Text 13234, 125 rader
Skriven 2008-03-19 21:48:57 av Jeff Bowman (1:229/500)
  Kommentar till text 13214 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
Ärende: Re: Bush Vetoes Waterboarding Bill
==========================================
RW>JB> Which is interesting to me, because I don't really know any, I don't
RW>JB> believe!  People around here have an obvious tendency to lean
RW>JB> conservative.  And ironically enough, even many of my internet
RW>JB> friends turned out to be Republican as I came to find out,
RW>JB> regardless of none of them even living in the same state as me.
 
RW> I think you'll find more of them, come November.
 
More independents, or more Republicans?  Cause I doubt we're going to see much
of the latter.  The American public seem to tire of one party or another after
a while in general, but after all we've seen from the Republicans over the last
eight years, I don't think the American public would vote another one in.  They
showed a good example of that line of thinking in the last mid-term.
 
 
RW> See, we think alike. I'm generally against abortion, but would consider a
RW> woman's right to choose as her own right. I wouldn't agree with him on
RW> invading Iran, I'd just nuke the whole place and let God sort it out.
RW> Global warming is a hoax perpetrated by politicians and stupid Europeons.
RW> There's plenty of scientific evidence against it. This past winter being
RW> the coldest in quite some time seems to be against the hoax. I oppose
RW> leaving Iraq unfinished. And everyone makes mistakes, so we can't fault
RW> him there.
 
 
Don't you find it coincidental that Bush would be such a big oil man, and then
the American government goes years with him in charge without wanting to
acknowledge global warming at all anymore?  EPA reports have also been
allegedly censored (taken from a BBC report, though it can obviously be found
elsewhere):
 
"But the amendments demanded by the president's staff were so extensive that
the climate section "no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on
climate change", according to an internal EPA memo quoted by the Associated
Press news agency."
 
Finally, under pressure from most of the rest of the world who already
acknowledges it, they're giving in to the notion of climate change.  For the
record, global warming in and of itself is generally accepted and acknowledged
as true. Whether it's man-made or not is really the only part which is still
seriously debated. And for every piece of supposed evidence that one side
gives, the other side will try to counter it.
 
And when you tend to look at who backs a lot of these "studies", it seems many
of them make their way back to big oil.  Sounds about like the tobacco industry
and cancer thing all over again.
 
As for winter temperatures, it was yet another extremely mild one here.  The
world also saw its share of freak weather.
 
 
RW>JB> No, but we picked him the last two.
 
RW> Considering the alternative, that was the right thing to do.
 
I don't think the alternatives would have ever ended up with the extremely low
approval rating Bush has the honor of holding.
 
 
RW> and had to work overtime to feed the family, paying more taxes wasn't to
RW> our advantage. The better approach is for Congress to stop spending and
RW> giving it away to foreign countrys.
 
Spending in general isn't the problem, it's how they're spending it
inappropriately that hurts.  Bridges to nowhere don't help the budget.  If only
the money they needed was allocated instead of millions going into peoples' pet
projects, the budget would be better off.  Earmarks should have been made
illegal from the get-go, because everyone's abused them for years.
 
 
RW> Clinton comes along, raises taxes and the next guy in the White House
RW> inherits a recession. The next person to inherit a recession won't have
RW> higher taxes to blame it on, it's going to be the cost of oil.
 
Bush spending the entire surplus Clinton built up and then taking us into the
largest debt ever is the sort of thing that helps cause a recession.
 
 
RW> The 8% will tell you the truth, "he's a democrat, or he's a republican"
RW> while the rest won't. That is, unless there's a reason to bring it up.
RW> Like he did something good, like raising your taxes retro-actively. Let
RW> him be a conservative politician and it gets mentioned all the time.
 
Just because a reporter is liberal or conservative doesn't mean they're
naturally biased.  You can hate someone's guts, but that doesn't mean you can't
write a fair story about'em.  If someone can't do that without inserting bias,
they suck at their job.
 
Though you're leading me to believe that every Republican reporter is truthful,
which in and of itself is biased.
 
 
RW>JB> There's more than one incident where they did "accidently" label
RW>JB> Republicans in trouble as Democrats.  I can even find you the
RW>JB> footage of it, if you're hesitant to believe it.
 
RW> If it's something from a liberal website, it wouldn't prove anything,
RW> except that liberals are liars.
 
So just because a website or channel you don't like covered something, that
automatically makes it bogus?  Liberal sites cover lots of things, that doesn't
mean it's not covered elsewhere too.
 
I don't think someone having taped it with a camcorder in this one case gets
much more raw:
 
http://youtube.com/watch?v=N_vtC98IFoA
 
Not wanting to believe it despite all the evidence to the contrary is just
silly at this point.  Especially when I can personally vouch for it.
 
 
RW>JB> I feel Democrats are far from greatest, but when put on a scale of
RW>JB> crimes one party has committed vs the other over the last few years
RW>JB> alone, Democrats come out far on top.
 
RW> LOL! On top of the 'most crimes committed' heap.
 
Don't think the facts back that one up.  A side-by-side comparison of the two
would show a clear difference.  Tom Delay, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and
Alberto Gonzales are just some of the top ones that come to mind at the moment.
Then there's lesser-known swindlers like Bill Frist from my very own state.

--- D'Bridge 2.99
 * Origin: FyBBS (1:229/500)