›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

So how's the Union?

tuttle88tuttle88
edited January 2007 in Everything Else
Everything going well? How's Iraq? In the latest battle of The President vs Words who came up trumps?
«1

Comments

  • CremlianCremlian
    Fucked. Nuff Said.
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    Fucked. Nuff Said.
    Did Bush say that? Cause that's awesome! The constitution doesn't say in what form the state of the union has to be delivered, he could have just said 'Yeah, we're fucked, I'm moving to Canada.'
  • AprecheApreche
    I've always said that if I were president the state of the union address would be just that. I would get up and say, "The Union is still in one piece. Good night."
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    GWB is no BC. That State of the Union address is the one chance the President gets to sit up behind a podium and call out the opposition party for what it truly is. GWB is living in a delusional world where the majority of voters know how to use their brains. He needs to come right out and say, "democrats are obstructing and republicans are pussies who are afraid of their own shadows."

    Bill Clinton knew how to give a State of the Union address...

    What I would do is have two speeches made (perhaps more) and leak one of them to the opposition party to base their counter speech on. Then I would make sure to cover lots of stuff not in the leaked speech so that when the opposition gets their turn they will have to wing it!
  • ErwinErwin
    The Union has its ups an downs but what you gonna do, Bush happens, right?
  • JasonJason
    I think the Union is in terrific shape. Lots of people disagree about the events and policies currently in action, and that forces them to discuss, define, reconsider, and weigh their stances. You could make a good argument that Bush's reign of terror terms have caused a mini-period of enlightenment.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    Everything going well? How's Iraq? In the latest battle of The President vs Words who came up trumps?
    State of the Union: World, please forgive us for the way we've been acting. We're not usually like this. We haven't been getting much sleep lately, things are hectic at work, and our president is retarded.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    edited January 2007
    Everything going well? How's Iraq? In the latest battle of The President vs Words who came up trumps?
    State of the Union: World, please forgive us for the way we've been acting. We're not usually like this. We haven't been getting much sleep lately, things are hectic at work, and our president is retarded.
    More like, "World, please forgive the wayward members of our government who are more than willing to sacrifice the lives of their fellow Americans to push their own agendas."

    Hey, both sides could have used that one!
    Post edited by HMTKSteve on
  • JasonJason
    We don't need forgiveness. I'm willing to be arrogant about the whole thing. As the world superpower and the main source of income, food, donations, medical relief, and fiscal assistance to the rest of the globe, we get to make mistakes with impunity. FIGHT!
  • AndrewAndrew
    We don't need forgiveness. I'm willing to be arrogant about the whole thing. As the world superpower and the main source of income, food, donations, medical relief, and fiscal assistance to the rest of the globe, we get to make mistakes with impunity. FIGHT!
    Unfortunately, China gives us fiscal assistance. They pretty much own our ass now.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    True. If China decides to devalue the dollar, we'll be at about the same level as Sealand.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    True. If China decides to devalue the dollar, we'll be at about the same level as Sealand.
    Why would they do that? They would stand to lose more out of it then we would.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    You think? Why? And this better not be another of your "the market is my God; the U.S., private industry, and my particular beliefs always win in the market; everyone makes every decision based on what I consider a rational analysis of what I believe the market will react; and the market will save us" deals. The market may have no bearing at all here because they don't like us very much. They might do it out of sheer bloody mindedness just because it would hurt us without caring how much it hurts them.
  • KilarneyKilarney
    Why would they do that? They would stand to lose more out of it then we would.
    I agree with this. My concern is what happens when this statement is no longer true.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    Why would they do that? They would stand to lose more out of it then we would.
    I agree with this. My concern is what happens when this statement is no longer true.
    Why did GWB go into Iraq? Did he rationally analyze the market? Did we stand to lose more than them? Yes. Did he do it anyway? Yes.

    tuttle88: Different subject: Remember Vietnam? That was based on a lie too. McNamara admitted the Tonkin incident was a lie. If you listen to commercially available LBJ phone tapes, you can actually hear LBJ and McNamara discussing how it was a lie. But at least when they told the lie the first time, it made a bit of sense.
  • JasonJason
    edited January 2007
    True. If China decides to devalue the dollar, we'll be at about the same level as Sealand.
    Why would they do that? They would stand to lose more out of it then we would.
    Are you talking about the same China where it's more profitable to farm for WoW gold than actually farm rice? A nation comprised of mostly peasants and secondarily of disgusting, crime-ridden, pollution-filled urban areas unparalleled in the U.S.? THEY own our asses? We own them. Without us as a market, they have less than the nothing they already have.
    Post edited by Jason on
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    Vietnam was based on a lie... yet we always hear it called "Nixon's War" which is... yet another lie!

    Let's not go into the Iraq debate again unless you start a new thread.

    China would lose out more than we would by devaluing the dollar.
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited January 2007
    "China would lose out more than we would by devaluing the dollar." Okay. Prove it. And again: it might not matter to them. They might do something like that just out of spite.

    The U.S. is the world's leading debtor nation. China is coming up fast: http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update45.htm and http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2007/01/24/afx3355804.html

    "Nixon's war"? That's a non sequitor. Completely off point. If it was a lie, it was not a lie designed to engage the U.S. in a war.

    "Let's not go into the Iraq debate again unless you start a new thread.": tuttle88 specifically asked about Iraq, so it's fair to talk about Iraq in this thread.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • ThaedThaed
    edited January 2007

    Are you talking about the same China where it's more profitable to farm for WoW gold than actually farm rice? A nation comprised of mostly peasants and secondarily of disgusting, crime-ridden, pollution-filled urban areas unparalleled in the U.S.?
    I agree with your conclusion, but while they have poverty like nothing we've ever seen, the pollution isn't as bad as people would have you think and crime is much lower than here. If they catch you doing a capital crime China (or, perhaps, for annoying a significant party member), you have about 3 months from conviction to execution. I vividly remember a beggar in the street who had his hands cut off, presumably for stealing. They don't mess around.
    Post edited by Thaed on
  • JasonJason
    A friend of mine recently returned to the U.S. from China, where he was on a business trip. He was required to have a Chinese-delegated guide with him at all times, and he was ordered to remain in Beijing's "American sector." His government shadow told him that if he left, he would likely be mugged and killed. Purely anecdotal, I know, and I usually hate those assertions.

    This friend is a chemical engineer here. He said that in a tour of a factory in China (which is similar to his place of employ here) he sighted more than 50 environmental infractions. He said the plant had chemical waste spilling from open ducts into a nearby waterway. He was also incensed by the open bathroom situation, and the resulting sewage that ran out into open troughs.

    Again, anecdotal. But he's a reliable guy and not prone to exaggeration.
  • tuttle88tuttle88
    Bill Clinton knew how to give a State of the Union address...
    Also how to kill Rwandans.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    Bill Clinton knew how to give a State of the Union address...
    Also how to kill Rwandans.
    I have to ask this question: Did President Clinton kill more people by his inaction than GW Bush has killed by his actions?
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited January 2007
    OMG! Let's see: 3,063 American military deaths, 54,432 Iraqi civilian deaths (at minimum), 655,000 Iraqi "excess" deaths, and 22,951 American wounded (I think you'd be particularly concerned about this. This is a generation ruined by lies and hubris) by GWB's action.

    Reuter's reports 937,000 total in Rwanda.

    Now, surely even you wouldn't place every single Rwandan death at BC's feet. Speculation as to what might have happened if he intervened is simply speculation.

    Here's the difference: GWB is responsible for every single Iraqi death.

    GWB FTW!
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    How many people died in Rwanda due to Bill Clinton's lack of taking action?
  • HungryJoeHungryJoe
    edited January 2007
    How many people died in Rwanda due to Bill Clinton's lack of taking action?
    I think you need to answer that if you claim it's more than what GWB is responsible for in Iraq. 937K total died in Rwanda. Are they all BC's responsibility?

    Only if you subscribe to this preemptive war crap theory and that we have an interest in being the world's policeman.

    EVEN IF you claim that all 937K are BC's responsibility, that number is capped. GWB is coming up fast and the numbers are getting larger every day. He'll catch up and surpass 937K soone enough.

    Face it. Your boy has the bloodiest hands.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    Why do you think he is "my boy" ???
  • RymRym
    How many people died in Rwanda due to Bill Clinton's lack of taking action?
    We can only blame Clinton as much as we can blame the rest of the nations of the world. No one intervened, and no one cared: we weren't an exception. It wasn't a failure of Clinton or the US so much as a failure of mankind in general.

    Also, Bill Clinton stated numerous times that US inaction in Rwanda was a mistake that he greatly and deeply regretted. He considered it the biggest regret of his administration.

    I don't hear any apologies or regrets from our current dear leader...
  • JasonJason
    We can only blame Clinton as much as we can blame the rest of the nations of the world. No one intervened, and no one cared: we weren't an exception.
    Um... with great power comes great responsibility? Monroe Doctrine? Rym, I'm surprised. I would have expected you to be the one who leaps up and says that as the most advanced, richest nation and the last remaining superpower, we have a duty to protect those who can't protect themselves. Captain America and his shield, and all that.
  • CremlianCremlian
    If you remember every time Bill Clinton tried to commit forces to places that actually wanted our help. The republican congress was all like "Your just doing that to cover up your blow job" and your trying to be the world police. Now look at us.. At it again, but instead of actually helping people who want our help...We are fighting a fight that most don't want us too. Lets just protect the Kurds and be done with it.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    edited January 2007
    If you remember every time Bill Clinton tried to commit forces to places that actually wanted our help. The republican congress was all like "Your just doing that to cover up your blow job" and your trying to be the world police. Now look at us.. At it again, but instead of actually helping people who want our help...We are fighting a fight that most don't want us too. Lets just protect the Kurds and be done with it.
    That is what partisanship gets you. Too many in politics see success for the nation, when the other party gets the credit for it, as a bad thing.

    It does not matter which party is in power, the other guys do not want to see success caused by politics that are not their own. Just look at the troop deployment issue. The president is sending over a new general and more troops. The new general went before a congressional committee and stated that if he does not get these extra troops he will fail. Now congress is trying to stop the extra troops! They are trying to guarantee failure!
    Post edited by HMTKSteve on
Sign In or Register to comment.