Democrats Move to Secure Loss in 2004 Presidental Elections

[Lexington_Steele]

Originally posted by Unregistered
Vote for Liberman. The man that knew so little about the music he wanted to ban he thought Marylin Manson was a chick.

And we know how wonderful Republicans are for funding the arts. [/sarcasm]

[Lexington_Steele]

NOTE TO HAMMA!!!!!

Remeber you can avoid a good portion of this by merely asking my questions to the developers.

[MrVicchio]

Morass this thread is in, lets break it down SHALL we:

1. Bush and Enron.... Please people, do some HW and research this not quote Terry McAlluiff (Sp, I know BAH on that). Bush YES, did have dealings with Enron.. BUT all the ENRON crap was going on I.E. the accounting morass BEFORE HE WAS PRESIDENT. And when Enron came asking Bush to help them, he told em to F-OFF. Now, please tell me how Bush is at fault for that..

2. Bush and Cheneys "Shady" business practices.. hmm again, know the subject further then the DNC please. Bush and Cheney BOth have multiple times been looked at by the Feds, and both times what they did was legal... what more do you want? Condemn a business man for using a legal loophole that allows him to do something legally as a criminal? WTF?

3. Osama, the taliban and Reagan. C'mon good lord, this is another crap line. The USA provided lagistical support to the rebels but NEVER EVER did Americans actually go into Afganistan, they stayed in Pakistan and gave missles and bought stuff off the Freedom Fighters in their war on the Soviets, much the same way the USSR backed the N.Vietnamese in that war.. its called how the world works. Do yourself a favor, drop that line too, makes you look uneducated.

From Lex-

don't see how it would be supprising. In a campaign, bush will be attacked with things like an economic decline, move from a budget surpluss to a budget deficit, lack of campaign finance reform, enron and bush's own similar practices with his own company.

The Economy was DECLINING BEFORE BUSH ENTERED OFFICE. No reasonable individual with a clue about the issues is going to say the decline is his fault, again, facts count, and the fact is it went into decline under CLINTON.

Lack of campaign finance reform.. hello what country do you line and what news do you get there.. Bush signed McCain-Fiengold into law.... .... .... ....

Comparisons will be made as to where America was before Bush and after and I don't think it will look favorably on Bush. Regardless of whether these thing are really bush's fault, he will still be held accountable by the American people.

Before we werent in a war, Before we hadn't seen 9/11, before we had the Tech Bubble...

Bush is trying to pass some serious tax cuts, those go in, you are going to see a lot of people look at the amount o fmoney they are keeping and you watch, they economy will continue on the up and up. It IS in fact moving, albiet slowly in an upward trend. Yes the stock market is slumping, but the overall economy is growing, and that is what counts, PERIOD.

Clinton negotiating the shutting down of the nuclear plant in Korea. And Osama couldn't have been actioned against..What could have he done? Invade all of the middle east?

Yeah, Clinton did such a WONDERFUL job there, negotiated what was a pointless treaty with a bunch of liars and Bush called em on it.. thats a minus to ole Slick Willy not a plus.

As for Osama.. Hello.. let us recall a few Oasam bin Laden exploits Prior to Bush Comming into office SHALL WE?

First WTC attacks
USS Cole
The Kenya and Tanzinia Bombings

Lets not forget that Sudan OFFERED to give Osama to the USA and CLINTON said no.. What did Clinton do... Hmm he fired off some cruise missles at an Asprin Factory and hit a few deserted Taliban/Al-Queda Camps in the Desert.. wow, man he sure tried to stop Osama every way he could..

And last but not least, the Popular vote line.. HAHAHAHHAHAHA the System worked! Amazing.. Know how the system works people, and realize that the Popular Vote matters not one whit. Not at all.

[MrVicchio]

Originally posted by Sputty
Also, the Republicans seem to disagree on a lot of issues, which is never good.

Yeah, and The dems agree 100% on everything.. they cant even agree whether to go LEFT or CENTER..

[Unregistered]

Lex - Funding the Arts, and Trying to prevent artists from making Art is two totally diffrent things.

Liberman wanted Marylin Manson as well as a few other artists music banned. As in there will be no more music.

Tipper Gore was the head of the PMRC and lead a crusade against free speech durring the 80's

The Clinton/Lewenski thing was a bunch of bullshit, and should never have gone as far as it did. Trust me I was not please with the Republicans wasting my tax money on it.

All bussinessman/politician means have shady dealings. That's how they get where they are, but Shady does not ammount to illeagle like what Kenneth Lay and Co did at Enron. If Bush has commited any crimes you can be assured that the Dems will try to impeach him.

[MrVicchio]

Personally, I wanna see Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi as the Dems Ticket in 2004. Can we say 1984 all over again? That would be so much fun, really it would be.

[Unregistered]

Funny would be the Al Sharpton/Harry Bellefonte ticket.

[Bighoss]

I honestly have to say that we haven't had a real strong president since WWII. Politcal parties are perhaps the must retarded thing in politics EVER. its like 2 governments in one country and both work against eachother...How stupid is that? If this country was gonna be saved Ross Peroe would have helped. Instead of holding up pretty pictures and using big words and not answer questions directly he talked about America like a business. It was perfect he knew what he was doing he used statistical facts and charts that were clear. The only problem was that he made to much sense ! Sadly common sense is now illegal or racist.

Here's a funny fact George Washington warned this country before he stepped down to not get involved with the rest of the world and get entangled in alliances with Europe and other places across sea's. Well we did and its fucked us over. He actually also warned us about political parties he said those would screw us up too.

So you can kiss my ass political parties

[MrVicchio]

That would be even better, cept then they could claim America is racist and demand reperations...

[Sputty]

No countries that I can think of have had a strong leader in awhile. I mean the "western" nations.

[Navaron]

As I opened this thread I though, o no, I'm gonna be here 30 mins, confronting all these misconceptions, however, good ol' MrVicchio got it done before me. I would like to explain Campaign Finance Reform in a way that applies to us.

THe law states that you can't place a politically oriented ad with in XX(60-90) number of days of an election. The new catch phrase is special interest group. A special interest group is a group of people with an interest in something. Pretty simple. Examples of this are, green peace, NRA, PETA, pro/anti lifers, - hell almost anything.

So these groups can't place an ad informing others of their opinion and position, and that of the candidates. This not only violates the right to free speach, it violates the right of assembly. Let me explain.

Why do people gather together to place an advertising campaign on tv? Two reasons, 1 - they all have similar views they want to express, 2 - they don't have enough money individually to do so. So they ban together and donate money for this cause. Nothing wrong there, hell the constitution and BoR says you can do that.

However, if wacko Ted Turner feels like placing an ad, he can - cause he's loaded, and no one can refute him, unless they are individually rich. You know why? Because limiting the speach of an individual violates the First Amendment. Doesn't seem fair does it? The group no longer has the right of assembly to use their free speach, but the wealthy individual does.

What do you care? Here's a real life example. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, (Ex VP candidate), is highly anti video game. He want's all video games with a T or higher rating to be removed from shelves where minors can see them. He also wants to fine all institutions who display these games, and advertise or support them, heavily. I'm sure I'm not the only one who reads PC Gamer, CGW, or any other video game site. If his laws were to pass, they would all go out of business, and we wouldn't know if a game was good or not (hell we wouldn't know if it was even coming out). Sure, he's an extremist no big deal. It'll never happen right. Hopefully.

But let's say it does, and more importantly, he takes Planetside (with it's awful violence and rampant racism) as a whipping horse. PSU will fight him right? Sure. I would, would you? Well if two of us say yeah, bingo we're a special interest group. SO let's say we all band together, gather up 200,000 dollars to run a nation wide newspaper campaign....we might as well spend it on lighter fluid, cause we'll all have alot of useless computers real soon. Our money can buy the ads, just not display them, we might influence the election with our dirty "soft money" from our evil special interest group. We can't display that we as gamers are normal people, and that this guy is nuts.

Hell, let's say we're lucky enough to run an ad the day before the ad ban....he still has 60-90 days to spout his nonsense unopposed unless the other candidate happens to know what the hell is going on, and if you take a quick scan...they're all old as hell.

We, as a special interest group, are evil, and are trying to corrupt America. Thank God for CFR, I don't want to help corrupt America. Thank you Senators MCCain and Feingold for shirking the CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS, and thank you for taking away my right to free speech and assembly, because *IF* I had those, God only knows what hell I would unleash....I mean, I wouldn't want to contribute to the world wildlife foundation...or National Geographic at that..

(Ironically, all the violence and rampant sex they are trying to ban in video games, they seem not to care about in Hollywood where most of their campaign money comes from....convinient huh?)

[MrVicchio]

I thought everyone had figured that one out by now.. Besides, the Supreme Court is gonna shoot that Anti-American, anti-freedom and unconstitutional POS out of the law books before too long. THATS why Bush signed it BTW. He could have rejected it, but he knew that if he did, the Dems would just harp on him and make that a huge nasty debate for the 2002 election, instead, he let it slip through and when the Court say "Get this POS garbage of the law books" He can laugh as the Dems scramble to explain to the American people why they were so for restricting free speech.

[Unregistered]

The Dems have always been against Free Speach.

Democrats think that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves and that every facest of our lives needs to be controld by the government. What we say, What we hear, What we see should all be regulated.

Republicans think that government needs to stay out of our private lives and that as Adults we are able to take care of ourselves and make our own decisions without government interfearence.

I know that is a simplistic compairison, but it is the basics of each parties philosphy.

[Sputty]

Luckily, I don't have democrats or republicns but dozens of other parties inculding the sepertists(How can you participate in a government's system you are against?) and the communists. Also, Conservatives, Liberals, "Allince"(They failed hilariously, super pro religious was their first leader). And many others. It's funny how many there can be.

[Unregistered]

Are you from Soviet Kanukistan (Canada)?