propaganda

[Lilly]

lemon meringue, we are being NICE in free your mind.

Why are you still asking this question after all this time? Wasn't our Electorial College system ever explained to you? Sarcasm perhaps?

not everyone is from the united states. and i wouldn't punish people outside of the u.s by teaching them about the electoral college.


now, zoomerang. to answer the original question

btw, what kind of a democrazy allows someone into office when a different candidate had more votes?

uhh...american kind of democracy. i can't remember exactly why the electoral college was introduced, i'll look into that for you. i'm not sure if you're familiar with the electoral college (though my guess is that you are) but basically, the states with more people in it have more sway, so the states like ooo i dunno...south dakota get the royal shaft in being represented ('cept now cos senator daschle is majority leader).

in the present time the electoral college makes no sense, and hopefully we will get rid of it before the next debaucle of an election.

 

[speedracer]

Re: lemon meringue, we are being NICE in free your mind.

not everyone is from the united states. and i wouldn't punish people outside of the u.s by teaching them about the electoral college.


now, zoomerang. to answer the original question

uhh...american kind of democracy. i can't remember exactly why the electoral college was introduced, i'll look into that for you. i'm not sure if you're familiar with the electoral college (though my guess is that you are) but basically, the states with more people in it have more sway, so the states like ooo i dunno...south dakota get the royal shaft in being represented ('cept now cos senator daschle is majority leader).

in the present time the electoral college makes no sense, and hopefully we will get rid of it before the next debaucle of an election.

Assuming that South Dakota has a fairly even distribution of Democratic and Republican votes, a South Dakotan's has more influence over the South Dakota electoral college than a Californian's vote has over the California electoral college, so that offsets California's edge in electoral college votes. (It is a shame that presidential candidates don't pay more attention to smaller states though.) (Then again, South Dakota has as many senators as California.) (Then again, Washington, D.C. has zero senators and representatives but still pays federal taxes.) (Then again, does a place that voted Marion Barry as mayor thrice deserve to have anybody in Congress?)

The more salient reason why the electoral college should be abolished is because a Republican's vote for President in, say, Massachusetts is completely worthless. (Ditto for a Democrat's vote for President in, say, Mississippi.)

 

[Popmartijn]

i was chatting about this situation with my mom last night, she came up with a really good point:

if the u.s can go and pre-emptively strike iraq without concrete evidence of their having wmd's, what stops iraq from striking the us pre-emptively?

This has been my reservation (and fear) all along. If the US is using an aggressive doctrine, what prevents Iraq from using the same doctrine. I fear, but I will not be surprised, that when Bush and Rumsfeld are increasing their threat to Iraq, Saddam will eventually start to attack US locations (as in terrorist attacks). This will be the result of copying the US doctrine (strike first before they can strike you) coupled with a feeling of being threathened.

When (not if, in the present situation) that attack comes (so as in Iraq being the first aggressor), then the US will get support for a war on Iraq (as the US got attacked first), but until then I think most of the other countries will adhere to the convention (whichever it was) not to attack countries without being attacked first. More and more countries are openly against a pre-emptive war on Iraq (Germany, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and there will be a governmental crisis in the UK should Blair pledge his support).

Marty

 

[Lilly]

this worries me

and there will be a governmental crisis in the UK should Blair pledge his support

Marty

yeah, rule of thumb, when your best friend disapproves, it's just a bad idea. if we had the uk's support, the situation would change a bit, but not having their support makes me nervous.

 

[Lemon Meringue]

sorry if i was crabby

Maybe I should have mentioned this instead. America is not a Democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic.

A Republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of (1) an executive and (2) a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation, all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create (3) a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize (4) certain inherent individual rights.


I hope that was informative.

 

[diamond]

Re: sorry if i was crabby

Maybe I should have mentioned this instead. America is not a Democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic.

A Republic is a form of government under a constitution which provides for the election of (1) an executive and (2) a legislative body, who working together in a representative capacity, have all the power of appointment, all power of legislation, all power to raise revenue and appropriate expenditures, and are required to create (3) a judiciary to pass upon the justice and legality of their governmental acts and to recognize (4) certain inherent individual rights.


I hope that was informative.

Very informative
re #4..does that allow Bear to call nice folk names?


DB9

 

[Zoomerang96]

diamond, and others...i know what your electric co collage of things means. i just dont know hot to spell it off hand...

i know you have that too...its all that was ever on the news at the end of 2000.

diamond, i havent been comparing bush to hitler since the first post.

thanks to everyone for pointing that out in goodwill, but i do understand the system, and i also understand that the system is stupid.

but hey, its not like canadas system is perfect, and its not an easy task to create a perfect one either.

 

[U2Bama]

A liberal called a conservative a name! That is offensive!!!

 

[Lilly]

diamond, welcome to the nicer fym

Very informative
re #4..does that allow Bear to call nice folk names?


DB9

does it allow diamond to call nice folk names? let's work on being nicer diamond. if you have a problem with the issue being discussed, please discuss the issue, not the perceived merits of the person posting it. thank you.

lilly

 

[speedracer]

A liberal called a conservative a name! That is offensive!!!

Thou tottering spur-galled skainsmate.

 

[diamond]

Re: diamond, welcome to the nicer fym

does it allow diamond to call nice folk names? let's work on being nicer diamond. if you have a problem with the issue being discussed, please discuss the issue, not the perceived merits of the person posting it. thank you.

lilly

Pt taken Lilly.
However, reviewing the thread I never called another Interfencer a name-
Not a-
dumbass
an idiot..ect.

I did take offense to one fellow making a correllation between Hitler and current President Of The United States
I will continue to post in a friendly manner.

For the record..I listen to ALL avenues of information..
consider all sides then make a decision on the polictical issues at hand.

Lastly I worked on The Bush Campaign and worked VERY HARD to stuff those damn ballot boxes in Florida that one night

Peace
Out-
DB9

 

[U2Bama]

"I was walkin,' down a ONE WAY STREET..."
-Huey Lewis & The News, 1982

 

[Lilly]

Originally posted by diamond However, reviewing the thread I never called another Interfencer a name-

Bear-
This is an example your lameness reaching new heights.
Good job.
DB9

Originally posted by Zoomerang96 what are you talking about diamond? , you dumbass.

you both succeeded in taking this thread into personal attacks.

i understand that you, diamond, support president bush, but if his administration/policies/decisions come under attack, i ask that you please provide why you don't accept what is being posted about. educate us on what you see bush doing, then we can have more progression.

bear, it was also inappropriate for you to bring it to a personal level, keep it to the issue, not to the people posting.

bama, i hope you realize that fym is NOT a one way street, it's just that i noticed diamond's first.

let 's keep this thread and fym nice, so that we can keep fym.

lilly

 

[Zoomerang96]

i love diamond, just in this thread anything goes. hes been quite grown up about everything, though we both have said stupid things.

i doubt he'll hold them against me, and i know im not upset about him questioning my merit.

u2bama on the other hand MIGHT be a guito. it would be worthwhile to investigate in the matter.

 

[Lilly]

we just don't want so much negativity

i know that you know one another, but we want to keep fym friendly. that's all.

more the than the



lilly

 

[Angela Harlem]

Mr Bama, why the reticence? Surely this doesn't stem from the minority v majority issue?
I really wish this place could see past nationality and political affiliation for just once. But Scarlett reckons tomorrow is another day, so lets see eh?

 

[z edge]

i understand that you, diamond, support president bush, but if his administration/policies/decisions come under attack, i ask that you please provide why you don't accept what is being posted about. educate us on what you see bush doing, then we can have more progression.

I emphatically disagree with this:

If someone has a problem with the policies/decisions/administration of President Bush and he comes under attack, then the person with the disagreement (posting the attack) should provide PROOF of what they have a problem with. Rather than post their opinion of him which is not fact and then we have to educate you? example:

Bush is a drug user

or

Bush = Hitler

I use these because they are reoccuring themes in here that are acceptable to the majority.

Thus, why should the few members of the forum who like Bush always be on the defensive?

Yet should we post documented fact about a certain leader(s) most of you seem to like ( unlike those few of us who "blindly follow Bush" ) there is usually an uprising where one of us will get warned, thread closed, and even worse.

Out of the many times I have been personally attacked in here, I have generally dealt with it myself without asking the mods for help. Out of the few times I have asked the mods for help the majority of the time I have been ignored or I got in trouble myself.

I was wondering too; IF pinkfloyd says "bomb z edge" is this acceptable? Or will I just get into trouble for asking?

 

[Angela Harlem]

No Z Edge, it is NOT ok for someone, anyone, to make a comment like that re: "Bomb Z Edge now". This is the 3rd time you have brought this up now. And regarding this, it is the only thing I am disagreeing with: the number of times you are bringing this up in the public forum. Has your point been made? If not, lets state for everyone here: Comments of this nature will not be tolerated. It goes both ways. Z Edge, it is impossible for anyone to tell, apart from blatant outright attacks, what is offensive to you. That goes for anyone. Deathbear as well, enough of the name calling BS.

When did someone ask you to post documented fact? It is not a requirement of this forum to come bearing hard evidence. If you want to refute whatever someone says, do it.

 

[z edge]

When did someone ask you to post documented fact? It is not a requirement of this forum to come bearing hard evidence. If you want to refute whatever someone says, do it.

See, I am getting hasseled for bringing it up. POINT PROVEN, thanks Angela.

So then, it is still okay to say:

Bush is a drug user

and

Bush = Hitler


And if you take offense to that you will get into trouble, simply put.

 

[Angela Harlem]

I am not hassling you at all. You made a claim and I wanted to know what specifically you were talking about. You didnt answer the question. No one ever has to prove anything they say. If someone wants to claim that bush takes drugs, FINE. You are more than entitled to ask them to show you some fact. They dont HAVE to. if they cant back it up, they will look like a trouble maker/liar. Why do you think this goes against you? If someone wants to make such a grand claim, let them Z Edge, because if they cant back it up, who is the laugh on? You or them? Not you I dont think.
I have not proved any point of yours, because you still aren't answering what I'm asking. I am more sick of the Bush=Hitler crap than you may be, remember that.
I am totally sick to death of people comparing the 2. If people dont want to prove it, fine, they again will look like they are just making grand sweeping statements about nothing. Why are you getting defensive at me now? Im not getting at you for anything I didnt think....

Is it ok to say those examples you posted? Is it not ok? People in here can say what they want, but be it on their head. If it is out of line, it will be dealt with. If someone claims something concrete about the President, fine. If someone asks them to prove it and they cant, they dont look exactly legit for it do they? let their words speak for them Z Edge. Are you claiming you are offended by every negative remark or blatant lie someone posts about the pres? What do you want done? All these threads closed so there is no anti Bush commentary? Do you want all the people banned who make these comments/lies? Suggest we get rid of anyone who does not support this war, or does not support your president?


The rest is just opinion. Argue your opinion til the cows come home. Attack someone, and get the treatment it deserves. Post a lie or bold untruth about something, and look like the BS'er you are. get flamed for it. Post a contrary opinion and participate in the debate that will follow.

We cant stop anyone from saying anything they want in here. We just have to clean it up once its said.

Z edge and everyone, go ahead and claim whatever the hell you want. If someone wants some evidence or proof, be prepared to show it, or look like a liar. Say that Bush takes drugs. If you can prove it, show it. If you cant, be prepared to look like a liar. its quite simple really.

Im going to bed. The alien baby needs sleep apparently.

Cant keep up with me it seems.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Blah..I didnt mean you in particular when I said 'you' in the other post z wege. i meant 'you all', 'us all' in general. half of it was directed at you. Hope you can interpret my half comatose rambling crap. im going to sleep for a few days.

g'night.

 

[Lilly]

So then, it is still okay to say:

Bush is a drug user

and

Bush = Hitler


And if you take offense to that you will get into trouble, simply put.

i don't like when people call bush hitler. which would be why i changed the title of this thread because it had nothing to do with "bush similar to hitler," it dealt with propaganda useage.

if you take offense to it, say it. please keep it to the issue, please do not attack people for their beliefs. moreover, talk about the issue presented in the thread NOT past issues.

we urge you to keep fym nice. i don't want to see it taken away.

lilly