GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Ok, I think I've had it with Bush (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=635443)

edgeprod 07-20-2006 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toonpornblog
Yeah. I can understand that. I was a registered dem at one point. It just seemed 'the right way' - but the longer time went, the more skewed things became, and, well.. we all have our opinions.

I personally am a Democrat because I believe in the general policies and objectives of the party over those of the Republican party. I generally HATE the leaders of my party, and wish we could get some real leadership. Unfortunately, it's the same hysteria and bullshit every term.

My general viewpoints, if you care, are:

* I believe in a woman?s right to choose. I do, in fact, feel that abortion is murder, and that a fetus is viable from conception. I don?t, however, disagree with the notion that it is a woman?s right to murder a child she has created. Until the actual birth process, I consider a child in the womb to be the "property" of the mother, to do with as she sees fit. This includes its destruction, if normal rearing of the fetus will endanger the life of the mother or significantly reduce the possibility for a functional life for the child. I do not believe in abortion for the purposes of birth control or vanity, and would recommend sterilization for the mother (except in very unusual circumstances) who undergoes more than three abortions or the father creates the necessity for more than three abortions.

* Creating a life burdens the parents with responsibilities. If a mother or father is unable to pay child support, yet continues to procreate, these individuals should be sterilized. This is a separate concept from parents who have children, but become unable to support them. The additional children after the indigent state provides the distinction.

* I am against the notion of a protracted death penalty and appeals process, but am definitely for a speedy execution. If you?re convicted of a crime qualifying you for the death penalty, and a jury of your peers with the concurrence of a judge sentences you to death, then you should die in a prompt manner, without further burden to the public. I don?t, however, think that our court system, in its current capacity, is capable of competently and consistently providing for a fair trial. Until that situation is remedied, I will be against putting "convicted" criminals to death.

* I believe that the government?s chief responsibility is the protection of its people. To that end, I am willing to give up a limited number of personal freedoms, under strictly controlled circumstances. Unfortunately, in this instance as well, I do not trust the current government to competently invade my privacy nor do I trust them fully to ensure my security. Thus, I feel the Patriot Act leaves the door open to abuse and with little trade off in the way of protection.

* Once a threat to the United States has been identified and confirmed, through a processes, as a citizen, I do not feel I need to be fully aware of, that threat should be neutralized or eliminated as expediently as possible. If this action creates an inconvenience or hardship on the surrounding community (a village in Pakistan, for example), the concept of proactively purging terrorists and criminals from one?s surroundings should be effectively communicated.

* I will never support nor engage in the public protest of a war undertaken by the United States. To do so would demonstrate a complete lack of regard for the lives of our soldiers and fellow citizens. To publicly protest during wartime is to futilely beat the drum of ignorance. Peaceful protests and demonstrations regarding other issues, however, I feel are justified and necessary under many circumstances. This includes boycotts and trade restrictions.

* I believe that anyone rooting for the deaths of American soldiers (this includes, of course, a few GFY posters) in order to further their own political agendas should be dealt with as we would deal with enemy combatants. An individual who secretly or openly calls for death to any American is an enemy of our country and its citizens. There are no exceptions, excuses, or distinctions.

* I will defend to the death the right to criticize the President of the United States, or any other leader, individual, company, idea, or practice. I will campaign against the Michael Moores, Al Frankens, and Bill O'Reillys of this world, or anyone else willing to fabricate information in order to further their political goals. Free speech, freedom of the press, and freedom to make a fool of oneself are important concepts. These ideas and ideals built the America we enjoy today.

* Censorship is not a concept I can stomach. I feel strongly that parents should take an active role in the upbringing and continual education of their children. If a child becomes so unruly that a parent cannot control their viewing of "sensitive" materials, then the child either hasn?t been raised properly or has a mental defect that should be addressed. The public at large should not suffer for the failings of irresponsible parents. The exceptions to this rule are works which are not art or expression, but are exploitation. This includes hate speech, which has no constructive place in a civilized society, and child pornography.

* I feel that stopping or slowing nuclear proliferation is a worthy ideal in the abstract. In practice, the United States should not be dismantling functional nuclear weapons in the hopes that other countries will graciously do the same. Leaving ourselves open to attack without the surety of mutual annihilation is asking for serious issues.

edgeprod 07-20-2006 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayeff
I wouldn't be in too much of a rush to buy into that differentiation. Capitalism, socialism, communism and all the other isms are all collectivist systems at root. Capitalism sits better with most of us, because it allows us to retain more illusions, but even the core principle of private ownership is largely that, an illusion. The unvarying common factor is that people are treated primarily as economic units who exist to serve an elite.

Sure, but show me the guy who pulled himself out of poverty to unthinkable wealth under the Communist system.

TurboAngel 07-20-2006 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks
wait until I announce my marriage to mojo


So it's really you?



:) :upsidedow :)

edgeprod 07-20-2006 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pussyserver
thanks to his brother the smarter bush ( jeb ) will never have a chance in hell at being president

I disagree. Every Bush that has been in the White House has run against a poor excuse for a candidate. Kerry? Gore? Dukakis? The only election a Bush lost was against Clinton, in 1992. And Clinton got what -- 43% of the vote? Slim pickings to be elected by.

Who is going to oppose Jeb? Who is going to pull enough votes away? We need a REAL candidate.

12clicks 07-20-2006 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TurboAngel
So it's really you?



:) :upsidedow :)

yes it is baby.
the gay thing gave it away, eh?

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks
the gay thing gave it away, eh?

BoyAlley?

edgeprod 07-20-2006 09:10 AM

It's late, and I'm going to sleep.

I'm impressed, though. We had an actual discussion about real issues, and with the exception of a few less enlightened individuals, very few insults were thrown around.

Bravo -- maybe this is the beginning of bridging the gap on here.

12clicks 07-20-2006 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgeprod
BoyAlley?

after me, he had to change his name to "Man'sAlley"

JUSTB 07-20-2006 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pussyserver
thanks to his brother the smarter bush ( jeb ) will never have a chance in hell at being president


I said that same exact thing to 12clicks on icq earlier!

HAPPYPEEKERS 07-20-2006 09:12 AM

OH MY LORD HAS HELL FROZEN OVER??????!!!!!!! LOL

how is this Ron... GO CLINTON lolol :-P

sherie 07-20-2006 09:13 AM

Wow! I figured there would be a time when Bush would do something to sway your opinion. I'm sorry that it was this.

And I applaud you edgeprod, you are a one man show and have posted some of the most intelligent things that I have ever seen on this forum. Thank you, you have restored my faith in mankind...well maybe just GFY lol. It's refreshing to see someone speak as you do; without ridicule and condescension and of course the name calling. Have a fabulous day!

ControlThy 07-20-2006 09:18 AM

I must still be dreaming.

:winkwink:

SuckOnThis 07-20-2006 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgeprod
What's the last thing the GOVERNMENT cured? Polio?

Polio has not been cured.

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgeprod
Ask Clinton's "war on drugs" how effective throwing money at a problem is.

It was not Clintons "war on drugs". The war on drugs was created by Nixon in 1971 and was pushed further by Reagan with the creation of a Drug Czar and dumbass forfeiture laws which allowed govt agents to seize peoples property over a fucking pot seed.

12clicks 07-20-2006 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sherie
It's refreshing to see someone speak as you do; without ridicule and condescension and of course the name calling. Have a fabulous day!

nothing wrong with a little name calling.:winkwink:

hell, even throw in some hair pulling

MaddCaz 07-20-2006 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks
That's it. It's over.
While I know tax cuts are the right thing to do, going into iraq was the right thing to do, spot on with the axis of evil, listening in on terrorist calls, etc., etc.
He lost me with this stemcell thing. You don't use your Veto ever before, not to slash the bloated budget, not to cut pork, no, you use it to stop something that has wide ranging support.
Even if most cures will NOT come from embriotic stemcell research, you only stir yourself to use your veto now?
I call idiot.:disgust

:disgust

xxxdesign-net 07-20-2006 10:47 AM

I think the fact that you still believe Bush himself is the guy behind everything you mentioned is adorable.. Don't lose your innocence 12clicks :)

12clicks 07-20-2006 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxdesign-net
I think the fact that you still believe Bush himself is the guy behind everything you mentioned is adorable.. Don't lose your innocence 12clicks :)

no, all the things YOU believe in are the facts. everyone knows that.:1orglaugh

Doctor Dre 07-20-2006 11:13 AM

Going to Iraq was only right if they wanted to win the war... I hope they do, but right now I think they just want to spend more money into the military ;)

Antonio 07-20-2006 11:43 AM

let me guess, your new hero is Robert Mugabe

Danid0llface 07-20-2006 12:09 PM

ah gotta love the shitty presedent america picked.

woj 07-20-2006 12:10 PM

100........,.

edgeprod 07-20-2006 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks
after me, he had to change his name to "Man'sAlley"

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I just fell out of my chair!

edgeprod 07-20-2006 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sherie
And I applaud you edgeprod, you are a one man show and have posted some of the most intelligent things that I have ever seen on this forum. Thank you, you have restored my faith in mankind...well maybe just GFY lol. It's refreshing to see someone speak as you do; without ridicule and condescension and of course the name calling. Have a fabulous day!

rofflecopter, omgwtfbbq!!!11oneonetwo

*slaps himself*

Er, I mean .. thank you. :)

edgeprod 07-20-2006 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis
Polio has not been cured.

I had NO idea, but you're right!

From Wikipedia:

"Eradication efforts led by the World Health Organization and The Rotary Foundation of Rotary International have reduced the number of annual diagnosed cases from the hundreds of thousands to around a thousand."

This is crazy. But the fact remains: you don't see too many young kids walking around with Polio lately.

Sexxxy Sites 07-20-2006 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgeprod
More likely, it's to stimulate private-sector research, WHERE IT BELONGS. Do you want the morons in the government having oversight for where the funding goes? Republicans will make it illegal to do ANY stem cell research, public OR private, and Democrats will rob from the program's funding to feed some illegal immigrant with 20 kids.

Too many people are confusing a veto on the FUNDING with a veto on the PROCESS. Stem cell research is legal. Companies do it all the time. These companies are commerical entities, trying to turn a buck. This is what we WANT. What's the last thing the GOVERNMENT cured? Polio? Nearly every major breakthrough has come from the PRIVATE sector.

Funding it at the government level is a huge mistake. If you want to find money for medical initiatives like this, why not cut bullshit porkbarrel projects like John Kerry's and Ted Kennedy's Big Dig ($10 BILLION over budget, and five YEARS late -- so far). $24 Billion (yeah, with a "B") for 6,376 "pet" projects (read: unnecessary shit that is intended to garner votes) was approved at the end of 2005, giving billions of YOUR money to Republicans and Democrats to get votes back home.

Bush did stem cell research a huge favor, but spin it any way you want, I guess. Ask Clinton's "war on drugs" how effective throwing money at a problem is. $30 Billion/year, and 70% of the people who post here still light one up every Friday, like clockwork.

Sorry for the perspective at such an early hour, but the barely educated ranting here has gotten so out of control, that even as a registered Democrat, I'm embarrassed by it.

You are 100% correct in my opinion. In 2005 the private sector spent 100 million dollars on embryonic and other stem cell research and this figure is expected to exceed 10 billion by 2010. Getting goverment monies is usually a game stopped, to much BS involved. Stem cell research will proceed nicely without government funding, but I do agree that using his first veto on this matter is pretty outrageous and is not in tune with the Congress and the people.

minusonebit 07-20-2006 05:40 PM

Recap of Bush Blunders:

Tax Cuts = Bad.
Iraq = Bad.
Axis of Evil BS = Bad.
Listening in on American's Telephone Calls = Bad.
Vetoing Stem Cell Research = Bad.

Thats 0/5. He is too stupid to be alive. Someone, please, stop the waste of oxygen!

Doctor Dre 07-20-2006 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minusonebit
Recap of Bush Blunders:

Tax Cuts = Bad.
Iraq = Bad.
Axis of Evil BS = Bad.
Listening in on American's Telephone Calls = Bad.
Vetoing Stem Cell Research = Bad.

Thats 0/5. He is too stupid to be alive. Someone, please, stop the waste of oxygen!

Iraq is actually pretty damn strategic if you look at the map of the middle east... The fact that he lied to the people to get there is something else thought.

edgeprod 07-20-2006 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sexxxy Sites
You are 100% correct in my opinion. In 2005 the private sector spent 100 million dollars on embryonic and other stem cell research and this figure is expected to exceed 10 billion by 2010. Getting goverment monies is usually a game stopped, to much BS involved. Stem cell research will proceed nicely without government funding, but I do agree that using his first veto on this matter is pretty outrageous and is not in tune with the Congress and the people.

Yes, you're correct here. The veto was a bit odd, and I think he's got the wrong motives, but it has the right effect. The funding would be so paltry anyway, and add SO much red tape.

I have a horse in the stem cell race, but I prefer not to go into details. Let's just say I prefer the research gets done.

JaneB 07-20-2006 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgeprod
More likely, it's to stimulate private-sector research, WHERE IT BELONGS. Do you want the morons in the government having oversight for where the funding goes? Republicans will make it illegal to do ANY stem cell research, public OR private, and Democrats will rob from the program's funding to feed some illegal immigrant with 20 kids.

Too many people are confusing a veto on the FUNDING with a veto on the PROCESS. Stem cell research is legal. Companies do it all the time. These companies are commerical entities, trying to turn a buck. This is what we WANT. What's the last thing the GOVERNMENT cured? Polio? Nearly every major breakthrough has come from the PRIVATE sector.

Funding it at the government level is a huge mistake. If you want to find money for medical initiatives like this, why not cut bullshit porkbarrel projects like John Kerry's and Ted Kennedy's Big Dig ($10 BILLION over budget, and five YEARS late -- so far). $24 Billion (yeah, with a "B") for 6,376 "pet" projects (read: unnecessary shit that is intended to garner votes) was approved at the end of 2005, giving billions of YOUR money to Republicans and Democrats to get votes back home.

Bush did stem cell research a huge favor, but spin it any way you want, I guess. Ask Clinton's "war on drugs" how effective throwing money at a problem is. $30 Billion/year, and 70% of the people who post here still light one up every Friday, like clockwork.

Sorry for the perspective at such an early hour, but the barely educated ranting here has gotten so out of control, that even as a registered Democrat, I'm embarrassed by it.


I agree with you 100%. People on here and in general do not know what they are talking about 99% of the time.

Brujah 07-20-2006 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaneB
I agree with you 100%. People on here and in general do not know what they are talking about 99% of the time.

Including you, after reading some of your posts. :2 cents:

edgeprod 07-20-2006 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaneB
I agree with you 100%. People on here and in general do not know what they are talking about 99% of the time.

It's not that they don't know what they're talking about that bothers me. It's how they express themselves. Look at the "oh, I'm not doing business with a Bush supporter" nonsense, etc. It's just drivel, and if people are really that stupid, they deserve what they get, I'd say.

I know a lot of Republicans discount my opinion solely based on the fact that I'm a Democrat, but I try to leave the general hysteria and backstabbing to others in the party. I'm saddened to say -- few of the Republicans here shout down the opposition by just repeating their point LOUDER. It'd be nice if the party of compassion, peace, and love ... would act like it from time to time.

I've gone out of my way not to be a cock, overall, in this thread. Maybe more people can try it, and we can have some serious discussions.

12clicks 07-20-2006 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by minusonebit
Recap of Bush Blunders:

Tax Cuts = Bad.
Iraq = Bad.
Axis of Evil BS = Bad.
Listening in on American's Telephone Calls = Bad.
Vetoing Stem Cell Research = Bad.

Thats 0/5. He is too stupid to be alive. Someone, please, stop the waste of oxygen!

how sadly uneducated you are.
lets just pic one.
how are tax cuts bad?

czarina 07-20-2006 08:30 PM

just one more proof that he is a total ass hat.

modF 07-20-2006 08:35 PM

Am I the only one who thinks the world will now spin off of it's axis? Have my prayers been answered?

edgeprod 07-20-2006 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks
how are tax cuts bad?

They stimulate growth, force fiscal responsibility, and remove something to complain about. The third part is the rub, I believe.

Of course, Presidents inherit the economies of those before them, for the most part -- so the next President is going to be set up, whoever it is.

pocketkangaroo 07-20-2006 08:44 PM

I'm surprised it has taken conservatives so long to figure this out. Bush spends like a liberal and has made some huge mistakes (Iraq, Katrina). I don't mind a conservative person running the country, but I want them to stand for conservative beliefs.

pocketkangaroo 07-20-2006 08:47 PM

Why are tax cuts bad? Why should I have to pay 40% while someone else pays 5%? Why should I be paying 5000 times the taxes that someone else pays when they use more government resources than me?

edgeprod 07-20-2006 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo
Why are tax cuts bad? Why should I have to pay 40% while someone else pays 5%? Why should I be paying 5000 times the taxes that someone else pays when they use more government resources than me?

You shouldn't actually have to pay *any* taxes. It's not strictly necessary for the middle class to do so. It's all of the wasteful spending that creates this need.

pocketkangaroo 07-20-2006 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgeprod
You shouldn't actually have to pay *any* taxes. It's not strictly necessary for the middle class to do so. It's all of the wasteful spending that creates this need.

I agree. However that is an issue both sides have a problem with.

jayeff 07-20-2006 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edgeprod
They (tax cuts) stimulate growth...

That is the sales pitch. What experience has shown repeatedly since WW2 is that as a stimulant for growth, tax cuts run a very poor second to increasing demand.

The reason is that corporate America is no longer in the business of taking risks. It only reacts. Nor do the wealthy, although they are usually the main beneficiaries of tax cuts, increase their spending in response.

Thus, painful as it may be to admit, Democrat spending on programs which put more money into the bottom of the economy, are much more productive. Almost all the people who benefit from their programs are on modest incomes, therefore they will spend the additional money. Once in circulation, it increases state and federal taxes and it also generates jobs, primarily jobs at the bottom end of the economic ladder, further fuelling the cycle.

It is not what many Republicans want to believe, but if you correlate government and the economy since 1950, Republicans have been responsible for shorter and less dramatic periods of growth, longer and deeper declines. Democrats have in fact performed much better overall.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123