0
   

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 09:32 am
Foxy:-

War is the extension of diplomacy by other means.Diplomacy is politics surely.Domestic policy is nothing but a mechanism for putting the society "in form" for the anarchic competition between nation states.Hence the UN.The objective of the UN,which is a long way from being realised,is to render relations between nation states into a similar condition as relations between ,say,Texas and New York.The advent of WMDs has forced the hand of nation states to set up the UN.It must be the future if we are to have one.

We did get the resolution (1444?) passed.There is some quibbles but it did pass and Russia and China let it go.Why they did is a good question.

spendius.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 09:49 am
spendius,

Nations have abandoned the gold standard. Their currencies float based on the flow of money in trade and investments. Our government didn't 'devalue' the dollar. Millions of people did that in their individual purchase and invesrtment decisions. The devaluation is merely an implicit part of the dynamic.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 09:54 am
georgeob1 wrote:
Nations have abandoned the gold standard.


Despite that, even in the 70's of last century (public) calls via (civil) MF Coastal Stations were announce in 'Gold Mark' ... and then calculated in the equevalent Deutsche Mark :wink:
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 09:54 am
A slipping dollar is inevitable and to hear you lefties complaining about it is a riot. At present, if my calculations are on, between 40% and 50% of the world's wealth is concentrated in the United States. Much of that money is in Real Estate Value, which itself is dependent on the public's means. As we continue to globally share our wealth, an ever-increasingly larger percentage of the world's population enjoys it, which brings up the value of their own property, goods, services, etc. Now, why wouldn't this be something to celebrate to liberal minded persons?

Lets not start crying poverty just yet, either. I'd wager dollars to donuts we have 100 times more people worried about buying stiffi-pills than where their next meal is coming from at any given moment in time. Hearing lefties whine about oppression in one breath, action against tyrants in the next, unfair trade practices in the one after that and then settling down to bashing America for "shipping our jobs over seas"... makes me wonder why ya'll need debate opponents at all. Oh, ya; someone has to point out how those things are related… otherwise some of our more educated would seemingly simultaneously bash all the problems and solutions at the same time.
Guess what folks:
If you want to share our wealth with the world, the dollar is going to slip.
If you want to stop a mass-murderer, you may have to kill him.
If you want to promote free trade, jobs will be shipped over seas.

Btw, did the fools who decided we shouldn't support the troops also outlaw Peace Signs? How about yellow ribbons... you know what a ruckus those can cause. Rolling Eyes


http://users.rcn.com/lizard.nai/peacesign.JPGhttp://www.truthinjustice.org/yellow-ribbon-tree.jpg
Edits = Fixed Picture, I hope.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 10:00 am
spendius wrote:
They say around here that when America sneezes we Yucks catch a cold and that when America catches a cold we get pneumonia.

Therefore we have a vested interest in seeing you in good shape.I was merely doing what any committed home team spectator would do in order to encourage you to improve.Nowhere,I would claim, did I criticise.I laid out a few facts-that's all.
You show an inordinate sensitivity.


I beg to differ, and will identify my particular issues below. I suspect that your posting in this thread is by design. You don't strike me as a dolt, so it is with less than full credulity that I receive your initial protestations of support. You appear to be about as supportive of the current administration as is your good friend Blatham.

spendius wrote:
I might be more "American" than you lot.I have read more American literature,seen more American movies and listen to more American music than most people.I really love America.


Do you also go around claiming to be more British than other Brits? If I read a lot of British papers and books, watched your TV, and listened to your music, would that make me more "British" than you? You and about every other British citizen would bristle if you heard those words from me. Oh, I should also point out that I've been declared an "honorary Mancunian." (Very Happy) My point being that I believe it to be inappropriate to claim to be "more" American/British than anyone else. (I'm assuming you're British, but I don't know this with certainty.)

Nevertheless, I'm pleased you "love America," but I fail to see how that is in any way supportive of your claim that you were/are not being critical. By the way, I don't believe it is a "sin" to be critical of particular policies of the US. Many of your liberal friends on this board are critical of her every single day.

spendius wrote:
You haven't heard a word of criticism of Mr Bush from me.


I disagree. Here is what you wrote earlier...

Quote:
Mr Bush is totally at the mercy of economic forces.He is engaged in the art of the possible.Bringing "freedom" to other countries is an entirely selfish policy.Principle there is none."Free" countries are to be loaded up with your overheads in order to help achieve the ONLY objective of US foreign policy which is the penetration of markets by US goods and services.


You appear to be maligning the motives of the Bush Administration as it regards its foreign policy objectives. Thus, you were being critical.

And you typed on ...

Quote:
Your power is derivative.It stems from European science,a rich cache of resources got for next to nothing and a fast expansion of population.As things stand you would be refused entry into the EEC which Russia will join at some point.Your own politicians treat you as if you were a bunch of clunkers.All rhetoric and no substance.You daren't even sign up to the Kyoto agreement and the Geneva convention has been tossed to one side.You will litigate yourselves into confusion in your gaderene rush to avoid manual work.


Frankly, it's difficult to read what you've written and come away with the feeling that you are what you claim to be: someone who loves the US - notwithstanding your protestations to be merely commenting in her best interests and with an eye to improve her current condition. I don't negate with all certainty that as a possible motive, and would like to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you certainly could choose your words and tone for your first post in this thread with greater care ... if you were trying to come across as you claim was your intent. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 10:04 am
spendius wrote:
It might well be a natural antidote but what if we get into a round of competitive devaluations and everybody takes that isolationist view?

Hypothetically, if every currency devalued by a factor of two, exchange rates would be the same as they were before -- and the price level in each country would be twice as high after the adjustment is finished than before it started. Overall, that would be a bad thing. It would also require an eminently irresponsible binge of money-printing by everybody's central banks, which hasn't happened over the last few decades, and is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future. No matter how selfishly the world's governments behave, "a round of competitive devaluations" isn't in the cards.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 10:14 am
Quote:
Main Entry: pol·i·tics
Pronunciation: 'pä-l&-"tiks
Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction
Etymology: Greek politika, from neuter plural of politikos political
Date: circa 1529
1 a : the art or science of government b : the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy c : the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government
2 : political actions, practices, or policies
3 a : political affairs or business; especially : competition between competing interest groups or individuals for power and leadership (as in a government) b : political life especially as a principal activity or profession c : political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices
4 : the political opinions or sympathies of a person
5 a : the total complex of relations between people living in society b : relations or conduct in a particular area of experience especially as seen or dealt with from a political point of view <office politics>


One could say what a country does with military personnel is political. One can say that what the military does is political.
I will never agree however that 'support the troops' is in itself a political statement as testified by all of you who claim to 'support the troops' while protesting the activity in which they are engaged.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 10:55 am
An article in yesterdays 'Financial Times starts like this:


Quote:
Central banks shift reserves away from U.S.

Moves seen undermining the dollar

Central banks are shifting reserves away from the U.S. and towards the eurozone in a move that looks set to deepen the Bush administration's difficulties in financing its ballooning current account deficit."


source/link to full article
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 11:14 am
spendius wrote:
MG:-

Have you ever read Russell's discussion of Dewey in A History Of Western Philosophy?

What's the thing you have with monkeys?We all love monkeys here.We watch every film we can that has them,Even the anthropomorphic ones.I find humans more interesting.I thought Witches of Eastwick superior to Planet of the Apes in many ways particularly with regard to useful lessons.

spendius.


sp

Likely not, though my Russel readings were a long time ago. I saw an interview with his publisher some years back. He claimed the manuscripts came in first draft, long-hand, and he never saw a correction. Bertrand is a long time hero of mine.

You got me laughing on the WofE comparison. Primate social behavior is where my interest lies. Much wondrous there, as with bonobos, the chimp most closely related to us genetically, who live "make love, not war". Many primates could punk themselves down in an easy-chair to read Grapes of Wrath and feel quite comfortable with a story where the males run about causing trouble while the women folk keep the show going. Baboon males of the same troupe greet each other by giving the other fellow's penis a tug (this is also the protocol in the american navy).
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 11:21 am
I almost missed this "All in the Family" moment (from the Style section of the Post). Overheard at the Alfalfa Dinner a couple of nights ago...my favorite quote of the week:

Quote:
Bush also said, "Secretary of State-designate Condoleezza Rice is here. People often ask me what Condi is like. Well, she is creative; she is tough -- think Martha Stewart with access to nuclear codes."


and......(this oughtta strike fear in the hearts of the Dems Laughing)...

Quote:
"Because of the inauguration, we have a lot of Bushes here tonight," the president said. "George Herbert Walker Bush, George W. Bush, Barbara Bush, Jeb Bush, George Prescott Bush, Marvin P. Bush, Laura Bush, William H.T. Bush, Doro Bush Koch and John Ellis Bush Jr.

"Or, as we are known within the family: 41, 43, 44, 45, 47, 49, 50, 51, 52, and Marvin."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30004-2005Jan23.html

(Hilarious article - it's two pages, folks. Use bugmenot.com if you don't want to register).
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 11:27 am
Laughing
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 11:30 am
Quote:
One could say what a country does with military personnel is political. One can say that what the military does is political.
I will never agree however that 'support the troops' is in itself a political statement as testified by all of you who claim to 'support the troops' while protesting the activity in which they are engaged.


fox

The university's policy is appropriate - their vehicles shouldn't be used for political statements. But this case IS somewhat different, and I think they made the wrong decision. That's given we trust the fellow's motives (he claims no political intent) and I can easily believe that. He could be a Democrat who doesn't like the war or Bush but who has a brother in the forces and feels his brother deserves a communal cheer.

But if the case were different, that is, if his intent was not merely to wave support to forces but also to show support for present administration policies, then that would be a political statement and should be treated as such. If the fellow had a history of political activism there that was known of, then that would alter the equation.

But I'd err, if it were my decision, in favor of his honesty and allow that particular sign.

Of course, there's another element in this too. The administration, and its supporters (you are one) who have made a connection between patriotism and support of troops in a war regardless of other considerations. In other words, "support the troops" in itself has gained a political connotation in this present climate. So it's understandable that the sign was read by the other fellow who complained as a political statement. Yet, as I say, I'd err to your side on this.

My post above was not directed at your sentiment re this particular incident. It was directed at your innuendo regarding universities generally. It's plays to a falsehood and to a species of propaganda I won't let slip.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 11:48 am
This is political:

http://www.buttonstore.com/support.our.troops/freedom1.gif


This is political:

http://home.earthlink.net/~topicalbuttons/Supporttroops.jpg

This is political:

http://www.buttonstore.com/support.our.troops/iraqi1200.gif

This isn't:

http://www.buttonstore.com/support.our.troops/SOTAF1.gif
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:00 pm
Of course those who assume the most annoying stance of condescension, judgmentalism, and presumed snotty superiority are unable to recognize that simple fact Obill.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:10 pm
Econimists agree as often as psychoanalysts do......there are lots of ways to tell a story.......so don't bother me with the 500 ways to understand why the dollar is down, please.

Support our Troops is about supporting our troops in a particular war. And it is a political statement, no matter what the person with the slogan stuck to his or her bumper means by it individually.

This is a silly argument anyway. And I have better things to do. Bye
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:18 pm
Lola wrote:
....

Support our Troops is about supporting our troops in a particular war. And it is a political statement, no matter what the person with the slogan stuck to his or her bumper means by it individually.

This is a silly argument anyway. And I have better things to do. Bye


I agree yours is a "silly argument." An American should support American troops regardless of their political views on the aspect of the present conflict. Making such as statement is not an endorsement of said conflict. It's profoundly sad that you feel you cannot be supportive of the troops that are over there fighting and dying, simply because you do not agree with the cause that they have been sent to accomplish.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:24 pm
And as for the declining dollar, this is nothing new in our history of the last several decades. Europe doesn't like it because it might keep more of those 'ugly Americans' at home instead of cruising the French Riviera, etc., but all in all, there are plusses and minuses in everything.

Declining Dollar OK for Now
Source: Sunday Gazette - Mail; Charleston, W.V.
Publication date: 2004-12-12

The Associated Press
NEW YORK - You might be having second thoughts about that European vacation because of the weak dollar, but Wall Street doesn't think it's such a bad thing - at least not for now.

The dollar has lost more than 30 percent of its value against the euro over the last three years, and recently dipped to new lows. It has recovered somewhat from several weeks of selling, and was trading at $1.32 against the euro late Friday, but still remains weak; analysts say the downward drift is likely to continue in 2005.

Believe it or not, that's good news for many U.S. stocks. While a sharp drop in currency valuations could jeopardize the financial markets by pushing interest rates higher and stock prices lower, the dollar's gradual decline has had mostly positive effects, said Lynn Reaser, chief economist with Banc of America Capital Management. It's made U.S. exports more competitive on the global market and slowed domestic demand for imports. That, combined with a slow rise in interest rates, should help level off the nation's current account deficits, she said.

"At this point, the decline in the dollar is actually, overall, relatively beneficial to the U.S. economy and many of our companies," Reaser said. "In terms of equity investors, they are finding that some of their companies are going to see a significant benefit."

Stocks that stand to make the most from a feeble dollar include major exporters, such as manufacturers and agricultural producers, as well as U.S.-based companies with sizable overseas operations. As their foreign earnings are translated back into dollars, they are likely to enjoy a large currency gain. This is particularly true for the tech sector and consumer staples, such as household products companies, many of which have close to 50 percent of their revenues coming from abroad.

U.S. companies competing on price in foreign markets - including those in materials, such as steel producers - are also well- positioned. For example, a U.S. firm selling a product in Asia may be able to capture market share from European makers.

And, as a cheaper dollar lures vacationing foreigners to America, domestic lodging providers stand to benefit. This also bodes well for high-end luxury retailers: European and Japanese tourists are likely to splurge on pricey watches, jewelry, handbags and clothes while they're here because in terms of their own currency, these items are less expensive. In addition, U.S. residents who choose to vacation closer to home provide another boost to the domestic economy.

The downside of the sliding dollar is that foreign investors might lose their appetite for U.S. Treasurys. But analysts say that seems unlikely now.

"A weaker dollar is something that's almost uniformly good for the U.S. as long as it happens in an orderly fashion, and you don't find foreign investors shying away from our bonds, causing interest rates to shoot up," said Jeff Kleintop, chief investment strategist for PNC Financial Services Group in Philadelphia. "If the dollar is weaker and interest rates are low, that's a Goldilocks.

http://www.builderonline.com/industry-news.asp?sectionID=30&articleID=87493
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:25 pm
Sorry to butt in here, folks, but I was just thinking about this today. I would like to be patriotic and supportive of our troops. However, I am firmly morally opposed to their actions. I mean them no harm, but I don't support their efforts. I won't put a ribbon on my car or my house. I had thought before that it was possible to support the troops but not support the war, now I think maybe not. Is it?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:30 pm
That's a tough one Freeduck, because I find no fault with those who are truly conscientious objectors and, however wrong I think they are, I can appreciate that some sincerely believe it is wrong for us to be in Iraq. I know enough miliatry types, however, to know they don't feel supported when they hear or read that what they are doing is immoral, corrupt, etc. etc. etc.

At the same time, I believe there are many family members, friends, and patriotic Americans who think it wrong that we invaded Iraq, but now that we are there want the matter ended finally, as quickly as possible, and with the best possible outcome. Those people do 'support the troops' with no political motivation whatsoever.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jan, 2005 12:40 pm
So we are back to the "if you don't support the war you are not a patriot" crapola.
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/10/2025 at 02:25:35