Comments | herewithsusan: Poorly written rant

herewithsusan

Poorly written rant

Nov 04, 2004 22:22

To be completely honest, the evening of the election I was fearful and ready to face a Kerry victory. Kerry was a man that I neither liked or supported, many of his policies came in direct contradiction with what I believed was best for this nation and the world, but despite that, I also promised myself that I would not let party lines stand ( Read more... )

Comments 21

nayette November 5 2004, 03:41:08 UTC

Hi ( ... )

pearl_jammer87 November 5 2004, 03:43:05 UTC

You have to understand though that many of these people have looked to the problems of the 2000 election and vowed to take revenge. This doesn't make the bitching any better, but at least you see where liberals are coming from.

Like you, I'm hoping this will die down. I'm tired of reading posts about people moving to Canada. I'm tired of hearing complaints in school about how the majority wanted Kerry. But, at the same time, I think you should have some patience. Some people really have strong feelings against Bush, and it might take a while for it to die down.

If this were January 20, I think it would be more of a problem.

completely off topic lillil002 November 6 2004, 15:43:18 UTC

but, if it were January 20, we would be done with high school in 6 days. just a nice little thought i wanted to add into the discussion.

popeasaurus_rex November 5 2004, 04:32:49 UTC

Yo, Ori, I didn't put up the hanger. Someone else did. I just stuck a sign to it because I thought it was funny considering there was a random hanger where the mistletato had been.

And plus, why don't you believe that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe Vs. Wade in these four years? It's obvious that Bush wants to, or at least that his base wants to, he has control over who to nominate as justices, etc. I mean why do you think that there is some point where he will stop?

I object to being criticized in this entry. Yes, I am pissed that Bush was reelected. However, you started talking to me during lunch, and I was not ridiculous in my statements, I was calm, I was respectful. The fact is that Jews skew liberal and it's just hard for you to cope with that.

Frankly, I see our country disintegrating. If you don't, so be it. I guess history will tell the tale.

herewithsusan November 5 2004, 05:08:59 UTC

They wont overturn it because it is absurd, and everyone knows it will fail, and cause public backlash. You dont need to be a genious to see that.

Bush does not want to
his base does not want to
select extremists in his base Maybe do. but who says they get their way?

Bush and his party would not allow themselves to make such a collasal error, because not only would it completly shatter his support, but also kill the legitimacy of the GOP for the next election cycle.

I expect to see very centrist judges appointed, you know why?

because Bush cares about this nation, and wants to see it united and strong, he wants to go down in the books as a good president, and in his second term he wont need to cater to his base as much. What he might do, in a realistic worst case scenario is appoint justices that will make abortion what bill clinton wanted it to be:

Safe, Legal, and Rare.

efreedenberg November 5 2004, 05:39:18 UTC

it's unfortunate that abortion numbers dropped drastically during the 8 clinton years, and they shot back up during bush's first term.

a hard reality to cope with, i'm sure. if anything, it's evidence of the failure of abstinence-only education.

herewithsusan November 6 2004, 21:31:06 UTC

thats a connection you cant make.
its like saying bush cut down more trees, hence the quality of the paper of the washington post is better.

besides that would imply that AO education was absoultly everywhere, and the vast overwhelming majority of people seeking abortions are teens, which isnt true.

popeasaurus_rex November 5 2004, 04:37:16 UTC

Oh yeah, and Bush won, of course. It sucks for most of us crazy wacky liberals and our insanely crazy wacky ideas. Maybe the people's mandate was for Bush.

But the people's mandate was for banning miscegenation and making it punishable by death.

The people's mandate was for the continuation of slavery.

The people's mandate was for segregation.

The people's mandate was for all kinds of terrible things. And in many of our opinions, it still is. Maybe the moral constructs used to get rid of these laws are just as phony as the Christian Right morality today, but I'd rather opt for more individual rights than less any day.

ptiteamericaine November 5 2004, 17:08:43 UTC

agreed. crazy wacky liberals are those that have defined our country's freedoms as they are known today: women's suffrage, civil rights... rights we take for granted today were once considered radical in the eyes of conservatives. but only change can lead to progress!

herewithsusan November 6 2004, 00:31:58 UTC

conservatives are not all, simpleton bumpkins from the south as you imagine.

These measures were passed by majority vote and the will and power of the people. For as many people struggeling against civil rights there were more fighting for it. etc.

fine, let's wait and see ptiteamericaine November 5 2004, 17:20:49 UTC

You're right, my personal freedoms have not been challenged with Bush as President. But then if that's your case in point, you misunderstand me, and probably many Democrats/liberals/"crazies." Of course my freedoms have not been squashed! Why would they be? I live in Potomac. My dad can afford to send his kids to private school, and if not, buy a BMW anyway. My mom wears Burberry. But this isn't about MY needs, or the needs of most of your liberal friends and acquaintances at JDS, or hell, at top private institutions like Emory. It's about the people who don't have as much. It's about bringing an end to social Darwinism ( ... )

Re: fine, let's wait and see herewithsusan November 6 2004, 02:52:39 UTC

do you actually think you care MORE?

because if you do, that is one of the most ignorant, and self absorbed statements one could make.

I care just as much you about helping others, i just feel there are more effective ways to do it than government handouts(and lets not spark a debate about it now). I beleive it will be a beautiful day in America, where poverty becomes truly rare.

Re: fine, let's wait and see ptiteamericaine November 6 2004, 03:04:39 UTC

well, calling them handouts is exactly the social darwinism that i'm referring to. and maybe i don't care more than YOU, but a lot of republicans i've talked to seriously think that people just need to "manage on their own" if they don't have healthcare or anyting else. u know amanda? like, the republican in your grade? she told me in tenth grade that she's republican because she doesn't see why she should have to give up her hard earned money to help people that are too lazy to get a job. i think that's selfish. people aren't poor because they're too lazy to get a job.

but ok. i'm not saying YOU don't care. so, please, STOP TAKING EVERYTHING AS A FUCKING INSULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I DON'T HATE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: fine, let's wait and see herewithsusan November 6 2004, 03:46:20 UTC

I bet you if you asked people if they were willing to give up their right to vote for the year, and in return not be taxed, the overwhelming majority would give up their voting rights. You know why ( ... )

Thread 10