|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 2, 2005 2:24:03 GMT -8
BTW Clinton had the economy in good shape. Best in years. His sex scandal didn't make him a bad president. He was a pretty good one. Thanks to the dot com boom and nothing to do with Clinton. Of course the Dot Coms all failed and crashed towards the end of his term which started a decline in the economy. 9/11 didn't help either. Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by argetha on Jan 2, 2005 2:32:45 GMT -8
Well, At least this forum has people from both sides. We could use more republicans -_- If you've read the previous posts, all you see are Democrats..
|
|
|
Post by trashbag on Jan 2, 2005 16:58:29 GMT -8
hmm
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 2, 2005 18:42:52 GMT -8
We could debate all day about the reasons for going into Iraq. I think the point is, that no one disagrees that Iraq was in violation of the cease fire (UN Resolution, 1440) and based on that, we had a right to do waht we did. I think some people just think the reasons were different and again, we could debate that all day. BTW, i'm a registered (I) , but all the distorted facts are making me jump in and set the record straight. I tend to defend anyone when I see people attacking them with false information and that is what has happened here. Some of you post opinions which are fine, but they are only opinions. Other's post false information.
Bottom line, is that we had a legal right to go in, and I am glad for the Iraqi children who get to go to school, and the women who are no longer being treated so horrible, raped and murdered, and for the fact that these people have power in places they never did before, clean water and sewer. Are there problems? Of course, nothing is perfect because we don't live in a perfect world. It sucks that anyone has died in this war and I wish it was over a long time ago. But if I was in a Country where your were shot in the head for saying something bad about the leader, or raped just because or told you couldn't go to school, then I would be thankfull for those that were making my life better. What a horrible situation it was before and all of those poor people, including children that he used Chemical Weapons on and murdered by the thousands. I saw the video of the mass dead bodies (woman, children) that were piled into the back of trucks. I'm glad that's all over and i'm glad a dangerous man no longer has control of a Country with alot of money and the ability to make WMD's and the support for terrorism. If people want to think it's for the oil, it doesn't change any of the above.
Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by nsanesocrates on Jan 3, 2005 0:29:27 GMT -8
Just curious if the people that want Bush dead believe in Freedom or Communism? Because it sounds like you are a Communist and I wonder why you don't move to a Communist Country? Or maybe you would like to? Since we live in a democracy, and the Majority voted for a candidate, to say you want your party to kill the opposition and take over sounds a lot like communism to me. Clinton was a horrible president, but since he was voted in by the people (not majority though) I didn't want him dead or removed by force because I believe in freedom and the right of the people to decide who they want in office. I guess I fear what our future holds if people really believe that after a vote by the people, the winner should be killed. Or maybe I should take into consideration the age of those saying it, and realize that's why they are too young to vote? Either way, if you believe in freedom, then you will support whatever President the people decide to vote into office. If there is a reason to impeach them (like Clinton), then there is a process to follow. Remember guys, when you get older, you may find yourself working for people now and then that you don't like, have different opinions than you, etc. and if you want a rewarding career, you must learn to get along with that person. I see so many young people trying to go against the system or against their boss if they don't like them and guess what? You will lose everytime. Sometimes you get lucky and get a cool boss, other times it's some A-Hole that you hate (I have had both). I guess the moral of the story is- Hate bush, point out his mistakes, cry over the election. But at the end of the day, understand that you are in the minority and if you believe in democracy, support what the majority decided. Okay kids, go back outside and play! ;D ;D Chalupa ;D ;D BTW, I love a good debate! But things like "I hate bush" or "Bush should die" makes it too easy for me to kick your *ss. Can someone give me a challenge with some facts? do i actually have to list the obvious facts about how bad bush's presidency is? no im not a communist, nor do i believe democracy is the best choice.. i think it might be a good idea for now, but its not the best we can come up with.
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 3, 2005 8:51:32 GMT -8
Hey Insane- Just for fun, make the list!!!! Chalupa I just want to check your facts!! muahahaha
|
|
|
Post by nsanesocrates on Jan 8, 2005 15:25:23 GMT -8
there arent any facts except the obvious. Employment rate has gone down dramatically, and he is still sending our jobs overseas for more money. Drug Control Office Faulted For Issuing Fake News Tapes By Ceci Connolly Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, January 7, 2005; Page A17 Shortly before last year's Super Bowl, local news stations across the country aired a story by Mike Morris describing plans for a new White House ad campaign on the dangers of drug abuse. What viewers did not know was that Morris is not a journalist and his "report" was produced by the government, actions that constituted illegal "covert propaganda," according to an investigation by the Government Accountability Office. In the second ruling of its kind, the investigative arm of Congress this week scolded the Bush administration for distributing phony prepackaged news reports that include a "suggested live intro" for anchors to read, interviews with Washington officials and a closing that mimics a typical broadcast news sign off Although television stations knew the materials were produced by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, there was nothing in the two-minute, prepackaged reports that would indicate to viewers that they came from the government or that Morris, a former journalist, was working under contract for the government. "You think you are getting a news story, but what you are getting is a paid announcement," said Susan A. Poling, managing associate general counsel at the GAO. "What is objectionable about these is the fact the viewer has no idea their tax dollars are being used to write and produce this video segment." In May, the GAO concluded that the Department of Health and Human Services violated two federal laws with similar fake news reports touting the administration's new Medicare drug benefit. When that opinion was released, officials at the drug control office decided to stop the practice, spokesman Thomas A. Riley said. "Our lawyers disagree with the GAO interpretation," he said. Nevertheless, if the video releases were going to be "controversial or create an appearance of a problem," the agency decided it was not worth pursuing, he said. The prepackaged news pieces represent a fraction of the anti-drug messages distributed by the office, Riley said. Production and distribution of the video news releases cost about $155,000. Riley said broadcast stations were fully aware they were receiving materials akin to printed news releases that producers could "slice and dice it however they want." In one video, titled "Urging Parents to Get the Facts Straight on Teen Marijuana Use," news stations were provided a script for the news anchor. It reads: "Despite the fact that marijuana is the most widely used illicit drug among today's youth, many parents admit they're still not taking the drug seriously. Now, the nation's experts in health, education and safety have joined the Drug Czar to speak directly to parents about the very real risks of teen marijuana use. Mike Morris has more." After interview snippets with John Walters, who heads the drug control policy office, and other experts, the story closes with the voiceover: "This is Mike Morris reporting." In another, the announcer appears to be "reporting" on a news conference by drug control officials, when "in reality, they are just paid to say a script," Poling said. "In essence, they're actors." The drug control agency distributed at least seven prepackaged news reports to 770 TV stations. At least 300 news shows used some portion of the materials, though it was impossible to determine how many aired the full prepackaged story or just portions such as "sound bites," Riley said. If the videos had been identified as coming from the federal agency, that would have been legal, Poling said. But the television package looks like authentic independent journalism. "The critical element of covert propaganda is the concealment of the agency's role in sponsoring the materials," GAO wrote to Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), who requested the Jan. 4 report. "It is illegal to use taxpayer dollars to influence public opinion surreptitiously," Waxman said yesterday. "Unfortunately, this is the second time in less than a year that GAO has caught the Bush administration violating a fundamental principle of open government." Source: washingtonpost.com
|
|
|
Post by nsanesocrates on Jan 8, 2005 15:30:29 GMT -8
OHHHH!!!! But theres more!!! Seems we arent to far away from everyones DNA on file!!!! Remember Fahrenheit 451 anyone? Single Government ID Moves Closer to Reality High-Tech Cards Are Designed to Bolster Security By Christopher Lee Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, December 30, 2004; Page A25 Federal officials are developing government-wide identification card standards for federal employees and contractors to prevent terrorists, criminals and other unauthorized people from getting into government buildings and computer systems. The effort, known as the Personal Identity Verification Project, stems from a homeland security-related presidential directive and is being managed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a Commerce Department agency with offices in Gaithersburg. In his Aug. 27 directive, President Bush said that "wide variations in the quality and security of forms of identification used to gain access to secure federal and other facilities where there is potential for terrorist attacks need to be eliminated." Bush called for the development of "secure and reliable forms of identification" for federal workers and contract employees. To that end, federal officials want to replace the existing piecemeal system of agency-level ID cards with <a style='text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="smart%20cards" onmouseover="window.status='smart cards'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">smart cards</a> that are hard to counterfeit, resistant to tampering and difficult to use by anyone other than the rightful card owner if lost or stolen. The new generation of ID cards must be able to digitally store biometric data such as facial photographs and fingerprint images, bear contact and contactless interfaces, and allow the encryption of data that can be used to electronically verify the user's identity, according to NIST draft standards. Such cards will be required for all federal employees, including members of the military, as well as for employees of private organizations and state and local governments who regularly require access to federally controlled facilities and computer systems. That is a universe of more than 2 million people, said W. Curt Barker, the project manager at NIST. Barker said the new standards will include tougher background check requirements before many recipients can get their agency ID card. Access to particularly sensitive offices or systems still will require higher clearance, he said. "There's wide variations in the quality and security of the forms of identification that people use to get access to federal facilities," he said. ". . . To be completely foolproof will be extraordinarily difficult, but we can raise the risk for the terrorist or other person who wants to fraudulently enter a facility and make it a little bit more difficult for them to get in." The common standard also will enable many employees who shuttle between departments to enter different buildings with one card. NIST, which has spent about $1 million on the project so far, expects to complete the new standards by late February. Employees could start using the new cards as early as fall 2005, Barker said. Several departments, notably defense, transportation and interior, began developing more secure, high-tech ID cards long before Bush issued the directive, he said. The trend ultimately could affect private sector workers, as well. Experts say the federal government's adoption of tighter ID card standards could spur more private businesses to follow suit. Some federal employees have concerns about the new cards. Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents more than 150,000 federal workers in 30 agencies, said the proposed standard would permit agencies to print employees' pay grade and rank on the new cards, which many workers would consider an invasion of privacy. "For example, an agency might seize upon this technology as a means to track employees as they move throughout a building," Kelley said in written comments to NIST last week. "That is troubling, standing alone. It would be particularly objectionable if the agency tried to track visits to particular sites such as the union office, Employee Assistance Program offices and the inspector general's office." NIST has gathered comments on the draft standard from more than 500 entities and individuals but has not made them public. On Jan. 19, the agency will hold a public meeting at the Potomac Center Plaza in downtown Washington to discuss policy, privacy and security concerns associated with the development of the new ID card standard. Anyone who wants to attend must preregister by Jan. 11 by e-mailing Sara Caswell, a NIST official, at sara@nist.gov, according to a notice in yesterday's Federal Register. Questions regarding registration can be directed to Caswell at (301) 975-4634 Source: washingtonpost.comThese are 2 facts. I have a few hundred more if you want them. Then again, these could be controlled news reports from the government too. therefore, that would prove my point even farther about his propaganda/secret money laundering schemes. This is nothing new, im surprised why your so shocked chalupa, this has been happening even before nixon. Oya, and dont forget the Employment Rate!! and the largest deficit in years!!!
|
|
|
Post by nsanesocrates on Jan 8, 2005 16:01:37 GMT -8
i have to post these in different posts due to the allowed character limit. this is old news, but still pertains chalupas post: New Education Bill Offers False Hope by David Salisbury David Salisbury is director of the Cato Institute's Center for Educational Freedom. Congress is expert at selling snake oil and the "No Child Left Behind Act" is a prime example. In spite of its pretentious name, the bill will do little to help children who are falling behind because they are trapped in failing public schools. Mostly, the bill allows the federal government to further usurp the authority of local communities to run their own schools. The bill includes federal mandates for state testing of students in reading and math in the third through eighth grade and gives extra money to schools with low scores. And, of course, the bill allocates $26.5 billion in federal funds for 2002 -- $8 billion more than last year's appropriation. The bill does contain a limited provision that would allow children to leave schools that don't improve after three years, but they can only transfer to another public school. In most cases, those schools are already overcrowded and so won't accept the additional students. For the past 50 years or more, we have observed a steady trend toward a situation where the federal government makes all the big decisions about education. Giving the federal government an even larger role, through federally mandated tests and increased funding, hardly seems promising. Twenty years ago we had some hope of seeing a decrease in federal involvement in education. At that time, Ronald Reagan came into office with an agenda to abolish the newly created federal Department of Education, which he dubbed "President Carter's new bureaucratic boondoggle." The Republican Party platform also favored dumping the new federal bureau. Republicans even sponsored some legislation to do that. Today things are different. Even though George Bush said during his campaign that he didn't want to be the superintendent of America's schools, the bill he signed Jan. 8 increases the role that the federal government plays in education and the amount of money that it spends on it. There is really no difference any more between what the Democrats and Republicans believe about what the federal role should be in education. The only thing they disagree on is how much money it should spend. Apparently, what is most important to congressional Republicans is to not be seen as "anti-education." In their view, that means spending lots of taxpayer funds on local schools. There are only a few members of Congress who believe that education is something that should be left in the hands of parents, or at least local and state leaders, rather than to the federal government. It has been that handful of people who have supported ideas such as vouchers and tuition tax credits, which would put money back into the hands of parents rather than bureaucrats. But there may still be hope for the future. Early versions of the bill included some promising aspects such as allowing students in failing public schools to attend a private school if they chose to. Although these were taken out of the final version of the bill, at least Bush put the idea of choice on the table. Even though the original proposal was limited in scope, it was more or less in the right direction and started the debate moving at the federal level. We should only hope that the ball is picked up again by the Bush administration and that a future Congress can carry it farther down the court. In the meantime, states are pushing ahead to implement parental choice on their own. We could have parental choice in every state within five years if the parents, activists and local elected officials are willing to work for it. Last year alone, at least 20 states proposed implementing school choice either through vouchers or tuition tax credits and today we have 10 states that have passed school choice measures. Those measures, enacted at the local rather than the federal level, may be our best hope for a brighter future where indeed no child may be left behind.[/i] Source: www.cato.orgThe federal government should stop sticking their noses in other peoples business. This is why we have so many problems in todays society. The government doesnt care why things are happening, they just care that its happening.
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 11, 2005 2:50:52 GMT -8
there arent any facts except the obvious. Employment rate has gone down dramatically, and he is still sending our jobs overseas for more money. Uh, it didn't matter who was in office, the economy was already in a decline when Bush took office and 9/11 was the nail in the coffin. 238,000 of those manufacturing jobs were lost in Clinton's last six month alone, showing that the decline was well-established even before Bush had spent a day in office. As of June the economy had regained nearly 1.5 million jobs since the worst point in the job slump in August 2003. Even manufacturing jobs are growing: 91,000 have been added since January. If anything, Bush has proven to be an excellent president when it comes to job growth. The fact that he was able to turn around a decline that he had nothing to do with is very impressive! And whats wrong with the White House wanting to put out information on the dangers of Drug Abuse? I also fail to see the problem with these high tech identification cards that will help the fight against terror?? Oh, you mean the same bill that Kerry also voted for? So who would you have picked as President then? They both voted for it. Hmmm, at least Bush did something- What other President has done better, and what did he do? It's easy to attack someone just cause you don't like them, but since the facts here don't add up, it looks to me like "You just don't like President Bush". He could be the best President we have ever had and you would still not like him. Americans voted overwhelmingly to re-elect Bush for a reason. Bush was the better choice. Kerry flip flopped so often, who could know what he might have done? At least there are "Facts" to support that statement. Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 11, 2005 3:04:42 GMT -8
Heck, if you can triple post to make no point, then I will double post to make a point! To prove my point on Kerry: Flip Flop #1: Flip Flop #2 Flip Flop #3 Flip Flop #4 Flip Flop #5 Flip Flop #6 Flip Flop #7 Flip Flop #8 Flip Flop #9 Flip Flop #10 I'm not out of Flip Flops, but out of space! ahaha- After reading this, someone please embarrass themself and say that Kerry would have made a better President. And then explain each of these Flip Flops. I bet it get's real quiet, or someone posts and ignores these issues!!!! Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by trashbag on Jan 11, 2005 3:13:53 GMT -8
hmm
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 11, 2005 17:05:14 GMT -8
lol- I just noticed that you started this Trash, and then slid out when it got hot! I actually was excited because I saw you had posted and I thought you jumped in to the debate. All well.......
Chalupa
|
|
|
Post by rabidgecko on Jan 11, 2005 17:52:30 GMT -8
Im not wanting to make you rabid, Chalupa, and bite me, but I'd like to point one thing out. Does the fact that such a large majority of the world is opposed to George Bush register anything in the minds of the Americans? Also, I'm not saying this in offense of anyone who voted for George Bush, but my mom recently showed me a printout of a website article about the Average IQ of voters in the USA. In this article, the website showed us that the average IQ of the people who voted for George Bush is lower than the average IQ of the people who voted for Kerry. However, I'm not saying that this shows the truth since many IQ tests can be flawed or inconclusive to the real intelligence of people. But that is a tad startling, that the states which leaned in favour of Bush had a lower average IQ.
Anyway, I'm not trying to get into the middle of a debate which i'm gonna participate in, I'm just sharing a couple of things that I have seen up here in Canada. I am not saying that Kerry would have been a better president either, so don't get all huffy you Bush fans.
p.s. I think Bush IS stupid however, for creating a missle defense program that hasn't even worked except on a rigged test where the dud missile had a GPS locator which helped the missle defense system actually hit. AND Bush is dragging Canada into this whole pot of shit too.
|
|
|
Post by Chalupa! on Jan 11, 2005 18:37:10 GMT -8
Im not wanting to make you rabid, Chalupa, and bite me, but I'd like to point one thing out. Does the fact that such a large majority of the world is opposed to George Bush register anything in the minds of the Americans? Not at all Rabid. If we cared, we would open the vote up to the rest of the world. Fact is, there is no Country like ours, and there is a reason for it. I won't get into it too deep, but check out the number of people flooding into the us trying to become citizens. Reason? They want what we have. There is a reason we have it. Enough said. Also, I'm not saying this in offense of anyone who voted for George Bush, but my mom recently showed me a printout of a website article about the Average IQ of voters in the USA. In this article, the website showed us that the average IQ of the people who voted for George Bush is lower than the average IQ of the people who voted for Kerry. However, I'm not saying that this shows the truth since many IQ tests can be flawed or inconclusive to the real intelligence of people. But that is a tad startling, that the states which leaned in favour of Bush had a lower average IQ. Don't worry Rabid- I respect everyones opinion. Although I hate to be the one to break this to you, but you, and your mom fell for a big hoax. In fact, I laughed for the first few minutes at your post before I got myself together. There is obviously no IQ stats by state. In fact, I am always amazed at people that claim Bush is stupid. I remember even hearing the biggest liberals admit that Bush was very intelligent. He is not a very good public speaker, but here is a link that compares the best known data which includes military entrance tests that show Bush has a higher IQ than Gore and Kerry: www.vdare.com/sailer/kerry_iq_lower.htmhere is a quick quote from the page if you don't wish to read it all: You actually make a very good point that I would like to emphasize here. And i'm not trying to put anyone down but I think it's important to bring this to your attention! I have always noticed that people whom are Liberal, believe everything they hear, read, or think up, as long as it fits their agenda. Liberals are also known to lie, cheat, falsify, etc. anything they have to do. Take for instance the infamous CBS document scandal where false documents were placed on 60 minutes in order to make Bush look bad and help Kerry in the election. That's why I pointed out earlier the Liberals that talk about wanting Bush dead (never heard that about Clinton from conservatives). I seriously see a close realtionship with the Democratic party and communism more and more. The facts are there to support this including the false claim after Bush beat Gore that black voters were stopped from voting in Florida and if they had voted, Gore would have won. This was false! I saw a reporter on Fox News ask for ONE!! I repeat ONE!! single name of any person that didn't get to vote. Guess what? None produced. I do start to get a little sick of the fraud put out by Liberals every day - and I don't blame the rest of you that fall for this stuff, but i'm hoping after looking at the facts you are all smart enough to see the light! So basically Rabid, you and your Mom fell victim to a bad prank, hoax, fraud or whatever you want to call it, by the liberal (communist) party. Chalupa BTW, Bush attended Yale, and Harvard Business School- Yes, he only had a C average at Yale, but Kerry wouldn't even make his grades public. Besides, since when can you call someone "stupid" when they graduated from Yale and Harvard? I really hate to be mean, but doesn't that really make you stupid? In fact, how many of you "Bush IQ Experts" knew this? Sorry, but you Bush haters have all been officially "Spanked" by Chalupa
|
|