Bush would lose the debate to the potatoe.
Sorry for the delay. I’ve been working my ass off! Anyhoo…
I’m not sure what scared you, my statement or what Bush would like to do our Constitution. AFAIK, there has never been an amendment ratified that specifically, and in no uncertain terms, excludes any US citizen from the enjoying the rights afforded to all other citizens. Sure, there were amendments that didn’t specifically include ALL citizens leading to narrow interpretations that ultimately disenfranchised parts of the population. But those have since been corrected by subsequent amendments that clarified and expanded the rights of the disenfranchised.
What Bush wants to do, OTOH, is specifically amend the Constitution to read, “You gay? Too bad, so sad. No pursuit of happiness for you.” :mad:
And yet at the same time he says,
“I also have this belief, strong belief, that freedom is not this country’s gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty’s gift to every man and woman in this world.” George W. Bush, 04.13.2004
and, this one is priceless:
“So long as I’m the President, I will press for freedom. I believe so strongly in the power of freedom.” George W. Bush, 04.13.2004
So, you decide. Bullshitter extraordinaire?
Remember, folks, this is the same G. W. Bush who, after having domains like bushsucks.com and bushblows.com registered to keep them out of the hands of critics, had this response to the launch of gwbush.com:
“There ought to be limits to freedom of speech”
Well, sure, Georgie. You shouldn’t legally be able to yell “FIRE!” in a crowded theatre, or say your crushed-chalk-and-sugar pills will cure cancer. Being pissed because someone took the most bleeding obvious domain to lampoon you is understandable, but is also protected by the First Amendment. Sure, you had the right to say that, too. But what was that quote by Mark Twain? Something about not opening your mouth?
And frankly, this whole June 30th deadline for the turnover of power in Iraq is, well… let’s just say he’s going to step on his dick, and hard.
Like… derrr… don’t you think the rest of us already know that? For crying out loud! Anything else PROFOUNDLY BLEEDING OBVIOUS you’d like to point out?
Look, the problem as I see it is this… what we have here with “London’s” observations is a classic case of “I’m quite happy to strangle my own mother thank you, but don’t YOU dare say a bad word about her…”
My point being that if London Calling was from anywhere WITHIN the USA you guys would be merely discussing his comments for what they’re worth - not from where they came from.
But nooooooooo… somebody from outside the USA has the unmitigated gall and temerity to make an observation about the quality of the US Presidential Electoral process and out comes the hysterical accusations of xenophobia etc. Well, all I can say is… physician, heal thyself. Take the observations for what they’re worth - because they have merit, and more importantly, the sooner you Americans realise that a sizeable portion of the rest of the world is openly laughing at your President, the sooner you’ll realise your President is having a direct affect on your global trade, and the esteem in which you’re held.
Man, I hate making comments like that, but it really pisses me off when some Americans are happy to openly describe the US President as the “leader of the free world” and then, when somebody from that free world makes a comment, it’s like no… he’s our President, not yours!
Technically, IIRC, Rumsfeld’s full title is “Secretary of state for Defense”. Doubt the Chimpanzee-in-Chief knows that anyway, but he might just have been being overly formal.
Apropos of nothing, remember the Bush/Gore debate, and how a lot of people said that Gore was too condescending? As I watched the press conference, I couldn’t help thinking that Bush is the most fucking condescending man on Earth. I really, really, don’t get that whole thing.
[QUOTE=Jackmannii]
Sorry babe.
Can’t be half as arrogant, though, as someone’s proclaiming (based on a loftily ignorant perch across the Atlantic) that GWB’s presence in office confirms the fundamental failure of the American system.I feel no compelling urge to convince you.
[quote]
Hey cuteness you must be able to see him from your own ignorant perch on your side of the Atlantic, you know the side where the nectar and ambrosia of freedom flows for all.
You made an absolute statement that your system was the best. I say maybe it is but until you know about all the others and then make a judgement you look and sound like one of those USA, USA, USA chanting muppets.
No, quite a few apparently do not, or they would not be making such counterproductively foolish remarks.
I take issue with anyone arguing that Bush’s presence in office indicates the fundamental failure of the American political system. Ignorance is even less palatable when the observations come from someone who drags in his xenophobic predjudices at every opportunity.
I kind of doubt this. The rest of the world seems only too happy to sell us stuff and balloon our trade imbalance. Make too much noise about U.S. policy, start boycotts and such and you risk pissing off the golden goose. It’s the new global economy.
Man, that’s some stupid shit. Of course people will still take your money. Maybe the point is they’re not so willing to give you theirs. You think the credit card never has to be paid off? God, some people are stupid.
Especially when they don’t read or comprehend the remarks they are responding to.
Again (should I quadruple space this or make some other effort to write sloooowly?), boycotts (in the unlikely event that effective ones take place) risk backfiring, either through official or informal retaliatory action. You think Americans are the only people somehow irreversibly wedded to the idea of buying foreign goods? Now that’s stupid.
I suppose one way I could be proved wrong is if the non-U.S. Dopers rise up en masse and demand their subscription money back from the (U.S-based) SDMB and new conscripts stop joining.
The appeal of scolding the Americans couldn’t be that addictive, could it?
Wait…are you implying that they’re robbing the US? Riiiiight. We’re giving them money, and getting nothing in return. Yep. Must be it. Oh, those incredible Americans, who are untrustworthy swindlers and stupid pawns.
Of course they are. People at home are too. Why do you arrogantly assume that we should care what a small minority abroad (of course, you will respond, without cites, that it is a great majority. Yay for faceless, argumentless masses of people!) thinks? Oh, right, because…
Care to back that up, or is that just wishful thinking? It’s amazing how much the far-left thinks that they can get away with saying.
Oh, and it’s effect.
Yes.
Just going on record, as an American, to state that some of us are aware that over one fifth of our $7 Trillion (that’s “Seven thousand million” for some of you blokes) debt is held by foreign investors, and that their confidence is being eroded by this President, and that this is indeed an important thing to take note of.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled bickering.
Doh! My limey-speak is off. “Seven thousand million” in debt would be 1/10 of a percent of our current level. Wishful thinking, perhaps…
You’re the only one talking about boycotts. I don’t know where you got the idea that someone said that “Americans are the only people somehow irreversibly wedded to the idea of buying foreign goods”. I’m not sure what that even means.
I think that the appeal of the SDMB is actually the opportunity to educate people, and if necessary to scold willfully stupid people. People like you give the rest of us opportunities.
athelas: When come back, bring coherence.
As you say in the real world the majority of US voters don’t care what the outside world thinks of Bush but to not believe that he is treated like a joke by the majority of Non Americans(at least Europeans) is to live in the twilight zone.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,114608,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/11/11/britain.bush.poll.ap/
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1108913/posts
Some aren’t that recent but it’s only got worse not better.
And of course you have the cites to show that these foreign investors, unmotivated as they are by mere concerns about monetary return, are pulling out of the U.S. en masse to dramatize their opposition to Bush Administration foreign policy.
There’s probably far greater concern among such investors about the catapulting national debt in general. And both GWB and his opposition take the blame for creating it.
I don’t have a short answer for that one. For the last few years I’ve been seeing some pretty silly ideas on message boards that have originated from other parts of the world, so I’m skeptical that Bush himself is the whole problem. There are legitimate complaints, then there’s propaganda. The facts are that both Bush and Kerry have privileged backgrounds, had families active in diplomatic circles, had similar education. Both have extensive political and social connections. Yet a British guy that I debate with sometimes, who seems to be well-informed in all other aspects, was suggesting that Bush had never been out of Texas before running for President. You see things like this and begin to wonder what the political machinations in Europe are doing vis-a-vis American politics, and then, how much you should let it influence your decisions here. JMO.
Besides that, I just don’t trust Kerry, can’t figure out what he stands for, and he’s my Senator. ::shrugs::
Two things, really.
We are now not talking about how people like Bush can get elected, but rather how he could get re-elected. That is scarier by some order of magnitude given the people now understand the man and his agenda better than they did first go around.
Second, I tend to think of information itself (quality, quantity, etc) as being part of the democratic “system”, and I fear that is one area in which US democracy suffers greatly.
You may disagree, or view it as something “missing”, I guess it doesn’t matter how we characterise it the net result is the same; the people are not well served by independent media and their judgement is influenced by propaganda (example Fox and Murdoch’s corporate-capitalist agenda, equally prevalent in many forms - perhaps more subtle - throughout US society, imho)
There is no obligation – whether in law or via, say, an Industry Code of Conduct’ – for broadcasters to carry objective, unbiased reporting in relation to news and current affairs.
And to Mr/s Knee-Jerk, yes, you have a Constitution. It’s flawed, that’s why you have Bush and why you may have him again. IMHO, of course.