We are living in neo-McCarthy, post-democratic times. - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-05-2003, 11:27 AM   #31
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 10:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
BonoVoxSupastar,

"Nice twisting of words...no it's illegal to not hire one who is qualified when you find out their political beliefs aren't that of yours. Just like religion, handicap, etc."

So its illegal for the Jewish family to give the business of mowing their lawn to the Jewish boy down the street rather than the Christian boy?


"No, you are missing the point. The point is not if she's anti-war or not. The point is people collectively are saying that if you are anti-war then you are anti-american. They are accusing people of being anti-american. This is where the "insufficent regard to evidence" lies..."

I wonder if you would give George Bush the same treatment in regards to the "insufficent regard to evidence" lies" that have been thrown at him since he ran for President?
Once again Sting you are not comparing apples to apples with your analogies...

And as far as the Bush comment, you will have to clarify, I'm not understanding your question...what insufficent regard to evidence do we speak of?
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 05-05-2003, 04:19 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:30 PM
BonoVoxSupastar,

"Once again Sting you are not comparing apples to apples with your analogies..."

Once again you fail to answer a simple question.



"And as far as the Bush comment, you will have to clarify, I'm not understanding your question...what insufficent regard to evidence do we speak of?"

I could probably take nearly every criticism leveled against Bush in this forum as an example of "remarks and criticisms being made against the president without sufficient evidence to back it up".

The mistaken victimization that people who critizes Bush or the USA feel is as groundless or baseless as their attacks on Bush for going after Iraq to put money in his pocket.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-05-2003, 04:22 PM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 04:30 PM
STING, does that mean you really believe "nearly every criticism" of Bush is unfounded?
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 05-05-2003, 04:54 PM   #34
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 10:30 AM
Quote:
Once again you fail to answer a simple question.
To answer your question...No it would not be illegal for the family to hire the Jewish boy rather than the Christian Boy. But why did they hire the Jewish boy? Did they hire him because they knew him, was he more experienced? Now if this was a real corporation or business and the Christian male was the qualified one, but they chose not to hire him because he was a Christian and the company was not a Jewish based type of company then yes it would be illegal. But I have a feeling you know this already and just enjoy the hoops.

Quote:
I could probably take nearly every criticism leveled against Bush in this forum as an example of "remarks and criticisms being made against the president without sufficient evidence to back it up".
Well then you really have no reason to be a part of this forum for you are obviously far superior then anyone else taking part in this forum and you're really probably wasting your time.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 05-05-2003, 07:51 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:30 PM
BonoVoxSupastar,

I brought up the Jewish boy example because earlier I think you had made a broad generalization and I think you realize that. I understand its wrong to do that on the corporate level, but you never made the distinction until now.

"Well then you really have no reason to be a part of this forum for you are obviously far superior then anyone else taking part in this forum and you're really probably wasting your time."

I don't see why its necessary to respond like that. I was simply trying to show that many here have a double standard. Its wrong to lable the opposition to the President " without sufficient evidence", but its ok to lable the President "without sufficient evidence".

Is it to much to ask that you treat the president with the same objectivity and respect that you feel those in opposition to the Presidents policies should recieve?

FIZZING,

"STING, does that mean you really believe "nearly every criticism" of Bush is unfounded?"

No. I'm sorry that I suggested that. But I do feel that President Bush gets bashed unfairly often in this forum.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-05-2003, 10:18 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 11:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
"STING, does that mean you really believe "nearly every criticism" of Bush is unfounded?"

No. I'm sorry that I suggested that. But I do feel that President Bush gets bashed unfairly often in this forum.
I agree, that there are some severly warped opinions of him in here on both the pro-Bush and con-Bush sides

Sting, seriously, I have never seen you even come close to being remotely critical of the president. I think communication or maybe even his communication style is his major weakness.

If you were to critique the president what would be the thing you would say he/his administration is weak in?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 05-05-2003, 10:36 PM   #37
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 12:30 PM
Even Bono made, at best, some very questionable fashion choices, if you catch my meaning.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 05-05-2003, 10:54 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:30 PM
Dreadsox,

"If you were to critique the president what would be the thing you would say he/his administration is weak in?"

Campaign Finance Reform, Gun Control, the environment, and some technical differences on which future weapons systems should be getting more or less funding. I also had strong disagreements with Bush's tax cut plan during the election campaign because we had the best economy perhaps in the nations history at that time and a tax cut would simply of increased inflation. Today we need tax cuts to revive the economy.

I was a big supporter of John McCain in the elections. If the primary compaign had continued to Pennsylvania, I would of done everything I could to see John McCain defeat Bush.

I actually think most Americans like his communication style and the fact that he has supplied Saturday Night live with more comedy than even Dan Quayle. But to me, public speaking is show businesses. That was one of Clintons top qualities. I care more about sound decisions on government policy, foreign and domestic, rather than how great a public speaker he is.

He is rather simple and direct when he speaks and does not sound like he is an arrogant "inside the beltway" type of guy. His obvious speaking mistakes make him seem more human and down to earth rather than an Ivy league elitest.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-05-2003, 11:39 PM   #39
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,687
Local Time: 10:30 AM
Quote:
I brought up the Jewish boy example because earlier I think you had made a broad generalization and I think you realize that. I understand its wrong to do that on the corporate level, but you never made the distinction until now.
I apologize for not being clear.

Quote:
I don't see why its necessary to respond like that. I was simply trying to show that many here have a double standard. Its wrong to lable the opposition to the President " without sufficient evidence", but its ok to lable the President "without sufficient evidence".
You stated that nearly every criticism you've heard about Bush on this forum could be used as an example of someone reacting without sufficient evidence. I think it's safe to say this forum has probably had several hundred criticisms of Bush since he's been in office, and you only believe a small few to be credible, I would say that makes me think you believe your views to be superior than a large percentage here.

I have given Bush all the objectivety possible. The difference is Bush's personality and politics are out there for everyone to see. So we can make educated judgements, they may not coincide with yours, but it doesn't mean they are not founded. But judging one's love for their country based on one issue is what I would consider "without sufficient evidence".
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 05-06-2003, 09:51 AM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
He is rather simple and direct when he speaks and does not sound like he is an arrogant "inside the beltway" type of guy. His obvious speaking mistakes make him seem more human and down to earth rather than an Ivy league elitest.
(STING, I'm just quoting this to illustrate point I want to make, it's not specifically a criticism of what you're saying.)

It seems to me that in American politics there's often a concern with whether a candidate seems like "a regular guy" who's "in touch with ordinary people" or whether he's an "elitist" who went to an Ivy League school.

Now, feel free to disagree with me, but I quite like the idea of a President who had a good education. I quite like the idea of a President who's one of the smartest guys in the world. I have no problem with him having been educated at an Ivy League school - in fact I'm encouraged by the idea that he was smart enough to get accepted to an Ivy League in the first place.

I don't find anything endearing about a President who can't construct a sentence without inventing words. What do I care if he can shake hands with your average guy on the street and talk about baseball or whatever inane subject he choses if it means I have to be concerned that when he talks to other world leaders, he's completely outclassed intellectually.

Guess what? Politics is complicated. Presidential level politics even more so. World leaders need to be intelligent enough to make the life-and-death decisions that come with the job. How on earth did we get to the point where being stupid is an asset when running for President? How on earth did we get to a point where in the 2000 election Republicans criticised Gore for being a "know-it-all" as though being an intelligent person should count against someone when running for President.

Why do we went to reduce political discussion to the lowest common denominator? Why can't we accept that when we're discussing international relations, when we're discussing who gets healthcare and who doesn't, when we're discussing how children should be educated and how social security should be funded, it's COMPLICATED. It's not easy, it shouldn't be reduced down to soundbites. When did political debate descend to the level of playground politics?

:::rant over:::
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 11:55 AM   #41
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 05:30 PM
at the moment we can see what hapens if someone tries it with easy solutions.
We see that in the international relations between the US and other countries, wee see that in the budget of the US and in the number of unemployed people
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 04:32 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 11:30 AM
Sting,

Just in case, I want to clarify, when I said communication problem, I was not referring to how intelligent he sounds. I do not believe that the "with us or against us" attitude is effective at communicating with the rest of the world. The schoolyard bully mentality, is not the way to make good friends.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 07:39 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 04:30 PM
Fizzing,

Just because someone wins the spelling bee at their local school does not make them a genious. Also, a person that may have difficulty with public speaking does not mean they are not intelligent. Some of the smartest minds on the planet have difficulty in social settings sometimes. Again, I don't think anyone votes for a leader based on his spelling mistakes or speaking ability. Whats important are the solutions he has to the various problems that confront the world.

Klaus,

The Unemployment rate in the USA is currently about half of what it is in Germany. The current unemployment rate is less than the average unemployment rate under President Clintons first administration.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 07:57 PM   #44
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 05:30 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Klaus,

The Unemployment rate in the USA is currently about half of what it is in Germany. The current unemployment rate is less than the average unemployment rate under President Clintons first administration.
You can't compare that because the statistics were made different! US excludes many long-term unemployed for example and that's the biggest part in our statistics.

There are also other statistical things you can't compare between our country because they just have the same name and are evaluated and calculated in a completely different way! (poverty for example).

More than that you should remember what changed since G.W.Bush is in the office, before that they had a huge plus, now a record minus in the budget...

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 05-06-2003, 08:25 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Just because someone wins the spelling bee at their local school does not make them a genious.
No, it doesn't. Although I can tell you for free that you won't win any spelling bees by spelling "genius" as "genious".

Quote:
Also, a person that may have difficulty with public speaking does not mean they are not intelligent. Some of the smartest minds on the planet have difficulty in social settings sometimes. Again, I don't think anyone votes for a leader based on his spelling mistakes or speaking ability. Whats important are the solutions he has to the various problems that confront the world.
That may be true, but forgive me for not having every confidence in a guy who can't give a five minute speech without going on linguistic safari.

Look, this isn't only about President Bush. It's about the dumbing down of politics in general. It's about the fact that we assume that unless an issue can be reduced to a ten second soundbite, people will lose interest. It's about the fact that people assume that issues like healthcare, education, social security, foreign policy, can be reduced to soundbites in the first place. It's about the fact that stupidity is seen as an asset and intelligence as a burden in political campaigns.

Politicians are told they'll look like "know-it-alls" or "arrogant" if they dare to present themselves as an educated, intelligent individual. We hear phrases like "Ivy League elitists" and we're told that what we really want is a President who's an ordinary guy, who can relate to the average man on the street. Although, while we're on this subject, please someone tell me how exactly a multi-millionaire like Mr. Bush, or any one of the 20+ millionaires in the US Senate, can relate to your 'average' American?

To return to the original subject, "what's important are the solutions he has to the various problems that confront the world." I don't disagree, however I'm beginning to wonder exactly what Mr. Bush's solutions are. Alienating countries which were once key allies of the United States? Increasing military spending by billions of dollars whilst simultaneously passing tax cuts which disproportionately benefit the richest people int he country? Ignoring the continuing chaos in Afghanistan to wage war against Iraq, only to begin preparations for a bombing campaign against Syria before war with Iraq has even ended? Pledging billions of dollars to fight AIDS, only to later disclose that the funding will be targeted to agencies which promote abstinence only, to guarantee himself the support of the hard-right of his party at the next election? And that's only in foreign policy.
__________________

__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com