Howard Dean rules!

[Bear6360]

A good reference epj3! And I want to add my point of view on Bush¡¯s economic policy.

Firstly, the price bubbles of houses and buildings: I heard that the average price of houses and buildings has been increased more than 40% during last 4 years. And interest rates have been almost 0% considering yearly inflations. Consequently, people did a mortgage refinancing and they got some extra money. And this surplus withholds the current U.S. economy. Thus, the demand of houses and construction is the source of current economy, not supply side. That's why Bush administration tries to keep its consumption at a certain level by extra money (tax cut can be understood in a same way).

Secondly, the power of dollar: Iraq was trying to change its oil transaction money from Dollar to Euro. And other OPEC countries were in support of using Euro instead of dollar. What if Euro will be pegged money in oil transaction? The depreciation of dollar will be definitely expected. Then, the weak dollar can affect the flow of capital to US from outside, negatively. This will cause house and construction markets to collapse. And again, if the house and construction demand falls, US economy will surely plummet down.

Bush¡¯s foreign policy can be associated with the domestic and economic policy by above reasons. However, our budget deficit is really critical. The portion of budget deficit out of GDP has incremented over 30% and this is almost a bankrupt situation. By spending money in Iraq and other government issues, the deficit has been fatal. Furthermore, Iraq can be another Vietnam because we don¡¯t have any more money to keep our troops maintaining. We will see how it goes.

I can¡¯t say Bush¡¯s decision was entirely wrong because of above reason. However, I can say the possibility of country bankruptcy is more increased than before, our economic health is much weaker than before, and other countries are less respectful to US than before. What a sad reality¡¦

Well stated!!

 

[Bear6360]

Don't you have to be born in the US to be president? I think that's what I remember from history class.

And back on topic, or maybe the sub-topic, Bush is an alright guy. He could be doing a lot better, but he could also be doing a lot worse, as could anyone in his position. I do think he's a better president than Gore, but that's just b/c I've grown up my whole life almost with Gore as a senator for my state. I voted for the first time this past Tuesday, and it felt good. I'll also vote in the next presidential election. I don't think I'll vote for bush, however. I'll have to see what else is out there (for the most part, my opinions tend to agree more with the Libertarian party, but even they scare me sometimes).

I guess I don't care too much about the economy much right now because our family is doing the best it's ever done. My father's glass company is rolling on, as is my mother's law practice. I've kept a steady job all through my teen yeers and never once had a problem finding a job, though they say more teen jobs are getting taken by adults nowadays b/c of the unemployment rate. Anyways, I know I'm making no sense, b/c after all, it is 2:00 am and I can't sleep, so I'll stop now.

You were making perfectly clear sense.
I agree with you about Bush being a better president than Gore....mainly because Gore is not a president!
Seriously, though, I know what you mean.

As for financial advice to everyone. If you have extra money, put it into real estate instead of the stock market. Granted, this is what's causing the stock market to fall, BUT if you don't want to lose it, real estate is safe (for right now).

 

[Kirby]

I agree with EPJ. Bill Clinton was a great president.

A history teacher of mine said to think about Presidents in terms of how HISTORY BOOKS will write about them 20 years from now.

Clinton will go down in the books as a good president. All of his moral problems will be minimized or not written about at all in history books.

I think it's too early to determine Bush's legacy. We need another 5 years or so to see the long term effects of his actions.

 

[Kirby]

As for financial advice to everyone. If you have extra money, put it into real estate instead of the stock market. Granted, this is what's causing the stock market to fall, BUT if you don't want to lose it, real estate is safe (for right now).

I was given that advice about 3 years ago (just before the the dot com crash) ad I didn't listen.

 

[Bear6360]

A history teacher of mine said to think about Presidents in terms of how HISTORY BOOKS will write about them 20 years from now.

Clinton will go down in the books as a good president. All of his moral problems will be minimized or not written about at all in history books.

I think it's too early to determine Bush's legacy. We need another 5 years or so to see the long term effects of his actions.

Yeah. If the next guy does even worse, Bush will be overlooked as the main fall guy.

Speaking of all that moral crap that happened with Clinton...that was just a bunch of crap. I really hate how the media plays out things like that.

 

[Bear6360]

I was given that advice about 3 years ago (just before the the dot com crash) ad I didn't listen.

I know I'm re-hashing old news....but you gotta make sure word gets around.

Sorry to hear about your financial loss, Kirby. Swing by sometime, and we'll have some beers.

 

[junglestylz]

Oh and btw, Howard Dean is neat, but i'd much rather see Hilary run just to have another Clinton beat out another Bush after their first term.

Fight for Right, Fight the Right

Try having her as an elected official for you and watching her and a couple of others absolutely run the state into the ground, to the point that it actually inflict a negative population growth in the ten of thousands every six months.

 

[Wadula]

bear, i consider myself being educated enough not to consider uneducated enough to take offense when you speak about uneducated hating other people.... ....everyone with me to this point?

i very barely had the chance or opportunity to have some politicaly labeled discussions with my fellow americans, but when there was one from time to time, we always were able to come along. we shared our points when contradicting and tapped our selves backs when on the same page. that Us-German-bad-relationship-stuff was more about media than real life.

Furthermore i don't think that the germans in general were against the war or participating. i think it was the current government along with their followers who created this picture. if you followed the news and speeches as well as public surveys, the population was kind of split. with the CDU, the conservative party, in power, germany shurely would have played a role in the war. as medics or supporters maybe, as a real fighting assignment is not good for our small and week armed forces.

 

[Wadula]

awcrap, know what? he did not think it's funny because it was not funny. at least not at this place in this situation.

 

[Bear6360]

bear, i consider myself being educated enough not to consider uneducated enough to take offense when you speak about uneducated hating other people.... ....everyone with me to this point?

The told me you were being nice, but I got a little lost.
I think you did NOT take offense to my statement, though.

 

[Wadula]

The told me you were being nice, but I got a little lost.
I think you did NOT take offense to my statement, though.

NO OFFENSE TAKEN!

 

[brahtw8]

i am honestly interested in this disenfranchisement of african americans, though. ive neevr heard that befroe and would love to see some sources backing up that claim

I don't have the time to go dig up the sources, but there was a government commission that investigated after the election and if you look around you can confirm what I am about to say.

Part of the problem in Florida was a unique initiate to purge the Florida voter rolls of convicted felons. Those efforts were aided by one other state, which provided a list of potential felons to Florida. That state was, drum roll please, Texas. As a result of serious errors in the record keeping of both states, thousands of individuals were included as felons who had their voting rights restored or never taken away. These people, predominantly african american, were turned away from the Florida polling places.

The one thing I will say is the current administration should be ashamed at the way it coddles Saudi Arabia. The administration admits that most of the 911 attackers were Saudi, and that the Saudi government aided them directly. This is not subject to debate. Yet, because of our close ties to the Saudi government, we do nothing. Didn't anybody get suspicious when the Saudis launched a PR campaign shortly after 911?

There are a lot of ugly things out there that most people don't want to know. I for one wish I didn't know that the current administration was negotiating with the Taliban in August of 2001 to put an oil pipeline in Afghanistan. I wish I didn't know that the only plane to fly on September 11th after the flights were shut down went around the country and whisked away Bin Laden family members to avoid questioning by the FBI and CIA, at the behest of the administration. I wish that the Bush family didn't have close ties to the Bin Laden family (Osama is the black sheep), including having been given a loan for their first oil investment. I wish Haliburton wasn't awarded an immense contract to rebuilt Iraq's oil infrastructure, after having done the same after the first Gulf War.

I wish the current administration had the balls to continue the war in Afghanistan and Northern Pakistan, where we know the Taliban is regrouping, rather than moving to Iraq as PR ploy and oil-quest/personal vendetta. Of course, we didn't want to upset our public allies in the war on terror, despite the fact that they were actually the source of the attacks.

Iraq was a terrible regime, but the war is not over. More US soldiers will die during the victory than ever did in the made-for-TV war. War does not end simply because GW decides the timing is right. It is still going on.

For all of you who support the Iraq intervention on humanitarian grounds, try to justify that stance and avoid going in to other similarly disadvantaged countries. (Let me guess, not in our national interest, which means no oil?)

But mostly, I lament the fact that the current nationalistic state and Cheney-doctrine of foreign policy will cause the country to shift farther and farther to the right as we hop from one middle-eastern country to the next over the next 30 years.

I can go toe-to-toe with anyone here on politics as well as bimmers. If you have read my posts in the past, you may want to think twice before you engage me on these issues, as I am relentless. I will track down the appropriate sources and quotations if pressed, but be my guest.

 

[Bear6360]

For all of you who support the Iraq intervention on humanitarian grounds, try to justify that stance and avoid going in to other similarly disadvantaged countries. (Let me guess, not in our national interest, which means no oil?)

Firstly, let me start with: I was wondering when the heck you were gonna get here!!
Secondly, I know that engaging you in political debate could ONLY be educating for all of us. You and BMWlover especially seem to know what's really goin' on (and Wadula). I didn't mean to exclude anyone.

I don't think I can disagree with your quote above. I think aid should be given to most of the disadvantaged countries. Things seem really fishy right now since there were not any weapons of mass destruction. GW needs a new angle....or to cover his butt. I think he's gonna end up being a "one termer."

 

[brahtw8]

Firstly, let me start with: I was wondering when the heck you were gonna get here!!
Secondly, I know that engaging you in political debate could ONLY be educating for all of us. You and BMWlover especially seem to know what's really goin' on (and Wadula). I didn't mean to exclude anyone.

I don't think I can disagree with your quote above. I think aid should be given to most of the disadvantaged countries. Things seem really fishy right now since there were not any weapons of mass destruction. GW needs a new angle....or to cover his butt. I think he's gonna end up being a "one termer."

Well, nobody sent me a PM and let me know I was needed!

I thank you for the compliments above.

I would like to say that I don't mean to dismiss contrary opinions or otherwise discourage people from posting on the subject. I got a little riled up and came out with guns blazing.

I am the first to admit that the previous administration made some poor choices. I was not pleased with the retalliatory bombing of the Afghani factory following the embassy attacks, as it smells of the same PR motivated action that I criticize the current administration for. I also was not pleased when they backed down on gays in the military (better to love those you fight with?), the war on drugs (Michael Douglas said it best "I don't know how you can fight a war against your own family", not to mention that the profit from prohibition is primarily responsible for all of the drug-related violence you see) and national healthcare.

Call me a socialist, but I think everybody deserves a crappy place to live, crappy schools, a crappy job, and minimal, basic health care. (And, BTW, I am in a high tax bracket and have very good, private health care).

I also am very disappointed in the Democratic leadership for being so spineless. The idea that the Republican party has a monopoly on patriotism is ridiculous and they should be doing more to combat the statements of some Republican politicians and pundits on the subject.

YMMV. [fake]

 

[Wadula]

me? you consider me to be a member of the politically knowing ones? thanks i feel honored, but my political knowledge, as far as domestic policy for the US is concerned, ends right at the gate when i get of flight LH 440 (the one that goes daily Frankfurt-Houston )

All i can say, admitting that reading brahtw8's made my brain hurt and i still did not understand all he said , i will learn on and on

 

[Bear6360]

Call me a socialist, but I think everybody deserves a crappy place to live, crappy schools, a crappy job, and minimal, basic health care. (And, BTW, I am in a high tax bracket and have very good, private health care).

Commie! [joke]

If we all had the same things, would we have to give up our bimmers? I don't like that idea. It bad.

 

[Bear6360]

Prohibition is a bad thing. Have we learned nothing as a nation, society, culture? I'm surprised gangs have not gone more the way of the mafia. I'm not saying legalizing drugs is good or bad, but the effects of NOT legalizing it could possibly be worse than legalizing it. At least if you legalize it, less people who want nothing to do with it will get hurt. ....that idea could go on for quite some time weighing all the variables and different situations so I'll leave it at that.

 

[Wadula]

bear, we are talking minimum requirements. that measn everybody should at least have a geo metro. it does not implement that more than a geo metro is not allowed. that would be comunizm or how ever that stuff is spelled. you got what i mean right?

 

[brahtw8]

Commie! [joke]

If we all had the same things, would we have to give up our bimmers? I don't like that idea. It bad.

I am not saying we should all have the same things. I am only saying that there should be a minimal level that you don't fall below. I certainly would not want to be at that level, and neither would you. It is actually cheaper to provide basic needs, as we pay a far greater price in emergency room health care, for when that cold turns into pneumonia, lost time from work, and prison costs.

 

[brahtw8]

Prohibition is a bad thing. Have we learned nothing as a nation, society, culture? I'm surprised gangs have not gone more the way of the mafia. I'm not saying legalizing drugs is good or bad, but the effects of NOT legalizing it could possibly be worse than legalizing it. At least if you legalize it, less people who want nothing to do with it will get hurt. ....that idea could go on for quite some time weighing all the variables and different situations so I'll leave it at that.

Yes, now you are making sense.

The liberals need to get some cojones. The anti-drug conservatives need to look back on their libertarian roots. The greatest of all rights is the right to be left alone.

I am not saying drugs are a good thing, but they are not immoral and should not be illegal. If I want to be a crackhead on my own time, that is my right. As long as I don't hurt anybody else, which is a big if and a complicated issue that cannot be dismissed outright, I have the right to do anything I want. Maintenance heroin programs work far better than having addicts robbing innocent people for their daily fix. The violence you see is a combination of the profit that can be made in an unregulated market (costs would go way down if they were legal) and the absence of opportunity in the ghetto (take the tax money and reinvest in the community).

The arguments against legalization are largely fabrication. Most people who want to do drugs are doing drugs, so you won't see a huge influx of users if you legalize. Legalization does not mean encouraging use. Take that tax money and make treatment available to all who have the courage to seek it. Drug use would go down. The gateway argument is amusing, as it conveniently ignores that alcohol and cigarettes are far more of a gateway than marijuana. It is a correlation, not a cause, which is a distinction that is too often ignored.