EricMM Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 Ecological progress is more important than economic progress, here and now.
Vyce Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 The Kyoto Protocol was / is a fucking mess, and choosing not to ratify it was one of the BEST things that Clinton did in office. Bush was wise to similarly follow in Clinton's footsteps on the matter. Furthermore, while global warming is an issue we should address, fucking stop acting like in 50 years the majority of the nation is going to be under water or be a tropic zone. Just fucking stop it. Your way of life isn't going to really change much, outside of maybe not having to wear as many sweaters in January.
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 The idea was unpopular, not standard fare conservative, opinions.
Art Sandusky Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 The destruction of New Orleans was far bigger than 9/11 in virtually every way, but people are always more into the former and all of its related issues. I hope that it gets its true respect one day for what it was. We should be talking about President Dean right now, dammit. We're due for another 60s-like decade come 2010. Nutrition programs should get the same funding as large food companies spend on marketing. Guys, this country is starting to get really unhealthy.
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 Nutrition programs should get the same funding as large food companies spend on marketing. Guys, this country is starting to get really unhealthy. Good one.
The Amazing Rando Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 We're due for another 60s-like decade come 2010. Do you mean that in kind of a 'damn the man' and 'live free' kind of way? Like the whole stereotypical mindset? If so, then I agree.
King Kamala Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 I know this may be weird for my introductary post to this forum (I may have posted here once or twice) but I'll say what's on my mind. I really don't see what's wrong with consensual sex between an adult and a minor to an extent. I mean student-teacher relationships are always awkward and having sex with prepubescent kids or even most pubescent kids is wrong. But...if say a 16 or 17 year old knows what they're getting into and wants to have sex with someone in their late 20s, I honestly don't see a problem. I think the thing is most kids that age don't really know what they're getting into and most older people aren't having sex with minors for the right reason. So I uh hope you don't think I'm a N.A.M.B.L.A supporter or something cause I'm not.
The Amazing Rando Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 16 or 17 isn't that bad, and I believe it's legal in some states. It's the 0-14 bracket that's creepy and wrong.
Slayer Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 Tax the churches. "Tax the businesses owned by the churches."
CanadianGuitarist Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 The destruction of New Orleans was far bigger than 9/11 in virtually every way, but people are always more into the former and all of its related issues. I hope that it gets its true respect one day for what it was. Absolutely correct. The reason I think 9-11 was so much bigger was because, and this wasn't meant to be a shot at the Bush administration, is that it's much easier(and this holds true in a lot of aspects of life) to rally people together in anger or violence than with something that can simply just be prepared for next time.
The Amazing Rando Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 Also, regardless of warning signs on the 9/11 side, we knew about and could have prepared for the Hurricane days in advance. People could have been evacuated early as more a precaution than an almost last second escape. The public treated New Orleans as less meaningful and less impactful because of the media circus around it and the idea that "this could have been prevented", but when 9/11 happened, it was total shock to the American public and in the media coverage afterwards it wasn't even known as first what the true story was.
King Kamala Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 16 or 17 isn't that bad, and I believe it's legal in some states. It's the 0-14 bracket that's creepy and wrong. Right that's what I was basically trying to say. If I had to pick a national age for it to be legal to have sex- I'd say 16.
The Amazing Rando Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 I was in agreement. The following aren't really politcal, but are some opinions: I think once any film makes 10 million in a box office, 10% of the eventual total (just for the box office) should be donated to help fund art/music/theater education in the country. Same goes for CD sales. I think that the news stations around today should go back to being about news, instead of worthless hype, banter, and the advertising/marketing mindset. There is too much fluff reported each and every day on nearly every station, when that time could be used more appropriately. I think there should be more early-evening educational programming on Network TV, and it should be marketed and advertised more than any sitcom or drama. My opinion is that the vast majority is incredily narrowminded on a wide variety of subjects and issues, so to put them out there to create a better understanding would, to me, seem to create a more socially aware culture. And finally, I dislike pretty much all pundit-type shows, regardless of slant or spin or whatever else. If they want shows like that, work harder to be bi-partisan and bring the public into the debate, because in the end with politics, it should be just as much about the people as it is the issues.
Broward83 Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 That's like saying you want to stop forest fires by getting rid of the forests. Sir, are you interested in joining a Grand Ol Party and helping to reform this great land we call America?
The Amazing Rando Posted June 27, 2006 Report Posted June 27, 2006 Bah, if i'm anything, i'm leaning libertarian. note: LEANING.
King Kamala Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 I was in agreement. The following aren't really politcal, but are some opinions: I think once any film makes 10 million in a box office, 10% of the eventual total (just for the box office) should be donated to help fund art/music/theater education in the country. Same goes for CD sales. I agree that way we can eliminate or at least downsixe the National Endowment for the Arts. Don't get me wrong I love the arts, I've been involved since the age of 8 but come on does our tax money really need to go it.
The Amazing Rando Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 Our tax money could go the other forms of education, though.
King Kamala Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 I was in agreement. The following aren't really politcal, but are some opinions: I think once any film makes 10 million in a box office, 10% of the eventual total (just for the box office) should be donated to help fund art/music/theater education in the country. Same goes for CD sales. I agree that way we can eliminate or at least downsixe the National Endowment for the Arts. Don't get me wrong I love the arts, I've been involved since the age of 8 but come on does our tax money really need to fund it? I agree with you again with the point the money that goes to the NEA could be going to much much more things important.
Red Baron Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 Washington was not a great General nor a political leader.
SuperJerk Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 George Herbert Walker Bush was an excellent president.
Red Baron Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 Louis Riel is Manitoba greatest hero...and villian, at the same time.
Vyce Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 The idea was unpopular, not standard fare conservative, opinions. Standard fare, conservative opinions are unpopular here.
Jobber of the Week Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 George Herbert Walker Bush was an excellent president. Well, I'd say he did the best he could and he had a lack of serious scandals. I'd say he was a good (not great, good) President, even though I don't like the guy personally for his talking smack about atheists.
Dobbs 3K Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 I believe PBS and NPR should be privatized, or at least allowed to run commercials and support themselves, rather than doing pledge drives every hour or so. I don't feel tax dollars should go to a network of TV and radio stations, at least ones that target a domestic audience.
EricMM Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 I lot of the people who like and listen to NPR would be so turned off by commercials that they would stop listening to it. I would.
Masked Man of Mystery Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 I believe PBS and NPR should be privatized, or at least allowed to run commercials and support themselves, rather than doing pledge drives every hour or so. I don't feel tax dollars should go to a network of TV and radio stations, at least ones that target a domestic audience. NPR and PBS are hardly funded by tax dollars, that's why they need to run quaterly or so fund drives. The government doesn't fund them well enough. I'd rather they pump the money from these awful and useless PSAs into them. PSAs suck.
dubq Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 Louis Riel is Manitoba greatest hero...and villian, at the same time. 3 points for the Louis Riel post.
Special K Posted June 28, 2006 Report Posted June 28, 2006 The PBS/NPR/NEA thing is such a rabble-rousing issue when it accounts for such a tiny tiny amount of the budget. If five bucks of the thousands and thousands of dollars I pay the feds go to Masterpiece Theatre or a starving artist instead of a fucking cruise missle, GOOD. And EVERYONE knew that NO was fucked if a hurricane came its way. I remember reading articles about it while I lived in NO. It's as much a part of the corrup local gov'ts fault, but this 'no one knew what could happen!' shit infuriates me. In fact, I think a lot of the data from the Scientific American or Nat'l Geographic or whatever article I read came from the Army Corp of Engineers. There's a straight up lie you can attribute to Bush. "No one knew what could happen!" Fuck you. that's why everyone with a dollar to spare left the city whenever a hurricane came calling, is it?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now