Teezeb-Presidental Election 2004

[beever]

I congratulate the President " President George Bush " For his win. I was a strong strong Kerry supporter. I went to a lot of Rallys for him and saw lots of support. I saw Also lots of support for president Bush, which was also great. Its good to see young children, young adults, adult and seniors take part in such Support whom ever the candidate they support. We are going through alot, as is all countries- but on topic with mine we have been So So So Divided. It is the " United States" but seems to be so much like a " Divided States Of America". Whom ever is to blaim, its so important to focus on real issues. I dedicated lots of time to this ellection towards Mr. Kerry. I met so many peolple and had so much fun, I need Every one to know that Kerry Was all About bringing us all back together as " One Nation Under God, For Liberty And Justice For all" as our Great Ancessters set. Its a great country, This is a Hard Loss for me-.....It brings Tears to my Eyes And Feel as it is a Bad Day For America. But at the same time I will Congratulate you Mr. President Bush For your victory, I just hope for the sake of America you focus first before anything else on pulling this- this country Mr. President together again. With all do respects to other country around the world i ask this President to focus on Us- The United States. We are falling apart Rapidly, we need Your Help. I love Iraq, i love Britan, i love England. I love every Country out there. But Please Mr. President - Its Time to focus On Us- The People whom ellected You. We have Given You a second Chance- Please Pull Us - America Back Together Again. I ask you this As My Preident. I thank you all for listening to me here. Its Me Teezeb- You know me from the Web- cam shows. I spent lots of hours campaiging for Mr. Kerry- and this ellection was so so importent to me, its a sad sad day for me- But lets Congratulate Mr. President Bush and hope that he will do these things Ive asked- He is a Good Man and good Leader, i believe he can if he sets his Heart to it. Its so importent to our Future and to our Beloved friends of other countries accross the world- thats how you spread Peace- Not by War- Terrist will always be around- we can deal with it and fight it- but not attack it- Please First and Most Mr.President " Help Us- The United States." :cry: :( :) :lol: :D Thats what i want to see. Thank You!

[Crazyhorse]

Forgive me for being a cold hearted cynic, but I dont think it matters who is elected president. The bad feeling around certain parts of the world will not stop until the security services stop interfering in other countries that they see as a threat.
Sometimes you just have to live with regimes you dont like - believe me, I put up with 13 years of Margaret Thatcher. :wink:

[Adrian]

For what it's worth I think there would be some wisdom in moving this thread to the off topic section where the issues it raises can be properly debated in their own right.

Although my own sympathies wouldn't naturally be Democrat, were I an American, I am disappointed that George W Bush has been re-elected and doubt very much whether the world is a safer place because of it.

He made a mess of the Iraq job which was entered into upon what we now know to be false pretences with the result that far more people have been killed out since there since the hostilities ceased than was ever the case during the military operation itself. Destabilised, the country is vulnerable to the attentions of terrorists, fanatics and hostage takers. Whilst removal of Saddam has been a good thing for the Iraqi people who now have the first real chance of building a decent regime for the first time in 30 years, it has created a massively unstable situation.

Furthermore, it is well enough known to the world that Bush isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the box, intellectually. That itself poses dangers in view of the fact that he's one of the most powerful men in the world - if not the most powerful. Moreover, without wishing to be indelicate, his relationship with Tony Blair is rather more intimate than many of us would wish it to be, with the result that Blair is, if anything, too ready to do Bush's bidding - regardless of the wisdom of the course of action proposed or the effect on British interests.

With regard to morality, every civilised society has to have some basic moral standards. However I suspect few contributers here will be delighted at the re-election of a President who has been all too keen to impose puritanical laws intruding on people's private lives and the legitimate, consensual, adult entertainmant industry.

Yesterday was a sad day for America, Britain and the rest of the civilised world. The American people had a chance to get rid of Bush and too many of them wasted it. I think the only good thing about the whole affair is that at most he'll only spend another four years at the White House.

By the way, Crazyhorse, I thought Margaret Thatcher was PM for 11 years - 1979 to 1990. I know she was disliked by a number of people, not least of all on account of her austerity measures when it came to public spending. However, she managed to bring it under control and she also brought some of the greedy, over-powerful trade unions, to heel. Personally I think she was a good Prime Minister.

:wink:

[Estelle]

Not being American I can only suspect that this result is a disastrous result for the people of the USA -esecially for women, especially for anybody who values freedom of expression, especially for anyone who believes in our right to determine our own sexuality and to educate our children to appreciate and value sexual diversity.

Being non-American I know that this result is a catastrophic result for the rest of the world. Because of America's overwhelming economic and military domination, what happens there impinges on all of us and the Bush administration has made it clear that it wishes to impose its political, economic and cultural values wordwide.

We have seen this in the refusal to do anything to improve global environmental issues. We have seen it in the attempt to force worldwide campaigns on birth control to toe the Bush line on reduced access to abortion and condom use to prevent the spread of AIDS. We have seen it in their obstruction of international campaigns to promote women's rights and in their active attempts to demonise non-white racial groups - especially those of Middle Eastern origin. We see it in the world-wide system of illegal imprisonment of political opponents by proxy - getting non-elected tyranical regimes (Hi there, Saddam!) to hold and torture "detainees" on theirbehalf. And of course, we see it in their stated willigness to invade pre-emptively, any country that might possibly now, or at some unspecified time in the future, threaten the "security" of the USA.

I could go on but .... it depresses me too much. It depresses me that a people that claim to be the world's premier democracy can choose a regime that is so patently anti-democratic. It frightens me that a country with a stated secular constitution can vote to allow religious bigots to impose their bigotry on themselves and on the rest of the world. It terrifies me when a nation that has the world's most massive arsenal of WMDs chooses a leadership who have openly stated their willingness to use them to "defend" that nation.

I look at the cadre of ideologues that run Bush's administration, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rove, Ledeen, Cheyney etc, and look at the deranged vision of the world that they have succeeded in selling to the American people. America is the Chosen People to bring enlightenment to the world. America is the greatest nation ever in the history of the world. America is uniquely powerful yet neurotically vulnerable. America is uniquely wronged - Sept 11th - and nobody appreciates our benificence and munificence.

I look at this vision and I look back in history to Jan 30th 1933 when a very similar vision was foisted on a cultured European nation and I wonder how a cultured 21st century people can be so wilfully blind to the lessons of history and can keep themselves so ignorant of the true nature of the world beyond their borders. I know there are millions of Americans who do not share the paranoid and bigoted agenda of Bush's White House. I honour your commitment to trying to see that freedom survives in USA. But right now I have to say that your fellow Americans scare the shit out of me. I don't share their vision of the world and I am very afraid of having it imposed on me whether I chose it or not.

Estelle

[bloom061604]

I think the only good thing about the whole affair is that at most he'll only spend another four years at the White House.
With Republican gains in the House and Senate to help enact his ideology into law, and his opportunity to appoint federal judges and Supreme Court justices that share his values, Bush in four years will make fundamental changes in the United States and, indeed, the world, that will last for a generation or more.

—Bloom

[bspider]

Very gloomy view, Bloom. I wonder how soon he'll be viewed as a 'lame duck' president?

Sometimes my optimism overcomes my cynicism...

Boris.

[WD12]

The whole thing truly is a horror. Everthing, well, almost everything, Bush has done has been bad.

Some of my friends know Kerry, I won't say how, and I supported him. I knew all along that his leadership of Vietnam Veterans Against the War would probably undermine his campaign.

I'm a Navy vet in Vietnam, doing pretty much what Kerry did there, and I totally supported the VVAW. I had no knowledge of him at the time, but I knew about VVAW. The war in Vietnam was, well, we all know what it was.

Kerry had the balls to stand up and say so. His stand was used against him in a smear campaign that was just shameless.

The upside is that Bush can no longer blame Clinton for his failures. He engineered this election, now he owns it.

Believe me europeans, we aren't all mindless followers of this conservative, war mongering bullshit. However, I think it's going to get worse before it gets better. Sorry.

[Wet Pacific Northwest]

With all due respect, those on the left seem to lose sight
sometimes of the 'tolerance' they preach - inclusiveness,
acceptance of ideas other than their own, etc.

Fact is 59 MILLION people in the US (more than any
other US president in history) voted for the guy.

They can't ALL be idiots.

I'm an independant - but I DO believe in tolerance. The
majority spoke, and I respect that.

Dave
WPNW

[DavidEngland99]

Well, let's try to look on the bright side! Even if Kerry had won he could not have removed the troops from Iraq immediately - and I believe a pull-out rather like Vietnam is the only likely long term outcome - presumably followed by the creation of an "Islamic state of Iraq". Maybe it is best that these events happen while the Republican right are in power so that they take the blame.

Not much comfort - but there you are.

BTW, some of you may want to visit http://www.impeachblair.org/

David

[quietpr]

I was somewhat dreading reading this commentary...I am but one conservative (not quite as conservative as Mr. Bush on a lot of things...I'd actually call myself moderate, but compared to this group I'm definitely rightward leaning) in a forum that is decidedly liberal and so I try to avoid politics here.

But I appreciated your comments...I know that most of the people who supported Kerry were good hearted people trying to do the right thing...as are most of the people who support Bush. The two sides look at the same facts...the same world...but come to completely different conclusions because they start with different underlying assumptions about human nature.

I feel that this election has shown the strength of America despite the divided feel of the election map. For the first time in decades over 70% of America's voting eligible citizens felt energized enough about their country to vote. More people voted in this election than in any election in US history (naturally owing to the increase in the number of people that can vote as our society ages, and the overall increase in our population...but as a proportion it's also amung the top 5 all time). The election went smoothly...there was no voter irregularites and no feelings of disenfranchizement. No one was hurt or killed at the polls...which many feared would happen given some of the violence happening at DNC and RNC local chapters...

Thanks for the post Teezeb...we voted for different people but it's nice to see we still have the same goal.

[DavidEngland99]

Wet Pacific Northwest,

I don't quite see your point - surely tolerance does not mean a refusal to criticise - nobody here is suggesting an armed uprising or anything! Here in the UK we 'tolerate' Blair - but I don't think Bush can count on him being in power much longer!

Quietpr,

You speak as though both sides are obviously honest! We know know that the supposed threat from WMD was essentially nonexistent (and much less than that posed by North Korea!) and that Al Qaeda had essentially no links with Iraq. We also know (because it is well documented) that many of Bush's team were advocating attacking Iraq before 9/11 and even before Bush came to power!

We have not brought peace to Iraq, we have not removed UBL, we have killed and maimed a huge number of Iraqis, and supplied UBL with untold numbers of new recruits.

How many of the people who voted for Bush realised those facts?

David

[Estelle]

Wet Pacific Northwest

I'm not saying that 59 million Bush voters are all idiots. In some ways I wish they were - it would make it easier to argue the case against them. Not that it makes any difference - even idiots have (and should have) the right to vote.

As it is they have voted with open eyes for a profoundly intolerent fundamentalist Christian neoconservative agenda - one that seeks to impose it's restrictions on freedom of action and civil liberties on all Americans - and on the rest of the world. Much the same as the Muslim fundamentalists wish to do. Both sides are actually completely at odds with the true spirit of the founders of the religions that they purport to advocate.

I am all for tolerence of any belief and action that does not harm others. But those 59 million voted for intolerence. One of the things I guess most of them would not tolerate would be sexually explicit message boards such as this one.

As you said, the majority spoke. That's what's so scary.

Estelle

[Justme]

Estelle-- although I AM big time conservative, that's not why I voted for Bush. I didn't actually vote FOR Bush. I voted AGAINST Kerry. I just simply cannot see a traitor to our country as commander and chief. And before everyone jumps on me, let me explain. No, I don't call protesting the war traitorous. Nor do I call going before Congress to speak on behalf of antiwar demonstrators traitorous. Actually, I find that quite patriotic, in and of itself. Hell, I don't even call throwing away the medals he got for his service traitorous. What I DO call traitorous was the fact that he was meeting in secret with the North Vietnamese, which undermined this country's efforts to bring about an end to the war, and ultimately killed more Americans, including those held in captivity. I also call it traitorous that he made a very public showing of supporting Hanoi Jane while in Viet Nam, who, by her actions led DIRECTLY to the torture and deaths of several POWS at the Hanoi Hilton. I call traitorous the actions of a man who so advanced the NVA cause at a time when we were at war with them, that they have actually seen fit to give him (as well as Jane Fonda) a TRIBUTE AS A WAR HERO in an exhibit in their war museum in Mo Chi Mien City!!

If the Democrats had nominated someone else, I would have most likely voted differently. I could not see for the life of me, why Joe Lieberman wasn't nominated. He's a good man who's fought tirelessly to advance the idea of living better, both here, as well as abroad, for ALL people. For a senior democrat, he's surprisingly bipartisan when it's come to getting things done in Washington, and I think he would have made a great president. But I just could NOT see Kerry in the oval office. It would go against everything I believe, and from the interviews I've seen and the polls that have been conducted, I think there are alot of people who voted the same way, for the same reasons-- not specifically because of the feeling of Kerry as a traitor, but because they wanted ANOYONE besides Kerry, mostly due to his willingness to say whatever he thought the crowd wanted to hear.

[Wet Pacific Northwest]

All I'm saying is the very thing the left says the right does,
THEY in fact do to the RIGHT!

They impose THEIR morals, to the degree of passing laws via
judges to avoid the popular vote, THEY impose censorship
by calling books like Tom Sawyer 'racist' and therefore cannot
be seen by the masses, they impose THEIR religion of
secular humanism on ALL people, and decry anyone with a
DIFFERENT religion (ie, based on a God) as INTOLERANT
ZEALOTS (unless of course their Native American Indians,
in which case THOSE gods are all fine to teach the kids in
school).

The American left is BLIND to their own blatant intolerance,
and it's JUST AS EVIL as RIGHT WING intolerance in every
possible way - it's just a different group of people that get
hurt. And if you cannot see this point, then you have swallowed
their cool-aid and cannot see the forest for the trees any more.

That's why I'm an independant.

Dave
WPNW

[beever]

With all do RESPECTS Mr. Just Me. I posted this post for RESPECT to Both Candidates. As Quietpr said- " We both agreed on the main goal even though we voted different men". I did not put down Bush even though i agree with what David England said. As WD12 will agree, Mr.Kerry IS a RESPECTFUL Man. And to comment on your rage comment against Kerry and Nam- Heres a little example- Lets Say Our Wife was in Iraq today, whether it be for journalism soldier or what not. She calls you, she says to you " Hun, Help us, some of us women are being raped by the US soldiers". Now your first thought would be a sickness inside- Right. Our Soldiers today Just would Not do this- but im saying this as an example. Back in Vietnam this did happen- our soldiers were great worriors and heroes. But it is a sad fact that this did occurr in places. Now the easiest thing to do is hush- look a way keep your mouth shut- at the same time theses Vietnamies women were going through a huge horific ordeal- its A Fact! Mr. Kerry was that one who spoke up for them, the ones we were suppose to be there to save- He put his political future, his respect and whole future in general on the line- for these innocent women who were going through this- to stop it! Did it cause harm on our POW- sadly- yes! But This was the responsibility we had to face for being a part of One Army- that was our responsibilty- Kerry did not create it- the few bad soldiers did- But someone HAD TO HELP these women. And someone in Gods eyes Did. The Few American soldiers who degrated this country for rapeing those women caused our POW`s to suffer worst then they ever should have- Not Jon Kerry! He helped the people we were there to help- a few of our soldiers were sick in mind unlike the most of them that were GREAT and RESPECTFUL soldiers!!! Jon Kerry did not Degrate America or our soldiers for Helping these women- Those few soldiers DID! And to use that for a negitive Political advantage is Just Sick!!!! I understand veterens view of being upset or POWs- but i wish they would really think of the real reason for that instead of pointing the finger at a man who had that Courage for Standing up even though it would look like he was the one Degrateing us. His goal was to help the vietnamies, not turn his back! As was The United States Mission! Now earlier i asked you What if your wife was in Iraq- she calls you and says- " Hun- some of the US soldiers are rapeing the women here- including Me" Now what would you think or say- " Well- nows not a good time to bring it up- Keep hush till the wars over and deal with it". No - you would not! You would want even ONE soldier to step up and do something- and if you could- you would step up to help her! Jon Kerry IS A GOOD MAN!!!!!! And gave it his all to help us come together as A nation as a Presidental Candidate for our country- and get better respect in the world! BECAUSE WE REALLY NEED BOTH BAD!!!!

[DavidEngland99]

Wet Pacific Northwest,

I would have thought your interest in the wetting fetish would have made you question a lot of the stuff put out by the religious right. I mean, if you were to enquire from Pat Robertson or whoever if it was OK to get sexual pleasure from wetting yourself or watching Sky's models do likewise, you would get a pretty dusty answer!

Similarly, I am not gay, but I don't see why society should pick on those who are - even in the name of an infinitely loving God (who presumably made them gay in the first place).

Those of us who are proud to NOT believe in God don't want to impose anything on people who go to church (or other place of worship) but we do resent the idea that they should impose their morals on everyone.

I also resent hypocrisy. People who will agonise over the fate of a 8-cell embrio while sending thousands of human beings to their death in Iraq, supporting the death penalty, etc. If every human life is precious, how can anyone support those things?

David

[Wet Pacific Northwest]

Wet Pacific Northwest,

I would have thought your interest in the wetting fetish would have made you question a lot of the stuff put out by the religious right.

Oh, I do. But I ALSO question a lot of the things put out by the
'secular left'.

There are KOOKS ON BOTH SIDES. For some reason, only the
kooks on the RIGHT ever get criticized. I say condemn ALL kooks,
on BOTH extremes.

You need to be careful when you start thinking YOUR view is better
than MY view, regardless of what those views might be. That's
where intolerence comes from, after all - the lack of accepting someone
ELSE'S view just because you think yours is 'more correct'.

I'm a live and let live person - and I condemn ALL extremism - Stalin
was a dangerous LEFTIST and Hitler was a dangerous RIGHTIST. The
REAL tolerance lies in the middle, and I simply abhor folks who want
to impinge their beliefs on others, no matter how 'correct' they think
they might be.

I'm Jewish, for example. But my kids are FORCED to be in Kwanza
plays, and for Ramadan (taught to them as 'the holy month of...), they
were taught 'the five pillars of faith' - so how exactly is THAT being
'tolerant'??? If they dared to say a prayer in class in Hebrew, I'm sure
they would get in trouble. But reciting Muslim prayers in an exercise
of 'tolerance' (yes, they had to do this as part of Ramadan) was both
OFFENSIVE to them, and has no place in school. It's just plain simple
LEFTIST agenda being 'rammed down their throats' - had it been an
Evangelical Xtian making them recite the 10 commandments instead
of the 5 pillars of faith, I strongly suspect it would have made the papers.

IT'S ALL intolerant! The left is just a bunch of hypocrites that does all
the things they acuse the right of doing.

And you've now made the assumption that I'm a 'right wing wacko' just
because I'm pointing out the hypocrisy! You made my point - you know
NOTHING about me or my views. I clearly said I'm an independant,
with the implication of being in the middle. But just because I condemn
leftist wackjobs AS WELL as right wing wack jobs, you seem inclined to
think I'm of the latter group, with NO KNOWLEGE OF ME AT ALL. Isn't
that just a little intolerant?

Dave
WPNW

[quietpr]

I refuse to be drawn into a political debate here...I'm outnumbered 1,872,197 to 2 on this forum and mostly by people who don't even live in my country and think they understand us.

I didn't say what I said under the assumption that both men are completely honest...I said what I said under the assumption that both men are equally deceptive. Bush ain't perfect...I'm less than thrilled with him in office. But Kerry is no saint either...they're both too partisan...too power hungry...and too little focussed on actually fighting for Americans and improving our quality of life.

I picked what I saw as the lesser of two evils. That's the way it is in this country most of the time.

[DavidEngland99]

Quietpr,

OK, we don't live in the USA, but we are affected by what you do - we even joined you in your war for God's sake! We even appreciate a lot of what the USA stands for - I mean when we see you going wrong it is not as if it was some other country going wrong - there obviously is a link between our two countries!

Wet Pacific Northwest,

I can't really accept that the left have an agenda of forcing other religions down people's throats - perhaps, as you say it is that we both look at all the nuts on the other side. I know there are half baked left-wing ideas - but when it comes to religion it is ultimately all arbitrary - perhaps that is why people can get so upset about it - I mean, when you really get down to it, how much does the Muslim faith differ from the Jewish one (if you permute the dates and the names for things!).

We in the UK used to mix up religion and politics and when the Catholics were in power they burned the Protestants, and when the Protestants were in power they burned the Catholics - isn't it better to keep them separate?

David

[Wet Pacific Northwest]

Yes, indeed it is better to keep them separate. But for
some reason 'separate' simply means shutting out
Christians.

Did you not read the part about how my kids were
required to do a report on the 'five pillars of faith'
in their PUBLIC school? No 'right wing nut jobs' there,
I can assure you. Left leaning and downright socialist
leaning in many cases school teachers and districts
with an 'agenda' - they also had to study Indian
religions, as well as ancient (but not ancient CHRISTIAN)
Gods. (Remember, I and my kids are JEWISH. Hardly
Pat Robertson contributors).

That's called 'tolerance' in the US - shun ONLY the 'right
wing wack job' religions, but all the rest are 'being inclusive'

How is that not hypocritical? There should be ZERO
RELIGIONS taught in public school!!!!

In the meantime, 'Tom Sawyer' is on the BANNED BOOKS
list. No, not banned by right wing religious types - not not
at all. But by politically correct LEFT WING NUT JOBS.

So in summary - the Five Pillars of Faith = OK TO TEACH, so
we won't offend muslims. Tom Sawyer = Racist tripe that
only THEY will decide we cannot see!! And you only ever
hear PORN being banned by 'nut jobs'. TOM SAWYER???????

Do a google for 'Banned books day' in the US and see just
exactly what those 'tolerant' NUT JOBS and socialist engineers
are doing on the LEFT. Then talk about religious folks and porn!

Dave
WPNW

[DavidEngland99]

Wet Pacific Northwest,

If what you say is true (and I assume it is) then the people responsible for 'left wing intolerance' have a lot to answer for - perhaps they should accept some of the blame for what has happened.

I certainly agree 100% that it is best to keep religion out of schools. A lot of people over here blame the separate religious schools (Catholic and Protestant) in Northern Ireland for the trouble over there (which is hopefully subsiding now).

In this country because there are church schools, the muslims demanded and got the chance to run their own schools - which could create great problems in years to come because it creates an 'us and them' attitude.

Sorry, you are right, as a Jew- you would not be checking with Pat Robertson - but my point is that people like him will continue to have great influence in the USA. People who claim to champion the rights of 8-cell embrios while supporting the death penalty, harrassment of gays (or wetters, if they even knew we exist - I suppose we would be just called perverts) and war are just unbearable.

Are you saying that the Democrats support "banned books day" or any of the things of which you complain?

LOL - maybe the USA needs a complete flush out of its politicians and a new crowd put in instead!

Never mind who you voted for, I am interested, do you think it was a good thing to invade Iraq?

David

[Estelle]

Hey, hang on, this is degenerating into a slanging match. Let's calm down a bit.

WPNW - I hold no candle at all for the views you choose to characterise as "secular humanist" or "left wing". Secularism doesn't ban or oppress religion, it just says that state policy should not be dictated by religion or by religious institutions.

I don't think that what you call "left wing" would be seen as such anywhere other than USA. Yes, the extreme left has all the faults of the extreme right. In fact, plotted on a circle they meet at the point marked "tyranny", 180 degrees away from "freedom", having gone round opposite sides of the circle to get there. Hitler and Stalin had much in common if you examine their beliefs and techniques carefully. It is those techniques of the manipulation of fear and xenophobia, combined with the belief in "unique mission and destiny" that are being mirrored so cynically, not so much by the religious right, but by the "neoconservatives" that really run Bush's regime. They took their ideas from Leo Strauss who advocated recreating a myth of American Destiny, saying that it did not have to be true - just convincing.

I agree with you about discriminatory application of religious ethics in schools. But then, I don't think religion has any place in schools other than as a private belief or as part of a culture/philosophy curriculum. Certainly organised prayer should not be there. If students want to pray in school - fine. Let them do it in their own time in a private space while the rest of us do our thing in our time.

The trouble with the religious fundamentalists (let's forget "left" and "right") is that they DO want to impose their creed and moral restrictions on the rest of us - worldwide. One of Bush's first actions was to restrict funding to any international family planning organisation that also gave abortion advice. That was just for starters. Osama Bin Ladin wants to impose the strictures of fundamentalist Islam on ALL Moslems and eventually on the whole world. In spite of their declared mutual opposition, Bush and OBM meet up at the back of the circle, just like Hitler and Stalin did in spite of theirs.

As for banning books or any other censorship - it is always stupid and always counter productive. If I ban your book I grant you the right to ban mine. I will never grant you that right. Ideas are never eradicated by censorship, just pushed underground, where they fester. I don't know "Tom Sawyer" so I've no idea if I would find it offensive. If I did find it offensive then I could either stop reading it or, if I thought it would "corrupt" others, argue against it. Stopping others from reading it puts me in the bigots' room.

Those of us who value freedom of belief and action don't wish to impose our beliefs on anyone. We don't require women to have abortions, we just think it should be a choice. We don't want to "convert" anyone to being a lesbian., we just claim the right to be lesbian if we choose. We don't want to stop others praying to whatever god rules their universe, we just don't want that god ruling ours. Etc etc.

No, I may not understand your country, any more than most Americans appear to understand any country BUT their own. I do understand how the world's only superpower controls the destiny of all of us and that the coalition of religious fundamentalism and neoconservatism that is represented by the Bush presidency and the Republican control of Congress and (soon) The US Supreme Court is a threat to liberty and freedom of thought throughout the world.

That said, I still honour American traditions of liberty and any American who truly tries to uphold them, rather than using the word "freedom" to excuse all kinds of oppression.

Estelle

[DavidEngland99]

Just to put what we are talking about into perspective, there are reports that the US totally destroyed a hospital:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3988433.stm

Unless it was evacuated, huge numbers of patients and extremely dedicated staff must have died in an attrocity like that. It reminds one of the picture of the little girl in Vietnam running with napalm burning on her back!

Even if the hospital had been evacuated, it would have been badly needed, and I don't suppose it will be replaced for ages!

Can some of you that voted for Bush PLEASE explain how you can 'win hearts and minds' after doing things like that.

David

[Wet Pacific Northwest]

Yes, the extreme left has all the faults of the extreme right.

That's all I'm saying. I just get really tired of only 'right wingers'
getting flack. There are just as many kooked out 'left wingers' in
the world.

And yes, I'm talking only of the US - that's what this thread was
started about, and that's where I live.

Live and let live - everyone is entitled to their own view in a free
world, but each person bears the responsibility of not ramming
their view down the throat of another. Very simple, actually.
And it saves discussing the particulars of what view is what. Just
keep them to yourself (I say to ALL people collectively, not just
you - please don't take offence - see I even spelled it British-style :-)

The world could be such a better place if extremists on BOTH SIDES
would keep their morals, views, and opinions to themselves and
quit trying to 'convert the unwashed'.

Happy weekend all - I'm checking out of the thread now

Peace and love and wet jeans :lol:

Dave
WPNW

[RDJay]

What we just saw was a big victory for the provincial and pseudo-provincial Americans, and a big loss for cosmopolitan Americans. We Americans have always cherished our provincial, down-on-the-farm, roots. But here's the problem. Being provincial and being the world's superpower are mutually exclusive.

By definition, being provincial means having an interest in no culture other than your local one. That's George Bush exactly. If he wanted to stay down on the ranch and chop wood, I would have no problem with his provincialism. But if he is going to be the leader of the free world, he had better have some interest in the other cultures. It's called being "cosmopolitan."

To a world which, for half a century, has looked to the US as its economic, cultural and military leader, the very LAST thing they want is a provincial ruling party. It would be like having the Taliban, or the Iranian mullahs, or the Aboriginals of New Zealand suddenly take over as leaders of the world and begin to use force to spread their culture.

I am a progressive-moderate who worked diligently in behalf of John Kerry. And I am still depressed about the way that election went. It is bad enough that we have to put up with Bush's incompetence for another four years, but the worst of it is the fact that us moderates no longer have a voice in this government. The "gullibles" (i.e. the ones who were suckered by Karl Rove's marketing wizardry and the neocons' con game) not only control the White House, but also the Pentagon, the House of Representatives, The Senate, the Supreme Court, and the vocal media. The rest of us have become a minority group and have been cut competely out of the process.

I thought at first about disappearing into Jamaica, the Andes or my homeland of Ireland....and disassociating myself from the whole thing. But I am now reconsidering. There might still be something that can be done.

I am of the belief that most Americans are actually moderates like myself. But they are disenfranchised by the two parties. The Democrats have that nasty liberal reputation which turns moderates off (not to mention that they are all over the map politically...with no coherency whatsoever); and the Republicans, while seeming to represent home and family values (important to moderates), are also represented by Bush and his warmongering band of baffoons.

I firmly believe that a huge share of those 55 million people who cast their votes for Bush did so with major reservations. It's just that they had to choose between "that decent Christian boy from the Texas backwoods who is whacking the hell out of them terrorists" and "that wierd flip-flopping peacenik from the gay-marriage state of Massachusetts."

Americans like tightly-knit families, so it is easy to see why they chose Bush over Kerry.

The former has a lovely librarian for a wife, two lovely all-American-girl daughters, and a famous, widely admired dad. The latter is a former playboy, now married to a mouthy rich-bitch flower-child who he kept hidden away most of the time but who, when she did occasionally emerge, talked more about her first hubby than her current one.

Voters had to choose the lesser of the evils, and Bush was it. I can sort of understand why...

I am in the process of putting together a think tank, of sorts, geared toward moderates of both parties who feel they need a voice. And, if it goes as planned, I will be contacting people in the US government and in the media who might be willing to set aside their partisanship in the interest of bringing the United States back to some manner of sanity.

Any of you moderate Americans who would like to come aboard, feel fee to pay us a visit and chime in at:

http://members3.boardhost.com/EROtalk/

[WD12]

Estelle, in what's obviouslya well-considered and thouroughly thought out discourse, seems to have gotten it all right.

It's a pleasure to be in the presence of such an intellect.

[Crazyhorse]

Wet Pacific Northwest.

Are you a government 'on message' clone?

Your reply

Fact is 59 MILLION people in the US (more than any
other US president in history) voted for the guy.

is exactly the establishment reply to anyone who questions the result.

What you fail to say is that more people also voted for Kerry than have voted for any US president in history.

Why dont you do a bit of investigation into the companies who had the contract to provide the computers for the election process in Ohio?
And their links with the Republicans, and why several Republican candidates came up with exactly the same majority.
Coincidence?
Or dumbass oil-obssessed greedy power-crazed politicians just being capable of persuading those who want to believe the cosy mummys' boy story?

[Wet Pacific Northwest]

I think it's time to get a Tin Foil Hat before the black
helicopters start hovering over your house!!

LOL! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Dave
WPNW

[bspider]

Come on, guys.

There was an election. One side got more votes than the other, and this is called democracy. As Winston put it: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." So my best advice to all is to put up and shut up, wait 4 more years, and try again.

No, he wouldn't have been my personal choice, and no, I didn't have a vote, being British. But this is all getting very, very silly.

Boris.

[Wet Pacific Northwest]

Amen. (pun intended) I AM in America, I DID vote for Bush, and I'm
really tired of all the hate speech from the supposed
'more caring' other side.

Bush won, Kerry lost. It's over.

Have a WONDERFUL DAY ALL!!! :D :D :D :D

Dave WPNW