h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well, the thread seems to have wandered away from American Politics over to the Food section. Must be because it is almost dinner time.

It's a benign case of topic drift.

Eventually we will slay the Tangent Beast and get back on topic.

Hey can I join in the thread..........


cus I'm board and could do with giggle or two


RJR

The topic (before we wandered) is American Politics: what would you like to contribute? There's plenty worth giggling about.

well for one thing, I think someone should change G. Dubya's Dyper, before he walkes down the Airport Stap's, just how can anyone take him serious, but apart from that just who does an American work, so many strange term's

oops and American Election work

hey jackie, ain't nuttin wrong with GW dyper. It's those drunken demo cats you got to worry about. Do a blood test on that murderer teddy boy and he wouldn't pass the right to walk. got to be at least 150 proof. What kind of people would vote for that kind of person. I really would like to know the answer to that. And, I am not joking about that.

Sorry Lil, I have to retort on this.

If Ted Kennedy is a murderer because of his drinking, then GW is a mass murderer because of his pure stupidity in putting us in Iraq.

I'll stop being a troll now. I hope others will do so also.

When the liberals get a good candidate they don't back him. Just because the man doesn't wear blinders and hate conservatives Lieberman is an outcast in his own party.

""If Ted Kennedy is a murderer because of his drinking,"" in this case it's not the drinking it is the fact that he did nothing except to try to avoid being caught drunk. He has been around a very long time hardly able to stand straight and keeps getting elected.

How does one equate putting a mass murderer out of buisiness and trying to help a country to get on it's feet with a coalition government with being a mass murderer. And if you are referring to the innocent civilians you can believe GW is sadden by their deaths. But their toll is nowhere near Sadam's. Which is right allowing this man to continue to kill thousands annually in which war is not part of the picture or killing minimally so that the killings can be stopped.

It is people like teddy that hurts the liberal cause. That and the undying illogical hatred. Jack Kennedy would never had become president if he had run a hate campaign. He was a man of compassion and a sense of logic spinkled with humour and that was what got him elected. He didn't run down his opponents, he showed where they were wrong and gave the people his political options which the people thought were better.

Hummm so then, Is American Politics still stuck in the nineteen sixtys?? Early Sixtys at that, and can't be moved on???

I would hardly consider Joe Lieberman to be a good candidate for the Democratic party. He votes whenever he can with the Republicans. That's a great thing if you're a member of the GOP, but not if you're a liberal Democrat. Lieberman has always supported the war in Iraq. I'm sorry if it goes against the whole "big tent" idea of party membership, but Iraq is one issue all Democrats should be against. Support for an immoral war created by faked foreign intelligence and shady politicans with a larger goal of regional control is something no member of my party should get behind.

I would whole heartly agree if I could believe the Conservative conspiracy as being real. But it goes against my grain to believe that our president whoever he may be would indulge in outright lies to do what GW is doing.

As for libby, I think he believes more in the Democrats liberal policies except for the war. For that I applaud him. For that the liberals may lose one man who might do a lot for them and make a formidable opponent of the conservatives.

I still contend that what we need is new blood; people who are more interested in what can benefit the American people rather than trying to destroy the parties of their opponents. Look around the States, you find coruption at the highest state levels in both parties. Instead of smacking their hands we need to be putting them in cells. Our Republican Govenor of Ohio is a good example of dishonesty that for all intent and purposes is not being spanked but should be.

Mo, you seem to have bitten down hard on that clunker that Lieberman's electoral troubles have to do with a "liberal inquisition". It's much simpler than that: the voters don't like him. They seem to prefer the other candidate, Ned Lamont.

It startles me to hear you defend W as an innocent. If he is, then he is dangerously incompetent, because his office is being run by other entities and he doesn't seem to know it. If that is the case then he should be removed from office as soon as possible.

The alternative is that he does know what is going on. Since he stands up in public and reads speeches defending the decisions that have been made, and since he has stated that he doesn't make mistakes, logic leads us to conclude that he is perfectly aware of all the lies that have been told to put us in Iraq. In that case, he should be removed from office as soon as possible.

Two other things, Mo:
1. liberal doesn't always mean the same thing as 'member of the Democratic Party.' If Lieberman's a liberal then I'm a banana.

2. You like to bring up Ted Kennedy's past at odd moments. If you keep that up, then I shall be compelled to remind you that Laura Bush is also guilty of vehicular manslaughter. Shall we have her thrown out of the White House? No, you would probably start talking about forgiving past sins at that point, wouldn't you.

It seems to me that we covered a lot of this information several months ago.

Yes, but as I say, these things have been repeated, and there is no sense that we've moved on.

Who knows what kinds of little peccadillos have been swept under the Bush rug courtesy of rich papa? Let us not forget that Bush, in addition to being either dangerously incompetent or completely evil, is also a reformed drunk/cocaine freak. And there is nothing more dangerous than a reformed drunk.

The timing of his amazing reform and conversion to Christianity has always smelled to me, as well, coming so quickly on the heels of his defeat in his race for whatever it was he was running for, governor? Representative? I'm not sure about that. But he was visited shortly after that defeat by Pat Robertson, I believe, who spent a couple of days with him "converting" him. Bush emerged from those meetings a changed man. I believe he was changed by the message that if he would only espouse the radical right, he would have a huge voting base that was mobilized to vote by their preachers.

I am really getting the picture that no one seems to think we need new blood and new ideas in our houses. No one has touched that subject.

Okay, Mofolo. I guess maybe I haven't been coming across clearly.

I believe we need new ideas. We need new blood. We need to totally revamp the way our government is doing business. Like, we have to stop the representatives from "doing business". I believe we need to completely outlaw all lobbying. All lobbying. The only people who should be able to tell congress what to do should be individual people. No more PACs. No more groups lobbying. No more perks, no more little trips to Japan and Hawaii and dinners out, no more money for campaigns except from individual people.

I believe individuals should run for office, not parties. How about total write-in votes? It would be a pain to count, but the people who truly inspire the trust and love of the American people would win.

I believe also that just because you have been elected to Congress or the Senate does not mean that you deserve a lifelong pension and lifelong medical care courtesy of the American people. If those guys had to rely on Social Security like the rest of us they would find a way to fix it pdq.

I believe that the whole mess of them should be impeached, or voted out of office.

There's a lot more, but this is enough for now.