![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 29 to 53 of 70. Go back in thread:
Posted by fayeroe on November 3, 2004, at 22:49:07
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Angela2, posted by alesta on November 3, 2004, at 22:44:22
When someone goes into an ill-advised war with no exit strategy and tells the citizens that the soldiers will be greeted with flowers.....that makes him a better president to have in a war??????? I don't think so.......we've spent over $150 billion, over a thousand of our soldiers have been killed and over 5,000 maimed, never to be the same again....a small goat could do better than that!!!
Posted by KaraS on November 3, 2004, at 22:50:58
In reply to thanks, kara dahling! that's kind of u dear.:-) (nm) » KaraS, posted by alesta on November 3, 2004, at 22:46:41
Amy,
Not kind - just true!
I copied your post to send to a friend of mine who voted for Bush. Think I'm going to copy part of your next post too and send it to her.
Kara
Posted by KaraS on November 3, 2004, at 23:15:19
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » fayeroe, posted by mair on November 3, 2004, at 16:49:26
> I'm sure I'll burn is psychobabble hell for those posts, but I'm just too angry to care.
You won't be there alone!
K
Posted by alesta on November 3, 2004, at 23:17:17
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » alesta, posted by fayeroe on November 3, 2004, at 22:49:07
> When someone goes into an ill-advised war with no exit strategy and tells the citizens that the soldiers will be greeted with flowers.....that makes him a better president to have in a war??????? I don't think so.......we've spent over $150 billion, over a thousand of our soldiers have been killed and over 5,000 maimed, never to be the same again....a small goat could do better than that!!!
hi fayeroe, i think you meant to post this to angela, hon? (i agree with you.) :-)
amy :)
Posted by fayeroe on November 3, 2004, at 23:26:25
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » fayeroe, posted by mair on November 3, 2004, at 16:49:26
Well, hon, I've got two buckets of water!!!
Posted by Sad Panda on November 4, 2004, at 2:00:11
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush????, posted by Wildman on November 3, 2004, at 10:46:22
"I do think that we are more secure than if we had not acted at all."
That's an illusion. The war in Iraq is producing the perfect breeding ground for disenchanted young men & reinforcing their beief that Cristians & especially Anglo-Saxons are the cause of their problems.
The war waged upon Afghanistan was barely tolerable, but attacking Iraq is clearly not in the interest of anyone that isn't from there.
"That having been said, we certainly are safer as a result of winning the cold war"
What would lead you to that delusion? In a cash strapped Russia there is more chance of a nuclear weapon falling in to the wrong hands. During the cold war it would more likely be an American that would start a nuclear war.
Posted by Sad Panda on November 4, 2004, at 2:17:11
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush????, posted by KaraS on November 3, 2004, at 12:47:16
> I think that Rupert Murdoch and the right-wing media have been distorting the truth and it is frightening to me. The majority of people do not seem to understand that invading Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism (no WMDs, no ties to Al Queda at the time). The comment about Bush being a corporation in disguise is dead on. Bush is not bright enough to run the country. He's just a figurehead representing right-wing interests. This is a very sad day for America and the world.
>
>Nice post Kara, spot on.
Our freshly re-elected prime minister, John Howard, is going to be overturning media ownership laws so that Murdoch can control more of our media. :/
Cheers,
Paul
Posted by KaraS on November 4, 2004, at 2:33:22
In reply to Murdoch » KaraS, posted by Sad Panda on November 4, 2004, at 2:17:11
> > I think that Rupert Murdoch and the right-wing media have been distorting the truth and it is frightening to me. The majority of people do not seem to understand that invading Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism (no WMDs, no ties to Al Queda at the time). The comment about Bush being a corporation in disguise is dead on. Bush is not bright enough to run the country. He's just a figurehead representing right-wing interests. This is a very sad day for America and the world.
> >
> >
>
> Nice post Kara, spot on.
>
> Our freshly re-elected prime minister, John Howard, is going to be overturning media ownership laws so that Murdoch can control more of our media. :/
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
Thanks and how frightening is that! Amazing how much trouble one person can cause. Yes, I was sorry to read that John Howard got re-elected. I think I read that it was probably because of your healthy economy despite the fact that most Australians don't agree with his stance on Iraq.Cheers,
Kara
Posted by Sad Panda on November 4, 2004, at 2:37:15
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush????, posted by Zena on November 3, 2004, at 8:42:25
> Seems like Bush won on the moral issues. They are more important than the rest of the stuff. He's a Christian.Put God first & everything falls into place. I know that for a fact.
>
>
>I found this kind of talk of Allah or God to be truely frightening.
There is no moral difference between Middle Eastern Muslim Terrorists flying planes in to buildings full of civilians in America & Western World Christian Military shoting or dropping bombs on civilians in Iraq. Both of these things are despicable.
Cheer,
Paul.
Posted by Sad Panda on November 4, 2004, at 3:04:47
In reply to Re: Murdoch » Sad Panda, posted by KaraS on November 4, 2004, at 2:33:22
> > > I think that Rupert Murdoch and the right-wing media have been distorting the truth and it is frightening to me. The majority of people do not seem to understand that invading Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism (no WMDs, no ties to Al Queda at the time). The comment about Bush being a corporation in disguise is dead on. Bush is not bright enough to run the country. He's just a figurehead representing right-wing interests. This is a very sad day for America and the world.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Nice post Kara, spot on.
> >
> > Our freshly re-elected prime minister, John Howard, is going to be overturning media ownership laws so that Murdoch can control more of our media. :/
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Paul
>
>
> Thanks and how frightening is that! Amazing how much trouble one person can cause. Yes, I was sorry to read that John Howard got re-elected. I think I read that it was probably because of your healthy economy despite the fact that most Australians don't agree with his stance on Iraq.
>
> Cheers,
> Kara
>
>Right wing politics here in Australia are on a par with what you have in America. This time Howard & the Liberals got re-elected because middle Australia is mortgaged up to the eye balls, last time he got re-elected 3 years ago was because he was turning refugee boats around or locking refugees up in the middle of a desert(Woomera).
I have left wing leanings because I enjoy having free doctors, hospitals, drugs, free education & good social security that doesn't leave people starving in the gutter.
Cheers,
Paul.
Posted by Shadowplayers721 on November 4, 2004, at 4:39:44
In reply to Who are all these people voting for Bush????, posted by jay on November 2, 2004, at 22:58:26
As for myself, I believe that these folks that continue to stay in their positions of power are not what they seem. This will be the 3rd time a Bush has been in office for president. Isn't that enough power plays. Where there is power, you know the rest. I believe we see acts and a lot of them on tv. I don't believe in politicians in general. I think they are actors. They dress and act certain ways to sell themselves to "the people". I am fed up with this circus. I watched the debates and again it was rehearsed statements that sounded good. Much of what they say is really nothing. Both guys didn't really give good specifics. In politics, you really never get that. Why? They don't want to offend anyone or anything. After the debates, no matter what the guys said or didn't say, their side thought they were excellent. I was thinking didn't they hear this guy stutter on many topics or totally not answer the question. I thought many times - "These politians must think I am totally ignorant. They talk to 'the people' like they are 4 years old." They really don't say much of anything. They may just give a buzz word like "education". Oh, that's sounds good. Yeah, well tell me what you will do with this education. How will you educate? Who will you educate? How much will this cost? Where in the dickens will you get this money to educate these people who you say need education? What will you expect to happen from this education? Where are all these high paying jobs going to be for these people with this education? They can't give you answers.
Oh, I am supposed to vote for this guy, because he said God one time. hmmmmmm They are totally playing words. They can't say what they really think or what the real issue is. They act like puppets. I see even their mannerisms are totally acted. It seems that it's more important for them to stand straight and not show true emotion. It's seems like the tv elects presidents. I see preachers telling people who to vote for on the religion channels too. I am thinking - "I think that I can determine that for myself". There were many other people on the ballot that never get a chance that may be more moral and have great ideas. But, we will never know. The others never get a chance. These men are chosen for us.
So, here's to more of the same ole thing and the games just continue...Cheers to politics
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 4:43:40
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » jay, posted by fayeroe on November 3, 2004, at 19:33:01
> very wealthy people ... are the only ones who will benefit from Bush.
>
> Jay> More likely to be people of the religious varitey. A blood thirsty lot whoever they are.
>
> Sad Panda> tax cuts for the very,very rich; tons of anti-environment legislation; going to war with Iraq instead of going after the terrorists (no weapons of mass destruction have been found, and no connection to Al-Qaeda established), thus diverting our valuable resources from terrorism; alienating the rest of the world, taking us from a fully balanced budget to record deficitswithin 4 years, poor handling of the war in iraq, i could go on...
>
> alesta> The hysterics of those on the left are amusing.
>
> Wildman> Bush is not bright enough to run the country.
>
> KaraS> Bush is one of the most immoral presidents we've ever had, and certainly the least-attuned to the US Constitution which I fully expect will become even more of a casualty than it has been in the last 4 years.
>
> mair> the administration here panders to the wealthy pals of his family
>
> fayeroePlease respect the views of others and be sensitive to their feelings.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above posts, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by SLS on November 4, 2004, at 6:53:25
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » SLS, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2004, at 16:58:51
Dear Dinah,
I had a hard time reading your post because it was a bit too long for me, but I wanted to reiterate what it was I was trying to say.
I think the symbol of strength and morality (social values) that many people voted for was an empty symbol, and that the facts surrounding issues often did not matter.
November 2 is second only to September 11 as a sad day for America. I anticipated the outcome for many months, but nevertheless I became genuinely depressed on November 3. I think Kerry would have made a good president. Unfortunately, he was a weak candidate.
I would have liked to see Dick Gephart get in.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on November 4, 2004, at 7:11:57
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Dinah, posted by SLS on November 4, 2004, at 6:53:25
I guess I shouldn't have posted this. Although I don't completely understand the PBC principles here, perhaps this post qualifies for one. I guess I'll be blocked for a week.
- Scott
> Dear Dinah,
>
> I had a hard time reading your post because it was a bit too long for me, but I wanted to reiterate what it was I was trying to say.
>
> I think the symbol of strength and morality (social values) that many people voted for was an empty symbol, and that the facts surrounding issues often did not matter.
>
> November 2 is second only to September 11 as a sad day for America. I anticipated the outcome for many months, but nevertheless I became genuinely depressed on November 3. I think Kerry would have made a good president. Unfortunately, he was a weak candidate.
>
> I would have liked to see Dick Gephart get in.
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 7:31:01
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Dinah, posted by SLS on November 4, 2004, at 6:53:25
I misunderstood, Scott. I'm sorry.
My point was that Bush was not the real reason Bush won the election. And that morality wasn't the real reason either.
But it's not something I should have tried to explain at Babble. I'll make myself scarce for a while.
Posted by verne on November 4, 2004, at 7:32:08
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » SLS, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2004, at 16:58:51
Dinah,
You make some great points. I hope the democratic party gets the message.
I think all the democratic candidates were weak from the get-go, but I really grew to like Dean after he dropped out, melted down, and gave the "I have a scream" speech. Dean came across as real whereas Kerry seemed almost manufactured.
I'm wondering whether Gephardt would have been a better choice for VP. A Kerry-Gephardt ticket may have carried Missouri and Iowa without losing ground elsewhere. And, too, Gephardt was the union favorite so Ohio may have been in the dem column.
This was one election where I wasn't crazy about either choice. I blew 2 months sobriety staying up watching the returns. I'm glad it's over.
verne
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 7:55:17
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Dinah, posted by verne on November 4, 2004, at 7:32:08
Believe it or not, I hope they get the message as well. I'm thinking the Democratic think tanks will probably do that once the shock wears off. Because the truth is that a Democratic president would have been of limited usefulness to them with Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House. And they should be more concerned about their losses there than the more visible loss.
I'd prefer a multiple party system of government, or better yet a no party system of government where you vote for individuals. But given that the two party system seems here to stay, I'd prefer a strong and healthy two parties that angle towards the center rather than to either side.
Posted by Angela2 on November 4, 2004, at 8:35:35
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Angela2, posted by alesta on November 3, 2004, at 22:44:22
> > Kerry doesn't even have a plan for the war on terror.
>
> and bush does? i'm sure kerry could come up with a much better plan than bush if he were to take office. do you honestly consider bush's actions the result of planning and careful thought? invading a country that had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks, and lying to the american ppl? kerry is a thoughtful, intelligent person, and bush is...well..not.
>
> <America is not going to automatically become this better place if we vote for John Kerry.
>
> i beg to differ. it will prevent bush from doing any further damage and destruction to our country, and it would let kerry replace some of bush's policies to help fix some of the damage. i have a feeling that 911 may have even been prevented if we had had another president who heeded the warnings we were given.
>
> i think one reason many americans voted for bush b/c he's christian, so they think he has moral values. just because bush is christain doesn't make him moral.
>
> amy
>Hey, I'm actually an uninformed voter. So I probably shouldn't even be in this conversation/ debate.
-Angela
Posted by fayeroe on November 4, 2004, at 9:05:46
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » SLS, posted by Dinah on November 3, 2004, at 16:58:51
Dinah, there is a dynamite article in Slate by William Saletan about what the Democrats need to do in 2008. Simplicity is the theme of the article and I completely agree with it. You can access it by going to MSNBC, if you're interested, and looking in opinions....P
Posted by fayeroe on November 4, 2004, at 9:09:00
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush????, posted by rubenstein on November 3, 2004, at 10:20:27
I love it!! I have cats (hair, hair, hair) or I'd go buy some black.......ah, the woman in black.
Posted by alesta on November 4, 2004, at 9:11:01
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » verne, posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 7:55:17
> Believe it or not, I hope they get the message as well. I'm thinking the Democratic think tanks will probably do that once the shock wears off. Because the truth is that a Democratic president would have been of limited usefulness to them with Republican majorities in both the Senate and the House. And they should be more concerned about their losses there than the more visible loss.
I think the Democrats have every right to be very concerned about losing both the presidency and the majority of congress. And I don't consider getting Bush out of office to be of limited usefulness by any means. At the very least, it will prevent further destructive legislation and change our policies concerning the war and other foreign policy.
amy
Posted by fayeroe on November 4, 2004, at 9:13:02
In reply to Murdoch » KaraS, posted by Sad Panda on November 4, 2004, at 2:17:11
Just wait until our news is completely biased to the far right.......
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 9:21:57
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Dinah, posted by alesta on November 4, 2004, at 9:11:01
I think you misunderstood me. (Although legislation is put through by the legislature.) That's not at all the point I was trying to make.
But I'm not even going to try anymore.
Posted by alesta on November 4, 2004, at 9:22:51
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » alesta, posted by Angela2 on November 4, 2004, at 8:35:35
hey angela,:)
i'm trying to stay out of this conversation myself. i don't want anybody's feelings to get hurt. but sometimes i read the posts and my feelings get hurt, lol, so i have to reply, if that makes any sense. you're one of the kindest people here, and i really value your opinions and valuable contributions to this site. i'm really glad you're here. :)take good care,
amy
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 9:32:22
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Dinah, posted by fayeroe on November 4, 2004, at 9:05:46
Sorry, I couldn't find it. I did see Glenn Reynolds article though, and agreed with it.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.