waltappel 1 #26 August 12, 2005 Quote>Those degenerate pieces of Hollywood scum that inhabit their ivory > towers and try to prescribe what is best for the rest of the world are > so full of shit that I don't know how they can live with themselves. Only 'pieces of Hollywood scum' I can think of who actually tried to change how people live their lives are Arnold and Ron Reagan. The rest of them are no more or less evil than some of the characters here on Speaker's Corner - it's just that more people listen to them. As usual Bill, there is wisdom in what you say. My perspective comes from someone who is a bit older than you. When I was growing up, celebrities, as a rule, were not vocal political activists. I kind of like it that way. I don't question the right of the Hollywood types to support their causes, but I get really sick of their incredibly vocal anti-American bias. And unlike most, if not all of the people who inhabit Speakers Corner, the Hollywood elite are wealthy and actually contribute large amounts of money to their twisted causes. Their bullshit goes beyond mere discussion. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #27 August 12, 2005 I think Hilary would be bad... I think GWB is worse. I don't think Hilary could win an election, but she could be a viable VP candidate if paired with a true moderate as a running mate. Economics-wise, I think Hilary is too far to the left, especially when it comes to health care. However, I would choose freedom of personal actions and thought over economic freedom and the ability to decide where my money goes. If I were forced to make an either-or choice, I feel that GWB is a threat to personal freedom, moreso than Hilary is a threat to economic freedom. That said, in a race between Hilary and GWB, I'd probably vote for a third party candidate such as Michael Badnarik. I'm sick of having to choose between the lesser of two evils. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #28 August 12, 2005 Well, I like that analysis better . Why do you think GWB is restricting personal freedom? Are you refering to the Patriot Act? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
meltdown 0 #29 August 12, 2005 The lefty professors and administrations at US universities do far more to restrict personal freedom than Bush could ever do. Conservatives at universities are routinely denied their free speech rights, or are shouted down by rabid lefties if they do manage to find a forum. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #30 August 12, 2005 QuoteThe lefty professors and administrations at US universities do far more to restrict personal freedom than Bush could ever do. Conservatives at universities are routinely denied their free speech rights, or are shouted down by rabid lefties if they do manage to find a forum. I wanted to make the same case, but it's been beaten to death here. Each side 'feels' the other side is restricting liberties. Can't get around it and the arguments are futile and hot-headed. Perfect for internet forums. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #31 August 12, 2005 QuoteThe lefty professors and administrations at US universities do far more to restrict personal freedom than Bush could ever do. Conservatives at universities are routinely denied their free speech rights, or are shouted down by rabid lefties if they do manage to find a forum. I do not get this impression when sitting in a classroom these past few years. I've seen liberal and conservative professors alike encourage Neo-Nazis (extreme right wing) and Neo-Marxists (extreme left wing) to explain and support their personal philosophies to whatever peaceful extent they feel comfortable with. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #32 August 12, 2005 I think GWB has demonstrated a track record of curtailing personal freedoms. A few examples: 1. the patriot act. yes, our representatives voted for it, but Bush seems to be its strongest advocate. 2. his advocacy of an anti gay marriage amendment 3. his anti-choice statements about abortion 4. his advocacy of holding people without enough evidence for a trial with regards to suspected terrorism Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #33 August 12, 2005 I have no problem with a private university restricting events or speeches on their private property. Public universities should be a more open forum, as they are funded with taxpayer money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
meltdown 0 #34 August 12, 2005 The lefty professors and administrations at US universities do far more to restrict personal freedom than Bush could ever do. Conservatives at universities are routinely denied their free speech rights, or are shouted down by rabid lefties if they do manage to find a forum. ---------------------------------------------------------- I wanted to make the same case, but it's been beaten to death here. Each side 'feels' the other side is restricting liberties. Can't get around it and the arguments are futile and hot-headed. Perfect for internet forums. _________________________________________________ Yeah, you're right. I'm going back to the Bonfire thread about the guy croaking after screwing a horse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #35 August 12, 2005 ***I think GWB has demonstrated a track record of curtailing personal freedoms. Except for maybe firearms ownership?Something that his opponents couldnt say with a straight faceMarc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #36 August 12, 2005 QuoteSure, I'd vote for Hillary--right after I finished pissing on the flag and burning it. IMO Hillary represents the people of this country about as much as Hitler represented the people of Germany. Despite what the media would have us believe, I know that the typical American is a really honest and decent person. I don't think she's even close. She strikes me as dishonest, manipulative, arrogant, and "all about Hillary". I don't think she's capable of representing anyone but herself. I've seen discussions by commentators who wonder about her decision-making capabilities. They seem to gloss over her character flaws. If she does run and win, I hope her running mate is Ted Kennedy. After all, if we're going to have Hillary as President, why not have an alcoholic murderer for Vice President? Walt WALT 4 PRESIDENT. (grounds for a new poll?)______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #37 August 12, 2005 Thanks for the sentiment, but I do not have the level-headed wisdom that should permeate that job. Neither does George W. Bush. Neither does Hillary. BillVon probably does, but I doubt he would want the job. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #38 August 12, 2005 >BillVon probably does. . . I do not! I'm too much of an asshole. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #39 August 12, 2005 Quote 1) I don't think she's electable. She may, in fact, get the nomination, but there is no way in hell she can actually win the election. She'll be doing the party a great disservice by running. She can use the Clinton legacy to get enough money to run a strong campaign, same way that W got money for the 2000 campaign and pushed the others out. But enough Democrats and virtually all Republicans will vote against her. A good candidate if you're running against a popular incumbent (say 1996), but a total waste in an open race like 2008 will be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #40 August 12, 2005 QuoteOnly 'pieces of Hollywood scum' I can think of who actually tried to change how people live their lives are Arnold and Ron Reagan. The rest of them are no more or less evil than some of the characters here on Speaker's Corner - it's just that more people listen to them. They have been major supporters in ways that matter (read: $$) on initiatives. I believe Hollywood spearheaded the last cigarette tax increase that is paying for daycare. I thought they were behind the ban on consumption of horse meat (??) and perhaps the ridiculous foie gras bill that for some reason got signed by Arnold to please that asshole Burton. Not big life changes - though I can't say Arnold has really changed our lives much either so far. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #41 August 12, 2005 Quote***I think GWB has demonstrated a track record of curtailing personal freedoms. Except for maybe firearms ownership?Something that his opponents couldnt say with a straight face I agree. Gun control laws are, for the most part, out of control. For some reason the democrats seem to want to ignore the second amendment, and the republicans recently seem to want to forget about the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, and tenth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #42 August 12, 2005 Quote>BillVon probably does. . . I do not! I'm too much of an asshole. And all the other politicians aren't? _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #43 August 12, 2005 Billvon for President! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #44 August 12, 2005 I would just as soon nuke the entire province of Jalasco, Mexico as vote for Hillary Clinton. That ain't going to happen anytime soon. JACKASS 2008!!!!!!!Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #45 August 12, 2005 Quote>BillVon probably does. . . I do not! I'm too much of an asshole. Sorry, Bill. I think if there were to be an asshole contest, you would find that you would not have a prayer of winning. Not even in the amateur division. I read your posts in rec.skydiving for years. That was a long time ago, and you always had a lot to say that was worth listening to. I met you at Bridge Day one year and saw you BASE jump from 240 ft. over hard dirt. You were a cool guy then and I doubt much has changed. edited to add: Not that any of the above would make you a good president, but you *do* have a very long track record of being very level-headed and wise beyond your years. Ok, time to get back to the regularly-scheduled bloodbath. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #46 August 12, 2005 QuoteBillvon for President! He would have my vote--and NOT because he would be the lesser of two evils! Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #48 August 12, 2005 It's tough to make a decision based on the sheer amount of pro and anti hilary stuff out there. Of course, not knowing who she's likely running against is also a factor. Wait, what am i saying, she jumped on the anti-gta bandwagon and showed exactly how much of a vote panderer she is and how insincere and uninformed she is. If I wanna have simulated half dressed pixelated dryhumping in my MA-17 rated video games I'll have it, I dont need you to re-rate it and accuse it of being the root of all evil in US society. "Everyone" knows thats the job of the current Administration. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #49 August 13, 2005 If she were running for trash collector, yes.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #50 August 13, 2005 QuoteIf she were running for trash collector, yes. Personally, I think my trash deserves better than that. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
