Bush's policies are clearly outlined if you choose to do your own research on them and not just listen to the rhetoric of the opposing candidates. You picked two statements he has made and pretend that is all he has proposed. Please make at least a half-assed effort at studying the issues before calling anyone with an educated opinion other than your own "certifiable"
His Social Security plan is something that I believe in. After studying it, I've found that it is not "risky" as his opposition loves to yell. It actually makes alot of sense and is a CHOICE, not a mandate. I personally would like to have some say over the chunk of my paycheck that is confiscated from me.
His plan for education seems sound. Our k-12 schools have really failed and that is evident in any testing that compares our students to other countries. Gore is too much in the pocket of labor unions (read: teachers unions) to make any kind of meaningfull chances, and he hasn't proposed any. Smaller class size is a non-issue. I've had exceptional classes and horrible classes in both small and large rooms. The quality of the teachers is what makes all the difference.
He (unlike Gore) addressed the issue of forign policy. Despite Gore's supposed claim to be an expert in this area, all I've seen him do is court forign business leaders for campaign donations. Bush on the other hand used the magic words "exit strategy", and promised that we wouldn't be sending our armed forces in to every country that is experiencing civil way. We have enlisted men leaving in droves (I know many of them) because they are sick of being assigned to countries hate them, and not have any clear reason to be there. Clinton/Gore has destroyed the armed force's moral, just ask people serving today.
So far, Gore has run on the platform "the economy is ok". So? What does that have to do with him? If anyone in government deserves credit for the economy (and they don't) it would be Greenspan. He is the only one who reall has any "effect" on it.
Simply put, I believe in what Bush has said, and moreso, I belive he has some credibility to follow through with it. Gore has shown that he has no concept of "truth" or "honesty" and seems to say anything to get elected. He also comes across as a whiny, pushy schoolyard bully with no manners while debating. Certainly not someone I would want dealing with forign officials.
First off, your concept of ownership is a little screwy. Nobody is giving anyone money. You are complaining that the federal government might be TAKING less money from the rich than they have in the past. This is also FALSE in itself.
The percentage of tax the rich pay now: 62%
The percentage of tat they will pay after Bush's tax cuts: 67%
67% > 62%
Sixty seven percent is GREATER than sixty two. The rich will carry MORE of the tax burden after Bush's tax cuts.
Also, I am just barely middle class, but under Gore's plan I get NOTHING. Under Bush's plan I would get to keep $600 more dollers a year that I make, that the government would ordinarly take and spend on thing's I may or may not agree with.
I'm sick and tired of everyone jumping over themselves to claim that Gore's "invented the internet" quote was taken out of context and actually has a tiny bit of truth to it, yet constantly dropping hints that Bush is some coke snorting (also a media invention) moron. This is the same thing that happened to Quayle. Sure he wasn't the best speaker, but he was pretty damn intelligent and never said half of the crap people associate with him. But since he is an evil republican, we can make up anything we want about him and Bush and pass it off as true. But you take a quote a little out of context about our Democrats and we will whine like a kicked dog.
Both candidates are smart. Both are effective leaders. It boils down to this issues, and polls show that the the public supports Bush's policies hands don't believe me, of course you don't. It's here: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/zo/)
Wouldn't it be nice if we could stop the stupid name calling and false characterizations and just vote for who is proposing the policies we believe in?
the people support Al Gore's policies, but the polls are shifting toward George W. Bush because the media is filled with false attacks on Al Gore's character.
This seems to be the whole point of the article, and this is completly untrue! I submit to you the results of these recent Reuters/Zogby polls:
Bush's Star Wars Anti-ballistic Shield Favored:
http:/http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001017/z o/starwars_1.html
Majority Opposed to Selling High-Tech Weapons to China:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001017/zo/chin a_2.html
More Autonomy for States to Set School Standards
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001017/zo/scho olstandards_1.html
Accountability Narrowly Beat Out Smaller Class Size:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001016/zo/clas s_1.html
State Rights Favored Over Federal Regulations on Health Care:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001016/zo/heal thcare_1.html
Teaching Certification Based on Teacher's Ability Favored:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001013/zo/teac hers_1.html
More Than Fifty Percent Favor Bush-Cheney's Homeless Plan:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001012/zo/home less_1.html
Bush-Cheney Position Preferred on Global Warming Treaty:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001011/zo/warm ing_4.html
It's rather obvious that the majority agree with Bush's policies. The statement above about the public favoring Gore's policies only displays sloppy reporting, the same kind that allowed the "invented the internet" story to get way out of proportion.
However, most believe that Gore is intelligent while Bush is dumb. A quick look at the facts show that while Bush was no straight A student, he did considerably better than Gore in undergrad school. Gores third semester at Harvard yielded straight C's with one D, worse than ANY semester Bush had at Harvard. Gore also flunked out of grad school with 5 F's out of 8 classes, and dropped out of Law school while failing. Obviously, the man is not smart, he is just better spoken than Bush. Bush certainly held his own in the debates, even coming across MORE intelligent than Gore at times.
We also all know Bush is a cocaine user right? Well, no, that was an invented story as well. We DO know he used to have a drinking problem, and didn't like to talk about it. Once, when a reporter was asking him about his, she also asked him if he did drugs. He refused to answer, so it seems everyone assumed he was a cocaine user. This is the kind of assumption that the democrats were so opposed to when it applied to Clinton (well, until the assumptions were proven true).
My point here is, Bush is just (if not more) as subject to rumor and lies as Gore, only the majority of the public SUPPORT his policies. THIS is why he is in the lead.
I agree with you (and for the that matter the points raised by the previous poster).
I also agree with Bush that if we had a surplus (which we do NOT) a tax cut would be in order for ALL, across the board. I'm barely lower middle class, and I would get a small tax cut under Bush's plan, and NO cut under Gore's.
I don't agree with his political beliefs. That's all it takes. Sure, he is probably the most moral and honest candidate, and I respect that. however, if I don't agree with his political beliefs, why would I vote for him. I'm more likely to vote Brown.
if it could be guaranteed that confiscation would not follow.
Who's word would you take as a guarantee? Since (as previously pointed out), registration of firearms has NEVER in the world's history NOT led to confiscation, I'd be wary.
Yes, and Quayle never said most of the stupid quotes he is attributed with. Gore never claimed that "love story" was written about him and Tipper. Bush is not dumb (he got better grades at Yale than Gore at Harvard, and didn't flunk out of grad and law school like Gore).
All of these are media inventions. Welcome to American politics, issues are irrevelant.
The whole reason that taxes are colleted at all just because people don't know how to (or moreso, are to selfish to) better spend their money.
In who's opinion? Yours? Who made you the expert?
Sorry to burst your bubble, the reason taxes were collected (specifically income taxes) was to fund the war effort. Like many other taxes, it was intended to be temporary, but became permanent.
Fink, but don't think that people will every be perfectly nice to each other and not force others to do what they want.
History will back you up on that, unfortunatly it seems every generation must learn history over again.
The same applies with the armed forces. I see people advocating a 50%+ decrease in armed forces because they don't see a need for them. After all, the planet is more civilised now and something like a world war would never happen again. Just like before WW2.
You are assuming the typical movie break-in. At night, one guy with a crowbar and ski-mask. Yes he would be scared off with an alarm system.
I look at it this way, during the LA riots, the only shops that weren't looted and destroyed were the ones that the owners stood guard over with firearms. Nobody saw that coming, and people would have declared you a racist nutcase for suggesting it was possible before it happened, yet some people WERE prepared for the worst.
Do I think think that something like that could happen where I'm at? Where civility breaks down temporarily and leaves me to protect myself, my loved ones, and property by myself? Probably not, but am I any worse off for having addressed the possibility?
Personally I think we should get rid of all firearms, they make death easy and without value.
I would love to see that, how do you propose we do it? Currently all our attempts have failed at doing anything other than making it harder for non-criminals to get guns to protect themselves from criminals (including the recently reported failed Brady Law).
I have a gun to protect myself from the people who use their guns to committ crimes against myself and my fellow law abiding citizens, but I don't want it. However, it being irresponsible of me to not provide for my own safety, I will not give it up until the last gun is out of the last criminal's hand, and my safety is guarenteed. When this is done, I'll be first in line to get rid of my gun.
If there is a single factor in government that has contributed to the currenty positive economy, it was Greenspan. Now don't get me wrong, he had a small role compared to the private sector, but he was certainly more influence than say, Clinton (who for some reason seems to think he had something to do with it).
I would have figured the source code would have been larger than that.
And what kind of code starts with "Internal Server Error"? Is that some kind of crazy new Java function?
Believe me, guns are WAY more regulated than cars (which ironically kill many times more people daily). I also believe accountibility is important, but some things frightend me about Gore's plan.
Specifically, a national database and registration of all gun owners is resisted by many on the "gun community". Sheer wacko, conspiricy theory types with no grasp on reality? Perhaps, but understand that NEVER before in history has manditory firearm registration NOT led to confiscation. I encourage you to look it up for yourself.
Your assesment of the situation is right as far as I'm concerned, but I disagree with your solution. Look at the last two decades. The more money we threw at education from a federal level the worse it became. The real answer here is to put the money in the hands of the people who need it, the schools. Increasing the federal education budget will not accompolish anything, we need to return that money to the local districts to let them improve their teacher saleries, teacher training, and facilities.
I think the money we spend on education now is more than enough, but it needs to be spent in the right place. A large group in DC (NEA) is not where we should be spending this money.
When you are the largest distribution and the one that is most portraying itself as the "corporate" linux, you are going to be held to a higher standard. Much of the "unwashed masses" see Radhat=Linux and with that popularity comes a responsibility to NOT FUCK UP!
So far, I'm not impressed with their QA, and that is giving all linux a bad name.
Slashdot Mirror
Bush's policies are clearly outlined if you choose to do your own research on them and not just listen to the rhetoric of the opposing candidates. You picked two statements he has made and pretend that is all he has proposed. Please make at least a half-assed effort at studying the issues before calling anyone with an educated opinion other than your own "certifiable"
His Social Security plan is something that I believe in. After studying it, I've found that it is not "risky" as his opposition loves to yell. It actually makes alot of sense and is a CHOICE, not a mandate. I personally would like to have some say over the chunk of my paycheck that is confiscated from me.
His plan for education seems sound. Our k-12 schools have really failed and that is evident in any testing that compares our students to other countries. Gore is too much in the pocket of labor unions (read: teachers unions) to make any kind of meaningfull chances, and he hasn't proposed any. Smaller class size is a non-issue. I've had exceptional classes and horrible classes in both small and large rooms. The quality of the teachers is what makes all the difference.
He (unlike Gore) addressed the issue of forign policy. Despite Gore's supposed claim to be an expert in this area, all I've seen him do is court forign business leaders for campaign donations. Bush on the other hand used the magic words "exit strategy", and promised that we wouldn't be sending our armed forces in to every country that is experiencing civil way. We have enlisted men leaving in droves (I know many of them) because they are sick of being assigned to countries hate them, and not have any clear reason to be there. Clinton/Gore has destroyed the armed force's moral, just ask people serving today.
So far, Gore has run on the platform "the economy is ok". So? What does that have to do with him? If anyone in government deserves credit for the economy (and they don't) it would be Greenspan. He is the only one who reall has any "effect" on it.
Simply put, I believe in what Bush has said, and moreso, I belive he has some credibility to follow through with it. Gore has shown that he has no concept of "truth" or "honesty" and seems to say anything to get elected. He also comes across as a whiny, pushy schoolyard bully with no manners while debating. Certainly not someone I would want dealing with forign officials.
Finkployd
Give more money to the rich
First off, your concept of ownership is a little screwy. Nobody is giving anyone money. You are complaining that the federal government might be TAKING less money from the rich than they have in the past. This is also FALSE in itself.
The percentage of tax the rich pay now: 62%
The percentage of tat they will pay after Bush's tax cuts: 67%
67% > 62%
Sixty seven percent is GREATER than sixty two. The rich will carry MORE of the tax burden after Bush's tax cuts.
Also, I am just barely middle class, but under Gore's plan I get NOTHING. Under Bush's plan I would get to keep $600 more dollers a year that I make, that the government would ordinarly take and spend on thing's I may or may not agree with.
So in closing, 67% > 62%
Finkployd
Thank you!
I'm sick and tired of everyone jumping over themselves to claim that Gore's "invented the internet" quote was taken out of context and actually has a tiny bit of truth to it, yet constantly dropping hints that Bush is some coke snorting (also a media invention) moron. This is the same thing that happened to Quayle. Sure he wasn't the best speaker, but he was pretty damn intelligent and never said half of the crap people associate with him. But since he is an evil republican, we can make up anything we want about him and Bush and pass it off as true. But you take a quote a little out of context about our Democrats and we will whine like a kicked dog.
Both candidates are smart. Both are effective leaders. It boils down to this issues, and polls show that the the public supports Bush's policies hands don't believe me, of course you don't. It's here: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/zo/)
Wouldn't it be nice if we could stop the stupid name calling and false characterizations and just vote for who is proposing the policies we believe in?
Finkployd
the people support Al Gore's policies, but the polls are shifting toward George W. Bush because the media is filled with false attacks on Al Gore's character.
z o/starwars_1.html
n a_2.html
o olstandards_1.html
s s_1.html
l thcare_1.html
c hers_1.html
e less_1.html
m ing_4.html
This seems to be the whole point of the article, and this is completly untrue! I submit to you the results of these recent Reuters/Zogby polls:
Bush's Star Wars Anti-ballistic Shield Favored:
http:/http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001017/
Majority Opposed to Selling High-Tech Weapons to China:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001017/zo/chi
More Autonomy for States to Set School Standards
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001017/zo/sch
Accountability Narrowly Beat Out Smaller Class Size:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001016/zo/cla
State Rights Favored Over Federal Regulations on Health Care:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001016/zo/hea
Teaching Certification Based on Teacher's Ability Favored:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001013/zo/tea
More Than Fifty Percent Favor Bush-Cheney's Homeless Plan:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001012/zo/hom
Bush-Cheney Position Preferred on Global Warming Treaty:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001011/zo/war
It's rather obvious that the majority agree with Bush's policies. The statement above about the public favoring Gore's policies only displays sloppy reporting, the same kind that allowed the "invented the internet" story to get way out of proportion.
However, most believe that Gore is intelligent while Bush is dumb. A quick look at the facts show that while Bush was no straight A student, he did considerably better than Gore in undergrad school. Gores third semester at Harvard yielded straight C's with one D, worse than ANY semester Bush had at Harvard. Gore also flunked out of grad school with 5 F's out of 8 classes, and dropped out of Law school while failing. Obviously, the man is not smart, he is just better spoken than Bush. Bush certainly held his own in the debates, even coming across MORE intelligent than Gore at times.
We also all know Bush is a cocaine user right? Well, no, that was an invented story as well. We DO know he used to have a drinking problem, and didn't like to talk about it. Once, when a reporter was asking him about his, she also asked him if he did drugs. He refused to answer, so it seems everyone assumed he was a cocaine user. This is the kind of assumption that the democrats were so opposed to when it applied to Clinton (well, until the assumptions were proven true).
My point here is, Bush is just (if not more) as subject to rumor and lies as Gore, only the majority of the public SUPPORT his policies. THIS is why he is in the lead.
Finkployd
by going directly against a judge's ruling.
:)
If this judge has no authority where you live, celebrate this by flaunting his arrogance.
Finkployd
I agree with you (and for the that matter the points raised by the previous poster).
I also agree with Bush that if we had a surplus (which we do NOT) a tax cut would be in order for ALL, across the board. I'm barely lower middle class, and I would get a small tax cut under Bush's plan, and NO cut under Gore's.
Finkployd
I don't agree with his political beliefs. That's all it takes. Sure, he is probably the most moral and honest candidate, and I respect that. however, if I don't agree with his political beliefs, why would I vote for him. I'm more likely to vote Brown.
Finkployd
if it could be guaranteed that confiscation would not follow.
Who's word would you take as a guarantee? Since (as previously pointed out), registration of firearms has NEVER in the world's history NOT led to confiscation, I'd be wary.
Finkployd
Yes, and Quayle never said most of the stupid quotes he is attributed with. Gore never claimed that "love story" was written about him and Tipper. Bush is not dumb (he got better grades at Yale than Gore at Harvard, and didn't flunk out of grad and law school like Gore).
All of these are media inventions. Welcome to American politics, issues are irrevelant.
Finkployd
The whole reason that taxes are colleted at all just because people don't know how to (or moreso, are to selfish to) better spend their money.
In who's opinion? Yours? Who made you the expert?
Sorry to burst your bubble, the reason taxes were collected (specifically income taxes) was to fund the war effort. Like many other taxes, it was intended to be temporary, but became permanent.
Finkployd
Fink, but don't think that people will every be perfectly nice to each other and not force others to do what they want.
History will back you up on that, unfortunatly it seems every generation must learn history over again.
The same applies with the armed forces. I see people advocating a 50%+ decrease in armed forces because they don't see a need for them. After all, the planet is more civilised now and something like a world war would never happen again. Just like before WW2.
Finkployd
You are assuming the typical movie break-in. At night, one guy with a crowbar and ski-mask. Yes he would be scared off with an alarm system.
I look at it this way, during the LA riots, the only shops that weren't looted and destroyed were the ones that the owners stood guard over with firearms. Nobody saw that coming, and people would have declared you a racist nutcase for suggesting it was possible before it happened, yet some people WERE prepared for the worst.
Do I think think that something like that could happen where I'm at? Where civility breaks down temporarily and leaves me to protect myself, my loved ones, and property by myself? Probably not, but am I any worse off for having addressed the possibility?
Finkployd
Not to mention that China pretty much has owned Clinton and Gore for the last few years.
Finkployd
Personally I think we should get rid of all firearms, they make death easy and without value.
I would love to see that, how do you propose we do it? Currently all our attempts have failed at doing anything other than making it harder for non-criminals to get guns to protect themselves from criminals (including the recently reported failed Brady Law).
I have a gun to protect myself from the people who use their guns to committ crimes against myself and my fellow law abiding citizens, but I don't want it. However, it being irresponsible of me to not provide for my own safety, I will not give it up until the last gun is out of the last criminal's hand, and my safety is guarenteed. When this is done, I'll be first in line to get rid of my gun.
Finkployd
If there is a single factor in government that has contributed to the currenty positive economy, it was Greenspan. Now don't get me wrong, he had a small role compared to the private sector, but he was certainly more influence than say, Clinton (who for some reason seems to think he had something to do with it).
Finkployd
Once they get elected, that promise is meaningless (see Bush Sr. ...)
:)
Or for more recent history, Clinton/Gore in 92 ran on the platform of a middle class tax cut. This was promptly forgotten.
Bush Sr only promised no new taxes, however the democrat controlled congress was able to override this. Thanks dems
Finkployd
Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along
Personally, I prefer to decide for MYSELF how MY money is best spent. A tax cut would let me do that.
Finkployd
That whole thing was simply a gross display of sloppy journalism to make Al Gore look like an idiot.
I can't believe that actually happend to a democrat. Usually it's the republicians they usualy use sloppy journalism to attack.
Oh well, tit for tat
Finkployd
I would have figured the source code would have been larger than that.
And what kind of code starts with "Internal Server Error"? Is that some kind of crazy new Java function?
:)
Finkployd
Believe me, guns are WAY more regulated than cars (which ironically kill many times more people daily). I also believe accountibility is important, but some things frightend me about Gore's plan.
Specifically, a national database and registration of all gun owners is resisted by many on the "gun community". Sheer wacko, conspiricy theory types with no grasp on reality? Perhaps, but understand that NEVER before in history has manditory firearm registration NOT led to confiscation. I encourage you to look it up for yourself.
Finkployd
Your assesment of the situation is right as far as I'm concerned, but I disagree with your solution. Look at the last two decades. The more money we threw at education from a federal level the worse it became. The real answer here is to put the money in the hands of the people who need it, the schools. Increasing the federal education budget will not accompolish anything, we need to return that money to the local districts to let them improve their teacher saleries, teacher training, and facilities.
I think the money we spend on education now is more than enough, but it needs to be spent in the right place. A large group in DC (NEA) is not where we should be spending this money.
Finkployd
s/390 Mainframes don't run AIX. Never have, never will. The run an operating system called OS/390.
Finkployd
When you are the largest distribution and the one that is most portraying itself as the "corporate" linux, you are going to be held to a higher standard. Much of the "unwashed masses" see Radhat=Linux and with that popularity comes a responsibility to NOT FUCK UP!
So far, I'm not impressed with their QA, and that is giving all linux a bad name.
Finkployd
Remember the first Gore vs. Bush debate?
All I remember is something about a "lock box"
:)
Finkployd
you won't need to buy those fake phones anymore to look cool, just plug your finger in your ear and yak away into whatever watch you have!
:)
Your defination of cool differs from mine
Finkployd