Support NeoGAF

[Socreges]

Be honest. This thread isn't about explanation or understanding.

Then what's it about? I'd like to know. Apparently I've kept myself in the dark.

Of all the political threads that I've read, I see a wealth of people that clearly like Bush and his administration quite a lot. From my perspective, I can't understand it. I see Bush and co. in a negative light, and for those that actually think fondly of Bush, I've never seen an explanation besides the usual talking points that are so convenient to throw around. People have argued FOR Bush, but generally in defense of him, rather than something truly POSITIVE (besides "strong on terror"). It was truly perplexing and I was always tempted to just dismiss anyone who felt that way. So I laid out several questions that I believe may be the reasons why people favour him; and worded them in such a way that they would require something besides 'yes' or 'no'.

Even though efralope is the only person to reply, I'll probably begin to give Bush supporters more of a fair shake than what I usually would.

 

[Leon]

:lol @ how defensive some people are. The guy just asked why. Jesus.

The only reason I can understand is how aggressive he is. But then again, being aggressive doesn't mean a thing when your course of actions are still ridiculously off base.

 

[Subitai]

I'm pro-life (I can't be hypocritical about my existence as I was adopted and not aborted).

A big trial lawyer vp is worse to me than a big business vp.

Bush delivered on the 2000 campaign promises I cared about (tax cuts, education reform, attempting to appoint conservative unactivist judges and enact tort reform)

The exporting jobs thing isn't a problem with me since we're due for a serious labor shortage in a few years.

The loss of manufacturing jobs isn't a problem for me because eventually automation will be less expensive than below cost labor. There will be no manufacturing jobs by the end of the century and will be an industry for engineers and businessmen.

I'm for the war in Iraq even though I would have preferred the administration sold it on connecting an important part of the world to the world economy to start drying up the terrorist swamp of unemployed muslims. Yes, we also did it for oil, but China, Japan, and India need the oil much more than us. They don't have an Alaska to turn to while they cram together a solar/hydrogen plan. Would you rather have the Chinese messing around in the middle east to maintain their energy supply?

Bush's record on the environment sucks, but I'd rather have that than raised tax rates, and employment laws chasing jobs that are going to leave anyway.

 

[Alcibiades]

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/

Kerry has a number of detailed plans. My concern isn't his lack of ideas, it's the difficulty he'll have in getting any of them passed

Also this is funny...(goes back to May)

I was referring primarily to his plans for Iraq/Terror.

the way I read it, Bush has attempted (or is attempting) many of what Kerry plans as well. Transforming the military to be more mobile and light ready to for quick responses was a policy for Rumsfeld since before 9/11.

This pretty much trumps most of the domestic issues (with the exception of the envinroment, which I agree with Nader/Kerry way more than the Republicans):

And John Kerry will only nominate individuals to the federal bench whose records demonstrate a respect for the full range of constitutional rights, including the right to privacy and the right to choose.

If Kerry is going to nominate judges based on their support of abortion rights, I don't want him in office.

That said, it'll be contentious on everything if he gets elected either way (with domestic issues and foreign affairs) due to the Republican majority in the house and the close Senate.

 

[KingV]

Oh shit...It's frightening to see there is people that think THIS. It reminded me about one of the members of the government from this film:

Terrible, Terrible movie. Whatever character you're talking about is probably the high point of the film. That film is seriously almost as bad as AVP. The running from the cold, the wolves... oh my god, the wolves, the crappy crappy science. The self important director. I can't believe I paid money for it.

 

[DarienA]

I'm glad Bush and the administration talk the talk about going to war, and when they had the chance to serve the walked the walked.

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/resource.aspx?id=13338

Well.....

 

[Che]

I'm pro-life (I can't be hypocritical about my existence as I was adopted and not aborted).

A big trial lawyer vp is worse to me than a big business vp.

Bush delivered on the 2000 campaign promises I cared about (tax cuts, education reform, attempting to appoint conservative unactivist judges and enact tort reform)

The exporting jobs thing isn't a problem with me since we're due for a serious labor shortage in a few years.

The loss of manufacturing jobs isn't a problem for me because eventually automation will be less expensive than below cost labor. There will be no manufacturing jobs by the end of the century and will be an industry for engineers and businessmen.

I'm for the war in Iraq even though I would have preferred the administration sold it on connecting an important part of the world to the world economy to start drying up the terrorist swamp of unemployed muslims. Yes, we also did it for oil, but China, Japan, and India need the oil much more than us. They don't have an Alaska to turn to while they cram together a solar/hydrogen plan. Would you rather have the Chinese messing around in the middle east to maintain their energy supply?

Bush's record on the environment sucks, but I'd rather have that than raised tax rates, and employment laws chasing jobs that are going to leave anyway.

In other words: "Money money money, and I would also like to emphasize, money money money."

When some of you greedy assholes, who vote Bush just thinking your pockets, die, don't forget to put all your precious blood money in your graves, and bury with them. Afterall they were your closest friends and the most important thing for you. Innocent human lives, animals, forests, children, all these are meaningless and come second.

 

[Tritroid]

Why?

Why are you asking the question? It's certainly not to understand someone else's position -- you've made your disdain perfectly clear.

Here's an idea -- grow up. Explore the notion of tolerance and exercise your political rights where it will do some good: on the bumper of your car and in the voting hall.

Amen.

 

[Cool]

I'm glad Bush and the administration talk the talk about going to war, and when they had the chance to serve the walked the walked.

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/resource.aspx?id=13338

Well.....

That's a very good point. They're willing to fight the wars using people they don't know, but they never participated in war when they had the chance. We jumped into that war with Iraq faster than anything almost without a thought it seemed.


*****

Also, one thing I can't understand is the whole abortion issue. Do people actullay think that someday abortion will someday be illegalized again when they say that that is one of the reasons they voted for/want to vote for Bush? I think once something like that is legalized once it'll still happen in the masses even if it was then considered illegal.

 

[nathkenn]

amen, this is bigger than bs tax breaks and health care, people have been complaining about that crap forever and it never gets fixed.

In other words: "Money money money, and I would also like to emphasize, money money money."

When some of you greedy assholes, who vote Bush just thinking your pockets, die, don't forget to put all your precious blood money in your graves, and bury with them. Afterall they were your closest friends and the most important thing for you. Innocent human lives, animals, forests, children, all these are meaningless and come second.

 

[Alcibiades]

In other words: "Money money money, and I would also like to emphasize, money money money."

When some of you greedy assholes, who vote Bush just thinking your pockets, die, don't forget to put all your precious blood money in your graves, and bury with them. Afterall they were your closest friends and the most important thing for you. Innocent human lives, animals, forests, children, all these are meaningless and come second.

Just because some Bush supporters on this board support a flat tax doesn't mean they are more greedy. The whole "he who dies with the most toys, still dies" mantra isn't lost on the "ignorant" side of the political spectrum.

Actually, the more Republican states (in the South) are more generous as they give a higher percentage of their income toward charaties, etc...

This has been reported many times, even on CNN, NBC, etc...

Places in the Northeast (heavily Democratic) give lesser amounts.

Liberals may just counter that it's only because it's "The Bible Belt" or whatever, but regardless of the reason, facts are facts.

As a general rule, Republican states are less greedy than Democratic states (regardless of exceptions like greedy CEO's, etc...)

http://www.catalogueforphilanthropy.org/cfp/db/generosity.php?year=2003

State Having Rank Giving Rank Rank Relation Generosity Index

Mississippi 50 6 44 1
Arkansas 47 5 42 2
South Dakota 45 8 37 3
Oklahoma 43 10 33 4
Alabama 41 9 32 5
Tennessee 35 3 32 6
Louisiana 44 12 32 7
Utah 30 2 28 8
South Carolina 39 14 25 9
Idaho 42 20 22 10
North Dakota 46 29 17 11
Wyoming 18 1 17 12
Texas 19 4 15 13
West Virginia 48 33 15 14
Nebraska 34 21 13 15
North Carolina 27 15 12 16
Florida 21 13 8 17
Kansas 26 19 7 18
Missouri 29 23 6 19
Georgia 16 11 5 20

The top 20 most generous states supported Bush in 2000.

For all the attacking Democrats do about Republicans being greedy, facts and figures show a different story.

Mississippi may be the poorest state in the Union, but they are #6 in giving.

BTW, while I agree that Republicans aren't doing anything to help the environment, I disagree they aren't pushing towards helping innocent human lives and children. They are tougher on crime and also helped pass a bill to outlaw partial birth abortion.

I go to a very conservative, pro-Republican school (Texas A&M, although not for those reasons, mostly cause the tuition and room and board are dirt cheap compared to other major colleges). The people here are very giving and unselfish. It didn't hit me all at once, but after being here for 3 years, it became obvious to me how generous the community was. It's pretty amazing (and unlike the "limousine liberals", it's very sincere).

The reason I noticied is because it's quite different from my regular hometown (on the border with Texas and Mexico). Attitudes are very different and after spending a few semesters here, I could see the difference. While I may disagree with some of the other students on some social issues, it doesn't take away from how I feel about their more generous nature in comparison to the communities I'm in when I'm not here.

 

[DarienA]

Wait are you saying that the average everday (middle class/lower class) person who is a Republican is more giving than the same Democrat?

 

[teiresias]

conservative unactivist judges

Oxymoron much? Unactivist like the "10 Comandments" judge right? Puhlease.

 

[Alcibiades]

Wait are you saying that the average everday (middle class/lower class) person who is a Republican is more giving than the same Democrat?

most likely.

Just like if you're a regular church-goer you're also more likely to be Republican.

I'm not saying either is a better thing to be (giving and/or churchgoer). You can make up your mind if either is a positive/negative, but facts are facts.

Personally, I'm not an avid churchgoer (haven't gone in like almost a year probably). Honestly, I hold preconceptions that are not too kind about some avid church-goers, but that doesn't get in the way of the fact that they are likely to be more giving.

 

[Alcibiades]

BTW, "right-wing" FOX is going to air an investigation special into what we know about the UN Oil-For-Food scandal this Sunday.

Should be interesting. While other networks have also reported on it, FOX seems to be going further in looking into it.

 

[DarienA]

most likely.

Just like if you're a regular church-goer you're also more likely to be Republican.

I'm not saying either is a better thing to be (giving and/or churchgoer). You can make up your mind if either is a positive/negative, but facts are facts.

umm bullshit. That "fact" certainly doesn't go for all races/colors/creeds

 

[Che]

I know that the result is what counts but that proves nothing to me. An example. My uncle is the most disgusting person alive who would kill his own mother to make money but he gives money to charity cos he wants to "save his soul".

 

[Alcibiades]

Despite the fact that there have been more terroirst attacks since that day? I've never heard about so much terrorism on the news until recently. Before then it was just random events you'd hear about happening once in a great while, a majority of it ocurring within the middle east. Now you have it happening in Europe, Russia, amongst other places -- and with more frequency.

this is silly, those terrorists didn't just pop out of nowhere.

Iraq may be an excuse to rise to the surface, but the fact that they were already there means it was only a matter of time.

The more countries go after terrorists, the more desperate they become, the more they respond.

Just like in ANY war, going after your enemy means you're probably going to see more retaliation.

The cell attacks that have taken place in the past 4 years didn't spring up from nothing-to-something right away.

Terrorist concerns in Spain have been around since before 9/11. They've been chasing Islamic suspects there, and a lot of activity has been tracked to Spain, BEFORE the Iraq War. The fact that a terrorist attack now happens is really not surprising, nor would it have been if Iraq had not been invaded.

Honestly, I don't feel much safer than I did back on 9/11, but that's only because I know intelligence reform takes years to really seep in, and a Gore/Kerry administration wouldn't have made me feel safer either.

I know we've been making tremendous steps, but the things that would make me feel safe aren't really things the United States can control. Reform in Saudi Arabia, an slow changing of the guard in Iran, those are things that would REALLY make me feel safer.

The Iraq war was but a small step, at least it's going to allow for better transparency in a country right in the heart of the Middle-East, but there is still a lot to be done.

Kerry buddying up with France isn't going to make me feel safer. Refusing to help the US because of fear or retalition for terrorism is really the showing of a weak country. If Iraqi terrorists were a problem, I could see the point, but the Islamic tribes that have it out for the US and allies aren't going to get along with you all of a sudden. Using excuses like the Palestinian issue or Iraq War issue, well, they're never going to run out of issues to use for an excuse (look that the head-scarf thing). The kind of society they want (with repression of women and everyone converted) isn't consistent with Western values anyway, so it's not like having left Iraq alone was going to keep them at bay.

 

[Alcibiades]

umm bullshit. That "fact" certainly doesn't go for all races/colors/creeds

true, black churchgoers are more likely to be Democratic (or blacks in general), but this has been reported in the news, I'm not making up examples.

It has been reported on CNN and stuff, I don't just watch FOX News...

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/prg/greenb/gengap.htm

look at Table 10. And that's even with Bill Clinton being one of the most religious President's we've had.

 

[DarienA]

true, black churchgoers are more likely to be Democratic (or blacks in general), but this has been reported in the news, I'm not making up examples.

It has been reported on CNN and stuff, I don't just watch FOX News...

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/prg/greenb/gengap.htm

look at Table 10. And that's even with Bill Clinton being one of the most religious President's we've had.

Here's the thing... I don't have to look at a table to know that your "fact" doesn't extend past White... specifically non-whites don't fit your statement.

And that's all the clarification I was looking to see you acknowledge.

 

[Ecrofirt]

so of you guys scare me. Really.

You're like a rabid dog at the idea that anyone can have a different opinion than yourself.

 

[Razoric]

Why?

Why are you asking the question? It's certainly not to understand someone else's position -- you've made your disdain perfectly clear.

Here's an idea -- grow up. Explore the notion of tolerance and exercise your political rights where it will do some good: on the bumper of your car and in the voting hall.

Exactly.

Why do I support the idiot known as George Bush? Because he's not Kerry. Why would anyone vote that rich, lying, flip-flopping arrogent piece of shit into office? My god.

"HEY LOOK AT ME IM A WAR HERO!!! WOO WOO I KNOW HOW TO COMMAND TROOPS!! DID I MENTION IM A WAR HERO?? I WAS IN NAM! MOM TELL THEM I WAS IN NAM!! MORE COMMERCIALS TO SAY I WAS IN NAM!!!! I SUPPORT WAR IN IRAQ, WAIT NO I DONT!! BUSH SUX!! HAHA I WAS IN NAM!!"

 

[nathkenn]

man, you sure can throw around some media buzz words

 

[Razoric]

man, you sure can throw around some media buzz words

didn't know "flip-flopping" was only for the media to use now. How about this.... the man cannot make a firm stance on anything. He is a joke and the only reason democrats champion this douche is because he's not George Bush. That's it.

 

[DarienA]

didn't know "flip-flopping" was only for the media to use now. How about this.... the man cannot make a firm stance on anything. He is a joke and the only reason democrats champion this douche is because he's not George Bush. That's it.

...that doesn't seem much different of a reason for why you champion Bush... because he's not Kerry.

 

[Razoric]

...that doesn't seem much different of a reason for why you champion Bush... because he's not Kerry.

Exactly. Slim pickins this year. My point being why does anyone care if there are people to support Bush? Is Kerry so damn great that if we dont vote for him our political views are totally fucked? I consider Bush the lesser of two evils. Hell I'd rather not even vote... Bush will win SC anyway.

 

[nathkenn]

it's not that kerry is great, it's that bush is so horrible, he stands against pretty much everything i believe in. Last time i made the mistake of not voting because of slim pickins, but holy crap have i seen the error of my ways

 

[xsarien]

it's not that kerry is great, it's that bush is so horrible, he stands against pretty much everything i believe in. Last time i made the mistake of not voting because of slim pickins, but holy crap have i seen the error of my ways

 

[DarienA]

Exactly. Slim pickins this year. My point being why does anyone care if there are people to support Bush? Is Kerry so damn great that if we dont vote for him our political views are totally fucked? I consider Bush the lesser of two evils. Hell I'd rather not even vote... Bush will win SC anyway.

For some people I think it's because they find it hard to believe people support Bush... looking at the economy, looking at the growing deficit.... and then there's Iraq.... and here's the thing that irks me about this fingerpointing Bush is now doing.

Yes Kerry supported going to Iraq, as did much of the gov't. But for along time now it seems like we went to Iraq without a complete plan. Even after we were in Iraq we were still calling up troops... it was noted in a few articles that estimates for the number of necessary forces were way off. There have just been these strange instances along the way where I've wondered... well wtf... didn't the plan for these types of problems? Now neither you nor I actually know if they did or didn't... but it certainly seems at times that they didn't.

 

[nathkenn]

thats the truth, i hope theres an awesome turnout this year. i think my hope in humanity would increase by a fraction

 

[AeroGod]

up to 5XL is some colors

:lol So true.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

At the very least, he was willing to engage in an unpopular war, that potentially may lose the election for him because he thought it was the right thing to do.

It wasn't nearly so unpopular when it started, though.

You've already proven it for me! You want to undertake serious financial burdens, country wide over something that MIGHT be happening, to an UNKNOWN degree, when the human effect is further UNKNOWN?

Even the Bush administration has reports now admitting human activity plays a role.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37232-2004Aug26.html:

A Bush administration report suggests that evidence of global warming has begun to affect animal and plant populations in visible ways, and that rising temperatures in North America are due in part to human activity.

Why would anyone vote that rich, lying, flip-flopping arrogent piece of shit into office? My god.

I thought that's what the topic was asking, put more tactfully.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

I'm pro-life (I can't be hypocritical about my existence as I was adopted and not aborted).

So do you support the death penality? Hypocracy swings both ways you can only be for both or against both. Not for one and against the other.

 

[Phoenix]

It's so easy to dislike Bush, simply because he wants to re-enstate the draft. Bull-shit.

FALSE! Be able to back your claims. I'm not voting Bush, but don't bring in bullshit.


I'll just dip in and out of this thread for a while

 

[Phoenix]

All I know is that whomever I end up voting for on election day, I will feel guilty for doing so. All of these candidates suck, and the entire political process has been reduced to a popularity contest.

FALSE! In reality the electorates for your state are under no obligation to vote for who you do and it is THEY who determine who the president actually is. The reason for the electoral college is in part to prevent the presidency form being a popularity contest.

 

[Phoenix]

there. fixed.

FALSE! The only people who are sheep are those who vote for candidates based on what they say and never take the time to investigate them on their own.

 

[xsarien]

All I know is that whomever I end up voting for on election day, I will feel guilty for doing so. All of these candidates suck, and the entire political process has been reduced to a popularity contest.

I think if there's one thing we've learned from 2000, it's that popularity doesn't matter.

 

[Razoric]

I think if there's one thing we've learned from 2000, it's that popularity doesn't matter.

ZING!

 

[Phoenix]

FALSE! Nader does not have a posse. People will vote for Nader because the other two candidates are both seriously deficient in a number of areas. No one voting for Nader will do so with the expectation of him winning or their vote making a difference

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

You could have used the edit button and put all that in one nice post. Now you have burned a whole 180 seconds of you life waiting for the ability to repost.

 

[Phoenix]

Bush's record on the environment sucks, but I'd rather have that than raised tax rates, and employment laws chasing jobs that are going to leave anyway.

CONFUSED! A polluted environment leads to increases in regulations against it and increases in ailments caused by pollution which results in rising costs to treat pollution and increasing cost of health care, both of which you pay for out of your own pocket. Thus you are creating a defacto tax.... same as when you buy a lottery ticket.

 

[seismologist]

Mississippi 50 6 44 1
Arkansas 47 5 42 2
South Dakota 45 8 37 3
Oklahoma 43 10 33 4
Alabama 41 9 32 5
Tennessee 35 3 32 6
Louisiana 44 12 32 7
Utah 30 2 28 8
South Carolina 39 14 25 9
Idaho 42 20 22 10
North Dakota 46 29 17 11
Wyoming 18 1 17 12
Texas 19 4 15 13
West Virginia 48 33 15 14
Nebraska 34 21 13 15
North Carolina 27 15 12 16
Florida 21 13 8 17
Kansas 26 19 7 18
Missouri 29 23 6 19
Georgia 16 11 5 20

If someone did a study on average IQ vs. states voting republican I think you'd find your answer.

 

[Phoenix]

So do you support the death penality? Hypocracy swings both ways you can only be for both or against both. Not for one and against the other.

FALSE! Being pro life is about giving a child a chance to be born into the world and live. The dealth penalty is about removing someone from society who has done something so evil that they could never be allowed back into society.

The two have nothing to do with each other.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

FALSE! Nader does not have a posse. People will vote for Nader because the other two candidates are both seriously deficient in a number of areas. No one voting for Nader will do so with the expectation of him winning or their vote making a difference

My hope is that my third-party vote will eventually be one of enough that voting reform is an issue that can't be ignored. Of course I don't expect anyone but Bush or Kerry (or possibly Cheney or Edwards) will be President of the USA in the next year.

 

[Pimpwerx]

I'm pro-life (I can't be hypocritical about my existence as I was adopted and not aborted).

A big trial lawyer vp is worse to me than a big business vp.

Fair enough. Although I would rather have neither trial lawyer or big business in bed with my politics...but that's just me.

Bush delivered on the 2000 campaign promises I cared about (tax cuts, education reform, attempting to appoint conservative unactivist judges and enact tort reform)

So tax cuts that resulted in record deficits two years running, and will end up being massive for years to come. Education reform that has resulted in one of the most idiotic policies in No Child Left Behind (thank your lucky stars you're not a teacher saddled with this poorly planned misadventure). And a bunch of buzz kills to write the laws. I don't mind the Supreme Court thing. Some people are conservative, some are liberal. I personally believe in more personal freedom and self-constraint. I don't believe the wheels will come off the wagon by allowing abortions and weed and so forth, and I don't want some Bible-thumping prick telling me what to do based on a work of fiction written centuries ago. But that's just how some get down. But the educations reform and tax cuts have to be two of the biggest failings of this administration. I fail to see the value of tax cuts when it just results in huge deficit spending. Tax cuts without spending cuts...argh....my brain wants to explode right now. I never understood the hardon some have for tax cuts when it just comes back to bite us in the ass years later. If cannibalizing the welfare state is the ultimate goal (include SS and MC in there as well), then mission accomplished. Saving Social Security has just become Mission Impossible. And please don't say "activist judges", that's smacks of talking points. There are a lot of cons who can think on their own two feet without being spoonfed a big load of bullshit by the administration.

The exporting jobs thing isn't a problem with me since we're due for a serious labor shortage in a few years.

The loss of manufacturing jobs isn't a problem for me because eventually automation will be less expensive than below cost labor. There will be no manufacturing jobs by the end of the century and will be an industry for engineers and businessmen.

I actually agree here. Exporting jobs is a result of globalization, which is impossible to stop. Ultimately, we should be mobilizing the entire world populace to increase productivity and equalize resource distribution. It's a utopian pipedream, but it's the ultimate goal IMO. The same with manufacturing jobs. Unions have been a big reason we haven't exploited machines as much as we could. Increased effciency and reduced costs. It'll take a century like you say, so I don't really bug out on that either. Ultimately, America will have to lose out b/c we hog a lot of the world's wealth. Redistribution is mandatory IMO.

I'm for the war in Iraq even though I would have preferred the administration sold it on connecting an important part of the world to the world economy to start drying up the terrorist swamp of unemployed muslims. Yes, we also did it for oil, but China, Japan, and India need the oil much more than us. They don't have an Alaska to turn to while they cram together a solar/hydrogen plan. Would you rather have the Chinese messing around in the middle east to maintain their energy supply?

How about no one meddling with the ME? I think that's a cheap copout of an excuse for going in an blowing shit up. Thousands of people lost their lives. Innocent people. And not due to terrorists, but due to American crusaders. If the Ruskies were to come and "liberate" us with bombs, killing thousands in the process, we all would have a shitfit, and there would be a massive "insurgence" that would make Iraq look like a walk in the park. But you have to walk a mile in another man's shoes to get a feel for his struggle. I find the Iraq war totally disgusting and the epitomy of imperialism. America's done this in numerous places, raping most of the Americas in the process. I don't care about oil, I care about treating people right. Unemployed Muslims causing trouble? Why are they causing trouble for us? No one asks why they are mad at us. There's a cause for it, and that requires *gasp* communicating and possibly negotiating with said terrorists. The administration probably wouldn't want their dirty laundry aired, so why bother asking what's up, let's try to kill 'em all. And of course, this will have as much success as the War on Drugs. Oh, that's right. A never-ending cash sink. Tax cuts + pointless spending = Neo-con agenda.

Bush's record on the environment sucks, but I'd rather have that than raised tax rates, and employment laws chasing jobs that are going to leave anyway.

Tax rates mean shit. How much more money does anyone who needs it actually make? The bottom end needs money more than anyone else, and the percentage cuts they get amounts to fuck all. Tax cuts are so fucking idiotic that it's no wonder they've roped most people into agreeing with them. This country is chock full of idiots. 4 more years. PEACE.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

FALSE! Being pro life is about giving a child a chance to be born into the world and live. The dealth penalty is about removing someone from society who has done something so evil that they could never be allowed back into society.

The two have nothing to do with each other.

I call FALSE on your FALSE.

Arguement 1:
Life is life. No matter how horrid a person has been in life they are still allowed redemption in the eyes of God (stealing a cookie/killing people is all the same to Him). It should be his will to decide when someone's life should end. We may not like the method but, He has his reasons for endings one's life that way.

You can remove a horrid person from society thru incarceration.
The death penality has never and will never be a deterrance for people to commit horrible cimes agains humanity
The cost and time of getting someone to the death chair/table/firing squad usually cost more than it would to let that person rot in jail.

All people should be given a chance to exist. Don't want to have children don't have sex it is that simple. Once you agree to the contract of sex you agree to the responsibility that comes with it. Abortions are the cowards way out of the most serious situation in life.


Arguement 2:
Ending a life either before birth or afterbirth due to their actions is a social function and necessity. Both cases allow society to move on without the fear of having a monster share the same air as the rest of the population or the burden of caring for a child that doesn't have the necessities to be function (wheather it be cash, love, time, interest). In both cases it is better to be rid of them than to burden society.

At any rate I'm pro-choice and pro-death penality. They both have a place and a need in our society.

 

[DarienA]

I would have preferred the administration sold it on connecting an important part of the world to the world economy to start drying up the terrorist swamp of unemployed muslims.

WTF? Unemployed muslims? I just saw this in someone's repost and couldn't actually believe someone really posted this. At the very least I'm going to say if you think terrorists are mostly unemployed muslims... you need to stop watching action movies.

That is such a f*cking insulting comment to make that I can't even think straight.

 

[xsarien]

Is this a rather inopportune moment to bring up the fact that "pro-life" is a rather inflammatory label? It essentially accuses the proponents of the opposing argument to be anti-life, which is pretty disgusting.

 

[Phoenix]

I call FALSE on your FALSE.

Arguement 1:
Life is life. No matter how horrid a person has been in life they are still allowed redemption in the eyes of God (stealing a cookie/killing people is all the same to Him).

I haven't seen anything definitive on that subject and God hasn't really let us in on it either. In the bible there are different codes of law that give different punishments for different crimes. While all of the above are violations of the 10 commandments the ordering of the commandments seems to suggest some priority/weighting.

The death penality has never and will never be a deterrance for people to commit horrible cimes agains humanity
The cost and time of getting someone to the death chair/table/firing squad usually cost more than it would to let that person rot in jail.

Please validate. I've heard this mentioned before but I've never seen anyone validate it and it goes against basic economics.

Arguement 2:
Ending a life either before birth or afterbirth due to their actions is a social function and necessity. Both cases allow society to move on without the fear of having a monster share the same air as the rest of the population or the burden of caring for a child that doesn't have the necessities to be function (wheather it be cash, love, time, interest). In both cases it is better to be rid of them than to burden society.

Definitely false. If you end the life of a child before birth you have absolutely no idea what kind of person you are killing, what their potential is, whether or not they can rise from their birth circumstances and do something better - possibly even moreso than those who were born to 'loving caring parents'. There are plenty of orphans that go on and do much more than sit around and collect wellfare.

 

[Ecrofirt]

DOn't worry Pheonix, Tommy's crazy.