0
   

It’s official… Bush has my vote and that’s final. This's why

 
 
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 01:37 am
I just watched an episode of cover to cover that left me glassy eyed and mad enough to kill. It was about child prostitution in places like Pnom Phen. They showed brothels where they were selling children as young 5 years old for the evening for $30. What does this have to do with Bush? I'll get to that. First I need to rant a little. I'm probably going to mix this up a little. Bear with me.

For starters, those of you against the death penalty are crazy. IMHO, if you can produce video from a hidden camera of a man or women offering to sell you a child for the evening (like they did with no problem on this program): Not only should you should be immune from all prosecution but you should be paid a hefty reward for stopping the offending black-heart from beating. I'm dead serious here. In thirty-six years on this planet, I've never seen anything quite as sickening as a child reacting with glee at the prospect of being bought. There isn't room on a civilized planet for people like this. I would propose a $1,000 reward for each dead perpetrator. That's about 3 years pay for your average citizen of Cambodia.

If you don't share my rage, or feel my solution is reasonable; take a look through your family photo album and pay particular attention to the photos of the children while considering this crime. This has got to stop.

Among the customers interviewed during the program was an American Doctor who travels there several times a year to take advantage. He explained that if you don't go for the very young you can avoid prosecution because the American law covering foreign behavior reads you have to "knowingly" have sex with a minor before you are in violation. What he didn't know was that President Bush signed into law a new bill that makes the act itself the crime without the loophole of intent, rightfully placing the burden of age verification on the potential offender. The Department of Homeland Security is currently preparing a case against this doctor. Guess what folks; Cambodia and most of the other leading offenders don't have oil, or much of anything else we want. I don't see how Bush and Co. benefit from cracking down on these disgusting rogues… any more than the rest of humanity.

Saddam Hussein and others like him rule their countries by fear. Dissention can lead to having your children raped and killed right in front of you. This, my friends, is an even worse crime than the one that put me in this murderous rage in the first place. State sponsored abuses, indeed, State performed abuses like this need to be addressed. What better justification for war could there be? I've read so many people calling this an "unjust war" and I just don't get it. Do people not know what horrors Saddam ordered? Do people not care what horrors Iraqis suffered? Do people really believe that nothing can be done to stop State sponsored atrocities? Is it too expensive? How much money is too much to spend saving people from watching their children get raped and murdered in front of them, by the police no less?

Saddam's men… his own son for crying out loud, had a reputation for his habit of kidnapping young girls for sex slaves and then murdering them when he tired of them. Are we now so desensitized to horror that we can take that with a grain of salt? I also hear people saying, "It wasn't our responsibility". This may be true, depending on whether or not you feel the strongest among us has a "responsibility" to defend the weakest among us from evil. I've asked dozens of men if they would stand idly by while a woman or child was raped. Every one, to a man, said NO. Strangely, many of these same men answer the opposite when the question is extrapolated to a country. I can only conclude that State sponsored rape is more palatable to some.

Whatever mixture of reasoning Bush used to conclude Saddam needed removal, he did NEED REMOVAL. Many of you know me pretty well now, and I think it's high time you let me send you the audio file referred to in my signature line. It's only a 171kb and will only take a couple minutes out of your life… though the message may stay with you longer. It won't hurt you, I promise.

In conclusion: Children the world over need to be protected from rapists and murderers. Saddam and his crew were both. No, I don't think we can lay a security blanket over the entire world. But it's high time we stop tolerating the blatant violators. Saddam was that. And this, is why Bush has now officially secured my vote.

OCCOM BILL
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,109 • Replies: 54
No top replies

 
theollady
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 07:28 am
OCCOM BILL,

While it is commendable to have a heart full of love for the foreign children of the world, and to rage for the prosecution of offenders everywhere, what is Bush, Ashcroft and government doing to help our own children in the USA?
I rage over THIS daily.

Having just seen a young "man", (I think 16 is kinda man, kind of child), sent home to his natural father--- who had dumped him on his drug using mother so he could marry again without responsibility--- I am full of rage. When asked for my recommendation--- with knowledge aforethought--- I asked the boy be fostered. but the human resources departments, almost always underfunded--- lacking caring 'foster parents' (mostly because they do not receive enough funds to cover decent care), send him out of their sight, so like many children, he falls through the cracks.

You want to talk about the 'sale' of little children? What about the TOTAL neglect of little children? Do you go out with the case workers in this USA and visit the "hovels and dumps" where thousands of kids sleep on a pile of rags and hungrily wait for a drunken parent to give them food the next morning? To unlock the bedroom door where they have been confined, threatened to be absolutly quiet so the parent can go out and 'party' without paying a sitter?? Surely, you have read a LITTLE about how pimps and sweeties mistreat and kill the offspring of the lovers they take?

Oh, and this is not just going on in hovels and dumps. Hundreds more lack the 'face' of parents, they only know nannies, sitters, grannies, etc, because they are UNWANTED. They grow up to become those ill people we have to face in subways, restaurants, and even jails. But does the justice system have any pity on these 'raggedys' of society? Untaught in social graces, probably suffering from prenatal alchohol syndrome, and other pain like AIDS or Herpes simplex, through no fault of their own?
Afraid not. They 'warehouse' them, suffering, until they are wheeled out of the prison feet first.

This country has enough problems to use every dollar and every volunteer that could ever be recruited.
We try to salvage old tires, plastic, and other scraps. What about humans? Everywhere. Beginning here.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 07:31 am
This problem just popped up in the last 3 years?

Sounds more like a social issue than a political issue.
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 07:35 am
I hear you Bill. Now send me some money.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 08:18 am
TheolladyI was following you right up until that last paragraph. Tax me all you want to take care of children, but for crying out loud, stop judging the importance of intervention by nationality. As horrible as the conditions you described are, they read like Disney Land compared to being kidnapped and forced into child prostitution, let alone STATE SPONSORED rape and murder just to keep the parents in line. Think about it. Imagine an American baby and an Iraqi baby lying side by side. Are they not equally deserving of your concern?

Cav:You gonna collect some reward?
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 08:27 am
"Cav:You gonna collect some reward?"

Only if you need someone killed. But seriously, I am with you philosophically, Bill. I happen to agree that Saddam needed ousting. However, for me, the jury is still out on whether or not the Bush administration is right for the future. There are a lot of issues to consider, beyond the war. P.S. Your condo looks gorgeous....do you have a seaview? I'm jealous...
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 08:44 am
People have all sorts of screwy reasons why they vote for or against a particular candidate. Most of them, it should be added, don't make a big deal about explaining their screwy reasons, but then I suppose if we allow them to vote we must allow them to have their own uniquely idiotic reasons for voting.

And therein lies the problem. The country does not lack good candidates for public office, it lacks qualified voters. We do not, as a society, suffer from a low level of voter participation, we would instead profit from even fewer people turning up at the polls. We should not be encouraging people to vote, we should instead be looking for ways to restrict the franchise.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 09:23 am
Bush's bill made it possible to prosecute that monster doctor, plus I think it's safe to assume Saddam would still be raping and torturing if not for Bush. It's a good start. I hope he goes after Kim next. All horrors pale in comparison to his.

Thanks, the sea is beautiful and everyone here has that view. There are only 6 units to a floor, so you get windows on both sides.

Thanks for the vote of confidence Joe. You'll be happy to know I usually carry about a dozen or more votes with me and I live in the state that decided the last election. :wink: BTW, if a situation comes up that calls for masterfully debating the wrong side of right, I'll PM you an invitation.
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 09:33 am
joefromchicago wrote:
People have all sorts of screwy reasons why they vote for or against a particular candidate. Most of them, it should be added, don't make a big deal about explaining their screwy reasons, but then I suppose if we allow them to vote we must allow them to have their own uniquely idiotic reasons for voting.

And therein lies the problem. The country does not lack good candidates for public office, it lacks qualified voters. We do not, as a society, suffer from a low level of voter participation, we would instead profit from even fewer people turning up at the polls. We should not be encouraging people to vote, we should instead be looking for ways to restrict the franchise.


Actually, I think what we should be doing is encouraging people to become informed voters and then vote. Too many voters just automatically pull the lever for their party's candidate because that is how they have always voted. They do not think about issues and such. Which is a shame.

I don't think I could back you in encouraging people not to vote or to restrict voting priviledges. Unless they are democrats of course. In which case I might support your idea if reserved only for them. :wink:
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 09:44 am
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Thanks for the vote of confidence Joe. You'll be happy to know I usually carry about a dozen or more votes with me and I live in the state that decided the last election. :wink:

If the results of the next election hinge on the votes of you and your cadre of followers, then I truly believe the country will get the kind of karmic punishment that it so richly deserves.

OCCOM BILL wrote:
BTW, if a situation comes up that calls for masterfully debating the wrong side of right, I'll PM you an invitation.

No need to PM me, O'BILL. If you're involved in the discussion, I'm confident that the wrong side is already well-represented.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 10:34 am
Joe

Have you suddenly allowed your magnificent intellect to turn to mush?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 11:25 am
Nothing sudden about it Perc. At least, not when it comes to this subject. Check out this post! Shocked Rolling Eyes Laughing
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 11:35 am
Shocked Rolling Eyes Laughing

I'm thinking of starting an emoticon game. This particular offering from Bill could mean either "Kerry? No way. Bush forever, raise the Tequila" or "Whoa, she's hot, okay, I'm normally an abstainer, but I'll try some Tequila. Hooey! Now everybody looks good!"
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 11:45 am
Shocked Rolling Eyes Laughing
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 11:48 am
To perc: How could you post that cav in a politics thread, it's okay, I don't take you seriously anyway, but I'm still laughing.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 11:58 am
perception wrote:
Joe

Have you suddenly allowed your magnificent intellect to turn to mush?

If you have reason to suspect that, then you should also have reason to doubt any answer that I give you.

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Nothing sudden about it Perc. At least, not when it comes to this subject. Check out this post!

That death penalty discussion really got your goat, didn't it?

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Shocked Rolling Eyes Laughing

Question Idea Exclamation Drunk
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 12:22 pm
cavfancier wrote:
To perc: How could you post that cav in a politics thread, it's okay, I don't take you seriously anyway, but I'm still laughing.


You lost me----what "cav" are you talking about??????
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 01:11 pm
Re: It's official… Bush has my vote and that's final. This's
OCCOM BILL wrote:
State sponsored abuses, indeed, State performed abuses like this need to be addressed. What better justification for war could there be? I've read so many people calling this an "unjust war" and I just don't get it. Do people not know what horrors Saddam ordered? Do people not care what horrors Iraqis suffered? Do people really believe that nothing can be done to stop State sponsored atrocities? Is it too expensive? How much money is too much to spend saving people from watching their children get raped and murdered in front of them, by the police no less?


There ain't enough money in the world to stop people from being brutal to each other. If you believe the best solution is to invade, then how many other countries should be on the invasion list?

OCCOM BILL wrote:
I've asked dozens of men if they would stand idly by while a woman or child was raped. Every one, to a man, said NO. Strangely, many of these same men answer the opposite when the question is extrapolated to a country. I can only conclude that State sponsored rape is more palatable to some.


So you are saying that anyone who doesn't agree that invading and occupying a whole country is the only way to stop state-sponsored atrocities is advocating state-sponsored atrocities? Interesting take.
0 Replies
 
theollady
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 01:37 pm
Mc, since when are "social issues" not political issues??

Occom-- the way I see it, a man cares for his family and their needs by applying his assets to them... FIRST.

It is sad to think that a man might take his pay and go down the street and feed a few other families while his own goes hungry!!

Plus, the rape and starvation of a child is RAPE AND STARVATION, whether it is here, there --- neglect, state sponsored, or parental guilt. It should just plain NOT HAPPEN!

'Voting for Bush' to accomplish these things is a CROCK. Many, many more people are going to have to CARE than one president of one country.
There are OTHER pressing reasons to ENDEAVOR to leave the Bush's out of politics.
That is all I have to say.
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 May, 2004 01:42 pm
cavfancier wrote:
Shocked Rolling Eyes Laughing

I'm thinking of starting an emoticon game. This particular offering from Bill could mean either "Kerry? No way. Bush forever, raise the Tequila" or "Whoa, she's hot, okay, I'm normally an abstainer, but I'll try some Tequila. Hooey! Now everybody looks good!"


My emoticon game...you used the same ones Bill did. Sorry if I lost you there.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » It’s official… Bush has my vote and that’s final. This's why
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/26/2024 at 10:35:27