Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

i'm a loser baby, so why don't you kill me?
addi Posted: Thu Nov 9 08:13:07 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  the new GOP theme song : )

I come back from vacation expecting to find a thread on the elections here...

and not one damn word....anywhere that I can find.

Rumsfeld....gone
Dems in control of the House
Dems in control of the Senate

No opinions from anyone on this?



 
beetlebum Posted: Thu Nov 9 08:33:10 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  i'm still in happy shock.


 
addi Posted: Thu Nov 9 08:44:05 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  beetlebum said:
>i'm still in happy shock.

: )

beats the hell out of regular ol' shock.


 
libra Posted: Thu Nov 9 12:32:23 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I think I'm in happy shock too


 
addi Posted: Thu Nov 9 14:10:40 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  a friend mailed this to me. thought it was a good read.



Now that the election is behind us, and the Democrats control both houses of Congress, there's no reason not to admit it: the Right was right about us all along. Here is our 25-point manifesto for the new Congress:

1. Mandatory homosexuality

2. Drug-filled condoms in schools

3. Introduce the new Destruction of Marriage Act

4. Border fence replaced with free shuttle buses

5. Osama Bin Laden to be Secretary of State

6. Withdraw from Iraq, apologize, reinstate Hussein

7. English language banned from all Federal buildings

8. Math classes replaced by encounter groups

9. All taxes to be tripled

10. All fortunes over $250,000 to be confiscated

11. On-demand welfare

12. Tofurkey to be named official Thanksgiving dish

13. Freeways to be removed, replaced with light rail systems

14. Pledge of Allegiance in schools replaced with morning flag-burning

15. Stem cells allowed to be harvested from any child under the age of 8

16. Comatose people to be ground up and fed to poor

17. Quarterly mandatory abortion lottery

18. God to be mocked roundly

19. Dissolve Executive Branch: reassign responsibipties to UN

20. Jane Fonda to be appointed Secretary of Appeasement

21. Outlaw all firearms: previous owners assigned to anger management therapy

22. Texas returned to Mexico

23. Ban Christmas: replace with Celebrate our Monkey Ancestors Day

24. Carter added to Mount Rushmore

25. Modify USA's motto to "Land of the French and the home of the brave"



 
libra Posted: Thu Nov 9 14:18:10 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>
>
>
>13. Freeways to be removed, replaced with light rail systems
>18. God to be mocked roundly
>
>21. Outlaw all firearms: previous owners assigned to anger management therapy
>
>22. Texas returned to Mexico
>
>

I'd be fine with these ones, actually.


 
JesusOnline Posted: Thu Nov 9 14:27:23 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Not being ut to scratch on American Politics...and not having watched any of the coverage becaue I'm at work.

Care to briefly fill me in on what this all entails.
House & the Senate?
basically a House of Paliament and House of Lords a'la the UK?

(Excuse my ignorance of the political system in the U.S)


 
JesusOnline Posted: Thu Nov 9 14:28:44 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  JesusOnline said:
>Many Many Spelling mistakes.

Damn


 
addi Posted: Thu Nov 9 14:43:30 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  JesusOnline said:

>(Excuse my ignorance of the political system in the U.S)

No worries about spelling.

And most of us (with the exception of Beetlebum) are probably ignorant of details about England's parlimentary system. I only know a little..and I learned that watching Monty Python : )

Simple version:
3 branches of gov here (Federalism)
Executive
Legislative
Judicial

The Congress is in the legislative branch, made up of the house of representatives and the senate.

Basically since '94 the republicans have controlled congress. With Bush as a republican that meant that since 2000 washington has been run by the republicans. With this election the democrats (stinkin' liberals) now will have a majority, and therefore will be able to have a much greater say in what does and doesn't happen here.

I can honestly say it's about damn time. The lunatics have been runnin' the asylum far too long.

BUT...
They better do something with this power or they'll be in the same boat as the republicans down the road.

To whom much is given, much is expected.


 
JesusOnline Posted: Thu Nov 9 16:21:17 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Ok, so following this vote.

Good ol' George is still President - but with the House of Representatives and the senate being Democrat now safe to assume he's not going to get much done in his last two years in office?

And that come election 08...Democrats will end up in office?


 
addi Posted: Thu Nov 9 16:51:12 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  JesusOnline said:
>Ok, so following this vote.
>
>Good ol' George is still President - but with the House of Representatives and the senate being Democrat now safe to assume he's not going to get much done in his last two years in office?

That's a fair assumption, but we'll have to wait and see how it plays out. If these new people do their job then things will take a decidedly different turn in DC...hopefully for the better.

>And that come election 08...Democrats will end up in office?

That would be sweet, but there's too much time between now and then to predict 08's election. So much can happen to change the policial winds.
I'm a progressive democrat myself, but I have to admit I hope they don't run Hillary Clinton for president. Nothing to do with her being a female at all..seriously. I just think she wouldn't be the best choice to represent the party.


 
JesusOnline Posted: Thu Nov 9 17:46:04 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Thanks for that.
*Is more clued up now = Wikipedia*


To the real questions surrounding the thread

addi said:
> No opinions from anyone on this?

Honestly, I don't have much of an opinion on this at the minute.
When election '08's over and done with that will have more of an impact on me personally than these Mid-terms - i.e. how our little nation co-operates with the U.S under a new president.

*and with a new Prime Minister too.



 
Mesh Posted: Thu Nov 9 20:57:57 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
> manifesto
>



I knews It!


 
addi Posted: Thu Nov 9 21:31:34 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Mr. Misses said:
>addi said:
>> manifesto
>>
>
>
>
>I knews It!

Meshie! : )

16. Comatose people to be ground up and fed to poor

This means you need to make sure you look alive and sane. I don't want to hear about you being ground up and fed to anybody!


 
ifihadahif Posted: Sat Nov 11 08:37:19 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Did anyone notice how the dems had to move to the right the get anyone elected ?
And that of the seats they did acquire, many of them were by less than 5000 votes.
Not exactly a mandate from the American people.
I don't think you'll see that much change in getting things done on capital hill.

As for it being "about damn time", is anyone aware that the dems controlled congress for most of the 20th century, 50 straight years before Reagan took office ?

And as for wanting A dem in the White House, let's try to remember all the great dem presidents in the last 50yrs or so.


 
addi Posted: Sat Nov 11 10:07:35 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I was beginning to wonder if you'd ever post here : )

I guess I can't really blame you. Your party is a total mess right now. Hang in there, hif...based on the past millions of american voters are stupid enough to return to their old ways again. I mean if we can put a moron like Dubya in not once, but twice, then there's surely a future ray of hope for you down and out conservatives.




 
ifihadahif Posted: Sat Nov 11 16:47:40 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>I was beginning to wonder if you'd ever post here : )
>
>I guess I can't really blame you. Your party is a total mess right now. Hang in there, hif...based on the past millions of american voters are stupid enough to return to their old ways again. I mean if we can put a moron like Dubya in not once, but twice, then there's surely a future ray of hope for you down and out conservatives.
>
Perhaps my party is in a bit of disarray for the moment, but not nearly as bad as the dems. This will be quite evident once the honeymoon is over and they go back to their old disjointed ways. There is no unity among the dems, I don't know why they don't just form 3 different parties and avoid all the pain.
At least the conservatives did accept their defeat with class unlike the dems.
There were no sour grapes or cries of foul, no disenfranchised voters, or screaming for recounts, even though the elections were close enough to warrant them.
I have yet to hear of any conservatives that plan to move to another country.


 
addi Posted: Sat Nov 11 20:09:17 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>I have yet to hear of any conservatives that plan to move to another country.

That's because no one else wants them in their country. So we're stuck with them here.
: )

*maybe they could move to Iraq and experience first hand the chaos they helped to create.




 
ifihadahif Posted: Sat Nov 11 21:10:11 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>>*maybe they could move to Iraq and experience first hand the chaos they helped to create.
>
Seems to me that the vote to go to war was near 100 percent wasn't it ?

Besides, even with the sectarian violence they have, most will tell you they have a much brighter future now than with Saddam.
Hell, even Ms. Pelosi will agree with that.

My big problem with the dems is with the partisanship we've had to endure these last few years. Mostly bitching and complaining about everything the republicans were doing wrong without putting forth any ideas of their own.
Like Dubya said, hindsight and second guessing is not a strategy.


 
addi Posted: Sun Nov 12 07:47:52 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Besides, even with the sectarian violence they have, most will tell you they have a much brighter future now than with Saddam.

Saddam was an asshole and deserves everything coming his way. But don't mistake people's opposition to the war there with thinking Saddam was okay. It's possible to hate the man AND hate Bush's foreign policy at the same time. There are several leaders in the world violating major human rights. It doesn't mean it's in our best interest to invade every one of those countries and dispose of their leaders.
And the situation right now for the average Iraqi citizen isnt better off than it was before. We've pushed them from the pot into the fire. If you actually hear first hand accounts from these people you'll find that they're scared shitless right now to even leave their homes in most parts of the country.
>
>My big problem with the dems is with the partisanship we've had to endure these last few years. Mostly bitching and complaining about everything the republicans were doing wrong without putting forth any ideas of their own.

As if the republicans are above such low partisanship behavior. That's a good one : )
You call it cheap partisan bickering by the Dems. I call it disgust and vocal opposition to most of Bush's policies over the past 6 years. If disagreeing with failed republican policies is merely partisanship to you..then so be it.
You're right about one thing. With the congress soon to be in the hands of the Dems it's time to stop the words and start some concrete actions. And it will be a monumental undertaking trying to straighten out the fucked up mess in Iraq.
Bush now has the luxury though of being the one that led us into the quicksand to hand the noose over to the congress and say, (John Stewart voice)"You don't like it? You fix it then...hehehe"


 
ifihadahif Posted: Sun Nov 12 08:14:57 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>ifihadahif said:
>
>>Besides, even with the sectarian violence they have, most will tell you they have a much brighter future now than with Saddam.
>
>Saddam was an asshole and deserves everything coming his way. But don't mistake people's opposition to the war there with thinking Saddam was okay. It's possible to hate the man AND hate Bush's foreign policy at the same time. There are several leaders in the world violating major human rights. It doesn't mean it's in our best interest to invade every one of those countries and dispose of their leaders.
>And the situation right now for the average Iraqi citizen isnt better off than it was before. We've pushed them from the pot into the fire. If you actually hear first hand accounts from these people you'll find that they're scared shitless right now to even leave their homes in most parts of the country.
>>
Not true. Yes there are parts of Iraq where the people are afraid, but not in most parts of the country. Actually it's only in 3 of the 19 provinces. Most of Iraq is fairly safe.
If you speak to people who have been there and actually talked with the Iraqis, you would hear a vastly different story.
Yes, some are afraid, but most of them feel their country has a bright future that was not there when Saddam was in power. They know the insurgency won't last forever.
>
>>My big problem with the dems is with the partisanship we've had to endure these last few years. Mostly bitching and complaining about everything the republicans were doing wrong without putting forth any ideas of their own.
>
>As if the republicans are above such low partisanship behavior. That's a good one : )
>You call it cheap partisan bickering by the Dems. I call it disgust and vocal opposition to most of Bush's policies over the past 6 years. If disagreeing with failed republican policies is merely partisanship to you..then so be it.
>
What good does it do to bitch and moan and complain about it and then offer no ideas of your own ? That's what the dems have been doing.



 
addi Posted: Sun Nov 12 09:43:47 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Not true. Yes there are parts of Iraq where the people are afraid, but not in most parts of the country. Actually it's only in 3 of the 19 provinces. Most of Iraq is fairly safe.

and you got these "facts" from the Happy Sunshine channel? It' just so silly and incorrect I don't think I can comment on it.


>They know the insurgency won't last forever.

not forever?!
Hell, the earth itself isn't going to last forever.
So what's acceptable to you, hif? 5 years..10 years..20 years? As long as you can confidently state it won't last forever then it's all justifiable, eh.

sad





 
ifihadahif Posted: Sun Nov 12 12:07:34 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>They know the insurgency won't last forever.
>
>not forever?!
>Hell, the earth itself isn't going to last forever.
>So what's acceptable to you, hif? 5 years..10 years..20 years? As long as you can confidently state it won't last forever then it's all justifiable, eh.
>
>sad
>
OK, so what is acceptable to you?
How would you go about crushing the insurgency any faster ?

Never mind, you wouldn't be there and Saddam would still be in power right ?

And Al Qaeda would have hit us several more times since 9/11 because they wouldn't have lost most of their top leaders and concentrated all their resources to keep democracy out of Iraq.
>
Sad


 
addi Posted: Sun Nov 12 12:48:09 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Never mind, you wouldn't be there and Saddam would still be in power right ?

Most likley. Unlike you I don't have the special talent of predicting all the "what ifs" if different policies had been taken. You've been blessed with that unique god given talent that other conservatives seem to have a monopoly on of believing that you know everything...past, present, and future.

and as long as we're on the topic if I had been made King of the Forest for a brief time I would have rooted out the Taliban in Afghanistan (like we did), but my next step wouldn't have been Iraq. I would can concentrated all my efforts to get Osama (Bush didn't), make sure afghanistan is secure (it isn't), and continue a search and destroy effort for any terrorist cell intelligence could uncover. I would not have diverted our efforts away from the primary goal of protecting our home and finding those responsible for 9/11...like Bush did. I would not have made a move that actually CREATED more of the enemy...like Bush did.


>Sad

No...very silly


 
ifihadahif Posted: Sun Nov 12 14:17:28 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  You wouldn't have gone after Saddam ?
Were you the only person on the planet that didn't believe he had WMD's ?


 
addi Posted: Sun Nov 12 15:25:20 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>You wouldn't have gone after Saddam ?
>Were you the only person on the planet that didn't believe he had WMD's ?

Yes. I'm a very special person

: )


 
ifihadahif Posted: Sun Nov 12 15:36:51 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>You wouldn't have gone after Saddam ?
>>Were you the only person on the planet that didn't believe he had WMD's ?
>
>Yes. I'm a very special person
>
>: )
>
Hey, that's an awesome avatar, did you shoot it yourself ?


 
addi Posted: Sun Nov 12 18:32:11 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Hey, that's an awesome avatar, did you shoot it yourself ?

Yes..thank you very much.
It was taken on my vacation last week. I thought the moon over the water was beautiful.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Fri Nov 17 10:39:52 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  You know, I wasn't nearly as upset over the Republicans losing congress as I was over the Louisville Cardinals losing to Rutgers.
That just sucked.


 
addi Posted: Fri Nov 17 11:29:19 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>You know, I wasn't nearly as upset over the Republicans losing congress as I was over the Louisville Cardinals losing to Rutgers.
>That just sucked.

I actually watched most of that game. I thought the fat lady had sung for Rutgers in the first half. Man...what a comeback. It did have to really suck for Card fans.

I didn't want to bring it up cuz I know I hate being reminded myself of a depressing loss when my team blows it : )


 
ifihadahif Posted: Fri Nov 17 11:55:55 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>I didn't want to bring it up cuz I know I hate being reminded myself of a depressing loss when my team blows it : )
>
Georgia Tech ?
Huskers ?


 
addi Posted: Fri Nov 17 12:43:11 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Huskers ?

: )

*and we've "blown it" several times the last fews seasons


 
misszero Posted: Mon Nov 20 20:05:05 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  okay, two political things.

was watching the arty international-content channel news the other day, and they were talking about the american democrat thing, and how things are going in Iraq and how they might be influenced by each other (or something, i wasn't really listening, up until this next bit)... and then the newsreader was like, direct quote: "...democrats hope for a quick pull out." Mmmm. well. I thought it was funny. Addi? Hoping for a quick pull out?

also, in my region, there's been some weird shit going on with the Labor party. The Liberal party is currently running our fair country (Liberals here are suck-balls. like, richy upper class blue-bloody types. Labor was more like people who work for companies, Liberals were people who owned them. sorta thing. like everywhere there's about as much difference between the 2 parties in a 2 party system as there is in taste between green and blue m&m's.) But i think we're going to be going to some kind of election sometime in the next 12 months (I'm not super up with politics, right?) and there's been all these revelations of regional labor party sex scandals. 1 minister up on child sex charges, another of his employees on unrelated child sex charges (rape of a 9 yr old girl), another labor minister was caught speeding in a government car and publicly humiliated throughout the state. and I'm thinking "wait... this is a little weird. one party can't be fucking up so consistently.." and then i remembered that people who own business also own the media in this country.

okay, one more thing. Our national broadcaster, The ABC, has recently been audited by the government (its kinda government run thing, you know, arts council blah blah. not propaganda.) and is now undergoing steps to reduce 'bias'(is reporting the facts and satirising the news really bias, anyway?). So far, this has basically just involved axing one show (The Glasshouse) which contained endless jabs at our prime minister and the liberals (but who also liked to bag the opposition leader... hrm.) The backlash from this is, that with 4 shows remaining, the hosts of the Glasshouse now seem to be like 'fuck em, they fired us, soon we'll be gone, so we'll say what we goddamn please til then" and its obvious that the level of their political bias was minimal before when compared to after the 'bias audit'. now they're crazy mofo's. And most people I've spoken to about this now feel even more strongly about the way this country is being run and by whom and blah blah, just based on the axing of this show (granted, 'most people i've spoken to' includes all my housemates, and about a dozen other people i know. actually, 'all people i've spoken to' would have been more accurate, but then, i have been known to mix with commo's and hippies, so...)

So yeah, basically, that big rant was all about how our government is going down the drain (and still not doing anything really about climate change, the PM still hasn't come straight out and said "yes, this is a problem" despite the fact that we're now in the longest drought in over a 1000 years (it used to be in a century, but we've hit the 10 century mark now, yay) and regarding what they did to the ABC, they look like a bunch of pricks without a sense of humour. Actually... I don't know if that big rant was really about anything, but it felt good to purge.


 
addi Posted: Mon Nov 20 21:01:26 2006 Post | Quote in Reply  
  misszero said:
>"...democrats hope for a quick pull out." Mmmm. well. I thought it was funny. Addi? Hoping for a quick pull out?

Lies! Lies I tell you...spread by the right wing media!
:)


*It was a lovely rant


 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]