Political Opinions-Please Keep this Healthy

BrenSaSC2 · 09-08-2003, 03:17 PM

I was just curious if any of you have thought about the upcoming Presidential Candidates for 2004. It seems weird that Bush's term is already up! I'm going to be voting for him this time around-my first Presidential Election that i'll be voting. I'm a republican-but I don't vote for Bush just for that particular reason. I think that for all the hardballs he has been throw, he has handle the situations with 9/11 and Iraq in the best way he could have with all he was dealt. He had a very trying first term and I hope to see him come through with flying colors on his (hopefully) second term. I strongly admire his stance on faith and that he's not afraid to show the country he is leading that he has a higher power he looks to and calls on for guidance.

Criosdaidhlaoch · 09-08-2003, 04:01 PM

I agree Bren. I'll be voting for Bush no doubt and I think its great he declares his faith so strongly. He has done a good job with the 9-11 thing and Iraq.

GOLDBERG · 09-08-2003, 04:43 PM

Eventhough I dont agree with few things he has done, I too will vote for him again. He has done more to try to keep this country safe than HillBilly Clinton ever did.

SC2_GT · 09-08-2003, 04:43 PM

I am too busy to think about the prez. right now. I will probably vote for Bush becasue he does show his faith, and how he has handled everything that has made for a rough first term.

We are trying to fight this new tax plan that the govenor wants to pass. I do see a need for tax reform for this state but not in the way that the govenor wants it. It is a 1.2billion dollar tax plan that will rasie on and add taxes to everything even when someone installs something, like a fridge, or just changes the oil in your car. Where would all of this money go, in to a "general fund", they say it is for schools but the schools will see very little of it. Grrrr, I hate it.

If I could be garunteed(sp?) that the money was going to schools then I would for for it.

BrenSaSC2 · 09-08-2003, 04:52 PM

I really wish that people would figure out how to work money into paying for kids to go to college. That's the main reason why kids can't go to their dream schools-schools of choice and so on-money is a huge factor. Money should never get in the way of education-and sometimes financial aid just doesn't work and scholarships can be so difficult to find without so many stipulations.

Matt · 09-08-2003, 05:32 PM

Dont' get me started on that tool Bush, he will not see my vote. What about those weapons of mass destruction? What about Bin Laden? It seems he's forgot about 9-11. Now he wants $87 billion from congress to fund this bs for over in Iraq. WTF? And $26 billion of it is going to Iraq to rebuild the country. If you weren't bombing those clowns in the first place you wouldn't have to worry about reconstructing. What the hell bomb them and say here you go, $26 billion for you. People ***** about how bad Clinton sucked, IMO Clinton was a hell of a lot better than Bush. At least the economy didn't blow balls with him in. Big deal if he was getting his while he was in office, I would be too, that has nothing to do with how he runs the country. Arnold needs to run for president, he'd get my vote. No country would want to piss off the terminator.

BrenSaSC2 · 09-08-2003, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

:. If you weren't bombing those clowns in the first place you wouldn't have to worry about reconstructing.

Reconstruction is one thing....a country that has been torn by a vicious dictator for years now is another:

http://www.mees.com/postedarticles/f.../a46n19b01.htm
Between 1980 and 2001, the total value of Iraqi oil exports amounted to about $192.2bn. Exports in the 1980s totaled about $123.8bn, and $68bn in the period 1990-2000. In 2001, the value of oil exports was estimated at about $14.8bn. However, even with such a huge inflow into public finances generated by oil rent (and not including other domestic economic activities), the Iraqi economy has experienced continuous deterioration since 1980. In terms of GDP per capita, Iraq may be classified as one of the few Least Developed Countries (LDCs)[1]. Such a conclusion obviously has important economic, political, and social implications as far as the remedies for dealing with the Iraqi crisis are concerned. Serious thought should be given to the moral legitimacy of the war reparations resulting form the 1991 Gulf war and the economic viability of commercial and financial agreements made under the previous regime, as well as privileged oil arrangements and preferential oil export deals with foreign countries and companies.
A number of important conclusions can be derived from these estimates. First, despite its oil revenues, Iraq has experienced a continuous and major economic deterioration and as a result Iraqis have experienced severe economic hardship, especially during the 1990s. Indeed, Iraqâs per capita GDP is well below the poverty line, which is widely estimated at $360.
The second main conclusion is that Iraq must diversify its economic activities and lessen its very high dependence on the oil sector for public finance and as the main source of foreign currency. For the future, Iraq must apply three integrated sets of economic policies. First, macroeconomic, fiscal and monetary stabilization policies must be implemented in order to control inflation through the reduction of the government and balance of payments deficits. Secondly a set of economic structural reforms should be introduced that include: overhauling the banking system and financial and stock markets; privatization; foreign trade; and the flow of foreign capital. The third requirement is the implementation of a major and well-balanced public investment program. Public investment should be limited to high-priority economic (physical), social and environmental projects.

I post this to prove a point: We may have destroyed some very important infrastructure fashions within Iraq during the war-HOWEVER-Iraq has been going through severe economic deterioration for years now-this is NOT due to the current president of the US, but the former dictator of Iraq. Yes-we have to reconstruct what we destroyed during the war-but that will not be the main cost of reconstructing Iraq-the main costs we'll be working on is setting up an Iraqi army, working to set up a government-to actually get the economy working in the country again. I think it's time we stop looking at who to blame for what-who made the worst decisions when and where and go "Hey, this country needs our help-They have for sometime. Now we need to take the initiative since Hussein is no longer in power and help these people out". It's ultimately not about power-it's about working to get the people to take charge of THEIR country again-like it should have been so long ago.

monkeyracing · 09-08-2003, 06:09 PM

Well, say what you want to about Bill Clinton, but at least he had character. (or rather, was a character) I just don't see the appeal of hiring G.W.B. for the job again. At the very least he's shown that he has a penchant for lost causes, and at worst one could consider him a war-mongerer.

I don't know, he's just too Replublican.

At least y'all have a choice, though. In the past 10 years here in Canaduh, the opposition political parties have reduced themsleves into utter irreleavance through infighting and bad policy. Essentially, we used to have 4 major parties, 2 of whom were the frontrunners in any election. The 2 frontrunners were the Liberals (democrats) and the Progressive Conservative (republicans) The last PC Prime Minister we had became so despised because of his economic policies that his party was utterly trounced at the next federal election. They were beaten to the point where his party ended up with too few seats in parliament to even be considered an "official" political group, according to parliamentary rules.

So, now we're stuck with the Liberals, and their leader, Jean Chretien. Under his control for the past 10 years, democracy has dwindled to nothing but a joke. When there's a vote, his party members (who dominate the house, BTW) have to vote with the party, and not with their conscience or for the people they're supposed to represent. If you vote against party policy, it's political death, your career is over.

Ranting complete.

Oh yeah, the other political parties here are the NDP (extreme Liberals) and the Alliance (extreme conservatives) So, what choice have we got, really?

Jim

BrenSaSC2 · 09-08-2003, 07:13 PM

Here we do have other parties-such as the Green Party...and if I'm not mistaken, isn't there a white party (not as popular)-but the two dominatees are republican and democrat. That's a shame that Canada seems to run by a dictatorship-I never think of Canada as having a dictator, but being almost a reflection of the US's democracy. It's a shame some systems just get overtaken by selfish parties.

00saturn · 09-08-2003, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Criosdaidhlaoch

I agree Bren. I'll be voting for Bush no doubt and I think its great he declares his faith so strongly. He has done a good job with the 9-11 thing and Iraq.

ditto, my thoughts exactly. It'll also be my first chance to vote, and there's no question who it'll be for