Nope :D
Have you ever spoken with or stood next to a Republican?

For Americans you mean? :confused:

Yawn... zzzzzzzz...

Yawn... zzzzzzzz...
There you lot go again, one simply asks for clarification and is met with sarcasm, oh well such is life for non Americans:rolleyes:

Have you ever spoken with or stood next to a Republican?of course...

There you lot go again, one simply asks for clarification and is met with sarcasm, oh well such is life for non Americans:rolleyes:

Life with you Rich is consistently talking about Americans. I'm bored with always having to talk within the context of your choosing - it's just monotonous and frankly it's getting to the point where I'm wanting to go else where for my online discussions. Not due to any animosity but simply because the context of all these threads are the same.

You talk of American insularity and yet you focus on no other subject but America. Focusing on one topic and one topic only IS insular and the entertainment value for me is nearing zero.

Looking at this thread (http://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=112760) just re-enforces the point. A discussion about airport security ends up talking about americans. Not one single american had posted on that thread. There was no involvement from any american at all and yet that's where the discussion ended up. It's just what you want to talk about day in and day out. Which is fine but it ain't for me.

of course...
That's evidence enough then, this commitee finds you guilty of being American and supporting Americanism:cool:

Life with you Rich is consistently talking about Americans. I'm bored with always having to talk within the context of your choosing - it's just monotonous and frankly it's getting to the point where I'm wanting to go else where for my online discussions. Not due to any animosity but simply because the context of all these threads are the same.

You talk of American insularity and yet you focus on no other subject but America. Focusing on one topic and one topic only IS insular and the entertainment value for me is nearing zero.

Looking at this thread (http://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=112760) just re-enforces the point. A discussion about airport security ends up talking about americans. Not one single american had posted on that thread. There was no involvement from any american at all and yet that's where the discussion ended up. It's just what you want to talk about day in and day out. Which is fine but it ain't for me.

Yawn ZZZZzzzzzzzz:rolleyes:

Hollywood is not good PR for the USA.

This is the most sensible thing you've said in a long time, Col. :D

This is the most sensible thing you've said in a long time, Col. :D
I think you'll find he's said something similar about Bush:D

That's evidence enough then, this commitee finds you guilty of being American born and raised:D
and supporting Americanism:cool:Americanism:
In the Soviet Union, progress through technology was given this term.
loyalty to the USA and its institutions
an expression that is characteristic of English as spoken by Americans
a custom that is peculiar to the United States or its citizens
In functionalist linguistics, an Americanism is a particular usage, i.e. a word or phrase used for the time being by the native speakers of English in the United States. Such usages are not rule driven, but are dynamic and culturally determined. The term may also describe such usages if they are exported to, and adopted by, the native speakers of English who live in other countries, especially through the popular media of television and movies.
I think you're getting it:rolleyes:

This is the most sensible thing you've said in a long time, Col. :D
Hi Cindy,

Sadly many of my most sensible comments are lost on some members of this forum.:rolleyes:

Hope you're well

Col

Hi Cindy,

Sadly many of my most sensible comments are lost on some members of this forum.:rolleyes:

Hope you're well

Col

Doing well enough. Been a bit busy lately so haven't been dropping by to throw in my two cents enough. I'm sure everyone has missed me. :cool:

I'm glad to see I didn't miss anything though, the topic is still exactly where I left it... :)

loyalty to the USA and its institutions


irrespective of its consequences, I think you're missing it:rolleyes:

I'm glad to see I didn't miss anything though, the topic is still exactly where I left it... :)
It does move from thread to thread though.;)

Col

irrespective of its consequences, I think you're missing it:rolleyes:The concept, design, and institutions of the country are not the problem...the current administration is. The definition says nothing of being a blindly following puppet of the president or his administration.

Life with you Rich is consistently talking about Americans. I'm bored with always having to talk within the context of your choosing
Lets see, the American President has managed to create the biggest worldwide threat of war. He's destroying countries left right and centre. He cares nothing for innocent lives, he cares nothing for American lives. Ignores the UN. The world is a much worse place than it has been in decades and you're bored? :confused:

it's just monotonous and frankly it's getting to the point where I'm wanting to go else where for my online discussions.

heat, kitchen, out, stand, get.:D ;) :p

Col

heat, kitchen, out, stand, get.:D ;) :p


It's not hot, that's the point. It's stagnant.

You know the first thing that leapt to my mind with the airline plot was not Georgey's take on it. It doesn't take a genius that he's going to use it as a supporting argument for his war on terror. What interested me, was why British muslims are entering the frame of mind that killing their own citizens is a good idea. British people killing British people.

I don't get that such an event occurs in your home country and yet all you want to discuss is America's take on it.

It does move from thread to thread though.;)

Col

I have noticed that myself. :eek: :D

What interested me, was why British muslims are entering the frame of mind that killing their own citizens is a good idea. British people killing British people.

I wondered about that myself.

British people killing British people.


Nationality has no sway when faced with religious indoctrination and in any case their argument is that we're killing their brothers.:rolleyes:
Fanatics and religion go hand in hand whatever country they come from.
anyway I thought you'd left?

I don't get that such an event occurs in your home country and yet all you want to discuss is America's take on it.
There's not much to say from the British perspective. The authorities are dealing with it and initially brought in a severe restriction on airline baggage. Now thats been relaxed a little as the possible threat seems less likely. The British think its better to be delayed a couple of hours rather than be blown out of the sky. Why make a fuss?
Anyway, another angle is to enable the British to get used to queueing for 3 or 4 hours because thats what happens at Disneyland for the rides or an ice-cream.:rolleyes: who in their right mind would want to go there and be patronised by a giant mouse:confused:

From today the stringent searches are going to be relaxed, unless you're a shifty looking muslim with a beard:D They said on the news they were not going to "target" ethnic groups they were going to "exclude" certain groups from detailed searches. i.e. if you're white you're ok, if you're not white you get searched:D

Anyway - haven't you gone yet?:confused: I thought you were "wanting to go else where for my online discussions." Or can't you keep away:D
Tell us when you're going and we'll send you a farewell e-card.

Col

From today the stringent searches are going to be relaxed, unless you're a shifty looking muslim with a beard:D They said on the news they were not going to "target" ethnic groups they were going to "exclude" certain groups from detailed searches. i.e. if you're white you're ok, if you're not white you get searched:D I was always under the impression that one of the greatest tools in the police arsenal was intuition and playing the hunches that come with experience. From that perspective, it's not "racial profiling" or "targeting" it's just good police work. Really...if you're on the lookout for muslim terrorists, are you going to pay as much attention to the caucasian/asian/latino? This whole politically correct notion is creating far more problems than it ever solved if you ask me. (which no one did, but c’est la vie:D )

Agree. But the "do gooders" are kicking up about it because it is "picking on" certain people.:rolleyes:

Mind you, whilst the security bods are frisking a bearded muslim type, the white "nun" with the semtex up his / her skirt slips on the plane:rolleyes:

Col

There's not much to say from the British perspective.

Frankly I think that's a bit of a shame.

The British think its better to be delayed a couple of hours rather than be blown out of the sky. Why make a fuss?

I wasn't actually talking about the inconvenience of queuing but as I said before "British people killing British people". Trying to direct you to some issues like:

1) Pro-terrorist rhetoric being preached in British mosques every Friday.
2) People who have been born in the UK having greater loyalty to their parent's heritage than their own.
3) Why British people (on this forum at least) seem unconcerned that people within their own communities will stop at nothing to kill non-muslims.

But it seems that you prefer to talk about Mickey Mouse...:(


Anyway, another angle is to enable the British to get used to queueing for 3 or 4 hours because thats what happens at Disneyland for the rides or an ice-cream.:rolleyes: who in their right mind would want to go there and be patronised by a giant mouse:confused:

but as I said before "British people killing British people".
Nothing new here - We've been doing it for centuries:rolleyes: The Scots v The English, The Irish v The English, Celtic supporters v Rangers - the list is fairly long.

1) Pro-terrorist rhetoric being preached in British mosques every Friday. is it? wouldn't know myself, I bow to your superior knowlege.

2) People who have been born in the UK having greater loyalty to their parent's heritage than their own.
Thats usually due to religious brainwashing
3) Why British people (on this forum at least) seem unconcerned that people within their own communities will stop at nothing to kill non-muslims.
As I said, we've been living with it for years. The IRA would strike at random, so what? it happens. . . . . . .

But it seems that you prefer to talk about Mickey Mouse...:(

Only that there was some people on the telly chatting about the huge queues at Disneyland (USA) - so queueing at Heathrow is good practice.

Are you going? or what

Col

Nothing new here - We've been doing it for centuries:rolleyes: The Scots v The English, The Irish v The English, Celtic supporters v Rangers - the list is fairly long.

Is English vs English anything new?


is it? wouldn't know myself, I bow to your superior knowlege.

I'm not trying to score points. I got this from a BBC radio show.
Is it something that concerns you?


Thats usually due to religious brainwashing

Does it concern you that it seems to be condoned in your own communities? ie. People with such extreme views being so inconspicious.

As I said, we've been living with it for years. The IRA would strike at random, so what? it happens. . . . . . .

No concern? No anger?



Only that there was some people on the telly chatting about the huge queues at Disneyland (USA) - so queueing at Heathrow is good practice.

From your previous statement, I now understand why this is relevant to you.


Are you going? or what


None of your business ;)

Nothing new here - We've been doing it for centuries:rolleyes: The Scots v The English, The Irish v The English, Celtic supporters v Rangers - the list is fairly long.
I dare say if you ask the Scots or the Irish, they would say it is not the English against the English as per your example. More like the common people aginst the tyrants of England. At least many bar talks in Scotland have pretty much been in that ilk.

Only that there was some people on the telly chatting about the huge queues at Disneyland (USA) - so queueing at Heathrow is good practice.
Seems to me that would be one of those They do it, so it must be ok for us, kind of things. SO what Disneyland has lines, so does the womans restroom on Friday nights at the bars (pubs), and the stop lights at rush hour. Seems like one of those press things to make you feel better. A better way would be to say, a longer wait OR get blown up, your choice.

At least many bar talks in Scotland have pretty much been in that ilk.

I've never been in a Scottish bar but yes, the examples given seem to have a deep-root in the history of the United Kingdom. The current terrorism in the UK seems to have no such history. It's as if the British suspects aren't seeing the UK as their home (unlike the Scots with Scotland and the Irish with Ireland) even though they have been born there. That's what I don't get.

Seems like one of those press things to make you feel better. A better way would be to say, a longer wait OR get blown up, your choice.

Yep, it's just a way to convince joe public that this is all just a part of life.

Seems about par for the course, just left wing crapola

More like the common people aginst the tyrants of England. At least many bar talks in Scotland have pretty much been in that ilk.


Just goes to show how dangerous hearsay is, those English tyrants subsidise Scotland, Wales and NI to the tune of countless millions every year :mad:

Rich, with no disrespect intended to you as a person, I must say that when you look at the terror operatives, they certainly DO claim that they want to destroy us, Israel, and anyone else who treats certain hard-line clerics as a bunch of confused old geezers who should be home sopping bread in milk.

Therefore, when you disputed some of my statements (on about page 5), you were stating something false-to-fact. It is hard to treat your ideas as anything other than an opinion colored by something negative.

You know what? I don't like the way GWB has done some things. If you want to say that he has not been one of our better presidents, I don't think I could effectively dispute you. Where we might disagree, though, is the fact that we can recover from a bad president because the populace isn't always deaf, dumb, and blind.

Well I'm not sure where that came from but simply because a few black high flyers have at last made it doesn't give you the right to take the moral high ground regarding the treatment of Negroes, equality and freedom etc.

I have seen poverty and wealth and all stages in between with Negroes. I live in a city where the black population was greater then any other single population. I know that at least in N'Awlins, prosperity comes to those OF ANY COLOR who wish to work. You have read some pure, unadulterated CRAP regarding suppression of blacks. Some historical suppression has indeed occurred, but lately that suppression is NOT directed to blacks. It is directed to poor people, who then try to vote for the folks who keep the gravy train coming. It is directed to the LAZY people of our country - of ANY color - who think that the world owes them a living.

You know, if there is anything wrong with the world, including my homeland but also including yours, it is the concept of "entitlements" to the folks who like to live on the dole and don't want to really earn their keep. No, maybe I don't want everyone to be fully self-supportive - but the negative noises you hear most often about our country come from demagogues who want to fan the flames among the poor - white AND black AND Hispanic AND whatever else you've got. Fan the flames, make some headlines, pull up some gut-wrenching, heart-breaking headlines. Until you realize that the heart-breaking situation is more often than not due to the person's unwillingness to take responsibility for his/her own life.

Remember our late president John F Kennedy? He rhetorically asked a question that still rings forth today as a meaningful, eloquent statement: Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country. I didn't vote for JFK at the time because I was not old enough. But knowing what I do about him now, I might have supported him.

a bunch of confused old geezers who should be home sopping bread in milk.


You'll forgive me I'm sure for retorting that I think the same applies to Bush, Chenny, etc



Where we might disagree, though, is the fact that we can recover from a bad president because the populace isn't always deaf, dumb, and blind.



I think that you'll find it will be many many years before America regains any standing in the world after Bush, I wish I could say that's not the case for us but sadly after Bliar the same holds true.


You have read some pure, unadulterated CRAP regarding suppression of blacks. Some historical suppression has indeed occurred,

Some? :confused:
Come off it, for most of America’s history they have been seen and treated as second class citizens, in fact I'd go so far as to say they were treat like shit. How can you claim equality and justice when there are still more Black kids in prisons in Texas than there are in school?
If there are numerous opportunities for Blacks in N'Awlins why did Bush lower the minimum wage there, one reason, the same reason they were tossed aside during Katrina, they're Black.
Aside from the horrific damage reeked by Katrina do you know what my most telling memory of the incident is?
Blacks herded like cattle into a stadium surrounded by police armed with pump action rifles, humanity, I don't think so.

I must say that when you look at the terror operatives, they certainly DO claim that they want to destroy us, Israel, and anyone else who treats certain hard-line clerics

Israel and the Jews is not a subject that can be covered in any depth in just a few lines except that
For many, hatred of the Jews goes back some 2,000 yrs and for others it stems from the setting up of the Jewish homeland.
There are many, myself included who have sympathy for Israel, however it doesn't do itself any favours when it reacts to aggression like a wounded tiger, striking back out of all proportion to the initial incident, (just like America)

Come off it, for most of America’s history they have been seen and treated as second class citizens, in fact I'd go so far as to say they were treat like shit. How can you claim equality and justice when there are still more Black kids in prisons in Texas than there are in school?

Maybe because black kids commit more crimes? :rolleyes: Everyone in this country has an equal opportunity for education. Whether or not they seize upon it is up to them. Some take the "easy" way out and turn to crime instead. If their parents allow them to do this, then shame on them. Unfortunately, some parents want their kids to steal/live on welfare/whatever rather than trying to better themselves, or they simply do not care. Should we take more steps to help those kids who want to help themselves? Probably, but I'm not really an expert on this area so I don't know what systems may already be in place for assistance or what may still be lacking.

Aside from the horrific damage reeked by Katrina do you know what my most telling memory of the incident is?
Blacks herded like cattle into a stadium surrounded by police armed with pump action rifles, humanity, I don't think so.

You must have been watching a different news program than I was. They weren't forcibly herded into the stadium. They went there because the leaders of that city/state told them to go there because it would be a safe place to wait out the storm. They also thought they would only be there a matter of hours, rather than days. I thought we went over all of this before in another thread.

Anyway, you clearly think you know more about it than those of us who live here, so poo on you. :D

Maybe because black kids commit more crimes? :rolleyes:
I don't dispute that but the question has to be why?

so poo on you
That's more like it, now you're getting into the spirit of it:D

as an aside as I was here last night my Grandson was sat beside me and was fascinated with your name, avatar, who you were and what you looked like. Of course I explained that no pictures of you existed here but that your daughter must look like you, having showed him her picture he saw another users name and said "who the hell is Kraj"?
I coudn't answer that one:D

That's more like it, now you're getting into the spirit of it:D

:D ;)

as an aside as I was here last night my Grandson was sat beside me and was fascinated with your name, avatar, who you were and what you looked like. Of course I explained that no pictures of you existed here but that your daughter must look like you, having showed him her picture he saw another users name and said "who the hell is Kraj"?
I coudn't answer that one:D

Aw, how cute. I do remember posting a pic here long ago before the forum crash, but I'm sure it's lost forever. I'm afraid I don't have any recent ones that I like. I haven't dropped all the weight from having Emily yet. :o I will, I'm determined, but it sure is taking a long time. :mad:

Ah, well. Now that I've hijacked the thread away from the hijack that had already taken place. :)

Ah, well. Now that I've hijacked the thread away from the hijack that had already taken place. :)

No worries, we'll soon get the thread back on track:eek: :D

No worries, we'll soon get the thread back on track:eek: :D

Somehow I don't feel that bad about hijacking a thread that's already been hijacked. :cool:

I try not to be the first one to do it though...

as an aside as I was here last night my Grandson was sat beside me and was fascinated with your name, avatar, who you were and what you looked like. Of course I explained that no pictures of you existed here but that your daughter must look like you, having showed him her picture he saw another users name and said "who the hell is Kraj"?
I coudn't answer that one:D

Grandson? Grandson! GRANDSON!!! :eek: :eek: I thought you were 21:confused: and just turned 22. You mean you've been lying to us all along? Has there been any truth to anything you've said to us? I'm crushed.:D

Grandson? Grandson! GRANDSON!!! :eek: :eek: I thought you were 21:confused: and just turned 22. You mean you've been lying to us all along? Has there been any truth to anything you've said to us? I'm crushed.:D

He started young, and so did his kids. :D

He started young, and so did his kids. :D

I don't know. I think you may be trying to cover for him and he almost had me convinced to cross over to the dark side. Now that I know the truth is not in him. I'll have to reconsider.:D

I don't know. I think you may be trying to cover for him and he almost had me convinced to cross over to the dark side. Now that I know the truth is not in him. I'll have to reconsider.:D

You're going to give him hope with statements like that. :D

And besides, what are you talking about just turned 22? If you look in his profile it clearly shows that he was born in 1985, making him 21. :rolleyes:

Now is the time to get back to the subject in hand

None of your business ;)

I'm wanting to go else where for my online discussions.
It is when you post on a public forum that you're thinking of leaving. If you don't want it to become other peoples business, keep quiet:rolleyes:

Col

I don't dispute that but the question has to be why? Because we don't have you, the Great and Powerful Oz, to come waive your magic wand and make everything coincide with your idealistic view of humanity.:rolleyes: Until you see fit to save us all, I suppose we'll just have to deal with the fact that people are people. They become what they know. If they grow up in a family/neighborhood which promotes living off the public dole as opposed to performing an honest day's work, they will not be likely to break the cycle. As long as the system will give them something for nothing, why should they work? The reason for their behavior is as simple as that of Pavlov's Dogs.

Because we don't have you, the Great and Powerful Oz, to come waive your magic wand and make everything coincide with your idealistic view of humanity.:rolleyes:
I, unlike you, am an optimist:rolleyes:


Until you see fit to save us all, I suppose we'll just have to deal with the fact that people are people. They become what they know. If they grow up in a family/neighborhood which promotes living off the public dole as opposed to performing an honest day's work, they will not be likely to break the cycle. As long as the system will give them something for nothing, why should they work? The reason for their behavior is as simple as that of Pavlov's Dogs.

Then your government should tackle the problem instead of poking its nose into every other countrys business:rolleyes:

I, unlike you, am an optimist:rolleyes: no argument there:cool: Then your government should tackle the problem instead of poking its nose into every other countrys business:rolleyes:
For once, we are in complete agreement:eek: I'll mark it on the calendar:D

you focus on no other subject but America.

Sign up to SteadfastPatrio.com, oops silly me, that focuses on no other subject but America and its greatness.:rolleyes:

It is when you post on a public forum that you're thinking of leaving. If you don't want it to become other peoples business, keep quiet:rolleyes:

Col

It was supposed to be a light-hearted comment ... but oh well... :(

you focus on no other subject but America.


Sign up to SteadfastPatrio.com, oops silly me, that focuses on no other subject but America and its greatness.:rolleyes:

Evidence for the prosecution Your Honor!

To return to the original topic of this thread.

I understand that in November, there are "mid-term elections". As I understand it, the senate comprises mainly of republican senators which means that Mr Bush pretty much gets his own way.

Are the mid-term elections an opportunity for American people to vote in some other senators who may put up some resistance to Mr Bush and his ideas?

If so, will people (who voted republican) change their vote to show some defiance against Mr Bush? or will people still vote the same and miss the opportunity to "do something"

The majority of Americans on this forum have voiced discontent at the current administrations antics - what are you going to do? continue to vote republican then tell us (outsiders) that you can do nothing?

Col

Senators serve for terms of six years each; the terms are staggered so that approximately one-third of the Senate seats are up for election every two years. The staggering of the terms is arranged such that both seats from a given state are never contested in the same general election. Assuming that if the elected body is really out to do the job people elected them to do, fresh ideas will allow for a more rounded approach and an overall evenness. Since there can only ever be a maximum of 1/3 change in membership, the mid terms will tweak the outlook slightly, but not usually create a great swing in bias...unless the current separation is extremely close. In reality it does become more of a "OK, you've had your shot, let's get someone else in there", so given current public opinion polls, you could very well see a replacement of those representatives who have supported the current administration and are now up for re-election...but that also depends upon public sentiment in the jurisdiction of the elected official.

EDIT:
FYI, the current separation is: In the House, the Republicans have a 232-202 advantage (the House's one Independent votes with the Democrats, and there's one vacancy). The Republicans control the Senate because it's split 55-44-1, and the one Independent votes with the Democrats.

So given that apparently most Americans disagree with Mr Bush's policies and that his popularity is at an all time low, one third of the senate who are republican could well be replaced by another party?

Trouble is I suppose, is that die hard republican voters will still vote republican no matter what.

I've noticed that in discussions here, the US populace attaches a high importance to whether a person is republican or democrat. In the UK we don't put anywhere near the importance on how people vote. In fact, it hardly ever crops up in conversation - I don't know how my wife votes even:rolleyes: It would be considered insensitive and bad manners to ask how someone voted.

Col

So given that apparently most Americans disagree with Mr Bush's policies and that his popularity is at an all time low, one third of the senate who are republican could well be replaced by another party?
Republican or Democrat is not nearly as important as public perception, but essentially yes...but it's also highly unlikely that they would all be replaced.Trouble is I suppose, is that die hard republican voters will still vote republican no matter what. My grandfather was like that. Just ticked the "Straight Republican" box and walked out of the booth:eek: Some codswallop about party loyalty.I've noticed that in discussions here, the US populace attaches a high importance to whether a person is republican or democrat...It would be considered insensitive and bad manners to ask how someone voted.We would also consider it rude to ask how someone voted, but not for the individual to offer said information. We pride ourselves on the anonimity of the voting process (or hide behind it:rolleyes: ), but will openly declare our party affiliation.

Hey Col,
Not trying to be tick tacky but just wanted to point out that you said this on this post:

I don't know how my wife votes even:rolleyes: It would be considered insensitive and bad manners to ask how someone voted.
Col

but asked this a few post back:

The majority of Americans on this forum have voiced discontent at the current administrations antics - what are you going to do? continue to vote republican then tell us (outsiders) that you can do nothing?Col

I guess this could be counted as you didn't ask how someone voted. You just asked how someone was going to vote.:D

I am only meaning this to pull your pigtails. Not trying to get a rise out of ya.:)

Gosh - 4 posts of sensible conversation:eek: ;)

The snag with our lot is that it is essentially labour or conservative parties who are likely to get power.

If you vote for Blairs lot (labour) you effectively rubber stamp his policies and his love affair with Mr Bush but the economy is under control and I judge that by my mortgage payments going up or down.
If you vote for Cameron (conservative) you vote for an Eton educated prat who likes fox hunting, owns a big estate and is a millionaire and has no idea about "normal" peoples lives.

So we're on a loser either way. You can waste your vote by voting for a lesser party who has no hope of power, or just not vote at all.

Col

The majority of Americans on this forum have voiced discontent at the current administrations antics - what are you going to do? continue to vote republican then tell us (outsiders) that you can do nothing?
I'm playing my 'get out of jail free' card. Both senators from Illinois are democrats as well as the congressman/representative from my district. Whether I vote for a Republican usually depends on my assessment of that person versus their Democrat opponent, but considering the current political climate of the country any Republican has to be obviously and significantly superior to the Dem to get my vote.


Trouble is I suppose, is that die hard republican voters will still vote republican no matter what.
Wherein lies the dilemma. Most Republicans I know don't care much for Bush but still voted for him because of the policies of the Republican platform, which he represents. Even if they disagree with certain things, they still disagree more with the Dems.

Thus, it continues to support my idea that social change only ever occurs at the rate people die.

I've noticed that in discussions here, the US populace attaches a high importance to whether a person is republican or democrat.
It's just another example of our need to label people and put everything into tidy categories and such. Yadda yadda... we've been over that all before.

I am only meaning this to pull your pigtails. Not trying to get a rise out of ya.:)
I think you know what I mean:rolleyes:

I suppose I could have asked a simple question really - does anyone (American) here think the mid-term elections will have any effect on Bush's policies going through senate? but its interesting how the voting works over the pond.

For example, there seems to be alot of emphasis on how Florida votes for the Prez - more emphasis than say on a "lesser" state?? why is that?

In the UK, we vote for an MP (member of parliament) of whatever party. The party with the most MP's gets to form a government and the leader of that party is Prime Minister. So there's no difference if you vote in Liverpool or in Plymouth

Col

Yadda yadda... we've been over that all before.
yadda yadda? your thread started well, but deteriorated at the end in an (almost) Flintstone-esque way:rolleyes:

Here endeth the sensible discussion we were having

Col

Here endeth the sensible discussion we were having

Col

I hope not, I was actually quite enjoying reading about British politics.

I hope not, I was actually quite enjoying reading about British politics.
Well you'll have to have a sensible discussion with Rich because I'm off now till next wednesday:D

Col

yadda yadda? your thread started well, but deteriorated at the end in an (almost) Flintstone-esque way:rolleyes:

Here endeth the sensible discussion we were having

Col
I just didn't see the point in rehashing a topic we've been over again and again which didn't even pertain to the main point of the discussion. And if it bugged you, why not just ignore it? If you liked the rest of my post, why not focus on that instead?

Pity Col has gone I wanted to point out to him that Blair went to Fettes the Eton of Scotland and did not vote against fox hunting. I guess he still lives in the past when the "workers" voted labour as they are like us , tosh! the last conservative prime minister went to the local state grammar school, most Labour ministers send their kids to fee paying schools.

Brian

I think you know what I mean:rolleyes:

I suppose I could have asked a simple question really - does anyone (American) here think the mid-term elections will have any effect on Bush's policies going through senate? but its interesting how the voting works over the pond.

For example, there seems to be alot of emphasis on how Florida votes for the Prez - more emphasis than say on a "lesser" state?? why is that?

In the UK, we vote for an MP (member of parliament) of whatever party. The party with the most MP's gets to form a government and the leader of that party is Prime Minister. So there's no difference if you vote in Liverpool or in Plymouth

Col

I did know what you meant. That's why I said "I was just pulling your pigtails" (teasing you) ahead of time.

So given that apparently most Americans disagree with Mr Bush's policies and that his popularity is at an all time low, one third of the senate who are republican could well be replaced by another party?
it is not that simple, because each senator or rep. are for a state. If they are doing a good job for their state and the people of their state, they can get relected just on that basis. Sen. and Rep. are state level elected. So those of us in Texas, can't vote for a California senator or representative. If we could there would be even less Democraps in :eek:

So those of us in Texas, can't vote for a California senator or representative. If we could there would be even less Democraps in :eek:
Democraps, eh? Hmmm... guess I'll start calling you a Repubican. :rolleyes:

no argument there:cool:
For once, we are in complete agreement:eek: I'll mark it on the calendar:D
So you admit there are serious problems in your country?

Evidence for the prosecution Your Honor!
Objection your HONOUR! Sustained!

So you admit there are serious problems in your country?

I don't think anyone here has ever claimed that there weren't. We just wish YOU would find another topic to talk about. :D ;)

I don't think anyone here has ever claimed that there weren't. We just wish YOU would find another topic to talk about. :D ;)
But we can't move on until these problems are sorted out. We do have your welfare at heart and our own of course :cool: :D

But we can't move on until these problems are sorted out. We do have your welfare at heart and our own of course :cool: :D

Of course. :rolleyes: :cool:

Democraps, eh? Hmmm... guess I'll start calling you a Repubican. :rolleyes:
Actually, I am more a Conservative (not the bastardized use of the extrem right wing) I vote for who I think better serves my beliefs in a certain priority list.

But we can't move on until these problems are sorted out. We do have your welfare at heart and our own of course :cool: :D
It's not your job to sort them out. AND since most of your observation as so WRONG in general, it is making things worse :p

But we can't move on until these problems are sorted out.
You are so right. I mean, it's like every single conversation in the history of humanity that didn't miraculously solve all social problems in one fell swoop were just a waste of time.

Amusingly enough, since in the UK to "sort out" is slang for "beat up", I think you've accomplished your goal. We can all agree that you've beaten the topic to death.

My boss told me he would sort me out for a rise.

No pain no gain I guess.

But we can't move on until these problems are sorted out.

Is that a royal we? :p

It's not your job to sort them out.
From an American, pot black kettle, ring any bells?:rolleyes:

You are so right.

I know :cool:

Rich:

You mean we have segregation, whites only, no blacks in school, etc, etc?

And by implication, we still have that?

False except to this extent only. If you have no blacks living in a school district, the odds are you will have no blacks in the schools of that district. If no blacks choose to live in a given area, that is their choice. Admittedly, some aberrant cases apply, such as the number of poor people living in a really well-to-do area and the proportions for such areas are perhaps a little off-average.

But the larger picture is that average communities with a normal mix of races will not have systemic segregation.

Rich, for once I have to say this: Express your opinions all you want, but SHUT YOUR PIE-HOLE about things that happen on our side of the pond unless you have PERSONALLY witnessed them in a way that excludes the chance that you missed something. Stuff you hear through the media often happens to be very badly slanted/spun by anti-Americans. It is at best hearsay evidence that wouldn't stand up in court for longer than it took a lawyer to say "I Object!"

Colin:

well its odd that when Clinton had a little grope with Monica there were huge calls for impeachment.
The next Prez kills thousands and is a total twat and makes the USA the laughing stock and makes everyone hate the USA yet nothing is said. . . . . . . .

Actually, this is in line with one of my OWN rants... We let kids see violence but heavens forfend that we should ever mention ..... SEX {gasp} in their vicinity. So kids grow up knowing how to kill in a classic Myriad of ways - but don't know what to do when confronted with a willing and healthy partner. Because Dad let little Tony watch the gangsta movies and war movies and slasher movies all he wanted... but the moment the child went to the X-rated channels, Dad bashed the kid up the side of the head for daring to want to see female anatomy.

This is because there is an obsession against sex and sexuality that comes from overly uptight religious types who are easily willing to misdirect us.

But I digress...

Colin, Bill was WASTEFUL - look at all those perfectly good cigars he ruined.

(C'mon folks. Look for tongue deeply in cheek.)

Stuff you hear through the media often happens to be very badly slanted/spun by anti-Americans. It is at best hearsay evidence that wouldn't stand up in court for longer than it took a lawyer to say "I Object!"


Standard American response to legitimate criticism, wheel out the standard "anti American" diatribe.

Still what would a stupid "anti American" Brit know anyway:rolleyes:
Try reading some for yourself
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5563891

Standard American response to legitimate criticism, wheel out the standard "anti American" diatribe.

Still what would a stupid "anti American" Brit know anyway:rolleyes:
Try reading some for yourself
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5563891
If it ends in .ORG or .GOV, it is to biased

If it ends in .ORG or .GOV, it is to biased
So the facts are inaccurate? :confused:

You ever hear of a little thing called "Reverse Discrimination"? It was the inevitable byproduct of the implementation of Affirmative Action. All AA did was create a system where people were not given jobs, admitted to schools, etc. because they were actually qualified, but because of the color of their skin or their gender. Institutions were given quotas to meet and lost government favor if they didn't. Their positions were required to be filled by certain percentages of blacks and females...regardless of the actual qualifications of the applicant, gender and race took precedence to fill the needed slots.The number of black students at UCLA has been falling for years, partly due to a ballot measure that ended racial preferences in admissions.
...
According to Connerly, the prestige of a UC diploma has upped the ante for everyone. Last year, more than 45,000 students applied to UCLA. Connerly says there are simply too few blacks who make the grade on the only standard that should count: academic merit. As a white, heterosexual, male (which is now the minority group in the US) all I can say is it's a bout time.

as Doc says...until you know all of the facts...

All AA did was create a system where people were not given jobs, admitted to schools, etc. because they were actually qualified, but because of the color of their skin or their gender. ..

You mean the system that replaced the system that denied people jobs because of the colour of their skin? :confused:

You mean the system that replaced the system that denied people jobs because of the colour of their skin? :confused:Frankly, yes. Giving or denying positions based upon skin color or gender is not a solution. You cannot make up for discriminatory actions by performing more discriminatory actions...ever heard of 2 wrongs do not make a right? Creating a fair system, not a biased one, should have been the goal.

Colin

Does the US government think of peoples values before they bomb them? NO

Did the terrorists think of people's values when they ran planes into buildings? NO. Did they think about the idea that many of the people in those towers would have been happy with a live-and-let-live relationship with their countries? NO. Is there ANY way to handle terrorists other than appeasement or eradication? So far, no one has found a long-term, successful middle ground... Do any of you remember the name Clement Atlee? (Sorry if I spelled it wrong) Do any of you understand that appeasement is an invitation to ask... nay DEMAND ... more - until it turns into a demand for all you have, and it STILL doesn't stop?

Does the US think of other peoples values whilst they ignore the Kyoto agreement for payment of backhanders?

Does the US think of other peoples values whilst stockpiling oil so "we'll be ok" when things get tight?

Do any of you understand that the United States is actually working on issues parallel to, but not identical with, the Kyoto treaty? We don't agree with the specific measures required by the treaty. So? If we are working towards improvement at the best pace we can manage, that isn't wrong, is it?

Our goal is to clean things up WITHOUT forcing companies to close. Our system doesn't allow us to do that without considering the number of people we force onto the welfare and unemployment rosters. Factor that into your comments before harping too loudly on this issue.

Do any of you realize that the punitive measures of the Kyoto treaty are so Draconian for the USA that the treaty itself is a slap? Do any of you realize that stockpiling ANYTHING - oil, food, medicine - is prudent activity to take in anticipation of a crisis? In other words, a realistic assessment of threats...

Does the US think of other peoples values arming Israel to kill innocent people and children on their behalf?

The USA has a unique heritage in some ways, not so unique in others. To us, it is parallel to the old Chinese proverb about fishing: Give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach him how to fish, feed him for a lifetime. As to Israel killing innocent people on our behalf, that is purely unadulterated CRAP. Colin, if you listen to the the terrorist states, they openly admit their goal is the elimination of the "Zionist" state. We are helping our friends defend themselves. Most of the time we don't care what the Islamic nations do. But when they shoot at our friends, we help.

Does anyone remember the lend-lease program during WW2 when the USA gave (excuse me, "loaned" at low interest with low probability of payback) lots of stuff to our UK friends? My dad worked at the Higgins Shipyards making the cargo ships that brought the UK some of that stuff. Do you perhaps see the parallel between us sending materials to the UK and sending materials to Israel, both of whom were in a fight for their lives at the time?

Are you going to tell us that you really think we should have left it to you guys on the other side of the pond to kill the Germans for us? Or perhaps we should have stopped the aid and let your government learn German. OPEN YOUR BLOODY EYES! :mad:

I think I finally understand Colin and Rich. The strategy is to just keep throwing crap until the other side gives up in frustration and goes away. Then you declare victory.

Sounds like Hezbollah, doesn't it.

That wasn't a question.

Sounds like Hezbollah, doesn't it.

The strategy is to just keep throwing shiite until the other side gives up in frustration and goes away. Then you declare victory.

I can quote exactly the same argument for people like that in my own country, however lumping a whole race together and branding them scroungers isn't acceptable or proof that they simply don't want to work.
If they can get more staying at home then there's something wrong with your wage/taxation structure.

The first part of this statement is why we complain when you accuse us of suppressing blacks. We have as many - or more - poor people who aren't black. We are trying to progress but there are those who won't cooperate. At what point do you take the Draconian solution of telling them, "Work or starve" ? Hey, I'll be the first to admit the USA has problems and they do hit blacks hard. But they hit whites, Hispanics, and Orientals hard, too, if those persons are poor and don't want to work. ANYBODY who tries to play the system gets things they shouldn't get. If they also get reviled, who gives a flying foo-bar?


And I absolutely agree with your comment about something being wrong with our tax/wage/welfare structure. Which is WHY the USA Democratic Party isn't in power right now. They are the biggest proponents (and the ones who tend to rely most on "gratitude" from the recipients) of an extensive welfare system.

Ignores the UN.

Bush SHOULD ignore the U.N. - it is toothless. Were it not that the goal of world peace is desirable, the U.N. would have become obsolete (on its other fronts) long ago. Look, for example, at their SPLENDID progress in Darfur. Look, for example, at their SPLENDID control of the Hutu/Tutsi conflict. Look, for example, at their EXCELLENT progress in controlling piracy in the Indian Ocean. Look, for example, at their WONDERFUL results in providing a platform for peace in the Middle East. Shall I continue?

Look at the U.N. for its trade organization that CONTINUALLY bashes the USA. Yes, when we stand up for our share of rights, we sometimes get thrown a bone like a barking dog - but when we complain up, down, and sideways about protectionist countries, what happens? Zip.

If it were left up to me, the U.N. would have disbanded a long time ago, to be replaced by something that has enough teeth to really work. Because, you see (or perhaps the problem is that you DON'T see), when you have a world with nations that almost openly support terrorists, wagging your finger at them and saying, "No, no, naughty, naughty" is useless. But the members of the U.N. won't vote to give up enough sovreignty to allow anything much stronger to happen. And a slap on the wrist isn't enough sometimes.

The strategy is to just keep throwing shiite until the other side gives up in frustration and goes away. Then you declare victory.

That was excellent, Bodi. I just about fell out of my chair laughing at this.:D

DocMan,

I was going to reply to one of your post and say "yea, what he said," but then I read another then another so now I'm not going to quote any of them I'm just going to make a blanket statement and say "yea to all of them." In my opinion, what you have said is spot on and well said. Good job.

Are the mid-term elections an opportunity for American people to vote in some other senators who may put up some resistance to Mr Bush and his ideas?

Decidedly yes, there is that opportunity. Some of our newspapers and TV shows are discussing many cases where specific seats are in jeopardy such that the Republicans might lose the majority in one of the houses of Congress. Actually, it is in exactly such situations that our government works best. When people are FORCED to compromise in order to get something passed through Congress, they have to stop their excessive slanting of those laws in their favor. That is the way the USA is supposed to work - via compromise. When one party has both houses of Congress AND the president, compromise isn't needed. That is why you see so much in the way of extreme decisions.

I'm seriously considering voting for a couple of Democrats for congress this time because some of the folks we have there now are just rubber-stampers.

Personally, I think Rich suffers from delusions of grandeur in a clinical sense. I think he truly is mystified as to why we don't see things his way and is literally incapable of comprehending the concept that he might possibly be incorrect.

This manifests as what others observe to be sarcasm, side-stepping, grand generalizations, hypocrisy, etc., when in his mind it is a perfectly logical and reasonable progression of thought. For example, no matter how many insults he slings at someone (either directly or by implication, the latter being his overwhelming preference) he honestly believes he is wronged when somone insults him. This pattern (eg., engaging in a certain negative behavior, complaining when another person behaives the same way, and finally failing to understand how the two behaviors are equivalent) repeats itself over and over in a near-Shakespearean comedy of errors.

That's why I stopped when I caught myself responding to the problems in Rich's post. He's not stubborn, or a jerk, or closed-minded, or uncaring; he just doesn't understand. You may as well try to explain the difference between red and blue to a person who was born blind.

Colin is a completely different story. I'm pretty sure he just feels constantly bombarded by crap that originates in the U.S., especially since Blair is basically an amplifier/repeater for it. Therefore, it helps him feel better to fire right back.

So we're on a loser either way. You can waste your vote by voting for a lesser party who has no hope of power, or just not vote at all.

That's very similar to the problem we had between Mr. Bush and Mr. Dole in 2000. The worst case of same was for Governor of Louisiana a couple of decades ago, when we had Edwin Edwards (Dem) and David Duke (Rep) as our runoff choices after the general election. So our choices were a known crook and a known bigot.

EE would have screwed us (actually, DID screw us) by funneling money to his own pocket, depriving many voters of the benefits of money that should have gone to their aid. DD would have chased business away from our state because of his racist posture.

Eventually, DD got arrested for tax fraud and EE got arrested for public malfeasance while in office. EE is still in jail. DD might be out now, but I've lost track of him.

This is the negative aspect of our system. And, if I may infer from between the lines in your comments, your own UK system has this same failing. When it comes to public office, you rarely get what you want or what you deserve. Instead, you get what you settle for.

For example, there seems to be alot of emphasis on how Florida votes for the Prez - more emphasis than say on a "lesser" state?? why is that?

One big issue with Florida is that many people go there to retire due to its climate. (No snow up to your ... belt-buckle ... during the winter months.) As such, its population comes from many other areas, thus broadening the diversity of said population. This makes it a better cross-section of the continuum of American voters. I.e. it is a microcosm of the USA.

Other issues might apply as well, but I think the diversity of the population is a big deal. Also, since GWB's brother Jeb Bush is the state's governor, there is a component of "loyalty" for GWB through Jeb. A loss of loyalty to Jeb would signal a loss of loyalty to GWB - and vice versa.

Standard American response to legitimate criticism, wheel out the standard "anti American" diatribe.

Sorry, Rich, that tactic won't fly with me. I have refuted you so you retreat to an implication that I used argumentum ad hominem against you. Nope. I merely denied that your generalization was valid. I then gave you the "out" that you could have gotten that faulty generalization from slanted news reporting as a source.

Remember, news organizations that report "ho-hum" news get bought out by those who like sensationalism. So OF COURSE you will see all the bad things. What you FAIL to realize is that our system allows that to happen (to call attention to bad things) so that we can try to correct it. When we find corruption, when we realize that Mr. XYZ is a crook, when we find waste in our government, the news media have an obligation to report it so that we can vote out the scoundrels.

But you appear (from what I can see of your comments) to believe that any problem you see on the news is wide-spread. In fact, such news items are the exception rather than the rule.

Thanks for your vote of confidence, ShaneMan

Thanks for your vote of confidence, ShaneMan

You've got my vote too, Doc Man. I don't jump into the political discussions much any more. Got tired of spinning my wheels and going nowhere. :(

You've got my vote too, Doc Man. I don't jump into the political discussions much any more. Got tired of spinning my wheels and going nowhere. :(

I'm surprised that anybody from across the pond still bothers to argue with Rich, as I've said on a previous thread he doesn't just move the goal posts but the whole damn stadium. I too don't contribute anymore as the anti American slant/rant creeps in everywhere. I think that he should rent a Harley and tour the States meeting ordinary folk he might learn a thing or two.

No doubt he going to tell me he has met many Americans but he still has a narrow jaundiced view.

Brian

I'm surprised that anybody from across the pond still bothers to argue with Rich, as I've said on a previous thread he doesn't just move the goal posts but the whole damn stadium. I too don't contribute anymore as the anti American slant/rant creeps in everywhere. I think that he should rent a Harley and tour the States meeting ordinary folk he might learn a thing or two.

No doubt he going to tell me he has met many Americans but he still has a narrow jaundiced view.

Brian

I knew I liked you for a reason. ;)

I knew I liked you for a reason. ;)

I don't know what to say, I'm flattered.:o

Brian

I'm surprised that anybody from across the pond still bothers to argue with Rich, as I've said on a previous thread he doesn't just move the goal posts but the whole damn stadium.

Ok, that's two good laughs I got from this thread, today. This was a good one Brian.

I too don't contribute anymore as the anti American slant/rant creeps in everywhere. I think that he should rent a Harley and tour the States meeting ordinary folk he might learn a thing or two.

No doubt he going to tell me he has met many Americans but he still has a narrow jaundiced view.

Brian

I appreciate you saying so Brian. I think the differences in cultures and people is fun to explore but to be verbally beat down gets old in a hurry. There are times that I think to myself, that I would really like to get to know some of the customs, saying and things that make up Great Britian, but you can't even go two post in without it getting hijacked off to slam America and Americans. I have known of only one person from GB and that was my best friends Mom, when I was growing up and I thought the world of her. I knew she had ways about her that were different from anyone I had ever been around, but I enjoyed the differences. When I came here, I really thought there could be some good exchanges with folks that have sort of intrigued me for years, but I'm getting to the point of thinking that if the norm, over there, is like some of the experiences I've had here, then I really wasn't interested in getting to know anyone there. I don't mind someone disagreeing, agreeably, but this bashing, blaming, conspiracy crap is like dragging ten miles of chain.

I'm surprised that anybody from across the pond still bothers to argue with Rich, as I've said on a previous thread he doesn't just move the goal posts but the whole damn stadium. I too don't contribute anymore as the anti American slant/rant creeps in everywhere. I think that he should rent a Harley and tour the States meeting ordinary folk he might learn a thing or two.

No doubt he going to tell me he has met many Americans but he still has a narrow jaundiced view.

Brian

You've been infected with the American disease Brian, you're now resorting to personal insults too

Colin



Did the terrorists think of people's values when they ran planes into buildings? NO. Did they think about the idea that many of the people in those towers would have been happy with a live-and-let-live relationship with their countries? NO. Is there ANY way to handle terrorists other than appeasement or eradication? So far, no one has found a long-term, successful middle ground...


What the hell did the invasion of Iraq have to do with the twin towers, you bombed the crap out of Afghanistan and then buggered off to invade Iraq, both countries are now in a state of civil war.:rolleyes:
You went off to attack Muslim countries out of revenge



Our goal is to clean things up WITHOUT forcing companies to close. Our system doesn't allow us to do that without considering the number of people we force onto the welfare and unemployment rosters. Factor that into your comments before harping too loudly on this issue.

Standard American Republican diatribe for doing nothing, why the hell shouldn't companies spend money putting right the damage they've done to the environment. The argument that spending money on protecting the environment costs jobs is nonsense, it creates jobs.

Does anyone remember the lend-lease program during WW2 when the USA gave (excuse me, "loaned" at low interest with low probability of payback) lots of stuff to our UK friends? My dad worked at the Higgins Shipyards making the cargo ships that brought the UK some of that stuff. Do you perhaps see the parallel between us sending materials to the UK and sending materials to Israel, both of whom were in a fight for their lives at the time?


Comparing Israel now with what the UK was up against during WW11 is a bloody insult. The two bear no comparison.

(excuse me, "loaned" at low interest with low probability of payback)

Loaned my ass:rolleyes: The UK is still repaying the US for defending democracy. The US grew rich as a result of WW11 and those "loans"

Are you going to tell us that you really think we should have left it to you guys on the other side of the pond to kill the Germans for us?
Here we go, the US won the war on its own, eventually :rolleyes:

Or perhaps we should have stopped the aid and let your government learn German. OPEN YOUR BLOODY EYES!


Oh skip the bloody "we saved you" crap, you sat on your ass for two years and only joined in when the Japs pissed on you fire.
The UK was brought to the brink of destruction by WW11, Israel is nowhere near that situation. YOU OPEN YOUR BLOODY EYES!

You've been infected with the American disease Brian, you're now resorting to personal insults too

Let's see how do you say it? Something about pot...kettle...black. Your going to say you don't but you do. Remember when you were calling me ShameMan instead of ShaneMan. You were at least attempting to. I wasn't insulted but your attempt was to try and insult me. Besides you can't seem to figure out with you constant (not an exaggeration) remarks about America and Americans, these remarks are insulting and the posters on this forum are insulted and have told you so numerous times. Does stop anything cause you come back with some deflect or an excuse. Well as my Grandmother use to tell me, "excuses are like butts, everyone has one and they all stink."

Let's see how do you say it? Something about pot...kettle...black. Your going to say you don't but you do. Remember when you were calling me ShameMan instead of ShaneMan. You were at least attempting to. I wasn't insulted but your attempt was to try and insult me. Besides you can't seem to figure out with you constant (not an exaggeration) remarks about America and Americans, these remarks are insulting and the posters on this forum are insulted and have told you so numerous times. Does stop anything cause you come back with some deflect or an excuse. Well as my Grandmother use to tell me, "excuses are like butts, everyone has one and they all stink."

I attack Americanism and what it stands for, as I told you before, sticks and stones.......:rolleyes:

...ever heard of 2 wrongs do not make a right?


Has America or Israel? :confused:

Which is WHY the USA Democratic Party isn't in power right now. They are the biggest proponents (and the ones who tend to rely most on "gratitude" from the recipients) of an extensive welfare system.

Unlike the Republicans who give huge tax rebates to the wealthy

I attack Americanism and what it stands for, as I told you before, sticks and stones.......:rolleyes:

I don't understand the "as I told you before, sticks and stones" part, cause I didn't call you anything. As far as the "I attack Americanism" part. I guess that is what you think you sound like when you do what you do, but what I hear is attack America and Americans, over and over and over again. Your right, you do attack, and attack. I just think it's a loss that you can't have the foresight to stop long enough to get to know the human beings that come to the forum, who happen to be Americans. Your choice, but I don't understand how someone can be so ate up with one subject that it's all they can think, say, or write.

I don't understand the "as I told you before, sticks and stones" part, cause I didn't call you anything.

This time around

but what I hear is attack America and Americans, over and over and over again. Your right, you do attack, and attack.

I'm merely responding to the "pro Americanism" posts here, maybe when Bush buggers off and the world returns to normal things might change.
But then again pigs might fly too....................

This time around



I'm merely responding to the "pro Americanism" posts here, maybe when Bush buggers off and the world returns to normal things might change.
But then again pigs might fly too....................

"This time around." Rich there have been a few times you got under my skin and I went too far with what I said to you, but it has not been my M.O. to insult you (other than what I am by birth--American)

Like I said, your choice. If Bush, the world returning to normal, pigs flying, are the only things in your life, then more power to ya. Just thought it might be nice to see if there is some other Rich besides the only face he's ever let us see. I can only control so much of the world I live in and I try to do my drop in the bucket, but I realize it's only a drop. From there I don't let the things I can't control, take over my life. My choice is to control my environment, not let my environment control me.

"This time around." Rich there have been a few times you got under my skin and I went too far with what I said to you, but it has not been my M.O. to insult you (other than what I am by birth--American)

Like I said, your choice. If Bush, the world returning to normal, pigs flying, are the only things in your life, then more power to ya. Just thought it might be nice to see if there is some other Rich besides the only face he's ever let us see. I can only control so much of the world I live in and I try to do my drop in the bucket, but I realize it's only a drop. From there I don't let the things I can't control, take over my life. My choice is to control my environment, not let my environment control me.

Why not start a revolution, nah that didn't work, back to the drawing board.
As for me and other things in my life, I have plenty thanks, they just don't appear as topics here, or somebody decides to change the subject anyway.:eek:

Now, enough about me and back to the worlds problems :D

Now, enough about me and back to the worlds problems :D

I'll pass. It's almost 3 am here, so I think I better go to bed. I'm driving to Oklahoma tomorrow morning to go to my step brothers wedding. Besides you don't want to solve the worlds problems, just America.:D

BTW yeah, yeah, I know. America is the worlds problem. See I have talked to you enough to have a conversation without you.:eek:

I'm driving to Oklahoma tomorrow morning to go to my step brothers wedding.

How far is that and why can't you catch the train?


Besides you don't want to solve the worlds problems, just America.:D

BTW yeah, yeah, I know. America is the worlds problem. See I have talked to you enough to have a conversation without you.:eek:

No that's not fair, America is only part of the problem, the largest part though:D

How far is that and why can't you catch the train?




No that's not fair, America is only part of the problem, the largest part though:D

Not quite a four hour drive. Train? What train? Actually, there is a train that goes between Oklahoma City and the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex but I've never been on it. Besides then I couldn't ride in my big, gas hog, GMC Yukon.:D

Well, I can almost have a conversation without you.

Good night (for me any way) and we'll pick up our verbal battles in a day or so.:D

Have a safe journey and don't drink too much at the wedding:)

Besides then I couldn't ride in my big, gas hog, GMC Yukon.:D



Is it one like this?



http://www.baxterbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Site=D3&Date=20060731&Category=PHOTOGALLERIES01&ArtNo=731001&Ref=PH&Params=Itemnr=4

No I think this is more your style

http://www.baxterbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/gallery?Site=D3&Date=20060727&Category=PHOTOGALLERIES&ArtNo=607270801&Ref=PH&Params=Itemnr=9

Bush SHOULD ignore the U.N. - it is toothless. Were it not that the goal of world peace is desirable, the U.N. would have become obsolete (on its other fronts) long ago. Look, for example, at their SPLENDID progress in Darfur. Look, for example, at their SPLENDID control of the Hutu/Tutsi conflict. Look, for example, at their EXCELLENT progress in controlling piracy in the Indian Ocean. Look, for example, at their WONDERFUL results in providing a platform for peace in the Middle East. Shall I continue?

.

Yes do continue, let's look at the American "policed world", Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Cuba, Korea, let's discuss who created the conditions that fuelled the Taliban etc.:rolleyes:
The United States wants the role of the worlds policeman yet refuses to accept the rules of those it pretends to be protecting.
Ever heard of the Gestapo, Gitmo etc. etc. and Bush wants to lecture the world on freedom, democracy, justice.
The US acts only in it's own interests, always has and always will.

when you have a world with nations that almost openly support terrorists, wagging your finger at them and saying, "No, no, naughty, naughty" is useless.


Yes I agree, that's why the US under Bush is now the biggest hypocrite on the planet, you've supported terrorists both openly and covertly in the past when it suited you, now since 9/11 the whole world has to suddenly sing the US tune.
Bush wanted a war and Iraq was an easy target, it had nothing to do with "terrorism", except that in this case Bush and Bliar were the terrorists:mad:

You've been infected with the American disease Brian, you're now resorting to personal insults too

Trust me, it's not just an American disease. It's not even mostly an American disease. ;)

Trust me,

For some odd reason I actually would :confused: ;)

For some odd reason I actually would :confused: ;)

Aw, thanks. But why would that be odd? :confused: ;)

We are loosing our freedoms..........little by little.
As we evolve into the New World Order. Where FEMA power will police a nation; US.



Terri321

But why would that be odd? :confused: ;)
Do you really want me to answer and start WW111, nah, diplomacy's my forte :cool:

diplomacy's my forte :cool:

:eek: :rolleyes: :D

Loaned my ass:rolleyes: The UK is still repaying the US for defending democracy. The US grew rich as a result of WW11 and those "loans"Sorry:o We Yanks sometimes forget that we are eternally greatful to and in the debt of the grand and glorious British Empire for actually financing our economy and creating our culture...

...wait a tic...wouldn't that make the current US geo-political stance your fault?:confused: ...you sat on your ass for two years and only joined in when the Japs pissed on you fire.That's because we were minding our own business...The UK was brought to the brink of destruction by WW11not to put too fine a point on it, but you'd think that since the reason the great empire didn't go careening off that cliff and into the great abyss of destruction was because we did indeed step in and pull your arse (and the rest of Europe's) out of the fire, you'd be able to back the f**k off once in a great while:rolleyes:

The UK was brought to the brink of destruction by WW11


Hundreds of thousands gave their lives to prevent it. Americans included.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/how_the_allies_won_03.shtml

Sorry:o We Yanks sometimes forget that we are eternally greatful to and in the debt of the grand and glorious British Empire for actually financing our economy and creating our culture...


What are you babbling about now? :rolleyes:


That's because we were minding our own business...not to put too fine a point on it

No you're forgetting the fierce anti British sentiment that was America at the time


but you'd think that since the reason the great empire didn't go careening off that cliff and into the great abyss of destruction was because we did indeed step in and pull your arse (and the rest of Europe's) out of the fire, you'd be able to back the f**k off once in a great while:rolleyes

and if you lot didn't keep claiming that we'd all be speaking German if not for you then you'd :rolleyes:
We saved your ass, not visa-versa, it was in America's interest to keep us armed until you decided to JOIN IN. You did not win the war on your own and if you want to get pissy every time it's pointed out then that your problem not mine!

and if you lot didn't keep claiming that we'd all be speaking German if not for you then you'd :rolleyes:

Would you have preferred Russian? :confused: :p

Would you have preferred Russian? :confused: :p
That'll be the next claim :rolleyes: :p

You've been infected with the American disease Brian, you're now resorting to personal insults too
http://www.ics.uci.edu/~sudeep/links_files/image002.jpg

...

*breathes*

....

*wipes tear from eye*

...

Seriously.... is that the best you can do? Is blaming everything on America the sum and totality of your cognitive powers? You can't even come up with some different way to martyr yourself that you have to resort to accusing other British people of being too American? Are you really that entertainingly insane or do you just get off on trying to get a rise out of people?

Get a grip, man. You complaining about being told you have "a narrow, jaundiced view" is like David Duke complaining about being called a racist.

...

Seriously.... is that the best you can do? Is blaming everything on America the sum and totality of your cognitive powers?

I don't blame everything on America, however in this case the poster was a frequent visitor and where part of his lineage could posibly be traced back to America.


You complaining about being told you have "a narrow, jaundiced view" is like David Duke complaining about being called a racist.

Well that's odd, almost every American posting here has been jumping down my throat claiming that racism doesn't exist in America anymore

How strange that this man recieved 40% of the vote including 60% of the white vote at the time of election:rolleyes:
Remind me again who needs to get a grip?

What are you babbling about now? :rolleyes:Sorry 'bout that...your powers of persuasion are too much for me at times:rolleyes:
and if you lot didn't keep claiming that we'd all be speaking German if not for you
...
You did not win the war on your own and if you want to get pissy every time it's pointed out then that your problem not mine!Tell yourself what you want, but despite our self-serving reasoning behind entering the war, there's no way you would have beaten the combined forces of the Axis powers without our help and you know it. I'm not suggesting that the Mighty US swept in like an avenging horde and single handedly routed the Germans, I'm suggesting that any way you cut it, the addition of the American military forces most certainly was the reason that the tide of the war shifted and without the that influx of military power, we'd not be having this pleasant conversation....Herr Riche:D

I don’t believe our lives will go back to normal. I don’t want to be the voice of doom and gloom. The inevitable is the New World Order politics is constantly marching onward and into.

We must have loss of liberties; we must respect the police that will control us.
We must accept the fact that presidents as well as other politicians can and will steal their chairs if not voted in by the people.

We must be told what to carry on our person, we must be scanned, our children must be fenced in and scanned. Its all for our protection. We want protection from the terrorists in our country, they are everywhere amongst us. We the people will be checked. Our homes must be checked without warrant. We can be arrested by FEMA, if we are it is without trial and we will loose our constitutional rights.

HAARP has a strong control of the weather, Elf Towers are springing up nation wide, as so are Concentration Camps. Our borders are soon to be opened as we are to carry a chip card we may feely cross the border as the card is like a passport.
Our Country will welcome many more new comers. We could have more concern of terrorism.

Seventy- three percent of the populations have raised eyebrows at the events of 911 as inside job. So in short, as the people seem to be over ruled, there is no way to stop the political, global desire for New World Order and all that comes with it. Big Brother is and will be keeping a very close eye on all of us. We will be controlled people.

Main stream media is not covering the political agenda as it truly is. We are fed selective information that is irrelevant to the events taking place in our Nation. This is a one very well planned step at a time procedure, to consistently lead us onward into.
There is no going back to what we once knew.


http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/gvcon6.html

This link opens to FEMA the secret government.



Terri321

Did I leave out the black helicopters and fear of the people?
Fear of the constitutional right we have to speak freely as we feel it is or as we see it.
Fear because the government knows all we do online and its recorded in a data base.
Fear of our telephone calls being intercepted and it too is recorded and stored in a data base. That the government keeps tabs on the so called people that are apposed to or speaking of the New World Order.
Fear of attack by government or loss of life is sweeping the land. When people are dominated and ruled by fear. Is that a free people?

So Terri, according to the US Constitution you should all be taking up arms & overthrowing the corrupt government?

I haven't read it in detail, but from bits I remember I think that's the reason for your Right To Bear Arms isn't it?

http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/gvcon6.html

This link opens to FEMA the secret government.



Terri321
You do realise that you'll now be branded anti American and an enemy of the State

So Terri, according to the US Constitution you should all be taking up arms & overthrowing the corrupt government?

I haven't read it in detail, but from bits I remember I think that's the reason for your Right To Bear Arms isn't it?

and to overthrow the church and stop God from running the country

So Terri, according to the US Constitution you should all be taking up arms & overthrowing the corrupt government?

I haven't read it in detail, but from bits I remember I think that's the reason for your Right To Bear Arms isn't it?



The right to bear arms is under attack. The government would like to see arms removed from all of our homes.


Politicians are exempt from. As well as those that currently own unregistered weapons.

Women have obtained a small gun for protection in cases of a stalker.
Homeowners have them for protection.
Hunters enjoy the sport of as well as the meat of.
Sharp shooters enjoy a riffle range and target practice.

With terrorists in our country. What a time to want to remove arms.

Those that have weapons with intent to kill and harm others will still maintain the carrying and ownership of them with no them. We knew that would happen.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xeHclwb8Ng&mode=related&search=



RIGHT TO CARRY PROHIBITED:
Wisconsin – Illinois



RIGHT TO CARRY SEVERELY RESTRICTED:
California - Iowa - New York - Massachusetts - Rhode Island
New Jersey - Maryland - Delaware - Hawaii - Washington, DC

http://www.2asisters.org/


Terri321

We will be striped of arms; we will be told what to carry on our person as now visible in airports. One week they were told not to carry face creams perfumes, lipstick and so forth. The next week a woman overlooked a water bottle and was threatened to be hauled to prison.

You will watch what you say or you can be held in contempt of government.
It’s happening too.

We must comply, one step at a time. We are going into a dictatorship. A dictatorship arises during a time of terrorists or war. The people are told exactly what to do and their freedoms are lost or restricted. What’s the next step?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA1g3wjHEmw&mode=related&search=


Terri321

there's no way you would have beaten the combined forces of the Axis powers without our help and you know it.
Can you proove it ? and in any case I've never claimed that we could.
What is at issue here is the claim that Israel is in the same postion now as the UK was during WW11.
Total nonsense. If America is the great defender of Judaism why did it refuse Britains request to allow Jews to flee Europe to North Africa during WW11?

You do realise that you'll now be branded anti American and an enemy of the State



Do you realize that act in itself is a violation of my constitutional right?
Freedom of speech: Is violated.



A Thoughtcrime

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Thoughtcriminal)

Jump to: navigation, search

In George Orwell's dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four the government attempts to control not only the speech and actions, but also the thoughts of its subjects, labeling unapproved thoughts with the term thoughtcrime or, in Newspeak, "crimethink".
In the book, Winston Smith, the main character, writes in his diary:

For a thought crime we must have the thought Police.

The Thought Police
(thinkpol in Newspeak) was the secret police of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four whose job it was to uncover and punish thoughtcrime.

The Thought Police used psychology and omnipresent surveillance to find and eliminate members of society who were capable of the mere thought of challenging ruling authority.


Orwell's Thought Police and their pursuit of thoughtcrime was based on the methods used by the totalitarian states and competing ideologies of the 20th century.

It also had much to do with Orwell's own "power of facing unpleasant facts," as he called it, and his willingness to criticise prevailing ideas which brought him into conflict with others and their "smelly little orthodoxies."

Although Orwell described himself as a democratic socialist, many other socialists (especially those who supported the communist branch of socialism) thought that his criticism of the Soviet Union under Stalin damaged the socialist cause.

The term "Thought Police," by extension, has come to refer to real or perceived enforcement of ideological correctness in any modern or historical contexts.

Are we still free?

Terr321

http://jonesreport.com/articles/240406_neil_young.html



Neil Young has a new song about to hit the radio stations.
If a thought is a crime; wait until the Gestapo hears this tune. Neil is going to be in violation of something.

Terri321

Do you realize that act in itself is a violation of my constitutional right?
Freedom of speech: Is violated.


I'm not convinced that anyone has ever truly had "freedom of speech"

I'm not convinced that anyone has ever truly had "freedom of speech"


Freedom of speech is still here for now in part. I say in part due to some being squelched for speaking. It is happening now as it has always. The wrong person in power that knows and or says; too much or could damage a system unseen by the common eye, or obvious to all; is removed conveniently from earth. Two examples are President Kennedy and Martin Luther King.


Freedom of speech to extent of so repetitiously vulgar can sound like a foreign language. We are now loosing freedom of speech slowly as in when and where to speak of politics and religion. People have lost jobs or expelled from schools, for speaking of such, when it has been so ordained to not.

Some people fear speaking what they think as they see the repercussions of others that have voiced their view on Politics. If you notice even the Hollywood Stars that step up to the mike to bash government policy: they all take recount on our liberty, our right, our freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech first off is a God given right, secondly granted through the death of our country men. Historically it is one of the rights that made this Nation great. For now, for a time, we still have freedom of speech in part.


Terri321

Freedom of speech is not a God given right.

Where it exists it is a situation forged for ourselves and gained by our actions as communities. Likewise, it can be lost or removed by the action or inaction of the community.

God has nothing to do with it. If we lost the power of free speech, would he suddenly wisk down from above to re-instate it?

Freedom of speech is also a state of mind, not a state of society. While you can still speak, you can say what you like. Others, who fear punishment for doing so have already lost more than the freedom of speech, they have lost the will. Those who speak and care not for any consequence of voicing their opinion are those who know the freedom.

"Lets Stop George Bush before he Destroys the Whole Planet Earth". Meh, leave him be... And rejoice like I do in the comfort that he can only serve two terms in office! Then, perhaps the world can get back to being a little less silly.

...And as I notice a lot of anti-American sentiment in these threads I'll also clarify that I don't hold GWB as the sole perpatratior of the current world trend - Our PM too, has a LOT to answer for in steadfastly supporting such a nutter.

The administration of quite a few governments around the globe in fact, has gone a bit fruity in recent years - almost like they are all working together to usher in the aforementioned NWO.

Terrorism relies on fear, keep your eyes open long enough and although I don't doubt there is a terrorist threat (always has been, always will be- on the cause changes) it is no where near as immense and all-pervading as the governments of the world wish us to perceive it. Fear can be manipulated, just keep an open mind as to who exactly is manipulating it and for what purposes.

...Seems a little bit of a coincidence that in an age where mankind is suddenly expoding the freedom of information and travelling almost effortlessly and at whim across the globe, where almost anything is within our reach - terrorism occurs and we're being closed down and restricted. Bit hard to govern and control an empowered and mobile population isn't it???

With terrorists in our country. What a time to want to remove arms.


I'm not quite sure why Rich hasn't pitched in here. Proably because you're doing such a fine job of degrading the intelligence of the American people. Anyway here is what he should have said: :p

The UK public has put up with terrorism and invasions for decades without arming up the populace etc etc...

P.S I think you've been reading too much Huxley and Orwell. If the US government can't suppress an insurgent force in Iraq or Afghanistan what makes you think they can do the same for the entire world? You can cross the French of your list for starters :p

Two examples are President Kennedy and Martin Luther King.

I hate to tell you this but the two examples you gave to support your theory are over three decades old - do you have anything a little more recent to back yourself up? The attempted assassination of Harry Whittington perhaps? :rolleyes:

Quote from Rich about me
I don't blame everything on America, however in this case the poster was a frequent visitor and where part of his lineage could posibly be traced back to America.

Just for the record I have no lineage back to America

Fathers side is from lowland Scots via Northern Ireland, Mothers almost pure Welsh, but there was a Hamilton in there a few generations ago.

I suppose Rich thinks anybody not attacking America must be American:(

Mind you I'm on his side on who won the war arguments, Germany was never going to invade GB, he actually wanted to do a deal we keep our Empire he gets Europe, but unlike those sitting on the sidelines getting rich we decided to fight evil.

Brian

BTW Kraj is a very astute and articulate guy, I'm glad somebody can see the difference between criticism of an action and personal abuse.

Brian

Germany was never going to invade GB, he actually wanted to do a deal we keep our Empire he gets Europe, but unlike those sitting on the sidelines getting rich we decided to fight evil.


Going to disagree with you here Bri, hope you don't mind :p

1) Neville Chamberlain did a deal with Hitler once. What came of that?
2) The UK was of vital strategic importance to the invasion of Europe. The UK had to be added to the reich to cut off the crucial supply routes from the United States.
3) The battle of Britain was a total commitment to achieve point 2. Why it didn't happen?
a) Radar
b) The UK being an island
c) The geniuses who designed the spitfire (and those who flew them of course)
d) Hitler switching his air superiority campaign from the airfields to the cities
e) Supplies from the US (had to slip that one in :p )
4) The agreement to keep your empire was worthless because of point 1) and because the Japanese (who were solely interested in conquest) were a superior force in the Pacific. The fall of Singapore for example.
5) I would like to remind you that US military casualties in world war 2 was going on towards 300,000. Yes this probably includes the war in the Pacific but the UK's empire extended there too. I really don't think 'sitting on the sidelines' is an apt way to describe the US's involvement.

Hi Dan slight delay as the missus stole the computer to order books:)

1 I was not talking about Neville Chamberlain, but Hitler's offers to Churchill from 1940 - 42
2 If Britain and Germany made a pact who was America supplying?
3 The battle of Britain was Hitlers alternative to risking an invasion afte being rebutted by Churchill
d Churchill was a ruthless bastard , he knew that if we bombed German cities they would retaliate by bombing ours and thus our airfields would be spared.
e US supplies were vital , its just that they cost us all our overseas investments, they were not free.
4 Ah yes the Japs. The war was over for Germany immediately after Pearl Harbour, with the Japs moving south thr Russians could move millions of troups from their Eastern borders to their Western front. But if we hadn't been fighting in Europe then who knows how things would have gone in the East.
5 The sitting on the sidelines refers to the period upto Japan and Germany declaring war on the USA, and I in no way want to minimise the human loss to america, but it was the one nation that came out of WW2 richer than when it started.

My sole objection is to the we won the war without us you would be speaking German brigade, oh and that we didn't get charged for our goods.


Brian

Hi Dan slight delay as the missus stole the computer to order books:)


How rude :mad: :p



1 I was not talking about Neville Chamberlain, but Hitler's offers to Churchill from 1940 - 42

I understand but do you really think Churchill even considered these offers as sincere, especially with Hitler's past record for keeping to agreements? The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact being another good example.


2 If Britain and Germany made a pact who was America supplying?

Well this is precisely the reason why the UK had to fall because of it's strategic location. Hitler had made plans to conquer the US (the development of long-range bombers) - removing the UK from the allied map was crucial for the implementation of these plans.

3 The battle of Britain was hitlers alternative to risking an invasion afte being rebutted by Churchill

Churchill's rebuttal was well grounded. It was an attempt to delay the involvement of the UK until the completion of Operation Barbarossa. Once Russia had fallen, you would have been next, IMHO.

d Chuchill was a ruthless bastard , he knew that if we bombed German cities they would retaliate by bombing ours and thus our airfields would be spared.

US military involvement was not forthcoming at the time, I guess desperate times calls for desperate measures. With total air superiority to the Luftwaffe, the UK would have fallen.


e Us supplies were vital , its just that they cost us all our overseas investments, they were not free.

I agree, to be honest Roosevelt's delay is still something I don't get. Probably something along the lines of Chamberlain's initial approach of appeasment but carried to a much further extent.


4 Ah yes the Japs. The war was over for Germany immediately after Pearl Harbour, with the Japs moving south thr Russians could move millions of troups from their Eastern borders to their Western front. But if we hadn't been fighting in Europe then who knows how things would have gone in the East.

Indeed.


5 The sitting on the sidelines refers to the period upto Japan and Germany declaring war on the USA, and I in no way want to minimise the human loss to america, but it was the one nation that came out of WW2 richer than when it started.

You have to remember that Chamberlain made his own excuses for inattendance at the beginning of hostilities. Roosevelt was achieving his own plans of recovery from the Great Depression with the New Deal.The involvement in war that was occuring thousands of miles away would have been seen as impacting on this. I understand how some may see this in a bitter light, but Chamberlain did much worse to the Czechs with the Munich agreement.


My sole objection is to the we won the war without us you would be speaking German brigade, oh and that we didn't get charged for our goods.


I understand, but I hope you appreciate why I wanted to point out the US casualties in the conflict. The delay was there, there is no arguing against it and there is a good argument that the Marshall plan was a money-making exercise. However I have known US citizens who were involved in the D-Day landings and visited the American cemetry in Cambridge, UK. I didn't want to allow that to get brushed under the carpet as it were.

I understand, but I hope you appreciate why I wanted to point out the US casualties in the conflict. The delay was there, there is no arguing against it and there is a good argument that the Marshall plan was a money-making exercise. However I have known US citizens who were involved in the D-Day landings and visited the American cemetry in Cambridge,