IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Bitching, but never solutions..., something ive noticed....
Guest_nikowwf_*
post Feb 14 2003, 04:08 PM
Post #1





Guests






Do you notice that there is a lot of general distrust / disgust with government lately? Not that its a bad thing in and of itself...a person NEEDS to question what is being done.

But it seems to me that the younger generation here is just WHINING. I usually don't see solutions being offered, or even a full understanding or effort to understand. Its more just BUSH IS WRONG, HE SUCKS, THIS SUCKS, BLAH BLAH. I rarely see a discussion of what SHOULD be done.

just an observation. People are talking about the world, but it sound the same as when they are bitching that HHH is not putting people over.

niko
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_EricMM_*
post Feb 14 2003, 04:11 PM
Post #2





Guests






Bush is holding the dems down.

No seriously, are you talking about people here? There are a few things I know nothing about but I tend to not bring them up. Who are you talking about?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_evenflowDDT_*
post Feb 14 2003, 05:58 PM
Post #3





Guests






That's what gets me so mad and eventually apathetic... there's no solution. And there never will be, because there will always be someone misrepresented or not being given an opportunity. It's how the class system and human relations work. There's no way for everyone to be represented - if the liberals were all in power they'd be doing the same thing as the conservatives are now, looking out only for their own interests and screwing everyone else. I'm only pissed because the current interests being looked out for aren't my interests. I've really got a soured (but true) view of politics, haven't I?

Well, I came up with a perfect solution but it'd get me arrested so I won't repeat it since OMG BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING~!

I love you Big Brother. Really I do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Dr. Wrestlingphysics_*
post Feb 14 2003, 07:55 PM
Post #4





Guests






It's easy to find fault, but more difficult to find solutions, and why bother, no-one will listen anyway. It's not as if Bush (or any one else in a position of power), believes he's wrong and is open to other opinions!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_El Satanico_*
post Feb 14 2003, 08:00 PM
Post #5





Guests






The main problem with giving "solutions" is that now there's nothing people can do to change the stuff other then becoming a politician and changing it from within. Even voting in a different political party doesn't change anything now. The line between Republicans and Democrates has blurred and there's little difference between them now.

Another problem is that there's no major problems where the young generation can rally together and help cause change by way of demonstrations and other such things. Back in the 60's there were big social problems where demonstrators were able to encourage change. Also In the 60's it was a case of a large chunk of the American population were outraged and demanded change.

Now the problems are smaller and don't cause national social outrage. Hell the majority of Americans would gladly give up freedoms and go against the Constitution if it would give them back their false sense of security. How are the people that have problems with that stuff suppose to fight back when the majority of people even the same generation are in favor of it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Tyler McClelland_*
post Feb 14 2003, 09:20 PM
Post #6





Guests






For every problem in which I have a significant opinion, I have an idea of how I would reform that particular area.

However, nobody asks it; why offer?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Olympic Slam_*
post Feb 15 2003, 12:52 AM
Post #7





Guests






QUOTE(nikowwf @ Feb 14 2003, 01:55 PM)
Do you notice that there is a lot of general distrust / disgust with government lately?  Not that its a bad thing in and of itself...a person NEEDS to question what is being done.

But it seems to me that the younger generation here is just WHINING.  I usually don't see solutions being offered, or even a full understanding or effort to understand.  Its more just BUSH IS WRONG, HE SUCKS, THIS SUCKS, BLAH BLAH.  I rarely see a discussion of what SHOULD be done.

just an observation.  People are talking about the world, but it sound the same as when they are bitching that HHH is not putting people over.

niko

Excellent observation Niko. One thing that is a fact is that it's REALLY cool to hate Bush and call him a moron ect. Most people are blissfully ignorant of how the government works, anything about economics, and anything about history. Add all those things up and you get a bunch of knee jerk reactions that pass as political commentary. "Bush is dumb. Clinton is a pervert. " Wow, what hard hitting analysis. It's just easier for the younger crowd and dumb folks in general to say the usual.......
"Bush is a moron." "He stole the election." "Bush is runining the economy" "The war with Iraq is only about big oil" ..........
It's much easier to sound off with the above then to actually get into a hard hitting and well researched debate about taxes, the war, the economy, terrorism and the like. What I've found is that most people are actually MORE conservative than they think they are. They just have a blind hatred for George W. Bush that may or may not be genuine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_kkktookmybabyaway_*
post Feb 15 2003, 12:52 AM
Post #8





Guests






"Do you notice that there is a lot of general distrust / disgust with government lately? Not that its a bad thing in and of itself...a person NEEDS to question what is being done."

I've noticed this since I began following politics 10+ years ago. Another thing I love is when Big Media says after some politician calls another a poopyhead, "The atmosphere on Capitol Hill has NEVER been worse." I laugh.

That's all...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_DrTom_*
post Feb 15 2003, 01:06 AM
Post #9





Guests






QUOTE
There's no way for everyone to be represented...

Everyone is represented, and everyone gets a chance. The thing is that the majority rules, so there will always be opinions and solutions that are discounted, voted down, etc. Just because one Party or the other doesn't get something passed doesn't mean they weren't being represented.

Representation is guaranteed. Results are not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Some Guy_*
post Feb 15 2003, 12:10 PM
Post #10





Guests






QUOTE(nikowwf @ Feb 14 2003, 04:55 PM)
Do you notice that there is a lot of general distrust / disgust with government lately? Not that its a bad thing in and of itself...a person NEEDS to question what is being done.

But it seems to me that the younger generation here is just WHINING. I usually don't see solutions being offered, or even a full understanding or effort to understand. Its more just BUSH IS WRONG, HE SUCKS, THIS SUCKS, BLAH BLAH. I rarely see a discussion of what SHOULD be done.

just an observation. People are talking about the world, but it sound the same as when they are bitching that HHH is not putting people over.

niko

IT's always been that way. In the 60s the Vietnam protesters didn't really offer much of an alternative, they just wanted out of the war. MOst people just see an issue that they like, jump on, get very limited info about it and lather, rinse, and repeat.
Most people can't back up their political beliefs with anything other than "this is wrong, damn it!" Which bodes the question, "what should we do instead?" and you get, "uhhhhhhhhhh.......... This is wrong, Dman it!"

You get that a lot form environmentalists.
"Oil is bad, it destroys the environment!"

"Ok, so what should we do instead?"

"Electric cars, Hydorgen cars, solar power, etc..."

"Ok, but we're years away from having that technolgy work as well and be as cheap as oil, how about Nuclear Power or using our own oil supplies until we can make that technology work?

"NO THat's bad, we need Electric cars, Hydorgen cars, solar power, etc.."

lather, rinse, repeat.

You get reason from one side and the "Veruca Salt" arguemetn form the other: "I WANT IT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

In fairness that can go either way on various issues between tha left and the right.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_EricMM_*
post Feb 15 2003, 12:21 PM
Post #11





Guests






Thats foolish Some Guy, there are lots of ways to help out the environment besides renewable fuels. As an environmentalist, I KNOW that the first step towards cleaning up this country isn't a new source of energy, it's EFFICENCY. Efficency would substantially reduce our use of everything, from fossil fuels to electricity to water. And conservation doesn't mean sitting in the cold dark, it means living your current lifestyle in a more efficent way. It's entirely possible, it's just that Americans as a whole are less informed about conservation than they are about say, geography, or Canadian Govt.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Some Guy_*
post Feb 15 2003, 12:38 PM
Post #12





Guests






I was demonstrating "debates" I've had with foolish and ignorant people. Eric, you know your shit and hence you aren't who i was talking about.
For the sake of fairness here's a debate with an ignorant pro-lifer.

"Abortion is murder!"

"OK, what do you propose we do instead? Give out contarception? (which I'm not in favor of)

"No, contraception is a sin"

"Ok, so what should we do instead?"

"PEople sdould only have sex to procreate."

"OK, do you really think that is a realistic goal?"

"UHhhhhhhh..... ABORTION IS MURDER!!!!!!!!"

Rather, rimse, repeat.

Happy now?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_EricMM_*
post Feb 15 2003, 05:37 PM
Post #13





Guests






Abortion is a difficult issue because it is a black or white instance. Either you perform abortions or you don't. I ask you, how can you mediate that? Is there a right answer? I think it's wrong to illegalize an operation that can save a mother's life, but I also think it's wrong for people to have abortions because they decided to screw around without protection. Where's the middle ground there?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Samurai_Goat_*
post Feb 15 2003, 06:55 PM
Post #14





Guests






Middle ground for abortion? If the mother's life is threatened, the child is a product of rape, or it is discoverd that the child will have vast genetic defects that, if it doesn't kill the child, will force it into an extreme existence of pain that will only run up the bank account of the family or the government, then abortion is legal. If this doesn't apply, no abortion for you. If you can't support the baby, have it adopted. Of course, in this hypothetical compromise, there'd have to be a sidenote to fix adoption agencies, but whatever. That's not the point.

Edit: A few glarin' grammar problems.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Olympic Slam_*
post Feb 15 2003, 11:59 PM
Post #15





Guests






Abortion has to be THE most complex issue on earth because there are so many different view points. It boggles my mind that anyone could approach the issue without at least incorporating some platforms from either side in their stance. Because of that, people who place abortion at the top of their political litmus test (Diane Feinstein and other feminists) scare me. What makes the issue even MORE confusing is that both sides ARE pro-life. One side wishes to save the life of a future living being. The other wishes to save the life of an established women. Let's face it, an unplanned birth ruins lives. If I were to become a father tommorow, my life as I know it would be OVER. No college, no more time for smarkboard, no time for hockey, no chance to ever become the amazing person I hope to become.

BTW Samurai Goat, I just finished Conker's Bad Fur Day and it was indeed awesome. Not Rare's best in my opinion (Banjo 2 all the way) but it's way up there. You must have good taste in games.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_B-X_*
post Feb 16 2003, 12:07 AM
Post #16





Guests






QUOTE(El Satanico @ Feb 14 2003, 08:47 PM)
Another problem is that there's no major problems where the young generation can rally together and help cause change by way of demonstrations and other such things.

Thats about to change.. REAL quick.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_EricMM_*
post Feb 16 2003, 11:52 AM
Post #17





Guests






What, are we all supposed to rally behind the war in Iraq?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_LooseCannon_*
post Feb 16 2003, 12:35 PM
Post #18





Guests






QUOTE(Olympic Slam @ Feb 16 2003, 01:46 AM)
Abortion has to be THE most complex issue on earth because there are so many different view points. It boggles my mind that anyone could approach the issue without at least incorporating some platforms from either side in their stance. Because of that, people who place abortion at the top of their political litmus test (Diane Feinstein and other feminists) scare me. What makes the issue even MORE confusing is that both sides ARE pro-life. One side wishes to save the life of a future living being. The other wishes to save the life of an established women. Let's face it, an unplanned birth ruins lives. If I were to become a father tommorow, my life as I know it would be OVER. No college, no more time for smarkboard, no time for hockey, no chance to ever become the amazing person I hope to become.

My approach has always been if it's the most complex issue on earth, why don't we just let people decide for themselves how to resolve it, instead of having the government resolve it for them. Let them deal with the decision with their own consciences. There's really no need for you or I or the electorate to arrive at a solution.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_EricMM_*
post Feb 16 2003, 12:43 PM
Post #19





Guests






And that, Loosecannon, is the pro choice argument, and that's the one I support.

I don't think anyone even the most adamant pro-choice woman thinks that a 16 year old girl having her uterus vacuumed is a happy event, but it shouldn't be banned, it can help people sometimes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_DrTom_*
post Feb 16 2003, 02:16 PM
Post #20





Guests






QUOTE
... why don't we just let people decide for themselves how to resolve it, instead of having the government resolve it for them.

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment there, which I dubbed "pro-ambivalence" on another forum years ago. However, the federal government HAS to take a stand on the abortion issue and keep it legal. As a proponent of the Tenth Amendment, this bothers me a little, but without the federal government making abortions legal, many women would be forced to unqualified clinics and back alleys to have the procedure done. No one ever wants to have an abortion, but if a woman is going to go through with it, we owe it to her to make it as safe as possible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_BDC_*
post Feb 16 2003, 02:59 PM
Post #21





Guests






To someone that doesn't believe in abortion, I still have to say it's the best option to make sure that since people are going to get it done anyway, make it safe for them.

I say it all the time... Devil's Arithmetic.

(Granted, no it's not the origin of the phrase, but it's still appropriate.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_LooseCannon_*
post Feb 16 2003, 03:08 PM
Post #22





Guests






nevermind
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_nikowwf_*
post Feb 20 2003, 01:27 PM
Post #23





Guests






Example, the war protests...

There is no plan...no WE WANT THIS TO HAPPEN. Its just DONT HAVE A WAR.....not GIVE THE INSPECTIONS MORE TIME......not SEND IN PEACEKEEPERS TO FOLLOW WEAPONS...not MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION WITH IRAQ. Its just DONT FIGHT...nice sentiment but hardly a very meaty solution.

im not saying one is right over another. I'm saying that if you just say DONT DO THIS...it doesn't work. You need a platform...not just a gripe.

niko
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Samurai_Goat_*
post Feb 20 2003, 04:13 PM
Post #24





Guests






"BTW Samurai Goat, I just finished Conker's Bad Fur Day and it was indeed awesome. Not Rare's best in my opinion (Banjo 2 all the way) but it's way up there. You must have good taste in games."

Why thank you. I try, I really do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Jobber of the Week_*
post Feb 20 2003, 04:36 PM
Post #25





Guests






I'd just like to mention that I bitch about the war, but I always make obvious my solution, which is to go finish the business with North Korea (WHICH DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN 'DROP BOMBS ON THEM'!) before you go to Iraq.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Some Guy_*
post Feb 20 2003, 05:11 PM
Post #26





Guests






WHat does "go finish the business with North Korea" mean then. Clinton and Carter (the foriegn policy wiz kids (IMG:http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) ) tried diplomacy and brides but all that got us and the world was another nuclear country. Somehow I doubt that a Communist dictator is going to listen much to the President or any other American who disagrees with them. Iraq was the first priority when they started and that's why it remains so today. I think some in the adminstration might be hoping that N. Korea attacks us in Iraq to give us an excuse to finish them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Jobber of the Week_*
post Feb 20 2003, 06:32 PM
Post #27





Guests






Well, the US and China could strengthen their relations by fixing the DPRK problem. China wants the entire Korea peninsula to be de-nuclearized, and is a strong influence on the North.

There's no need for inspectors in this situation, becuase they're not hiding anything. They're bragging that they're breaking treaties and international laws. There needs to be a demand that they disarm, and if they don't, /then/ take them out.

But in my opinion, that's way more important than Iraq. Especially since I doubt Iraq is going to immedately launch anything at us if we didn't keep making angry gestures at us. They have important business with their oil fields and stuff. N. Korea is a corpse of a nation with nothing to lose. They're far more likely to start violence.

Deal with Iraq, but only after the DPRK.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Some Guy_*
post Feb 20 2003, 06:51 PM
Post #28





Guests






Fair enough. But since we started with Iraq and have been moving closer and closer to war with them shouldn't we finish them and then go to N. Korea? If we dropped the Iraq thing, it would have made the last year or so a waste of time. Besides the military aspect of the Iraqi deal will be pretty short, a few months at most of fighting. N. Korea could take years, if we fight to lose like we did in the 50s and China keeps getting in the way like they did then. Or if we do it right it could take about the same ammount of time as Iraq. And the aftermeth would be easier, we could just turn the conquered North over to the South and let them deal with re-intergrating them. S. Korea is pretty decent so that shoudn't be a problem, aside from the economic devastation that Communisn has brougt upon the North. I heard somewhere that the avg. salary in S. Korea is 3 times that of the North.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Jobber of the Week_*
post Feb 20 2003, 07:01 PM
Post #29





Guests






QUOTE(Some Guy @ Feb 20 2003, 05:38 PM)
But since we started with Iraq and have been moving closer and closer to war with them shouldn't we finish them and then go to N. Korea?

Well, I've been saying this before they started sending ship after ship of troops and supplies over there.

Yeah, Bush is practically already "there" in his mind. He can't wait to get started. That doesn't mean I can't say he's got his priorities mixed up. And then to say "Okay, so let's pretend that you're president RIGHT NOW and you got all these troops over in Kuwait because Bush sent them over there and now you want to divert them all to North Korea?" doesn't really work.

And like I said, China doesn't want either the North or South to have nuclear capabilities. They'll help apply the pressure necessary to get the DPRK to disarm their nuclear capabilities and put the monitors and things back. I think we're going to have to send aid of some sort to them after they've done so. But I'd only resort to violence if they said they wouldn't disarm in the face of China and the rest of the world. If that happened, there's little choice what's left to do.

And I understand the administration is preaching somewhat the same thing, going on about diplomatic measures and stuff. But they're seriously downplaying everything and ought to give it more attention. I don't understand the point of saying "Yeah, North Korea is some poorhouse country that's just a blip on our rardar." Uhm.. Doesn't that mean they have nothing to lose if they wanted to fire nukes? (IMG:http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Some Guy_*
post Feb 20 2003, 07:14 PM
Post #30





Guests






I think they are only downplaying it because they are committed to Iraq right now. The administration has worked very hard on Iraq and to give it alll up at the last minute is not a great idea. North Korea is next, Bush is letting the diplomats go (and eventually fail)over there right now and then after Iraq they'll get his full attention.

I agree with you that N. Korea is the potnetially bigger threat, but Iraq, which has been a problem for well over a decade is first. N, Korea kind of just jumped back into the the news with their, "Look at me i've got Nukes!" announcement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd January 2018 - 04:11 PM
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here