Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

By the way, the Detroit News (which for some reason puts a "Census 2000" header on that page) has some nice charts that show which way the employment, poverty, and health coverage trends were going before and after the Bush administration, and identifies a few of the points the Neocons are trying to spin on this. Notice the little valley in 2000 for the poverty numbers, and the peak in 2000 for the median income. Looks like the previous administration wasn't doing great for insurance coverage for awhile (almost as bad as this one), but look at that huge drop in the uninsured numbers in 99.

The creepiest TOTPD ever:

_________________

I personally feel that any president has only a small influence on the success/failure of the economy. And it's the economy that is causing most of the problems you have mentioned about unemployment, poverty, and people without health care.

I don't want to leave you with the impression that I think Dubya has done everything right, far from it. But I think his biggest failures have been diplomatic. Bigger than Iraq, I think he has severely dropped the ball with North Korea. They will be causing us big problems soon, I believe. I also don't support the constitutional amendment against gay marriage. I am against gay marriage, but I believe that should be managed at a state level.

However, looking at Kerry's platform, there are a lot of things I disagree with there, as well. And I don't see him having a lot of success with the economy either. I know of a lot of companies that are worried that he will have a negative effect on their economy, not because of moving jobs overseas, but just because they are aerospace/military.

You can't blame things on "the economy". The economy isn't a thing. It's a circumstance. It's a set of conditions dictated by, among other things, the results of policies of this administration. If you're going to blame things on "the economy", the you have to figure out what's causing the economy to do what it's doing. And that cause is this administration. I can't see how you can look at those charts, and see the trends before this administration and see the trends after now, and say, "oh, that has nothing to do with the actions of the administration that began immediately before these trends, it's the economy". Maybe if employment and poverty were going downhill before Bush and they just continued, then maybe. But they were both improving significantly, and sustainably. You think it's just a coincidence that they started going downhill immediately upon Bush's incumbency?

_________________

How dare you insinuate that I am not a Christian because I do not support the HATRED of others!? God does not want us to hate ANYONE - criminal, homosexual, republican, democrat, black, white, man, woman, child, ANYONE!

Ok....you probably weren't trying to be mean to me, so I won't be mean to you, but I will say that I take personal offense to that comment. But - as a good Christian would do - I forgive you. (And I don't mean that sarcastically.....no hard feelings. )

_________________

yeah he will defend the us at any cost, but most importantly is the cost. 87 billion +. So instead of killing our own economy even more he kills everone elses economy too

Don't you mean 12,000 human lives (and that's just the civilians) and $130 billion? And that's just this term.

_________________

1. Actuly, some of my friends in europe have more knolloge of this election than my older brother.
2.And our moral state is bad, how?
3.*sigh* Im not a libral, im not conservative, I just don't like Bush. But I hate it when other partys say that the other doesint care about their opinion...

_________________
Spaceballs: The Sig

I would like to point out, that Osama Bin Laden was not affileated with Saddam Hussain(sp?). Lets do some role-playing here. You are the President of, lets say France, and someone with NO RELATION TO THE U.S. GOV. thats from the U.S. destroys, lets say the Arc De Triumf(I can NEVER spell this -_-;), WOULD YOU GO TO WAR WITH Saddam?

_________________
Spaceballs: The Sig

President Bush seemed to have unfinished business with Saddam from the Gulf War, as he had been causing slaughter and destruction in his home country even in the early 90's. That is most likely why Bush went to war with Iraq, to free the country from Saddam's dictatorship, either that or the fact that he and his officials did truly believe that Saddam was affiliated with Bin Laden.

I'm a Canadian too..and yes, what Gravy Train Captain said is true, many up here don't like Bush, especially since Canada has a liberal federal government which doesn't seem to like Bush too much, and therefore relay these feelings to the citizens.

_________________
"well, I'll just uh, put these pants on." ~Homestar

Or maybe it could be that the citizens don't like Bush and therefore relay these feelings to their elected representatives?

_________________

Definitely could be possible too. Either way, there are a huge number of Liberals in the country that greatly dislike Bush.

_________________
"well, I'll just uh, put these pants on." ~Homestar

*sigh* The grass is always greener...

_________________

Did I say I hate homosexuals? If I implied so, I apologize, but by saying homosexuality, according to my beliefs, is wrong, I mean homosexuality itself is wrong. Ever heard of love the sinner, hate the sin? Thats what I'm trying to portray here. If I offended you, I apologize.

Also someone mentioned gasoline prices. Do you think George Bush has any control over them? He's not saying.... hey you guys.. why don't you increase gas prices. The people of whom we perchase oil have raised the prices of petroleum to almost 50 dollars a barrel. So... quit complaining!

_________________

I hear this all the time and I think it's the one of the most asinine sentiments ever. Why hate at all? What is it about hating things that's so comforting for some people?



Does bush directly control the gas prices? No. But both the War in Iraq, which Bush started, and the Bush administration's economic policies and energy policies have a direct effect on gas prices.

_________________

Hey, I have a reason to vote for Bush:

'Cuz John McCain told me to, darnit.

Why? Is being differint wrong? Is loving someone(even if it is another man/woman) Wrong? If the bible is your answer, if I remember, it says nothing about homosexuality. Besides, if you follow the Conservitive Christian group, you would be aganst them marrying. Not being Gay. Also I would like to point out, that you can't decide whether you are Gay/Lesbian or not, it's with you when you are born.

_________________
Spaceballs: The Sig

To me, yes. I believe that homosexuality is wrong. Thats what I believe. End of that. But like I said, I don't hate people that are homosexual.



Ah, but it does, and I quote:

Genesis 19
4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
close quote

'Know' is used both in Hebrw and English in this kind of context as a euphemism in place of a sexual word.

This is the sin of which the cities Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed as it says in verse 20 of Genesis 18

20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;

This 'sin' being homosexuality.

I know this probably means nothing to those who do not believe the bible to be a holy book. This was only to provide basis for me using the bible as a means of a... well "belief system". I'm just trying to explain this to jengajam. Others of you may not believe that homosexuality is wrong, and that is your opinion. I don't want to have a big argument over that.




Well, I don't really have a factual basis for my opinion, but I just don't agree with that. The sex you are attracted to is not determined when you are born I think. I don't really have a factual basis for this though. :-/

_________________

Nope, you sure don't. But hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.

And I still don't get this whole undermining-the-First-Amendment-to-reinforce-your-personal-belief-system thing.

I believe that marginalizing people because of their sexuality is wrong and that if a just god exists he would consider such beliefs to be hateful and deserving of punishment. But you don't see me trying to pass laws limiting your freedoms because of it, do you?

_________________

[EDIT: This is in reply to Noj's post]

But as you remember in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, GOD is the one who dealt the punishment, not man!

Oh, and I think it's Leviticus which also says that menstruating women are unclean and to be avoided, and that you can be punished for wearing clothing of two different materials.

I'm not saying that the Bible should be discredited, but we need to remember that times are different now - in Biblical times, women were nothing, don't forget that. Would you say that women should not have the rights they do today, because it was that way in Biblical times? That's not a rhetorical question - please tell me your feelings!

Jesus also said, "Love thy neighbour"....that's if your neighbours are Adam and Eve OR Adam and Steve!

_________________

jeez, thanks. I really appreciate that.



My point exactly. Meaning God saw their actions as a sin. Are you telling me that I'm trying to punish people because they're gay? Well I'm not. If youre talking about making a constitutional amendment, I'm really not sure about the same sex marriage being outlawed in the constitution. I have mixed feelings about it.



I believe that is a part of the old law, the law of moses. When Jesus came he instituted his higher law. Thats why most of us christian don't sacrafice a lamb when we go to church or stay far away from bacon. Anyway... beside the point.

I also have a question. Why do homosexual couples strive so hard to gain marriage? Is there some... right you get when you are married?

_________________

Hmmm... how would a gay marriage affect you? Keep on supporting Bush!

Why do gay people strive so hard to want to get married? The same reason you or me would want to get married to the ideal woman, my friend. I want to find the lady of my dreams, get married, grow old, and die together. I want marriage to be the committment of our love, and I want the world to know it. I want the status of our love to have risen higher by a simple cermony, with wedding rings being used to signify our eternal love for one another. You may not want to get married because of that, you may want to get married because it's the "right thing to do." Well, so would many gay people.

The fact is, I want to have a marriage with the right woman, and I can't think how I'd take it if I were denied that. Now, my question is, who is Bush to deny that for anyone? Who is he indeed?

_________________
Move sig, move sig, move sig, move sig. For great justice take off every sig. Move sig, move sig, move sig. You know what you doing take off every sig.

I have an experiment for you. Find the happiest married couple you know, and ask them how they would feel if the state told them that it was illegal, on the grounds that the bride has green eyes or the groom is balding, for them to be married, that their love just isn't good enough to count. Because of circumstances beyond their control, they don't qualify. Then come back here and tell us their response.

I'm not kidding, I'd really like you to do this. It'll take all of five minutes of your time. The experiment requires that you don't mention gay marriage, and you present it as a hypothetical situation which they are in, because that''ll affect their answer. Let us know what they tell you.

Because that's exactly what a Destruction of Marriage Amendment would do. It's saying "Your love isn't good enough to be recognized by the state because you both put Mr. in front of your name", or "Your love isn't good enough to be recognized by the state because you both menstruate."

How would you feel if the state told you you didn't deserve certain rights that everybody else in the country has because of the way you were born?

_________________

The Independent is running a stunning article called "Bush by numbers: Four years of double standards". It's free of The Independent's usual editorializing and leaves it up to you to interpret the numbers however you wish. I'd quote some here, but there's just so much good stuff I could never choose. But do yourself a favor and read the whole thing. Even I never realized how awful things have gotten.

_________________

The articale states that 39 percent of the taxes cuts will go to the top 1 percent. Well duh the top 1 percent pay 33.89% of income taxes, before the tax cuts the top 1 percent paid 37.42%. The people who pay the most will get largest tax cuts. More figures: The top 5% pay 53.25% of all taxes, top 50% pay 96.03% of all taxes. Oh yeah that really seems fair the richer you are the more you pay...

That's an interesting point, Prof. No. By their very nature, tax cuts will ALWAYS favor the rich because they're the ones paying most of them to start with. That is, unless they came up with some formula so that everyone got exactly the same $ amount cut.

_________________

The only to pervent rich from paying the most is to repeal progressive income tax.

Even if the tax was a set rate, then the rich would still pay more because they have much more income. The rich paying more taxes is not necessarily a bad thing, but just realize that anytime there are any sort of tax cuts, they will ultimately benefit from them the most. There's no way around it unless you set an income cap on the tax cuts.

_________________

They will benefit the most but they will still pay the most which is unfair. The only way to tax people fairly is to have a national sales taxes. Which is what America had before 1913.

Okay, so you picked out one fact from the list, tossed in your own faulty interpretation, and ignored the rest of the article. You even ignored the rest of the numbers under the same heading, which run counter to your entire argument. That's a cute trick (Karl Rove would be proud), but there's still more than two hundred numbers that you neglected to provide a flippant response to.

Don't worry, I can wait.

_________________