The most important paragraph of Bush's State of the Union Speech

bmulligan

bmulligan

CAGiversary!
Feedback
25 (100%)
"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace. " -George W. Bush, President of the United States, Feb 2nd, 2005

Get the above statement through your thick, numb skulls - George Bush may be a tool, a fool, an idiot, a puppet, or many other schoolyard names you dems like to wash him with, but he understands the principle better than most, except for people from New Hapmshire, or maybe Patrick Henry.
And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "

Then the piece de resistance:

"The terrorists and insurgents are violently opposed to democracy, and will continue to attack it. Yet the terrorists' most powerful myth is being destroyed. The whole world is seeing that the car bombers and assassins are not only fighting coalition forces, they are trying to destroy the hopes of Iraqis, expressed in free elections. And the whole world now knows that a small group of extremists will not overturn the will of the Iraqi people."

I don't think he's ever said this so declaritively and concisely. Bravo ! I've waited for this for so long. Finally - eat shit Teddy, you traitorous, drunken, fat bastard!

Then the send-off:

"...The abolition of slavery was only a dream until it was fulfilled. The liberation of Europe from fascism was only a dream until it was achieved. The fall of imperial communism was only a dream until, one day, it was accomplished. Our generation has dreams of its own, and we also go forward with confidence. The road of Providence is uneven and unpredictable, yet we know where it leads: It leads to freedom. "

Beautiful. :cry:
 
[quote name='bmulligan']"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace. " -George W. Bush, President of the United States, Feb 2nd, 2005

Get the above statement through your thick, numb skulls - George Bush may be a tool, a fool, an idiot, a puppet, or many other schoolyard names you dems like to wash him with, but he understands the principle better than most, except for people from New Hapmshire, or maybe Patrick Henry.
And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "

Then the piece de resistance:

"The terrorists and insurgents are violently opposed to democracy, and will continue to attack it. Yet the terrorists' most powerful myth is being destroyed. The whole world is seeing that the car bombers and assassins are not only fighting coalition forces, they are trying to destroy the hopes of Iraqis, expressed in free elections. And the whole world now knows that a small group of extremists will not overturn the will of the Iraqi people."

I don't think he's ever said this so declaritively and concisely. Bravo ! I've waited for this for so long. Finally - eat shit Teddy, you traitorous, drunken, fat bastard!

Then the send-off:

"...The abolition of slavery was only a dream until it was fulfilled. The liberation of Europe from fascism was only a dream until it was achieved. The fall of imperial communism was only a dream until, one day, it was accomplished. Our generation has dreams of its own, and we also go forward with confidence. The road of Providence is uneven and unpredictable, yet we know where it leads: It leads to freedom. "

Beautiful. :cry:[/quote]

I agree, the speech was awesome. He really said things in a way that even the dems were enthusiastic for a good portion of the program. I really hope that Bush can reach out to Reid, Clinton, Kerry, Edwards and Pelosi etc. and get members of congress to do the same thing. I really think that the next four years could be a great time for America and the world.
 
You truly are dreaming right? I would be more enthusiastic about all this if they truly stood for what they say. Look at Iran now and back in 1953, I think that example stands for itself.
MAYBE if we left Iran alone and didn't target Sadaam for Bush's postskirmish Afghanistan popularity wave or if we did we'd back up the claims but it goes from him looking for Nukes, then to WMD's and now to "Weapons Of Mass Murder". Seriously if his case was proven perhaps I might be a bit more supportive. I don't know if I'd necessarily believe they were instituting real Democracy in Iraq or not but I wouldn't be as mad as I am now. Although I have to say I was really pissed off with Bush showing that mother and everything. It's too bad her son truly didn't die protecting the U.S. IMO.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace. " -George W. Bush, President of the United States, Feb 2nd, 2005

Get the above statement through your thick, numb skulls - George Bush may be a tool, a fool, an idiot, a puppet, or many other schoolyard names you dems like to wash him with, but he understands the principle better than most, except for people from New Hapmshire, or maybe Patrick Henry. [/quote]

So what are we doing when we're dragging Iraqis out of their homes in the middle of the night, creating checkpoint after checkpoint in cities, are starting to look into i.d. tags for the Iraqis, arresting Iraqis with no probable cause, denying legal rights to detainees, and holding an election during an occupation which is illegal? Yeah, we're really giving the Iraqis control of their own lives. :roll:

[quote name='bmulligan']And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "[/quote]

That's good, because Bush sure hasn't done crap with the Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts so far.

[quote name='bmulligan']Then the piece de resistance:

"The terrorists and insurgents are violently opposed to democracy, and will continue to attack it. Yet the terrorists' most powerful myth is being destroyed. The whole world is seeing that the car bombers and assassins are not only fighting coalition forces, they are trying to destroy the hopes of Iraqis, expressed in free elections. And the whole world now knows that a small group of extremists will not overturn the will of the Iraqi people."

I don't think he's ever said this so declaritively and concisely. Bravo ! I've waited for this for so long. Finally - eat shit Teddy, you traitorous, drunken, fat bastard![/quote]

No, they're violently opposed to the entire occupation. Who needs Saddam when you got the U.S. doing the torturing, killings, rapings, etc?

[quote name='bmulligan']Then the send-off:

"...The abolition of slavery was only a dream until it was fulfilled. The liberation of Europe from fascism was only a dream until it was achieved. The fall of imperial communism was only a dream until, one day, it was accomplished. Our generation has dreams of its own, and we also go forward with confidence. The road of Providence is uneven and unpredictable, yet we know where it leads: It leads to freedom. "

Beautiful. :cry:[/quote]

Not that he wrote any of this himself. Or accomplished any of this himself.

It's scary just how brain-washed half of America really is.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace. " -George W. Bush, President of the United States, Feb 2nd, 2005

Get the above statement through your thick, numb skulls - George Bush may be a tool, a fool, an idiot, a puppet, or many other schoolyard names you dems like to wash him with, but he understands the principle better than most, except for people from New Hapmshire, or maybe Patrick Henry.
And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "

Then the piece de resistance:

"The terrorists and insurgents are violently opposed to democracy, and will continue to attack it. Yet the terrorists' most powerful myth is being destroyed. The whole world is seeing that the car bombers and assassins are not only fighting coalition forces, they are trying to destroy the hopes of Iraqis, expressed in free elections. And the whole world now knows that a small group of extremists will not overturn the will of the Iraqi people."

I don't think he's ever said this so declaritively and concisely. Bravo ! I've waited for this for so long. Finally - eat shit Teddy, you traitorous, drunken, fat bastard!

Then the send-off:

"...The abolition of slavery was only a dream until it was fulfilled. The liberation of Europe from fascism was only a dream until it was achieved. The fall of imperial communism was only a dream until, one day, it was accomplished. Our generation has dreams of its own, and we also go forward with confidence. The road of Providence is uneven and unpredictable, yet we know where it leads: It leads to freedom. "

Beautiful. :cry:[/quote]

Bravo. For such a radical fundamentalist and inveterate liar or screw-up (depending on what you believe), he has pretty good speech writers.
 
For some reason we have this belief that we should reproduce our type of government all over the world. There was another nation that tried this about 50 years ago. They wanted to end poverty and oppression, seems altruistic enough doesn't it? But the USSR's desired goal was communism and we opposed that. We fought them because we thought it was evil and oppressive.

For some reason we all believe that democracy is the best government for every nation on earth. Some people don't want democracy and we shouldn't force it on them. The ethnocentrism from our country just gets to be sickening at time.

We think we're always right and that we're always on the right side. There's the old saying that goes "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Believe me, I'm in no way legitimizing what the rebels in Iraq are doing but we have to put it into perspective. This country was built by rebels. Can you imagine what it would be like if the events of 228 years ago happened today?
 
[quote name='camoor']Bravo. For such a radical fundamentalist and inveterate liar or screw-up (depending on what you believe), he has pretty good speech writers.[/quote]

Speech writers being the key phrase here. This was put into his speech I believe in response too some comments he made earlier about "spreading freedom throughout the world", which when you think about it is in direct contradiction with "The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else".
 
[quote name='bmulligan']"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace. " -George W. Bush, President of the United States, Feb 2nd, 2005[/quote]
This doesn't even make any sense. What he just said was that he has no intention of imposing 'our form of government' (AKA Democracy) on anyone else, as long as they're a democracy. Seriously, reread the above section and think about it for a second. He said two directly opposing things within the same paragraph.

Definitely good speechwriters to make such as inconsistent speech and still have it come out sounding decent.
 
[quote name='Drocket'][quote name='bmulligan']"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens, and reflect their own cultures. And because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace. " -George W. Bush, President of the United States, Feb 2nd, 2005[/quote]
This doesn't even make any sense. What he just said was that he has no intention of imposing 'our form of government' (AKA Democracy) on anyone else, as long as they're a democracy. Seriously, reread the above section and think about it for a second. He said two directly opposing things within the same paragraph.

Definitely good speechwriters to make such as inconsistent speech and still have it come out sounding decent.[/quote]

:lol: I actually thought that was what I heard when I listened to the speech as well. But then I listened to the rebroadcast. He says that we have no right to impose our form of government. He then describes our enemies. He then says our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations (not democracy), with the governments answering to the citizens (not exclusive to a democracy), while reflecting their own culture. Here's where it really becomes vague though (and like I said, I totally see your point). He then says, "... because democracies respect their own people and their neighbors, the advance of freedom will lead to peace." It sounds like we are instituting said democracy on them. But the interim government of Iraq actually set up how things would initially would be and they still have yet to draw up a constitution outlining the specifics. But I think that last sentence was just saying that Bush approves of the form their government is taking, because yadda yadda yadda.

Crap. I'm going to be late for class. And I haven't done my hw again! Where did the time go...
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']For some reason we have this belief that we should reproduce our type of government all over the world. There was another nation that tried this about 50 years ago. They wanted to end poverty and oppression, seems altruistic enough doesn't it? But the USSR's desired goal was communism and we opposed that. We fought them because we thought it was evil and oppressive.

For some reason we all believe that democracy is the best government for every nation on earth. Some people don't want democracy and we shouldn't force it on them. The ethnocentrism from our country just gets to be sickening at time.

We think we're always right and that we're always on the right side. There's the old saying that goes "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Believe me, I'm in no way legitimizing what the rebels in Iraq are doing but we have to put it into perspective. This country was built by rebels. Can you imagine what it would be like if the events of 228 years ago happened today?[/quote]

To compare supporting democracy and the Soviet Union's spreading of communism is insane. How many communist countries have let their people choose their own leaders and make their own laws? Zero.

We haven't forced democracy on anyone, only helped those who wanted it have the means to achieve it where we could. And there are democracies in every part of the world in countries with majorities in every major religion, a pretty strong indicator for universal God-given values and rights, as our founders believed.
 
[quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='RedvsBlue']For some reason we have this belief that we should reproduce our type of government all over the world. There was another nation that tried this about 50 years ago. They wanted to end poverty and oppression, seems altruistic enough doesn't it? But the USSR's desired goal was communism and we opposed that. We fought them because we thought it was evil and oppressive.

For some reason we all believe that democracy is the best government for every nation on earth. Some people don't want democracy and we shouldn't force it on them. The ethnocentrism from our country just gets to be sickening at time.

We think we're always right and that we're always on the right side. There's the old saying that goes "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Believe me, I'm in no way legitimizing what the rebels in Iraq are doing but we have to put it into perspective. This country was built by rebels. Can you imagine what it would be like if the events of 228 years ago happened today?[/quote]

To compare supporting democracy and the Soviet Union's spreading of communism is insane. How many communist countries have let their people choose their own leaders and make their own laws? Zero.[/quote]

Why is it insane? Also as far as letting people choose their leaders. How many people do it in America? The presidential elections (which always have the highest voter turnout) rarely go above 65% voter turnout. That means 35% are sitting around doing nothing about their country. This isn't even getting into the whole aspect of money and politics. Who's the last president elected that was really just Joe Nobody? The closest could be considered Bill Clinton because he started out as more or less middle class. Other than that, for the most part, all of our presidents have been rich elites (from both parties).

[quote name='elprincipe']We haven't forced democracy on anyone, only helped those who wanted it have the means to achieve it where we could. And there are democracies in every part of the world in countries with majorities in every major religion, a pretty strong indicator for universal God-given values and rights, as our founders believed.[/quote]

We haven't forced democracy on anyone? So what options did we really give Afghanistan and Iraq? From the beginning everyone said that we went into those countries to liberate them and to bring democracy to the middle east. Everyone has been making a big deal about how if we can bring democracy to the middle east that it would make the other nations take note.

Why haven't we helped other nations that are desiring to be free? What about the slaughtering that took place in Sudan? Did we do anything about that? Not really. There's plenty of other instances of countries that are desiring to have a different government but we aren't going around to every single one of those nations are we?

Now don't get me wrong, I love this country and our form of government. The one thing I am upset about though is that we feel the need to turn all nations into democracies throughout the world. The decision for a country to change their government must come from within. Not from the west.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='RedvsBlue']For some reason we have this belief that we should reproduce our type of government all over the world. There was another nation that tried this about 50 years ago. They wanted to end poverty and oppression, seems altruistic enough doesn't it? But the USSR's desired goal was communism and we opposed that. We fought them because we thought it was evil and oppressive.

For some reason we all believe that democracy is the best government for every nation on earth. Some people don't want democracy and we shouldn't force it on them. The ethnocentrism from our country just gets to be sickening at time.

We think we're always right and that we're always on the right side. There's the old saying that goes "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Believe me, I'm in no way legitimizing what the rebels in Iraq are doing but we have to put it into perspective. This country was built by rebels. Can you imagine what it would be like if the events of 228 years ago happened today?[/quote]

To compare supporting democracy and the Soviet Union's spreading of communism is insane. How many communist countries have let their people choose their own leaders and make their own laws? Zero.[/quote]

Why is it insane? Also as far as letting people choose their leaders. How many people do it in America? The presidential elections (which always have the highest voter turnout) rarely go above 65% voter turnout. That means 35% are sitting around doing nothing about their country. This isn't even getting into the whole aspect of money and politics. Who's the last president elected that was really just Joe Nobody? The closest could be considered Bill Clinton because he started out as more or less middle class. Other than that, for the most part, all of our presidents have been rich elites (from both parties).

[quote name='elprincipe']We haven't forced democracy on anyone, only helped those who wanted it have the means to achieve it where we could. And there are democracies in every part of the world in countries with majorities in every major religion, a pretty strong indicator for universal God-given values and rights, as our founders believed.[/quote]

We haven't forced democracy on anyone? So what options did we really give Afghanistan and Iraq? From the beginning everyone said that we went into those countries to liberate them and to bring democracy to the middle east. Everyone has been making a big deal about how if we can bring democracy to the middle east that it would make the other nations take note.

Why haven't we helped other nations that are desiring to be free? What about the slaughtering that took place in Sudan? Did we do anything about that? Not really. There's plenty of other instances of countries that are desiring to have a different government but we aren't going around to every single one of those nations are we?

Now don't get me wrong, I love this country and our form of government. The one thing I am upset about though is that we feel the need to turn all nations into democracies throughout the world. The decision for a country to change their government must come from within. Not from the west.[/quote]

Good points.

If democracy truly is the best governmental system in the world, we need to get off our asses, get the deficit under control, halt our pathetic dependence on the teat of oil, and stop intruding on the rights of the discriminated-minority-du-jour. There is something to be said for "leading by example"

Don't forget Lincoln when talking about Presidents who started in humble beginnings. He was one of the best...
 
[quote name='camoor'][quote name='RedvsBlue'][quote name='elprincipe'][quote name='RedvsBlue']For some reason we have this belief that we should reproduce our type of government all over the world. There was another nation that tried this about 50 years ago. They wanted to end poverty and oppression, seems altruistic enough doesn't it? But the USSR's desired goal was communism and we opposed that. We fought them because we thought it was evil and oppressive.

For some reason we all believe that democracy is the best government for every nation on earth. Some people don't want democracy and we shouldn't force it on them. The ethnocentrism from our country just gets to be sickening at time.

We think we're always right and that we're always on the right side. There's the old saying that goes "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Believe me, I'm in no way legitimizing what the rebels in Iraq are doing but we have to put it into perspective. This country was built by rebels. Can you imagine what it would be like if the events of 228 years ago happened today?[/quote]

To compare supporting democracy and the Soviet Union's spreading of communism is insane. How many communist countries have let their people choose their own leaders and make their own laws? Zero.[/quote]

Why is it insane? Also as far as letting people choose their leaders. How many people do it in America? The presidential elections (which always have the highest voter turnout) rarely go above 65% voter turnout. That means 35% are sitting around doing nothing about their country. This isn't even getting into the whole aspect of money and politics. Who's the last president elected that was really just Joe Nobody? The closest could be considered Bill Clinton because he started out as more or less middle class. Other than that, for the most part, all of our presidents have been rich elites (from both parties).

[quote name='elprincipe']We haven't forced democracy on anyone, only helped those who wanted it have the means to achieve it where we could. And there are democracies in every part of the world in countries with majorities in every major religion, a pretty strong indicator for universal God-given values and rights, as our founders believed.[/quote]

We haven't forced democracy on anyone? So what options did we really give Afghanistan and Iraq? From the beginning everyone said that we went into those countries to liberate them and to bring democracy to the middle east. Everyone has been making a big deal about how if we can bring democracy to the middle east that it would make the other nations take note.

Why haven't we helped other nations that are desiring to be free? What about the slaughtering that took place in Sudan? Did we do anything about that? Not really. There's plenty of other instances of countries that are desiring to have a different government but we aren't going around to every single one of those nations are we?

Now don't get me wrong, I love this country and our form of government. The one thing I am upset about though is that we feel the need to turn all nations into democracies throughout the world. The decision for a country to change their government must come from within. Not from the west.[/quote]

Good points.

If democracy truly is the best governmental system in the world, we need to get off our asses, get the deficit under control, halt our pathetic dependence on the teat of oil, and stop intruding on the rights of the discriminated-minority-du-jour. There is something to be said for "leading by example"

Don't forget Lincoln when talking about Presidents who started in humble beginnings. He was one of the best...[/quote]

RvB, you argue regarding those who don't exercise their freedoms (non-voters). That is their choice, and they have made their voice known by not voting - they don't want to voice. And when they do that, they have no right to later complain. They didn't do something when they had the chance. They gave up that right, IMO. I just get sick of people complaining who don't try to affect change during the appointed time.

And as you can probably see in my reply to Drocket, I don't see that we have forced anything on anyone. We opened the gates of freedom and they have started to make choices. Things aren't etched in stone yet. Besides, there were groups in Iraq who were covertly working with the U.S. Government for years, and it was their agenda to make a free and democratic Iraq before anyone in this country even made the slightest attempt. Ahmed Chalabi was one of them (too bad we trusted him and he turned out to be dirty).

But I do agree with you about some things. You mentioned the Sudan. You speak in past tense. It is still going on though. No one seems to care no one is doing anything!:

The US has said that genocide is being committed and has again started to lobby for a UN resolution threatening sanctions against Sudan, it says. Previous attempts to threaten sanctions have been blocked by China, which has oil interests in Sudan, and Russia, which has sold arms to the government, according to lobby group Human Rights Watch.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4202599.stm

That is crap! Human life vs. money?!? What did we learn from Rwanda? That the Tutsis and Hutus offered no economical benefit to us, so we left them to die? That's what it seems to me. Why do they need to have an investigation to see if genocide took place? Genocide seems like a pretty cut and dry situation to me...anyway...

And camoor, I included your quote because I agree with you, at least on good old President Lincoln. Can you imagine where we'd be without him?
 
[quote name='"bmulligan"']"And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:[/b]

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "

You're kidding, right? If Bush is such a great president, why is his approval rating down to 43%? He will end up destroying the Republican party.
 
[quote name='"coffman"'][quote name='bmulligan']"And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:[/b]

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "

You're kidding, right? If Bush is such a great president, why is his approval rating down to 43%? He will end up destroying the Republican party.[/quote]

One can only hope :D. It would never happen, but it would be nice to see a split in the party, creating two. It could be like canada was for about 12 years or so, two conservative parties (tories and alliance) who prevented each other from gaining enough votes to actually win. Then again the liberal party (moderate) still tended to grab over 50% of the vote, and the real liberal party (the ndp) grabbed 10-20. Then again, the two conservative parties did merge recently :( .
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue']For some reason we have this belief that we should reproduce our type of government all over the world. There was another nation that tried this about 50 years ago. They wanted to end poverty and oppression, seems altruistic enough doesn't it? But the USSR's desired goal was communism and we opposed that. We fought them because we thought it was evil and oppressive.

For some reason we all believe that democracy is the best government for every nation on earth. Some people don't want democracy and we shouldn't force it on them. The ethnocentrism from our country just gets to be sickening at time.

We think we're always right and that we're always on the right side. There's the old saying that goes "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Believe me, I'm in no way legitimizing what the rebels in Iraq are doing but we have to put it into perspective. This country was built by rebels. Can you imagine what it would be like if the events of 228 years ago happened today?[/quote]

I'll give you someone who doesn't want democracy: dictators. Imagine for a moment that Bush was an absolute dicator. Imagine your parents being dragged off in the middle night. Imagine you speak out against the government and they come to your house and rape your sister and kill you both. Do you honestly think that's a good idea? Would you go so far as to "like" that?

Let me ask you: who doesn't want democracy? The British Colonies wanted it. The Russians wanted it. South Korea wanted it. Ukrane wanted it. East Germany wanted it. Iraq wanted it.

Frankly, I view it as completly naive to say that there are people out there who perfer to live under tyranny than democracy.
 
[quote name='"alonzomourning23"'][quote name='coffman'][quote name='bmulligan']"And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:[/b]

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "

You're kidding, right? If Bush is such a great president, why is his approval rating down to 43%? He will end up destroying the Republican party.[/quote]

One can only hope :D. It would never happen, but it would be nice to see a split in the party, creating two. It could be like canada was for about 12 years or so, two conservative parties (tories and alliance) who prevented each other from gaining enough votes to actually win. Then again the liberal party (moderate) still tended to grab over 50% of the vote, and the real liberal party (the ndp) grabbed 10-20. Then again, the two conservative parties did merge recently :( .[/quote]

There is a much greater chance of the democratic party splintering before the republican party. The reactionary left, backed by it's moveon.org constiuency with spokesperson Dean want control, the environmentalist left want their own party, the so-called "reagan democrats", or southern democrats, and the disintegration of racial group solidarity are all shards of the Democratic party waiting to seperate from absence of glue to bind them together. The only thing that held them this election was the "I Hate Bush" mantra. There'd have to be a charismatic bastard bigger than Ross Perot to actually split the republicans. I'm talking 10 times more personality than Arnold on Green Acres for that to happen.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']There is a much greater chance of the democratic party splintering before the republican party.[/quote]
There's a number of splits in the Democratic party, but they at least have some ties to one another on some issues. The Republican party has 2 key factions who essentially share absolutely nothing in common. One group is the religious right, who are essentially pushing to turn the US into a theocracy. They really have no other goal than to use the federal government to force their religious beliefs onto as many people as they can. The other side is the more 'traditional' Republicans, the true conservatives, who are more focused on economic issues than social ones and who believe in smaller government.

As I said, the 2 sides have pretty much nothing in common, and are in fact often diametrically opposed on many issues. The fight between the two groups has been brewing since the day they teamed up.

The next 20 years is going to be interesting, politically. I strongly believe that both parties are going to have major shake-ups, to the point where they're going to have very little in common with their current incarnations. The religious right is going completely take over the Republican party (they pretty much have already), and will be joined by the southern Democrats. The traditional Republicans are going to wind up teamed with the northern Democrats - they actually share more in common than they think (a lot of the traditional Republicans are NOT happy about Bush's Social Security plan because they believe in a little thing called fiscal responsibility, not blowing 2 trillion to gamble on the stock market), and at that point, fighting off the religious right group is going to be far more important than their petty differences. Definitely going to be an interesting 20 years...
 
[quote name='"bmulligan"'][quote name='alonzomourning23'][quote name='coffman'][quote name='bmulligan']"And to further cement his legacy as one of the greatest presidents ever, he continued with this:[/b]

"The beginnings of reform and democracy in the Palestinian territories are now showing the power of freedom to break old patterns of violence and failure. Tomorrow morning, Secretary of State Rice departs on a trip that will take her to Israel and the West Bank for meetings with Prime Minister Sharon and President Abbas. She will discuss with them how we and our friends can help the Palestinian people end terror and build the institutions of a peaceful, independent democratic state. To promote this democracy, I will ask Congress for 350 million dollars to support Palestinian political, economic, and security reforms. The goal of two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace is within reach ¡ª and America will help them achieve that goal. "

You're kidding, right? If Bush is such a great president, why is his approval rating down to 43%? He will end up destroying the Republican party.[/quote]

One can only hope :D. It would never happen, but it would be nice to see a split in the party, creating two. It could be like canada was for about 12 years or so, two conservative parties (tories and alliance) who prevented each other from gaining enough votes to actually win. Then again the liberal party (moderate) still tended to grab over 50% of the vote, and the real liberal party (the ndp) grabbed 10-20. Then again, the two conservative parties did merge recently :( .[/quote]

There is a much greater chance of the democratic party splintering before the republican party. The reactionary left, backed by it's moveon.org constiuency with spokesperson Dean want control, the environmentalist left want their own party, the so-called "reagan democrats", or southern democrats, and the disintegration of racial group solidarity are all shards of the Democratic party waiting to seperate from absence of glue to bind them together. The only thing that held them this election was the "I Hate Bush" mantra. There'd have to be a charismatic bastard bigger than Ross Perot to actually split the republicans. I'm talking 10 times more personality than Arnold on Green Acres for that to happen.[/quote]

Ideologically there is a larger division between the moderate and the religious right than there is in the democratic party, they're just on the winning side at the moment. Though, beyond what I said, I'm not even interested in arguing this, it just won't happen under the current conditions.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']it just won't happen under the current conditions.[/quote]
Actually, it will. The moderate and religious right were forced together because they were 'losing', and felt like they needed each other more than they hated each other. Now that they're in power and they're actually able to create the policies they want, they're discovering that they want entirely different things. The cracks are showing more than a little, and they're getting wider with every passing day. You have more and more Republicans who are discovering that they HATE what their party has become. McCain is one of the foremost among the traditional Republicans who are unhappy - he's still holding back because he still has some party loyalty, but every time he talks, he comes a little bit closer to out-and-out denouncing Bush.

There's nothing like winning to bring out people's disagreements.
 
[quote name='Drocket'][quote name='alonzomourning23']it just won't happen under the current conditions.[/quote]
Actually, it will. The moderate and religious right were forced together because they were 'losing', and felt like they needed each other more than they hated each other. Now that they're in power and they're actually able to create the policies they want, they're discovering that they want entirely different things. The cracks are showing more than a little, and they're getting wider with every passing day. You have more and more Republicans who are discovering that they HATE what their party has become. McCain is one of the foremost among the traditional Republicans who are unhappy - he's still holding back because he still has some party loyalty, but every time he talks, he comes a little bit closer to out-and-out denouncing Bush.

There's nothing like winning to bring out people's disagreements.[/quote]

From reading the post I responded to, he was talking about a split of one party, not simply realignment. I was saying that a split, where one party remains in tact and the other breaks off into 2 or 3 smaller parties, will not happen.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']From reading the post I responded to, he was talking about a split of one party, not simply realignment. I was saying that a split, where one party remains in tact and the other breaks off into 2 or 3 smaller parties, will not happen.[/quote]
With the possible exception of the very unlikely event where both parties manage to split simultaneously, one party pretty much has to go first. So yes, it will happen :) (and it'll be the Republican party.)
 
Actually, I might agree with you. Looking back at the '92 and '96 elections, I now remember that a democrat was elected twice without a majority by effectively splitting the republican party by Ross Perot.

However, if someone like Hillary gets the nomination in '08, the 'hate hillary' glue will solidify any breach in the republican armor.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']However, if someone like Hillary gets the nomination in '08, the 'hate hillary' glue will solidify any breach in the republican armor.[/quote]
That's a good point. Clinton hatred (often to the point of being completely irrational) is probably the only thing that managed to keep the Republican party together this long. Perot's campaign mostly appealed to traditional conservative Republicans, and he managed to siphon away an amazing number of them (considering it was a brand-new third party, run by someone of questionable sanity, vs a Republican canidate who actually had a pretty good record (considering that he was cleaning up Reagan's mess, at least.)) There were a lot of traditional Republicans fed up with the party even at that point, but Clinton-hatred managed to mostly glue them back into the party for quite a while.

Either way, though, I don't think the collapse of the Republican party is quite immenent. Its most likely going to be either 8 or 12 years (depending on how the elections go) before the big split happens. The next 4 years are going to predominately involve the build-up of festering resentment, and that takes a while to come to a boil.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top