OT: Things to do before the inauguration

I don't think its as simple as all that, though a lot of people would like to paint it that way.

I haven't seen many of the anti-Bush crowd say they honestly felt that Kerry was going to be their shining knight leading the world into a peaceful and prosperous future. One major indicator of this is that I haven't seen ANY anguish over Kerry missing his chance to lead. Most people that supported him did so because he was not-Bush, and they're now complaining because Bush is still in power, not that Kerry isn't.

In much the same way many people that supported Bush didn't see Kerry as a viable alternative. I'm not going to go around and say I really really like Bush, though I don't doubt there are those that do. IMO Kerry would not do as good a job dealing with all the issues of the day. Not much of an endorsement of our political process I'm afraid, but its the one we have.

You'd think that most gardeners would be nature lovers, yet there are some that chop down their trees and rip up their shrubs and put lawns in their place. There's all sorts of gardeners

I don't feel its correct that the Bush administration is openly hostile to the environment, but I won't present a lot of arguments against that here. There is more to this then just big business vs the environment and should be a topic all on its own.

I also don't believe that a population that junks up things the way we do really deep down cares as much about it as they say they do. The environment is a lot closer then the arctic or the nearest rainforest

-- its right outside the door.

IMO the whole issue needs to be reopened to decide what is right and what is wrong, and what we can do to preserve the environment. We will never be able to go back to they way things were, and we need to create policies and make plans that are rational, achievable, and able to work in the world we have. I don't think that's really been done since the 70s, but it would be a hard thing to do. There just seems to be too much anger around for that to happen.

Yes, we are just like everybody else. I think Bush is proud of being an American, and is disappointed that we don't have more support around the world, but I really haven't seen that "we are better then everyone else" attitude.

He has the attitude that he is going to do what he thinks is right, and to hell with what the rest of the world wants. that's not the same thing, but I can see how that could create that perception. I don't know of any other reason you would feel this way.

Again I don't see it.

Your views and beliefs have the same weight as any christians, and your vote counts just as much. But all people have to make their decisions based on their beliefs, whether they are atheists or christians. Some of the arguments I've had are with posters that seem to imply christians should check their beliefs at the door and act as de facto atheists. People can't do that and shouldn't. Everyone has to work within their beliefs and do what they feel is right.

Religion has always been part of the political process, but this is the first time that I can recall it being an object of fear. There are no laws being passed that promote christianity as the state religion, and I sincerely believe this is a misguided fear.

I don't doubt that I'll be flamed again, but I don't mind. :)

I'm not much of a communicator, so I don't know if I've answered your questions. My main point has been that things aren't as black and white as some are trying to make them. Few voted for Bush because they are mean, evil, racist, stupid, ignorant or just love to be at war.

I don't agree with some of the things you have concerns about, but you've been one of the few that have actually tried to have a rational discussion about any of these topics. You asked some reasonable questions, you didn't shout or insult me, and I attempted to reply in kind. At least I hope I did.

There are far too many lines drawn in the sand, too much anger and intolerance, and too many people that aren't willing to listen.

Swyck

Reply to
Swyck
Loading thread data ...

OK, I don't get overly excited about top or bottom posting, but when you put your response in between my "said" and the previous "said", you're putting words in my mouth - your words.

Pretty please - top or bottom :-).

Reply to
Larry Blanchard

Thank you for your reply. I think I am beginning to understand. It appears that you value leadership and authenticity above other issues when you are choosing a president. It appears that you don't give much weight to any specific issue but are looking at the candidates as businessmen and not much more. You want a president who can run the business of the nation and not looking for someone to advance some sort of moral or political agenda. I think I can wrap my head around that.

Is your lack of emotional attachment because you have not been negatively or positively affected by the government? Is it because your personal interests are more paramount to you than some abstract concept of government?

For me, I cringe every time I see Bush's face because I fear his power. He has the ability to create a hostile atmosphere for gays in this country; he has the power to ruin our national park system which I hold dear; he has the power to give government control over what I see, hear, and say. And he has taken steps to do all of the above.

I also worry deeply about the plight of the poor in our great country. I see a huge divide between the haves and the have-nots. With a church every two miles, why does America have homeless, or children who die from starvation? Where are all the christians and what are they doing about it? Is organized religion just a social club?

I cannot look at the two candidates and say there is not much difference because for me, there is a huge difference. And it mainly has to do with how power is used. I understand the argument that John Kerry was no Bill Clinton. Yes, I agree and I wanted Howard Dean myself. I liked Dean for some of the same reasons you liked Bush. He appears to be a talented leader willing to make the tough choices and he appears to be authentic. Kerry was just another Washington insider.

However, I believe Kerry would use the power of the presidency in a more responsible manner. He believes the constitution is an incredibly important and well designed document as do I. Bush seems to think that the constitution is a hindrance to his personal beliefs and has tried in several frightening ways to remove citizens rights instead of protecting them. Bush also forces his religious beliefs on the entire country by nominating religiously conservative judges, by preventing abortion clinics from receiving federal funds, and by preventing teachers from giving kids the facts about sex. I could go on for days about my dislikes for Bush's leadership style but others have posted great links which summarize it better than I ever could.

I guess the difference between us is that I feel much more personally affected by the president's power. If you feel up to it, would you expand a little on why you don't. I think that is the hardest thing for me to understand.

Reply to
figaro

Reply to
gregpresley

There's another take, but it's only slightly different.

1) Bush's energy policy was hacked together using advisors whose identity he has kept secret. However, this is OK. You can rest assured that even though these advisors were probably the CEOs of major utilities, they have your best interests at heart. The reason for the secrecy is very simple: They're busy guys, and they were afraid of being inundated with thank-you notes from people like you and I. 2) The fact that Bush won't discuss who advises him is not indicative of evil. Rather, you are expected to have complete faith in him. Like the emperor of Japan, Bush has a direct connection to a deity. 3) The fact that the fish you catch are probably loaded with mercury isn't important. You're probably too busy to take them home and cook them anyway. You should be more concerned about the health of coal-burning utilities in the midwest.

This is all pretty simple.

Reply to
Doug Kanter

The WAYS in which Bush is hostile to the environment are often too complicated to fit into your typical TV news story, and probably too complex for your average walkin' around slob to understand. Example:

"Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops."

Never mind concerns about eating such crops. That's probably the least risky part of the issue. What do you personally know about the other risks?

Reply to
Doug Kanter

And the Spokesmans resident trogdolyte (DaveO) has a column today in which, among other things, he mentions "the questionable theory of evolution".

I've passed anger - I'm in the sorrow stage now.

Reply to
Larry Blanchard

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (IntarsiaCo) wrote in news:20041211122138.23235.00001984 @mb-m03.aol.com:

who is willing to believe that such things as 'supported blah blah' constitutes an 'accomplishment', then yes, it's quite an impressive list.

Reply to
Salty Thumb

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List

formatting link
the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the endorsements or recommendations I make.

Reply to
dr-solo

snipped-for-privacy@wi.rr.xx.com Dec 12, 12:31 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.gardens From: snipped-for-privacy@wi.rr.xx.com Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:31:09 GMT Local: Sun, Dec 12 2004 12:31 pm Subject: Re: OT: Things to do before the inauguration

"I am past sorrow and in denial. I turn the TV off the moment one of "them" come on. Ingrid"

I am literally rolling on the floor laughing my ass off at you stupid liberals!!!!! Have at it!

Reply to
Dennis Hoy

Have you or your kids enlisted yet?

Reply to
Doug Kanter

Yes, Doug, I served over 30 years ago, and was, in fact, a graduate of US Naval Academy. Of course, you would know nothing about that sort of thing. And yes, our son is doing his part, too, not that you would understand that, either.

Reply to
Dennis Hoy

Now if only you knew yer head from yer ass!

Acts of creation are ordinarily reserved for gods and poets. To plant a pine, one need only own a shovel.

-- Aldo Leopold

Reply to
Tom Jaszewski

Them radios are dangerous duty! Acts of creation are ordinarily reserved for gods and poets. To plant a pine, one need only own a shovel.

-- Aldo Leopold

Reply to
Tom Jaszewski

What I *do* know is that a leader has to earn the title. Anyone who follows a faker into war shames their country and has no business calling themselves a patriot. A robot, perhaps, but certainly not a patriot. Since it is a fact that we now have a faker in the White House, the rest follows logically.

Reply to
Doug Kanter

You would think that a graduate of the belly button academy would have more sense than you do, Denny. But then again, a good soldier does what he's told without question even if its to jump off a cliff like some mindless lemming.

Blindly going off to an undeclared war for oil for the rich for some faker awol chicken hawk former alcoholic cokehead is not patriotism. It is stupidity of the highest degree. Your son will be nothing more than cannon fodder for terrorists just like the many unfortunate victims before him.

The American people need to speak up and say they have had enough of this bull shit and have Dubya and his cronies thrown out of office. They should impeach the bastard for abusing his office. Most of his cabinet have already abandoned him like rats abandoning a sinking ship.

Reply to
Cereus-validus...

Please contact the non-profit American Health Association at 561-361-9091 to sign up for free Post Election Selection Trauma (PEST) support group therapy.

OR

The Canadian Refugee System

formatting link
and persons needing protection are people in or outside Canada who fear returning to their country of nationality or habitual residence. In keeping with its humanitarian tradition and international obligations, Canada provides protection to thousands of people every year. Through its refugee protection system, Canada offers safe haven to persons with a well-founded fear of persecution, as well as those at risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

OR

formatting link
is a traditional country of immigration: for over 150 years, while other countries have been combining high birth rates and emigration, France has been taking in foreign populations to prevent her demographic decline. Even today, immigration is still in some cases put forward as the remedy for the ageing of the national population. Arch defender of human rights, France also likes to think of herself as a land of asylum for political refugees. Since the beginning of the last century she has taken in, inter alia, Italians, Poles, White Russians, Ukrainians, Armenians, Spanish Republicans, Chileans and Asians. In 1952, France signed the

1951 Geneva Convention which governs current asylum methods and created the Office français de protection des réfugiés et apatrides (OFPRA ? French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons).
Reply to
IntarsiaCo

Houston's air pollution problem was with ground-level ozone ONLY. According to the EPA, there are six components or kinds of air pollution, ozone being just one of them.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:hMu2WJNsGqAJ:

formatting link
"According to EPA, Los Angeles' air still is ranked in a poorer category than the air in Houston. While Houston violates the federal standard for ozone, Los Angeles violates the standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter."

formatting link
"In some ways, calling Houston America's smoggiest city misrepresented the relative quality of air in the two cities. Los Angeles' air is worse than Houston's in other categories."

More recent info on ozone violations:

formatting link
Areas with the Worst Ozone Air Pollution

1 LOS ANGELES-RIVERSIDE-ORANGE COUNTY, CA 2 FRESNO, CA 3 BAKERSFIELD, CA 4 VISALIA- -PORTERVILLE, CA 5 HOUSTON-BAYTOWN-HUNTSVILLE, TX CMSA 6 MERCED, CA 7 SACRAMENTO-ARDEN-ARCADE--TRUCKEE, CA-NV 8 HANFORD-CORCORAN, CA 9 KNOXVILLE-SEVIERVILLE-LA FOLLETTE, TN 10 DALLAS-FORT WORTH, TX CMSA

And overall air quality:

formatting link
of days in 2000-2002 when air quality was unhealthy

  1. Riverside-San Bernardino, Ca. 445 days
  2. Fresno, Ca. 421
  3. Bakersfield, Ca. 409
  4. Los Angeles-Long Beach, Ca. 255
  5. Sacramento, Ca. 163
  6. Pittsburgh, Penn. 134
  7. Knoxville, Tenn. 109
  8. Birmingham, Al. 100
  9. Houston, Tx. 94
  10. Baltimore, Md. 93

And particle pollution:

formatting link
Areas Most Polluted by Year-Round Particle Pollution

1 LOS ANGELES-LONG BEACH-RIVERSIDE, CA 2 VISALIA-PORTERVILLE, CA 3 BAKERSFIELD, CA 4 FRESNO-MADERA, CA 5 PITTSBURGH-NEW CASTLE, PA 6 DETROIT-WARREN-FLINT, MI 7 ATLANTA-SANDY SPRINGS-GAINESVILLE, GA 8 CLEVELAND-AKRON-ELYRIA, OH 9 HANFORD-CORCORAN, CA 10 BIRMINGHAM-HOOVER-CULLMAN, AL (Houston is not on the list of 26 cities)

This isn't to say that Bush isn't lax on the environment. Keep in mind I'm not defending him here -- I'm addressing the misconceptions about Houston's air pollution.

Reply to
JP

Young Jaszewski was never one to let facts get in his way.

Reply to
Dennis Hoy

"Dennis Hoy" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

Just like the Bush family.

Reply to
Damned Liberal

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.