Why are we so Pro Bush???

[Josh]

Alright... What's the explaination?

All the other major polls have G. W. Bush only leading by 3%

http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/10/31/tracking.poll/index.html

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/trackingpoll_001031.html

Both times we have run this poll it has been a landslide.

Could it be a liberal bias in the media... the last Ridgid Poll turned out saying 90% of you think there is a liberal bias in the media.

What do you guys think?

Later, Josh

[Walnut45]

I think the bias is based on the belief that the government is the SOURCE of authority.

The Constitution clearly restricted the government by granting it specific powers and retaining the rest for the People and the States. We have ourselves to blame by looking to the government to solve our own problems.

So if the media thinks the government should handle medicine, retirement, welfare, education etc., then Gore appears to meet their expectations. If they understood that it's not the governments authorized duty to do so, they might think differently.

The average Joe thinks America is a democracy, when it is in fact a constitutional republic. The media always refers to the U.S. as a democracy. The average Joe also thinks we obtained our RIGHTS from the Constitution or Bill of Rights, when in fact we had those Rights before the government was ever authorized. We, the People, restricted the governments authority to ever infringe on our retained Rights with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Now in actual practice, we have an entirely different system of government today than was ever authorized. How did this happen? Slowly and by a change in perception by the public.

I wish every American would read the Constitution before they vote, every time they vote as a reminder of what this country IS.

Now, if the media understood what the Constitution said and meant, would they act differently and would it be bias?

[No bull dust just sawdust]

Bush who?

[K.M. Delano]

That's because those of us who visit this forum are way too busy to stay on the phone long enough for one of those Polls!

On the seriose side Josh, I do think that polls can be manipulated to fit the cause of the group raking the polls. Call at different times of the day, and you will likly get the unemployed/under employed and the retired. They more than likly have issues different that Joe public who is gainfully employed.

[Mark IV]

Josh asked 2 questions, in a way:
1. Why do Ridgid polls turn out differently than media polls?
2. And he poses a possible explanation: Could it be liberal bias in the media?

Ridgid polls are not "true" polls as compared to media polls, because they are not based on random samples of registered voters. They are based on a fairly narrow subset of the population, those who choose to visit and hang on the Ridgid website, and even more specifically, those who choose to participate in the survey.

This subset by definition consists of people who have computers and internet access, and are reasonably comfortable using them. They also tend to be plumbing/HVAC contractors, woodworkers, home hobbyists and DIYers. This is a very narrow sample compared to a truly random survey, and also is based on a much smaller sample (the media polls usually have at least 1000 participants, and one of the linked articles reported over 2000).

It might also be argued that of this Ridgid subset, woodworkers and DIYers tend to have higher incomes, and are more likely to have the "rugged individualist" mindset, both characteristic of Republican demographics. Even though some Ridgid participants are of the traditionally Democratic union membership, they are the voting block that the Dems have been losing their grip on most.

So, those are some observations on the first question.

Liberal bias in the media is not really a secret (see "Bias" by Bernard Goldberg), and another possible part of the explanation. You can skew the results of any poll by whom you call, and how you phrase the questions. Calling around downtown LA would yield different results than a sample which drew more heavily on midwestern rural communities. If the pollster has internalized a certain political agenda, the poll can (consciously or not) reflect that agenda.

Do you oppose or support President Bush's occupation of Iraq?
Do you oppose or support American intervention in Iraq?

The phrasing sets up the response, especially in relatively undecided individuals with low party ID.

What I find interesting is the "margin of error" statistic that poll stories always include, usually around 2-3%. I have no idea how they come up with that, but why are they so often completely wrong? Does that mean they are within 2% of the actual number? That's the implication, yet....

The recent California election was predicted much closer, right down to the wire, than the final vote. What happened to this 2% margin of error? They were wrong by a lot... like way wrong, some 10-20% off the final vote. Did the "likely voters" stay home at the last minute? Actually, there was a huge turnout, with 54% of registered voters showing up at the polls. Arnold took around 49% of the final vote.

Did the media's attempt to influence the outcome fail? A look at the LA Times' antics just prior to the election leaves little doubt about their motivation (of course, they don't represent a random sample of the media, etc.).

At any rate, one headline we will never see: Media Bungles Pre-Election Polling.
:rolleyes:

[spacebluesonoma]

why would anyone introduce a political subject on a tool/woodworking/plumbing/hvac board?

that aside

why are we so pro bush?

because he is the first american president in quite some time to do what is right, despite what is popular!

because terrorists attacked this great nation and we must answer the call to arms.

because we finally have a president who is a credit to the office he holds, taking his oath seriously. he restored dignity to the oval office!

that is WHY!

[exUsairwaysmech]

I hope that President Bush will increase tariff's on Chinese goods so that he can cut taxes on the individuals even more!

[Lodge]

President Bush cannot even pronounce the word dignity. Ever listen to him speak. It is like watching a bad train wreck. Unfortunately for us, he was the lesser of two evils. Have any of you ever heard Blair and Bush speak together? It is positively embarassing to hear them back to back. Bush makes America seems like a bunch of ignorant jackasses.

[Rafael]

Eloquence and good leadership do not necesarily go together. Hitler was eloquent. As were many other murderous and incompetent leaders. Blair, I agree, has an amazing way with words; but he is a socialist and socialism is evil since it necessitates the taking of ones god given rights without regard to an individual's choice.
I will fault Bush for some things and congratulate him for other things, but his lack of eloquence is immaterial.

[I love my tool]

As long as we're changing the subject, has anyone purchased the new Nissan RX-8, I hear it is pretty fast! Has anyone seen Master & Commander; The Far Side of The World.? I did, A-W-E-S-O-M-E!! Especially if you've ever spent time in the military.

Although it may sound like I may be complaining, at least the off-topic postings are intelligent and well written. Shows some people still think for themselves. That's more than I can say for some other BBs I vist. tongue.gif

[Lodge]

Our beloved President has taken more of our rights and increased spending more than any other President in the history of our great country. What is he, a dem or a rep? Bush and his ultra conservative cadre represent more of a threat to our Constitutional rights than any terrorist in the history of the world.
I take exception to your argument that public speaking is immaterial in a leader. The leader of a country is the personification of the country. Bush represents us as a country on a international stage. People have so little with which to judge our country and unfortunetly, the speaches that Bush gives are all that most people have to go on. He speaks with a fourth grader's vocabulary with all the mastery of language of a second grader.
His beliefs aside, Hitler was a great leader of the German people. Can anyone name a great leader who was not an eloquent speaker? I think that the two groups are mutally exclusive.

[I love my tool]

You wrote...
"The leader of a country is the personification of the country."
I have never in my 20 years with my wife succumbed like a spineless coward and cheated on my wife or friends. To think that type of behavior personifies our country is ridiculous.
I do however, hold honesty, integrity, and family a sacred belief.

Then you wrote...
"Hitler was a great leader of the German people."
Ask any German person, one who hasn't shaved their head, if they think Hitler was a "great leader." I don't like to talk bad about people, but your comments, sir, are idiotic. Sei nicht so blöd! :mad:

[ 11-26-2003, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: I love my tool ]

[Josh]

Guys...
I posted this over three years ago. So a lot has changed since then. We decided to post the question on the RIDGID Survey because it was interesting to most people durring election time. The only reason I brought the question into the forum was to try and spur some topics other than woodworking or plumbing in the general discussion.

SpaceBlue...
Believe me... I was never slamming Bush by asking this question in the forum. It was simple curiosity about why our survey was so different from the news sites.

Grey44Ghost...
I checked into the "bug" and I didnt encounter the error you are encountering. We did not develop the forum software we are running. It is a comercial package that we simply installed. It is illegal for us to change any of the code in the forum software. I would guess that your browser is having trouble updating your cookies on your machine or some of the settings in your browser need to be changed. I will update our forum software when a newer version comes out with significant updates.

Josh

[Lodge]

I knew that the comment concerning Hitler was going to cause some of you to not be able to divorce yourself from the obvious negative effects that Hitler had on the German people and the rest of the world. However, one cannot argue with the fact that he was a great leader of people. But for the military might of the Allies, we would all be speaking German now. Was Napolean not a great leader of men because he too wanted to take over the world? How did Hitler rise to the top and lead a county into the greatest war the world has ever seen? That is the definition of a leader, regardless of the principles of the leader. Not all leaders are good, but they are still leaders.
Now, if you can understand the context in which I stated that, you might be able to see that I am right.

-------------------------
Play nice, gentlemen.

[ 11-26-2003, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Norm ]

[Lodge]

Furthermore, when the Clinton affair was ongoing, were you not embarrassed, as I was, that the image of America was being tarnished on a world stage? The President of the United States is our representative. He or she acts on behalf of the citizens and becomes "us" when in office.

[Norm]

Originally posted by Lodge:
Furthermore, when the Clinton affair was ongoing, were you not embarrassed, as I was, that the image of America was being tarnished on a world stage? The President of the United States is our representative. He or she acts on behalf of the citizens and becomes "us" when in office. Hmmmm, that's an interesting observation. I have felt the same way in the past about public officials myself. But I think to be fair that you should acknowledge that Clinton was much more popular with the rest of the world than the current president. The French and German people were puzzled by President Clinton's condemnation in the American press, and now the English seem equally puzzled by President Bush's continued popularity.

In the military, we were always told to show respect for the rank, not the person. Does that idea come into play here?

Ultimately, I don't think I can accept the idea that the holder of the office of the President of the United States is in himself a symbol of the American people. We are much too diverse a nation for that. That concept seems more in tune with a monarchy than a democracy. Just my thoughts.

Norm

[I love my tool]

Lodge, Lodge, Lodge...

You write: "Not all leaders are good, but they are still leaders. Now, if you can understand the context in which I stated that, you might be able to see that I am right."
I understand that you don't really mean what you say, which is absolutely funny given your vocation. I'll agree that he was as "effective" a leader as Lenin, Stalin, Ho Chi Minh, Noriega, and Idi Amin. But "great?" Sorry Cap'n, but "Great" would be Mother Teresa, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, and Abe Lincoln.

And that's all I have to say about that. tongue.gif

[Rafael]

Here is a simple rule: If the germans and french like our leader, the leader is bad; if they hate our leader, our leader is good. This has been a good rule for at least the last 100 years.
Lodge,
Hitler was not a good leader for the german people, he killed millions of them. He was a good leader for himself and an evil group of elitist scum, not for the german people. Evil with or without good intentions is still evil. 99.99% of politicians and other similar leaders are evil, pure and simple.
Anybody, and I mean ANYBODY, who wants to take away any god given right I have is evil and deserves all that they get as a result.

[Lodge]

I repeat. I am NOT arguing that Hitler was in any way shape or form "good". Again, I ask that divorce yourself from the evil that Hitler stands for and the evil that he caused. We are down to a battle of semantics. The difference between the words "great" and "effective". Given your definition of "great", I admit, and have argued, that Hitler was not a "great" leader. However, my original argument, in which you seem to concur, is that he was an "effective" leader. Even though evil. Regardless of where the leader leads, their accomplishments, whether for the good or for the bad, will tell you if they were an effective or great leader of people.

[Lodge]

The President is our representative. His actions reflect directly upon us as a people. The very nature of our system is that we can remove those that do not fit our collective idea of what our leader should be. Respect for the rank is short sighted. The ultimate power rests in the people. Well, those of us that actually vote. When those in office act poorly, it shows that we chose poorly.

[Lodge]

I would argue that it is more in tune with a democracy than with a monarchy since our leaders are chosen in the ballot box and not 'by God' or bloodline.

[exUsairwaysmech]

Lodge,

"I repeat. I am NOT arguing that Hitler was in any way shape or form "good"."

I am happy that you clarified this,because the last person in the US to publicly express this was stripped of her baseball franchise(Marge Schott).

[rgrady]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lodge:
[QB] Our beloved President has taken more of our rights and increased spending more than any other President in the history of our great country.

Hey Lodge, please explain what rights you have lost. I have not lost any of my rights.
It costs money to fight the war on terrorism on 2 fronts. I for one am glad to spend the money to "TAKE THE FIGHT TO THE SCUM WHO KILLED SO MANY OF OUR CITIZENS". Would you rather us wait for them to attack us on our soil again. He is doing what Clinton did not have the guts to do.
I for one am proud to have a president with the balls to do what needed to be done. I do not care if other countries like or dislike him. There is only one country I care about and I live in it.

[Cranky]

Yikes - this is a topic I ain't gonna touch :D

My mailbox has already been "forced" to change once. Once is enough ;)

Interesting topic tho

[amadorjon]

Yes, but as a student of history we must observe, that hitler led a disgraced Deutchland, weighed down by the badly written Vesallies Treaty, from a disgrace to a major force to be reckoned with. This is not to speak of his politics or his administrations atrocities. Also to those here, have you ever read Mien Kampf?? It tells the story of a man who was orphaned and homeless to being a man feared or revered throughout the world.

A nasty dictator he was, but an idiot no, certainly not

Also I must also say to comments above that the military might of the allies had nothing to do with his defeat, the military might of America, the greatest nation on earth did, and after his defeat, and being the only industialized nation left standing on earth, did we take over the world? No we rebuilt it, and sheilded the world from the coomie scum trying to take it over, and for all that the liberal european scum today call us imperialists!

Bush is not the best (reagan was) but he sure beats the alternative

Sorry for the rant!!!!!

Jon

[Mark IV]

Hitler's father died when he was 13, his mother when he was 18, so not exactly an "orphan" in the conventional sense.

[amadorjon]

True, but after being homeless in Vienna in the teens, the food in the bavarian Army didnt seem half bad huh???

Also I beg to differ his mother died when he was much younger. I tried to look it up but I was framing all day and frankly am tired.

See ya,
Jon

[ 01-05-2004, 11:47 PM: Message edited by: amadorjon ]

[Mark IV]

Adolf was born April 20, 1889. His Mutti Klara died December 21, 1907.

Pity the painting thing didn't work out for him.

[amadorjon]

Well frankly if it wasnt him it wouldve been someone else. He put a nice face on the NSDAP but a fascist wouldve rose I'm sure. The vesallies treaty and its after effects along with the weak weimar republic made 20's geramny a powder keg waiting to explode.

If France and britain woulve listened to wilson after w. war 1 and had a victory without punishment or something of the sorts we probably wouldve never heard of the nazi party. Anyways this really isnt the proper place to discuss Deutche history or our president so i will not post on the subject anymore. Nice chatting with ya,

Jon

[RGad]

Why do we love George Bush so much? Well, let's see . . . .

Saddam Hussein is gone.

Lybia has renounced terrorism and opened itself up for international inspection with respect to its nuclear program.

Iran has done the same.

North Korea has announced the willingness to do the same.

You don't know it yet, but even the Syrians are getting nervous now that the United States has demonstrated some genuine backbone.

Man, that all sounds like a good enough reason to me.

[robwegner]

I believe it was norm stated that clinton was popular with other countries. I agree, especially w/ the chinese with all the nuke secrets he allowed to be compromised.

[RGad]

Norm: I take your question to be: why are woodworkers (or, more generally, people who work with their hands to build things and fix things) more inclined to support the President (assuming the premise to be true; note that opinions expressed on a forum like this are self-selecting) than the public at large, as implied by media-sponsored polls (again assuming the premise to be true)?

At least in part the answer lies in the difference between scientists and engineers.

As one old time engineer explained it to me, the difference between scientists and engineers is best illustrated by a story. There was once a quiz show. At the end of a long, narrow stage was the quiz master, a scientist and an engineer. At the other end was Miss November, suitably uniformed.

"The rules," the quiz master informed the scientist and the engineer, "are as follows: I will ask each of you a question, alternating between you. For each correct answer, you get to advance half the remaining distance to Miss November. . . ."

"Hold up," interrupted the scientist, "as a matter of well known theory, we will never get there."

"Stuff it, old man," interposed the engineer, who then turned to the quiz master and ordered, "Fire away; I'll get close enough."

It may be that the members of this forum, on average, are a more practical bunch than the population at large, and therefore recognize that in the real world, the solution to the problems that face us right now are hard, direct, forceful, and unequivocal action. We may not always make perfect responses, but neither do we sit around and wring our hands, talk a problem to death, or refuse to do anything without a concensus (inevitably a compromised weakened to achieve broad acceptance) from the United Nations. As someone once said, to insist on perfection is to shun achieving the acceptable.

[Norm]

Actually, I didn't start his topic, Josh did. His original post was during the 2000 election, when we ran a poll that indicated that visitors to the RIDGID website ran much more strongly to Bush than the evenly divided national electorate.

I don't think there is any real mystery. The demographics of our user base are pretty fertile Bush territory.

But there is no reason to assume that the political leanings of this group has anything to do with the President's reaction to 9/11 or any actions he has taken since inaugeration. Instead, I would assume that a poll taken now would be very similar to one taken before President Bush's election; that is, heavily in his favor. Which would be no change.

Your story about the engineer vs the scientist reminds me of what we Air Force electronic techs used to say about equipment that worked in the lab but not in the field; that it was designed by an engineer.


Originally posted by RGad:
Norm: I take your question to be: why are woodworkers (or, more generally, people who work with their hands to build things and fix things) more inclined to support the President (assuming the premise to be true; note that opinions expressed on a forum like this are self-selecting) than the public at large, as implied by media-sponsored polls (again assuming the premise to be true)?

At least in part the answer lies in the difference between scientists and engineers.

As one old time engineer explained it to me, the difference between scientists and engineers is best illustrated by a story. There was once a quiz show. At the end of a long, narrow stage was the quiz master, a scientist and an engineer. At the other end was Miss November, suitably uniformed.

"The rules," the quiz master informed the scientist and the engineer, "are as follows: I will ask each of you a question, alternating between you. For each correct answer, you get to advance half the remaining distance to Miss November. . . ."

"Hold up," interrupted the scientist, "as a matter of well known theory, we will never get there."

"Stuff it, old man," interposed the engineer, who then turned to the quiz master and ordered, "Fire away; I'll get close enough."

It may be that the members of this forum, on average, are a more practical bunch than the population at large, and therefore recognize that in the real world, the solution to the problems that face us right now are hard, direct, forceful, and unequivocal action. We may not always make perfect responses, but neither do we sit around and wring our hands, talk a problem to death, or refuse to do anything without a concensus (inevitably a compromised weakened to achieve broad acceptance) from the United Nations. As someone once said, to insist on perfection is to shun achieving the acceptable.

[RGad]

Very good.

I heard a guy (actually, a witness on the stand) once refer to "an Ancient Chinese Proverb to the effect that 'no lawn mower should ever be designed except by a guy who once cut grass for a living.'"

[Sgt Beavis]

I can only speak for myself and not others.

I am a conservative and I don't count GWB as a conservative. Prescription Benefits, Steel Tarriffs, Immigration Amnesty, and Spending like a drunk sailor are just a few of the reasons I don't particularly want to vote for GWB.

However, John Kerry is NOT an acceptable alternative. For every issue that the President has ticked me off about, there is one over riding issue that is EXTREMELY important to me and that is the defense of this nation. In that issue, GWB excels IMO. Forget about the WMD issue and Immenent Threats. Most people in this country knew from the beginning that the situation in Iraq was unacceptable. Even Clinton felt that way. GW was the only guy with the balls to pull the trigger. GW has handled the post 9-11 security of this nation better than Gore, Kerry, or Dean could ever hope for. My only beef with him on this issue is that he hasn't pressed harder.

The Democrats and other liberals should be ashamed of themselves IMO. They had two viable candidates for the Presidency in Edwards and Lieberman. I would have given significant consideration to either one of those fellows, had they been nominated. However, in their own blind hatred of all things George Bush and Iraq, they gravitated to the two of the three worst people that this country would need as President at this time, Dean, and Kerry. (Kucinich is #3, but even the Dems know he's a nut) Of all the Democratic candidates, only Lieberman GETS IT when it comes to national defense. Given that Lieberman is also a fiscal conservative for the most part and you have someone that I can consider. I also like Lieberman because he IS one of the most moral men on the hill.

Unfortunately, the Dems have blinders on and have done a great disservice to the country by nominating this stick in the mud.

So, here I am, getting ready to vote for GWB, AGAIN.

Party of the people my rear end......

[ 04-29-2004, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Sgt Beavis ]

[imported_tyxlc]

Bush supports the really important issues (and they don't happen to have anything to do with money). Kerry supports the really scary issues. So, though Bush is not by any means perfect, he is, IMO, the only candidate I can consider. If he does not get reelected, there is no telling what this country (to start with) will become.

[benttwigg]

I agree that Bush is a Man of integrity and exactly what we needed in the White House at this critical time in history. As to the spending and jobs issue I can sum it up in three little numbers...911

What can you expect!! If that doesn't float your boat how about Enron, or other cheating, stealing big business fall outs.

I understand the Dems want to have their guy in office just like the Repubs would if Gore was in office. But here is the rub when it comes to why we like Bush. The Dems fell into a pattern of lying and deceit when Bill & Hillery were in the White House. "Good became Bad & Bad became Good". The Dems wanted to convince the American people that the lack of integrity flowing out of their party was OK! (Just move On)!

So having a man with integrity in the White House is killing the Dems. So it does suprise me that they would attack the President with the same deceit and bad form that just left the White House an Administration ago. Even at the cost of our troops morale abroad.

Please be reminded that this is a time for unity in our country. Back the Man with Integrity and encourage our troops on a job well done for all history. God Bless America and God Bless George Bush!

[imported_TAC]

Man of integrity, choke on another pretzel... Puke on another diplomat, I can't stand the fool, he's just finnishing what his father started.

[imported_TAC]

Oh yeah Josh, must be alot of sawdust in their eyes.. At $40 a barrel and reduced tax on the wealthy I would say he's doing a great job. Oh I'm sorry he's fighting for the 911 victims, yeah okay! I watched the twin towers crumble from my window, my brother walked home full of dust. I was and am there, I am not dismissing the other tradgedies, but the Iraqi war is of liberation from Sadam, Bush Sr.'s war, not 911's war. So many misconceptions, damn propaganda.

[benttwigg]

I wonder if the family of the man who lost his head would question the connection between 911 and Iraq and the war on terror?

Lose the politics and unite this country.

[spacebluesonoma]

Our beloved President has taken more of our rights

i have challenged a great many on this topic, no one ever gives a straight answer. i dont expect anything different. I AM A law abiding american citicizen. period! i will assume you are too. ( i am not talking about nor always wearing our seatbelt or driving a little fast....you get the point!

so now since i am assuming you are a law abiding citicen as well...i want you to name one right that you no longer have today that you had pre 911? how has the patriot act affected your life ?

[Rafael]

What's interesting is that the patriot act is essentially nothing more than the RICO statutes and some other applications of laws that have been used against organized crime for decades. Nothing new under the sun except that the new target is muslims. All I can conclude is that it is alright for law enforcement to go after italians but not muslims, at least according to the anti-bush crowd.

[spacebluesonoma]

yeah it is truly amazing. but the mentality of the anti bush crowd is truly amazing. aol users..this place shows truly how stupid some of them really are!

aol://5863:126/mB:530401

cut and paste this to your browser

[spacebluesonoma]

to answer the question of the thread.....we are so pro bush because he is etting the job done! dong what needs to be done...the right thing, not the most popular thing

[jim swamp]

Watch Ferenhiet 911 and that may change your views on who you vote for. I'm not into politics but this movie will make you think twice when voting.

[spacebluesonoma]

i prefer to base my electoral decision's on facts. thanks

[imported_ByteButcher]

Roger and Me was the first and last Michael Moore film I'll ever see. His protrayal of the people of Flint as group of helpless dolts needing him to speak for them against the evil GM was an insult. I knew better, growing up Saginaw, another GM town a few miles away. Unfortunatly the man now claims residence in another town a few miles up the road from me. What an embarrassment.

[imported_CWSmith]

I have been reading this column for some time and frankly I hesitate to even jump in here. I really don't know what the majority of pro-Bush folks are looking at. A most recent statement was that "I like to make my decisions based on facts"??? What facts would those be my friend? Perhaps you can share some of those with us. I'm pretty open minded (and a Republican), but frankly I have yet to see a single "fact" that says that Mr. Bush has done anything right.

Of course maybe you're one of the very few people who are making so much money that you actually did get a tax break and have much more money to spend today than you did four years ago. Maybe you liked that big tax write-off you got for buying an SUV under the corporate tax write off program. Maybe you're one of the officers of my company who took a $10 million grant and millions more in tax breaks and moved a major product line to communist China while laying off over 200 senior aged employees. Maybe you liked having your pension and benefits cut. Maybe you think that getting $300 a month after 30 years of service is cool, especially when you have to give back $200 of it for medical insurance which has $3000 a year deductible and then only provides minimum coverage.)

Maybe you have a nice Union contract and you're not faced with loosing your overtime pay. Or you don't live in an area like Corning where over 8,000 people have been laid off and the companies responsible are now spending hundreds of millions to build in Asia.

Maybe you and your family and your neighbors don't need to ever fill a prescription and you love the entertainment value of those millions spent for pharmaceutical commercials. Maybe you believe that imported drugs from Canada is bad for us but that importing flu vaccine from England and Canada is okay. Maybe you don't know that a large percentage of our pharmaceuticals are imported anyway, because it is more profitable not to hire American workers or build on American soil.

Or perhaps you truly believe that Saddam Hussien was behind 911... if so please send your facts to the 911 Commission, because they need your sources! Maybe you believe that we have seriously crippled the terrorist activity and if so, please send the facts to both the U.S. and world press, as well as the American Intelligence Agencies, for those poor fools have only found the opposite to be true. There are literally thousands more terrorists in Iraq today than there were under Saddam!

Or perhaps you think the environment is better? Guess you're not seeing the budget cuts in the National parks, the opening of more federal lands to the oil companies, etc. Guess you don't mind that we've rolled back the EPA rules and acid rain is worse now then it was. Maybe you need to visit the Adirondacks!

Perhaps you think that "No Child Left Behind" is really a wonderful thing. Guess you don't want to know about the thousands of families who are now living off of what once was going to be their children's college funds. But that is probably a good thing, because we're going to need those kids to spend time in Iraq and not in college.

Probably the most important thing though is your belief that G.W. is the patriot of our times. After all, didn't he look really terrific standing on that carrier, in his flight suit, helmet under arm, and flags and "mission accomplished" banner waving in the background? Didn't you just love it when he shouted out, "Bring it on"? Of course, you may be too young to remember that in the 60's there were two ways to avoid service in Vietnam... stay in college or join the National Guard! The NG, God Bless then all, isn't that way anymore is it. I guess G.W. would have to find somewhere else to hide if he was a young man today. But I'm sure his daddy would surely find someway to keep him from serving his country properly. After all, isn’t that what being rich and influential is all about? But wait, John Kerry wasn’t told that, was he?

Maybe you think that our troops are so well supplied that they are invincible. Please tell the parents of over a thousand poor kids that it was all just an accident. While you're at it, tell our troops that tanks, vehicle and personnel armor, gasoline, parts, and even water isn't in short supply. That troops themselves aren't in short supply. That even bullets aren't in short supply... but maybe you don't know that we are having to buy our ammunition from Germany and Israel at premium prices because our own manufacturing isn't tooled to keep up and our surplus is gone! (But I understand we have plenty of bullets for those AK-47's that the gun lobby has to have.)

Well, this has been too long and it has put me in a bad mood. I love it when people don't know enough to read, to listen, to look objectively at the world and simply don't have enough knowledge to ask "WHY?" But maybe I'm wrong; maybe I'm missing something, so please, show me the facts.

Might is not right and religious beliefs is not a reason in itself to go to war. Wrapping yourself in the flag doesn't make you a patriot and neither does squandering the strength and youth of a nation seeking vengeance against the wrong target. Nothing that G.W. has done is "Christian" and nothing that he has done is either militarily sound or politically correct in the eyes of the world. Look at history, look at the world, and look at the future. G.W. is a poster-boy for everything that we, as a forward-thinking democratic society should be against. He has squandered not only our present finances and political trust, but also our future. No one wants to die in vain for their country, and our president needs to know that our lives, and the lives of our sons and daughters, can only be spent on the most just of causes. What we have done in Iraq has been counter productive. In fact we have created far more terrorists than we have eliminited and we have put both our country and all of our allies in jeopardy for being so blind to the true objectives. It will be hard to recover from the last four years, do you really think you want four more?

[ 10-23-2004, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: CWSmith ]

[K.M. Delano]

I was going to respond to this, but then I remembered that this is a TOOL & WoodWorking forum.

[imported_CWSmith]

Originally posted by K.M. Delano:
I was going to respond to this, but then I remembered that this is a TOOL & WoodWorking forum. KMD,

Yeah, I suppose so... and I did state that I hated to wade into this. But after 47 previous posts on the "Bush" subject (and I believe you were the 4th), I find it rather humorous that nobody complained about this prior to my query for understanding the Bush fairy tale. But I'm not surprised, because I find that pretty much in keeping with Mr. Bush's stance on things. Sort of a strategy where he targets the opposition with his own transgressions, so everything will appear righteous on his part. This is pretty well demonstrated by attacking the guy wearing the medals while he dodged the Vietnam war entirely. Or declaring that America would be in danger if Kerry were elected, when he (Mr. Bush) has been responsible for recruiting more terrorists than Osama Bin Laden could ever have! Hey, I can't figure it out, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of logic to any of this. Guess I need to just keep my sense of humor and wait to see if a bad joke turns out to be worse than it already is.

No personal disrespect intended,

CWS
A really embarrassed Republican

[ 10-23-2004, 07:42 PM: Message edited by: CWSmith ]

[K.M. Delano]

Yup. I was number 4. Never did give an answer to the ? at hand, nore did I indicate where I stand on the Political side.

That's because those of us who visit this forum are way too busy to stay on the phone long enough for one of those Polls!

On the seriose side Josh, I do think that polls can be manipulated to fit the cause of the group raking the polls. Call at different times of the day, and you will likly get the unemployed/under employed and the retired. They more than likly have issues different that Joe public who is gainfully employed.

Although one could surmise my stance by what I did say. Or would they be wrong?

[michael stephen]

brace yourself, Kerry just might win..

[rgrady]

It only takes a little common sense to see G.W. did what had to be done...popular or not. I guess you don't need any to paint a post

[imported_CWSmith]

Gee, and I guess the "common sense" that you mentioned is the reason why we have been so successful? We've created far more terrorists than there were before the invasion, and that's a plain truth fact! Maybe you don't read the news though or you think that all the news media in the world is biased.

How about the report in the NY Times on Monday that revealed that Bush actually prohibited a strike over a year ago, against this Zarquawi character because it would have been counter to his reasons to invade Iraq. Read: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/26/opinion/26krugman.html?oref=login&th

Yesterday, Bush's only response to the loss of 380 million tons of explosives was to verbally attack Kerry "because he doesn't know the facts". Typical, because Bush himself doesn't know the facts... and he should have! It was his command, his watch, and his neglect to have enough troops on the ground to secure the site, even though the international Nuclear commision gave him all the details before the invasion started.

There is NO common sense to the invasion or Iraq whatsoever; and, all the fabrication in the world isn't going to cover the truth. Unfortunately, Bush supporters aren't interested in that. Read the news, listen to the world, and try to know something about history and the world around you. Ask yourself why the millionaires are spending millions of $ to keep the Bush regime in power, the answer is pretty clear, they've made millions because of it and they will make millions more if he stays and guys like you and I are paying the tab, not to mention the debt and sorrow of our children and grandchildren.

[rgrady]

I have determined it is a waste of time responding to these rantings. This will be my last post. See ya at the polls

[imported_ByteButcher]

We've created far more terrorists than there were before the invasion, and that's a plain truth fact! The left often seems to be confused about the concept of "fact". Apparently they think if you assert something often enough, or it just fits into your beliefs, that makes it fact.

The claim that there are more terrorists than before, whether true or not cannot be a "fact". It simply can't be tested or verified in any way unless you had some sort of terrorist detector and could scan everyone on the planet.

To further claim that we "created" them is even more ridiculous. The radical Islam religion coupled with the promise of large cash payments to the family creates terrorists.

I did see Sadam state on camera that he was sworn to destroy the United States. Since no one ever challanged the authenticity of the tape I do accept that as "fact".

[imported_CWSmith]

Left?? I'm a lot more right than anything else, having been a Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan, Bush (senior) supporter! But militarily, Iraq made no sense whatsoever. From both a strategic and logistical point of view Iraq offered very little threat to this country or our interest in counter-terrorism. In actuality, Saddam was more a stabilizing force against terrorism in Iraq. His regime did a very efficient job of keeping terrorism out of Iraq as it was certainly counter to his desire to hold power within that country. However, his interest in financial rewarding Palistinian terrorist acts agaist Israel is well documented, but that is a different matter.

The senior George Bush saw the situation in Iraq for the quagmire that it represented. Unfortunately G.W. doesn't have either the insight or strategic thinking abilities. Our primary objective was to capture Osama Bin Ladin and to destroy that terrorist network. G.W. lost site of that! When we went into Iraq, we made a quick job of slicing through Saddam's military and with the efficiency and might of our military, the outcome of that conventional warfare was in, no doubt, our favor. However, we had no strategy in place to deal with the aftermath of that victory. We had no strategy for securing and holding the territory we crossed and we had little in the way of security forces to hold and secure the vast caches of military supply dumps that we ran across. Once our quick strike mobile forces reached their objectives, we were unprepared to hold, occupy, and win over the population. Subsequently we are now an enemy occupational force in a land that is both hostile and extremely well armed. The results are that there are now more terrorists in Iraq today than there were four years ago... and that is a fact; unless of course you don't read or listen to the news both here and abroad or have an understanding of world events.

If you take a look at our own country I think you can honestly say that terrorism is minimal here. However, if we were to be occupied by an unwelcome foriegn military, thousands of us would become terrorist against that occupational force. And each day of the occupation, our numbers would grow. We wouldn't be nearly as well armed as the Iraqi's though!

CWS

[ 11-01-2004, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: CWSmith ]

[RogerCraig]

I just do not understand how it is that people can support Bush for anything other than as a poster child for an organization supprting programs to aid those who have reading disabilities.

Either I am totally ignorant or Bush and his crew are morons.

Rice as head of the State Department claims to be fluent in Russian. What a joke!!!

People in Europe laugh at Bush, He is a total flop.

This is a failed experiment in government and more people in American are beginning to realize it.

Repubs, stop defending a lousy excuse for a President and look at the havoc this guy has created.

Demos think. We are not sheep!

Wish I could say the same thing about the other side, which merely raises the flag and thumps the Bible.

[Lorax]

Originally posted by RogerCraig:
Either I am totally ignorant or Bush and his crew are morons. Well Bush is not a moron so I guess that leaves what's behind door #1. :rolleyes: Buh bye.

[plumber]

Dang it. Aside from bashing Chinese communists I had thought this was finally a place where hard working Americans could discuss their tools and ideas without partisan politics. Hopefully these threads are few and far between here.

I have extremely strong feelings about some of the issues brought up but respect that a person can still be a good American regardless of his political affilliations, those who claim otherwise dont deserve to live here. The hateful partisanship embracing our country is 100 times more dangerous to our freedom than anything a handful of terrorists can do including a small nuclear device.

[spacebluesonoma]

TAC

the ONLY reason his father did not finish it is because he bowed to the UN and took the path of least resistance. (AS THE UN ALWAYS DOES). DOes north korea ring a bell??

His father should have finished it. But he didn't

Clintoon should have done more against terrorism. How many times did we get hit while that clown was in office and he did nothing??

We would not have hit iraq if 911 did not happen. NOW I am not saying iraq had anything to do with 911. But iraq did support terrorism. Iraq was also in violation of the cease fire agreement.

In 1999 al quaida met with iraq and saddam offered osama training grounds and safe haven. Osama declined because he was sitting pretty under the taliban.

in 2001 we removed the taliban after they were behind a tragic event that happened one quiet sept morn.

Now it it POSSIBLE that the offer would have been re extended?

sure saddam and osama did not drink beer together, but they had a common enemy, in the USA.

Now if you look to the left of iraq, and look to the right of iraq, what do you see?

How has the climate changed in the middle east since saddam was apprehended?

A lot of nations are rethinking their position on terrorism.

Some are putting thoughts into actions.

THe invasion of iraq was not a bad thing.

The only political error was quantifying the amounts of WMD we thought we would find.

We found some, but nothing signifigant. The WMD he had that he admitted to having are currently unaccounted for.

But WMD was not the only reason we went in.

We had 3 reasons, congress authorized it, bush gave him a final "final" ultimatum. Similar to the final ultimatium Clinton gave saddam in nov of 1998 and from 1998 to 2002 saddam would not permit UNSCOM in! he refused to play by the rules.

He had 12 years to destroy and account for his wmd and just under 3 years to sever his ties to terrorism.

He failed on both accounts.

The invasion was JUST ,and necessary!

Iraq was a legitimate target in the global war on terrorism!

[plumber]

Well since it must be then I will have to comment on this as well.

Iraq did not attack us. Osam Bin Laden attacked us. had we gone into Afghanistan with even 1/4 of the muster Bush used in Iraq the war on terror would be much further along than it is now. There was no reason for the hurried rush into Iraq.

Now that we are there we must prevail but to think we can erase 6000 years of animosity amoung all of the people there in less than a couple of election cycles here is knaive. This administration is in such a hurry to declare success it has prematurely celebrated every little bit of fortune only to be shown it has been wrong.

And if Clinton was a clown then Bush is surely a baboon.

Most would probably agree that this forum would be far better off if we as Americans kept our opinions to tools and their makers and left politics to the political sites.

[Polar Sparky 1224]

I agree,

Bush should go after the poeple that attacked us first and after eliminating the problem there, he can go after others and yes it would be easy.

They would have seen and heard about the destruction that happened to a group of people that cheered at the murder of numerus innocents. You are lucky I'm not presedent, I would've nuked something in make my point. I don't care how i win but i will be the last one standing.

I really don't like bush that much but kerry is an idiot. The thing that really bothers me is how you either pick Republican or Democract. What ever happend to other choices? If i had a choice between the two party's I would pick neither. Wouldn't it be great if the Government was "for the poeple", not for the people with the most money and campain donations!

Do we really want places like Walmart killing off other stores? My cousin used to live central Utah and now has to drive 2 hours to a grocery store since everyone gets such a great deal at walmart. But what about the older people that were only able to get to the local grocery store?

They are supposed to put a walmart in centerville. I see no need for another store there, we have target, HD and albertsons already, adding a walmart will mean jobs for a few people until other stores suffer, then more is lost rather than gained.

People will want to outlaw all firearms. THAT IDEA IS OUTRIGHT INSANE!!!! Look at the crime rate in The U.K. very few of their police carry guns and don't get much respect. If you want to get away with crime move there. A teenager can get away with stabbing someone since they are still minors. How dum is that? And the reason for this lack of respect is children that grew up without disipline. "You shouldn't spank", "You shouldn't yell", then what should i do when my kid does wrong? Do we need more people that don't care about other when making choices? NO! I want my son to understand that his choices affect others and, before you do something think about what the end outcome will be.

Take care of your tools and they'll take care of you!

[imported_MSchenker]

People...
I like this forum, and I like the members. Many times, I have received helpful advice from many of you.

I have been on other woodworking forums where politics invades discussions about the craft, and I have yet to see a single discussion where it is a good thing. There is a short-lived sense of pleasure, but it can be undercut by a long-term loss of connection with your fellow woodworkers.

By all means, if you want to talk politics, it's a free country -- go right ahead. I'm just saying that I have witnessed some destructive political discussions on other woodworking forums, and I, for one, have decided to limit politics to my local town meetings!

[Polar Sparky 1224]

Here's a way to reshape our country for the better.... lets deport the power hungry politicans and go back to the basics like...
THE CONSTITUTION!!!!!

YOU KNOW FREEDOM OF SPEECH,
FREEDOM OF RELIGION (not to be confused with hiding behind religion to justify acts of violence.)
RIGHT TO BARE ARMS

WE ALL HAVE BRAINS TO THINK FOR OURSELVES WHY ARE WE TOLD HOW TO THINK?

[michael stephen]

where was pres. bush, when katrina was hitting new orleans? :(

[jaco]

The last good republican was Lincoln.

[plumber]

I'll not spoil a good web site with politics or religion. There are a million and one sites for these subjects, give or take a few hundred thousand...

That said, Bush has not finished a thing he started and is the worst president this country ever had. A drunkard and druggie till he was forty and never succeeded at a thing unless his daddies friends held his hand and gave him money. He surrounds himself with ideological sychophants and will not listen to anything he does not want to hear(much like a spoiled 5 year old).

A lot of bad things happened on his watch that were not his fault, but the root of those things go back much farther than his predecessor. The fighting in the middle east has been going on for thousands of years and will be going on long after the United States is an ancient history lesson. To think we are going to solve things with a half hearted attempt in Babylon is foolhardy at best.

Thats my last post on this thread. It will boil the blood of some and make others cheer which is why these topics are best left for other sites. Plus I am not going to be here often enough to have a dialouge with anyone on the subject.

have a nice day.

[id3372]

Yes, he actually said this.


http://x5.freeshare.us/122fs303269.jpg

[swoosh81]

where was pres. bush, when katrina was hitting new orleans? :(
What should he have done I'm so sick of hearing about katrina to bad it didn't just wipe out the state of Louisiana!! 49 states would sound good to me. Did you ever read what these people who lived there did with there money they were givin'??The only bad thing that came out of it was there are still over 1,000 pedophiles still running around the country somewhere preying on our kids!!

[Roadrunner]

Sorry, I can't see Bush woodworking, hey wait isn't that kind of like fratricide? I betting the secret service wouldn't let him within 100' of a running tablesaw.
I guess as a population woodworkers are either 1. Hard working people who just can't stop creating things, or, 2. like my self, a desk jockey that has to get moving at the end of the day and has to create something tangible That given, WARNING broad generalization coming here, that encompasses what the Republican party typifies. The industrious person who given the opportunity will self motivate and do something. That said, if woodworkers have republican tendencies, then that might explain the skew. Now before you Dems jump me, I am a real middle of the road guy. Believe what you want, its your opinion, and every day someone dies protecting it, and I'd hate to be the one that infringes on that sacrifice. Do I agree with war, no, but at some time, when talking isn't getting the job done, action must be taken. Saddam had warning, we just needed a reason. Remember epoxy doesn't kick until you add catylst.
just my .02, not adjusted for inflation.