Presidential Address

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

I WAS USING AN ANALOGY... crypes.

So was I.

How do you know Bush knows what he's talking about.
It's been four and a half years since 9/11 and apparently the borders are still sieves.

[Dragon Star]

I WAS USING AN ANALOGY... crypes.

So was I.

How do you know Bush knows what he's talking about.
It's been four and a half years since 9/11 and apparently the borders are still sieves.

I don't, and never claimed to know. But simply saying "OMGWTFBBQ teh Bush ideas!!1!!" Is wrong in every regard when you simply don't know, obviously some of you do know what your talking about, but if you look back, my original beef was with Jimmy, not the rest of you, you all butted in...not that I mind but just rest assured I am not saying you all are inadequate of knowing anything about the subject.

[Bandit]

I don't consider myself "butting in," more like tossing my two cents in. I disagree with your POV regarding the expression of one's opinion Dragon Star. It's one thing to disagree with 'em, but another thing altogether to claim they shouldn't be expressed - for whatever "reason." I personally am geo/politically savvy (it's a hobby) and know shit because of that, but this issue isn't exactly rocket-science. What's not to know about it? We have a problem with people sneaking into this country. That's it. Bush didn't cause it, but he seems willfully ignorant regarding it, just like his predecessors .. and they didn't have 9/11 on their watch. We are just lucky this leaky-border issue hasn't bit us in the ass. Hell, it still could. :?

[Dragon Star]

Well, for the record my POV on expressing opinions that I posted in this thread is for this topic, not for all topics. Other topics are easy to know about and are most of the time simple, and don't require knowing much about the topic. But when talking about the hardest job in the world, you need to know what your talking about to a great extent before getting worked up about it.

The fact is Jimmy made his claim on the basis that bush makes bad decisions, which is undeniably an incorrect thing to do. There is much more involved in protecting a country then people know. There are pages and pages of rules, guidelines, problems, dangers, consequences, exc... that no many people take for consideration when making generalizations.

I don't expect any of you to share my POV, as apparently none of you do.

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

Telling people that an opinion should not be expressed because
'they don't know what they are talking about', is not a counter argument.
It's censorship.

Telling him why that opinion (in your opinion) is wrong is.

So, why is it wrong?

[Dragon Star]

*Sigh*...I figured it would be apparent by now...but in case you missed it...

It's not his opinion that is incorrect, it's the basis of his opinion. He is making over-generalizations about the President without knowing everything involved, and what is going on behind the scenes. From my POV this is very incorrect.

[St. Jimmy]

Okay, so what if I don't know as much stuff about politics as you do? Just because I don't know as much about it, doesn't mean that I don't know somethings are bad ideas.

As far as all the rules, and regutations behind the scenes of the Government, they could maybe bend the rules a bit to make our country better. What did FDR do? Oh yeah! That's right, instead of playing by every rule like most presidents before him, he bent the rules to give him more power to do what he needed to do to fix the country. And guess what, he came to be known as one of our country's greatest presidents ever for the things he did after bending the rule to do what had to be done!!! :o What a shocker!

I have much more to say, but my mom is getting bitchy about me being on the computer at 11:46pm. which is pretty gay, seems how I am on till 12:30 on Saturday's. I will say more in the morning. But for now goodnight!

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

Seriously, he thinks he is so much better then the president he needs to step up and prove it. Because he has no idea just how difficult it is to pull something like that off, and mostly wants to poke Bush with a stick instead of being rational.

It's not his opinion that is incorrect, it's the basis of his opinion. He is making over-generalizations about the President without knowing everything involved, and what is going on behind the scenes. From my POV this is very incorrect.

What is the basis of his opinion?

And all of us form opinions 'without knowing everything involved, and
what is going on behind the scenes' all the time.
There never is enough information. Or time to digest it all.

A good counter argument might have been: 'But most people who know about this kind of stuff don't agree with you'.
If it were true.

Border security in itself is actually not that difficult.
Many countries manage to do it.
The daunting part is the immense length of the US-borders.

BTW, why does this apparent traditional neglect for border security exist?
Especially if you compare it with (air)ports.
For example, nowadays, if I want to fly to the US, I first have to acquire
a visa at an embassy or consulate, which I might not get.
Then, before boarding the plane, I have to fill out a DHS form
stating, among many other things, what the first address I'll stay at
in the US will be.
This form will arrive in America before I do.

[Dragon Star]

Seriously, he thinks he is so much better then the president he needs to step up and prove it. Because he has no idea just how difficult it is to pull something like that off, and mostly wants to poke Bush with a stick instead of being rational.

It's not his opinion that is incorrect, it's the basis of his opinion. He is making over-generalizations about the President without knowing everything involved, and what is going on behind the scenes. From my POV this is very incorrect.

What is the basis of his opinion?

I am actually quite tired if repeating it, just read for yourself.

And all of us form opinions 'without knowing everything involved, and
what is going on behind the scenes' all the time.
There never is enough information. Or time to digest it all.

I just not 5 posts ago, wrote that my opinion was FOR THIS TOPIC! Do you get that at all? Not all topics should have the same strictness, but I find this one to require it because it is so in depth. This is not one of those topics that can be generalized.

A good counter argument might have been: 'But most people who know about this kind of stuff don't agree with you'.
If it were true.

Please don't tell me how to make my own arguments, I find myself to be doing a good job defending my POV so far.

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

So on some subjects only specialists are allowed to have an opinion?

Why don't you educate us on border security then?

[Lonewulf]

As far as all the rules, and regutations behind the scenes of the Government, they could maybe bend the rules a bit to make our country better. What did FDR do? Oh yeah! That's right, instead of playing by every rule like most presidents before him, he bent the rules to give him more power to do what he needed to do to fix the country.

You know, the first thing I thought of when I read this was, "So did Hitler".

Someone bends the rules, they're automatically someone who's willing to bend rules. Rules were put there for a reason, in the most part.

Other than that, I still say that if they're serious about closing the borders, they should just do it. But they aren't serious about it, because immigrant workers bring cheap labor that americans aren't willing to do.

[St. Jimmy]

As far as all the rules, and regutations behind the scenes of the Government, they could maybe bend the rules a bit to make our country better. What did FDR do? Oh yeah! That's right, instead of playing by every rule like most presidents before him, he bent the rules to give him more power to do what he needed to do to fix the country.

You know, the first thing I thought of when I read this was, "So did Hitler".

Someone bends the rules, they're automatically someone who's willing to bend rules. Rules were put there for a reason, in the most part.

I am not talking about some corrupt maniac bending the rules. I am talking about Bush bending them a little to fix our border security probem. I do think Bush is one of our dumber presidents, but I also think that he is a good guy, and if he were to bend the rules he wouldn't do any screwed up shit.

It's not his opinion that is incorrect, it's the basis of his opinion. He is making over-generalizations about the President without knowing everything involved, and what is going on behind the scenes.

What that says to me is, that I am not wrong, which would mean that I am right, but I don't know about the stuff that I am right about. So, basically you are saying that: I am right about what I said, but the reason why I am right is wrong? Bush is an idiot and I don't know why? Is that it? That's what it sounds like to me.

Here's a bit of clarification on my correct ideas that are based on what I don't know. (At least that's what Dragon Star said)

Bush wants to send the National Guard in addition to 5,000 more border patrol officers to watch the Mexico-US border. He wants to install video cameras, Infared cameras, new watch towers, and a bunch of other stuff on the Mexico-US border.

Bush's idea for installing all this new technology and sending troops, and hiring more people to protect our borders=Pretty darn good idea. The only bad thing that I've said about this specific idea here is that it will be expensive, but so will everything else to protect our borders.

He also talked about the illegal immigrants that are currently in the US. He said that they must pay a fine, and then after passing some sort of test, they can stay in the country and do work chosen by the gov't, BUT they still won't be legal US citizens! Then must go back to their country. So basically he's saying as long as illegal immigrants pay us some money, they can stay here.

Bush's idea about illegal immigrants already in America, makes sense in theory, but how would it even work? they're never gonna havhe the money to pay all their back-taxes + the fines for sneaking in to our country illegally. They can stay if they pay. Well none of them are gonna be able to pay, so why don't we just send them back first thing instead going through a bunch of stupid stuff that the immigrants can't do?

Then Bush decided to tell some stary about how this illegal mexican immigrant was in the army for 22 years, went to Iraq, and The guy asked Bush if he could become a legal citizen, Bush told the guy he could!!!!! WTF! Yes, after all this new, more secure immigrantion policy ideas, he goes and contradicts himself with a story about an illegal immigrant, that somehow forged papers to get into the army, was allowed to be an american citizen! Bush is stupid.....

Okay, nobody can deny what I said right here. This is why Bush is an idiot. If what he did at the end of his speech right here wasn't stupid and contradictory, I don't know what is....

[Dragon Star]

So on some subjects only specialists are allowed to have an opinion?

Is that what I said? No, I said you need to know everything about it before jumping to conclusions irrationally.

Why don't you educate us on border security then?

I wish I could, but obvoulsly I don't know enough about the subject to soundly state wether or not what Bush is doing is a good idea or not. I don't believe many of us do...

What that says to me is, that I am not wrong, which would mean that I am right, but I don't know about the stuff that I am right about. So, basically you are saying that: I am right about what I said, but the reason why I am right is wrong? Bush is an idiot and I don't know why? Is that it? That's what it sounds like to me.

No, I am saying your right in having an opinion, having an opinion is a good thing, but basing it off of previous experiences of incorrect decisions is not the right thing to do...I am saying that you need to have more of a educated opinion then a biased one. Does this not make any sense to any of you?

Thank you very much for getting around to replying, and thanks for the clarification.

As for the last statement about the story, although it poses a problem there really isn't much that can be done about that anyways, to me it would seem slightly unfair to give someone a cookie, let then nibble on it and then smash it in the face and kick their ass out the door. But again, there is always a reason for even "stupid" ideas, and there is more behind the scenes I assure you as to why this would be included in the plan. You really need to start blaming more then just the president, he doesn't make all the decisions you know...

[Lance]

Why don't you educate us on border security then?

I wish I could, but obvoulsly I don't know enough about the subject to soundly state wether or not what Bush is doing is a good idea or not. I don't believe many of us do...

I strongly disagree. Anyone who pays any attention at all can see clearly that what Bush is doing is not a good idea. I hate to say this, Dragon Star, because I have a great deal of resect for you, but this makes it sound like you are ignoring the reality of the situation and are biased in favor of Bush regardless of whether he is right or wrong.

I think your opinion of St. Jimmy's opinion is far more baseless than you claim St. Jimmy's is.

[Lonewulf]

As far as all the rules, and regutations behind the scenes of the Government, they could maybe bend the rules a bit to make our country better. What did FDR do? Oh yeah! That's right, instead of playing by every rule like most presidents before him, he bent the rules to give him more power to do what he needed to do to fix the country.

You know, the first thing I thought of when I read this was, "So did Hitler".

Someone bends the rules, they're automatically someone who's willing to bend rules. Rules were put there for a reason, in the most part.

I am not talking about some corrupt maniac bending the rules. I am talking about Bush bending them a little to fix our border security probem. I do think Bush is one of our dumber presidents, but I also think that he is a good guy, and if he were to bend the rules he wouldn't do any screwed up shit.

I'd debate on Hitler being an "insane maniac", but that's a discussion for another thread.

I think Bush has already done some "screwed up shit", personally.

[Dragon Star]

Why don't you educate us on border security then?

I wish I could, but obvoulsly I don't know enough about the subject to soundly state wether or not what Bush is doing is a good idea or not. I don't believe many of us do...

I strongly disagree. Anyone who pays any attention at all can see clearly that what Bush is doing is not a good idea. I hate to say this, Dragon Star, because I have a great deal of resect for you, but this makes it sound like you are ignoring the reality of the situation and are biased in favor of Bush regardless of whether he is right or wrong.

I think your opinion of St. Jimmy's opinion is far more baseless than you claim St. Jimmy's is.

I suppose your right...I will retract my case as I am apparetnly smacking a steel door here...

But for the record: I do defend Bush, but only because his reputation exceeds his actions. I do not deny that he has made bad decisions, but I think his correct ones outweigh his incorrect ones. I feel that he could find a cure for cancer and everyone would still take a shit on his head.

[Bandit]

Why don't you educate us on border security then?

I wish I could, but obvoulsly I don't know enough about the subject to soundly state wether or not what Bush is doing is a good idea or not. I don't believe many of us do...

I strongly disagree. Anyone who pays any attention at all can see clearly that what Bush is doing is not a good idea. I hate to say this, Dragon Star, because I have a great deal of resect for you, but this makes it sound like you are ignoring the reality of the situation and are biased in favor of Bush regardless of whether he is right or wrong.

I think your opinion of St. Jimmy's opinion is far more baseless than you claim St. Jimmy's is.

I suppose your right...I will retract my case as I am apparetnly smacking a steel door here...

But for the record: I do defend Bush, but only because his reputation exceeds his actions. I do not deny that he has made bad decisions, but I think his correct ones outweigh his incorrect ones. I feel that he could find a cure for cancer and everyone would still take a shit on his head.

That's true for some people that can't see past whatever partisan banner they're waving, but in my case I haven't seen too much of anything from the current administration that I agree with - and that's based on objectively reviewing what the Bush administration has (and hasn't done) in the last 5 years.

I think the main issue here wasn't differing POVs as much as you claiming that certain topics are above critique based only on your own opinion of same.

If you want to start a thread and list the things you feel the administration has gotten right, feel free to do so. Heh .. maybe I'm overlooking something. :wink:

[Dragon Star]

No matter what I say, I am not going to change any minds that are already made up...and I would just dig a hole big enough to bury the empire state building...so I figure I will just shut up.

[umop ap!sdn]

I feel that he could find a cure for cancer and everyone would still take a shit on his head.

Not everyone; in that case my opinion of him as the discoverer of the cure would be pretty favorable. But I still wouldn't want him for a President.

[umop ap!sdn]

Okay that was a simulpost. :? There's really nothing wrong with sharing opinions or friendly debating. Sure, it's unlikely that one will change another's mind, but everyone can at least make a case for why they have the opinions they do. It's also possible that someone who is undecided may be following hts thread, or may run across it at some future date.

[Lance]

No matter what I say, I am not going to change any minds that are already made up...and I would just dig a hole big enough to bury the empire state building...so I figure I will just shut up.

Why? Most people around here are skeptics who know how to evaluate new evidence and vary their opinion accordingly. We aren't the run-of-the-mill GLPers or Weekly World News subscribers that believe for no good reason and won't ever change our minds.

There are things GWB has done that I think were good. And there are things he has bod that I thought were bad, or stupid, or illegal, or dishonest, or "with other than our best interest in mind", or what ever. So my overall opinion of him as a president is that he has done a less than stellar job.

If you feel differently, state why. Maybe you will change my opinion, at least in part, and maybe you won't. But we will all be more knowledgeable after the discussion that we are before it.

[Dragon Star]

Well to be honest I probably don't think Bush has done that much more good things then everyone else here, I just look at it in a much more optimistic way, I stay positive...so honestly I have nothing to say that has not already been said, I have no case or argument to present. For every right I state their will be 5 wrongs pitched the other direction...so it's pointless.

[Lance]

If I change your rank to:

Lover of Bush

Would it piss you off or would the double meaning be okay?

[Dragon Star]

If I change your rank to:

Lover of Bush

Would it piss you off or would the double meaning be okay?

Lol, I like it. :D

Can I keep "Protector of the Realm" though?

[Мастер]

If Bush presents a bad idea it is our right to call it as it is. There is no requirement that we have a better idea first.

Well, I think it is anyone's right to criticize his idea whether that person knows WTF s/he is talking about or not. But which ideas are bad? To me, a bad policy is one that is less good than at least one feasible alternative policy, by whatever metric "good" is defined. If one can't think of any feasible alternatives, how does one know if the policy is bad or not?