By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Bush's final plan to gaurantee his place in history.

akuma587 on 31 October 2008
Words Of Wisdom said:
akuma587 said:

Women have breasts an ass for one reason, to please me.  Why should we allow them to sue for sexual harassment.  It used to be you could pressure any woman in the work place into sex or threaten that she would lose her job.  Those were the good ol' days...

Those "good ol' days" are still alive in Russia.

In fact, they're so much alive that Russian women have to attach notes when applying for jobs stating "intim nye predlagat" indicating that they will not sleep with their bosses/hirers.  Of course, that means they're automatically put on the bottom pile of people to hire as well.

Ignorance must be bliss for you.

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or if you didn't pick up on my sarcasm.  But the point is made either way.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
Broncos724 on 31 October 2008
steven787 said:
Broncos724 said:
These moves would clearly be unpopular, so now is the best time to do it if you're the Bush administration. And I say the less the government regulates our lives, the better.

 

This is the confusion people often have.  This isn't government regulating your life.  This is government regulating things that effect your life that you wouldn't have any control over.  Like Bush has already done to the inspection of food, regulation of the sale of drugs, the testing of contaminants and poisons in products like toys, banking supervision, the security of our airports and seaports, and now he wants to extend that to everything else.

Saying " the less the government regulates our lives, the better", when we are talking about government regulation for health, safety, or security of finances demonstrates a lack of understanding. 

Regulating the manufacture, shipment, and sale of items or products that we can not control as individual citizens is not a bad thing.  It's actually understood in capitalism, that to have a free market you need to have equal information.  The government has the duty to make sure these things are safe because if they are not you'll find out after you're already sick or dead.

Of course all the genius amateur-free market-economists on the internet would not know that, because they've never tried to actually learn about it.

BTW, on an aside:

When does a republican stay out of your life?  Guns and...  guns and...

If they had had their way over the past 50 years, blacks still would barely be able to vote, discrimination for race, gender, age, and disability would still be a-OK, your boss would still be able to sexually harass you, and injustice would be even more rampant than it is today.  If you're gay, they don't want you to have rights.  If your young or black, they don't want you to vote.  If your skin is brown, they don't want you to immigrate.  If you don't believe in their god, they want to kick you out of school.  If you get injured while doing something heroic, they send you a medical bill.  They tap your phone and arrest you with out due process, in the name of the public good.

 

The main function of government is to protect its people (at least that is how I see it).  So clearly there are some regulations that are necessary, and I agree with this.  But at some point regulations become more burdensome than helpful, they stifle economic growth.  When regulating something there's a tradeoff, and the question is whether or not the increased security is worth the economic decrease.

Oh and with that last paragraph, great way to associate the entire Republican party with the radical religious nutjobs of the right.  Way to be mature.



Retrasado on 31 October 2008

lol. well, I don't think this is a good idea, but the guy who wrote that article is a freakin' retard. If you're going to write a news story, at least TRY to sound at least borderline neutral....



Not trying to be a fanboy. Of course, it's hard when you own the best console eve... dang it

steven787 on 31 October 2008

If you're going to be president at lease TRY not to fuck up the country completely and listen to people with a varying degree of opinions.

Edit: BTW, I agree, the article is ridiculously biased.  But the fact of the article remain unchanged, and it's not good for the people who live here.  The wealth of the nation is more than just GDP.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Jackson50 on 31 October 2008
steven787 said: Of course all the genius amateur-free market-economists on the internet would not know that, because they've never tried to actually learn about it.

I concur with this sentiment. I am shocked at how many people have never heard of an externality. There are some cases where government involvement is necessary. Now, I probably disagree with some of you on the amount of regulation required in certain areas, but to automatically state that less regulation is good without thoroughly assessing the situation is…silly. 

 



Around the Network
WiiStation360 on 31 October 2008

Once the public finds out about this, I expect Bush's approval rating to take a serious hit. Oh wait... Nothing to lose. Might as well cram in everything you still can while you still have the chance.

If you think this is bad, just wait until he starts handing out Presidential pardons. This stuff happens every time a president leaves office.



akuma587 on 31 October 2008
Retrasado said:
lol. well, I don't think this is a good idea, but the guy who wrote that article is a freakin' retard. If you're going to write a news story, at least TRY to sound at least borderline neutral....

The guy works for The Washington Post, a newspaper that endorsed McCain. 

Show me where the article inserts a liberal bias.  I read through the entire thing and I don't see any interjection of bias by the author, even though there is plenty of good reason to inject bias.  He is very tame compared to most articles I read.

This is a typical Republican shenanigan, to blame the messenger and hope that people will ignore the message.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

akuma587 on 31 October 2008
Jackson50 said:
steven787 said: Of course all the genius amateur-free market-economists on the internet would not know that, because they've never tried to actually learn about it.

I concur with this sentiment. I am shocked at how many people have never heard of an externality. There are some cases where government involvement is necessary. Now, I probably disagree with some of you on the amount of regulation required in certain areas, but to automatically state that less regulation is good without thoroughly assessing the situation is…silly. 

 

Hey!  There is obviously no harm to anyone allowing corporations to pump lead into the air and dump toxins into our rivers.  Shouldn't we be more concerned with how this will affect the market?  I mean those corporations might have to pay a few thousand dollars to dispose of their waste properly.  That it money that is being taken out of your pocket to spread the wealth around that hurts Joe The Plumber and Suzie the Sailor and Billy the Builder.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Jackson50 on 31 October 2008

I find it dubious that the Post endorsed McCain. I imagine you are referring to the Times.

*edit* My inclination was correct. The Times endorsed McCain, and the Post endorsed Obama.

http://www.demconwatchblog.com/2008/09/presidential-newspaper-endorsement-list.html 



akuma587 on 31 October 2008
Jackson50 said:
I find it dubious that the Post endorsed McCain. I imagine you are referring to the Times.

I can't find it at the moment but I remember seeing it on Realclearpolitics.com.  Neither their or the Washington Post's search function lets me bring it up. 

Even if they didn't endorse McCain, this article is still not biased in any noticeable way.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson