humanity in the world. I still believe America is that good place, that city on a hill that brings hope to men, women, and children everywhere...and I believe not only that it is, but that it can still be....

[pisces2473]

The way you write...you should be a speechwriter, CK ;)

[wordsmith]

Originally posted by Crimson King II

We're not that bad, folks. We will get back to a time when elections aren't in doubt, when we respect our nation again. But first we must be willing, we must recognize history and our place. I liken the times to those after the Lincoln assassination and before Teddy Roosevelt...contested, close elections, very few incumbents winning reelection, and policy tumult everywhere. We'll get America back. We'll get it back....

I think this is important, though hard, to remember. Thanks, CK.

[Crimson King II]

Gasp! My IDEAL job! Were I to do anything....

[heatherf]

I don't think people are really serious about the Canada thing- it's to cold up there....

Back to the CK/Pisces topic....I honestly hope things will get better. I want them to so badly. I want my ignorance is bliss days back.....my pre 9/11 days back. It keeps me up at night.

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by heatherf
Back to the CK/Pisces topic....I honestly hope things will get better. I want them to so badly. I want my ignorance is bliss days back.....my pre 9/11 days back. It keeps me up at night.
Don't you think our grandparents were freaked after Pearl Harbor? They thought it could happen again...and it almost did during the Cuban Missile Crisis...but things did get better...so I'm sure they will for us in our lifetime too.

[Crimson King II]

You know what would be a good idea...in a nasty and close election like this, the president elect should allow the vanquished to give a speech on inauguration day, especially if the vanquished is a losing incumbent. I think that would go a long way to have someone stand there and ease the transition and tell his supporters we're one nation, and we need to continue to be one nation, that there's still an angel in the whirlwind, and that America is going to remain America, complete with the hope, heart, and humanity that has marked its history since it began in the minds of the founders so many years ago.

[heatherf]

Jen,

I do agree with you, except that I really feel like things today are on a much larger scale. The potential for much more loss of life as a whole just seems huge.

[pisces2473]

Heather,
Of course it does, b/c this is our reality. The potential for mass destruction was real back then...but we weren't alive, so we have no idea...

I know it's scary...but we have to believe something will happen to make things get better...

[Crimson King II]

But should we wait for something to happen, or should we make something happen. I think that's the difference in this election, and I think it's the difference between our generation and those of the past...

[pisces2473]

Hmm good question...but what do we do? And how do you mean "do something?" As a government, or as individuals...

Very interesting, CK...keep it going...

[heatherf]

See Jen, I know you are right......but it doesn't supress all my fears....

Ck- I don't have any sort of answer for you.

[pisces2473]

I know, Heather...but you'll figure it out someday.

I think ALL potential parents are scared about bringing kids into the world--every generation had fears to face...

[heatherf]

Jen, you are right. My mom told me that it took her 4 years to finally decide to have a child.

[pisces2473]

Awww, I'm glad you talked to your mom about this stuff, Heather, esp. if she went through the same thing...
*hugs*

[Crimson King II]

Well Pisces...

I think this is our generational calling. Our government IS supposed to protect us. How do we deal with terrorists? We cannot appease them. So what then?

At minimum, I know Bush will take a fight to them. I don't know Kerry will. I know we've started something, I don't know that Kerry will or can finish it. Alternatively, if we wait...what are we waiting for? What event can we envision that will cause them to back away and not attack us more? How does this end? Can anyone tell how it ends? Probably not. But I think Bush is willing and trying to end it. I'm not sure Kerry's effort to end it will preserve America's strength or security...

[heatherf]

Thank you for the hug Jen, I really need it!

CK,

I personally see the terrorism issue extending way beyond another 4 years, regardless of what the US does to try to stop it.

[Crimson King II]

I agree heather...but we still need to be diligent and fight during those years...

[gluegun]

I'm not particularly a religious person, but I DO believe that America has been guided by a divine hand to secure freedom and liberty and ensure the march of humanity in the world.

Guided by a divine hand? Are you serious?

[Crimson King II]

I am serious...and look at many of the speeches by the Presidents in our history...they believed that too. Look at the circumstances of our founding...there is no scenario in which one could have imagined us winning that Revolution....no scenario in which one could have imagined a large democracy over so much land area....at every turn America has beaten long, long, odds....

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by Crimson King II
I think this is our generational calling. Our government IS supposed to protect us. How do we deal with terrorists? We cannot appease them. So what then?
Hmmm, maybe we're talking different things...what can WE, as normal 20 something citizens, really do? I guess we could join up to fight in the war (although I'd be kicked out for poor eyesight and anxiety) but what else? What can we do here at home? I'm thinking on low levels, like victory gardens in 1944, etc.

And Heather and CK--yes, it won't be over, but we still need to fight against it.

Glue--that's his opinion.

[heatherf]

but we still need to be diligent and fight during those years

I know....I know.....My issue is of course HOW we do this.

Jen, I don't know how we are supposed to do anything either. :confused:

[Crimson King II]

And glue...I just mean that, whether coincidence or not, we've always had the right people in the right place at the right time on a broad scale. Does anyone believe Carter could have wrangled with Gorbachev? Does anyone believe Nixon would have done a better job in 1961 with Kruschev? Could Benedict Arnold have guided the Army of the Potomac? What if General Lee had decided to fight a guerilla war in 1865? What if Grant had hung Lee and other generals instead of treat them with dignity and seek to reunite a torn nation?

It's an eerie coincidence that we've marched through time as we have.


Pisces...I don't know what we can do individually, but one thing I think we can do is be patient and not seek complete upheaval at the smallest failure every time one exists....

[gluegun]

This is not a direct cut at CK. I just want to post a random thought.

The other day my mom and I were talking about how frightening it is when a President (or any leader for that matter) thinks that he/she has a direct line to God. I mean, if God says that what you're doing is right then by God IT MUST BE RIGHT.

scary shit if you ask me

[heatherf]

What if General Lee had decided to fight a guerilla war in 1865

Ck- we all know that the General Lee is the car that the Duke boys had. How can a car fight in a guerilla war?? ;)

[Crimson King II]

Scary because some are paranoid.

Go read Wilson's speeches and FDR's speeches...many, many, many, deeply spiritual references to God. Clinton invoked God more in his first term than Bush has. Reagan began his presidency with a prayer at the inauguration. Read ALL of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and Second Inaugural.

I'm tired of people railing against Bush and calling him a fanatic, a scary fundamentalist. I find that is a pile on technique used by those who have already decided they're not supporting him and just want to get cheap. Nor has Bush done that...he's never said he's doing God's mission. Please. This line ignores our history, and it doesn't hold him to the same standard as other presidents which you don't find as "scary." It's cheap and it's weak.

[heatherf]

CK/Glue

I think why I find it a little scary that Bush does proclaim to be on God's side/Born Again/Fundamentalist is because it somehow shifts the burden from Bush himself to God. IMO that's cowardice.

It's somehow all God's will???:confused:

[gluegun]

Oh, I know that through out history US Presidents have been religious. It pains me to know that we aren't going to have an atheist president any time soon.

[gluegun]

CK/Glue I think why I find it a little scary that Bush does proclaim to be on God's side/Born Again/Fundamentalist is because it somehow shifts the burden from Bush himself to God. IMO that's cowardice.

More than that, it makes Bush absolutely correct. He is doing "God's work" after all. Pretty much every leader of every war has said that God is on his side. The terrorists are using the exact same argument. It is so ironic to me.

[Crimson King II]

HE'S NOT DOING THAT!!!!!!! That's a concocted myth that people like Michael Moore have thrown out there to stir up this type of ridiculous fear. They essentially are faulting the guy because he's a Christian.


Bush has said the decisions are his, not God's, and he only prays that he's doing good.

[heatherf]

Ck,

Bush effing meets with Pat Robertson who tells him, God is on your side....blah blah blah...and this is published to the press.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/19/robertson.bush.iraq/

[Crimson King II]

And how is this different from Jesse Jackson telling Kerry and Clinton the same thing?!?!?!?

You're not out there calling Kerry and Clinton scary crazies! So let's not put Robertson's words in Bush's mouth either!

[heatherf]

Yeah....I'm not thinking that Jesse Jackson is in charge of the whole Christian Coalition either.

[Crimson King II]

Neither is Pat FREAKING Robertson!!!! The Christian Coalition is a political action group! Nonetheless, they don't speak for the President.

Jackson does proclaim himself as a Reverend everywhere! He's got two or three of his own, equally effective political groups! Again...why don't you call Kerry and Clinton scary crazies?

[pisces2473]

Who would you rather have Kerry listen to--the Pope or Jesse?

[gluegun]

CK, I specifically said that EVERY leader thinks that God is on his side.

[Crimson King II]

Who cares? Why doesn't listening to either of them make him a scary crazy who we can equate to the terrorists? Why is it that such circumstances only apply to Bush?!?!?

[pisces2473]

Not me! I think Jesse is just as creepy as Pat!!!!

[gluegun]

BTW CK, if it makes you feel any better, I was extremely disappointed when Kerry talked about God during the first presidential debate. I shook my head at the TV.

[Crimson King II]

Ok glue....does that mean FDR, Reagan, Kennedy, Clinton, LBJ, and Nixon were scary crazies who ironically are doing the same thing the terrorists are???

[heatherf]

Pat Robertson is the founder. What did he just establish the CC and walk away?

Maybe it's just me, but do people take Jesse Jackson seriously? (ok, that sounded bad, but I'm serious)

I didn't imply that they are scary crazies anywhere....I only implied that it takes the burden off of Bush.

[Crimson King II]

Yeah, he did leave it. He founded it to help him when he ran for President in 1988!!! He doesn't need it now, and he's not involved with it today.

No one takes him seriously either! So WHY do you use HIS words to put them into BUSH's mouth, and discredit BUSH? And WHY don't you do the SAME with Jesse and his in bed relationship with CLINTON and KERRY????

[heatherf]

I'm only confused on your last post? Nobody takes who seriously either? Nobody takes PR seriously? Yeah right.

I just don't hear of people speaking on Kerry saying it's God's will.

[Crimson King II]

Nobody DOES take Pat Robertson seriously...he's a crank. He raises money, but he's a crank. People put FAR MORE stock in Jackson than Robertson. It's one thing to find concern with one's supporters, but don't make their comments the President's! Don't put words in his mouth and then criticize him for saying those things!

Moreover, all Pat said was he believed Bush had God's blessing. Fine. I don't see much insidious in that. Nor does he say Bush said he was doing God's work, or that he believed that. There's a big leap from Pat believes Bush has God's blessing to Bush thinks he's doing God's work and is therefore acting just like the terrorists. A BIG leap.

[gluegun]

Ok glue....does that mean FDR, Reagan, Kennedy, Clinton, LBJ, and Nixon were scary crazies who ironically are doing the same thing the terrorists are???

Hey man, I'm an equal opportunity anti-religionist. I told you before that I'd prefer that my president be atheist.

[Crimson King II]

Fine. If you're okay with the moral equivocation that "US Presidents are the same as terrorists," then fine. I got nothing more...

[maxwell78]

Regardless of who wins on Tuesday, I'm going to drink heavily and hope to God that John McCain runs in 2008. :D

[pisces2473]

Oooh cool.

And have Joe Lieberman as VP. Historic pair--a leftish Rep w/ a rightish Dem. Good times!

[dietzy]

It's somehow all God's will???

Interesting you should say that because I think that it is! Well of course that is because it is my belief that God is all knowing, all powerful, and controls everything. I guess if you do not believe that or do not believe in God at all then that would be hard to rationalize. This is also one of the big reasons that I support Bush...because he prays, because he reads the Bible, because he seeks counsel from Godly men, and because he looks to God for wisdom, strength, and support. I think that makes him a better stronger leader.

More than that, it makes Bush absolutely correct. He is doing "God's work" after all. Pretty much every leader of every war has said that God is on his side. The terrorists are using the exact same argument. It is so ironic to me.

WHOA! You are WAY off base on this one, IMO! You are comparing their god (little g) to God (big G). You are comparing a belief system based on death, killing, destruction and terror (not saying all the Muslim faith, but the sect that the terrorists are apart of) with a belief in love. I think it is downright ridiculous to try and compare terrorists and why they are doing what they are doing to Bush or Christianity! Attempting to do so shows ignorance...no...correction...flat out stupidity.

And why do liberals always bash Bush for his faith? And yet have no problem with Clinton, Gore, Sharpton, Jackson and Kerry visiting multiple churches every weekend and preaching during the normal church service about their political views. Or Kerry in the last day trying miserably to come off as deeply religious and quoting scripture to support him being President. Bush is never so blatant or insincere. And site me one instance in this campaign that Bush has done politicing from a pulpit! If he did he would be roasted by the press for separation of church and state. All of the liberals do it constantly and it is fine...when in reality, those churches should be losing their tax exemption status!

what can WE, as normal 20 something citizens, really do?

I think there is a lot that can be done such as:
1. Be the best you that you can be...use your skills talents and abilities to go out and make the world better
2. Stay positive and don't fall into the negative
3. Teach the youth of America about our TRUE historical roots and not the new history being taught and shoved down the throats of kids who will grow up hating America
4. Help those in need
5. Be engaged in the political process by voting intelligently and not just following your party
6. Vote every chance you can get
7. Write often to local, state and federal politicians
8. Start groups/organizations to have your collective voice heard...it can make a difference!
9. Support our troops with everything you got no matter how bad things get or appear or are presented to you by the press; actually take time to speak to our troops...take them to dinner...buy them and their families Christmas presents...adopt a soldier....they are making the ultimate sacrifice for US!
10. Support the leaders of this country. Even if you do not agree with everything they do. There is a difference between disagreeing and doing things properly to make changes, and ridiculing, bashing, and destroying our leaders. This weakens the whole country and does nothing to help your cause

Just a few quick thoughts off of the top of my head.

[heatherf]

Ck-

People like my mom (born again christians) take Pat Robertson seriously, isn't that effing scary?

So it's people like that who think, oh, God is on Bushs' side....so it' must be God's will....and if God's will is that x, y, z happen, well then it must just be a part of God's bigger plan, and Bush is doing all he can......

Just callin it like I see it, first person experience....been there, done that, got the t-shirt.

Do you talk to born agains frequently? See, I do, this is what I hear.

[dietzy]

Maybe it's just me, but do people take Jesse Jackson seriously? (ok, that sounded bad, but I'm serious)

WAY too many people actually do listen to him and take him seriously which is REALLY scarey in my opinion. He pretty much is the unofficial spokesman and sniper for the ACLU. He is the right hand man of Sharpton, Kerry and Clinton. He is portrayed by the media as the U.S. Pope.

[heatherf]

(see Dietzy's post above, compared to what I just said)

Interesting you should say that because I think that it is!

[heatherf]

Hmmm....I've just always considered Jesse Jackson as some sort of bastard step child American joke. Maybe I'm wrong? But whenever he talks - all I hear is blah blah blah blah blah. Maybe I should start listening to him? (don't worry- I won't!)

[maxwell78]

Originally posted by pisces2473
Oooh cool.

And have Joe Lieberman as VP. Historic pair--a leftish Rep w/ a rightish Dem. Good times!
Ah yes. And I bet you thought we had government paralysis now! haha. Absolutely nothing would get done then. haha.

Alright, so seriously, besides CK, who are my other Republican peeps around here? No need to be shy.

[pisces2473]

I am a moderate! :)

[heatherf]

Just like it was God's will to have planes slammed into the world trade center- killing thousands of people.

Just like it's God's will that hundreds of thousands of innocent Sudanese people are being gunned down right now by their own government.

[Crimson King II]

I talk to some. However, their beliefs are no reason to carve them from the process or vilify them. They are not terrorists. They would not go and start a fight or a war without provocation and threat. Nor would Bush. Nor would the United States. If 9/11 did not happen, there would be no war cry to fight anywhere...certainly not from the Christians.


Also...great article on the election:

Chris Hitchens (http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=hitchens)


I especially love the part where Hitchens chastises the left for being intellectually dishonest...which they have been throughout this election. He says the left are the simpleminded and hypocritical in this election, he says Bush is being at minimum honest in his positions...this from a far left gadfly....a good read...take it for the little it's worth...but I think it is enlightening.

[Crimson King II]

No heather...think there's some plot to affirmatively act and go attack another nation by a roving band of discreet Methodists? There is a FUNDAMENTAL difference....to equivocate is simply unsound and wrong. People voting for Bush because they respect or share his religious beliefs are NOTHING like the 9/11 planners.

[heatherf]

But CK, born again christians DO believe that somehow it's all God's will. It's all his larger plan and we as simple human people cannot understand his grandiose ideas.....

[maxwell78]

Fantastic article, CK. My favorite part?
I can't wait to see President Kerry discover which corporation, aside from Halliburton, should after all have got the contract to reconstruct Iraq's oil industry.

[gluegun]

And why do liberals always bash Bush for his faith? And yet have no problem with Clinton, Gore, Sharpton, Jackson and Kerry visiting multiple churches every weekend and preaching during the normal church service about their political views. Or Kerry in the last day trying miserably to come off as deeply religious and quoting scripture to support him being President.

I can only assume that you aren't talking to me here.

[dietzy]

Since Halliburton was the only company in the world that could do what they do in the short time it was needed. A fact conveniently overlooked all the time. And that there is really only one other company in the world that can do what Halliburton can do if time were not an issue...and that is a French company which would mean outsourcing jobs.

[Crimson King II]

And let them believe that heather. But don't say that's Bush's thinking...it's not. There are a number on the left who believe there is no god, and who believe America is the worst thing to happen to the world...I'll carve ours out if you carve out yours.


Exactly maxwell....I guess Nabisco could have rebuilt the oilfields and managed them in Iraq.....

[dietzy]

Talking about any liberal that bashes Bush on his faith and not equally bashes the others.

[heatherf]

Dude- Nabisco makes Oreos.......I'm probably the only one on here that knows that....they probably make dog food too- doesn't every food company make dog food?

(hungry belly I have, sorry guys. :( )

I didn't say it was Bushs' thinking...I said it was implied.

[Crimson King II]

Then make similar implications on Kerry...it must equally be implied that he believes America is secondary to world government, that the terrorists should be met with sympathy and money and appeasement, and that it's entirely understandable that we would be attacked.


Equally scary. A push.

[heatherf]

But there are only implications to be made for Kerry if Kerry is elected pres. Then it would have been God's will.

[heatherf]

Ck,

I swear to you- this is how Born Again/Fundamentalist Christians seriously think. Ask Dietzy, he appearently knows first hand as well.

[WeirdBrake]

You could make the argument that Christians, historically, have not been much better than the modern day Muslim terrorists. The medieval Christians burned people alive for disagreeing with religious doctrine. They killed and tortured people during the Crusades and the Inquisition. They perpetuated anti-Semitism and regarded the Jews as in league with Satan. They forcibly deprived women of equal rights. They tortured and killed suspected "witches."

Hmmm... torturing and killing those who disagree with you, depriving women of rights, violent acts of warfare and bloodshed in the name of religion... sound familiar? That's exactly what the Muslim terrorists do. All in the name of "God."

Gluegun makes a great point about the same type of absolutist "God is on my side" mindset and how dangerous it is. Personally, I don't believe in God. I think the belief in God, for many reasons, is irrational, warped, and foolish. I don't particularly care for Christianity (or any of the major monotheistic religions) because I think the Christian worldview is basically flawed. I also think there's a reason the rates of atheism tend to be higher among the more educated sections of the population.

[Crimson King II]

They may well believe things happen for God's reason...how does that equate to being the same as terrorists? There's a great leap from "I believe things happen by God's will" to "I believe we should actively seek to attack other people and destroy their world because God wants me to."

Two totally different things...one is benign, and they should not be equivocated.

[Crimson King II]

You can make that argument Brake. But I'm guessing Christians in Georgia believe much differently than those in the Crusades or the Inquisition (much of which ALSO dealt with battles and wars against Muslim fundamentalists by the way...).

[heatherf]

Hmmmm CK, I think you might be confusing what I've said on my posts to someone else about the whole terrorist thing.

Are you asking if the terrorists also believe they are doing God's will?

[WeirdBrake]

I give mainstream Christians some credit for changing their ways since the 14th century (although I think this mainly has to do with the fact that Christianity has LESSENED in intensity since then). But all I'm saying is that the same mindset of monotheistic absolutism-- regardless of religion-- is dangerous, and history proves it (and is still proving it with the Muslim terrorists).

[gluegun]

But all I'm saying is that the same mindset of monotheistic absolutism-- regardless of religion-- is dangerous, and history proves it

Can anybody possibly deny this?

[Crimson King II]

No...clearly they do believe that. But their belief has led them to make terrorist attacks on a nation of people regardless of the victims' religion. I contend that if 9/11 does not happen, then there would be NO similar groundswell leading to a similar attack on another nation by fundamentalist Christians out of the Carolinas.

[Crimson King II]

Dangerous? Sure. So tell me, specifically, what is the danger coming from American fundamentalist christians? Where are they mobilizing, and where will they be attacking? The equivocation drives me nuts.

[heatherf]

I don't know why I'm having such a hard time understanding your posts.....

[WeirdBrake]

I'm not arguing that there are Christian fundie terrorists who pose the same threat as the Muslim fundie terrorists. Clearly (and fortunately), there are not. I'm talking about the underlying mindsets themselves and using history to make my point.

[Crimson King II]

If that thinking is so dangerous in general, then what specific danger arises from Christians in America? Everyone chants that that thinking is dangerous, but short of citing the Crusades, they can't identify the danger....it's merely anti-religion garbage at that point. People don't like religion and it intimidates them, so they call it dangerous and cite the crusades....

I just want to know where the specific danger lies that warrants equating American Christians to Fundamentalist Muslim terrorists.

[Crimson King II]

(crickets...)


That's what I thought.

[WeirdBrake]

CK, anti-religion talk is not "garbage." It's thought to be garbage by people who don't want to give up their comforting SkyDad worldview.

Let me spell it out for you. When you believe that an "all-loving" God could permit all the suffering in this world and still be called all-loving, that's warped. When you believe that God is going to punish people with eternal torture in the afterlife, that's warped. If you believe that God is going to punish people for not believing in certain religious doctrines, that's warped. These are warped, irrational, heartless beliefs that are, in my opinion, the same as the beliefs of the terrorists, who similarly rationalize torture and suffering as justified by God. OK, so the Christian fundies in America are less likely to act on it and actually victimize people in the name of it. But still, from a philosophical standpoint, I find these belief systems equally repugnant.

[WeirdBrake]

I have a law class to go to now, so I'll be back posting a little later.

[heatherf]

Ck,

My whole opinion was that it implies that God take responsibility for the actions of the president, because Bush proclaims to be Born-Again, and Born Again christians fundamentally believe that God has put Bush in office...yadda yadda yadda.

I'm not getting into your discussion with WB cause I don't agree with WB a lot of the times....

[wordsmith]

'Brake, you know I love you, but, damn...

CK, anti-religion talk is not "garbage." It's thought to be garbage by people who don't want to give up their comforting SkyDad worldview.

I'm gonna hope this isn't your viewpoint on everyone embracing a Christian worldview.

[heatherf]

Wb is not very compassionated.

[and1grad]

The problem is that the both of you (CK & WB) are pretty much right. Christians dont really push their religion on anybody anymore but at the same time religion causes more death & destruction than anything ever has. Also, it seems like we're trying to say that terrorist acts come from a rational base, as in terrorists thinking that Christians pose some form of a threat. I dont believe that terror is based in rational thought.

Also, I prefer the President/whatever keep up with their religious belief that they should be in office. It means nothing. Just like when people thank god after winning the grammy. Who cares? If it makes people happy to believe it...then let them.

Also, I still believe that the only reason Christianity has "lessened" is because science started disproving the Church.

[Benwa]

If Uncle Sam is blessed with a divine hand, I believe he is using that hand to jerk off.

Trying to get back on the topic of the thread. If your guy doesn't win. There is absolutely nothing you can do because your gov't doesn't belong to you anymore. Your opinion is only asked for rarely and it is to decide who you wish to hand your power over to. First, its important to give your opinion when you aren't asked for it. We are so far removed from the decision process its embarrasing. And I don't want to pick someone to relingiush my power to. Especially when thet person is under no obligation to voice your opinion. I am not a sheep in search of a shepherd.

We're in some serious need of a revitalising of democracy. And the only way its been done in the past is to get up and make it so. If you want this thing to work you must participate. and I don't mean participate by voting. Thats the lamest excuse of participation. If the system is giving you friction then you sidestep it. If its broke beyond salvation then abandond it. And question authority at every step. Don't blindly disobey, but question every form of it you meet. Atrocities are only partly caused by bad leaders, the majority is caused by a complacent citizenry thats too frightened to stand up and say whats right. Most people don't murder people they have a conflict with, so why do we allow our gov't to behave this way? It's because we're too scared to stand up and tell authority to go F itself. We don't refuse or resist. And we're too scared to step out and speak because we are scared of eachother. Stop bickering amongst ourselves. No one is right, but if we work together we can figure something out. And most importantly we're going to have to decide to evolve. Stop seeing division everywhere. The things that make us different are meaningless. That includes everyone on the planet, yes even those the leaders have labeled enemies. Get up, Step out of yourself and struggle god dammit!

[Crimson King II]

That's a lot of writing to have said so little.

As political and governmental theory, there's no substance there.

[pisces2473]

SkyDad! LOL That reminds me of the SNL skit where Will Ferrell was playing Jesus and he got hurt or something and yelled "Oh, my DAD!"

[heatherf]

Shut up! I never saw that! LMAO!!!!!!!

Oh, my dad!

Jesus SNL skits are the best! Remember the David Spade/Roseanne one. Where David Spade is the annoying receptionist who always said - "And you are....???" Well Phit Hartman played Jesus, David Spade was the receptionist for NBC Studios and Jesus said - that he's there at NBC to announce to the world that he has returned. Recpetionist says, "and you are???" Jesus says- "Christ, your Lord". Receptionist, "And he (the boss) would know you from a book and or ummmm??"

So Jesus goes and sits next to Roseanne, and she asks Jesus, "Isn't he (the receptionist) just the worst?" Jesus replies, "Yes, he is"

Funniest!

Ok, gotta go to lunch!

[pisces2473]

I never saw THAT one! LOL

[WeirdBrake]

OK, looks like it's a competition between my "SkyDad" and Benwa's "If Uncle Sam is blessed with a divine hand, I believe he is using that hand to jerk off." Put your votes in now, people.

[Benwa]

I like them both. I believe in a world where pretend cloud dwelling daddies and poorly dressed nation mascots that jerk off can live on a level playing field.

[and1grad]

That would be Disneyworld.

[AlFa]

Originally posted by wordsmith
A sigh, a hope that the next four years aren't too sad and terrifying, and get on with life. What else are you gonna do?

Good point, Jen...even under atrocious leadership, the United States still has it far better than many countries. Not that there aren't people here living in horrid situations, by any means.


Actually, I really think this is something of a concern no matter who wins isn't it. I certainly don't think it's fair to ONLY be concerned with what happens if Bush wins.

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by pisces2473
Okay...well, a lot of people say this and are serious, I just wanna know why they think Canada will be ANY better, that's all.

Canada has a lower crime rate and health care for all. Sounds better to me.

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by Crimson King II

I just want to know where the specific danger lies that warrants equating American Christians to Fundamentalist Muslim terrorists.

They both want to decrease our civil rights. See the Patriot Act.

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by AlFa

Actually, I really think this is something of a concern no matter who wins isn't it. I certainly don't think it's fair to ONLY be concerned with what happens if Bush wins.

I personally think nothing will really change if either one wins. Neither one wants to make any real radical changes in policy. The only thing that might significantly change is the Supreme Court justices will probably die and be replaced. So, the President will nominate new judges. Bush is strongly anti-abortion and has said he won't put any judges who are pro-choice on the bench. Kerry would try to do things differently, most likely. But that is the only major difference that I see.

[The Stranger]

Just for the record--Christopher Hitchens endorsed Kerry.

That said...I'm afraid of any kind of religious fundamentalists, simply because they tend to be anti-science and they want to outlaw the things that their religion doesn't approve of. Today they're limiting stem-cell research for no scientific or logical reason, tomorrow they could be trying to outlaw sex outside of marriage. I want leaders who believe that the Constitution is the supreme document of our nation, not the Bible. I'd rather not live in a society where people are put in jail for being gay or having an abortion.

I love America, but that doesn't mean that I'm blind to our faults. We've done both wonderful things and horrible things. There's nothing unpatriotic about dissent.

Bush absolutely terrifies me, as his worldview is far too simplistic and cut off from reality. He thinks that the economy is good? He thinks that Iraq is going well? He thinks that his diplomacy is effective? A Republican like John McCain could have planned the war well and kept the government out of our bedrooms. But he was too 20th century for the fundies ("He's evil, he won't forbid pregnant single women from being schoolteachers!"), so they made a lot of insinuations about his service in Vietnam, back in the 2000 primaries. (Sound familiar?)

The sad thing is, I know many reasonable, intelligent, completely patriotic Republicans and Christians. They constantly reassure me that not all of them are fundies like Bush.

To address the original post...well, assuming I don't get drafted to go fight in Iran or Syria, the main change will be that my gay friends will all move to Canada or Europe, just so they have the option of getting married. I'm sure that our rights will continue to be decreased (for our own protection, of course), and that we'll manage to tick off even more of the Middle Eastern moderates that could've been won over to our side. Given how Bush has handled Iraq thus far, I think that my friends and relatives over there stand a much higher chance of dying, if he's President. America can survive Bush, though--I have far more faith in it than him.

[Crimson King II]

Actually Stranger, "just for the record" (what record by the way?!?) Hitchens didn't. The article is titled Why I'm for Bush! He's always said Bush is on the right side of the terror/war issue, and he's always criticized Kerry for being intellectually dishonest. Read it. He has said he thinks Kerry will win. He supports Bush. No bother though...he's a liberal.

As for you Pink Hat...that's a severely misleading, ignorant, and dishonest statement. You just said American Christians are dangerous because they want to decrease civil rights, and the only support you give is "see the Patriot Act."

Well first, there's nothing in the Patriot Act that either says it was authored by or wholly put forth by any Christian group. Nothing in it says that it is to advance Christian principles. It was passed with Bipartisan support, in both houses, supported by both this President and the previous one, yet somehow you'll call Bush and the Reps Christian zealots, but won't lay blame on any Dems. It's ridiculous, pathetic, and frankly stupid. Moreover, how is passage of a law in congress equivocal to flying a plane into a building. You should be banished from this dimension. I'll catch hell for saying something like that, but fine...you're irresponsible and stupid for saying something like that...it's untrue, you know it, you have no concern for the truth, you throw glaring hyperbole out there with no support, and it's uncalled for.

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by Pink Hat
Canada has a lower crime rate and health care for all. Sounds better to me.
Do you realize HOW bad the Canadian health system is? Yeah it's for everyone, but people have to wait weeks for tests like MRIs (same day treatment in the US). Yeah, things are cheaper, like drugs, but when more serious things are being withheld, then it's not any better. Don't throw out such blatant statments without knowing how bad it is up north.

[gluegun]

Pink Hat, just ignore Crimson King's unnecessary insults. You'll quickly learn that anybody posting on the politics thread is fare game for Crimson's attacks. Prepare for words like stupid, ignorant, uneducated, misinformed, irresponsible, pathetic, self-righteous, indignant, etc.

[WeirdBrake]

While I don't condone CK's personal attack on Pink Hat, I can understand what set him off. The comparison between Americans who support the Patriot Act and the terrorists who want to torture and kill us all because "they both want to decrease our civil rights" is certainly infuriating, to say the least. It can't even be dignified with a response.

Again, I'm not sayin' he shoulda insulted her..... but I underSTAND!

[Crimson King II]

And I think such irresponsible statements SHOULD be condemned, and that it is that sort of moral equivocation that destroys society. I'm willing to make such condemnation, and call it a personal attack if you want, but I'll make it in no uncertain terms. It's not hard...let me be clear...it is wrong, wrongheaded, and ignorant...it is misguided, unfair, dishonest, and cruel...it is weak, it is disingenuous, and it is ridiculous, pathetic, subintellectual, and sad.

[gluegun]

CK is now showing off the fact that his mind is a thesaurus of insults.

[Crimson King II]

I don't think those are insults. Is there nothing said today that is not ignorant? Is every comment a well-spring of intellect? Must we be more concerned with political correctness than accuracy and truth? Is there no "wrong" anymore?

I find that insulting.

[Crimson King II]

Moreover, gluegun...you're willing to defend Pink Hat's comments, do you subscribe to them? Do you think American Christians are as dangerous as Fundamentalist Muslim Terrorists? Do you think the danger of the Patriot Act is equal to that threat posed by such terrorists?

That line of thinking is simply inherently flawed. It is logically wrong. Be as polite as you'd like, but it is not right.

[gluegun]

Get your facts straight CK. I never defended PinkHat's comments. I defended his right to voice his opinion with out being met with a personal attack.

[wordsmith]

ANY religious extremism has the potential to be dangerous. You can't put it on some kind of apples-and-oranges continuum, and say, "Well, if it's not flying hijacked planes into buildings, you've got nothing to be up in arms about," which is what I feel is often the sentiment.

Fundamentalist Christian viewpoints would gladly make it illegal for me to terminate a pregnancy if I so desired, which is something that is NOBODY'S business but mine. It's not people being crushed and burned alive in a burning skyscraper, no. It's not even close. But it's none the less a very personal, very hard-hitting issue, and one that's very important to me. It's not something you can throw up a comparison, and say, "See? Christian extremists aren't so bad, compared to what the Muslim extremists are capable of."

[Crimson King II]

And I never said Pink Hat can't comment. But in my America, when something so irresponsible and blatantly wrong is uttered, I am also entitled and willing to condemn it as wrong.

And wordsmith...great answer. That said, it is clear by that answer that no similar danger is posed by American Christians. At most, the danger lies that their movement and beliefs curtail a right which you perceive that is found nowhere in natural law doctrine, nowhere in Constitutional law doctrine, nowhere in American tradition, and only found through activist, judge-made law since the 1970s. While I respect that viewpoint, it only illustrates that the greatest danger we face from Christians is that they may somehow grow in numbers and influence social change through democratic means. To equivocate that at all, as Pink Hat tries to do, is wrong and mean and cruel and irresponsible.

[gluegun]

What is with your repeated use of the word "irresponsible" CK? Are you saying that we have a responsibility to not voice our opinions. I seriously don't understand your overuse of that word.

[wordsmith]

I hope you're not saying that you can assign a value to what are "worse" dangers or more real threats, though. It doesn't matter one whit to me whether the dangers are "similar." They're equally real. My point was that I am absolutely as fearful of the threat of extremist groups dictating personal choices I make with my body as I am with planes hitting things.

[Crimson King II]

Republican Democracies cannot work if their foundation of truth and freedom erodes. Honest discourse is imperative. To make a statement like that as an American citizen is irresponsible citizenship...it's irresponsible to those you are speaking to, and it's irresponsible to those who have preserved our freedoms throughout 228 years of history. It's also irresponsible to condemn other benign American citizens by comparing their reasonable, though disparate beliefs in a Democratic nation, to terrorist killers devoted to destroying not only a way of life, but life itself.

And yeah, WS...there are worse dangers out there. Not all dangers are equivocal. If you think a policy change is dangerous, fine. If you think those seeking to change policy democratically are on the same level as those seeking to destroy us and our nation, then you are equivocating. No way are those equal. But again...your scenario does not even recognize that a "right to an abortion," and a "right to live" or a "right to liberty" are not inherently equal rights unto themselves (I'm not talking equal rights among peoples in the classic "equal rights" term). Right to life, liberty, property, are fundamental, natural and ancient rights. Right to an abortion? Well, at least half of America (ALL fundamentalists or extremists??? Get real...) dispute whether that is a right at all. Some want to take that from you through Democratic, peaceful means. Others want to take those natural rights from you, kill you, and do it all by force, power, and violence. Bet your ass those aren't equal or equivocal.

[wordsmith]

Originally posted by Crimson King II
And yeah, WS...there are worse dangers out there. Not all dangers are equivocal. If you think a policy change is dangerous, fine. If you think those seeking to change policy democratically are on the same level as those seeking to destroy us and our nation, then you are equivocating. No way are those equal. But again...your scenario does not even recognize that a "right to an abortion," and a "right to live" or a "right to liberty" are not inherently equal rights unto themselves (I'm not talking equal rights among peoples in the classic "equal rights" term). Right to life, liberty, property, are fundamental, natural and ancient rights. Right to an abortion? Well, at least half of America (ALL fundamentalists or extremists??? Get real...) dispute whether that is a right at all. Some want to take that from you through Democratic, peaceful means. Others want to take those natural rights from you, kill you, and do it all by force, power, and violence. Bet your ass those aren't equal or equivocal.

I'm saying that I fear them equally, regardless of how you want to phrase it. As is absolutely my prerogative. You can't argue with that.

[Crimson King II]

I can't argue that YOU fear them equally. I can suggest that is ridiculous...which is my opinion. Moreover, you may fear them equally, but I assure you one threat is very, very real with grave, grave, grave consequences, while the other...simply isn't. Also, there's a far cry between democratic means of change and terroristic, violent means of change. Americans believe in one, not the other. Equivocation between Al Quaeda and the 700 Club is ridiculous, irresponsible, and wrong.

[wordsmith]

Judge me and my fears all you want. It doesn't change them.

[Crimson King II]

I'm not judging them. And while it might not change them, it doesn't make expressions of them in that manner any more responsible or rational.

But when we sit on a QLC board and moan that our generation isn't important, and we cry because decisions are so difficult, and that nothing goes our way, blah, blah, blah, don't we have to wonder how much of that is caused by our indifference to say something is indeed wrong and right. If some dictator invaded the Sudetenland or France today, WE would be sitting here, going, "Well, I can see why that would be important to them to do, but I really think they're no bigger threat than Jerry Falwell, who I see between 9 and 10 every Thursday on the Evangelical channel...THAT guy wants to take our rights away too. He's FOR the Patriot Act!!! (So was John Kerry by the way...) Why should we put our energy into helping England???"

[wordsmith]

My fears were not expressed in a manner that was irresponsible OR irrational.

[Crimson King II]

I agree. YOURS weren't...and I apologize for that statement. But you did use them to explain a comment that American Christians were as dangerous as, or equivocal to, terrorists.

[WeirdBrake]

I'm gonna have to defend CK's point this time around. There are realities that are up for civilized debate and passionate opinion. They can be argued over, fought over, felt deeply, etc.

Then there are realities that stare you in the face with such blatant malevolent power and simplicity that they knock you clear on your ass. 9/11 was such a reality. Al Qaida and these Muslim terrorists are such a reality. The beheadings and suicide bombings and overall dedication to human destruction-- and specifically American destruction-- are such a reality.

You can hate Bush, disagree with Bush, and make fun of Bush. But to compare him or the legislative authors of the Patriot Act to these organized serial killers is a form of hyperbole that approaches offensive lunacy, so I can understand CK getting hot under the collar about it and responding as such. This time, I can't really frown on CK's personal attack.

For a moment, put yourself in the shoes of a parent whose kid was abducted and murdered by a child predator. The predator is caught, but the prosecutor assigned to the case starts doing things that are ethically questionable... possibly violating the defendant's constitutional rights but possibly not. The prosecutor starts to get criticized in the press for how he's handling the case. One journalist then makes the remark that the prosecutor is "no better than the murderer because both have no regard for people's basic rights."

Seriously, if you were the parent in that situation, wouldn't you be enraged by such a comparison? The comparison of an ethically questionable prosecutor to the scumbag who murdered your child? Sure, the journalist might be allowed to make such a comment, but is that not totally irresponsible and hurtful?

Well, in a sense, that's what it's like to compare certain Americans to the Muslim terrorists who are our enemies.

[wordsmith]

Originally posted by Crimson King II
I agree. YOURS weren't...and I apologize for that statement. But you did use them to explain a comment that American Christians were as dangerous as, or equivocal to, terrorists.

This isn't meant to sound nitpicky, but my comment had to do with religious extremists, not American Christians. There are MANY American Christians who are not extremists. And I didn't say anything but that I feared both threats equally.

P.S. W.B. You'll note that I haven't touched the Patriot Act. My only responses have related to my fear of the ramifications of religious extremism. All I'm saying is that I truly do believe that there are definite enemies of liberty within our own country.

[Crimson King II]

And that's a fair enough statement WS. So go fight them democratically as they too fight here. Short of calling them equal to terrorists, I got no problem...Pink Hat's comments were far more inciteful to my rant than yours were...

[Benwa]

I wouldn't go as far as saying Bush and the terrorist are identicle. But I would say there are disturbing similarities. Anyone who adheres to an ideology is potentially dangerous. Because the same qualities which draw those people to fanatacism are the same qualities that make them prone to commit murder or be non pliable or to have all consuming hatred. And this whole conflict we're having now with America and the muslim extremist is a battle of ideologies. The American style of democracy versus the muslim fundametal theocracy. And ironically american style democracy doesn't represent democracy and muslim fundamental theocracy doesn't represent the muslim faith. They both are sort of bastard children of each. Its a battle of ideas. Of pictures in our heads! How silly is that.

Neither side is 100% guilty and neither is 100% innocent. Both have done horrible things that make the retaliatin of the other party understandable. Morality/ Truth isn't binary. It isn't a 1 or a 0. I read a good article that said there are two type of people in this world, one type feels there are two type of people in the world and the other type feels that just perhaps that people are in an area of gray. Both sides in this conflict are in binary mode. It's my way or the highway. Your either with us or against us. You either believe in our ideology or you are a devil dog and deserve to die and burn in hell. This is why theres such a conflict with no obvious resolution in sight. Neither side will budge. Neither side will compromise. And neither side will try to understand that the other side may have some valid concerns.

Again, I wouldn't say both sides are the same but their bullheaded adhearance to their ideology is identical. And I think this is where people can start believing that both sides are identical.

If these conflicts want to be resolved, the first step is to put down your ideology. You don't need it that badly. Your ideology may work for you but it doesn't work for everyone. I for one try to stay away from any ideology because I feel it limits me. Ideas are constantly changing and evolving and dying and being reborn. Which brings the issue up if ideas are even true, but thats more of a philosphical exploration.

[wordsmith]

Originally posted by Crimson King II
And that's a fair enough statement WS. So go fight them democratically as they too fight here. Short of calling them equal to terrorists, I got no problem...Pink Hat's comments were far more inciteful to my rant than yours were...

Point taken and appreciated.

[Crimson King II]

That is SUCH equivocal, blame-America first crap. What is our ideology? Freedom and power held in the hands of people? Freedom to live and grow and decide your own destiny? Values of peace?

George Bush has 0% culpability. He did not declare war on anyone except when he felt it necessary to protect his people. We are not seeking to end a way of life, nor are we seeking to colonize.

Garbage. Benwa loves to be sensational. Rational, logical, reasonable? Other stories altogether...

[Benwa]

It doesn't matter if you think we are trying to end a way of life or to colonise. What matters is that THEY think that we are. Why would they think this. Is it because we have such a dominating presence over the world? Maybe its because we have over 160 military bases over the world. Maybe its because we push our american business over there. I honestly don't know. And thats disturbing. We don't even know their grievances.

I'm not necassarily pinning W for this. It goes beyond Bush and Binladen and whatever the new conflict or present boogie man is. Its a long time coming. Not everything is about your golden boy. Its a series of failures throughout a long period of time.

You know what. If you love this ideology why don't you stop posting, join up and go kill those f*ckers. Get out of your law school, step out from behind your desk and go slaughter some evil doers. If you love it so much then act on it. I'm living what I believe in, a noviolent life. Why don't you get your balls out of your moms purse and live the way you believe.

[Crimson King II]

More bogus crap. Why would they think that? Oh, I don't know...maybe they're unrational animals? Or maybe they're rational and completely wrong? You present a false choice. A peace-loving ideology of freedom does not require war. It does NOT matter that they perceive we are trying to colonize or end their way of life...because a McDonald's springs up in Turkmenistan is NO indication that there is some American army mobilizing to kill them. Frankly, I stopped giving a damn about their perception of us at 8:30 am on September 11, 2001. Because that's when I realized their perception was 1) wrong and 2) entirely opposed to mine.

The only solution is NOT to pick up from my desk and go to war. I take umbrage at this notion that someone is my "golden boy." I don't need you to patronize. But you post a bunch of neutral, equivocal, general crap under the guise that it is intellectual...it's not...it's squishy and weak. America is not equivocal to terrorists. We are not playing the same game. Stop pretending we are.

[Benwa]

So join up. Strap it on! Come on. Go kill them bastards. Thats what they deserve right. So quit being a candy ass and get out there and do it! Its OK for the farm boys to fight for it but not for you. Oh, you want to be perhaps a policy maker and shuffle papers for patriotism. You want to be the guy to decide where the soldiers go while your safe in a bunker. If I believed in it my ass would be there.

Edit: I mentioned binary thought. Ck wrote "I realized their perception was 1) wrong and 2) entirely opposed to mine. " Isn't that so amazingly binary! Them wrong, Me Right! Them die, Me prosper! I can't even begin to say how that precisely defines my point.

[WeirdBrake]

Benwa... I notice you are freely writing posts on a public message board. You're criticizing the President. You're criticizing the American government. You're expressing dissent. And I also notice that you haven't been hauled away by men with guns and then locked away/tortured/killed/beheaded. I'm sure if you were living in bin Laden's ideal Muslim theocracy, you'd enjoy the same freedom if you wanted to openly criticize Muslim fundamentalism, right?

[Benwa]

Thats a good point WB!

America isn't all bad, I don't think I ever said that. The framers of the constitution purposely planted a seed that allows dissent to happen more easily (I'm sure leaders thru our history would at time liked to change that!). And its imperitive I continue the dissent because really that is very american. All the greats in history have been the most rebelious. Just because you can voice your opinion doesn't mean you can bring change. People can protest all they wish but as long as the do things like pay taxes it doesn't really matter. Disagreeing is easy, changing it is hard. And theres certain fail safes installed to hinder progressive change. The growth of surveillance, the propagandised polarisation of the public which makes ourselves the object of most resistance, fear mongering, overbearing policing groups.

My opportunity to voice dissent is why I don't leave to another country. If change is going to happen its going to happen here. Just because I hate what americas become doesn't mean I hate america. Helping a country gain true democracy would be great, but first I think we need to make sure we have it first.

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by gluegun
Pink Hat, just ignore Crimson King's unnecessary insults. You'll quickly learn that anybody posting on the politics thread is fare game for Crimson's attacks. Prepare for words like stupid, ignorant, uneducated, misinformed, irresponsible, pathetic, self-righteous, indignant, etc.

I kind of noticed. No offense taken. I don't expect to be taken very seriously on this board because of my political views, my bluntness, and my terseness. For example, instead of asking, "Gee, Morgan, what do you think is the link between American Christians and the Patriot Act?" I get an emotional rant based on a misinterpretation of what I said. I thought my statement was clear, but apparently it wasn't.

When the question was asked about "American Christians," I wasn't blaming just the Republican zealots. I was blaming every single Christian in Congress. Including the Dems. "American Christians" is a very inclusive group that includes Democrats, you know. I might be missing something, but I don't believe that there are any non-Christians in Congress. If I'm wrong, inform me otherwise.

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by Pink Hat
I might be missing something, but I don't believe that there are any non-Christians in Congress. If I'm wrong, inform me otherwise.
Where were you in 2000??? Joe Lieberman, the Dem VP candidate, is a devout JEW--and a senator from CT.

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by pisces2473

Do you realize HOW bad the Canadian health system is? Yeah it's for everyone, but people have to wait weeks for tests like MRIs (same day treatment in the US). Yeah, things are cheaper, like drugs, but when more serious things are being withheld, then it's not any better. Don't throw out such blatant statments without knowing how bad it is up north.

:D

Ok. Let me break it down for you.

People with universal health care in Canada have to wait weeks for expensive tests like MRIs. People with insurance in the United States can do it the same day, assuming you are correct. People without insurance in the United States don't get the MRI at all. There is about 44 million people in the US without health insurance. I am one of them. I'd rather wait weeks for a test in Canada then have no test at all.

US health care is the best in the world -- if you can afford it. If you can't, then, you're worse off than if you lived in Canada. So, eat your own words: Don't throw out such blatant statements without knowing how bad it is down here.

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by pisces2473

Where were you in 2000??? Joe Lieberman, the Dem VP candidate, is a devout JEW--and a senator from CT.

I forgot about him. I stand corrected. So, I now blame everyone with a Judeo-Christian background in Congress. Does that make you happy now?

[pisces2473]

Yes, I do know how bad it is down here--I was the research assistant for a former professor who wrote a book about how fucked up the US system is. I've also taken graduate level courses in health care policy. Anyone can get an MRI or whatever in this country, with or without insurance...as long as they go to the hospital. Just going to any doctor, without insurance, and demanding one will not work. I would rather live here than in Canada, knowing that I can walk into an ER with a problem and get the treatment without bias.

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by pisces2473
Yes, I do know how bad it is down here--I was the research assistant for a former professor who wrote a book about how fucked up the US system is. I've also taken graduate level courses in health care policy. Anyone can get an MRI or whatever in this country, with or without insurance...as long as they go to the hospital. Just going to any doctor, without insurance, and demanding one will not work. I would rather live here than in Canada, knowing that I can walk into an ER with a problem and get the treatment without bias.

You appeal ad hominem. Good for you.

Well, let's suppose, hypothetically, that I go to the ER. The doctors tell me I need an MRI. Since you are so good about research, can you tell me how much one costs, and suggest a plan about how will I pay for it without insurance?

[Pink Hat]

Originally posted by WeirdBrake
The comparison between Americans who support the Patriot Act and the terrorists who want to torture and kill us all because "they both want to decrease our civil rights" is certainly infuriating, to say the least.

Well, I think I pointed out what they both have in common. I take responsibility for the misinterpretation that CKII said that they are "equally dangerous." It depends on your definition of danger. If you think life >>> civil rights, then, of course, the terrorists are more dangerous than the politicians, because the politicians do not directly kill you, the terrorists do.

I view "danger" in terms of risk. The terrorist who might possibly kill you, and most likely won't due to various distance factors and slim probabilities, is less risky -- and therefore less dangerous, in my opinion -- than the smiling politician who definitely will take away your civil rights through the democratic process in the name of "the war on terror."

I value my freedom over my life, or, in other words, I'd rather a terrorist kill me than a politician take my civil rights away. At least, in my opinion, I would rather die believing in freedom than live knowing I willingly gave my freedom up. I believe there's someone on the QLC board who has a signature quote from Malcolm X saying that you must value freedom over everything to truely value it. I agree with that sentiment completely.

Oh, yes, and I agree with both wordsmith and Benwa on everything I have read thus far.

[Benwa]

MRI. you know it is possible to detect disease without high techinology. Doctors in india do it all the time. In countries such as india, a doc (at least an ayurvedic doc) can detect illness in pulse or by examining body. Then maybe mri is used to confirm.

This ties into my argument that western medicine is way more wacked than simply who pays for the bill. Why are we training our physicians to be so technology dependent. You can detect a heart attack in a pulse. You can stop seizures with readily available ingredients

a big part of reducing medical costs is actually reducing the cost of medicine. TRain doctors to detect illness witout a big million dollar machine when their fingers can tell them what is wrong. I'm not saying ban mri, I'm just saying train docs to be more effective for cheap. (I say this among many other things)

[WeirdBrake]

P.S. W.B. You'll note that I haven't touched the Patriot Act. My only responses have related to my fear of the ramifications of religious extremism. All I'm saying is that I truly do believe that there are definite enemies of liberty within our own country.

I know that, wordsmith. I was only addressing the comparison between the Patriot Act authors and Muslim terrorists and why that comparison is out of whack.

Thats a good point WB!

Thanks, Benwa. Given your last post, I think you're more of an all-American patriot than you want to let on. ;)

[Crimson King II]

Malcolm X would not condone life over freedom, moreover, Malcolm X repudiated many of his prior quotes in his last two years of life...so consider that source.

Also, Bernie Sanders is a socialist atheist from Vermont...he's been a Congressman for years...surprise...he typically votes with the Democrats.

Stop the equivocation...all I ask. Under NO circumstances are Christians, American Christians, or members of Congress remotely equivocal to terrorists. It's important to be with our guys...not theirs.

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by Benwa
MRI. you know it is possible to detect disease without high techinology. Doctors in india do it all the time. In countries such as india, a doc (at least an ayurvedic doc) can detect illness in pulse or by examining body. Then maybe mri is used to confirm.

This ties into my argument that western medicine is way more wacked than simply who pays for the bill. Why are we training our physicians to be so technology dependent. You can detect a heart attack in a pulse. You can stop seizures with readily available ingredients

a big part of reducing medical costs is actually reducing the cost of medicine. TRain doctors to detect illness witout a big million dollar machine when their fingers can tell them what is wrong. I'm not saying ban mri, I'm just saying train docs to be more effective for cheap. (I say this among many other things)
I totally agree Benwa...I think it's great when docs use a combo of Western and Eastern medicine...

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by Pink Hat
Well, let's suppose, hypothetically, that I go to the ER. The doctors tell me I need an MRI. Since you are so good about research, can you tell me how much one costs, and suggest a plan about how will I pay for it without insurance?
They are between 2 and 4 thousand, depending on the hospital. The billing department will suggest a payment plan for you, given your income and ability to pay.

Simple as that.

[wordsmith]

But, Jen, I think this is really a valid thing. I have insurance, but it's crappy and doesn't pay for very much at all. When I had to go the emergency room last year...the hospital wouldn't set me up with a plan I could afford. Even the minimum payment allowed was too much for my small budget to handle. It went into collection, which sucked a lot. I know I'm not alone in this kind of stuff.

[pisces2473]

I know I know...I don't have any answers! I'm sorry, I wish things were different with the system. I just don't like when people think that Canada is the automatic way out. It's not better. Why don't people want to try to change things here instead of up and leaving for some place better? My last post might have sounded haughty, but I feel that when people just give up, they are cowards. It's your nation, fight for what you want.


Jessie, what are they gonna "collect" from you, when you don't have anything to begin with? It's not like you own a house, or have an expensive car...so I'd be like, "Go ahead, come after me! Can't squeeze water from a stone!"

[wordsmith]

Jessie, what are they gonna "collect" from you, when you don't have anything to begin with? It's not like you own a house, or have an expensive car...so I'd be like, "Go ahead, come after me! Can't squeeze water from a stone!"

I know, I know...that's what I always say, Jen...what are they possibly gonna take? It's not like there are debtor's prisons, anymore, like there were in Victorian times. But I worry about things like being able to get approved to buy things in the future, because of what crap like this does to my credit. I haven't always had the best of budgeting skills in the past, so it's not like this is an invalid concern. I'm totally fine with renting an apt. and driving a 10-year old car now, but at some point, I'm going to need to have purchasing power. Sigh. I can already see myself perpetuating my parents' cycle.

[pisces2473]

Originally posted by wordsmith
I know, I know...that's what I always say, Jen...what are they possibly gonna take? It's not like there are debtor's prisons, anymore, like there were in Victorian times. But I worry about things like being able to get approved to buy things in the future, because of what crap like this does to my credit. I haven't always had the best of budgeting skills in the past, so it's not like this is an invalid concern. I'm totally fine with renting an apt. and driving a 10-year old car now, but at some point, I'm going to need to have purchasing power. Sigh. I can already see myself perpetuating my parents' cycle.
I understand...I never thought of it that far down the pipe, but it makes sense now...

I know, I'm afraid I'm going to start running up debt, whereas I grew up with the rule of not buying things unless you could pay for them...but you can't live without certain things, thus you must charge them. I know I don't have it as bad as some people, but I still worry, even though my therapist told me I shouldn't be so worried about money right now. Hello, it's how I was raised!!!

[wordsmith]

If it makes you feel any better, Jen, (or at least not alone!), I will NEVER be stress-free about money issues. There's just no getting past a broke upbringing. Even if I were massively wealthy, I have a feeling I'd still stress about things.

It makes me mad, because my financial concerns don't even spring from spending unwisely. I never splurge on stupid crap I don't need, I never blow money for kicks, or to treat myself. My financial stresses come solely from things like having to pay for oral surgery out of pocket, costly car repairs, etc. It's not stuff I can just do without. A lot of people in debt put themselves there through negligent spending. It makes me frustrated that I'm so careful, and still have the woes.

[pisces2473]

I totally understand...I think my parents had it a little easier when they were my age...money was tight, but I don't think they had to CHARGE GROCERIES like I have had to some months...

*sigh*

I really shouldn't complain about my money stuff--I'm sure I could squeeze the budget tighter to contribute more to my savings... Get rid of DSL, buy a rabbit ear thing for my TV and get rid of the $13/month cable I have now...never buy anything new for myself...but part of me wants to have something nice, you know?

It's not like I spent $200/week on clothes or anything ridiculous... I am careful about my spending...but there's always shortages. I understand how someone in your situation has money problems and is very prudent and careful. Can you imagine being in your shoes and NOT CARING!? SCARY THOUGHT! :eek:

[wordsmith]

I know. I've always been one to strive to keep things simple and cost-effective. I don't have cable, I don't have internet, I don't have a cell phone, I have no payment on an $800 car that gets 50-plus miles to the gallon, I chose to live in a small, low-cost-of-living town, I charge nothing, all my clothes come from places like Target or Wal Mart, or (splurge city) Old Navy, at the most outlet stores...

I try to put as much as I can of every paycheck into savings (which some weeks means nothing, sadly), but even at that rate, something like having to have my wisdom teeth out sucks down a whole year's worth of savings at that rate in one fell swoop, and it takes me another year to recover.

I guess I just have to suck it up and admit that even living really low on the food chain, my salary is apparently insufficient to live on, or at least, insuffiecent to live on and budget with an eye toward emergency expenditures. :(

[pisces2473]

I am not putting things into savings. I am terrible. I have about a thousand dollars in savings...which is really nothing if something bad should happen...

I really should get rid of my cable--$13 x12 = $156 in a year that I could be putting into savings. The little rabbit ears aren't that much... I could call the phone company and see if they can hook me up w/ a better deal for my service and get rid of DSL...will I put that savings into my savings? Hopefully so.