Posted by: Bahman ®
11/15/2002, 06:52:15
Author Profile Mail author
|
1) Is very ambigous, Aaron. I'd rather say, from 0 to 10, I'd give him 7.2) It depends on who else is running!
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/15/2002, 11:13:37
Author Profile Mail author
|
Is very ambigous, Aaron.I knew I wrote 'Unscientific' for a reason; I'll do better in the future. Thanks for the input! Aaron
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/17/2002, 08:59:27
Author Profile Mail author
|
Bahman,Have you seen, or do you watch, the CNN (political debate) television program Crossfire? Somehow I think you might enjoy it; personally, I find it a hoot! Aaron
|
Posted by: Bahman ®
11/17/2002, 09:39:17
Author Profile Mail author
|
No, I haven't watched crossfire. As a matter of fact, we don't have cable (I am resisting it, my argument being that about 20 normal channels should be enough!) Now, tell me, is the crossfire format adversarial? If so, I don't like it.On the other hand, do you watch PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer? It is the best, IMO.
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/17/2002, 11:13:59
Author Profile Mail author
|
Crossfire is about as adversarial as I think Bush is conservative, which is a great deal. But the argumentation is all in good fun, and I find the production both informative and humorous. Here's an example:[This is from several days ago, when Al Sharpton made an appearance. On this day, Paul Begala (a Democrat) and Tucker Carlson (a Republican) were co-hosting. (The wording is not exact, but close enough.)] Tucker: ...I favor you to be the Democratic presidential candidate in 2004... Al: ...I wish you'd stop saying that. Everytime you say that, I go down in the polls! As for NewsHour with Jim, I used to watch it (in fact, a great deal during the 2000 elections), but not so much lately. At this point I'm pretty much addicted to Crossfire. Aaron
|
Posted by: JAK ®
11/17/2002, 09:42:14
Author Profile Mail author
|
“A hoot”Not quite sure what you mean by that. But CNN and CNBC offer some most enlightened discussions. The deliberate polarization there is less attractive than the commentary on PBS or (National Public Radio) NPR. Washington Week In Review and Newshour with Jim Lehrer (PBS) have much to offer those who listen. Crossfire is often excellent...but “a hoot”...seems a bit pejorative. JAK
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/17/2002, 11:03:20
Author Profile Mail author
|
By describing Crossfire as "a hoot," I mean to say I thoroughly enjoy it.I agree that CNN and CNBC produce some quality shows, and often listen to NPR. NPR is the only station which carries classical music in my area, so the news (and such) come nearly as coincidence for me.
Modified by Aaron V. at Sun, Nov 17, 2002, 11:20:01
|
Posted by: james ®
11/15/2002, 07:55:04
Author Profile Mail author
|
He looks too much like a chicken...I often visualize him with a beak. I think Gore would have been a better president, at least with what would seem to be better confidence.
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/15/2002, 11:44:36
Author Profile Mail author
|
james,I don't want to unnecessarily bias the thread, but I will mention that I would have preferred Gore as president (no big surprise there), and have often thought of how the state of the nation may have differed under his guide. Feel free to discuss some of your thoughts on this regard, I'd be interested to hear them. Aarom
|
Posted by: TLC ®
11/16/2002, 03:56:51
Author Profile Mail author
|
Not really. Not any more than George Dubya's nose or any of the other rediculous personal affronts that I have read in this thread. Statements like this generally are not up to my standards. We all slip occasionally. I guess my point is that we should all refrain from stupid shallowness when voicing our opinions on other people. TLC
|
Posted by: nofaith ®
11/16/2002, 12:35:46
Author Profile Mail author
|
I'm a Libertarian, so Gore appealed even less to me than Bush did. However, I will say that he is more intelligent than Bush, but that is not hard. Just to qualify what I mean when I call Bush "dumb," I'm spefically referring to his barely mustering a C average in a school which is well known for never giving below a 75%, his inability to complete sentences correctly, or pronounce the word "nuclear." (trust me, I could go on...) It's not a joke in poor taste, it's simply a fact: Bush is not a bright man. Luckily, a President doesn't have to be smart for his cabinet to get things done.We were presented with some very poor options in 2000. I can't wait to see who the Democrats muster in 2004. I will probably not like him/her either. -Dan
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/17/2002, 07:35:21
Author Profile Mail author
|
Dan,I can certainly understand how a Libertarian would find Gore unappealing (and indeed many Democrats). I personally favored him greatly over Bush in 2000 for his environmental stance, and for the increased likelihood of international cooperation (versus unilateralism). As a Libertarian, how do you feel about Nancy Polosi replacing Dick as minority leader in the house? What Democrat would you feel most comfortable voting for in 2004 for President (if you were somehow forced to vote Democratic, not that I think you would vote for Bush, or anything)? Aaron
|
Posted by: nofaith ®
11/17/2002, 09:42:03
Author Profile Mail author
|
I'm a libertarian in view, not in party. I vote for Democrats or Republicans--whatever suits me at the time. To choose a Democrat candidate? Probably Gephardt, or possibly Daschle, although both disagree with me on so many issues it's hard to count them. I even disagree with every Libertarians on at least a few issues. This whole terrorism thing has gotten people voting for measures they really don't believe in, so that mucks it up even more.According to the survey on this site, I'm a liberal libertarian... See here for a matching up on issues (I didn't match with any Democrat possibilities for Pres, unfortunately). -Dan
|
Posted by: Jrmh ®
11/15/2002, 22:51:17
Author Profile Mail author
|
If I close my eyes real tight and squeeze them until it hurts I can almost picture George W. with a beak. Oh, wait, now I am picturing other presidents and almost presidents. Probably the ugliest one was President Lincoln. However, he was also the most revered. So, beauty is skin deep eh? A lot of the ladies seem to be teken by George W.'s look and confidence. Quite a few men compare him to President Ronald Reagan. History will be the real judge. BTW, Someone once asked Reagan how he could always be so calm and confident. His reply? "Well, I've gone against John Wayne before the camera." Personally, the worst I can describe George W. is to George Burns when he was younger. Think about it.I understand that President Ike was so popular that the Democrats would not attack him personally, just some of his policies. I say George W. is the best less than perfect president we have had so far.
|
Posted by: james ®
11/16/2002, 04:50:49
Author Profile Mail author
|
Yes, its pretty funny. Visualize all presidents with beaks. Now visualize them tweeting like a parakeet, and pecking a mirror...now visualize all the world leaders in a cage with beaks pecking there own image in the mirror, and the little bell tinging. If only they can realize their own vulnerability. If a vagina would only split open in their hearts, the world would be a better place.
Modified by james at Sat, Nov 16, 2002, 05:00:03
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/16/2002, 05:57:45
Author Profile Mail author
|
If a vagina would only split open in their hearts, the world would be a better place.I think I understand what you're saying ... or has the fruit gone to your head?
|
Posted by: james ®
11/17/2002, 10:58:57
Author Profile Mail author
|
This has to do with compassion. What I mean is that sometimes being 'weak' is actually being 'strong'. Crying is better than killing someone or going to war.
|
Posted by: diehl ®
11/15/2002, 09:46:38
Author Profile Mail author
|
1. I'd say given the circumstances he is doing a decent job, granted he isn't the best one for the job (but the best people don't run). There are many I would rather have Bush over them... (some of those fundamentalists and fanatics scare me: well most any extremest of any group would be a poor chioce).
I'll give Gorgie a 6.52. Well it will be the first elsetion I get to vote in... it depends on who else runs... I mean we could have a real dumbass for the Democratic canidate, and sadly 3rd (4th?) party canadates are mostly a joke (but it would be nice for them to win once)
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/15/2002, 11:19:57
Author Profile Mail author
|
diehl,The 2002 elections would have been my first opportunity to vote, and I was anxiously awaiting my time. Unfortunately, I also happened to recently move to Florida, and realized all too late that one must register about a month before voting here. I would have voted my mind on this protocol to Jeb Bush (by voting against him), but d*mmit!, I couldn't! How are the registration procedures in Georgia? Aaron
|
Posted by: TLC ®
11/15/2002, 21:08:31
Author Profile Mail author
|
Hi Diehl; You say: "Well, it will be the first "elsetion" (election I assume) I get to vote in..." You have to be talking about 2004, right? Does this mean that you will be voting age for the first time, or that you will be a naturalized citizen entitled to vote for the first time? Just curious. TLC
|
Posted by: diehl ®
11/16/2002, 10:00:37
Author Profile Mail author
|
Yes, I meant 'election' I am a horrible typist (an intoxicated monkey could do a better job) ;-)I will be of voting age (currently I'm 17), and to clarify I meant presidential election. (Bless spell check... I forgot to use it last time)
|
Posted by: TLC ®
11/17/2002, 06:21:51
Author Profile Mail author
|
Diehl; With all due respect Sir, as a 17 year old neophyte who has to have a minimal amount of living experience and the associated worldly knowledge gathered therein, would you please tell me how you know that... "granted, he isn't the best one for the job"? ( George W.) What do you base your 6.5 rating on? Do you have someone else in mind that is better qualified?Just a word of advice, if I may. In the arena of intellectual interlocutors such as some are on this forum, you will come across in a better manner if you brush up on your spelling. Having to depend on spell check on such basic words as "election" and "candidates" tells me that you need more effort along these lines. Please don't consider these statements as in any way offensive Best regards; TLC
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/17/2002, 08:46:06
Author Profile Mail author
|
TLC,The reason I posted this thread was to gather the opinions of others regarding their approval for, or against, George W. Personally, I don’t believe an individual should be disadvantaged, and not allowed an opinion, because of being a certain age. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but in your above post you seem to question Diehl’s ability to give an opinion on just such a basis. In my experience (however little that may be), I have found that age is not necessarily a limiting factor. Regards, Aaron
|
Posted by: TLC ®
11/17/2002, 19:57:04
Author Profile Mail author
|
Aaron; I simply asked Diehl what he based his opinions on. Honest question. There are many youngsters around with inate wisdom of which I am in awe. However in my lifes experiences, one of the major traits that I have noted in others is that,in general, but not always the case, the ones with the least amount of living experience and knowledge are the very ones who voice the strongest opinions. Diehl told me his age in his post to me. I had asked him because he stated that he will be voting for the first time in the next election. I have read enough of Diehl's posts to consider him far from unknowledgeable and quite frankly, was a little surprised at his age. My apologies for any offense taken by misleading words or comments on my part to anyone in this thread. With respect; TLC
|
Posted by: diehl ®
11/18/2002, 10:20:07
Author Profile Mail author
|
First off I'm flattered ;-) Spelling has been a weakness of mine for ages (well relative to my sense of time, which I am noticing changes in). I do try, but it seems nothing short of wrote memorization will solve it (and I dislike memorization...)Giving him a rating of 6.5 is not to say he is doing a poor job or even an unsatisfactory job. I do feel however, that he does make less-than-optimal decisions occasionally, as would anyone. In addition, I tend to rate things on an exponential scale; I rarely give anything over an 8.5 or so. I never give 10, to get that he would have to be perfection incarnate. Now I do not count the pervading circumstances in this rating, it would be unfair to hold him accountable for events such as 9-11 or the poor economy (both of these were set in motion long before he held office). However, how he handles these events does matter, and in my opinion, he is doing a decent job (not a great job, not a poor job either).
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/18/2002, 10:49:58
Author Profile Mail author
|
No need for apologies, I'm just thankful to have our communication cleared.
|
Posted by: nofaith ®
11/15/2002, 10:19:06
Author Profile Mail author
|
Bush is unfortunately very dumb, but he has a fairly bright cabinet. However, his cabinet's use of sensationalism about terrorism to promote the rolling back of privacy laws has so me so utterly disgusted at the time being that I am blind to anything else he is doing anywhere else. At the time being, I give him a 1 out of 10. I read a page of stupid things he has said once, and I was thinking that it was unfair to pull them out of context like that. But the next day, in an article in the Daily Herald (Utah), I read two quotes which were just as bad: "I don't spend a lot of time taking polls around the world to tell me what I think is the right way to act," Bush said. "I just got to know how I feel." & "If there is a mandate in any election -- at least in this one -- it's that people want something to get done," Luckily, the cabinet doesn't seem to base too many decisions on Bush's small intellect, but unfortunately what they are doing is far worse then stupid--it's criminal. I can't believe how brazen they are getting--hiring the key figure in the Iran Contra scandal to data mine credit card transactions, emails, and web use...it's crazy! (http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/14/opinion/14SAFI.html). Please, oh please, don't pass this bill! It makes me sick to watch our govt. turn into 1984, while all the time blaming it on the terrorists. Scratch that. 0/10 -Dan
|
Posted by: Aaron V. ®
11/15/2002, 14:32:37
Author Profile Mail author
|
Perhaps my favorite Bush Bamboozal was something I heard while listening to NPR, back when talks between Bush and Putin regarding nuclear arms reduction were still headline news. While in Moscow, Bush was asked why he would want to dismantle and store nuclear components if the goal of a new treaty would be for disarmament; Bush replied, "Quality control."When I first read of such Bush bamboozals during the 2000 elections, I considered the whole production a pretty good joke. But mistakes like the above can seriously cost the U.S. credibility in the eyes of other nations. Speaking of credibility, I wonder how many people realize Cheney's old company was doing business with Baghdad from when he was CEO? Aaron
|
Posted by: diehl ®
11/19/2002, 05:17:14
Author Profile Mail author
|
"It makes me sick to watch our govt. turn into 1984, while all the time blaming it on the terrorists."1984 is perhaps that scariest thing I have ever read. It hit a part of me that apparently is very sensitive; I think it is that even their minds were no longer theirs. I will admit to having nightmares for 2 weeks after reading it. But that aside I do consider it a great book, and a very good warning of what path society could/can take. Along the same lines I have read Brave New World, and Catch 22, again both have a very strong affect on me...
|
Posted by: nofaith ®
11/19/2002, 07:06:33
Author Profile Mail author
|
1984 bothered me immensely, and much of it is sensationalism. I doubt our govt. will ever truly resemble it. However, the changes that are being made which allow spying w/o warrants, etc., make it that much closer to "Big Brother," and I hate it. Even a slight resemblance to 1984 is bad enough to scare me.If our freedoms become restricted because someone from another country attacks us, we have given them (the terrorists) far more power than they should ever have. They have accomplished a lot. If you are interested in 1984 style movies, "Brazil" is a long, but fairly good one. -Dan
|
Posted by: TLC ®
11/22/2002, 05:15:02
Author Profile Mail author
|
Dan; " The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich" and "Mein Kampf" will give anyone with enough fortitude to read and absorb them, an acute understanding how twisted logic can take and control the masses.TLC
|
Posted by: TLC ®
11/17/2002, 03:37:26
Author Profile Mail author
|
Aaron;1) I give George W. Bush a 10 ( most of the nation agrees with me) 2) I will vote for him in 2004 TLC
Modified by TLC at Sun, Nov 17, 2002, 03:38:35
|
|
