Gunner said:
Meth affects judgment, and has a very long "hang time" which means it
will affect your judgment even during working hours.
I'll take your word for that - I'm not well versed in the effects of drugs.
According to the mindless drones on the Left..Bush has a Neocon hand
up his ass and is simply a puppet. You new here?
I pop in to sci.electronics.design from time to time. On-topic subjects
are sometimes of interest, and off-topic threads can be entertaining,
but the huge noise-to-signal ratio drives me out again after a few days.
Personally, I haven't figured out whether Bush is a puppet controlled by
self-serving Neocons (and/or others), or he really is in control
himself. If he is a puppet, you really have to wonder how anyone that
stupid, even in the American political system, could rise to that
position. On the other hand, when he is caught on his own without his
script writers and minders, he appears so lost and clueless that there
is no way Bush himself is the mastermind behind the Bush machine.
There's a saying, "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by
stupidity", but I am in two minds as to whether it applies here.
Not that being a puppet is necessarily a bad idea for a president - at
least, compared to being wilful but stupid - depending on the people
pulling the strings. Regan was to a large extent a puppet figurehead
(what do you expect if you vote in an actor?), but wasn't all bad.
Thank you for confirmation of your Bush hating. It simply drips from
your previous posts. As for where or what you are..it is simply not
germane. As for the babble about Yank presidents who deserve the
job..damned few politicians of any nationality deserve the job...be it
Vidkun Quisling, or Rob Roy.
I still don't see how my opinion of Bush "drips from my previous posts".
You marked me down as a Bush hater, and degenerated to laughable
insults, after a single one-line post. But I guess it drips more than
enough from this post.
Incidentally, Rob Roy was not a politician - he was a farmer turned
outlaw. If you want to pick on a Scottish politician, Tony Blair would
be a better bet.
And Quisling arguably acted in what he genuinely thought was the
country's best interest. He believed Hitler would win, and that
cooperation would limit the damage to Norway and Norwegians, while
resistance was ultimately futile and would make matters worse. History
is written by the winners, and in this case it was not Hitler, Quisling,
and friends.
But in general I agree - there are few politicians that are capable of
doing a good job, and genuinely aim to do the best for their country.
Some politicians have brains, and some have a heart - there are not many
with both, but the USA seems to have an unfair proportion of those with
neither.
Your posts are filled with erronious statements that prove your bias
and ignorance. Yes..Bush was a poor choice..but given the far far
worse choice..the man you claim was superior..snicker...it was hold
our noses and vote for the lesser of two evils.
I'm not *totally* biased - I am cynical and derisive towards both
American parties and their leaders. Yes, I think Kerry would have been
a better choice. Not a good choice, and probably not the best choice
among the Democratic candidates, but better than Bush none the less. Of
course, I can't prove it - but Bush's continuous record of lies, abuse
of the American people and their hopes and fears, the destruction of the
American economy, the on-going attempts of destruction of American
democracy, the destruction of Iraq, the destruction of America's image
around the world, the pandering to bin Laden's dream - the list goes on.
It's hard to see how Kerry, or anyone else, could have been worse.
With the Media always spewing the Negatives, and never reporting the
positives..its not surprising the lumpin proletariat gives him a bad
grade. And of course.its quite intentional
American media has always had a sheep mentality. They follow each other
blindly. For most of the past five years, the mainstream media has
followed the Bush party line on almost everything, with a total
disregard for any concept of "truth" or "objectivity", for fear of being
branded "unpatriotic" and therefore "terrorist sympathisers". Now,
somehow, it has become possible to criticise Bush, and everyone is doing it.
For comparison..it only took a small fraction of far left extremists
to take control of Czarist Russia. And of course..they butchered
hundreds of millions.
Politics is almost circular - there is very little practical difference
between extreme left and extreme right, it's the "extreme" that becomes
most relevant. The extreme left and the extreme right will blame
different groups for their countries ills, but it ends up much the same
for the majority of people.
Oh yah..you do have problems of your own..seems Socialism isnt doing
so well ...chuckle...and the hordes of Fundimentalist Islamic Fascists
are going to be keeping you busy for quite some time for the
foreseeable future.
Jihad!! Jihad!
But hey...you have three choices.. convert to Islam, pay the tax and
become a dhzeim, or die.
Make your choices wisely.
I guess you don't get much real information about Europe there in the
USA. Your media has the attitude "out of America, out of mind".
A great thing about Europe is its diversity - for example, France's
current problems are not mirrored outside the country, and social
democracy works fine here in Norway (see the UN's list of the best
countries to live in).
David
Let "those people" have
