SSminneapolis Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 John Eisenhower, the Republican son of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, has recently bailed on the party he was a member of for more than 50 years, registered as an Independent, and will be voting for John Kerry this coming election. Read why here (unless, of course, your mind is closed, then don't bother). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> my mind may be close...but at least my head is not up my ass.. i have made my decision...i do not care how john eisenhower is voting. i don't care how anyone is voting but ME. if my candidate wins or looses at least i voted for who I wanted...not who the media made me think i prefer... you are clearly the minority here AV. why not simply post a link to the information you would like to provide and spare us from your commentary...i think we would all be much better off...i know i would... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deezel Posted October 11, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 I'll be the first one to break the rules...check these out... http://www.jibjab.com/ <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dissident! I must admit, those jibjab "commercials" are quite funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deezel Posted October 11, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 NakedAv is ok. He's entitled to his political views just like the rest of us. And he has made attempts to support his views by posting links to information. I'll admit I have not looked at all the links, but give him credit for trying. I can see where some people might view Bush as a hothead. He definitely can get "riled up" when talking about something he has strong feelings about. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Also notice that NakedAv tends to get a little "riled up" himself. I admit that I can be that way, too, at times. For me, I can identify/sympathize with this quality of Bush's personality. In debates or other "pressure" situations, it is easier for a person to be pushed into an "agitated" state. I do not think that Bush is in the same state of mind when he is making important decisions. So even if he appears to be a hothead at times, I think he is more calm and analytical when sitting down with his advisors and discussing policy and making decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBSS Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 John Eisenhower, the Republican son of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, has recently bailed on the party he was a member of for more than 50 years, registered as an Independent, and will be voting for John Kerry this coming election. Read why here (unless, of course, your mind is closed, then don't bother). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> my mind may be close...but at least my head is not up my ass.. i have made my decision...i do not care how john eisenhower is voting. i don't care how anyone is voting but ME. if my candidate wins or looses at least i voted for who I wanted...not who the media made me think i prefer... you are clearly the minority here AV. why not simply post a link to the information you would like to provide and spare us from your commentary...i think we would all be much better off...i know i would... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Wow, I guess you would really like that type of country that Bush is talking about, where there is no dissent. In that case, I'll spare you the commentary (like you requested) and just give you a link (again, like you have requested): SSminneapolis' Ideal World Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoTToN Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 ahhh everyone run bush is here to take over the world!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurbochargedBerserker Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 This is pretty funny. What has happened to our educational system that people believe big decisions like this should be made emotionally? Deezel for attempting to have a logical, fact based discussion. I recently had a discussion with a guy here at work who believes that there isn't a democrat in the world who can logically and calmly discuss politics without resorting to emotional pleas. I personally believe it isn't democrats who have this problem but the extremists -- ya know extreme leftys and extreme rightys. NakedAV says that he doesn't like Kerry, just dislikes Bush, but I've never seen anyone argue more emotionally and less to the point. Just my two cents, Bro -- you are entitled to post anyway you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBSS Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 This is pretty funny. What has happened to our educational system that people believe big decisions like this should be made emotionally? Deezel for attempting to have a logical, fact based discussion. I recently had a discussion with a guy here at work who believes that there isn't a democrat in the world who can logically and calmly discuss politics without resorting to emotional pleas. I personally believe it isn't democrats who have this problem but the extremists -- ya know extreme leftys and extreme rightys. NakedAV says that he doesn't like Kerry, just dislikes Bush, but I've never seen anyone argue more emotionally and less to the point. Just my two cents, Bro -- you are entitled to post anyway you like. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> TCB - I may have passion in my beliefs, but I also make points. If you can't see them, you aren't reading what I'm writing, or you're not seeing them because....well, who knows why, perhaps because you don't want to. So tell me how you just contributed to the discussion? By putting me down in a more relaxed way than SSminneapolis? Did you have a point to make about the topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurbochargedBerserker Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 This is pretty funny. What has happened to our educational system that people believe big decisions like this should be made emotionally? Deezel for attempting to have a logical, fact based discussion. I recently had a discussion with a guy here at work who believes that there isn't a democrat in the world who can logically and calmly discuss politics without resorting to emotional pleas. I personally believe it isn't democrats who have this problem but the extremists -- ya know extreme leftys and extreme rightys. NakedAV says that he doesn't like Kerry, just dislikes Bush, but I've never seen anyone argue more emotionally and less to the point. Just my two cents, Bro -- you are entitled to post anyway you like. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> TCB - I may have passion in my beliefs, but I also make points. If you can't see them, you aren't reading what I'm writing, or you're not seeing them because....well, who knows why, perhaps because you don't want to. So tell me how you just contributed to the discussion? By putting me down in a more relaxed way than SSminneapolis? Did you have a point to make about the topic? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I honestly didn't mean to put you down, Naked and I apologize if you feel that was my intent. As I said, you are completely entitled to post anyway you like and to decide and vote anyway you like. I should've added a similar post to your major oponents in these threads (SSMin?). I wish people on both sides would put away the rhetoric and talk about facts, but it doesn't seem like our system rewards anyone for doing that (elections aren't really about facts anymore anyway -- there have turned into soundbyte fests), and the 'facts' are pretty obfuscated by a media that is rewarded for sensationalism rather that objectivity. Oh and my point was that by coming across as a left-wing hothead, you aren't winning any arguments. In fact, your points are probably not being heard because few people are reading them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSminneapolis Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 so now i am a facist...not even close. if anything the government should look to private companies to take over some of the duties they currently have...we all know private companies would compete to reduce the cost while maintaining strict quality of what ever service they provide...this idea has been tossed around with regards to the regulatory agencies for a few years and is begining to take shape... would be a bad idea to contract some private companies to handle some of the security issues in airports and sea ports...even border crossings...i know there would be plenty of people opting to do that rather than join the military... or adopt something similar to britians MI5...the trouble with that is that it allows agents to break-in and enter peoples homes place wire taps to gather intelligence with only the okay from whomever is in charge..instead of a court order as they are allowed now...the reality with that is that if you aren't doing anything wrong - you really shouldn't worry about them looking at you for information...i am sure the ACLU would have a hissy fit if the governement suggested any such thing...but then again..what has the ACLU done to help the war on terror besides blame agencies for profiling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSminneapolis Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 i have provided facts...and opinions...in the different political threads here... but it seems that the facts that help bush aren't good enough for AV, which is fine by me cause the facts that he provides in attempt to help kerry aren't good enough for me... there is not a single shred of information in the world that could get me to think of kerry as anything but a snake...the war on terror was a nusance...well never get rid of it except to reduce it to a nusance...so last week he was going to track them down and kill them all...but now he is going to reduce it to a nusance...enough said... with regards to nakedAV earlier post (#13)...yes politicians are supposed to represent what the people want..but people vote on their candidate based on their core beliefs and convictions...kerry has none. his core beliefs are whichever way the polls are swinging...i am sure that if the polls suggest bush would win with 80% of the vote kerry would start compaigning for bush the next day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcairns Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 "I own a timber company Yeah, wasn't that a hoot? Nothing like a guy who knows what assets he has. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> From FactCheck.org President Bush himself would have qualified as a "small business owner" under the Republican definition, based on his 2001 federal income tax returns. He reported $84 of business income from his part ownership of a timber-growing enterprise. However, 99.99% of Bush's total income came from other sources that year. (Bush also qualified as a "small business owner" in 2000 based on $314 of "business income," but not in 2002 and 2003 when he reported his timber income as "royalties" on a different tax schedule.) (Oct 9; CORRECTION: What we originally reported as a "timber-growing" enterprise is actually described on Bush's tax return as an "oil and gas production" concern, the Lone Star Trust. We were confused because The Lone Star Trust currently owns 50% of another company, "LSTF, LLC", described on Bush’s 2003 financial disclosure forms as a limited-liability company organized "for the purpose of the production of trees for commercial sales." So, Bush does own part interest in a tree-growing company, but the $84 came from an oil and gas company and we should have reported it as such.) If I had finances like Bush's or Kerry's, I don't think I would have remembered such a trivial thing either . Anyway, he certainly does not "own" a timber company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSminneapolis Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 factcheck.org link to lumber company info... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBSS Posted October 11, 2004 Report Share Posted October 11, 2004 I honestly didn't mean to put you down, Naked and I apologize if you feel that was my intent. As I said, you are completely entitled to post anyway you like and to decide and vote anyway you like. I should've added a similar post to your major oponents in these threads (SSMin?). I wish people on both sides would put away the rhetoric and talk about facts, but it doesn't seem like our system rewards anyone for doing that (elections aren't really about facts anymore anyway -- there have turned into soundbyte fests), and the 'facts' are pretty obfuscated by a media that is rewarded for sensationalism rather that objectivity. Oh and my point was that by coming across as a left-wing hothead, you aren't winning any arguments. In fact, your points are probably not being heard because few people are reading them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, you have your own system here that you've created, so I'm not buying your wholesale condemnation of the 'system'. When you look at what happens here at SilveradoSS.com, discussion is not what is rewarded, it is mutual backslapping about how great GWB is and how right he is about everything, all the time. You've all created it, and the reward system furthers the same thing over and over again. I appreciate your attempt to set things right. However, if you were really as objective as you present yourself as wanting to be, you would be calling other people on their BS as often as you do me - perhaps more so since there are more of them. But you don't. It is clear I am outnumbered, which makes it more difficult to be clear - I am always bracing for personal attacks, which of course always come. It is very predictable, and quite sad. Perhaps I should just heed what SSminneapolis says in his posts (and the nasty PM's he sends to me), telling me to get lost because I am 'wrong' and 'outnumbered'. I know more than a few people who would be happy about that. At this point I'm pretty sure no one here (with the exception of deezel) even knows what productive discourse means, much less understands the benefits of it. But hey, whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSminneapolis Posted October 12, 2004 Report Share Posted October 12, 2004 PM's...there was only one it is mutual backslapping because that is how we feel. like you are going to walk into a republican convention and actually think they are going to spend their time listening to your view..of like if i were to walk into a democratic convention - they probably are not going to listen to me... that is just common sense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBSS Posted October 12, 2004 Report Share Posted October 12, 2004 PM's...there was only one it is mutual backslapping because that is how we feel. like you are going to walk into a republican convention and actually think they are going to spend their time listening to your view..of like if i were to walk into a democratic convention - they probably are not going to listen to me... that is just common sense... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well that's interesting, because that pretty much feels like what I'm doing - walking into a Republican convention. But if that's the case, then it would be helpful if you stopped creating threads making believe that you want to have discussion, when in reality you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.