Gang-Rape Cover-Up by US, Halliborton/KBR

2

Comments

  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    Firefox has built-in spellcheck.

    My first post was lamenting the article. I've read that same story a million times...just a different version of that story each time.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    And I do just want to verify my comment about your poor education system. There are stats out for the 2000 and 2004 elections. I'll google them but I think I've posted them here before, a couple years ago. Basically the red states were in the bottom 25-30 states according to average IQ. The blue states were in the top 20-25 when ranked by IQ.

    That speaks volumes about the world's largest superpower.

    No need to apologize about that. Our education system sucks ass, compared to other industrialized nations.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    Firefox has built-in spellcheck

    I am using Safari.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    mammasan wrote:
    No need to apologize about that. Our education system sucks ass, compared to other industrialized nations.

    Which I think was the biggest factor in your elections! But hey, that's just me.
  • chopitdown
    chopitdown Posts: 2,222
    Derrick wrote:
    Which I think was the biggest factor in your elections! But hey, that's just me.

    are you referring to the candidates or voters?
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    voters.
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    voters.
    Clarification: "Eligible Voters" because people who don't vote are also to blame for ignorance.
  • chopitdown
    chopitdown Posts: 2,222
    Derrick wrote:
    voters.

    that's true b/c they do pick the candidates...which aren't much better.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    Which I think was the biggest factor in your elections! But hey, that's just me.

    I disagree. I think the biggest factor in the 2000 election was apathy. Nether of the two candidates really had any mass appeal. The more moderate population was not interested so voter turn out was not high. Also the fact that the Supreme Court basically picked the winner didn't help. As for the 2004 election the blame falls squarely on the Democrats. John Kerry was a horrorable candidate and the Democrats really need to field someone who was going to be able to stand up to the Bush/Cheney/Rove propaganda machine. Kerry was not able to do that and payed the price by loosing to an unpopular president like Bush. Education has very little to do with it and the article you stated about the IQ of each state was debunked. It has everything to do with voter apathy.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    Voter apathy is still ignorance which I relate heavily to education. :-)
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    Voter apathy is still ignorance which I relate heavily to education. :-)

    I guess it could be viewed that way, but even some of the best schooled individuals could still be ignorant.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • lalalalaaaaaaaa
    lalalalaaaaaaaa Posts: 2,445
    Derrick wrote:
    Who have a vested interest in certain politicians! the STATE!

    That's right, who do you think makes the biggest campaign donations?
    Rich investors make the biggest donations
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    mammasan wrote:
    I disagree. I think the biggest factor in the 2000 election was apathy. Nether of the two candidates really had any mass appeal. The more moderate population was not interested so voter turn out was not high. Also the fact that the Supreme Court basically picked the winner didn't help. As for the 2004 election the blame falls squarely on the Democrats. John Kerry was a horrorable candidate and the Democrats really need to field someone who was going to be able to stand up to the Bush/Cheney/Rove propaganda machine. Kerry was not able to do that and payed the price by loosing to an unpopular president like Bush. Education has very little to do with it and the article you stated about the IQ of each state was debunked. It has everything to do with voter apathy.

    John Kerry was fine. The worst the republicans could stick on him was labelling him a flipflopper. Which by the way, the ability to not be a stubborn ass and listen to reasoning was one of Kerry's strong points. A "flipflopper" is a much better leader than a stubborn dictator.

    Bush was not unpopular in 2003/2004. He was able to instill fear. Like a pimp to his whores who he sends out to get tricks (err...sends to war) but makes them believe they need him for protection. Don't blame the dems....blame the system. You need more than two parties if you want to see good dynamics happening.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick, saturnal is pretty much on the money with this one. Our media is controlled by corporation who in fact control the government. Regardless of who is in charge our free media has been compramised.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    He has said:
    - Rich investors make the biggest campaign donations (influencing govt)
    - Rich investors control the media

    So the govt is indirectly controlling it because they serve the same interests.

    When you think about it, this is actually worse than the govt controlling the media directly, because at least you get a chance to vote out governments every four years.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    John Kerry was fine. The worst the republicans could stick on him was labelling him a flipflopper. Which by the way, the ability to not be a stubborn ass and listen to reasoning was one of Kerry's strong points. A "flipflopper" is a much better leader than a stubborn dictator.

    Bush was not unpopular in 2003/2004. He was able to instill fear. Like a pimp to his whores who he sends out to get tricks (err...sends to war) but makes them believe they need him for protection. Don't blame the dems....blame the system. You need more than two parties if you want to see good dynamics happening.

    Of course we need more than two parties, but I disagree with you on the Kerry bit. Kerry was a horrorable candidate. He did not instill any sense of hope in people. He wasn't strong enough to go up against the Bush propaganda machine. The Dem are to blame, partially, for their defeat in 2004. Bush's popularity was on the decline back then. Had the Dems fielded a strong candidate their chances of success would have been much better. Look at the whole Swift Boat fiasco. For an entire month Kerry remained silent while a Political Action Group was besmugging his service record in favor of two men who did everyuthing in their power not to have to go to Vietnam. If I was Kerry I would have been out there putting up the question to see Bush's and/or Cheney's service record. He completely fucked up and lost because of it. It really doesn't matter because Kerry would have been a horrorable president anyway, but better than Bush.

    The source of voter apathy in this country is that people realize that neither party really cares about the people. They are both controlled by corporations and special interest groups and domestic, foreign, and economic policy is dictated by lobbyist and special interest groups not by what is in the best interest of the nation and it's citizens. It's not a good excuse for this complete lack of care but it's the reason why it exists. I think though that the pendulium has started to swing the other way and that more people are starting to realize that together we do have a voice and we can force our government to listen to us. It will take time and maybe change will not occur in this next election but it will happen.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    mammasan wrote:
    I guess it could be viewed that way, but even some of the best schooled individuals could still be ignorant.

    Sure, but the dumb states voted red in general. The smart states voted blue. You don't don't need a lot of stats to figure that out. I'm sure a lot of highly educated folks didn't vote in 2000 because they were so happy with the previous eight years they figured the rest of the nation would take care of the voting situation for them. Unwise!

    I'd rather have a president that gets BJs than a president that has his fingers in a natural resource. :-) Out-of-marriage blow jobs I can handle.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    He has said:
    - Rich investors make the biggest campaign donations (influencing govt)
    - Rich investors control the media

    So the govt is indirectly controlling it because they serve the same interests.

    When you think about it, this is actually worse than the govt controlling the media directly, because at least you get a chance to vote out governments every four years.

    We really don't get to vote out governments every four years. You either have a Democrat or a Republican in office. Not much of a choice there and since the same people who control the candidates control the media they only feature the candidate that they want to win and marginalize those they fear.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    Kerry talked about the issues. Bush talked about bashing Kerry. Kerry took the high road. W took the low road.

    Blame the dems if you want. Americans fell for dirty tactics.
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    Anyways, back to original point. If you aren't american, and you go by the news (online, print, television, etc.) you have to agree that articles like the one this thread is about paint a very poor picture of your people and who your people choose to elect.

Categories