|
Post by dolt on Nov 11, 2006 16:22:08 GMT -5
Historical Fact: no deficit Historical Fact: shrinking national debt
Current Fact: largest deficit ever Current Fact: China holds the notes on our increasing national debt
Truth doesn't require lenghthy explaination. It doesn't begin with 'once upon a time', nor end with 'happily ever after'.
|
|
|
Post by x on Nov 12, 2006 3:14:53 GMT -5
What was the complaint with xmission and SPEWS. I think it's abundantly obvious that SPEWS hasn't worked but what was the background of your complaint? First, it wasn't my complaint. Second, SPEWS works just fine. The basis of the problem was that Xmission had a problem with a customer. They didn't respond to it and they got listed. Ashdown went ape and started waving cartooneys and making a fool of himself. That didn't impress anyone. Once he fixed the problem the listing went away and everyone was happy. The damage to his reputation was done though.
|
|
|
Post by x on Nov 12, 2006 3:30:30 GMT -5
Historical Fact: no deficit Historical Fact: shrinking national debt Current Fact: largest deficit ever Current Fact: China holds the notes on our increasing national debt Truth doesn't require lenghthy explaination. It doesn't begin with 'once upon a time', nor end with 'happily ever after'. You're forgetting a few things in there. Clinton didn't have two wars plus all the expense of new homeland security measures to deal with. There's also the problem that where we are now in terms of security in large measure has Clinton to blame. He allowed all the nutburgers all over the world to do almost whatever they wanted. He watched while Saddam thumbed his nose at the west. But Clinton wasn't entirely unresponsive. After one bombing raid in 1998 against Saddam, he stated that he was convinced that Saddam was looking for WMD and would use them if he could. Funny, that's what the Dems are criticizing Bush for these days. Now don't get me wrong. There are plenty of things I think Bush is off his rocker about. The handling of Iraq post-invasion hasn't gone well at all and needs to be fixed. I also disagree a lot with him about most of his social policies. But I think we need to be fair.
|
|
|
Post by stitch on Nov 12, 2006 8:36:37 GMT -5
Didn't mean to offend anyone. About a month ago, Bill Clinton was interviewed either by 60 Minutes or Larry King (I forget which one). I think it was Larry King that was asking the questions. In that interview he was asked if he thought that capturing Saddam Hussein was the way to go. Clinton answered the question by saying that he and his adminstration tried several times to "take care of" Saddam, they had covert ops looking for him and could not get to him. The same with Bin Laden. Clinton did not say whether he thought the way in which things were handled this time was right or wrong. He just said what I just typed out. That info was never released to the public the way he said it in the interview, but Clinton did say that operations had taken place several times during his time in office and that he did not want to go to war unless he absolutely had to and at the time, we did not need to go to war, but we definitely needed to eliminate a threat...he chose to do so with secret ops. I agree with you Sailor that we may not be any better off having the democrats be the majority in the House and Senate; however, at this particular point in time, President Bush has completely done an about face from what he demanded a few days ago. Now, he has let go of Rumsfeld and made a complete change in his demeanor. He is now willing to work with the Dems, so he says- I don't believe that for a second, based on his MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY standance on every issue he deals with. He is clearly NOT a great listener and does what he wants to regardless of the outcome and how it affects people... His own United States...you and me, his co-workers, people across the world. The only ones not really affected by his policies are his immediate family. Only NOW does President Bush seem to want to listen to all sides of an issue. I'm not saying EVERYTHING he does is wrong. He does have good intensions in alot of things he does. It's just that more than not, his good intensions fall to the wayside because he will not budge in any way when he gets a thought in his head. He doesn't seem to think things out completely... THIS IS THE WAY YOU FIX THIS... but he doesn't seem to have a plan B ever. Political issues often times need a Plan B, Plan C, Plan D and so forth, in order to resolve a problem. Running a country is probably a little bit like fixing a computer program. When you fix an issue in a computer program, sometimes the entire problem is fixed when you do a specific action. But MOST times when you correct something in a program, something else is affected and another area of the program might not work, so you have to put in another fix. The trick is to anticipate what MIGHT go wrong.. If nothing else goes wrong, GREAT You were prepared.. President Bush often goes straight ahead and is not willing to acknowledge that other things will come up, yet alone be prepared for them and that is why the dems have won this year. The people feel we need a pair of fresh eyes that can help President Bush see what might be in his blindspot. That's all....
|
|
|
Post by dolt on Nov 12, 2006 8:37:37 GMT -5
You are right CA. Both faced an antagonistic taunting Saddam making outrageous threats and claims. One used coalition building and diplomacy, one stepped into the breach.
The intel to prevent the World Trade Tower/Pentagon disaster was available. The handling was bungled by the current administration. I will tell you what I think they are exceptionally proficient at, disbursing money to contractors.
The expense was worth getting Osama though. Oh that's right we missed. Do you remember Clinton's Balkans intervention? There were dire warnings about large US causality rates, the insult and danger of having US troops not under US command. Why isn't the same being shouted by the same people over the current Afghanistan command structure?
Population Stats
U.S.: 300,190,425 World: 6,556,460,971
Work smarter not harder.
|
|
|
Post by x on Nov 13, 2006 21:00:31 GMT -5
I don't see Afghanistan as being a big problem right now. Iraq is.
|
|
|
Post by dolt on Nov 13, 2006 22:58:43 GMT -5
It is nice to arrive at common ground. I don't see the command structure to be a problem there nor, was it in Bosnia. Certainly agree that Iraq is a big problem.
|
|
|
Post by x on Nov 14, 2006 0:18:14 GMT -5
It is nice to arrive at common ground. I don't see the command structure to be a problem there nor, was it in Bosnia. Certainly agree that Iraq is a big problem. Oh I agree. I think there are two issues with regard to Iraq that are almost always lumped together. One is whether going in was the right thing to do. Two is whether the execution of the occupation after the invasion has been done well. I admit it took me a long time to realize the difference.
|
|
|
Post by stitch on Nov 15, 2006 22:37:48 GMT -5
I just think the soldiers are to be commended for the strength and ideals they have. They have to fight and try to maintain order and build a balance in the region now.
Even though the war effort has become not so popular, the soldiers are still #1 in all our minds as are those Iraqi people, who are not part of the destruction, but trying to survive it as well.
How did you guys feel about the new voting machines? Any thoughts? I didn't mind them, but hope they are accurate and bug/hacker free.
|
|
|
Post by x on Nov 16, 2006 2:43:04 GMT -5
My biggest problem with the voting machine was that the intuitive place to put the access card was front right. After looking around for about 5 seconds and finding where it was supposed to go, it was a breeze.
I do think that having a paper record for the voter as well as for the election commission would be a good idea. An even better idea would be to allow online voting. Some jurisdictions around the country have had that for years. If nothing else it would probably increase voter turnout.
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Nov 16, 2006 14:36:43 GMT -5
I may have my source wrong (usually do) but I believe it was Winston Churchill that said... "If you're 20 and not a liberal you don't have a heart. And if you're 40 and not a conservative you don't have a brain"
I just love that quote regarless of the source because it shows how politics fade in the light of the aging process. Call it cynical, or pragmatic, or dementia, I notice that generally people become more conservative as they grow older. Will be interested in your comments in about 30 years.
|
|
|
Post by dolt on Nov 16, 2006 16:48:47 GMT -5
Where does populist score on that scale Sailor? And I have a feeling the terms were perceived differently when the quote was delivered. Surely none can claim fiscal conservatism in this day and age.
|
|
|
Post by stitch on Dec 2, 2006 22:30:51 GMT -5
I just love that quote regarless of the source because it shows how politics fade in the light of the aging process. Call it cynical, or pragmatic, or dementia, I notice that generally people become more conservative as they grow older. Will be interested in your comments in about 30 years. You are great Sailor.. I totally agree with you. Although, I think MTV should be congratulated on their efforts in getting the 20 year olds interested in political issues. MTV started by bringing in the candidates and after Bill Clinton won, he was on MTV doing roundtable discussions with viewers and college students at the MTV studios more than once a year. They discussed current issues with him and asked questions on strategy and had opportunity to give Mr. C their own opinion etc. Because of that effort, that generation is much more in tune than they used to be and many want their voices heard. As for P Diddy's Vote or Die campaign last year... Apparently...The man didn't VOTE! Neither did Paris Hilton or most of the celebs that were pitching that slogan. I think that may have actually hurt the cause! That info should have never been made public.
|
|
|
Post by UTRadioGuide.com on Dec 3, 2006 2:10:46 GMT -5
Where does populist score on that scale Sailor? And I have a feeling the terms were perceived differently when the quote was delivered. Surely none can claim fiscal conservatism in this day and age. Geez... so if I'm in my 20's now and conservative than what does that mean when I'm 40? ;D
|
|