Kerry's concession

[toms]

i'm not sure why all the congratulation... what did you expect him to do? rant or call bush an idiot (which he probably is)....

I don't think there has EVER been a concession speech that wasn't gracious... whether they really meant it or not.

 

On a slightly different note, what do you guys think about unifying the nation?

Both bush and kerry referenced unifying the nation in their speeches, and you would have to admit that the nation is as divided as it has been for years. Republican states voted more republican than last time, democrat states voted more democrat, and swing states were about as evenly divided as before.

 

Not only that, but half the nation seems to be voting on the basis of religion or personal morals, the other on the basis of the economy and politics.

 

Do you think bush CAN unite the nation at all?

Do you think he should, or does the fact he won mean he has a mandate to be even more hardline republican (as cheny obviously wants?)

Could Kerry have done any better?

Are you worried that (apart from about 2 issues, and a few minor differences of emphasis) you have two parties and candidates that are pretty much identical (even in the same secret club at the same university), yet the nation seems split?

 

Any thoughts....

[ronbrothers]

Originally posted by kipperthefrog

it shows what kind of person he is! cute aint he?

 

I don't get it. How many of us have never seen or used the finger?

[Spider AL]

I don't get it. How many of us have never seen or used the finger?

Many of us should NOT be elected to the office of President of the US.

 

See, this is the difference between some of us and some of us. Some of us believe we should elect an exemplar to leadership status, someone who is BETTER than us, who can do everything that leadership entails better than we can, someone who can make the right decisions based on logic and reason and maturity.

 

Apparently though, the majority of Americans want to be led by someone who is exactly the same as they are.

[ronbrothers]

Originally posted by toms

i'm not sure why all the congratulation... what did you expect him to do? rant or call bush an idiot (which he probably is)....

I don't think there has EVER been a concession speech that wasn't gracious... whether they really meant it or not.

 

He out classed Al Gore, Jr. Gore was bitter and still is. I blame the division on him. Why? Because he as a candidate for president was in a leadership position. Bush and Kerry may never agree on ideals, but their speeches at least set the tone that it is time to bring the two sides back together.

 

Ultimately, we are all Americans. As a Conservative, I don't believe Liberals love their children or spouses any less. I believe they want to provide for their families. Put clothes on their backs, food on the table and a roof over their heads. We want to protect our families and better ourselves. We simply disagree, sometimes emphatically, on how to get there.

[ronbrothers]

Originally posted by Spider AL

Many of us should NOT be elected to the office of President of the US.

 

See, this is the difference between some of us and some of us. Some of us believe we should elect an exemplar to leadership status, someone who is BETTER than us, who can do everything that leadership entails better than we can, someone who can make the right decisions based on logic and reason and maturity.

 

Apparently though, the majority of Americans want to be led by someone who is exactly the same as they are.

 

I agree completely! There is no place in this country for elites. Now whether or not some of us would be qualified to be in a leadership position is another story.

[Vagabond]

Originally posted by ronbrothers

I don't get it. How many of us have never seen or used the finger?

 

First of all, most of us are not The President of the United States of America - I expect better judgment from the president.

 

Second of all, for someone who claims to be a born again Christian, he sure doesn't seem very "moral" to me. I give people the finger all the time, but I also don't go around representing the religious right. As W would say, this is known as, hy-poc-ri-sy.

[Kurgan]

It's not that, it's just that public figures are expected to carry themselves with more dignity and diplomacy.

 

That's why you get videos of politicans picking their noses or throwing punches at protesters, or swearing and it's big news. These guys are on camera all the time and they're not some rockstar, they're supposed to be representing us to the world, and most of them come from wealthy, supposedly refined backgrounds (then again they can also come from the spoiled rich).

[Vagabond]

Originally posted by ronbrothers

I agree completely! There is no place in this country for elites. Now whether or not some of us would be qualified to be in a leadership position is another story.

 

Um, I don't think that's what he was saying. What I got from his message is this:

 

Most of us don't want to elect some "regular guy" to office - someone like the guy next door. We want to elect someome much smarter than we are, who has the capacity to make the correct choices, so that we can focus on living our lives. If such a person is described as "elite", then so be it.

 

It's not different than a hiring manager. Given two candidates for a position you're trying to fill, do you hire the guy with the exemplary GPA and IQ, or do you hire the average guy with a GPA and IQ just like yours? I know I'd want the best qualified guy working for my company. Electing a president is no different. However, it would seem that a majority of the people in this country would be poor hiring managers.

[Kurgan]

Originally posted by ronbrothers

I agree completely! There is no place in this country for elites. Now whether or not some of us would be qualified to be in a leadership position is another story.

 

That's an interesting question.

 

So is Bush flipping the bird a good thing, because he's a "man of the people" or is it a bad thing because he's "not acting the part (of a gentleman leader & role model)"?

 

I tend to side with the latter, since it's not just his public that sees what his does, but the whole world (especially the case with the US president).

[Spider AL]

Um, I don't think that's what he was saying.

Damn right Vagabond, that certainly wasn't what I was saying. What I was saying was perfectly clear, and YOU got it, but I shouldn't be surprised that certain elements did not.

 

What I was saying was this:

 

You should elect someone better than yourself. You should elect the BEST.

 

Instead, the majority of Americans chose to elect someone who they thought was just like them. And in essence, is EXACTLY like them. Woe unto the world.

[stingerhs]

Originally posted by Vagabond

First of all, most of us are not The President of the United States of America - I expect better judgment from the president.

 

Second of all, for someone who claims to be a born again Christian, he sure doesn't seem very "moral" to me. I give people the finger all the time, but I also don't go around representing the religious right. As W would say, this is known as, hy-poc-ri-sy.

ok, so as a christain, i am no longer human and make mistakes???

 

oh, no, wait, you view all christians as these "infallible saints", right??? or is it just that you think that bush giving the finger makes him any less of this view you have of christians???

 

i make mistakes and sin all the time, but it does NOT disqualify me from being a christain, and the same applies to the president. and it does not make us hypocrites.

[ET Warrior]

Originally posted by stingerhs

ok, so as a christain, i am no longer human and make mistakes???

 

That's not what he's saying atall. What he is saying is that not ONLY is George Bush the leader of America, he's also trying to present himself as a very moral and religious leader-esque fellow.

 

Would you respect when your pastor told you to live thy nabor if you saw him giving his neighbor the finger the day before?

[stingerhs]

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Would you respect when your pastor told you to live thy nabor if you saw him giving his neighbor the finger the day before?

ahh, the age old what-if. very well. to be honest, i would be quite shocked because it is extremely hard for me to even imagine him doing such a thing. however, that would not make me feel any less of him. as i stated earlier, all christians are still human. we all make mistakes, so it does not make us any less of christians, nor disqualify us from being anything. it may disqualify me in your eyes by cussing you out right now, but it still wouldn't disqualify me in God's eyes.

[ET Warrior]

So you wouldn't find it hypocritical for your pastor to flip off his neighbor and then tell YOU to love your neighbor?

 

 

Yours and my definition of hypocracy must be out of synch.

[Kurgan]

Originally posted by Dave Grohl

What state do you live in:mad:

 

I saw the speech. It was pretty good. Edwards got a tad carried away with the whole Iraq thing though. And people were clapping a lot.

 

Iowa.

[Vagabond]

Originally posted by stingerhs

...ok, so as a christain, i am no longer human and make mistakes...

 

Sure you can make mistakes. Are you Human? Hmmm...

 

Anyway, the point is:

 

1. As was already pointed out to you, he goes around courting the religious right, claiming to be so moral, and then he makes a very conscious choice to flip off the camera. This isn't him stubbing his toe, and making an involuntary exclamation, of which I would be more forgiving. No, he decided to flip off the camera and then did it. This demonstrates that neither is he moral, but that he willingly chose to behave in an immoral way. This was no mistake - it was a conscious choice.

 

2. As President of the United States, he is expected to demonstrate a level professionalism and diplomacy appropriate to such a visible and important position. Instead, he's shown that he doesn't have the common sense to understand that, unless he is behind his bedroom door with his wife, he is always on the job and in the public eye. He's just such a superb choice in every aspect of the word

[toms]

it has long been a documented fact that people in europe like to elect people they feel are smarter than them, but people in the US like to elect people they feel are "average joes".

 

Not sure which is the best approach really, but i'd tend towards the smarter ones myself. In general i feel that politicians should be regular people who understand and represent the people, but when they are all a political elite, i don't see the point in picking the more stupid of the two political elite just because tehy seem more average.

 

Its odd that they are both rich, both nothing like the average joe, both went to the same uni (though one got in on merit, one on donations), were even both members of the same society at uni...

but somehow bush managed to convince blue collar america that he was one of them... and that kerry spoke french (which appears to have been a sign of weakness )

[Hiroki]

You guys are making far too big of a deal out of this. You'll find any reason to bash the man. If Clinton did it, nobody would say a word.

 

Honestly, he didn't know he was on camera, and was joking around with the people there. If he did this in public, then it would be bad, but otherwise.

[Vagabond]

Originally posted by Hiroki

You guys are making far too big of a deal out of this. You'll find any reason to bash the man. If Clinton did it, nobody would say a word.

 

Honestly, he didn't know he was on camera, and was joking around with the people there. If he did this in public, then it would be bad, but otherwise.

 

Ya, sure. I bet The Pope flips people off behind closed doors too

[Hiroki]

Well, he never said he was a saint. Honestly, there is a difference in being moral, and being "holy". I doubt the Pope can even flip somebody off INSIDE his own bedroom. Which considering he is the Pope, is proper.

 

Bush is just a man, however. He is the president, but he is not the friggen Pope still. Comparing them is absurd. The president is much like a good hearted business man. He presents a good clean always proper image to the public, and over all, is a good person. But sure, when he thinks he isn't in the public eye, he might be frustrated and do things we all have done before.

[Spider AL]

Listen to yourself Hiroki, you're equating the president of the United States to an "average joe".

 

The president has MORE POWER than the pope. Well, his advisors do. It is in the nature of leaders that they should observe a higher standard of behaviour than those they lead, because they must lead by example to their own people, and they must make a good impression on the world. And the president of the US is arguably the most powerful leader on the planet.

 

And remembering all this, to whom have you given the greatest power in the world?

 

You haven't elected a great strategist, a great thinker, a great orator, a great humanitarian, no, you've elected a man who flips off the camera when it's not turned on. You've elected a fundamentalist. You've elected a neo-conservative mouthpiece. You've elected the goofy rich kid whose parents are friendly with the school board.

 

It's beyond me, it really is.

[Vagabond]

I hear you, Spider AL. I'm just baffled at how people could give this guy another 4 years in office. Aside from Afghanistan, I can't list one other thing that I agree with that he did. Not one.

 

My only guess is that Republicans keep intentionally underfunding education to dumb down the electorate, so that the voters won't be smart enough to see that the emperor has no clothes. Other than that, Bush's reelection is just exasperatingly illogical.

 

And today he says something along the lines of, "We need to start the healing process and unite the country", and then in the same breath he says, "This election [51%-48%] has given me a mandate with political capital, and I intend to spend that capital. To do that, I'm going to need everyone's support."

 

Translation: "Now that we Republicans control the congress by a bigger majority, and I'm in the White House, everyone needs to change their positions to be closer to what we Republicans believe, because we're going to do whatever we want anyway. You're either with us or against us."

 

I'll say it again, W is an arrogant little dummy, and I can't stand him.

[Hiroki]

You know, I hate you two. Geez. Let me go over this once again.

 

Just because he has "more power" doesn't mean he has to be perfect. So he flipped off a camera that was not running. Who cares? It doesn't show he is a bad leader. If he flipped it off in front of America when it was running, it would've have shown he had poor taste, and probably was unfit to lead.

 

You liberals wanted Clinton to remain in even after he broke his marital vows several times, but Bush flips off an inactive camera and DAMN, we better get him out of there. Grow up.

 

Don't judge a man on something so trivial. Your bias nature seeps through your every word.

[Spider AL]

You know, I hate you two.

Really? Well I hate anyone who allows themself to be yanked around by a neo-conservative puppeteer.

 

Just because he has "more power" doesn't mean he has to be perfect.

WHAT? The job with the most power should be given to the best person! Not joe schmo, the guy you'd get on with in your local bar! Don't you think people should exhibit desirable traits before they're given a position of responsibility? Or are you suspicious of anyone who exhibits sophistication?

 

You liberals wanted Clinton to remain in even after he broke his marital vows several times,

Who the hell are you calling a liberal? And who said anything about Clinton? People liked Clinton because he was good for the American economy and worked tirelessly for world peace, in the middle east, in northern ireland where he made big changes. But as soon as he was caught lying to his PEOPLE, he should have been SACKED. Now Bush and his government have been caught lying, you people have given him MORE power, MORE of a mandate.

 

Who cares? It doesn't show he is a bad leader. If he flipped it off in front of America when it was running, it would've have shown he had poor taste, and probably was unfit to lead.

It shows that he's a bit of a twit. He's about to speak on serious issues to his nation, he has a responsibility to care. What does he do? Does he compose himself and review his speech? Does he check details with his aides? No. He flips off the camera and gurns as he chuckles. That's not a leader, it's a twit. I wouldn't give such a twit a job as a NEWS READER.

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by Hiroki

Just because he has "more power" doesn't mean he has to be perfect.

 

But he should strive for it a bit more than the average joe. Indeed, he should attempt to be a paragon of virtue.

 

Originally posted by Hiroki

So he flipped off a camera that was not running. Who cares? It doesn't show he is a bad leader.

 

Apparently it was running. Wouldn't his lack of attention to details such as this bring into question his qualifications? Or maybe he just didn't care. Playing around is okay, but I'd question his "victory salute" comment that was associated with it. Was he saluting the American public?

 

Originally posted by Hiroki

If he flipped it off in front of America when it was running, it would've have shown he had poor taste, and probably was unfit to lead.

 

Then you're in agreement with Spider and Vagabond?

 

Originally posted by Hiroki

You liberals wanted Clinton to remain in even after he broke his marital vows several times, but Bush flips off an inactive camera and DAMN, we better get him out of there. Grow up.

 

No, half the American public wants Bush out of office because he violated their trust by deceiving them into believing that Saddam was the equivalent of Al Qaeda, then invaded Iraq rather than capture/kill Bin Laden.

 

Personally, his jocular finger-flip actually increased my regard for the guy. I recognize that he's only playing around and that there's a "good" side Bush.

 

Originally posted by Hiroki

Don't judge a man on something so trivial. Your bias nature seeps through your every word.

 

Its good that there's no bias in your own words then.

 

One thing this election has proven is that there is a little over half of the American public that is influenced by superstition and belief rather than logic and reason. This is why we have a workforce that is technically and scientifically deficient and why high school kids in the U.S. place below the rest of the Western (and much of the Eastern) world in Science. The general ignorance of the American populace will lead to its downfall if not checked. The European Union will surpass us as the world leader, as may Japan and even China.

 

I can only hope that Bush doesn't screw it up for the next Republican who might actually be worth voting for. But by then, all the followers that currently refuse to consider that they might actually be misled (or vote only because they think a single person can influence grandiose issues like abortion or gay marriage) will be burnt by the mismanagement of the nation and the ever increasing death toll on our sons, brothers and fathers in Iraq as well as the fact that Bush & co. have to date failed to deliver on their claim to "make America safer" from terrorism. If anything, its more dangerous. AssWipes like Bin Laden need idiots like Bush to encourage increased membership in their terrorist organizations.

 

To all those pundits of Bush... his followers... be careful what you wish for.