View Full Version : Why is Bush a good president?
Anyone? And, to simplify, I could prefer that we start with one claim, post some links, and figure out that one before moving on to the next...[:D]
No one has a positive assertion to make?
pelastration
Oct25-03, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by Zero
No one has a positive assertion to make?
I believe I found one: He really supports the US weapon industry and insures that way 'extra' jobs !
I don't believe Gore would have done this better.
Some 'holes' in Florida made the difference.
Originally posted by pelastration
I believe I found one: He really supports the US weapon industry and insures that way 'extra' jobs !
I don't believe Gore would have done this better.
Some 'holes' in Florida made the difference. Ok, so, if you are a millionaire arms dealer, you are better off thanks to Bush?
pelastration
Oct25-03, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by Zero
Ok, so, if you are a millionaire arms dealer, you are better off thanks to Bush?
Aren't those millionaire arms dealers telling Bush what to do? They give him the comics to read.
I am sure one of them is Superman. [!:)]
Originally posted by pelastration
Aren't those millionaire arms dealers telling Bush what to do? They give him the comics to read.
I am sure one of them is Superman. [!:)] Now, now...I was hoping for some serious discussion here...making fun of Bush's intelligence isn't getting us anywhere.
Bush has the guts to lie, big time, to the American people ... No whimpy lies like Clinton told. And, better yet, he's convinced he has God on his side. What more could you want from a President?
You guys aren't getting into the spirit of this thread...I want a Bush supporter to post something good that Bush has actually done for America. And, hopefully, it will be something that no one else would have done but him, some sort of bold initiative that he and his administration came up with. Something bold, and something that worked!
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 02:09 AM
Well, Zero, What do you expect, you have posted this in a forum full of educated people... Educated people arrive at the same conclusions.
On the other hand, one could say that Bush has been given a ****ty hand to play with... IMO, these have been two pretty terrible years for a conservative leader. Ofcourse he can manipulate the general public, as any president can, and still attain the majority will. But he cannot manipulate the educated; Eventually, the educated will manipulate the general public against the conservative.
One could say that under Bush, the **** has slid down hill slower.
If that is a positive thing...
Originally posted by Mattius_
Well, Zero, What do you expect, you have posted this in a forum full of educated people... Educated people arrive at the same conclusions.
On the other hand, one could say that Bush has been given a ****ty hand to play with... IMO, these have been two pretty terrible years for a conservative leader. Ofcourse he can manipulate the general public, as any president can, and still attain the majority will. But he cannot manipulate the educated; Eventually, the educated will manipulate the general public against the conservative.
One could say that under Bush, the **** has slid down hill slower.
If that is a positive thing... I was hoping that someone would make a supportable argument for re-electing Bush...I honestly don't see one, but obviously not everyone who votes for him is a slobbering moron.
Why is Bush a good president?
"Good" compared to who?
Educated people arrive at the same conclusions.
I object.
Originally posted by kat
"Good" compared to who? Not good compared to anyone...can you present stand-alone reasons that Bush is a good president?
Originally posted by Hurkyl
I object. Ok. But why ??
pelastration
Oct26-03, 09:30 AM
I think good or bad are just perception definitions in relation to each one's goals, idea's or ethics.
For sure Bush or his administration have done a number of good things. But other may be called doubtful.
My concern is that a number of his decisions may be based on pure religious motives, pure fundamentalist believes (like being be chosen not only by the voters but also by God ... with the task to bring his will on Earth). On Internet I found indications on that but I don't know how solid these are.
So if Bush has not only a RED telephone direct with Putin but also a direct BLUE telephone line with God then we may have a problem.
We see a number of similar world leaders like that: the Iranese top, Sharon, the Pope, .... whom all 'believe' they represent a 'chosen group' and have an "un-doubtful right" to tell others how everything should be organized and settled.
History shows were extremes can lead: Stalin and Pol-Pot (pseudo religion), Hitler ( superior race), ...
There is something like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and I believe that is very important.
(http://www.un.org/rights/50/decla.htm)
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Fundamentalist standpoint's are in essence anti-democratic, and in a certain extend even racist if a certain group is give a natural supremacy given by God. They deny that other have similar rights as themselves.
When cultures (based on supremacy of race or religion) clash on the world map (cfr. Former Yugoslavia, Palestine, ...) we always see growth of extremism and the behavior which embeds aggression and motives for terrorism. We see always that action causes reaction.
Tolerance is the key to a better world.
So a question arises: Why does US (Bush) fears of the International Court of Justice (http://www.icj-cij.org/). Are there things we don't know? Did Clinton had the same problems with the ICJ? No.
Originally posted by pelastration
When cultures (based on supremacy of race or religion) clash on the world map (cfr. Former Yugoslavia, Palestine, ...) we always see growth of extremism and the behavior which embeds aggression and motives for terrorism. We see always that action causes reaction.
Tolerance is the key to a better world.
So a question arises: Why does US (Bush) fears of the International Court of Justice (http://www.icj-cij.org/). Are there things we don't know? Did Clinton had the same problems with the ICJ? No.
Ha ! Ha ! HA ! [:D]
What a bunch of BS ! [:D] "International" court of "justice" ?! [g)]
Who the hell are you (not personally - in general) to tell
people what justice is ? When the last time you fought somebody
or lived hard lives or had to combat terrorists. Your pathetic
European Union thinks it can decide what justice is for
everyone on the planet ? What are you the smartest ? The most
just ? Where's all that "major experience" coming from, huh ?
You think you know what the normal way of life is, what
real principles are ? Not according to history. As for the
way you live - you're on burrowed time and the clock is
ticking loudly, enjoying your short lived supperiority over
the huge 3rd world and developing countries that will soon
leave your economy in the gutter as "hard-working" people
like you should expect. International Court of Justice ?
Ask a person from a 3rd world country wheather he would
like to spend the rest of his life in your air-conditioned,
cable-TV, sports active, 3 full meals a day jails and he'll
admit any crime you want him to. Did the sense of "Justice"
of west Europe get born (except the UK) before it lived
under Hitler or maybe during that time. How about
the French sense of "justice", their recent history
is saturated with it. So take your justice and your
"International" court and preach to some 3rd world country
that cares, at least while it has no choice and is being
payed for it.
Nothing personal btw, I was just adressing Belgium, the EU,
and the rest of your "international" self-appointed
"super-rightouss" fools.
BTW, this is off topic, pelastration. [;)]
Live long and prosper.
So, drag...where are the reasons for your support of Bush? Stay on topic, please.
Originally posted by pelastration
I think good or bad are just perception definitions in relation to each one's goals, idea's or ethics.
For sure Bush or his administration have done a number of good things. But other may be called doubtful.
My concern is that a number of his decisions may be based on pure religious motives, pure fundamentalist believes (like being be chosen not only by the voters but also by God ... with the task to bring his will on Earth). On Internet I found indications on that but I don't know how solid these are.
So if Bush has not only a RED telephone direct with Putin but also a direct BLUE telephone line with God then we may have a problem.
We see a number of similar world leaders like that: the Iranese top, Sharon, the Pope, .... whom all 'believe' they represent a 'chosen group' and have an "un-doubtful right" to tell others how everything should be organized and settled.
History shows were extremes can lead: Stalin and Pol-Pot (pseudo religion), Hitler ( superior race), ...
There is something like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and I believe that is very important.
(http://www.un.org/rights/50/decla.htm)
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Fundamentalist standpoint's are in essence anti-democratic, and in a certain extend even racist if a certain group is give a natural supremacy given by God. They deny that other have similar rights as themselves.
When cultures (based on supremacy of race or religion) clash on the world map (cfr. Former Yugoslavia, Palestine, ...) we always see growth of extremism and the behavior which embeds aggression and motives for terrorism. We see always that action causes reaction.
Tolerance is the key to a better world.
So a question arises: Why does US (Bush) fears of the International Court of Justice (http://www.icj-cij.org/). Are there things we don't know? Did Clinton had the same problems with the ICJ? No. This is the something that would be better served in a separate thread, not discussed here.
Originally posted by Zero
Not good compared to anyone...can you present stand-alone reasons that Bush is a good president?
I can't remember a "good" president..not any of those I remember from the last 4 decades at least. No, wait, I take that back...Carter was a "good" president, but he was not a very effective one.
Originally posted by kat
I can't remember a "good" president..not any of those I remember from the last 4 decades at least. No, wait, I take that back...Carter was a "good" president, but he was not a very effective one. If there are no 'good' presidents, then at least we can ask if their policies have the promised outcomes, and whether those outcomes are a positive or negative for all of us.
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 05:15 PM
The defeating thing of this all is the fact that policies generally have long term affects, and yet we vote for people on those same policies in the present.
Long story short, we cant judge a presidents actions until we look at them in retrospect, from a distance, and with little emotion.
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 05:17 PM
Ok, i just thought of something positive about bush.
There havent been anymore terrorist attacks on u.s. soil.
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 05:21 PM
Also, He has kept US casualties low in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Originally posted by Mattius_
Ok, i just thought of something positive about bush.
There havent been anymore terrorist attacks on u.s. soil. Is that something Bush is responsible for? How many terrorists attacks have there been on U.S. soil total? (I assume you mean foreign terrorism)
Originally posted by Mattius_
Also, He has kept US casualties low in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Really? He did that? Is that the goal of the military? And would there have been less casualties if he had done things differently?
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 05:42 PM
See, i knew it would come to this...
Anything a president does is reflected through lower bodies...
If 100,000 soldiers died in Afghanistan and Iraq, who would be blamed?? The generals??? HA! You had better believe bush would be taking ALLLLLL of the heat from that.
Also, I think you forgot that the person to appoints commanding generals IS the president.
russ_watters
Oct26-03, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by Zero
Really? He did that? Is that the goal of the military? And would there have been less casualties if he had done things differently? Zero, I thought the question was if he was "good"? Now you seem to be asserting that unless he's perfect, he can't be good.
And yes, keeping casualties low is a goal of the military's leadership, which includes both the uniformed and civilian leadership.
In any case, the primary thing that I see from Bush that is good is leadership. Its the reason presidents have a high approval rating during time of war, but it is very difficult to quantify.
Chemicalsuperfreak
Oct26-03, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by Mattius_
Also, He has kept US casualties low in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
If he hadn't lied about WMD in Iraq there wouldn't have been any casualties in Iraq.
And as for Afghanistan, we had the Northern Alliance do all of the real fighting for us, which is probably why most of the Taliban and Al Qaeda were able to slip away.
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 06:33 PM
Who really cares if the taliban and al-qaeda got away? they arent here, and they havent been able to get here, so who the hell cares?
secondly, the war in iraq was much more than wmd's it was aimed to do a multitude of other things. Sure he lied about wmd's but it was his justification to get other things on his agenda done.
Originally posted by Mattius_
Who really cares if the taliban and al-qaeda got away? they arent here, and they havent been able to get here, so who the hell cares?
secondly, the war in iraq was much more than wmd's it was aimed to do a multitude of other things. Sure he lied about wmd's but it was his justification to get other things on his agenda done. That's an...interesting(?) argument. You don't care about the purpose of the invasion of Afghanistan, and you don't care if the president lies to the American people about why our troops and Iraqi civilians are dying? Wow, honesty, cool!![:D]
Originally posted by russ_watters
Zero, I thought the question was if he was "good"? Now you seem to be asserting that unless he's perfect, he can't be good.
And yes, keeping casualties low is a goal of the military's leadership, which includes both the uniformed and civilian leadership.
In any case, the primary thing that I see from Bush that is good is leadership. Its the reason presidents have a high approval rating during time of war, but it is very difficult to quantify. Two questions:
1) How do I make assertions by asking questions?
2) How do you define leadership?
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 09:31 PM
Hmmm, The purpose of invading Afghanistan... Hmmm...
Well, since the general public didnt even know where Afghanistan was until after 9-11 so im going so say the invasion had something to do with 9-11...
I think, if i recall, the purpose of the invasion was to...
they arent here, and they havent been able to get here
oh yea, i already stated that... The primary objective for the invasion of Afghanistan was to root out the taliban and their constituents, and keep them from harming America again.
So, i go back to my original statement:
Who really cares if the taliban and al-qaeda got away? they arent here, and they havent been able to get here, so who the hell cares?
Secondly, Last time I checked, the civilian casualty count was not available... so how can YOU begin to postulate our brutality? Also, last time i checked, losing a couple hundred soldiers in a war which removes another person from power is UNPRECEDENTED IN HISTORY. k?
please try to avoid being a product of the media. Thx!
Originally posted by Mattius_
Secondly, Last time I checked, the civilian casualty count was not available... so how can YOU begin to postulate our brutality? Also, last time i checked, losing a couple hundred soldiers in a war which removes another person from power is UNPRECEDENTED IN HISTORY. k?
please try to avoid being a product of the media. Thx! Can I ask you a question? How do you balance the idea that Iraq was a threat to the U.S. with the fact that we steamrolled over Iraq with minimal casualties?
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 09:48 PM
What did i say before?
In my opinion, the Iraqi war had very little to do with Iraq. When i said:
the war in iraq was much more than wmd's it was aimed to do a multitude of other things. Sure he lied about wmd's but it was his justification to get other things on his agenda done.
Those 'other things' include economic issues, society issues, and the fact it was inherently easy because of our people's general sentiments to the middle-east, and the fact that we could justify it by screaming TERRORRISM!!!
And ofcourse, along the way, we take a dictator out in the name of 'freedom.'
So, to respond to your question, Id say that you participated in libel, and misrepresented me to the rest of this forum, apologize.
i prefer bush over gore, but that doesn't say much. I think gore just would've sat around and done nothing... at least bush is stimulating the media... entertaining...
If we find out years from now that going into iraq was a good thing, then i think bush would've been the only one to do it. So go bush! ...course like Mattius said, its a retrospect thing. Right now we can't really tell whether it was good or bad. I also agree with him pretty much on bush's 'lying' or whatever. He had an agenda sure, wmd was just a means of getting the public to agree with him. He is a good leader... he got most of america steeming with pride, ready to go blow up foriegners, and really half of it wasn't even true. But, again, if we find out later on that it was all worth it, then he's a great guy...
Lets see though... concrete things that bush has done well... i dunno.
Originally posted by Gale17
i prefer bush over gore, but that doesn't say much. I think gore just would've sat around and done nothing... at least bush is stimulating the media... entertaining...
If we find out years from now that going into iraq was a good thing, then i think bush would've been the only one to do it. So go bush! ...course like Mattius said, its a retrospect thing. Right now we can't really tell whether it was good or bad. I also agree with him pretty much on bush's 'lying' or whatever. He had an agenda sure, wmd was just a means of getting the public to agree with him. He is a good leader... he got most of america steeming with pride, ready to go blow up foriegners, and really half of it wasn't even true. But, again, if we find out later on that it was all worth it, then he's a great guy...
Lets see though... concrete things that bush has done well... i dunno. So, if he tells lies that make people happy, it is ok to lie? Don't you think that it is slightly dangerous to act first, and hope it works out later?
And, do you seriously think that anyone who was president would have done nothing after an attack?
So far, we have 'Bush is a good leader' and 'Bush isn't afraid to lie to get his way'...are these two ideas compatable?
So, if he tells lies that make people happy, it is ok to lie? Don't you think that it is slightly dangerous to act first, and hope it works out later?
And, do you seriously think that anyone who was president would have done nothing after an attack?
No, i don't think he'd have done nothing but i doubt he'd go to war, or do too much counter stuff at all. He'd just patch things up, try and make people happy, not stir too much up. Which is fine i guess, but yeah, action imo is better. Which, answers your other question. Action at least keeps things stimulated. And there risk in everything anyways, so sure it may be dangerous to act first, but the question is, "is it worth it." and we don't know yet. We don't know what he knows, we don't know what other agendas he was pushing. And yes, its ok to lie. He is a politician. if it works out in the end, i might think less of his personal morals, but better of him as a leader who got the job done.
Originally posted by Gale17
No, i don't think he'd have done nothing but i doubt he'd go to war, or do too much counter stuff at all. He'd just patch things up, try and make people happy, not stir too much up. Which is fine i guess, but yeah, action imo is better. Which, answers your other question. Action at least keeps things stimulated. And there risk in everything anyways, so sure it may be dangerous to act first, but the question is, "is it worth it." and we don't know yet. We don't know what he knows, we don't know what other agendas he was pushing. And yes, its ok to lie. He is a politician. if it works out in the end, i might think less of his personal morals, but better of him as a leader who got the job done. Is attacking always the answer? And I'm confused about your use of the word 'stimulated'...
And, to play devil's advocate here...if he is lying about his motives, how can you trust anything he says or does? What if his real motivation is to follow the voices in his head, beamed by microwave from Altair IV? Or, just the normal accusation, which is the quest to control the world's oil supplies.
So far, we have 'Bush is a good leader' and 'Bush isn't afraid to lie to get his way'...are these two ideas compatable?
guess it depends on what you think a good leader is...
Originally posted by Gale17
guess it depends on what you think a good leader is... Well, some people consider things like integrity to matter...and some don't.
And, to play devil's advocate here...if he is lying about his motives, how can you trust anything he says or does? What if his real motivation is to follow the voices in his head, beamed by microwave from Altair IV? Or, just the normal accusation, which is the quest to control the world's oil supplies.
He's the president... i didn't vote for him... but a lot of other people did. I don't trust him and more than i would any other human being, less because he's so much power. But he's making things happen, which i think is better than nothing happening, so i don't care what his motives are right now.
Now, I'm first going to assume that if he heard voices or was beamed here that someone would have caught on... unless its some huge conspiracy, in which case, i'll just stay out of it. Conspiracies aren't my bag. If it's to control oil, then whatever. We're America, we're supposed to try and dominate everyone aren't we? I mean that seriously though. I think bush is just American, he's doing exactly what America wants, most anyways, which is what a president's supposed to do.
Originally posted by Gale17
He's the president... i didn't vote for him... but a lot of other people did. I don't trust him and more than i would any other human being, less because he's so much power. But he's making things happen, which i think is better than nothing happening, so i don't care what his motives are right now.
Now, I'm first going to assume that if he heard voices or was beamed here that someone would have caught on... unless its some huge conspiracy, in which case, i'll just stay out of it. Conspiracies aren't my bag. If it's to control oil, then whatever. We're America, we're supposed to try and dominate everyone aren't we? I mean that seriously though. I think bush is just American, he's doing exactly what America wants, most anyways, which is what a president's supposed to do. Wow. I am suddenly scared for the future of America.
Wow. I am suddenly scared for the future of America.
why????
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 10:25 PM
Well Zero, You seemed to have skipped over my post altogether, should that be considered a form of deception? Is deception a form of lying?
Nonetheless, I will skip it with you, because i got my point across last post.
Now then, as far as your battle against falsehood Zero, i would say that without lying, we would still be in caves...
Lying gets things done. Its a way of life, my sister nannies for these 2 kids, one is 5 the other is 2, we gave the 2 year old a box of m&ms to share with her brother, she gave him some, ate some, and then hid the rest of the candy in her car seat. When we asked her to share with her brother again she told us it was all gone.
Lying is apart of evolution, that is where intelligence comes in, if you can lie and get away with it, more power to you! You get the m&ms, the other person can starve, Natural Selection!
I'd just like to say that zero, mattius, i love you guys. You're so cool. politics must bring out the best in people.
Mattius_
Oct26-03, 10:51 PM
Heh, Zero and I have a 'love to hate' relationship... We are always waiting for eachother to slip up. The kind of debate that stems from this relationship is often humourous, as it is now...
Originally posted by Mattius_
What did i say before?
In my opinion, the Iraqi war had very little to do with Iraq. When i said:
Those 'other things' include economic issues, society issues, and the fact it was inherently easy because of our people's general sentiments to the middle-east, and the fact that we could justify it by screaming TERRORRISM!!!
And ofcourse, along the way, we take a dictator out in the name of 'freedom.'
So, to respond to your question, Id say that you participated in libel, and misrepresented me to the rest of this forum, apologize. That's funny...libel? Pffffffffft!!
Oh, by teh way,,,you are describing America as a rogue nation that should be nuked soonest...care to reconsider?
Originally posted by Mattius_
Well Zero, You seemed to have skipped over my post altogether, should that be considered a form of deception? Is deception a form of lying?
Nonetheless, I will skip it with you, because i got my point across last post.
Now then, as far as your battle against falsehood Zero, i would say that without lying, we would still be in caves...
Lying gets things done. Its a way of life, my sister nannies for these 2 kids, one is 5 the other is 2, we gave the 2 year old a box of m&ms to share with her brother, she gave him some, ate some, and then hid the rest of the candy in her car seat. When we asked her to share with her brother again she told us it was all gone.
Lying is apart of evolution, that is where intelligence comes in, if you can lie and get away with it, more power to you! You get the m&ms, the other person can starve, Natural Selection! What's next? martial law, maybe go ahead and install a theocracy?
pelastration
Oct27-03, 05:43 AM
Originally posted by Gale17
If it's to control oil, then whatever. We're America, we're supposed to try and dominate everyone aren't we? I mean that seriously though. I think bush is just American, he's doing exactly what America wants, most anyways, which is what a president's supposed to do.
Originally posted by Mattius_
Well Zero, You seemed to have skipped over my post altogether, should that be considered a form of deception? Is deception a form of lying?
Lying gets things done. Its a way of life, my sister nannies for these 2 kids, one is 5 the other is 2, we gave the 2 year old a box of m&ms to share with her brother, she gave him some, ate some, and then hid the rest of the candy in her car seat. When we asked her to share with her brother again she told us it was all gone.
Lying is apart of evolution, that is where intelligence comes in, if you can lie and get away with it, more power to you! You get the m&ms, the other person can starve, Natural Selection!
Whow ... I am learning a lot reading these straight and clear posts.
But reading Zero's posts and some other I am pleased to noticed that Gale17 and Mattius posts don't reflect the view of all Americans.
For those who find the Bible important ... One of the Ten Commandments (form which some Americans seems to be exempted) states :
"9.__ You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor."
( Gossiping or telling lies or saying false things about others (in court or anywhere) is against God's law.)
http://www.quietwaters.org/ten_copmmandments.htm
Interpretation: http://billboardsforchrist.org/commandments_viii,_ix,_x.htm#Commandment%20IX.
" "False" means not true, wrong, lying, dishonest, incorrect. "Testimony" means making a statement under the promise to tell the truth, a declaration of truth. "Neighbor" means any person at all.
satan is the father of lies: John 8:44 - Jesus said to those who opposed Him, "You belong to your father the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."___ See_ Acts 5:3,_ Rev 21:8_".
Of course there are some more Commandments.
Waiting now for a post telling me that this is out of focus.
Originally posted by pelastration
Whow ... I am learning a lot reading these straight and clear posts.
But reading Zero's posts and some other I am pleased to noticed that Gale17 and Mattius posts don't reflect the view of all Americans.
For those who find the Bible important ... One of the Ten Commandments (form which some Americans seems to be exempted) states :
"9.__ You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor."
( Gossiping or telling lies or saying false things about others (in court or anywhere) is against God's law.)
http://www.quietwaters.org/ten_copmmandments.htm
Interpretation: http://billboardsforchrist.org/commandments_viii,_ix,_x.htm#Commandment%20IX.
" "False" means not true, wrong, lying, dishonest, incorrect. "Testimony" means making a statement under the promise to tell the truth, a declaration of truth. "Neighbor" means any person at all.
satan is the father of lies: John 8:44 - Jesus said to those who opposed Him, "You belong to your father the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."___ See_ Acts 5:3,_ Rev 21:8_".
Of course there are some more Commandments.
Waiting now for a post telling me that this is out of focus. Yeah, just a little out of focus...care to try to bring it all to a point?
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 12:02 PM
Oh, by teh way,,,you are describing America as a rogue nation that should be nuked soonest...care to reconsider?
Listen, your morals are far apart from mine, that is your interpretation, not mine... My interpretation is to view things as they are, and then defend the common sense that human nature produces!
Your interpretation is to view things as they are, and then attach your thoughts on how things should be... A romantic approach, but, inevitably, a catastrophic failure...
Dont tell nature how it is supposed to work, nature is the only denominator that is true... dont tell truth it is wrong...
Originally posted by Mattius_
Listen, your morals are far apart from mine, that is your interpretation, not mine... My interpretation is to view things as they are, and then defend the common sense that human nature produces!
Your interpretation is to view things as they are, and then attach your thoughts on how things should be... A romantic approach, but, inevitably, a catastrophic failure...
Dont tell nature how it is supposed to work, nature is the only denominator that is true... dont tell truth it is wrong... Hmmmm...sounds like someone is angry?[6)]
So, you say that 'human nature' means that the stong should take from the weak, the powerful should ignore the needs of the powerless, and that might makes right?
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 12:20 PM
Not mad at all, hmmm maybe it was because i was listening to eminem... lol
So, you say that 'human nature' means that the stong should take from the weak, the powerful should ignore the needs of the powerless, and that might makes right?
I say that an individual should do whatever he can do advance himself... If people are victimized along the way, tough cookies, thats life... When a human advances itself, the human race subsequently advances as well... Isnt that what we are all aiming for?
Now, please dont confuse my ideology with the implication that i support the harm of people regularly... As i said before, If an individual does something to help himself, then let it be done...
I will soon be volunteering at a homeless shelter, I do it because it makes me feel good inside...
This would be a good example of an individual helping himself advance spiritually, right? So, once he feels confident about himself, he goes onto bigger and brighter things.
There you go...
Somehow, you skirt the edges of being a sociopath...tell me, where does that come from? I know where it comes from with Bush: failing at everything and still advancing, the psychology of an addict...what's your excuse?[6)]
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 12:38 PM
so·ci·o·path ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ss--pth, -sh-)
n.
One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior.
Forgive me for being so literal, but this isnt what you meant was it?
Originally posted by Mattius_
so·ci·o·path ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ss--pth, -sh-)
n.
One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior.
Forgive me for being so literal, but this isnt what you meant was it? If people are victimized along the way, tough cookies, thats life
You tell me, boss...I'm not calling you a sociopath, but some of your statements certainly come close to the definition, don't they?
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 12:57 PM
I can get attached to people, my best friend is in the last leg of his life, 4 years of slow decomposure, all for nothing... Doesnt get much more demoralizing...
This is my conclusion, be objective, be fair, be without emotion when you make decisions.
I don't doubt your ability to empathise with people one-on-one...I do see a disconnect between you and those you would probably consider to be 'other'.
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 01:14 PM
Everything is mathematical... Issues have values, values which are determined by units.
death of a few hundred people for cause 'X' can be expressed in a mathematical equation. The difficult part is assinging values.
Emotion distorts values, it amplifies individual tragedies to more then they really are. That is why the lack of emotion integral to assigning values to issues. Ofcourse, It may come off as sociopathical to the ignorant.
Originally posted by Mattius_
Everything is mathematical... Issues have values, values which are determined by units.
death of a few hundred people for cause 'X' can be expressed in a mathematical equation. The difficult part is assinging values.
Emotion distorts values, it amplifies individual tragedies to more then they really are. That is why the lack of emotion integral to assigning values to issues. Ofcourse, It may come off as sociopathical to the ignorant. I think YOU are the one who ignores human nature. It is 'ignorant' to assume that anyone can divorce themselves from emotion entirely.
And, I think we have gone WAY off-topic.
So, what do we have in favor of Bush? He tells lies people like, he does stuff(no consideration on whether his actions are useful or not', and he 'leads'. Low casualities against nations that apparently weren't a threat. Anything else?
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 01:26 PM
I never said i have tried to branch myself from emotion entirely, that is proposturous.
What i said was that emotion in an important decision(in a leadership position) is bad. You can be emotional in day to day life, but you must leave emotion out when dealing with principal problems...
Originally posted by Mattius_
I never said i have tried to branch myself from emotion entirely, that is proposturous.
What i said was that emotion in an important decision(in a leadership position) is bad. You can be emotional in day to day life, but you must leave emotion out when dealing with principal problems... I don't think Bush does that, exactly...I think he simply doesn't care about people who don't give him money.
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 01:29 PM
Money is a variable for human advancement, isnt it?
Originally posted by Mattius_
Money is a variable for human advancement, isnt it? Depends on whether or not you are a sociopath or not...[6)]
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 01:37 PM
money is a possesion, possesions advance the human race, kinda like that possesion your typing on.
Originally posted by Mattius_
money is a possesion, possesions advance the human race, kinda like that possesion your typing on. [i]Jeez, I thought it was things like knowledge and freedom that advanced the human race, not greed and disregard for our fellow humans...
pelastration
Oct27-03, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by Mattius_
This is my conclusion, be objective, be fair, be without emotion when you make decisions.
Be objective ? ... You said lying is allowed.
Be fair ? ... You said lying is allowed.
Make you decisions without emotions ... and without ethics, without respect?
Boy ... there is a lot of experience you have to go through in this life.
Originally posted by Mattius_
money is a possesion, possesions advance the human race, kinda like that possesion your typing on.
Mattius,
I hope sincerely that you will never meet someone that sees and treats you like on object or as a quantity of meat. That seems the way you look to others. Objects, like Nintendo manikins.
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 05:18 PM
[i]Jeez, I thought it was things like knowledge and freedom that advanced the human race, not greed and disregard for our fellow humans...
Greed and disregard for other humans(in a rational way) are products of freedom. Knowledge comes when people build empires of wealth produced by freedom.
I hope sincerely that you will never meet someone that sees and treats you like on object or as a quantity of meat. That seems the way you look to others. Objects, like Nintendo manikins.
What is Capitalism people? I'll tell you, Capitalism is everything i have said previously! Greed, Self-betterment, and manipulation of other humans. What has Capitalism created? It has created the greatest body of knowledge ever known in history.
You dont like the 3 variables that make up capitalism? Go somewhere else and see how many calories you get a day!
pelastration
Oct27-03, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by Mattius_
Greed and disregard for other humans(in a rational way) are products of freedom. Knowledge comes when people build empires of wealth produced by freedom.
What is Capitalism people? I'll tell you, Capitalism is everything i have said previously! Greed, Self-betterment, and manipulation of other humans. What has Capitalism created? It has created the greatest body of knowledge ever known in history.
You dont like the 3 variables that make up capitalism? Go somewhere else and see how many calories you get a day!
Mattius,
do you have a religion? Is it Bushism? Or Bull****ism? Are your statements what you learned from Daddy? There is so much alienation in what you are saying. Are you clean?
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 07:18 PM
My thoughts are my own. I admire no specific person or ideal, except myself, and my ideal. I dont let any religon show me how things work, I find out how things work on my own. You would be suprised at what rationality comes from my ideology if you actually understood it.
Greed and disregard for other humans(in a rational way) are products of freedom. Knowledge comes when people build empires of wealth produced by freedom.
Hmm... have you ever wonder why the majority of scientists are liberals? Maybe then you will have an idea of the place (or lack of) greed has in generating knowledge.
Yes, true, greed is great at building empires, great collections, forging ivory spires. But these destroy the actual creation of knowledge, real learning. Real progress.
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 07:29 PM
I agree that scientists themselves tend to search for more spiritual advancement, but, scientists are paid by greedy people who want to use a scientists knowledge and benefit from it... Have you ever wondered why the large majority of business owners are repubilican?
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 07:38 PM
How many scientists can you name that werent supported by corporations of governments?
pelastration
Oct27-03, 08:35 PM
For the people having the intellectual and human sensibility and dignity:
For the moment the International Labor Organization says that there are more than 40,000 slaves in Brasile (about 45% in the Fishing industry, about 90% can not write). .
http://www.ilo.org/
Quote: The chief coordinator of this project, Patricia Audi, is far better equipped than myself to discuss the details of this project so I shall not enter into more details at this time. However, it is important to place the issue of Brazilian slave labor in its wider international context. Is this a global problem? Does slavery and forced labor exist throughout the world today? If so, why? Is poverty the main factor to explain it and what can be done about it? What
approaches are needed to root out once and for all an unacceptable scourge of our modern society?
Regrettably, forced labor and slavery are global problems today. They are not relics of a bygone age. They do not survive in a few pockets in remote and isolated parts of developing countries. There are problems of forced labor in all continents in both developing and developed countries, in more open and in more closed societies. It would be rash to speculate as to the exact numbers affected. One author, a well-known author called Kevin Bales, who has a book in ten languages, now, has given a figure of twenty seven million slaves in the world today. This can only be a very rough estimate. At a conference, a very large conference, attended by over one thousand people on trafficking, at the European union in Brussels last week, reference was made to several millions of persons, mainly young women and children being trafficked into slavery for sexual or for labor exploitation. But such figures, I repeat, can at this time only be rough estimates. Forced labor is of its essence a largely clandestine and hidden phenomenon. Who are the victims? The victims, throughout the world, are vulnerable and powerless people often without identity documents or without organizations to represent them. The exploiters may be landlords, feudal landlords, they can be trafficking syndicates and intermediaries linked to organized crime. The agents who force labor, those responsible, may be quite humble individuals, with limited economic resources, such as the gatos or empreiteiros, such a well-known feature of Brazil’s rural labor markets. But the agents can also be highly sophisticated enterprises involved in operations worth billions of dollars.
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 09:06 PM
This is a tragedy i am aware of. I ideologically support the idea that all people should have a chance... Many of these people didnt have a chance to prove themselves... Unfortuneatly, This is how nature works sometimes... This is rough efficiency, which could be purified if every nation in the world endorsed the 'born equal' clause.
However, at what cost does the 'born equal' premise prove effective? Who or what pays for the 'born equal' laws?
It is my interpretation that the born equal clause is paid for by the wealthy, who need their money to expand their own endeavors... Is there a happy medium?
Not under any logic that i am aware of.
Ok well first off i don't think its fair to really attack Matius. Second, this thread isn't really about morals or anything like that. I think that'd be an interesting topic for a different thread but this one is about bush.
My argument is just that even with lies or by any other 'immoral' or 'unethical' means, if bush gets the job done, then he gets it done. As mattius said, we can't really see the big picture deal until later on. Maybe this'll all be for the best, we don't know. I'd say bush is good president just cause he got elected. I'd say it takes a lot of effort and skill to be elected president of the united states. So i'd say whoever can get into that position and stay there is a decent president, even if i don't agree with them.
But maybe we should really decide what defines a good president before we continue this debate eh?
Mattius_
Oct27-03, 09:47 PM
Its ok Gale, Everytime they have attacked me, i have responed with logic greater than their's...
Originally posted by Gale17
Ok well first off i don't think its fair to really attack Matius. Second, this thread isn't really about morals or anything like that. I think that'd be an interesting topic for a different thread but this one is about bush.
My argument is just that even with lies or by any other 'immoral' or 'unethical' means, if bush gets the job done, then he gets it done. As mattius said, we can't really see the big picture deal until later on. Maybe this'll all be for the best, we don't know. I'd say bush is good president just cause he got elected. I'd say it takes a lot of effort and skill to be elected president of the united states. So i'd say whoever can get into that position and stay there is a decent president, even if i don't agree with them.
But maybe we should really decide what defines a good president before we continue this debate eh? You keep saying 'gets the job done'...what 'job'? Ruining the country to line the pockets of his campaign contributors?
pelastration
Oct28-03, 04:16 AM
Originally posted by Zero
You keep saying 'gets the job done'...what 'job'? Ruining the country to line the pockets of his campaign contributors?
This is the job:
Originally posted by Gale17
If it's to control oil, then whatever. We're America, we're supposed to try and dominate everyone aren't we? I mean that seriously though. I think bush is just American, he's doing exactly what America wants, most anyways, which is what a president's supposed to do.
Other countries don't want US-dictates.
Is this what it comes down to? That Americans actually believe that anything is ok, so long as it advances U.S. interests? By Gale17's logic, it is ok if we killed Iraqi civilians for oil...which means murder is ok, so long as you get what you want.
The good news, I guess, is that most people with such a sick view of politics usually don't vote?(We hope?) Jesus, this is disturbing![:(]
we don't know what "the job" is yet. I don't know if it's to get oil or no. Could be something else. I say that the mark of a good president is that he accomplishes his goals with his county's support. Bush is able to get support and it appears he's accomplishing some goal. Whether overall its good for America in general we can't say yet. But what defines a good president?
Originally posted by Gale17
we don't know what "the job" is yet. I don't know if it's to get oil or no. Could be something else. I say that the mark of a good president is that he accomplishes his goals with his county's support. Bush is able to get support and it appears he's accomplishing some goal. Whether overall its good for America in general we can't say yet. But what defines a good president? So it doesn't matter what the goal is, so long as he accomplishes it? What if his goal is to turn America into a dictatorship...if he succeeds in destroying the Constitution, does that make him a good president?
You kids watch too much Survivior, and think that 'winner take all' and 'might makes right' are proper human values.[6)]
Mattius_
Oct28-03, 05:59 PM
you kids? was that remark intended for me?
Also Zero, what is the difference between a person calling someone a sociopath and person calling someone a hypocrite?
>>....who voted for him is a slobbering idiot.
And you are....what?
Originally posted by Mattius_
you kids? was that remark intended for me?
Also Zero, what is the difference between a person calling someone a sociopath and person calling someone a hypocrite? I made it perfectly clear that I was not calling you a sociopath. Read back and see for yourself.
MasterKung
Nov19-03, 08:17 PM
aww man, this discussion was getting good, too bad it ended a few weeks ago, somebody should spark it up again so i can have more fun stuff to read[:D]
im not going to join because i dont know squat about politics, very little on current events, and my own morals confuse me. im surprised i can even walk straight. [6)]
oh, one thing though, my goodness, just reading what some of you have to say makes me look over my shoulder to make sure im not getting stabbed in the back...and i dont even know you. thats pretty bad.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.