Should we over throw Bush? Discuss here!
cannot overthrow bush, no way possible. can't rush the oval office, door will lock and marines will kill everyone in the adjoining office, you can try and shoort him, but good luck with that!
Vice President and Drug Tzar of The Movement To Free Ommpa loompa Land From The Tyrannical Rule Of The Evil Capitalsitic Despot Willy Wonka And Associates
They said we the peoplke have the power to over throw Bush if we are not pleased with him. What happened to that?
Vice President and Drug Tzar of The Movement To Free Ommpa loompa Land From The Tyrannical Rule Of The Evil Capitalsitic Despot Willy Wonka And Associates
Vote Democrat in 2004.
Special Envoy to Tea-Drinking Nations for The Movement To Free Oompa Loompa Land From The Tyrannical Rule Of The Evil Capitalistic Despot Willy Wonka And Associates
You seem to have missed the chapter on the Civil War.
TeeAhr1. Real live legend of the New American West.
Overthrow? You mean impeach? He hasn't done anything impeachable. In fact, his approval rating is still rather high.
yeah bush is watched like a dog by the old republican gaurd. no mishaps. his aproval rateing is slipping tho! in 04 we shal see!
well, Im not a poltical person but I dont think Bush should be in office if hes going to be cocky and seek allies with other countries to fight against Saddam. Why cant somebody send an assianation to kill him off and be over with. Prevent the war and such. We shouldnt let more and more people die because of Saddam.
as well for him to have high school kids from allover to be withdrawned and be sent to war in case of emercency? OMG !! NEVER!!
boygasmo = boygasm?
what about it, same guy. I sorta removed my account and it wouldnt let me use it again so i went with o on the end. Boy orgasm
Don't you think they would have done that already if they could? You can't just assassinate Saddam, one of his kids would just take over, and even if a good person were put into office, the rest of the government is still horribly corrupt anyway. Besides, to kill Saddam, you'd have to kill all of his doubles he has running around, too. Just to make sure.
There is no way to "prevent" the war. Bush picked the grounds of "imcompliance" for war because he knows that Saddam will never comply peaceably. (Or peacably?)
The only way to end the governmental corruption and dictatorship in Iraq is to clean out its government and start over. Its the only way Bush can eliminate Saddam's indirect "threats" to the US, and more importantly, threats to Isreal:kick out the regime and empower the Iraqi people to run their government themselves.
I don't know why he was ever elected, I can't stand him, he does all right on some things, but I cann't stand his speaking skills or his decisions regarding many things. Like the war and reducing the education budget, my school doesn't have books as it is.
he wasn't elected. gore had more vots. if it wasn't for electoral votes.
popular vote emplies winning.... silly american election system
Something needs to be done about the system in which votes are accounted for. I'll refer you to the best protest signs post, someone replied with; Re-elect Gore. It's the best thing I've heard in a long while.
Chief Political Right Hand Woman to Ceo, Founder and First Member of The Movement to Free Oompa Loompa Land from the Tryanicall Capitalsitic Despot Willy Wonka
It wasn't just the electoral votes that got Gore a loss in the end. There was the whole Florida voting thing. In the end the Supreme Court really decided who was going to be President.
It just worked in Bush's favor that the Governor of Florida just happened to be another Bush. And that the person who put some of the people in the Supreme court there was his daddy.
But I do agree with the electoral college.
They did an entire recount of the state, which found that if Gore's lawsuit for a recount in certain counties had been approved, he still would have lost.
However, had they recounted the whole state, Gore would have won. But no side ever asked for that, because it would take so long.
So, Bush would be president either way. Little too late to go back to this. I mean, Gore has moved on, so good to just follow his example...
There was also a lawsuit since there was a claim that African-American voters (mostly Democratic) weren't being allowed to vote. The Registration people unfairly assumed that they came out of prision, and since Florida has a law baring ex-felons from voting, they weren't allowed a voice.
When all this mess arrived, it was all settled by a Republican-dominated U.S. Supreme Court. That is the part that urks me. Bush got voted in by people that his father set in place.
well considering Bush stole the white house we should steal it back. seriously, the guy said "hispanos" in reference to the hispanic people of this country. i don't think there has more carelessness and stupidity in the white house since Taft sat down and got stuck in his bathtub. but hey, he's jus tryin to get paid.
I'm an Anarchist, so I don't believe in the government and pretty much all the policital leaders out there. They do things for the group, and not individuals, and they just want to feel important.
I am not an anarchist, but I'm pretty well versed.
And I'm just wondering if you're going to support your statements by making them informed or if you're just going to leave your statements as is. Because I'd rather not just tear them apart right now without giving you a chance.
Historian of The Movement To Free Ommpa loompa Land From The Tyrannical Rule Of The Evil Capitalsitic Despot Willy Wonka And Associates
It would be much more fun to do it the unfair way! *grin*
I am an anarchist (as much as I'm an anything-ist), and I'm pretty well versed. And I am wondering the very same thing.
I voted for Nader in 2000 because I strongly disliked the Gore camp (they're in favor of stuff like censorship of music, the Internet, and so-forth) and Bush scared the crap out of me. However, I'm definitely getting myself an absentee ballot and voting Democrat in 2004 - it's the lesser of two evils for me.
I don't know about approval ratings; it's impossible for statistics to represent the opinions of the entirety of the nation's population of 275,000,000, and when you see some poll indicating that Bush has a 65% approval rating, there's no way of telling where the Big Three, the Associated Press or Reuters got their figures - they could have taken them all from some little podunk town in Oklahoma, for all you know.
I was under the impression that what happened was Bush got appointed by the Supreme Court, who finally decided to put him in the White House after abruptly ending their recount of the electoral vote because had they continued counting, it would have indicated that Gore had actually won. Is that what happened or did I leave something out? I've been away for too long :)...
usually those polls are fairly accurate. At the bottom of every survey they tell you how many people are being surveyed- and they are taken throughout the USA. And they are actually pretty useful to have for politicians, it at least gives them something to work with. If they didn't have them then they would continue on being corrupted hypocritical moneybags. Oh, wait... maybe the surveys aren't so effective after all:-P
CEO, President, Founder, and First member of:
The Movement To Free Ommpa loompa Land From The Tyrannical Rule Of The Evil Capitalsitic Despot Willy Wonka And Associates
It is true they take statistics from "throughout" the US, but how do the networks and newspapers define "throughout"? It's not uncommon for two cities in the same county or area (or even two districts of one large city) to be completely disparate in terms of the political sensibilities of their citizens. My town of Port Angeles, WA has a predominantly working class population and is pretty conservative. But less than 60 miles to the east lies Port Townsend, which is both more affluent and more liberal than PA.
News agencies can easily confine their random phone calls to conservative parts of the US. Then again, they can also simply say they called a bunch of people from around the country; nobody I know has ever received a phone call from one of the Big Three asking them what they think of the war...
Yeah, I wonder how managed the statistics are too. I read earlier this week in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that 55% (don't quote me on that, but thereabouts) of Minnesotans support unilateral action. I've met one. (Unfortunately, it's my mother, but that's neither here nor there.) Who's kidding whom here?
John Ashcroft and his Ministry of Homeland Security are watching you...
They may bring you in for seditious speech.
Last week I read in the Progressive (Yes, I read both conservative and liberal magazines; including middle-of-the-road)that they arrested an Iranian immigrant, just because he was an Iranian immigrant. This man was a Wall Street investor who had lived here for 20 years and had done nothing to no one. They brought him in for no reason at all--- simply because of his race. Don't give them a reason to arrest you guys, too.
They gave him a strip search, full rectal examination, and kept him locked away behind cold bars with no food for two days.
Why complain about torturing terrorists when Bush's plan is torchuring American citizens!
Why doesn't Ashcroft just be honest and rename his little terrorist group the Office of FATHERLAND Security...
Heil Bush! *vomits*
And like someone else said, adapted slightly... the only Bush I trust is the one in my front yard. It's nice. It flowers.
"I'm never sure if I have gender dysphoria or species dysphoria. I often try to explain that I'm really a starfish trapped in a human body and I'm very new to your planet." ~ Patrick Califia
I hope they would consider go against war and try to work on promoting peace over gas issues and terrorisms. I dont see why we have to keep promoting more death and your loved ones disapear. Thats a frightening thought, to see somebody disapear and people coming back with gruestiqe stories about their first kill and bloody battle to with with angst like many other vetrians.
As a "card-carrying" anarchist (nyuk nyuk), of course I believe in the right of the People to choose their own fate, and the correlate right to use any means necessary to defend that right. Our rights aren't handed down to us by dead slaveholding tax-evading white men, nor do they come from some omnipotent Spirit in the Sky. They come from ourselves and our will to fight for them, which, incidentally, is why we have fewer rights (please note that here, I use the word to describe our "legal" rights) in America now than at any other point in our national history since the War of 1812.
But as a pragmatist, I understand that the working class, whether in the burbs, the fields, or the slums, is so stoned on television and fast food preservatives that they don't give much of a damn either way. We're just not pissed off enough as a nation yet. Yes, people are finally starting to take to the streets and try to be heard, and I don't want to demean that, but there's a lot of hard road between protest signs and hey-hey chants and the real bottom-up (no crude puns, please) social revolution that we so desperately need if anything of substance is ever really going to change. As long as the same group of people are making the policy decisions, why should we expect them to push anyone's interests but their own?
So ultimately, that's got to be the goal, nothing less: a system of governance (or non-governance, if you prefer) where We (as in The People) are making the policy decisions, where Our interests, rather than the blind idiiot-god Kapital, are the driving force of change. But that's a long way away. Years, surely, maybe generations. Our job is to change the world, and the way to do that is one man, one woman at a time. We've got to start waking people up, and that's got to start with waking up ourselves. It's time to remember that we do have rights, we do deserve dignity, and anyone -- anyone -- who tries to take that away, no matter what they're selling, Must. Be. Stopped.
Another world really is possible, and if you can reach one person with that message, then you've brought it one step closer. That really is the only way to effect change on the scale we're discussing here, one brick at a time. That's how they built the Great Wall of China, and I hear you can see that motherfucker from space. And we can't just tell them, we've got to show them, we've got to come up with a better idea, not just scold people for voting Bush and driving SUVs. If we can do all that, if that fire can be lit in enough people's bellies, then maybe there really is a chance. Probably not in my lifetime. But maybe, if the gods are willing and I bust my balls, in my little brother's. Keep the faith.
Here's the solution to the dilemma. Find a gorgeous intern who is willing to give George W a proper blow job (preferably a cute Texas cowboy - it would be more scandalous). This might accomplish three things:
1. loosen him up a bit (he seems awfully tense lately;)
2. offer us grounds for impeachment
3. give Kenny Star something to do
So, spread the word in Texas!
"God, please save me from your followers!"
Ken star hasn't been a "special counsel" since 1998
And overthrow democracy? Yeah yeah, "Do we really have a democracy right now?" you ask. Fuck yeah. Do you realize how fucking LUCKY we are?!? That we can actually have gay pride parades and - unless you're in the south - not have to go to jail for sodomy (move to CA if this doesn't apply to you)?? For sure our country has problems (and for sure I hate Bush), but let's be a little realistic here...
There IS a difference in how they work. Now, should we overthrow bush? Potentially, if he continues working on Orwellian legislature. The truth is, our gov't is shit. It's backwards and doesn't work. We don't necessarly need to overthrow it though. Our generation needs to get in there and overHAUL it instead. I'll probably get arrested for saying this in a public forum, so if I do, I'll see ya in a few years unless the CIA and that homeland security group just don't fake my death.
--Corvus, the disenchanted one.
War makes rattling good history. Peace makes poor reading.
Liberty is the freedom of operation without intercession by a higher authority.
Vanity rather than wisdom determines how the world is run.
Killing for peace is like screwing for virginity.
This is another political forum.
I thought this was some shaving thread uniting people against growing pubic hair. I'm way too lazy to keep that under control, so I never read this thread before...
Thinking of ways to stop this war and get Bush out of office is as useful as wondering how to get the speeding bus that's five feet away from you from stopping before you get killed. Not happening.
Now, Bush is up for re-election next year. Starting now on strategy for getting his ass out at that point in time? Much more constructive. Unless you want to just be reactionary, bitch, and not do anything (like most gay activists).
I do not fall into this category, because i don't care enough about this issue to get riled up. There will be a big protest here on sunday, and I will be in my nice, warm apartment, as per usual, while everyong braves the rain to preach to the converted.
...you should really be paying closer attention.
You know, a combination between El Presidente's last name and the idea of shaving one's pubic hair would make a killer political slogan, don't you think?
let's hire a mob or....som assaisans....or me! & kill him! then all all troubles caused by Bush r gone! (if u hire me, Does any1 hav a sniper rifle? *evil laugh* mohahaha!!!)
"keep ur thorns,cuz m running away" -Mudvayne
"girls & girls,but u the 1," -t.A.T.u.
Cheney as President works for you? I must have missed something...
I've heard it said, and I agree with it more and more; it's not so much Bush that terrifies me, but the very evil, very dangerous people he surrounds himself with.
TeeAhr1. The Cheese Stands Alone.
Dubya by himself is harmless, it's Cheney, Rumsfield, Gen. Franks, and the ever popular Mr. Powell whom we should fear.
I like the pictures - it'd be great to print them out and turn them into posters and plaster 'em everywhere.
They reminded me of something: has anyone here actually seen the seal for the Department of Homeland Security? I can't remember where to find it on the Internet, but it depicts an All-Seeing Eye (i.e. the eye in the pyramid, like they have on $1 bills) casting light on the world with an inscription in Latin underneath (can't remember what it says). Anyway, you look at it and you want to think it's some kind of morbid joke...but it's not.
"Our goal is not to expand Government, but to create an agile organization that takes advantage of modern technology and management techniques to meet a new and constantly evolving threat. "
--- President's Message to Congress, June 18, 2002
But the report on the website slips it all to us...
"The Department would build and maintain a comprehensive assessment of our nation
That's the seal for the Office of Homeland Security, but I'm talking about the new Department of Homeland Security, the logo for which has the Masonic All-Seeing Eye casting a light on the world. It's creepy shit...