Political stance

Scathach · Post by **Scathach** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:19 pm

Since, inevitably, when I enter any kind of political debate I am accused of belonging to some group or another and thus demonized, I'll go ahead and get the basics out of the way.

I am not a democrat. I am not a republican. I don't belong to any political party. I am slightly more liberal than conservative, but it really depends on the topic in question.

Guns - I believe that firearms should be registered and that civilians do not need to own 50 caliber automatic weapons. I do however, believe we have the right to bear arms and think the best method of preventing kids from accidently shooting themselves and their friends is to teach them the proper method of using a gun.

Religion - I think everyone is entitled to both freedom of and freedom from religion, as you cannot have one without the other. Religion should not be taught in public school. I do not believe going to church /mosque /synagogue /whatever makes anyone more moral than anyone else. I am not a Christian, and if you wish to debate why you best have read the bible first. I believe the term hypocrite tends to be a more accurate term than 'religious' when describing most individuals, be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Pagan, etc....

Education - I believe everyone should be allowed to get an education. I do not believe anyone has the 'right' to a good grade and if you are a disruptive force in the classroom the teacher should be able to kick you out. If you don't do your homework, don't study, or cheat, you get an F. Don't like it, tough. I don't think teachers get near the respect they deserve and that most administrators are unnecessary wastes of space. I believe it is the parent's job to discipline and instill morals in a child and the teacher's job to teach the kid reading, 'riting, and 'rithmetic. I think it is utterly ridiculous that teachers have to buy school supplies out of their own pockets and that school funding could be improved by kicking 80% of the administrators out.

Affirmitive Action - We hold these truths to be self-evident that all people are born equal. What you do with your life from that point on determines your worth, not your ethnicity/gender. Affirmitive Action is inherently racist, and more racism will not fix the problem of racism any more than shooting more holes in a boat will help it float.

Welfare - I do not believe we should support those who are unwilling to take care of themselves. That said, I to believe a system should be in place to support those unable to take care of themselves (read as children and those with mental or physical disabilities that truly do prevent them from working) and provide them with food and shelter.

Homosexuality - As long as all involved are consenting adults (please understand what 'capable of consent' and 'adult' mean before debating this issue), it's nobody's business what goes on in the privacy of the bedroom. I do not believe that two gay people getting married negatively impacts my own relationships. I do not believe that homosexuality is a choice anymore than my own attraction to the opposite gender is. I do not believe churches should be forced to marry anyone they do not approve of, but churches should not be allowed to dictate who is married under the eyes of the law. Homosexuality is not a contagious disease and the percentage of homosexuals throughout history has been fairly constant.

Sex - No one was traumatised by Janet's boob. Get over it already. It's completely ridiculous that people let their kid's watch all kinds of violent programming and yet competely flip out over the thought their child might see skin. Abstinence only education does not work, and has been proven repeatedly not to work. Teens will get laid. You were a teenager once, you should know better than to believe otherwise. You are better off making sure they know how to have safe sex then pretending they don't have sex. Teach your kids that they are worth more than a romp in the back of a car, but make sure they know what to do if they do decide to have sex. Otherwise, you have kids believing mountain dew is a spermicide and anal sex enables one to stay a virgin.

But Clinton/Bush! - Michael Moore is a liberal. Jack Chick is a conservative. Both are complete tards. Al Franken is a liberal. Ann Coulter is a conservative. Both are tards. Ted Kennedy is a liberal. Jerry Falwell is a conservative. Both are tards. We can play this game all day, or we can admit that both sides have their share of retards and get over it already. If someone put a gun to my head and forced me to choose between Bush and Clinton, I'd probably just tell them to go ahead and shoot.

Video Games - Violence has been around since the first human found a sharp stick. Video games don't create it.

TV - Parent your kids. Don't let the TV do it. I'm an adult, you don't have the right to censor what I watch because you are to stupid to learn how to work the friggin parental controls that come with every TV/cable box/satellite dish and too lazy to supervise little Bobby and Susie. The PTC has it's liberals and it's conservatives, don't pretend only one side is doing it.

Iraq - Was a phenomenally stupid idea based on bad intel and a pack of lies. You cannot plan a war based on wishful thinking. That said, it's too late now, we made the mess, we need to clean it up.

9-11 - Proper intelligence (and I'm not talking about espionage) could have prevented it. People being taught that they are responsible for their own safety and that they shouldn't depend on mommy government to save them could have prevented it.

Patriot Act - Doesn't make us safer, just takes away rights and leads to abuses. Want to be safe? Buy a gun, learn to shoot it.

Terrorists - Most terrorism is domestic. Domestic terrorism is pretty evenly split between PETA groups and the Christian Nation groups. I don't fear brown people.

Fundamentalists - Are tards, regardless of whether you put the word 'Muslim' or the word 'Christian' in front of fundamentalist. Fred Phelps and Osama bin Laden are cut from the same cloth.

Gender Issues - I am a woman. I work in construction. Sexual harassment is still a problem. I am a rape survivor, and would gladly kick the arse of those idiots with a 'blame the victim' mentality. I do not believe either gender is superior. I do not believe either gender deserves rights the other does not. I believe the only things that should be for 'men only' or 'women only' are bathrooms, everything else should be a matter of ability and choice, not gender. If a woman can make the wrestling team, she should be allowed. If a man wants to take home ec, he should be allowed.

Child Support - Boys, it's called a condom. Girls, it's called the pill. If you don't use them, then it's called a child and you are both equally responsible.

Taxes - Are a necessary evil. If you control 90% of the wealth, don't whine because you pay 90% of the taxes. I've had to choose between food and rent come tax season, I'm not sympathetic to you having to choose between the 38' yacht and the 40' yacht. Don't like it? Lobby your buddies to quit wasting so damn much money.

Vote - You don't vote, you don't get to complain.

Lawsuits - If you ignore the warning signs and break your arse, you don't get to sue. If you injure yourself in the commission of a crime, you don't get to sue. If you are where you are not supposed to be, you don't get to sue. If you ignore the warning labels, you don't get to sue. If you do not apply common sense, you don't get to sue. If you are willfully negligent, expect to get sued.

Crime and Punishment - There are things human beings do not do. If you do them, do not expect to be treated like a human being. Don't like the punishment? Here is a novel idea - don't commit the crime.

Drugs - Pot is no more dangerous than booze and nicotine. A business should be allowed to decide for itself if it should be smoking or non-smoking. Throwing your cigarette on the sidewalk is littering and rude. Blowing smoke in people's faces is rude. Grinding out your cigarette on my hand-made wooden benches is rude. Lighting up in my house after I've asked you not to is rude. I don't hate you because you are a smoker, I hate you because you are a rude. If you drive drunk, I have no sympathy for your arse.

Prostitution - If it's legal to give it away, it should be legal to sell it.

Democracy - Worst possible system of government, except for all others. America on the other hand, is not a democracy. It is a republic. A democracy and a republic are not the same thing.

Treason - Stating there is something you dislike about the US is not treason. Stating improvement could be made is not treason. Disliking the current administration is not treason. Thinking the patriot act is stupid is not treason. Being a republican is not treason. Being a democrate is not treason. Being a liberal is not treason. Being a conservative is not treason. Liberals are not commies. Conservatives are not Nazis.

Narnian · Post by **Narnian** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:04 pm

You forgot abortion!

T.s.a.o · Post by **T.s.a.o** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:22 pm

yeah thats only slightly conservitave, but once the word 'politics' enters, everything is demonized. i've never heard of non-demonational politics

Scathach · Post by **Scathach** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 6:27 pm

[quote="Narnian"]You forgot abortion![/quote]

Pro-choice

I'm pro-morning after pill, pro-birth control, and pro-sex education. 2nd trimester and up abortions only to protect the mother.

That said, I think women who use abortions as birth control are low-life scum.

Sciguy · Post by **Sciguy** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:44 pm

I find your use of Retard most disturbing since I know several retarted people. My I Humbly sugest the word Asshole?

It's PC. Makes me feel better. And goes to show how we bend over backwards for manners.

Still, how I actualy managed to make Asshole sound PC eludes me.

Pc is something that's verries. There's levels that make sense, and levels that are a completely astanine.

Iraq... Saddam should have been run out of power a deckade ago.

When we completeled Desert Storm, we were about to go in to invade when the UN talked us out of it. They took responsabilaty. And they laid terms to Saddam which included inspections and no chemical weapons.

Saddam said okay.

Saddam then denied access to those same Inspectors and gassed Kurds within his country with said chemical weapons he never had.

Clinton bombs him but that was the limit of what he did. The UN sanctioned and bulled while allowing Saddam to abuse the Food for Oil deal, because UN officals were involved.

Bush may have gotten the Intel wrong, but he did the job that was in aa long time comming. Wrong intel, but Saddam had to go down.

IronFox · Post by **IronFox** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:51 am

Hell, the only reason Clinton authorized that cruise missle strike on Iraq was to distract people from the whole Lewinsky scandal. And you can say what you like about Bush screwing up foreign policy, but I'd take his over Clinton's any day of the week.

Scathach · Post by **Scathach** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:15 am

[quote="Sciguy"]I find your use of Retard most disturbing since I know several retarted people. My I Humbly sugest the word Asshole? [/quote]

I do not use the word 'retarded' to refer to those with mental disabilities. I use the word 'retarded' to refer to those incapable of rational thought. There is a difference.

Shyal_malkes · Post by **Shyal_malkes** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 5:30 pm

those incapable of rational thought to me are less irritating then those who are capable of it and refuse to do so anyway.

thankfully I haven't run into either of those two kinds of people in a very long time.

EdBecerra · Post by **EdBecerra** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:44 pm

IronFox wrote:Hell, the only reason Clinton authorized that cruise missle strike on Iraq was to distract people from the whole Lewinsky scandal. And you can say what you like about Bush screwing up foreign policy, but I'd take his over Clinton's any day of the week.

Clinton's problem - in my opinion only! - was that he was a good governor, but a lousy President. When you're a state governor, you can make mistakes. After all, no matter how badly you screw up, the Federal government is there to limit the damage. But when you're the President, the buck STOPS on your desk, and there's no one to go crying home to. No room to play fast and loose, thinking that "It doesn't matter if I screw up badly, Washington will save the day if it gets too bad..."

There are any number of governors who think of their office as a chance to experiment with social systems using live people as guinea pigs, (*cough*Grey Davis*cough) believing that if they fail, Washington will bail them out.

But when you're the President... no more safety net.

It's just that a few of them seem to have forgotten that, and when they fell and the net wasn't there, they have this dumbfounded look on their face, wondering what the hell happened...

Gengar003 · Post by **Gengar003** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 7:33 pm

Wow. I agree almost completely. Handy-dandy.

I want to be able to own a 50-caliber automatic weapon if I choose to, though. Civillians don't need Humvees, 72-inch plasma TVs, $30,000 recliners, dual-core, hyperthreading 3.2gHz, 8 gig ram, 2 gig video card computers, or that 38' yacht, either... but the gov't doesn't limit them because they're unneccessary.

I think I know what you're saying, though -- that allowing "just anyone" to get ahold of weapons that powerful is inviting disaster. You're right, or at least I agree with that. I'd want that option available if I were a gun aficionado, I think. I know I'd be hella pissed if the gov't told me my new computer could only be so fast, and not a megahertz more.

T.s.a.o · Post by **T.s.a.o** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:07 pm

what do you mean? I'm a civillian and my computer needs its own renderfarm! its required for my trade. there are no civillians however, that should be assassains, gansters, or dumb Marvel fanatics running around with uzis and tanks. Hey, I know kids who tried to castrate people with paintball rifles or whatever, or at least they boasted of it. I may not need those new apple multi touch screens yet, but they sure look cool.

EdBecerra · Post by **EdBecerra** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:27 pm

t.s.a.o wrote:there are no civillians however, that should be assassains, gansters, or dumb Marvel fanatics running around with uzis and tanks. Hey, I know kids who tried to castrate people with paintball rifles or whatever, or at least they boasted of it. I may not need those new apple multi touch screens yet, but they sure look cool.

A good point, Tsao, but there's one problem with it. A disarmed public is a public with no control over it's own government. A vote is meaningless if you don't have some way to enforce the results. There's nothing to stop the head of state from saying "F*ck this vote, I'm declaring myself Emperor for Life of Whozistan, and if you don't like it, take it up with my loyal army and their tanks, dive bombers, chemical weapons of mass destruction, et cetera..."

There's a word describing people who have no weapons to fight with... "sheep". And sheep do what they're told or they die. And often, they die anyway. Simply because the wolves in the world want something to eat, and the sheep can't put up a fight.

My grandfather said it best (tho he got the words from someone else): I'll trust a politician... if I have a gun to his head, a knife to his throat and a set of vice-grips clamped on his [censored].

It's an ugly way to look at the human race, but hey, it's the truth.

EdBecerra · Post by **EdBecerra** » Tue Mar 07, 2006 11:39 pm

Gengar003 wrote:I want to be able to own a 50-caliber automatic weapon if I choose to, though. Civillians don't need Humvees, 72-inch plasma TVs, $30,000 recliners, dual-core, hyperthreading 3.2gHz, 8 gig ram, 2 gig video card computers, or that 38' yacht, either... but the gov't doesn't limit them because they're unneccessary.

I think I know what you're saying, though -- that allowing "just anyone" to get ahold of weapons that powerful is inviting disaster. You're right, or at least I agree with that. I'd want that option available if I were a gun aficionado, I think. I know I'd be hella pissed if the gov't told me my new computer could only be so fast, and not a megahertz more.

Actually, that did almost happen. Keep in mind that encryption programs and some of the faster personal computers ARE restricted export items in the USA. Phil Zimmerman, a fellow Coloradan and creator of "Pretty Good Privacy" was harrassed almost constantly by the US goverment, who didn't want a powerful encryption program in the hands of private citizens.

PGP's author, Phil Zimmerman, was criminally investigated for three years by the U.S. Government for having violated munitions control regulations in connection with the availability outside the US and Canada of PGP. The investigation was abruptly dropped. Zimmerman has publicly stated that the investigation might have been dropped because the U.S. government had found a way to break PGP messages of that period.

Additionally, a number of the more advanced CPU's on the market are restricted items, and you can be arrested for trying to sell them to Cuba, North Korea, and a number of other nations on the US goverment's watch list. You can also have your laptop confiscated if you attempt to take it with you should you try to travel to a nation on the list - at least, if you try to travel to those nations directly from a port or airport in the USA.

Shortly after its release, PGP found its way outside the US, and in February 1993 Zimmermann became the formal target of a criminal investigation by the US Government for "munitions export without a license". Cryptosystems using keys larger than 40-bits were then considered munitions within the definition of the US export regulations; PGP has never used keys smaller than 128 bits so it qualified at that time. Penalties for violation, if found guilty, were substantial. The investigation of Zimmermann was eventually closed without filing criminal charges against him or anyone else.

US export regulations regarding cryptography remain in force, but were liberalized substantially throughout the late 1990s. Since 2000, compliance with the regulations is also much easier. PGP no longer meets the definition of a non-exportable weapon, and can be exported anywhere, assuming local regulations permit.

When all is said and done - don't trust a government.

ANY government.

Sciguy · Post by **Sciguy** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:06 am

I managed to find this recently, and I couldn't help but think about the small PC rant I made.

http://www.madblast.com/index.cfm?action=view&id=12810

Maxgoof · Post by **Maxgoof** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:47 am

EdBecerra wrote:Clinton's problem - in my opinion only! - was that he was a good governor, but a lousy President. When you're a state governor, you can make mistakes. After all, no matter how badly you screw up, the Federal government is there to limit the damage. But when you're the President, the buck STOPS on your desk, and there's no one to go crying home to. No room to play fast and loose, thinking that "It doesn't matter if I screw up badly, Washington will save the day if it gets too bad..."

I'd say that this was Jimmy Carter's primary failing, along with an unhealthy level of naivete, which exists to this day.

Clinton's biggest problem is an ego that demands approval. Everything he did in office was designed to make himself look good, whether it actually did any good or not.

He promised a middle class tax cut in the campaign, and the first thing he did as president was drop that promise claiming he had worked harder to get the tax cut than he had ever worked in his life. Even a cursory look at it shows that was complete and utter bullcrap.

Clinton is the reason the Democrats lost control of the White House, the Senate, and the House. Clinton now has them convinced that it was the attacks on him, personally, that brought that about, and think they can win it back by attacking Bush.

But it isn't working, is it? Yet, he and the Democrats refuse to believe that it is the rejection of their baseless attacks that is causing themselves to lose consistantly on the federal level. They have fallen for their own lies, just as Clinton did, and God knows what damage they will do before they either come to their senses or die an ignoble death.

Scathach · Post by **Scathach** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 am

[quote="maxgoof"]But it isn't working, is it? Yet, he and the Democrats refuse to believe that it is the rejection of their baseless attacks that is causing themselves to lose consistantly on the federal level. They have fallen for their own lies, just as Clinton did, and God knows what damage they will do before they either come to their senses or die an ignoble death.[/quote]

You know, I can make this exact same argument about the Republicans.

It has nothing to do with the party, it has everything to do with politicians.

All politicians lie. All politicians attack their opponents baselessly.

Clinton lied about a blowjob. Bush lied about intel. Both are politicians, why was anyone surprised they lied?

Both the Republicans and the Democrats have some terrible policies and often act like rabid retards.

Which, incidently, is why I refuse to join either party. Both are so utterly certain they are right about everything that neither is willing to acknowledge that 'hey, the other side has a point'.

JakeWasHere · Post by **JakeWasHere** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:42 pm

Bill Hicks' first maxim:
"ALL GOVERNMENTS ARE LYING COCKSUCKERS. IF YOU TRUST THEM, YOU DESERVE WHATEVER YOU WILL GET."

Maxgoof · Post by **Maxgoof** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 1:06 pm

Scathach wrote:You know, I can make this exact same argument about the Republicans.

No, you couldn't. The Republican's have not lost ground in the Senate, House, or the White House. If they had, you could. But they have not.

T.s.a.o · Post by **T.s.a.o** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:30 pm

Ed, just remember the world partly runs on the Devil's politicis, you just need to remember that our Father has the final say on Anything, and he's easy to "lobby". It'll be quite hard to get any needs from a politician if I have to compete with society for the biggest gun to blackmail him with. Its just too much of a risk to carry a gun in these parts. Not only are the police sweeping every 30 minutes for the concieved activities with weapons, if the rest of the 'ghetto' finds out-well, lets just say its too much of an attention getter, and my sister really dosent' need that.

Scathach · Post by **Scathach** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:36 am

[quote="maxgoof"][quote="Scathach"]You know, I can make this exact same argument about the Republicans.[/quote]

No, you couldn't. The Republican's have not lost ground in the Senate, House, or the White House. If they had, you could. But they have not.[/quote]

Apparently, you are unfamiliar with history.