A fun, pointless conversation with a Bush supporter.

[DipDipDive]

Way to miss the point completely, pal...

random internet dude: im a moderate too
random internet dude: i hate both sides of that argument
me: may I ask you who you voted for?
random internet dude: so i vote by choosing my issues i care about
random internet dude: well bush
random internet dude: hate him
random internet dude: but bush
random internet dude: just hated kerry more
me: why?
random internet dude: he couldnt make up his damn mind about anything
random internet dude: id rather pick someone that stands by something then someone that cant decide
random internet dude: but i still hate bush
me: bush doesn't really stand by anything but making sure he and his rich christian pals are well off
random internet dude: yep
random internet dude: and he does that well
random internet dude: that really was a hard vote for me
random internet dude: i didnt pick till i was standing there lookking at the screen
me: I've known since i was 17 that bush would be a horrible president
me: and i've known all the shit that's just now surfacing about him all along
me: he's a world class dickhead
random internet dude: um the only thing good about bush
random internet dude: he would have done better then kerry dealthing wiht 911
me: you mean gore?
me: kerry didn't run in the election before 9/11
random internet dude: i know
random internet dude: but he wouldnt have handled it as well as bush would have
random internet dude: bush will stand behind the troops
random internet dude: so thats why i voted for him i guess
random internet dude: i dont know
random internet dude: i really dont like bush anyways
me: well, he doesn't have much choice but to stand behind the troops... he started the war.
random internet dude: right
random internet dude: but the war needs to be left in the hands of the poeple now
random internet dude: we have other issues
me: yeah... all of which we had before the war started. poverty has always been an issue while bush has been giving tax cuts to the rich, but people are finally starting to pay attention to that now because of the hurricane
me: so now everyone's realizing that the war wasn't necessary because we have plenty of struggles of our own to deal with, but it shouldn't take a tragedy like katrina for people to take notice of shit like that
random internet dude: yep
random internet dude: well it is a good idea
random internet dude: now we can have open elections to a poeple who never had that
random internet dude: and we have more access to oil
random internet dude: the most importnat part
random internet dude: but in hindsight thats easy to say
me: well, I think before the whole bombing the fuck out of another nation to tap into their natural resources idea came about, maybe the geniuses in the most powerful positions in our nation could've kicked around the idea of alternate fuel sources
random internet dude: YES
random internet dude: but thats not the american way
me: but then bush's oil whore friends would lose money, so of course raping the rest of the world is the only other option
random internet dude: gas prices should be around 6.00 a gallon
random internet dude: world price
random internet dude: but the govt subsitized it to lower prices
random internet dude: so we have cheap gas
random internet dude: so people dont mind spending that much for it
me: I mind it when I know that our technology is advanced enough to not have to use it
random internet dude: so unitl gas prices really rise and not just because of a hurricane
random internet dude: then we will never really make that jump in technology like we should
me: and why is that?
me: because oil profits make the rich richer
me: and I have a problem with that, especially considering the fact that natural resources don't last forever
random internet dude: right
random internet dude: bush has stake in oil
random internet dude: hes looking after his friends
me: and that's bullshit
me: the wealthy are the minority in america
me: but they seem to get all the benefits of a republican administration
random internet dude: right but they have what the poor dont have
random internet dude: MONEY
random internet dude: it all comes down to money
me: right. and it shouldn't. which is why I didn't vote for bush.
random internet dude: whoever has the money can pay off whomever to get what they want
random internet dude: more money
random internet dude: :-)
random internet dude: i like you
random internet dude: your fun to talk to
me: uhhhh. thanks.


I probably would've had more success having an intelligent political discussion with a pug.

[DroppinScience]

I don't get those who claim they hated both Bush and Kerry, yet voted for Bush.

That's what you get for listening to your parents. :rolleyes:

So, did you chat with gmsisko on AIM or something? :p

[DipDipDive]

So, did you chat with gmsisko on AIM or something? :p

Heh.

The most frustrating thing about that conversation is the whole "Bush does a good job of standing by what he believes in" nonsense. Obviously that's true because of the benefits the wealthy continue to receive under his term, but I don't think Bush ever would've won the election without the poor, ignorant, southern christian vote, and I'm pretty damn sure that if his actions and his words matched, those poor, ignorant, christian southerners never would've voted for him.

[DroppinScience]

The most frustrating thing about that conversation is the whole "Bush does a good job of standing by what he believes in" nonsense.

You should've told him that Bush's ideology is WRONG and that it's better to change your ways to the right position than sticking with something that won't work, just because you're a stubborn dumbass.

[SobaViolence]

i think political dialogue should be replaced with straight forward 'yo mama' jokes and obscene gestures.


no one really listens anymore. and those with power only care for the protection and expansion of their power.

[sam i am]

Didn't Hitler stand by what he believed in as well?

Didn't Stalin? Lenin? JFK? LBJ? FDR? Lincoln? Washington? Jefferson?

If you're going to compare Bush to Hitler, why not to these others as well?

[racer5.0stang]

but I don't think Bush ever would've won the election without the poor, ignorant, southern christian vote, and I'm pretty damn sure that if his actions and his words matched, those poor, ignorant, christian southerners never would've voted for him.

That makes alot sense, seeing that those people make up the majority of the population. :rolleyes:

That is kinda like saying " I hate Bush, because I said."

[DIGI]

That makes alot sense, seeing that those people make up the majority of the population. :rolleyes:

That is kinda like saying " I hate Bush, because I said."


It's pretty obvious who you voted for just by looking at your username. "Yeah, I can't wait 'til we grease those sand n*ggers so we can take all their oil and I can either put Premium in the '92 'Stang or a shitload of regular in my '87 IROC. What a beautiful dilemma to have!!! FUCKIN' A, MAN!! Fuckin' Bush got my vote."

[Qdrop]

Didn't Hitler stand by what he believed in as well?

oh stop that....
that is so childish and impulsive....


Ye old "compare em' to Hitler" retort....

[Qdrop]

random internet dude: just hated kerry more
me: why?
random internet dude: he couldnt make up his damn mind about anything
random internet dude: id rather pick someone that stands by something then someone that cant decide
[...]
random internet dude: that really was a hard vote for me
random internet dude: i didnt pick till i was standing there lookking at the screen


see, THIS shows the power of the media....the slanderous, FOXNEWS, mudslinging media.

this is what Karl Rove does....
he creates soundbytes like "flip flopper" and has them endlessly repeated at every turn...so that every american has that "kerry=flipflopper" connection in the back of thier head.
not there was much truth to it...no more than any other politician.
but truth is not important here.
what was important was to rely on basic psychology to sway a swing-voter.
and it worked...

i bet this dude couldn't recite ONE FUCKIN INSTANCE of kerry flip-flopping....but he's "sure" he did because he heard it so many times.

fuckin pathetic.



random internet dude: um the only thing good about bush
random internet dude: he would have done better then kerry dealthing wiht 911
me: you mean gore?
me: kerry didn't run in the election before 9/11
random internet dude: i know
random internet dude: but he wouldnt have handled it as well as bush would have


see....these are the people that vote for Bush..
"sound-byte junkies"

he couldn't explain what he means by Kerry or Gore not doing as good a job- hell, he didn't even remember which one was running when!

he just heard that so many times from right-wing sources....that he just accepted it....assimilated it.

the fact that he didn't remember who was running in 2000 just strengthens the fact that FACTS and REALITY aren't deciding factors in his rationale....just sound bytes.

he is a fuckin lemming in the truest form.

it is intellectually lazy people like him, and the majority of the American public, that ALLOW such "Karl Rove tactics" to work.....the "sound byte mentality".

[Echewta]

Sounds like you are probably going to be marrying this guy DDD.

[DipDipDive]

That makes alot sense, seeing that those people make up the majority of the population. :rolleyes:

That is kinda like saying " I hate Bush, because I said."

No it's not.

It's like saying "Bush's target audience in all of his campaigning was the misinformed-white-christian-southerner vote," because that's the truth. His whole demeanor appealed to that demographic because they felt his "morals" were what mattered and not the reality of all his political endeavors. Of course he played that up because he knew it would win him the election. We're talking basic public relations here.

[Funkaloyd]

Didn't Hitler stand by what he believed in as well?Didn't Stalin? Lenin? JFK? LBJ? FDR? Lincoln? Washington? Jefferson?
If you're going to compare Bush to Hitler, why not to these others as well?oh stop that....
that is so childish and impulsive....
Ye old "compare em' to Hitler" retort....You're both dumb Nazis. The point is that "id rather pick someone that stands by something then someone that cant decide" is simply not a good argument.

[racer5.0stang]

It's pretty obvious who you voted for just by looking at your username.

What is obvious is the amount of ignorance that spews from your post.

Just another gmsisko alias.

[racer5.0stang]

It's like saying "Bush's target audience in all of his campaigning was the misinformed-white-christian-southerner vote," because that's the truth.

I'm not sure that one group of people were misinformed. Everyone had the same information and each person made their decision on what to do with it.

Of course he played that up because he knew it would win him the election.

Or maybe because it is the truth.

How do you trust a man without morals?

Besides, wasn't Kerry an altar boy?

[Schmeltz]

The question is not "How do you trust a man without morals?" but "How could any sane person trust a man with Bush's morals?" I would consider the illegal destruction of a sovereign country in pursuit of demonstrably falsified aims a pretty immoral thing to do. Especially when it results in the slaughter of thousands of innocent people. But I dunno, maybe that kind of morality is more important to Bush voters than reality is.

[Qdrop]

You're both dumb Nazis. The point is that "id rather pick someone that stands by something then someone that cant decide" is simply not a good argument.

how does that^ apply to me?

i was just commenting on the slanderous immaturity of comparing anyone/thing you don't like to Hitler....

[synch]

i was just commenting on the slanderous immaturity of comparing anyone/thing you don't like to Hitler....
That's so something Hitler would say.

[racer5.0stang]

The question is not "How do you trust a man without morals?" but "How could any sane person trust a man with Bush's morals?" I would consider the illegal destruction of a sovereign country in pursuit of demonstrably falsified aims a pretty immoral thing to do. Especially when it results in the slaughter of thousands of innocent people. But I dunno, maybe that kind of morality is more important to Bush voters than reality is.

WMDs, terror, terrorists, nuclur, bad.

The reality of it is we do not have all of the information needed to make the decisions that the President has made. He obviously has more info than the general public, but that has proven to be wrong from time to time. The information that the general public gets is often exaggerated or completely wrong.

How does the old saying go... Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[Ace42X]

i was just commenting on the slanderous immaturity of comparing anyone/thing you don't like to Hitler....

A proponent of Godwin's law and collaries. Myself I don't find a problem of comparing people or things to Hitler. Yes it relies on purely emotive "shock" value, but generally that is all most people react to in debate. Cogent arguments are seen as "intellectual posturing." A good, old-fashioned comparison with Hitler has most people tapping out.

[Qdrop]

A proponent of Godwin's law and collaries. Myself I don't find a problem of comparing people or things to Hitler. Yes it relies on purely emotive "shock" value, but generally that is all most people react to in debate. Cogent arguments are seen as "intellectual posturing." A good, old-fashioned comparison with Hitler has most people tapping out.

ahahah..
true dat.

[Schmeltz]

The information that the general public gets is often exaggerated or completely wrong.


So is the information offered to the President, it seems.

Hitler.

[racer5.0stang]

So is the information offered to the President, it seems.

Hitler.


The reality of it is we do not have all of the information needed to make the decisions that the President has made. He obviously has more info than the general public, but that has proven to be wrong from time to time. The information that the general public gets is often exaggerated or completely wrong.

Try re-reading my original post, slowly this time.

Stalin.

[Schmeltz]

So the information offered to Bush about Iraqi WMD's was neither exaggerated nor completely wrong? There's a bit of difference between being wrong from time to time, and being so wrong that it kills a hundred thousand people.

Your willingness to let Bush off the hook for this "simple misunderstanding" is completely Hitlerian.

[sam i am]

You're both dumb Nazis. The point is that "id rather pick someone that stands by something then someone that cant decide" is simply not a good argument.

Funkaloyd, you're a Funk-A-Nazi! :rolleyes: ;)

[sam i am]

That's so something Hitler would say.

synch - you're a synch-a-Nazi! :rolleyes: ;)

[sam i am]

A proponent of Godwin's law and collaries. Myself I don't find a problem of comparing people or things to Hitler. Yes it relies on purely emotive "shock" value, but generally that is all most people react to in debate. Cogent arguments are seen as "intellectual posturing." A good, old-fashioned comparison with Hitler has most people tapping out.

I would rather have cogent arguments than "Nazi"-slinging, but you are correct that it tends to get peoples' attention.

It's like utlizing sand n***ger up above. It gets attention even though it's completely idiotic, erroneous in usage, and unfathomably offensive to anyone with the intellectual capacity to fill a thumbnail.

[sam i am]

So the information offered to Bush about Iraqi WMD's was neither exaggerated nor completely wrong? There's a bit of difference between being wrong from time to time, and being so wrong that it kills a hundred thousand people.

Your willingness to let Bush off the hook for this "simple misunderstanding" is completely Hitlerian.

Scmeltz - you're a Hitler clone, ain't ya? You are the love child of Hitler and Stalin! You probably have Margaret Thatcher as your Aunt & Lizzie Borden as your great-grandmother! You're a Bruno Hauptmann supporter, aren't ya? Or just an athletic supporter? :rolleyes: :eek:

[Ace42X]

It gets attention even though it's completely idiotic, erroneous in usage, and unfathomably offensive to anyone with the intellectual capacity to fill a thumbnail.

That is not strictly true.

If someone's argument was "no-one who is a vegetarian could be evil" and you counter with "Hitler was a vegetarian" that refutes their comment quite nicely. Assuming they concur with the premise that Hitler was evil, but of course, it is precisely the popularity of that premise which make Hitler comparisons so powerful.

Yes, saying "Hitler was a vegetarian, so all vegetarians must be evil" is illogical, but that doesn't mean you have to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[infidel]

He obviously has more info than the general public...He sure didn't show that in dealing with Katrina when his aides had to draw straws three days after the hurricane hit to decide who was going to be the one to give junior a dvd of the news.
His aides say it scares the shit out of them to be the one who has to give bush bad news.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9287434/
How this could be—how the president of the United States could have even less "situational awareness," as they say in the military, than the average American about the worst natural disaster in a century—is one of the more perplexing and troubling chapters in a story that, despite moments of heroism and acts of great generosity, ranks as a national disgrace.

[QueenAdrock]

oh stop that....
that is so childish and impulsive....


Ye old "compare em' to Hitler" retort....


I dunno. I didn't think it meant "Bush is Hitler" when I read it, I saw it as a "Just because he stands by what he believes doesn't make it right" post. Many people in history have been wrong about their views, but stuck by them no matter what because that's what "strong leaders" do. And that's what I took away by his comment, but maybe that's just me.

[Qdrop]

you're all a bunch of Mussonlini's.....

all of you....

[sam i am]

That is not strictly true.

If someone's argument was "no-one who is a vegetarian could be evil" and you counter with "Hitler was a vegetarian" that refutes their comment quite nicely. Assuming they concur with the premise that Hitler was evil, but of course, it is precisely the popularity of that premise which make Hitler comparisons so powerful.

Yes, saying "Hitler was a vegetarian, so all vegetarians must be evil" is illogical, but that doesn't mean you have to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Actually, my comment was for the "sand n***ger" comment above. Completely ludicrous.

[sam i am]

you're all a bunch of Mussonlini's.....

all of you....

You Pontius Pilate! You Atilla the Hun! You burner of Rome! You sacker of the Library at Alexandria! You slave-trader! How dare ye compare us to Mussolini's, you Eva Braun loving, vegetarian, hippie, wanna-be Liberal inchwhippur! LOL :D