Should Kerry be Torecellied?

[Guest MikeSC]

well I know for a fact that Clinton's approval ratings went up when Kenn Starr started his shenanigans. I mean the main focus on what they HOPED would bring Clinton down, totally backfired. Yes it gave the right and late night talk show hosts plenty of fodder to play with, but for your average joe, most thought the whole impeachment thing was lame.

They also had precious little actual RESPECT for Clinton, either.

-=Mike

[Guest hunger4unger]

I'm not a big supporter of Kerry, he's not the ideal candidate by any means but with everything that Bush has done badly during his time in office, Kerry has to screw up really, really badly not to be victorious.

[Guest MikeSC]

I'm not a big supporter of Kerry, he's not the ideal candidate by any means but with everything that Bush has done badly during his time in office, Kerry has to screw up really, really badly not to be victorious.

Of course, you don't vote here, so your opinion on his electability is not terribly useful.

 

The man has a very slim chance to possibly win.

-=Mike

[Guest hunger4unger]

Just because I am not eligible to vote there doesn't mean I can't form an opinion on the election. Many people worldwide will be following the election closely, especially since the outcome will have an effect on world affairs.

[Guest MikeSC]

Just because I am not eligible to vote there doesn't mean I can't form an opinion on the election. Many people worldwide will be following the election closely, especially since the outcome will have an effect on world affairs.

And they support Kerry, because liberal politicians will cowtow to corrupt groups like the U.N.

 

Conservatives won't, so they don't like it.

 

So be it.

-=Mike

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Conservatives only cowtow to corrupt domestic organizations like The Christian Coalition.

[Guest MikeSC]

Conservatives only cowtow to corrupt domestic organizations like The Christian Coalition.

How is the Christian Coalition "corrupt"? They may be ass-backwards, but I've not heard of any massive financial irregularities involving them.

 

The U.N, on the other hand...

-=Mike

[EricMM 0]

Does a "vehicle" belong in a crosswalk? Were you walking the bike or riding it? If you were riding it, di you have the right of way? Seems to me that you bikers want to regonized as both vehicles and pedestrians.

BTW, I've been hit by a car twice while riding a bike (I was too young to drive). The first was my fault, I crossed the street on an angle and the woman couldn't see me when she turned onto the street. The second was whole I was riding on the sidewalk and someone backed out of a driveway into me. I, nor the bike were hurt in either. Rather than getting mad at the people who hit me, I realized that I did not belong on the road on a bike. Because they are not safe when you're up against an automobile. And no, I was certainlynot wearing spandex.

 

I was on the crosswalk because I had rode on a bike path to an intersection. I had the light and crossing signal, and was about to bike across the street, when the van to my left suddenly drove over my bike. Yes, I had the right of way, I wasn't even MOVING. He was so focused on oncoming traffic on his left that he didn't look right, which was where he was turning.

 

I would love to be recognized as a vehicle and NOT a pedestrian, and I drive on the road as much as possible. But sometimes you gotta leave the road or either hit a car or be run off the road. It's not like we want to own the lane, we just want the shoulder, which usually has a three - six foot space outside of the white line at the right side of the road. Thats it. I wasn't hit on the road. If I had been on foot, I could practically have been hit in the same way.

[Vyce 0]

I drive on the road as much as possible.

Question: Which side of the rode do you drive on?

 

The left, facing the traffic, or the right, with it?

 

Because NOTHING makes me want to run over someone as much as the bastards that ride on the right.

[Guest Brian]

We're supposed to ride on the right, by law.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Conservatives only cowtow to corrupt domestic organizations like The Christian Coalition.

How is the Christian Coalition "corrupt"? They may be ass-backwards, but I've not heard of any massive financial irregularities involving them.

 

The U.N, on the other hand...

-=Mike

I meant morally. I'm sure there's some nutso right-winger religious group that owns sweatshops in Indonesia or something, though. Sheer probability dictates it. I agree with you about the UN being crooks, though. They're political figures, I'd expect nothing else.

[Guest MikeSC]

Conservatives only cowtow to corrupt domestic organizations like The Christian Coalition.

How is the Christian Coalition "corrupt"? They may be ass-backwards, but I've not heard of any massive financial irregularities involving them.

 

The U.N, on the other hand...

-=Mike

I meant morally. I'm sure there's some nutso right-winger religious group that owns sweatshops in Indonesia or something, though. Sheer probability dictates it. I agree with you about the UN being crooks, though. They're political figures, I'd expect nothing else.

Thing is, I don't oppose people who run "sweatshops" in Indonesia. The workers there are treated like --- well AMERICAN workers were treated in the early 1900's. That is what happens when you industrialize and try to modernize.

 

The Christian Coalition are just a bunch of ass-backwards idiots.

-=Mike

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

I drive on the road as much as possible.

Question: Which side of the rode do you drive on?

 

The left, facing the traffic, or the right, with it?

 

Because NOTHING makes me want to run over someone as much as the bastards that ride on the right.

Legally in Canada we have to ride on the right. Bicycles are still considered vehicles.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

This is purely a hypothetical point, naturally, but:

 

Thing is, I don't oppose people who run "sweatshops" in Indonesia. The workers there are treated like --- well AMERICAN workers were treated in the early 1900's. That is what happens when you industrialize and try to modernize.

 

How can you not oppose business practices that maim people for the sake of turning a profit? If indeed sweatshop conditions (I've never been in one, I don't know) are like turn of the century industrial workings in the western world, then there's all kinds of people who are inhaling some wretched fumes which will eventually kill them, not to mention some 3rd degree burns and lost limbs. How is that not a crooked business practice, or are you just looking for something to argue about?

[Guest MikeSC]

This is purely a hypothetical point, naturally, but:

 

Thing is, I don't oppose people who run "sweatshops" in Indonesia. The workers there are treated like --- well AMERICAN workers were treated in the early 1900's. That is what happens when you industrialize and try to modernize.

 

How can you not oppose business practices that maim people for the sake of turning a profit? If indeed sweatshop conditions (I've never been in one, I don't know) are like turn of the century industrial workings in the western world, then there's all kinds of people who are inhaling some wretched fumes which will eventually kill them, not to mention some 3rd degree burns and lost limbs. How is that not a crooked business practice, or are you just looking for something to argue about?

Because, Agent, I view industrialization and modernization as a timeline. Every country must go through the same steps. And, sadly, one of the steps is the stage where workers are treated like dirt. This leads to unions, which are quite useful early on.

 

It's not pleasant. But, imagine a child for a moment --- while learning to walk, they fall down. Does anybody ENJOY watching the child fall and get hurt? No --- but it's a necessary step in development.

-=Mike

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Even when the same products could be made in the states on automated equipment, providing jobs for people to run those machines, and the networks and shit that run them? I'm talking about things like soccer balls and shoes here. It's unethical, to me anyway, to exploit the 3rd world, even for the sake of their economic development. (while we absorb almost all profits)

[Guest MikeSC]

Even when the same products could be made in the states on automated equipment, providing jobs for people to run those machines, and the networks and shit that run them? I'm talking about things like soccer balls and shoes here. It's unethical, to me anyway, to exploit the 3rd world, even for the sake of their economic development. (while we absorb almost all profits)

The costs of making them here would be prohibitive to selling them.

 

Unions have priced certain jobs out of the country.

-=Mike

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Ah, but machines can make a lot more shoes than Indonesians can. (I'd imagine)...nevermind. This is turning into a labyrinth of business ethics when my original point was that the right wing deals with as many shifty people as the left. We'll give the left the UN, and the conservatives have to claim the entire religious right. The PTL, there's some fiscally shady people.

[Guest MikeSC]

Ah, but machines can make a lot more shoes than Indonesians can. (I'd imagine)...nevermind. This is turning into a labyrinth of business ethics when my original point was that the right wing deals with as many shifty people as the left. We'll give the left the UN, and the conservatives have to claim the entire religious right. The PTL, there's some fiscally shady people.

Thing is, a lot of things that get accredited to the right are ridiculous. Some people still try to refer to Enron as a "Republican" scandal --- even though they made their money under Clinton and had all of their accounting flaws before Bush took office.

 

The right has some nut jobs --- but the left has NAMBLA and they trump ANYTHING the right has.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I don't remember politicians pandering to NAMBLA.

[Guest MikeSC]

I don't remember politicians pandering to NAMBLA.

They pander to the gay rights community --- and like it or not, NAMBLA is in tight with the gay rights community.

 

It's not a good thing for the gay rights community, mind you. It hurts them badly --- but it is how it is.

-=Mike

[Styles 0]

I don't remember politicians pandering to NAMBLA.

They pander to the gay rights community --- and like it or not, NAMBLA is in tight with the gay rights community.

 

It's not a good thing for the gay rights community, mind you. It hurts them badly --- but it is how it is.

-=Mike

They are also protected by the ALCU which has become a pretty pro-left organization....