polarized society

Post Reply New Topic

Bush
1. Stole the 2000 election reguardless of not getting the popular vote... His brother jeb in florida deliberately disqualified hundreds of votes that should have counted.
2. 9/11. It is no secret the Bush and BinLaden families go way back in the oil industries, not to mention both are millionaires. Bush adm. deliberately blocks one investigation after another into 9/11 by independant agencies (wonder what he might be hiding?).
-note- create problem, create solution, easiest way to get ppl to blindly follow out of fear. 9/11 did several things for establishing a police state,
a) built Bush up as wartime president
b) provided an excuse to highten security
c) provided an excuse for war
d) gave him a bs excuse to spy on American citizens (patriot act, the very legislation that is pissing away our constitution).
e) elimination of seperation of church and state.
f) calling protesters anti-American for not agreeing with the president despite the fact that this country was founded on our right to disagree and protest.

-rebuilding Iraq-- practice for home.

Bush is a puppett being lead from higher on the chain, from the Vatican Church. The same Vatican Church that recently elected Benedict as the new Pope. Benedict was a former Nazi officer in Germany and a member of the Hitler youth group growing up. Now, I don't know what I'm talking about?

Oh, but the man in the ski mask wasn't gonna rob the bank, he was going to a halloween party (Imao).

1)There is no proof for the first part about his brother fixing the nation of florida's votes, it is just another conspiracy theory.
2)Also conspiracy, no proof of anything. Bush's role as a wartime president really hasn't helped him any either. Many people hate him directly because of the Iraq war. The patriot act really has very little strength anyway, if what you were saying was true then you would have been kidnapped by CIA agents by now for knowing way too much. He never eliminated the separation between church and state, it is arguable that he has tried to but most people know that he does not really have the power to do so. America was founded mostly on the fact that we did not want to pay taxes, all presidents have problems with the people that dissent against them but still Bush has not started rounding these dissenters into labor/death camps and lacks the power to do so. Finally the military is way underpowered to attempt to rebuild America and he would lack the power required to use the military for such an end. The number of non-military Americans so severely overwhelms the number of military people that any attempt to use our military as an occupying force on our own nation would be impossible.

Ok, nice, we now have the pope involved in this already crazy conspiracy theory. You think that the Pope is directing Bush, who is a member of a different faith and leading a country that has historically had a problem with Catholics on what? A war of world conquest? Now what are you going to do, throw in Bill Gates for good measure saying that his contributions to Africa are to build an army for the new world order? No, you don't know what you are talking about. The current pope has actually been opposed to military efforts in the middle east, including the war in Iraq and has been critical of the US for doing so. All things considered, I think that your claims outrageous. There is no link between the Pope and Bush, and all of your claims are based upon a lot of speculation and not a lot of evidence. This is politics as usual, perhaps less corrupt than it has been in the past. The "stealing" of the election by Bush for one is no where near as bad as the corrupt bargain that got John Quincy Adams into office as that was an underhanded deal that was outright obvious and anti-democratic. The patriot act is nowhere nearly as bad as the Alien and Sedition act under John Adams as under that act you would go to jail for everything you have just said because you were criticizing the president. The Iraq war is sort of similar to our generation's Vietnam war, it is a big loss of money and military expense that few people appreciate and that causes us some internal dispute. Bush is nothing new, he is just another American president, he probably won't even be considered a major one 50 years later anyway. There is no need to worry about Bush, he is leaving in 2 years.

Well fortunately I am not a member of either side. I hate both Democrats and Republicans equally. For those who are curious, I am a Libertarian.

I don't care what you are so long as it is sane. Sane people are cool, it is just the insane ones on any party that are bad and of course some parties are naturally crazier like the Constitution party and the Guns and Dope party are both pretty crazy. Sane democrats exists as do sane republicans as do sane libertarians, it is just that if a party has any power those voices are drowned out by the insane people. If the libertarians were a major party we would see this with them too as we would hear from anarcho-capitalists, and randroids trying to bad mouth the opposing parties and establish libertarian thought as the only correct way to think.

Here's an important question Libertarians need to ask themselves. Supposing I make a contract with an assassin to kill you, you successfully defend yourself against the assassin's aggression and the assassin fails, revealing my identity. Do you have any right to defend yourself from me, or must you leave me alone since I have not been aggressive towards you directly?

The best description of the Libertarian stance was the one I read on wikipedia "Libertarianism is a political philosophy advocating that individuals should be free to do whatever they wish with their person or property, as long as they do not infringe on the same liberty of others. Libertarians hold as a fundamental maxim that all human interaction should be voluntary and consensual. They maintain that the initiation of physical force against another person or his property, the threat of initiating it, or the commission of fraud against any person, is a violation of that principle."

I am fairly certain that any reasonable person would agree that hiring someone to kill someone else is infringing on his or her basic human rights.

WoooooooHoooooooo I am too!! !! !! !! !! !!

Well, I was going to say I'm Libertarian, until I read that.
Down with the bourgoise! Long live the proletariat!

For what it's worth, I vote for the New Democratic Party. They seem to range from left to super left