| Mr. Scully 06.06.2007 05:57 |
George Bush has arrived in our country (Czech Republic) yesterday. Half of Prague was closed, the signal of mobile phones was disturbed (which is illegal) to avoid potentional terrorist attacks, several personal freedoms were "repressed" to ensure him a safe stay. OK, I can somehow handle that. But I really had to laugh when he was chewing a gum and began his official speech by greeting the president of Estonia... Also it was funny how he expected a big applause after each sentence he said. Considering he hasn't said anything important at all... he should know that we're not sheeps who applaud everything the "big boss" says. It's funny what presidents the two strongest nations in the world have. Putin = smart dictator, Bush = IQ of a washing machine. |
| The Fairy King 06.06.2007 06:13 |
I have a distrust of all dictators, presidents and prime ministers. Discuss. |
| .Jony. 06.06.2007 07:07 |
couldn't agree more freedom for all I'm actually a democratic anarchist: not too much involvement in the government in my business, but on the otherhand have a minimal higher institution to secure safety and order what I truly despise is presidents telling us to go on a war or not, like blair or bush. it's not democratic at all when the majority of the pupolation doesn't want war...especially considering that we finance the war |
| .Jony. 06.06.2007 07:08 |
I might add, a perfect example is this very board here, no dictatorial mods or despote admin like those power hungry bastards on QOL freedom of speech should always have the highest value, only limited by the equal rights of your fellow men. freedom and equality: what more do you need? |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 06.06.2007 07:14 |
Mr. Scully wrote: George Bush has arrived in our country (Czech Republic) yesterday. Half of Prague was closed, the signal of mobile phones was disturbed (which is illegal) to avoid potentional terrorist attacks, several personal freedoms were "repressed" to ensure him a safe stay. OK, I can somehow handle that. But I really had to laugh when he was chewing a gum and began his official speech by greeting the president of Estonia... Also it was funny how he expected a big applause after each sentence he said. Considering he hasn't said anything important at all... he should know that we're not sheeps who applaud everything the "big boss" says. It's funny what presidents the two strongest nations in the world have. Putin = smart dictator, Bush = IQ of a washing machine.from the white house: dear sir. i,the undersigned am upset and annoyed with the derogatory remarks comparing my IQ with an object that doesnt have a brain of its own,only operates when programmed by others from abroad and has no charisma and operates purely on a spin cycle when told to. please refrain from comparing me with George W Bush again. yours sincerely a washing machine |
| AspiringPhilosophe 06.06.2007 09:22 |
**laughes** Good one, Joxer! Unfortunately, I am forced to disagree on one thing...Bush is not stupid. In strictly academic matters, he is smarter than Clinton was. He is just the worst public communicator in all of history...which makes him appear stupid. Clinton at least appeared smarter than he was because he was a communicator incarnate. I've long said that Bush needs to do one of three things on the communication front: Fire his current speech writer, hire one if he doesn't have one, or actually start listening to the one he has and do what he/she sugguests. Bush's biggest problem is his ego. He surrounds himself by yes men and women (yes, Condi is one of them) who are afraid to tell him the truth. Therefore, he lives in a closed world where he thinks what he sees is reality, and expects the behavior of others outside that circle to conform. When it doesn't, he just doesn't get it but since the "Yes People" confirm that it was just a minor flap, he believes it. *edit* BTW...I'm not defending Bush by any stretch of the imagination...I'm just waiting until he's out of office. I'm actually more interested to see how the newly elected French President Sarkozy performs at the G8...and if Putin decides to blow anything up |
| user name 06.06.2007 16:23 |
Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar... |
| Micrówave 06.06.2007 16:41 |
Mr. Scully wrote: he should know that we're not sheeps who applaud everything the "big boss" says.Then why is the proposed "missle shield" going in your back yard? Because your "president" WILL DO "everything the 'big boss' says", even though (supposedly) 70% of your countrymen don't want it. |
| Legy 06.06.2007 16:42 |
Oh my, Bush smarter than Dubbya? Clinton: Graduated from Georgetown University and in 1968 won a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University. He received a law degree from Yale University in 1973. Bush: Received a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School in 1975. Not to mention he's run most of the businesses he's owned into the ground. |
| Micrówave 06.06.2007 16:43 |
artemismoon wrote: Bush: Received a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School in 1975. Not to mention he's run most of the businesses he's owned into the ground.Name some. Texas Rangers were one of the most financially successful sports teams when Bush ran them. |
| ***Marial-B*** 06.06.2007 16:44 |
Meh... What worries me about all the Bush thing is that now he has his nose checking on Venezuela and Chavez. I don't like both, imagine how could a verbal war between those two dummies would be -.-' |
| Legy 06.06.2007 16:51 |
Micrówave wrote:Texas Rangers is one of his exceptions, he made a lot of money with that one. I know Harken Energy and Spectrum 7 weren't so good to him. Don't get me wrong, he's obviously smart enough to get an MBA from Harvard, but he's not as accomplished as Clinton.artemismoon wrote: Bush: Received a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School in 1975. Not to mention he's run most of the businesses he's owned into the ground.Name some. Texas Rangers were one of the most financially successful sports teams when Bush ran them. |
| Mr. Scully 06.06.2007 17:03 |
Micrówave wrote:First of all, our president has nothing to do with the missile shield (his opinion is about as "important" as mine).Mr. Scully wrote: he should know that we're not sheeps who applaud everything the "big boss" says.Then why is the proposed "missle shield" going in your back yard? Because your "president" WILL DO "everything the 'big boss' says", even though (supposedly) 70% of your countrymen don't want it. Secondly, our government thinks it's (in this case) better to help our allies, it can be useful in the future (what if Iran really gets hold of those long range rockets). That however doesn't mean we always support Bush's "war of terror" (using Borat's words :-) Last but not least - I don't know if Bush is or isn't stupid but he totally lacks any education. Until he became a president, I bet he had no idea there's a thing called "Europe" near Asia. Damn, he knows less about world politicians than I do and I'm a programmer! |
| Micrówave 06.06.2007 17:03 |
You wanna compare Clinton's business saavy with Bush's? Better get a lawyer. HILLARY ALMOST WENT TO JAIL!!! Their investing partners DID!!! |
| Micrówave 06.06.2007 17:16 |
Mr. Scully wrote: Last but not least - I don't know if Bush is or isn't stupid but he totally lacks any education.Well Bush went to Harvard. Where'd you go? The Prague Programming University? Mr. Scully wrote: Until he became a president, I bet he had no idea there's a thing called "Europe" near Asia.Do you know how many times I've had to buy a new atlas of Europe in the last 15 years? I'll bet half the people on Queenzone couldn't name all the countries in Europe. Mr. Scully wrote: Damn, he knows less about world politicians than I do and I'm a programmer!He's making over a million a year, leader of the free world, and has his own security force... ...and you're working a help desk for $15/hour. Edge: Bush |
| Legy 06.06.2007 17:18 |
Micrówave wrote: You wanna compare Clinton's business saavy with Bush's? Better get a lawyer. HILLARY ALMOST WENT TO JAIL!!! Their investing partners DID!!!Don't get me started on Hillary, she's not the one we're talking about. I pray Hillary isn't voted into the Oval Office. Clinton and Whitewater, well you know the facts. About smarts, Clinton is more accomplished than Bush. |
| Micrówave 06.06.2007 17:23 |
No, but Bill was just as guilty. He was President...untouchable. So when it comes to stealing money from honest investors, your are correct sir: Clinton IS more accomplished than Bush. Boy this is one WEEEAAAKKK "Bush is stupid" thread. I expect more out of you all. I feel like I'm playing against the handicapped. C'mon haters!!! Do better than this! |
| Legy 06.06.2007 17:32 |
Micrówave wrote: No, but Bill was just as guilty. He was President...untouchable. So when it comes to stealing money from honest investors, your are correct sir: Clinton IS more accomplished than BushWe finally agree! You know how I feel about Bush, I'm not a hater, I voted for the guy. Has he disappointed me? Yes, he sure has, and he's apparently disappointed most of the people that voted for him. I was just posting that Clinton has more degrees than Bush. So, which canidate are you liking the most? No one on either side has impressed me to this point. |
| Legy 06.06.2007 17:33 |
oops |
| Micrówave 06.06.2007 17:49 |
artemismoon wrote: So, which canidate are you liking the most? No one on either side has impressed me to this point.I'm already missing Al Sharpton. I think it's funny how the brother and the lady think they've even got a chance. I'd probably go for The Mayor, just because he's a New Yorker. Who's gonna mess with New York? And no offense meant or taken. Having fun here, nobody have a cow for Christ sake. I'm not attacking Czechoslwhateveria. I'd rather be comparing American Bush to European Bush. |
| Legy 06.06.2007 17:57 |
It'd sure be nice to have Kinky run! Hillary Clinton has a good chance of winning this, and that's truly sad. All she's done is ride her husbands tail for the past 30 years. She never divorced him because she knew she would run for President one day. And the only reason people are even interested in her is because of Bill. And that my friend is the sad state of our country. Obama, not going to win. There are too many racist people in this country for that to happen. Giuliani I like, he's a moderate Republican and he was able to pull New York through 911 |
| YourValentine 06.06.2007 18:22 |
"And no offense meant or taken. Having fun here, nobody have a cow for Christ sake. I'm not attacking Czechoslwhateveria." I am sure nobody takes offense, that would require to take you seriously. But since you just proved that you are a dumb Yankeelandian who does not know Austria from Australia - why should anyone take you seriously. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 06.06.2007 18:58 |
Eh....the only power Bush has left is his veto pen, and it's obvious when he uses it that he is only doing it because his damn stubbornness provoked him, instead of doing what is in the best interest of the country (or the interest of the people that he is supposed to represent). He's out in 2008....we just have to wait until then. The only guarantee is that the Democrats will win the next election (if they can't manage to pull this one out, with more than 70% of the country upset at Congress or the President or the Republican Party or a combination of all three then they are pretty sad.) What I meant when I said Bush was smarter was his grades and his standardized test scores being higher than Clinton's. Bush still couldn't give a speech to save his life, and couldn't communicate his way out of a wet bag. |
| onevsion 06.06.2007 19:20 |
Great posts Martin...! |
| deleted user 06.06.2007 19:32 |
Mr. Scully wrote: George Bush has arrived in our country (Czech Republic) yesterday. Half of Prague was closed, the signal of mobile phones was disturbed (which is illegal) to avoid potentional terrorist attacks, several personal freedoms were "repressed" to ensure him a safe stay. OK, I can somehow handle that. But I really had to laugh when he was chewing a gum and began his official speech by greeting the president of Estonia... Also it was funny how he expected a big applause after each sentence he said. Considering he hasn't said anything important at all... he should know that we're not sheeps who applaud everything the "big boss" says. It's funny what presidents the two strongest nations in the world have. Putin = smart dictator, Bush = IQ of a washing machine.And you think Putin is that much better? I mean, really? |
| Legy 06.06.2007 20:13 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: What I meant when I said Bush was smarter was his grades and his standardized test scores being higher than Clinton's.Really? I find this hard to believe. Can you please show me? |
| AspiringPhilosophe 06.06.2007 21:40 |
artemismoon wrote:My bad...I should have researched that further. I was mistaken, I will admit.CMU HistoryGirl wrote: What I meant when I said Bush was smarter was his grades and his standardized test scores being higher than Clinton's.Really? I find this hard to believe. Can you please show me? But I still think Bush's biggest problem is his horrible communication ability (or lack thereof) |
| user name 06.06.2007 22:22 |
Bush isn't nearly as detrimental to the United States nor the world as one would think by reading this thread and many other criticisms. I stand by logic and reason when I say, "It's no big deal." Gosh, I really think that people just need something to complain about 24/7. Same thing with the Clinton scandal. Bush is okay. Clinton was okay. The next President, who I will guarantee will be hated and complained about by at least half or more of the population - I'm sure he'll be okay, too. My point is this: There's pointing out a government's flaws, and suggesting possible and viable solutions. Then there's complaining, and acting like Bush or Clinton or anyone else is the worst thing since Gigli. The first time I will completely abhor a President is when I am actively and directly affected by his actions in a strong, negative way. This has not happened yet to me, you, or anyone. |
| Legy 06.06.2007 22:35 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote:HA! I knew it! In your face, feels so good! Joking, a little 311 quote.artemismoon wrote:My bad...I should have researched that further. I was mistaken, I will admit. But I still think Bush's biggest problem is his horrible communication ability (or lack thereof)CMU HistoryGirl wrote: What I meant when I said Bush was smarter was his grades and his standardized test scores being higher than Clinton's.Really? I find this hard to believe. Can you please show me? Both parties are run by big buisness and special interest groups. It's sad, but it is the truth. |
| YourValentine 07.06.2007 04:11 |
"Bush isn't nearly as detrimental to the United States nor the world as one would think by reading this thread and many other criticisms. I stand by logic and reason when I say, "It's no big deal ....... The first time I will completely abhor a President is when I am actively and directly affected by his actions in a strong, negative way. This has not happened yet to me, you, or anyone." This is a very selfish point of view. Only because your house has not been bombed you say Bush's crimes are not detrimental for anyone in this world. Only if you yourself are grabbed and thrown into prison and held for years with no charges or only if your relatives are killed in an illegal war, only then Bush's crimes are a "big deal"? All my life I have tried to understand how it could happen that the Nazis could commit all their crimes and the Germans just watched in apathy (at least most of them). First it was the Jews, the Socialists, then the Czechs, the Poles, and nobody seemed to think it's a "big deal", either. Germany had no democratic tradition but the USA have. The country watches how the rule of law is bluntly ignored and I see no mass protest. I still do not understand it - who is supposed to defend the human rights if not you and me? And please don't tell me Bush is not Hitler, I know that. All I am saying is that I just do not understand the indifference of the American public watching their reputation in the world and their human rights achievements going down the drain. Today the world is a much more dangerous place for you and me thanks to Bush. |
| pittrek 07.06.2007 04:21 |
Couldn't say it better. |
| @ndy38 07.06.2007 04:27 |
YourValentine wrote: Today the world is a much more dangerous place for you and me thanks to Bush.And Cheney, Rumsfeld, Blair.... |
| pittrek 07.06.2007 04:41 |
... and don't forget George's best friend Vladimir, who turned from a democrat to a old-fashioned russion cár (or how you write the russion title in english) |
| thomasquinn 32989 07.06.2007 05:51 |
Couldn't Bush visit northern Spain soon? I hear ETA is on the prowl again... |
| Mr. Scully 07.06.2007 06:59 |
<-Dances With Cats-> - nope, Putin is definitely worse (= more dangerous to the free world). But he seems to be far more intelligent than Bush. I don't think I have to react to Micrówave's insults. I don't give a fuck how many millions Bush earns or how popular he is in Texas. Before he became a president, he hasn't (as far as I know) travelled outside USA except for Mexico. He is not a world politician. He is a local citizen of Texas who suddenly has a great responsibility and he abuses it. The fact that he is a bad speaker, doesn't help either. |
| pittrek 07.06.2007 07:11 |
And his "shoot first, then ask" politics is not normal. I really can't remember any other USA president who would be hated in the world. |
| thomasquinn 32989 07.06.2007 10:00 |
Mr. Scully wrote: <-Dances With Cats-> - nope, Putin is definitely worse (= more dangerous to the free world). But he seems to be far more intelligent than Bush.Putin is the living, breathing (I think) and talking proof of something I've stood by ever since I've had the brain to think about it: secret service and government should be kept as far apart from each other as is humanly possible. Preferably even further. You'd have thought that after Andropov, Russia would think twice about a KGB-officer in the Kremlin...especially not one who knows damn well what he is doing, and Putin does. He's quite possibly the most intelligent world-leader of any significance in the world today, and that's the scary part. Having said that, being smarter than Bush doesn't take much. I'd say that the average 3rd generation by-product of brother-sister marriages located in say, Reb-Central Alabama could give him a run for his money IQ-wise. |
| Erin 07.06.2007 11:05 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: But I still think Bush's biggest problem is his horrible communication ability (or lack thereof)If anyone's bored, here's a pretty good article about Bush's stupidity. link |
| AspiringPhilosophe 07.06.2007 11:12 |
Hey Barb, wanna know why there are no mass protests that you see? Two reasons: 1. Can't show them on TV...just like they can't show pictures of the coffins of soldiers coming off planes from Iraq and Afghanistan. It would demoralize the people and threaten unity, so Bush has cut them off (not directly, but indirectly) 2. Far too many people hold the same attitude as MusicMan, though maybe not for the same reasons. For some, it's about being directly affected before action needs to be taken (thus the differences in protests for the Iraq war with a volunteer army and the Vietnam war with a conscript army). For some, it's pointless to start complaining now because it's so close to over. For others, they see the futility in trying to fight a completely corrupt government system, especially if the government can f*** up the rest of your life for it. Not saying it's right, but that's the situation. I think Putin is a bigger threat than Bush is, because at least we have control over all of our arsenal of weaponry and while Bush may be stupid and inept, he's not psychotic on the same level as Putin. |
| Legy 07.06.2007 11:35 |
What scares me about Putin is that he's an old KGB agent. Bush really doesn't have a shiny red button to push. There are so many levels you have to go through to actually proceed with a nuclear attack. I don't know how things work in Russia, maybe someone here knows. Hopefully the tensions between both the US and Russia will die down. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 11:44 |
YourValentine wrote: Today the world is a much more dangerous place for you and me thanks to Bush.Well Barb, I'm not going to play your childish game. Meanwhile, we're having some real dialogue about the true problem: a viable solution. That's what no one has. We needed a hard line president going into 2000, every American knew that. And it was going to be one of the most difficult times in history for that job. Everyone knew that. So far, he's done what he was elected to do. I'd like to see someone do better. We were doing just fine before you came into the thread, thanks. How about you go argue Pokemon vs Digimon instead. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 11:49 |
Erin wrote: If anyone's bored, here's a pretty good article about Bush's stupidity. linkThe same guy who said this: "But Mormonism is different because it is based on such a transparent and recent fraud. It's Scientology plus 125 years. Perhaps Christianity and Judaism are merely more venerable and poetic versions of the same." No thanks, you can keep your religious bigots to yourself, thanks, Erin. So far, you people still can't get too many facts to support your latest attack. CMU HistoryGirl wrote: instead of doing what is in the best interest of the country (or the interest of the people that he is supposed to representNow I know you've at least watched some of these debates. Just exactly WHAT is in the "best interest of the country" then? Pulling the troops out and doing WHAT? I have yet to hear that plan from any of the 20 bozos currently distancing from the Bush plan. You've got about 6 or 7 different ideas being pushed and Bush is the one stopping progress? He hasn't changed his stance, all these filibusters have. Plus without the Patriot Act and the current security measures can you be absolutely positive this latest terror plot would have been foiled or it wouldn't have happened? No, you can't. Lots of American civilian lives were saved because of the Bush Administration last week. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 07.06.2007 12:01 |
Micrówave wrote:That was harsh, Mircowave. You do know that insulting people over something that they have no control over only makes you appear stupid, right?YourValentine wrote: Today the world is a much more dangerous place for you and me thanks to Bush.Well Barb, I thought you had a lot more than that. What a small-minded person you are. I'm glad you don't take me seriously. But then, after your childish, niave views on the world, who are you? Keep joining email lists to save the world and blame Bush for everything wrong. You've gotten pretty offensive lately. Problems? Meanwhile, we're having some real dialogue about the true problem: a viable solution. That's what no one has. We needed a hard line president going into 2000, every American knew that. And it was going to be one of the most difficult times in history for that job. Everyone knew that. So far, he's done what he was elected to do. I'd like to see someone do better. No mass graves being discovered in our country, I believe you're German. So go bury your head in the sand. If you want to place blame on her, because she is German, for what the Germans did almost 100 years ago, then people should rightly be placing blame on us for Slavery almost 300 years ago. I thought you had more dignity than that, Microwave. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 12:12 |
Sorry CMU. I get tired of her attacking people because she runs the board. And to say Bush made the world a more dangerous place is no different from what I said to her. Of course I don't blame every German citizen. But no German has the right to throw the stones she likes to. Perhaps she forgets her own history. But you're, right, maybe it was a little harsh. But blaming Bush for everything is ALL SHE DOES! It gets old and maybe she needs to pull her head out. Oh, and by the way. The first slave masters were AFRICANS, not Americans. Egyptians had slaves 2000 years before the Europeans, then the Americans (who came from Europe!!!) had. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 07.06.2007 12:13 |
Microwave, Just out of interest....can you prove that the terrorist plots that were just foiled could not have been foiled without the Patriot Act and current security measures? No, you can't either. We will never know. Your argument holds no water, because it cannot be proven either way. As for the rest of the response....Why do you assume that everything goes back to the Iraq invasion? I'll have you know that I was speaking of other things that Bush has done (or failed to do) that are in the best interest of the country. 1) The No Child Left Behind Act, which is a miserable failure and impossible to hold because it makes no exception for the learning disabled. You can't honestly expect children with Downs Syndrome to be doing advanced quadratic equations with the rest of their classmates. 2) Immigration....hasn't managed to get a damn thing done about that, though he made it a keystone of his 2004 campaign. And before you go off on a rant about how Congress won't let him, he had control of the Congress until 2006....he could have and should have pushed it through then, just in case he lost the Congress in the next election (which he did) 3) Rising Health Care Costs....another keystone of his 2004 campaign that he hasn't done a damn thing about (and the same rationale applies as above) 4) Social Security.....another keystone he hasn't managed to get anything done on. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 07.06.2007 12:16 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Microwave, Just out of interest....can you prove that the terrorist plots that were just foiled could not have been foiled without the Patriot Act and current security measures? No, you can't either. We will never know. Your argument holds no water, because it cannot be proven either way. As for the rest of the response....Why do you assume that everything goes back to the Iraq invasion? I'll have you know that I was speaking of other things that Bush has done (or failed to do) that are in the best interest of the country. 1) The No Child Left Behind Act, which is a miserable failure and impossible to hold because it makes no exception for the learning disabled. You can't honestly expect children with Downs Syndrome to be doing advanced quadratic equations with the rest of their classmates. 2) Immigration....hasn't managed to get a damn thing done about that, though he made it a keystone of his 2004 campaign. And before you go off on a rant about how Congress won't let him, he had control of the Congress until 2006....he could have and should have pushed it through then, just in case he lost the Congress in the next election (which he did) 3) Rising Health Care Costs....another keystone of his 2004 campaign that he hasn't done a damn thing about (and the same rationale applies as above) 4) Social Security.....another keystone he hasn't managed to get anything done on.Oh....and the slavery thing you brought up...common misconception. Egyptians did not use slaves in large numbers....they actually had fewer slaves then other civilizations at the time. The pyramids and public building projects that everyone thinks were built by slaves were actually built by farmers during the indundation season (when for 5 months the Nile was flooded, fertilizing the land and making agriculture possible). So, for 5 months the farmers couldn't do any farming....guess what they did? Yep...worked on public building sites, and were paid for it. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 12:17 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Microwave, Just out of interest....can you prove that the terrorist plots that were just foiled could not have been foiled without the Patriot Act and current security measures?Yes I can. A wiretap transcript given to CNN by the FBI indicates the alleged plotters targeted the airport because of the popularity its namesake, John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1963. Wire tapping was one of the new measures put in place by The Bush Adminstration. Your response? CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Egyptians did not use slaves in large numbers.... The pyramids and public building projects that everyone thinks were built by slaves were actually built by farmers during the indundation season (when for 5 months the Nile was flooded, fertilizing the land and making agriculture possible).But they DID have slaves, right? That was what I was getting at. Americans weren't the first. And the Pyramids were built by flooded farmers in 5 months? Wow. I did not know that. I have to read up on that. That's amazing. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 07.06.2007 12:23 |
Micrówave wrote:You think wire tapping wasn't happening before Bush? Hate to disappoint you, but since the invention of the telephone wire tapping has been prevalent, though granted in a piecemeal fashion and not proclaimed as loudly.CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Microwave, Just out of interest....can you prove that the terrorist plots that were just foiled could not have been foiled without the Patriot Act and current security measures?Yes I can. A wiretap transcript given to CNN by the FBI indicates the alleged plotters targeted the airport because of the popularity its namesake, John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1963. Wire tapping was one of the new measures put in place by The Bush Adminstration. Your response? I'm still waiting for a response to the rest of what I said, including correcting you on your errant views of the history of slavery. And I never said the Pyramids were built in 5 months...I said for 5 months of the year the farmers worked on them. They took years to build....it's an amazing concept called "working in shifts" during the year. Stonemasons and architects worked year round, and the farmers came in to help move the stuff and get it into place during the flood season. Yes, Egyptians had slaves...but so did Assyrians, Babylonians, Mesopotamians, Hitties, Greeks, Romans, and yes, even Jews. The primary difference is that slaves in those times were captured enemies in a post-war situation. Slavery was not, as it was in the US, based on money and skin color. Whoever you captured, that was your slave, regardless of color, ethnicity, or any of that. Americans have the distinction of turning slavery into a race issue...which has had resounding (and far more devastating) effects to this day. And just to head you off at the pass, yes, I realize that African Tribal cheifs sold their enemies into slavery to the Europeans who came asking for them. Is there a reason that Americans couldn't have figured out this was wrong? |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 12:33 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: You think wire tapping wasn't happening before Bush? Hate to disappoint you, but since the invention of the telephone wire tapping has been prevalent, though granted in a piecemeal fashion and not proclaimed as loudly. I'm still waiting for a response to the rest of what I said, including correcting you on your errant views of the history of slavery. And I never said the Pyramids were built in 5 months...I said for 5 months of the year the farmers worked on them. They took years to buildYou know, I expected that. Any successful item that the current Administration has done you'll say the same thing. Hate to disappoint you, but it WAS the new measures. So, since you're going to say 'well, we were already doing that before Bush', I'll answer your questions the same way... |
| Legy 07.06.2007 12:39 |
I'm a banker, and I can tell you that the Patriot Act works. Many financial institutions have been able to stop funding to terrorist. I've seen it work many, many times. |
| Legy 07.06.2007 12:39 |
Double post |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 12:40 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote:1) The No Child Left Behind Act, which is a miserable failure and impossible to hold because it makes no exception for the learning disabled. You can't honestly expect children with Downs Syndrome to be doing advanced quadratic equations with the rest of their classmates. I live in Texas. There are seperate classes for those special needs children here. Perhaps they don't have Special Eduction where you live? So what did Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, and Ford do for education? I remember Hillary praising the "invisible jump rope". That was so every kid could jump rope. Not too different, huh? 2) Immigration.... Before Bush, we had nothing. At least now we've got some half-ass fencing, a few yards of barbed wire, and stopped giving the border patrol cases of Tecate. So what did Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, and Ford do for immigration? 3) Rising Health Care Costs After The Clinton Administration is when health care skyrocketed. Bush's team says they're trying to do something about it. Who knows? But it wasn't Bush who started that whole mess. And you know that! 4) Social Security.....another keystone he hasn't managed to get anything done on. So what did Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, and Ford do for Social Security? Fact, no one has done anything since FDR. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 12:41 |
artemismoon wrote: I'm a banker, and I can tell you that the Patriot Act works. Many financial institutions have been able to stop funding to terrorist. I've seen it work many, many times.As am I. We have seen mortgage fraud go down drastically in the last four years. So there you go CMU. Not just me saying the Patriot Act works. What have you now, good woman? |
| Legy 07.06.2007 12:54 |
If it weren't for the war in Iraq, Bush would be a popular President. He did a lot of good things for the State of Texas, Perry on the other hand has done nothing. Bush has passed several laws that have benefited the American populous. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 12:59 |
Like we say in Texas: "I think she ran outta ammo." |
| AspiringPhilosophe 07.06.2007 13:17 |
1) The No Child Left Behind Act Yes, we have special education in Michigan. I believe that all states have special education. But I also go to a university that is focused on training teachers, and many of my friends have been through the education program, (or are teachers) and the NCLB act has been getting a lot of press. If you actually read the law, (which I have) you will see that the law itself makes no distinction for special ed. It says that a set percentage of students must make a certain score on federally approved standardized tests in order to be in compliance with the law. There are no federally approved standardized tests for special education, and obviously if you make them take the grade level federally accepted ones, they will fail miserably. And since you have to report how many students you have attending the schools, you can't just have the special ed students not take the test, or you won't make the specific percentage that you need to be in compliance. This has been pointed out to the federal government, but they haven't bothered to amend the law. Since the States have to follow the letter of the law.... And I'm going to address this issue here, since you bring it up in every single response. I am not a democrat, I am not a republican, I am not a Green party member. I am an observer, and I point out areas of improvement for all past presidents, which includes the list you mention (Clinton, Regan, Bush SR., Carter). I am not a fan of any of them. I am not anti-Bush, as much as you would like to paint me as one. I am anti-Politicians who don't do what they promised to do, which means I am anti-all Politicians of any stripe. Insults only work if the other person is insulted by them, and I have not been insulted by your insinuation that I am anti-Bush or a Clinton supporter. So, now that I have removed that weapon from your arsenal, moving on.... 2)Immigration. Oh yes, let's throw a party! A band of vigilantes patrolling the border with a few hundred feet of barbed wire fence! That will really make a dent in the problem. And did you ever notice, btw, that everyone always thinks of Mexico when they talk about illegal immigration? If I remember correctly, there was a terrorist plot that was intercepted at the Canadian border. Anyway...for a President who vowed to fix the problem (completely fix the problem) this is a pretty poor result. He should have done what he wanted to do with the immigration policy when he had control of Congress (including giving amnesty to all of the law-breakers who are here currently, which he favors via his "guest worker" program). As far as what the others did for immigration...nothing. Which is why I am against them as well. As pointed out above, I am anti-politicians who don't keep their promises. 3)Health Care Costs. Yes, I am aware that the problem didn't start under Bush. But that doesn't absolve him of not doing anything to even attempt to stop the problem. The costs of health care are determined by the economy, which is why the President can only have a very limited impact on them, with one exception. Nice attempt to lay this one at the feet of Clinton, but the technology and medicine that we have today wasn't discovered until he was in office. It's the technology that makes it so blasted expensive...that and the ridiculous cost of malpractice insurance doctors must carry to ward off the 10 Million dollar lawsuits that people in America love to bring. The one thing the president could do is make socialized medicine for all American citizens. Oh wait...that's too much government for Republicans to handle. Never mind that then. 4) Social Security. Everyone since FDR has two hands of blame in this one. The first hand for dipping into the pot to relieve government expenditures without paying the money back, the second hand for not doing anything earlier to solve the impending crisis, which economists have been screaming abo |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 13:35 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: And now I'm off to work for the afternoon, before you accuse me again of "running out of ammo". It's called multi-tasking...typing and eating lunch.I was making a stereotypical joke, me being in Texas, et al. It's people like you who actually HAVE SOMETHING to say about all this that makes for a great discussion. I apologize if you assume I've thrown you into the Anti-Bush gang, but all those name-callers have left, we've used too big of words. I actually enjoy your re-torts. If we all agreed, we'd be responding to the "Freddie Threadie" or something. It's nice to have someone actually thinking about possible solutions other than "Bush made the world dangerous" and nothing to support a uneducated accusation. |
| thomasquinn 32989 07.06.2007 14:24 |
Micrówave wrote: Sorry CMU. I get tired of her attacking people because she runs the board. And to say Bush made the world a more dangerous place is no different from what I said to her. Of course I don't blame every German citizen. But no German has the right to throw the stones she likes to. Perhaps she forgets her own history.So all Germans are responsible for what was done by their country before they were born? Let's talk about forgetting our history for a moment here, then: You're a Texas-man, aren't you? Your state seceded in 1861. You're a traitor! Your cause has more American deaths ascribed to it than all terrorists put together! Your nation murdered the Native Americans. Murderer! You're responsible for that! During the so-called 'Gilded Age' (from the end of the Reconstruction to roughly 1900) your government oppressed the workers, forbade them to organize, consented to wages too low to live on and forbade protest against it. You're an oppressor of the poor, you asshole! Your countrymen murdered the village of My-Lai. You are a cold-blooded child-murderer, you Texas psycho! I could go on like this for quite a while. So it's gonna be your choice: either you cool down, or I'm going to repay you every post you make with the same flawed arguments you use yourself. |
| Donna13 07.06.2007 15:13 |
"I could go on like this for quite a while. So it's gonna be your choice: either you cool down, or I'm going to repay you every post you make with the same flawed arguments you use yourself." How diplomatic of you. Ha. Oh, well. Carry on, you politically savvy posters. My grandmother is a political activist (local issues mostly) and she always gets riled up while talking about politics. But she has lived to be 95 and her brain is still sharp. Must be good for her. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 15:49 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: Let's talk...Sorry, I don't debate children. Especially one with a third grade eduction. Go back to school. <b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: I'm going to repay you every post you make with the same flawed arguments you use yourself.You're going to read & respond to all of my posts? So you ARE a loser. Cool. Glad I interest you so much. Should I BLOG for you as well? Maybe create a myspace page for you to play on? Star TREK or Star WARS uniform? Are you wearing yours, Commander? |
| Maz 07.06.2007 15:52 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: During the so-called 'Gilded Age' (from the end of the Reconstruction to roughly 1900) your government oppressed the workers, forbade them to organize, consented to wages too low to live on and forbade protest against it.That is a complete and absolute misinterpretation of national politics in the late-19th century. To assume that the national government could have/should have gotten involved in business is poor historical research and makes modern-day assumptions on the past. I'm guessing your first year studies haven't gotten you to the Progressive era yet. Besides, the govt at that time could do little for the chronic under-employment of the country - it was a simple fact of life that working class people generally worked only 40 weeks a year. And as for the "forbade to organize" line, perhaps a little more research on the Grange, Knights or Labor, among others, will show you how some consider the Gilded Age a golden age of labor activity. <b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: I could go on like this for quite a while. So it's gonna be your choice: either you cool down, or I'm going to repay you every post you make with the same flawed arguments you use yourself.Pot, meet kettle |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 15:54 |
he needs to lay off the pot.
His last contribution to Queenzone:
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: Wait a minute...Boh Rhap was about 9-11, wasn't it?Obviously, not the king of one-liners. And it's all about Bush/9-11/dictatorships blah blah blah. I was trying to turn the thread from Bush is Stupid to something a little more intellegent. |
| user name 07.06.2007 16:18 |
YourValentine wrote: This is a very selfish point of view. Only because your house has not been bombed you say Bush's crimes are not detrimental for anyone in this world. Only if you yourself are grabbed and thrown into prison and held for years with no charges or only if your relatives are killed in an illegal war, only then Bush's crimes are a "big deal"? All my life I have tried to understand how it could happen that the Nazis could commit all their crimes and the Germans just watched in apathy (at least most of them). First it was the Jews, the Socialists, then the Czechs, the Poles, and nobody seemed to think it's a "big deal", either. Germany had no democratic tradition but the USA have. The country watches how the rule of law is bluntly ignored and I see no mass protest. I still do not understand it - who is supposed to defend the human rights if not you and me? And please don't tell me Bush is not Hitler, I know that. All I am saying is that I just do not understand the indifference of the American public watching their reputation in the world and their human rights achievements going down the drain. Today the world is a much more dangerous place for you and me thanks to Bush.You missed the point. The fact is, in the aggregate, the world has not been made worse because Bush has been in office. Sure, there's a war in Iraq. It's not the first war that will have involved the US, and it's certainly not the last. War happens. Secondly, illegalities and rights infringements, while abhorrent, weren't invented by Bush. Like the rest of society, military methods and transparencies are constantly evolving. They will keep happening, but they will slowly be lessened as time goes on. Also, international law is somewhat subjective. There is no superior force governing the nations - the national level is the highest level of government. To say a war is "illegal" is pretty silly. What is a legal war? And how much does that matter? The world isn't a dangerous place for you nor me. That is a fact. It would be awesome if we all could live in perfect harmony, and everybody followed all the rules. However, it's not Bush's fault, nor anyone else's, that this isn't happening. Society progresses, but it progresses very slowly. You can't seriously expect sudden changes. Of course I'm not selfish, and I'm concerned for others. But I'm also logical and realistic. I don't expect the world to suddenly accept homosexuals, end all warfare, and have absolute liberty for all. A President doesn't do that - a President can't do that. He also couldn't impede or stop it if he tried. He may only be able to dent it, but nothing significant. That is the nature of our society, and the nature of the government of the United States of America. |
| Micrówave 07.06.2007 16:19 |
Excellent post, MM. Spot on! |
| Mr. Scully 07.06.2007 18:00 |
Funny how the discussion has evolved. I definitely didn't want to discuss various aspects of the politics of Bush and his country. For example, I don't give a damn about Iraq because that country is fucked up, no matter if the US soldiers are there or not. My only point was that GB is an idiot and a nerd. He had no idea about the outside world before he became a president. Maybe he is a good businessman but he knows shit about international law or countries outside the American continent. Maybe he was an excellent governor of Texas. But being a president requires much more abilities. |
| Lisser 07.06.2007 18:28 |
Micrówave wrote: Excellent post, MM. Spot on!I totally agree. Very well put so that non Americans can maybe understand a little better and not hate us so much. Sometimes on this board I feel like a mass murderer and human scum just bc I am American. I don't like that. There are tons of things I would like for Bush to do different. There were tons of things I wanted Clinton to do different. There are also things that I am glad they both did, as other Presidents in the past have. I don't know the answers. I just do what I can every day to be a productive citizen of the country I live in. I work, I pay my taxes, I abide by the laws, I have two children that I provide for all their basic, emotional, and physical needs as well as teach them life skills. I don't participate in protests mostly bc my time is limited to working, caring for my children, and my home. But to be honest I don't like all the conflict and negativity that happens at protests. I vote, try to keep up with the politicians in my district's stances on issues, and I do not harm anyone and I don't have any control over what other people do including the President of the USA. I try very hard to listen to what other non Americans on this board say and put myself in to their shoes to see how what the USA does to affect them whether it be negatively or positively. Most, if not all is all negative. That we kill people, bomb people that don't deserve it, we imprison people illegally, etc. What'd I'd really like to know is is the country I live in a disgraceful, brutal nation bc I don't necessarily have this view of my country. But of course that is because of the life I have. I am not nieve and I do know that many, many other people in my country as well as others do not have the privaledged life that I have. Everyday at work I meet with them and try to enable them to help themselves. Some want help, some don't and I can't force them to accept my assistance but I do all that I can as one person. I've been out of the United States, but only to Mexico and it was in a very nice resort so maybe I'm not even qualified to speak on this but I do deserve to voice my feelings. If the USA does do so many awful things then I feel horrible. As an American I don't want this to happen. I've sent emails, letters. I get a generic reply, I vote and keep up on issues but I can't lie...I've got a family to care for and I don't always have the time to make sure I'm doing all I can to make this country a better place for the entire world. My priorities are my children and raising them in this shithole of a world and trying to keep them safe and happy. I do care about how what the USA does and how what we do affects other nations but I am also guilty of putting what I can do to "help" on the back burner. I don't know whatelse to say other than I am an American and I do care about world issues and issues here in America. I feel like I do my part as one person to contribute to the world but I can't ignore anymore that this board has a very bad reputation for bashing America and Americans. I'm not sure how it affects other Americans on here but it sort of hurts my feelings, not that it matters to any of you but I hope every person on here knows that I would never intentionally hurt any of you. I just wish we were capable of debating and voicing our opinions to each other with it turning in to a bash fest. I know I've said it before but oh well, another time won't hurt. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 07.06.2007 19:52 |
@ Microwave Umm...wasn't expecting a compliment, but thanks. Indeed, variety is the spice of life, and most people here know that I'm up for a good debate anytime (especially so now since my normal debate partners....my fellow Grad students....are all home for the summer break and I'm stuck here in this town with next to nothing to do). BTW, I apologize if I came across as harsh in starting this debate...I just thought what you said to Barb was a low blow. In response to Lisser, I know how you feel. I feel embarrassed to be an American, most of the time. It's nothing about the country or the ideals, but it's because I know that a stereotypical reputation will proceed me anywhere I go outside the country. People will find out that I'm an American, and will already be forming judgments on me before they've even met me, or gotten to know me. I wish I didn't have to spend my time in other countries trying to explain myself or the country's policies, but that is the world we live in. I am just myself...nice to everyone I meet (unless they give me a reason not to be) and try to leave the impression that maybe Americans are more complicated than it looks from the outside. If I can leave that impression with just one person, it's worth it. |
| YourValentine 07.06.2007 20:01 |
I am sorry you feel that way, Melissa. I am sure there are a lot of bad things happening in Luxemburg and Oman (for example) but the USA is the only superpower and the impact of US policy on the rest of the world is enormous, we are all affected while nobody cares much about what is happening in Luxemburg. Criticizing Bush is not bashing America although I understand if you feel that people hold you responsible for the actions of your current government, I know the feeling:) @ MusicMan: "You missed the point. The fact is, in the aggregate, the world has not been made worse because Bush has been in office." That's not a fact, isn't it? It's just your opinion "Sure, there's a war in Iraq. It's not the first war that will have involved the US, and it's certainly not the last. War happens." Wars don't "happen" like hurricans. They are started by people who have the power to start them. "Secondly, illegalities and rights infringements, while abhorrent, weren't invented by Bush. Like the rest of society, military methods and transparencies are constantly evolving. They will keep happening, but they will slowly be lessened as time goes on." Why is that? You make it sound like it's an evolutionary process but we have seen that rights infringements can increase rather than be lessened. "Also, international law is somewhat subjective. There is no superior force governing the nations - the national level is the highest level of government. To say a war is "illegal" is pretty silly. What is a legal war? And how much does that matter?" Legal or not, war does not solve any problems as we can watch right now. However, international law is not subjective at all, a "legal" war is a war that was "legalized" by the UN like for example the war in Afghanistan. An illegal war is a war that is started against the UN vote. How much does it matter? It does matter for people who hope that mankind progresses to a level where international law is respected and diplomacy is given a chance rather than trying to solve matters with wars. "The world isn't a dangerous place for you nor me. That is a fact." A fact? I do feel safe in my country but there are a lot of places where I would not be safe anymore and the number of places has increased considerably in the last six years. "It would be awesome if we all could live in perfect harmony, and everybody followed all the rules. However, it's not Bush's fault, nor anyone else's, that this isn't happening. Society progresses, but it progresses very slowly. You can't seriously expect sudden changes." I do not expect sudden changes, I expect progress but again - progress to more justice and fairness is not an evolutionary process, it has to be achieved. The "natural" development is the rule of the bigger and the stronger. "Of course I'm not selfish, and I'm concerned for others. But I'm also logical and realistic. I don't expect the world to suddenly accept homosexuals, end all warfare, and have absolute liberty for all. A President doesn't do that - a President can't do that. He also couldn't impede or stop it if he tried. He may only be able to dent it, but nothing significant. That is the nature of our society, and the nature of the government of the United States of America." Somehow I do not believe that Bush represents the nature of the American society. I always thought the nature of the American society is represented by the spirit of the constitution which was revolutionary and about citizen rights. One thing is sure: the President of the USA is the most powerful person in the world and he can make a difference. More than anyone else. As a result he has the biggest responsibility, too. |
| Mr. Scully 08.06.2007 03:24 |
Thank god for people like CMU HistoryGirl or Lisser. It's always a pleasure to read your posts - no matter if I agree with you or not. You always raise the level of the discussion :) |
| AspiringPhilosophe 08.06.2007 07:29 |
Mr. Scully wrote: Thank god for people like CMU HistoryGirl or Lisser. It's always a pleasure to read your posts - no matter if I agree with you or not. You always raise the level of the discussion :)Wow....two compliments in 24 hours! Thanks Mr. Scully :-) I do my best to make sure intelligent conversation isn't a dying art. |
| Erin 08.06.2007 09:38 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: I feel embarrassed to be an American, most of the time. It's nothing about the country or the ideals, but it's because I know that a stereotypical reputation will proceed me anywhere I go outside the country.I know what you're getting at, but I would never be embarrassed to be an American. I do wonder when I am overseas, which is rare, what people think of us. I kind of dread talking to people, because they might think I am some loud mouth, generic American tourist. If people are going to draw conclusions about my political or social views strictly because I'm from the US, they are the close minded one with the problem. |
| Donna13 08.06.2007 09:38 |
Mr. Scully wrote: Thank god for people like CMU HistoryGirl or Lisser. It's always a pleasure to read your posts - no matter if I agree with you or not. You always raise the level of the discussion :)What about YV? Look up, Scully. Ha. Anyway, as for being ashamed to be an American, that is rediculous. Everyone is an individual. I don't dislike others because of their country or some crazy leader their country once had. I think crazy leaders are more a condition of being human (as a whole), not caused by anyone's race, nationality, or culture. They appear once in a while and we have to put up with them until we figure out how to get rid of them. With Bush, I don't think it is a case of being dumb. I think it is a case of having certain beliefs and having that combined with bad advice at the so-called "expert" level. Some "experts" ignoring other experts, too much optimism without good information, blah, blah, blah. In another couple of years we will have another president digging into the situation, but who knows if we can change direction. That is where we need the continued support of the international community. Yes, criticism is support - it helps us move in the right direction - definitely. There is no "super-power" anymore - everything is connected. All the money is connected anyway. Cultures are being connected via modern communication and ease of travel. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 08.06.2007 11:18 |
Erin wrote:Indeed, you raise good points as always, Erin. I just hate being studied myself....I hate feeling like I'm some kind of specimen in a jar that is being observed and studied from all angles. It embarrasses me, and that's what I felt like when I was in France. I was so anxious to improve on my language skills and learn about the culture, but every person I talked to wanted the low down on America and American policies from an American. After a while I got really tired of spending the best class of my life and the best time of my life to date trying to explain myself and my country. I know that some people are going to hate you no matter what you do, and once I've established that someone is like that I don't bother with them, because nothing will make them change their minds. But I hate being talked down to until people get to know me, putting me on the defensive immediately before we even get a chance to properly meet and learn about each other. Besides, I can get pretty cynical at times (I know, that's a shock) and spend a lot of time thinking about how far we haven't come when it comes to the professed ideals of the country; I have trouble attaching myself to something that has deliberately done things I'm ashamed of.CMU HistoryGirl wrote: I feel embarrassed to be an American, most of the time. It's nothing about the country or the ideals, but it's because I know that a stereotypical reputation will proceed me anywhere I go outside the country.I know what you're getting at, but I would never be embarrassed to be an American. I do wonder when I am overseas, which is rare, what people think of us. I kind of dread talking to people, because they might think I am some loud mouth, generic American tourist. If people are going to draw conclusions about my political or social views strictly because I'm from the US, they are the close minded one with the problem. |
| Lisser 08.06.2007 11:25 |
Thanks Martin!! Also thank you Donna for your post. I share a lot of your feelings. For example, I don't view America as the "super power" of the world. I don't think we are the most powerful nation or the richest. The things I see on a day to day basis prove that to me. Most of it, granted is not our government's fault in my opinion. In my profession I happen to run in to an abundance of people who tend to be lazy and just do not want to work. They get food stamps from the government for free food but then turn around and sell them to someone for half the amount (for example if you get $800/month in food stamps, they will sell them to someone for $400 in cash) so they can buy drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes. People abuse the system in America. Our welfare system doesn't "work" for most people bc it is and has always been designed from the beginning to be a temporary support to families in need. But what it winds up being is a life long dependance. Once parents start getting those welfare checks, food stamps, free housing, and all their bills paid, they do not want to go back to work, that is if they even worked a day in their life before. Kids grow up on America's welfare system and then they have children of their own and they do not know how to provide for them bc they never have had a role model or someone who has worked or brought home a paycheck so they raise their children on welfare. They've never seen a parent get up and go to work. Mommy doesn't work, neither does Daddy bc he's in jail for not paying child support or has never been present at all!! If there were one thing I could do for my country that would be it. To some how find a way to break that cycle. We do have so many opportunities for our citizens and there are jobs everywhere where I live. I can't speak for the rest of the country, but jobs are posted everywhere!!!! Not that they are the most desirable, but they are there. People get upset so many Mexicans or other immigrants come here. I don't bc they come here and work their asses off and they take care of their children, at least where I'm located at they do. All my Hispanic families work and they work HARD. I offered them English classes this year and they all came!! They want to learn and they want to have the life that can be offered to people that live here if you just put a little effort in to it. They want to become productive, legal citizens. This is my experience. I welcome anyone to America that wants to come here and contribute to society, I don't care what color your skin is or if you can't speak English when you get here. I think you should make an effort to learn for your own benefit since that is the native language but America is supposed to be a melting pot of people. We are supposed to be a nation of support and friendship. That is the view I want the world to have of my country and it is very evident that I'm wrong. It frustrates me but I won't ever stop what I do each day to help the world to be a better place. Gawd I sound like a dork but that is really how I feel. |
| Donna13 08.06.2007 12:04 |
Lisser, both you and HistoryGirl might be surprised to find out how people from other countries admire you. I think we hear a lot of the negative (about Americans) and not too much of the positive. But it is out there. You and HistoryGirl are in situations where you are doing so much to influence society (no marching in the streets required for that). |
| Erin 08.06.2007 12:05 |
"I'm Lisser, and I approve this message." ;-) |
| Mr.Jingles 08.06.2007 12:13 |
Geez! You guys are complaining about having a embarassing nationality? I am both American and Colombian. BEAT THAT! |
| AspiringPhilosophe 08.06.2007 13:15 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: Geez! You guys are complaining about having a embarassing nationality? I am both American and Colombian. BEAT THAT!Hey, I'd love to be American and something else, rather than just American. Remember, Americans are the mutts of the world! :-) |
| AspiringPhilosophe 08.06.2007 13:17 |
Donna13 wrote: Lisser, both you and HistoryGirl might be surprised to find out how people from other countries admire you. I think we hear a lot of the negative (about Americans) and not too much of the positive. But it is out there. You and HistoryGirl are in situations where you are doing so much to influence society (no marching in the streets required for that).I hardly think being a Grad student qualifies as anything influential, but thanks :-) |
| AspiringPhilosophe 08.06.2007 13:18 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: Geez! You guys are complaining about having a embarassing nationality? I am both American and Colombian. BEAT THAT!Oh hush! I'd love to be American and something else, rather than just American. At least you have a cool culture to immerse yourself in. Americans are the mutts of the world...we have no culture ;-) |
| Maz 08.06.2007 13:42 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: I hardly think being a Grad student qualifies as anything influential, but thanks :-)Grad students are the people who really make the world go around. Forget about the Masons, Stonecutters, and the G-8; it's us hopelessly overworked and underpaid academics. |
| AspiringPhilosophe 08.06.2007 13:54 |
Maz wrote:**Laughes** Overworked and underpaid....you better believe that!!! I'd like to add under appreciated though! Thanks Maz!CMU HistoryGirl wrote: I hardly think being a Grad student qualifies as anything influential, but thanks :-)Grad students are the people who really make the world go around. Forget about the Masons, Stonecutters, and the G-8; it's us hopelessly overworked and underpaid academics. |
| Lisser 08.06.2007 14:12 |
Maz wrote:]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: I hardly think being a Grad student qualifies as anything influential, but thanks :-)Grad students are the people who really make the world go around. Forget about the Masons, Stonecutters, and the G-8; it's us hopelessly overworked and underpaid academics. Amen girl. Where the hell have you been anyway? You had better email me or something. Sheeit. I'm tired of being an ignored friend. You suck! ;) |
| AspiringPhilosophe 08.06.2007 14:21 |
Lisser wrote:You haven't been on MSN for about forever...I figured you weren't using it any more or something. I'll be gone this weekend, but I'll e-mail you when I come back, I promise!! That is, assuming I can find your e-mail address...I've been having computer issues for about the last month and I keep finding things that are missing :-)Maz wrote:] Amen girl. Where the hell have you been anyway? You had better email me or something. Sheeit. I'm tired of being an ignored friend. You suck! ;)CMU HistoryGirl wrote: I hardly think being a Grad student qualifies as anything influential, but thanks :-)Grad students are the people who really make the world go around. Forget about the Masons, Stonecutters, and the G-8; it's us hopelessly overworked and underpaid academics. Love ya Lisser! |
| Erin 08.06.2007 14:24 |
I never use MSN, anymore. Man, I am so uncool. I guess that's what happens when you turn 30! ;-( |
| Lisser 08.06.2007 14:44 |
I'm always on MSN!! I'm on it right now. But Erin I have you on ICQ and you suck getting on there buttface. |
| Erin 08.06.2007 17:31 |
Lisser wrote: But Erin I have you on ICQ and you suck getting on there buttface.I know. I'm pathetic. ;-) |
| Lisser 08.06.2007 18:52 |
Erin wrote:You're also a buttface. Don't forget that!Lisser wrote: But Erin I have you on ICQ and you suck getting on there buttface.I know. I'm pathetic. ;-) |