Forums » Off-Topic
Well, maybe someone, somewhere, might value something you have. Probably not, but you can always look around. I suggest Northern Thailand... someone there will, uh, employ you ;)
Shapenaji said:
Back on Topic, as far as "Using the speech to attack the president."
The President has never made civil rights a cornerstone of his presidency, is it unusual that the same civil rights activists would lash out at him when given the forum?
Especially when Bush is clearly trying to associate himself with the movement via his presence.
If he didn't want it to be political, he shouldn't have shown up. Not with his record.
Everything is political in this country, deal with it. Address the argument, not the forum or the individuals involved. Coretta S. King had a history of activism, I think she would have been proud.
Reply:
Heres the problem, President bush was a fellow mourner of her death. Unfortunately the president has to show up to every major event, or be viewed ,for worse, that he doesn't care about the civil rights movement. You ca not tell him not to show up, becuase thats exsactly what you want, and the democrats would have a political field day with that one. Maybe bush was trying to associate himself with the civil rights movement, maybe hes also a evil scheming bastard planning to destory america? but hes a dumbass right? Then that couldnt be possible.
Coretta S . King did have a history of activism, but she also had respect and self control, unfortunately thats something the democratic party is severly lacking.
Back on Topic, as far as "Using the speech to attack the president."
The President has never made civil rights a cornerstone of his presidency, is it unusual that the same civil rights activists would lash out at him when given the forum?
Especially when Bush is clearly trying to associate himself with the movement via his presence.
If he didn't want it to be political, he shouldn't have shown up. Not with his record.
Everything is political in this country, deal with it. Address the argument, not the forum or the individuals involved. Coretta S. King had a history of activism, I think she would have been proud.
Reply:
Heres the problem, President bush was a fellow mourner of her death. Unfortunately the president has to show up to every major event, or be viewed ,for worse, that he doesn't care about the civil rights movement. You ca not tell him not to show up, becuase thats exsactly what you want, and the democrats would have a political field day with that one. Maybe bush was trying to associate himself with the civil rights movement, maybe hes also a evil scheming bastard planning to destory america? but hes a dumbass right? Then that couldnt be possible.
Coretta S . King did have a history of activism, but she also had respect and self control, unfortunately thats something the democratic party is severly lacking.
Good discussion. I'mma gonna agree with Lebermac here 100%. Shape also has a good point. So does Dr. Lecter. Taking that off-topic shoot out even further... on a psychological aspect, its just not healthy to live off of someone else's work for long periods of time. Sure, it can also be a good thing to get a hand-out every once in a while when we're in the dumps (it happens to anybody - not just on a nourishment level, but with other social aspects). In giving out loads and loads of food, there's a point you reach where it just stops working. Granted, I think we (the U.S.) could be doing a lot more of it before we hit that point... but there really is a better way.
Going back to the Eulogy/Funeral... I can see political talking points related to civil rights being discussed, even if they are negatively directed towards present political figures... but I think a line was crossed. One example would be where he started talking about "not finding any weapons of mass destruction." That's way outside the field of anything relating to civil rights. I think even some of the Katrina comments were way outside the ballpark. Can he say it? Of course - but he's not exactly showing a lot of good character.
Going back to the Eulogy/Funeral... I can see political talking points related to civil rights being discussed, even if they are negatively directed towards present political figures... but I think a line was crossed. One example would be where he started talking about "not finding any weapons of mass destruction." That's way outside the field of anything relating to civil rights. I think even some of the Katrina comments were way outside the ballpark. Can he say it? Of course - but he's not exactly showing a lot of good character.
(I'll get you yer money next time I see ya ingame, Doukutsu...)
I don't think this was a "gotcha" moment for President Bush. If he wanted to, he could have said something, he's the damn PRESIDENT. And he's a big boy, politically, he should have KNOWN that he would have potshots taken at him.
And regarding the disrespect shown towards the President: That's nothing new, either. This president is a poor public speaker and doesn't think very well on his feet, the various media outlets and democrats are ALWAYS trying to get him to say things off-the-cuff so that he'll screw up just ONCE, and then they can gleefully re-broadcast it over and over and over.
Anyway, it's easy to agree that hunger and poverty is bad. However, everyone's got their own line for where to begin and end the help. Not wanting to spend everything helping others at home and around the world does NOT mean that the United States does not care about ending world hunger. It just means we draw the line somewhere. In fact, I'd wager that the United States is the single biggest exporter of free food to the world by FAR.
I don't think this was a "gotcha" moment for President Bush. If he wanted to, he could have said something, he's the damn PRESIDENT. And he's a big boy, politically, he should have KNOWN that he would have potshots taken at him.
And regarding the disrespect shown towards the President: That's nothing new, either. This president is a poor public speaker and doesn't think very well on his feet, the various media outlets and democrats are ALWAYS trying to get him to say things off-the-cuff so that he'll screw up just ONCE, and then they can gleefully re-broadcast it over and over and over.
Anyway, it's easy to agree that hunger and poverty is bad. However, everyone's got their own line for where to begin and end the help. Not wanting to spend everything helping others at home and around the world does NOT mean that the United States does not care about ending world hunger. It just means we draw the line somewhere. In fact, I'd wager that the United States is the single biggest exporter of free food to the world by FAR.
Sure we are, but we use it as a bargaining tool, so its not STRICTLY free.
The countries have to open up their markets to our companies, give them benefits, and the country will still end up owing us.
We trap countries in debt.
Chikira:
Respect and Self-control are missing all-round, on both sides of the aisle. They go back and forth playing the hurt kitten. The President is a big boy, he can take it. And Coretta may have had respect and self-control, but I don't think she disagreed with those who had passion, and let it be known.
The countries have to open up their markets to our companies, give them benefits, and the country will still end up owing us.
We trap countries in debt.
Chikira:
Respect and Self-control are missing all-round, on both sides of the aisle. They go back and forth playing the hurt kitten. The President is a big boy, he can take it. And Coretta may have had respect and self-control, but I don't think she disagreed with those who had passion, and let it be known.
