Text 13337, 105 rader
Skriven 2008-03-22 08:31:11 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 13207 av Jeff Bowman (1:229/500)
Ärende: Republicans....
=======================
 JB> I honestly did think he was Republican based on some of the things he's
 JB> said, which is why I was surprised.

Whatever he says he's a fanatic republican.

 JB> However, if he says he's independent,

He isn't as you must have seen by now.

 JB> I will say however that he's agreed with me on some things more recently
 JB> which did surprise me, where as a run-of-the-mill Republican would have
 JB> probably still debated just for the sake of defending another Republican,
 JB> so he gets the benefit of the doubt from me I suppose.

Denying to even check out the links you posted shows otherwise.

 JB> I've certainly expressed Democratic bias though, and don't really consider
 JB> myself truly independent anyway.

No one really are.

BF>> I believe McCain can do many good things to the American people and I've
BF>> heard that he have many good ideas but when it comes to foregin politics
BF>> he's just as bad as Bush.

 JB> McCain was generally fine in my book till he started the 'ol typical
 JB> liberal bashing. I don't agree with him on the war or certain other
 JB> things, but once they take it to that level, it's just stupid.  When
 JB> you're trying to become president, argue with their opinions or plans, but
 JB> don't try to insult them simply based on their party.

I agree.

BF>> And I've even heard Obama say some bulshit as well like: There isn't any
BF>> other country in the world where a colored man can live as good as in USA.
BF>> Hasn't he ever been outside of USA? Hell, many of them have it better than
BF>> me in Sweden for example.

 JB> Barack is likely just trying to appeal to black folk with stuff like that.

It's when being a patriot turns to fanatism.

 BF>> You speak of total freedom for everyone in USA but not when it comes to
 BF>> wiman obviously. Sounds like here when the church had something to do
with
 BF>> it.

 JB> Anti-abortionists here are generally conservatives/Republicans.  I've
 JB> never personally known a Democrat who opposed abortion, though I'm sure
 JB> some do.  I just think there are many circumstances where a woman should
 JB> have the option to abort a pregnancy, from rape, to health concerns (for
 JB> both mother and child), incest, age, etc. I don't agree with the late-term
 JB> abortions though unless possibly for a serious medical reason.  But for
 JB> the most part, it should be the woman's choice, not someone else trying to
 JB> push opinion and religious views on another individual.  That's usually
 JB> wrong no matter what the issue.

I agree. Bothering so much about every single life but not about those 50 000
ambulances not beeing able to go to nearest hosptital...I just can't understand
it.

BF>> Someone have to pay for everything and who is paying for the war in Iraq?
BF>> And when that money is gone, from where does the new money come from? The
BF>> republican party? Fox have already said that every instance in USA have
BF>> accepted to raise the tax later this year.

 JB> We'll apparently just keep borrowing it until the dollar isn't worth the
 JB> paper it's printed on.

And let China to take over.

BF>> There are crooks in every party and I wonder how Fox would report if/when
BF>> a republican would be caught with his pants down.

 JB> Former Republican congressman Mark Foley was involved in a scandal
 JB> involving him sending sexually explicit messages and emails to teenage
 JB> boys.  There were also accusations from boys who said they had actually
 JB> had relations with him.  He later resigned. But Fox News "accidently"
 JB> labeled him as a Democrat. At another point, Brit Hume of the channel
 JB> tried to compare Foley's attempts at pedophilia to Bill Clinton and the
 JB> Monica Lewinksy thing, as if that's possible.  This whole scandal later
 JB> included several other Republicans accused of similar behavior, but you
 JB> didn't see Fox going out of their way to cover it.

Why am I'm not surprised.

 JB> "From 5 p.m. to 11 p.m. ET on August 27, Fox News devoted only 3 minutes
 JB> and 47 seconds to segments discussing Sen. Larry Craig's lewd-conduct
 JB> arrest. By contrast, MSNBC aired 8 minutes and 26 seconds of coverage on
 JB> the story, while CNN aired 20 minutes and 38 seconds."

I'm still not surprised.

BF>> I guess that Fox is happy for Rev. Wright. They have shown him 10
BF>> times/hour the past week. Wonder what they would have done for a week
BF>> without him.

 JB> Probably would have done the usual of telling how awesome the war is
 JB> going, or continue to focus on Spitzer, I assume.

Well, it's good to be back home where news are reported as they should be,
as news, no matter whom it concern.

---
 * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)