tzor wrote:Just for the record we didn't really elect Bush twice.
The first time we refused to elect Gore.
The second time we elected Bush only because the people who wanted Gore were still sore and we wanted to annoy them.
Heh. That's an interesting way of putting it...
I know it is an interesting way of putting it. As I go and look back on the year 2000 I am still amazed how much I changed in the short months between spring and fall. I was mad as hell for Bush’s attempt to “win” the New York primary by in effect invalidating all the opposition. I was real mad as hell that the my favorite candidate for president couldn’t get elected in the party because he was both African American and Roman Catholic and thus he was opposed in the southern states. I did not like Bush, not in the least.
I hated Gore more. I hated his elitist attitude, that he knew what was good for us and whether we wanted it or not he would force us to his superior will and master plan.
There was also the problem that Gore was a pre-born baby killing advocate in the great american self genocide of our own nation.
That was the reason why in 2000 I voted for Bush. Not that it mattered, I live in NY.
Now 2008 is another matter; currently the solid democratic state can give neither Hillary nor Barack a majority in polls over McCain so as some people suggest we have become a “purple” state, no longer solidly blue as we once were.
b.k. barunt wrote:The American people are way past even understanding what GFY means. Remember - this is the nation of fucktards who elected Bush - twice!
Just for the record we didn't really elect Bush twice.
The first time we refused to elect Gore.
The second time we elected Bush only because the people who wanted Gore were still sore and we wanted to annoy them.
Heh. That's an interesting way of putting it...
If it isn't too personal, how do you vote Neot-dog?
SHES BEEN IN THE SENATE 4 HOW MANY YEARS AND SHES DONE SHIT EXCEPT to vote for the war
hussein had no connection to9/11 and had no wmds so why the hell go to iraq and not after osma? Ill tell u why its because osma could float to a country that we had no reason to invade so we couldnt capture him. But after something as tragic as 9/11 the public wanted blood(including me) and with the government holding out on info they told us Sadam had a connection to 9/11 so bush says if the public wants blood give it to them. but when we get there its oops they werent responsible for 9/11 and they had NO wmds
got tonkaed wrote:Honestly i dont think nappy has a race issue here. Obama has been regarded under some analysis as the most liberal minded senator, and some of his policy makes nappy absolutly sick. I think a quick search would reveal that he believes obama would absolute ruin the US and perhaps by extension the world, if he enacted his ecnomic policy. Having said all that, i think his beef is simply one that is oriented on views, in which case mr. napoleon is of the mind that most liberal thinkers (in the political sense, though i realize i just spoke about economic policy) are pretty stupid.
It would have been a lot more fun the other way around... but I guess we don't want to go around getting unnecessary forum bans...
Hillary Clinton isn't a sub-moron, even if she's corrupt. Obama and his "da change for deh Amewica" (is that too far? let's find out...) on the oher hand, is simple cretinery. Raising taxes by $800.000.000.000 (that's a big number, dumboy tom) without even starting to talk about his disratrous inflationnary policies, bilateral trade protectionnism, and aspirations to being a social-engineer, is the last thing you want in a recession. We're talking the biggest expansion of Federal Power since the starry-eyed Mr. Fixits of the New Deal.
By the way, Neoteny, as a Southerner, what are your views on the New Deal? I'm trying to research how Roosevelt (if at all) depleted the Solid South, or whether it was only when Trumann et al. started allowing integration that all you nasty wacist evil abusive wepublican leik wednecks started voting for the GOP.
Dude. It's unquestionably the latter that caused Southerners to go Republican.
Napoleon Ier wrote:If it isn't too personal, how do you vote Neot-dog?
How have I voted, or what do I vote on? I tend to vote liberally (America-wise, of course). My points of interest usually focus on education and social policies. Education in particular is important enough to me that I actually inquire a bit into foreign schooling systems (hence my worry about the French university system a few months back). Nothing bothers me more than hearing of the newest Republican stunt on a school board...
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Neoteny wrote:
got tonkaed wrote:Honestly i dont think nappy has a race issue here. Obama has been regarded under some analysis as the most liberal minded senator, and some of his policy makes nappy absolutly sick. I think a quick search would reveal that he believes obama would absolute ruin the US and perhaps by extension the world, if he enacted his ecnomic policy. Having said all that, i think his beef is simply one that is oriented on views, in which case mr. napoleon is of the mind that most liberal thinkers (in the political sense, though i realize i just spoke about economic policy) are pretty stupid.
It would have been a lot more fun the other way around... but I guess we don't want to go around getting unnecessary forum bans...
Hillary Clinton isn't a sub-moron, even if she's corrupt. Obama and his "da change for deh Amewica" (is that too far? let's find out...) on the oher hand, is simple cretinery. Raising taxes by $800.000.000.000 (that's a big number, dumboy tom) without even starting to talk about his disratrous inflationnary policies, bilateral trade protectionnism, and aspirations to being a social-engineer, is the last thing you want in a recession. We're talking the biggest expansion of Federal Power since the starry-eyed Mr. Fixits of the New Deal.
By the way, Neoteny, as a Southerner, what are your views on the New Deal? I'm trying to research how Roosevelt (if at all) depleted the Solid South, or whether it was only when Trumann et al. started allowing integration that all you nasty wacist evil abusive wepublican leik wednecks started voting for the GOP.
I think I may have mentioned in the past that my mind is not tuned toward economic understanding on the state level. I feel rather incapable of voting on economics, and rather rely on other people to follow that. So I can't tell you my, or even other southerners (because I refuse, generally, to talk about economics in a political discussion) opinions on the subject. Sorry to disappoint.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
You wanted a response? Oh silly me I must be in the wrong room.
Anyway, we invaded Iraq because Saddam tried to assassinate Bush Sr. because he took away his little plaything called Quait but never bothered to personally visit him and slap him in the face. This annoyed GW who was trying to get an excuse to attack him long before 9/11. (There is evidence he was planning this from day one of his presidency, perhaps even eariler?) It didn't help anything that Saddam was desperately hiding something (the fact that his nation was impotent and could have been invaded by three kids and a mule from Iran at any moment) so it was easy to stack a case that he was up to vile nastiness.
This diverted attention from Afganistan which people probably thought was a good thing. That place was probably a quagmire anyway, after all look at what happened to the Soviet Union when they went there long term.
Yea the truth does kind of suck. Not as bad as knowing that the explosion on the Maine (the cause of the Spanish American war) was actually an accident in the boiler room but still depressing in its own way.
Neoteny wrote: How have I voted, or what do I vote on? I tend to vote liberally (America-wise, of course). My points of interest usually focus on education and social policies. Education in particular is important enough to me that I actually inquire a bit into foreign schooling systems (hence my worry about the French university system a few months back). Nothing bothers me more than hearing of the newest Republican stunt on a school board...
The thing with French universities is that the State doesn't really allow much room for them to breathe, they're dominated by Marxist syndicates (that is no conspiracy-joke, the potential basically still exists for a Mai '68 bis, as we saw in 2006 when Villepin had to back down on the CPE), and they're generally poor in quality. Still, in terms of science, the Bac S (Scientifique) is still the most respected.
As for the New Deal, ah well. No-one really knows anything about it. I've seen our equivalent of a literary companion guide (to give you another example of sheer goonery at the examining board level) for "To Kill a Mockingbird" rant about the brilliant effects of "Teddy" Roosevelt's New Deal (cheeeeeeeers AQA). Gives you an idea of what i'm facing...Maybe b.k barunt can help me out though?
Last edited by Napoleon Ier on Mon Apr 28, 2008 1:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Neoteny wrote: How have I voted, or what do I vote on? I tend to vote liberally (America-wise, of course). My points of interest usually focus on education and social policies. Education in particular is important enough to me that I actually inquire a bit into foreign schooling systems (hence my worry about the French university system a few months back). Nothing bothers me more than hearing of the newest Republican stunt on a school board...
The thing with French universities is that the State doesn't really allow much room for them to breathe, they're dominated by Marxist syndicates (that is no conspiracy-joke, the potential basically still exists for a Mai '68 bis, as we saw in 2006 when Villepin had to back down on the CPE), and they're generally poor in quality. Still, in terms of science, the Bac S (Scientifique) is still the most respected.
I had heard that the socialistic aspects of the system were playing hell with the collaboration of the more prominent minds of French academia. If that's the case, it is rather unfortunate.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Neoteny wrote: How have I voted, or what do I vote on? I tend to vote liberally (America-wise, of course). My points of interest usually focus on education and social policies. Education in particular is important enough to me that I actually inquire a bit into foreign schooling systems (hence my worry about the French university system a few months back). Nothing bothers me more than hearing of the newest Republican stunt on a school board...
The thing with French universities is that the State doesn't really allow much room for them to breathe, they're dominated by Marxist syndicates (that is no conspiracy-joke, the potential basically still exists for a Mai '68 bis, as we saw in 2006 when Villepin had to back down on the CPE), and they're generally poor in quality. Still, in terms of science, the Bac S (Scientifique) is still the most respected.
I had heard that the socialistic aspects of the system were playing hell with the collaboration of the more prominent minds of French academia. If that's the case, it is rather unfortunate.
Well, as you know, my judgement on the matter may be slightly clouded...
It happens. All I know is that I don't see many French names in my genetics papers, which is disappointing considering the rather notable history of French science. Not to bring you down or anything...
For humor's sake, a google search of "french science" brings up the first hit of "french science fiction." The first hit for "american science" is a supply company.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
I'm a Romanian, so I do not know much about US' problems, but I do know that neither candidate is good for the position. From what I've heard, the US are a christian nation. With a muslim(yeay for Obama) or a dumb woman(Hillary is NOT smart) as a president I cannot see how that will still be in effect(being a christian nation). I do not know much about McCain.
