![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 46 to 70 of 70. Go back in thread:
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.
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 9:33:46
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » fayeroe, posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 9:32:22
Well, a large part of it anyway.
Posted by alesta on November 4, 2004, at 9:46:53
In reply to Re: PBC » jay » Paul » amy » Wildman » Kara » mair » fayeroe, posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 4:43:40
> > 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
> >
> > fayeroe
>
> Please 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
>> Bob
dr. bob, i honestly don't see how my post was uncivil, and disagree. if we can't openly talk about the candidates, positive and negative, then you may as well ban political discussions, instead of blocking people unexpectedly, as i fear you might do. i was not uncivil. also, people are always going to be sensitive no matter how civilly you discuss politics.
i personally wish i had the will to stay out of political discussions on this forum, as i do find discussing politics can be hurtful to some, and i certainly don't want to hurt anyone.
amy
Posted by alesta on November 4, 2004, at 9:56:16
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » alesta, posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 9:21:57
> I think you misunderstood me. (Although legislation is put through by the legislature.)
i realize that. but the president has the power to veto that legislation.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 11:45:36
In reply to Re: PBC » Dr. Bob, posted by alesta on November 4, 2004, at 9:46:53
> further destructive legislation
Please respect the views of others and be sensitive to their feelings. The last time you were blocked it was for 1 week, and I'm going to make this for another week.
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, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
> if we can't openly talk about the candidates, positive and negative, then you may as well ban political discussions... also, people are always going to be sensitive no matter how civilly you discuss politics.
It's because people are going to be sensitive that I'm trying to minimize negative discussions. Positive discussions I think are fine...
Bob
Posted by Emme on November 4, 2004, at 13:50:12
In reply to Who are all these people voting for Bush????, posted by jay on November 2, 2004, at 22:58:26
We're all deeply concerned about the war and other current issues. But Let's not forget about one of the most durable legacies a president leaves. We're talking decades. The stakes are high. How many are likely to exit the court this year? I forget.
Posted by AuntieMel on November 4, 2004, at 15:04:05
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » verne, posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 7:55:17
I've always been a believer that if one party controlls congress the other party should be in the white house. That way nothing passes without a good consensus.
gridlock is a good thing.
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 16:40:35
In reply to Re: Two party system » Dinah, posted by AuntieMel on November 4, 2004, at 15:04:05
Or one party the house and the other the senate. The more their hands are tied, the better it is for us. :)
I'd still rather have a no party system. Imagine lawmakers voting for what they think makes sense and people voting for the candidate who is running. But that's just a dream.
Posted by jay on November 4, 2004, at 16:54:10
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » jay, posted by Dinah on November 2, 2004, at 23:48:02
> Do you get CNN? The numbers actually say the exact opposite. The very wealthy voted for Kerry more than Bush. The middle class voted more for Bush. People voted against their perceived economic interests in favor of voting for their cultural values - on both sides.
>
> Americans for the most part voted for what they thought was right. You may not agree with 51% of them as to what was right. But I see no reason not to respect people following their consciences.
>Not from the numbers I got from "The Economic Times". They rolled in Bush's tax cuts (which most only went to the top percentile of the wealthiest people), as well as to corporations and their tax shelters. Bush used smoke and mirrors to pretend he could handle the economy...but he hasn't...and won't, and Bill Clinton left him a legacy of a great economy, with only George to screw it up and bring in massive debt. And that debt is growing by the second. He doesn't care about us 'average' and 'below average' income people (well..I live in Canada...so I am somewhat looked after:-). How any working person could vote for him is beyond me...it really is.
Jay
Posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 19:03:11
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Dinah, posted by jay on November 4, 2004, at 16:54:10
I don't believe anything fruitful can come from this discussion, Jay. I'm obviously not managing to convey the information that I'm attempting to convey, and I'm not sure anyone wants to hear it anyway.
There are lots of people here who feel just as you do. I'm sure you'll feel better talking to them than you would to me.
Posted by zeugma on November 4, 2004, at 20:29:28
In reply to Re: blocked for week » alesta, posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 11:45:36
> > further destructive legislation
>
> Please respect the views of others and be sensitive to their feelings. The last time you were blocked it was for 1 week, and I'm going to make this for another week.Dr. Bob, I agree with you. calling an act of legislation 'destructive', even if it wipes out the lives of countless innocents, is bound to hurt someone's feelings, and should not be tolerated on this board.
>
> 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, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
>
> > if we can't openly talk about the candidates, positive and negative, then you may as well ban political discussions... also, people are always going to be sensitive no matter how civilly you discuss politics.
>
> It's because people are going to be sensitive that I'm trying to minimize negative discussions. Positive discussions I think are fine...
>I am very sensitive. Please, people, say something positive about Bush, because I am at a loss!
-z
> Bob
Posted by mair on November 4, 2004, at 21:58:44
In reply to Agreed » AuntieMel, posted by Dinah on November 4, 2004, at 16:40:35
I think my state has close to a no party system. It went pretty overwelmingly for Kerry and almost as overwelmingly for an incumbent Republican Governor and Republican Lt. Governor. You don't register by parties here, and there is no option on any ballot to vote a straight party ticket.
But what probably helps this alot is that the Republican Right is of little consequence. Most of the Republicans are centrist as are many of the Democrats so it's pretty easy to cross party lines. And by and large, politicians have always been very good about understanding that they represent more than just the people in their party.
I know lots of people would like to blame the divisiveness on the irrelevant liberal democrats, but seriously from where I stand, things seem so divided because the Republican Party has gotten both very conservative and very partisan, and in my opinion, George Bush made little or no attempt to give consideration or make concessions to those to the left of him. Not only have the Democrats been marginalized, but seemingly so have moderate Republicans, at least those who are in Congress.
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 22:14:05
In reply to Re: Who are all these people voting for Bush???? » Dinah, posted by jay on November 4, 2004, at 16:54:10
> Bush used smoke and mirrors to pretend he could handle the economy...but he hasn't...and won't ... He doesn't care about us 'average' and 'below average' income people ... How any working person could vote for him is beyond me...it really is.
Please respect the views of others and be sensitive to their feelings. The last time you were blocked it was for 2 weeks, and I'm going to make this for another 2 weeks.
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 post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by yoshimi on November 5, 2004, at 1:51:13
In reply to Supreme court justices, posted by Emme on November 4, 2004, at 13:50:12
Posted by yoshimi on November 5, 2004, at 1:53:31
In reply to Re: blocked for week » Dr. Bob, posted by zeugma on November 4, 2004, at 20:29:28
I am positive that Bush will be out of there in 4 years or less. Hope that helps.
Posted by Sad Panda on November 5, 2004, at 11:16:50
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks » jay, posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 22:14:05
> > Bush used smoke and mirrors to pretend he could handle the economy...but he hasn't...and won't ... He doesn't care about us 'average' and 'below average' income people ... How any working person could vote for him is beyond me...it really is.
>
> Please respect the views of others and be sensitive to their feelings. The last time you were blocked it was for 2 weeks, and I'm going to make this for another 2 weeks.
>
> 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 post, should of course themselves be civil.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
>
>Dr. Bob, 2 weeks is bit harsh don't you think? If you were to apply your civilty rule evenly & fairly then 2/3 thirds of posters here would be banned.
Cheers,
Paul.
Posted by Toph on November 5, 2004, at 12:00:48
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks » jay, posted by Dr. Bob on November 4, 2004, at 22:14:05
Bob, I share Paul's view that these sanctions seem harsh. I realize that when people defy your rules you must make an example of them, but the political statements on PBS appear intended to express solidarity of either glee that Bush won or disappointment that Kerry lost. Jays statement was not a personal attack towards an individual. Someone used a good analogy when they said that cheering for the Red Socks may have offended a Cardinal fan but was not a personal attack worthy of a block. I, too, can't wait until the political fervor dies down, but it seems to me posters shouldn't be sanctioned for saying, "I'm for Lamictal, Prozac stinks for depression."
-Toph
Posted by Dr. Bob on November 5, 2004, at 14:14:05
In reply to Re: blocked for political beliefs » Dr. Bob, posted by Toph on November 5, 2004, at 12:00:48
> Bob, I share Paul's view that these sanctions seem harsh...
I replied over at PBA, here's a link:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20041027/msgs/412235.html
Thanks,
Bob
This is the end of the 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.