Ironworks Gaming Forum - The Best We Can Do?

Ironworks Gaming Forum (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/index.php)

- General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=28)

- - The Best We Can Do? (http://www.ironworksforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=81692)

Thank you, Timber - I was about to say the same thing. It seems to me the debate got derailed.

To be honest - I agree with what Jim Jeffords said. Regardless of who it comes from or why - the truth is the truth. It seems to me that this administration got sidetracked from what the important issues were to what was urgent. All fine and dandy, but everything on the plate needs to be addressed.

It takes a very strong man to make decisions that aren't popular for the future well being of this country instead of just answering the phone (addressing what is in front of him at the moment.)

I would like to see the economy fixed - more than most - and I know it isn't going to be a quickie, either. Without that, there is no funding for the education. I look at what the kids are learning in schools and it is frightening how little they know. I compare to what I did in school (1970 to 1982) and I am really alarmed at how unprepared we are to deal with our future. They don't know a whole lot - but they do know computers. (My mother used to tell me it isn't what you know that is important, it is if you know where to find the information.)

I think Saddam has waited 10 years already - what is the rush?

Quote:

Originally posted by MagiK:
Ok, I wont call your candidates idiots if you quit callin mine idiots :)sorry.

As I posted above... I have refrained from calling Bush an idiot here.

Mark

Quote:

Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
Always nice to pop in and read Magick's OpEd article for the day. :D

Jeffords is not likely an idiot. The things he points out in his article, regardless of his political agenda for saying them now, are all somewhat true. You couldn't contradict them, so you attacked Jeffords and past Dems and the Dem party, throwing blame around for the past 40 years' wrongs in this Country. Surely you don't expect me to believe you are niave enough to think the issues are so simple you can pin all that wrongdoing on one party.

true enough, I attacked him by calling him an idiot and pointed out his hipocracy and his weasely methods but I also pointed out that his whole assumption was false and that all he was doing is twisting the issue to try and help his "latest" party's election campaign chances. 

The truth is that these are problems, and they need to be addressed.

As well, even if Jeffords is playing them now as a political ploy, it's a pretty smart one, again undercutting your belief in his idiocy.

That deserved a wave? I would say that there is every bit as much evidence that jeffords is an idiot as there is that Bush is one [img]smile.gif[/img] 
[img]graemlins/thewave.gif[/img]

I just don't believe you read the article and thought the issues through before you replied - as evidenced by the number of replies you typed up - a new one added following each new post you read. You had your stance and then tried to make your argument fit it. B- work at best. :D

Actually I did read the article. I read it before too when he switched parties touting them as his platform of concern way back then. What I said is true. This country spends enough money to educate half the known universe annually, there is no need to confiscate ever increasing amounts of capital to fund the fraud, waste and abuse. Jeffords knows this, every one of those blathering widbags on capitol hill knows it, they just refuse to do anything about it because it doesnt play into their plans for implementing the "victim" mentality on the general populace.

By the way, I will note that you didn't manage to discredit anything I said...just criticized me for having said it. [img]smile.gif[/img] cheers!

Sorry Mark, I didn't mean to make this a pick on Mark for telling me to not call him an idiot. You were right and I was wrong on that account.

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker:
That is the big problem with partisan politics. The individuals get blamed for anything the party does. One small point, though, Jeffords may caucus with the Dems, but he is in fact an Independent. I give high points for walking away from the Republicans and trying to do right by the people of Vermont and of the USA.

I found his timing (right after getting elected) to be highly suspect and smelling of duplicity. Yes follow your convictions but don't lie to get elected then switch sides. Of course being honest about what you stand for and who you stood with would obviously be a ghastly injustice for the voters of Vermont. (note. that was sarcasm ;) )

As has been in the past, even if a party is in power, it is very difficult to enact change. The easiest way for a President to get what he wants is during war time, which I might add is what we are seeing now.

These "idiots" that we call them, have to be pretty damn smart to get elected and do their jobs. These are the jobs that are usually thankless and the most difficult. they are not perfect, afterall they are only human.

Generalizing about Republicans vs. Democrats is a worthless passtime, the parties mean nothing to me, the only thing that is important is the people the politicians represent and the Party should come 2nd.

We cannot allow the Republican party to control the Executive and Legislative branches as it is clear that party comes first and "all" Americans come second.
And on the obverse side the same goes for the Democrats...there has to be balance or I think all hell break loose...thank God for the fillibuster.

Rant Off!

Mark

My comments were not just partisan politics. The issues are what I stated. Wether it is Medical or Educational, we are already confiscating enough funds to meet our needs. the problem is not money, you can't just throw money at problems. Fix the waste fraud and abuse and you fix the problem!

[ 10-07-2002, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Quote:

Originally posted by MagiK:
Sorry Mark, I didn't mean to make this a pick on Mark for telling me to not call him an idiot. You were right and I was wrong on that account.

You know, I really don't know why I get so angrivated (word I made up!) when someone bashes the Dems. I have no connection to the party and do not follow all their platforms (I'm Independent...vote for the best person for the job). I do not follow the Republicans at all either (did you notice?). But I do start to bristle when the Senators I voted for and who I feel are doing a great job, get bashed. I feel equally as strong about Leahy and also Congressman Sanders. I feel they all fight the good fight. This is my opinion, of course and others "will" disagree, but I hate them being called idiots just like others feel when their "boy" gets smacked around. That is why I've decided not to call other people idiots. It's just wrong.
And just because I feel that way, it doesn't mean that others have to respect my "boys". So fire away MagiK and Iron_Ranger, I will try to be less thinskinned in the future.

Mark

Cut some of the funding for the army and spend the money on schools and health care instead! Who's gonna invade the US, anyway? Canada? Mexico?

Any invading force from overseas could easily be spotted and destroyed before it arrived, I should believe. So less guns and more books and doctors!

That's what I'd do, anyway, if I was in power in the US.

MagiK, I don't believe that it's purely corruption that's keeping funds stuck in the system, and if it is, then Jeffords is right anyway. Something has to be done. Whether it's allocating more funds or cleaning up the "clogs" in the financial system. His central point is true even if some of his other points can be debated.

Personally I think that there's no doubt that Georgey is attacking Iraq purely to boost his own votes, to draw away attention from other problems and to get more oil. I can't see how anyone can doubt it, and I wouldn't really have that big a problem with it, if George and his supporters would just ADMIT it. Instead of rambling about how they're removing a dangerous dictator and defending the US. Sure, they're removing a dictator. Okay, so he might be a threat to the US. But that isn't George's primary motivation.

Quote:

Originally posted by MagiK:
true enough, I attacked him by calling him an idiot and pointed out his hipocracy and his weasely methods but I also pointed out that his whole assumption was false and that all he was doing is twisting the issue to try and help his "latest" party's election campaign chances.

Quote:

Originally posted by Rokenn:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MagiK:
true enough, I attacked him by calling him an idiot and pointed out his hipocracy and his weasely methods but I also pointed out that his whole assumption was false and that all he was doing is twisting the issue to try and help his "latest" party's election campaign chances.

mmm this sounds a lot like what Bush has been doing with the Iraq debate. I remember about 2 weeks ago him baiting the democrats about wanting to wait for the UN to act before giving him god-mode for war in the middle east.

If he truely wanted the debate to be non(or atleast less) political, he would have waited till after the elections to send this to Congress. Instead he sends it now to distract from his problems at home.[/QUOTE]You know, I think you missed the part where I said that the dems were doing what they were accusing Bush of doing... and voiced my outrage at thier being so outrageously hipocritical. [img]smile.gif[/img]

MagiK..You should read the book Jeffords wrote about the whole "switching sides" thing you speak of, before you judge him. It's called "My Declaration of Independence" and is available at Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...lance&n=507846

I'll say it again...he is not a Democrat..a small distinction, but true nonetheless.

Mark