Spoiler: European Union
In post 37, mathcam wrote:What's the real reason behind this push, other than that people want to punish immigrants (and to ostractize anyone who stands up for them for being anti-American)? This efficiency argument is quite clearly insufficient...the European union has been thriving for some time now despite the presence of dozens of languages, with little sign of abatement. Is it a fear that our goverment won't be able to function because half of the senate will be speaking Spanish and half English? Despite being very unlikely, this would, if anything, be a signal that maybe we should take a closer look at the demographics of this nation than is implied by such a blind move as declaring non-English speakers non-American.
Spoiler: North Korea
In post 5, Elnar wrote:Fishbulb pretty much summed it up.
But as for actual politics, I'm pretty strictly republican/conservative. My parents are split down the middle (my mom being conservative and my dad liberal), so I've gotten an equal amount of opinions and philosophies from each of them and decided that the republican party is the way to go. Even though I'm not yet of voting age, I still like to be well versed in politics so that I can take part in debates on politics.
I don't believe in the communism utopia. People who work harder should get paid more and have more benefits than people who drift through life in a constant high.
President Bush's war on Iraq: I'm not quite sure how to feel about it. I like the fact that he is spreading democracy into the Middle East, and I felt that action was necessary to prevent another September 11th. I probably would have went about it in the same fashion. However, it seems to be causing a lot of chaos in Iraq and I think that as soon as troops are pulled out, chaos will become worse and a possible civil war between the Shi'ite muslims and Sunni muslims may occur.
I also think the US should be paying a lot more attention to North Korea. Kim Jong II is probably the biggest threat to America right now. I believe that he has nuclear weapons and I know he wouldn't really hesitate to use them.
Spoiler: Tony
In post 1, vollkan wrote:<3 indeed. The speech by Rudd was excellent.
In case you missed it, on Lateline Tuesday night they interviewed Tony Abbott about the apology and this gem came up:
Host: "Mr Abbott, in a defamation case, you stated before a court that, quote, 'An apology without payment is meaningless.' Since you have declared your support for saying sorry to Aboriginal people, does that mean you support paying compensation?"
Abbott: "That's a matter for the current government."
Host: "But you stated yourself in that case, before a court, that any apology requires a willingness to compensate."
Abbott: "As I said, it is the government making the apology."
I burst into laughter at this.
Spoiler: Putin
In post 53, Yosarian2 wrote:That's not really what a slippery slope argument is.Thestatusquo wrote: A slipperly slope argument goes something like this:
If X happens, then Y will happen as well, when X and Y are not connected.
It's more like:
If we allow X to happen, then next thing you know, 2X will happen, and then if we don't stop it there 3X will happen, ect.
Sometimes that is true, and sometimes it is not. It all depends on the situation, and is usually debatable. For example, there are cases where a government started out restricting the press from critizing them in certain situations, and then slowly expanded that over time (see Russia under Putin right now); so when people 4 years ago used a slippery slope argument to say "if we allow them to do this right now, then they'll do something worse later", they were right.
Spoiler: Trump
In post 33, Phoebus wrote:I noticed that too!MeMe wrote:Yes -- I noticed that this week Phil said "This was the first pit stop in the Amazing Race" rather than his usual "This was the first pit stop in a race around the world."
They sure aren't getting the Emmythistime.
Maybe Donald Trump will get fourth time lucky.
Also, in the starting credits, you have the American flag in the background - so it's a giveaway.
Ya know, the Gaghans talked about having travelled a lot around the world earlier when they were doing family interviews before the race started. Even the contestants might have been hornswoggled this time.
Spoiler: Hmm
In post 72, Candice wrote:Clinton WHO? NOT Hillary. *shudders*
Spoiler: Obama
In post 75, Cubsfan4life wrote:Let me pipe in about Obama since I'm from Illinois:
I think he's great. He shows a lot of signs of promise and truly is a "rising star" in the Democratic Party. I will say though that I don't think anybody should be jumping to make him a presidential/vice-presidential candidate yet. First off- He hasn't served on the Senate yet. We need to actually see his record before we start calling him future president. Second, he had a rather easy election. With Jack Ryan dropping out the Republicans did not have a candidate for a long period of time. This gave him absolutely no competition at that time. Then, after about 20 possible candidates, including Mike Ditka, the GOP chose Alan Keyes who is..... an idiot. Basically, Obama didn't have to go through the mud slinging process and ran virtually unopposed. So, I believe he will do a good job as Senator I by no means he should be placed on any tickets yet.
that last one was actually 2nd mention but that was more interesting