Next best thing for the US (and perhaps the world)

[colourwheel]

Voting for one criminal because they promise to use a different kind of lube when they bend you over is still voting to have a criminal violate you.

 

I'll have none of it. I'll vote third party, and even if the person i vote for loses, then at least i didn't consent to being violated.

 

No disrespect I understand how you might feel but I think using the word "criminal" is a little extreme pointing to either political party this election. No one who is running this year to my knowledge has ever been a convicted felon. Sure people might strongly believe someone is in the wrong for things they have done, either being fact or fiction, but to characterize and call someone something they are clearly not is really kind of unfair.

 

You can call any politician a liar or a hypocrite but these are mostly subjective lables unless they are actually caught doing something with enough evidence it's beyond any doubt for it to be concidered otherwise.

 

IMO i wish more people in america would atleast try to justify labeling politicians with a good arguement before calling them names and not just saying they read some blog or saw something on youtube or TV. Honestly i sometimes blame myself sometimes doing the same and try to catch myself before making judgement about politicians I would ussualy do research on my own looking at the fact and reading reports from a few point of views on multiple sides of an issue. If people get into the habit of name calling all the time in politics that just leads to hate. i would think everyone can agree no one likes hatred.

[dazzerfong]

@ csgators:

 

Don't want to go off-topic anymore, but let's begin with simple history:

 

Vietnam - Border problems. One side (both sides really are responsible) got nuts, the other gets even more nuts.

Taiwan - Not exactly a war, Taiwan's part of China. It's kind of the same thing with East Timor, except East Timor got their independence.

Tibet - Part of China on and off history, but most recently, since the 1950's. Kind of like letting go Bueno Aires: not going to happen, at least in their books.

 

@ colourwheel

 

Agreed: we all know that politicians don't do what the public want. But being labelled a criminal? Excluding Truman and Nixon, can't really say much on that.

[dazzerfong]

@ csgators:

 

Don't want to go off-topic anymore, but let's begin with simple history:

 

Vietnam - Border problems. One side (both sides really are responsible) got nuts, the other gets even more nuts.

Taiwan - Not exactly a war, Taiwan's part of China. It's kind of the same thing with East Timor, except East Timor got their independence.

Tibet - Part of China on and off history, but most recently, since the 1950's. Kind of like letting go Texas: not going to happen, at least in their books.

 

@ mandamus:

 

Promise it's the last post on China. No, in my opinion, and being a Chinese person, we're too different to the rest of the world to 'rule' it. The attitudes, morals and ethics are just too different for China to comfortably control the world. Subtle influences, maybe. Direct control? Never.

 

@ colourwheel

 

Agreed: we all know that politicians don't do what the public want. But being labelled a criminal? Excluding Truman and Nixon, can't really say much on that.

Edited September 10, 2012 by dazzerfong

[HeyYou]

China may not want to Rule the world.... they just wanna own it. :) And they are doing a fine job of buying it up too...

[Vindekarr]

I agree Dazzer. I can't see China ever having any megolomaniacal desires unless it goes through a vast cultural change. Correct me if this is ignorance, but the history I've read about China suggests that from their early years, they've been something of an isolationist people. I've read that some believe the great wall was built as much to keep the rest of the world away from The Middle Kingdom as to simply be a martial defence. And none of their recent policy has suggested any sort of imperialist ambition anyway. China has probably the biggest pool of military resources anywhere in the developed world, and while they may not neccessarily win, they could have a damn good go at taking over any of a slew of places. Japan for example-couldn't possibly defeat all of China. But China hasn't shown any interest in using it's powers. Just as it has been in the past, China seems to be a bit of a sleepey giant, content to live as it has lived, without needing to flex it's considerable might.

 

What i can see happening in China is them becoming even more capitalist-they've got vast industrial capacity and fairly loose development laws. They also have the money to bring in top level talent, and a vast labour pool. I can forsee China becoming the world hyperpower, economically-they practically are already-but not an empire, they've had plenty of chances to be one before now.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Vindekarr

[csgators]

@ csgators:

 

Don't want to go off-topic anymore, but let's begin with simple history:

 

Vietnam - Border problems. One side (both sides really are responsible) got nuts, the other gets even more nuts.

Taiwan - Not exactly a war, Taiwan's part of China. It's kind of the same thing with East Timor, except East Timor got their independence.

Tibet - Part of China on and off history, but most recently, since the 1950's. Kind of like letting go Texas: not going to happen, at least in their books.

 

 

Taiwan is part of China? According to the PRC they are but the people of Taiwan beg to differ. Vietnam has been invaded by China multiple times. Do you really think Vietnam wanted war with China? The last time Vietnam was invaded by China it was because Vietnam invaded Cambodia to stop the Khmer Rouge. That was a favor to the world and Vietnam kicked the crap out of China to boot. The border disputes are all instigated by China to claim more land. If China ever once set foot in a place then they say they have a right to it. Sounds like a European country still less than 100 years ago.

[Mandamus]

@ mandamus:

 

Promise it's the last post on China. No, in my opinion, and being a Chinese person, we're too different to the rest of the world to 'rule' it. The attitudes, morals and ethics are just too different for China to comfortably control the world. Subtle influences, maybe. Direct control? Never.

I'll promise the same. You have every right to reply to my post, when I re-read I think it's a bit rude toward the Chinese people. I'm making assumptions about the future based on the recent history of China. Maybe I feel comfortable with the US because I feel culturally closer to them, or maybe because with the the US as world leader I know from experience what to expect. With China I don't really know what to expect. I've also had met very persons from China, maybe it's my ignorance speaking more than my fear (insert :shrug: emoticon here)

[colourwheel]

I think everyone fears change and too much change in a short time can be dangerous. Not always dangerous but its not good for too much change to happen in a short time. The problem though is sometimes you can't turn back and a lot of change has to happen fast in a short time.

 

It's like you have a tooth ache and you wait till it get infected and in serious pain and your whole jaw gets swollen. since you didnt go to the dentist and get it looked at year ago, now you have to take anti-biotices to reduce the swelling and then go back to probably get a root canal. Get pain killers to just live every day without as much pain. then go back to actually get your tooth worked on. But even after you will still be in pain. You will have to stay on anti-biotics and stay on pain meds. Then have to take better care of your teeth.

 

That in itself is a lot to go through and your body will be stressed out. Sure you will feel better after its all over and done with and your tooth ache will soon become an after thought.

 

But most the time people avoid the dentist is because they fear what the dentist will say or do. Ussually people who fear the dentist will be forced into going eventually anyways just to get better. And no one likes to be forced to do something.

 

Being forced to change because things have gotten so bad can't be ignored but still feared.

 

All Americans might have to someday accept the force of dramatic changes because things could get really bad if we have another Horrible pressident any time soon. (saying Bush was horrible)

Edited September 10, 2012 by colourwheel

[Syco21]

Voting for one criminal because they promise to use a different kind of lube when they bend you over is still voting to have a criminal violate you.

 

I'll have none of it. I'll vote third party, and even if the person i vote for loses, then at least i didn't consent to being violated.

 

No disrespect I understand how you might feel but I think using the word "criminal" is a little extreme pointing to either political party this election. No one who is running this year to my knowledge has ever been a convicted felon. Sure people might strongly believe someone is in the wrong for things they have done, either being fact or fiction, but to characterize and call someone something they are clearly not is really kind of unfair.

 

You can call any politician a liar or a hypocrite but these are mostly subjective lables unless they are actually caught doing something with enough evidence it's beyond any doubt for it to be concidered otherwise.

 

IMO i wish more people in america would atleast try to justify labeling politicians with a good arguement before calling them names and not just saying they read some blog or saw something on youtube or TV. Honestly i sometimes blame myself sometimes doing the same and try to catch myself before making judgement about politicians I would ussualy do research on my own looking at the fact and reading reports from a few point of views on multiple sides of an issue. If people get into the habit of name calling all the time in politics that just leads to hate. i would think everyone can agree no one likes hatred.

Hasn't anyone ever taught you not to make assumptions? Didn't they teach you about metaphors in school? The politicians aren't literally bending us over and last i checked, forced penetration is rape and rape is a crime. So the most logical assumption would be that criminal was part of the metaphor.

 

But whatever, doesn't really matter. There's other issues too. Being a criminal is not a matter of being convicted, it's a matter of committing crimes. Being convicted of a crime doesn't make a person a criminal, it only reaffirms the criminal label. Committing a crime makes a person a criminal. Most Americans are.

 

Never the less, many of these politicians are criminals, liars and hypocrites. Romney is both a liar and a hypocrite, that can be easily proven. Obama is also a last, again this can be easily proven, assuming people don't all have short term memory. He made many promises during his first campaign and delivered on almost none of them. In failing to deliver his promises, he conned the American people, I'd say this makes him a criminal. But i guess I'm one of the few that actually want to see our politicians held to their promises and accountable for their lies.

 

Even so, there are other issues as well, Fast and Furious was a criminal operation illegally arming drug cartels in Mexico that has directly lead to the death of thousands of Mexican citizens and several American citizens. This was done without the permission of the Mexican government, they weren't even informed.

 

This was done under Obama, but Bush had a similar operation. Make no mistake, our politicians are criminals,just because they control the judicial system, doesn't absolve them of their crimes.

[colourwheel]

@Syco21

 

A broken promiss is hardly something that would fall under criminal activity.

 

As for this "fast and Furious" thing there is no evidence still to what you are claiming. You might strongly feel Obama is to blame for this but if he is guilty i am sure he will be held accountable for it later.

Edited September 11, 2012 by colourwheel