Quote:
Yeh, EVERY SINGLE American will do that
They have the opportunity to exercise their right to vote. Whether they vote utilizing this free service of information, or research their issues, is their own business.

The issues you mentioned above...the people you claim to want to "restrict," tend to vote democrat. Democrats are marked for their feelings that everyone should vote.

Yet you feel that rather than exercising free will, there should be some arbitrary quiz or regulation to test 'intelligence' on the issues to validate their constitutional rights?

I don't understand how anyone thinking logically can take your argument seriously. And I'm not saying that as a conservative - I'm saying that as an American citizen.


Quote:
If you want to talk record numbers, let's talk about how Clinton slashed the deficit in HALF, while Bush has the highest one ever.
No, I don't want to talk numbers - you know why? Because you clearly don't want to discuss the issue. Stop running around Clinton's record defense cuts.

And what's your point? We're at war...and btw...guess when the second highest deficit was? Oops! 1994-5, during Clintons administration! And he wasn't at war...whoops. (My source is again, Microeconomics 6t Ed. Boyes and Melvin. If you want, I'll post their diagram as well).

Quote:
It's working in Iran and North Korea though, right?
Is it? You tell me? You're the one who is against the Iraq war, but thinks diplomacy won't work in N.Korea, and Iran, who knows.

Quote:
And you have no idea about what could happen with the future of our country if you want it handled the way you do.
I beg to differ. And I bet a whole bunch of people here agree with me...and not just conservatives or liberals. What I have argued in this thread is not partisan - it's common sense.


Quote:
It's not the same context.
How do you figure?

War with Iraq (Cause: WMD's, Genocide)
War with N.Korea (Cause: WMD's)
War with Iran (Cause: WMD's)

So explain to me how this is in a different context? Because according to your argument, you want to wage unilateral war against one country arbitrarily, but find it completely wrong to do it for the same reasons in another.

Quote:
Of course I know less than the government, but saying I know less then the President is stretching it.
And here's a reality check -

- The President is a Yale graduate (history, actually...my kind of guy ).

I sincerely doubt, regardless of any linguistic conundrums he might have (he's clearly not the most eloquent speaker in the world), he is much more knowledgeble than you.

Quote:
Hey, while we're at it, lets give money to the Palestinian terrorists in Israel too!
Hey! Rather than try and refute my argument, just concede, since you apparently can't. Otherwise you'd actually try to respond.

M'kay?

Quote:
Clinton's presidency and his numerous visits preety much made peace in Israel until 1996. In 1996, Israel's prime minister at the time did something as some sort of Palestinian church. I can't think of what it was. My UN Club teacher was telling us about it Tuesday.
"Peace" is an overstatement. These two countries have been warring since the inception of the state of Israel in 1948 (enacted in '49), and they are using religion to back their land rights for the holy land. Their should be a safe Israeli land, and a safe Palestinian homeland.

Oh, and here is some information on Clinton...

From the signing of the Oslo accords in 1993 until September 2000, when the Camp David summit came to naught, about 256 Israelis -- civilians and soldiers alike -- were killed by Palestinian violence. Bill Clinton was in office during those years...Between Sept. 29, 2000, and September 2004 -- four, not eight, years -- 1,026 Israelis were killed by Palestinians...those years correspond to the second intifada, which erupted after the collapse of the Clinton-inspired peace talks...The second intifada was not caused by Bush, and Clinton's critics are right in saying that for too long Washington was much too nice to Yasser Arafat. In fact, Clinton's own Middle East negotiator, Dennis Ross, writes in his book, "The Missing Peace," that "President Bush and those around him were right to believe that we had indulged Arafat too much."

Source: The Washington Post, Tuesday, October 26, 2004; Page A25.

Israel-Palestine Relations Since Clinton Inauguration

Israel-Palestine "peace" hasn't been the same since the second intifada, which has nothing to do with Bush.

Quote:
This is where we don't see eye to eye. A communist isn't a terrorist, IMO. Fidel Castro isn't a terrorist. The NVA and Ho Chi Minh weren't terrorists. Enemies? Yes. Communists? Yes. Terrorists? No.
Mmm, okay, I was using terrorists to compare to our current situation in Iraq.

And I don't associate communists with terrorism, or necessarily anything negative. But the problem is inherently most people are to stupid to understand the philosophy behind the system itself, and rather, it's cool to either make fun of or support communist doctrines.

However, it is somewhat interesting that you can't really find a "good" communist out of the whole bunch...Hitler (totalitarian)...Stalin...Mussolini (fascism)...Castro...et al.

Quote:
Then they'll obviously go on welfare.
And that's a problem with the system. Welfare should be reserved for people in actual need...i.e., unwed mothers who can't afford day care in order to earn a living. That would be an instance where I would support welfare.

Quote:
Yes.
And now the second part of my question...where?

Quote:
Look at all of the committees FDR made during the Depression and WW II.
Yeah...what's your point? That WWII and FDR helped put people back to work? Okay. That's historically accurate.

But in doing so, he also created long-term issues over the role of social programs such as welfare, the essentially defunct social security system, and medicare/medicaid.

Quote:
Or another chance of life.
Yeah...forgive me for being a bit of a pessimist. I think, in all honestly, maybe rapists should be castrated. That would solve the problem real quick, eh?

[/politically_incorrect]

Quote:
Where did I say that ALL of the youth are lazy? Also, appointing someone young doesn't mean a teenager. People in their early or late 20's are young.
Hmm...I didn't say all. I was generally referring to youth, in general. You said most. Here's your quote though, to refresh your memory:

Quote:
Most kids only care about what they wear to school. They don't care about grades or anything else.
Quote:
I said there are BARELY ANY. I didn't say there weren't any! And compared to small businesses, there are BARELY ANY big businesses! (95% to 5%)
Well then you should've compared it to small businesses in the first place, but either way, you should classify the difference between a "small" business and "big" business. Also, you do realize that the reason for small business growth and excessively high numbers is because of the ease of start up? And also, that 90% of businesses fail within the first fiscal year?

Quote:
I didn't say the AMERICAN lower class. I said he'd be part of THE lower class!
THE LOWER CLASS OF WHAT?!?!? EAST JUHUNGA?!?!

Quote:
A flourishing economy means that we're in a prosperity stage. Are you nuts?
Again, I'm going to need a big [/sarcasm] sticker to help you out, Pat.

Quote:
All the people on welfare deserve to get money if they try to get a job.
It's called "unemployment," which are monies you can collect whilst unemployed but actively searching for a job, and it's a totally different thing.

Quote:
The government should have more restrictions on who gets it, but they DON'T. I don't see George attemping to fix that.
Hmm...he wants medicaid reforms...it's clear he hasn't taken a blind eye to these corrupt systems...

but maybe he can't because democrats love their social programs, regardless of their corruption. I remeber a quote by a senator a few years ago that said "we refuse to reform medicare because it will hurt the receipients thereof."

Quote:
Which is why taxes need to be raised.
Wow. You really are economically challenged, aren't you?

Please open an economics textbook before you come back, if you want to be taken seriously. Because it's illogical...and economically impossible - to spur fiscal growth if taxes are raised - because it lowers private sector revenue, and increases government revenue...


Quote:
Show me where I said it was ok. Show me. Thanks. I didn't say it was ok, so don't say I did and stop saying that I said things I didn't. If she doesn't die, then it's obviously not murder or homicide.
Ohh! Wow! So despite the fact that he was convicted on drugs before, gets "reformed," but ends up shooting a little girl...as long as she doesn't die...it's not a murder or homicide...so he's reformed?

Last time I checked - it would be felonious assault with a deadly weapon. :rolleyes:

Quote:
Do you have any concept of listening to the other side. Seems like you have Hannity syndrome.
Yeah, I do. Ask Plaw. Ask DonsAdvisor. But your argument is clearly warped and not in touch with reality, so of course I'm going to hammer your argument as if it were a hot chick. (that's for Partagas) :p

Quote:
Genocide. Do you really want to go there?
Do you think arguing is going to even help your argument? Sure. Let's see what your history teacher taught you today.

Quote:
Answer my question.
Done.

Quote:
Personal freedoms? What about the freedom for two men or two women to get married? Europe hates us because we're in Iraq.
Gay marriage is now a personal freedom? Since when? Last time I checked, a majority of Americans feel it is wrong, and it should be banned. Religiously, and evolutionarily (there is not logic behind homosexuality - it would end procreation and the race would die out) wrong.

And if you think Iraq is why Europe hates us? I need to talk to your "history" teacher, because he's feeding you a load of crap. Please open a good history textbook - preferably one American, say, post civil war, and Europe circa WWI. Then come back to the table.


Quote:
Where did I say it was a perfect system? Just because I like it the way it is now, doesn't mean I think it's perfect. I don't have history this year. I have World Cultures.
You dedicated an entire Pat's Thoughts (sorry, I find that statement kind of redundant in this case :p ) on how Social Security is fine as it is.

And World Cultures? Okay. Your world cultures "teacher" needs to get in touch with reality.

Quote:
Answer my question.
I don't have to. My thoughts were, and still are, clearly outlined in my previous statement, as I've said for the last week and a half.

Quote:
The UN and Sudan, baby. -Pat
Haha! Yeah...the same way they've enforced Israeli-Palestinian peace, stopped African genocide, corrupted aid programs, and wavered to the European agenda.

I really trust them. (HERE...BIG SARCASM HERE)