America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 39,732 comments
  • 1,792,430 views
ledhed
The only poll that matters is the one that put him in office ..these other polls are so easily manipulated and unscientific that its pretty much a waste of time even reading them .

And the polls that put Mr. Bush in office weren't manipulated?


ledhed
I guess it gives the talking heads something to do . At any rate who would want a President who only did things according to polls ? that would be like France .

A country with a president who did things based on the consensus of the public would be a democracy...
 
A country with a president who did things based on the consensus of the public would be a messed up country because "regular" people like me--I don't know a bout you or whoever else--don't really realize the complexities of running a country and making every little detail work, even if it doesn't work nearly as well as you would have liked. The government makes the majority of its decisions without asking any of us, because we, as a whole, would probably end up making the wrong decision by basing it on our own opinion, and not that of 280,000,000 different people. I believe America's government is classified as a democratic republic, anyway.
 
speedy_samurai
katherine harris, disenfranchised voters, all that stuff you may have heard about many moon ago.
Yes, the controversial election. I remember that one. In the end all that you listed did not matter because it was a US Supreme Court decision that brought about the end and decision. As for disenfrachised voters: find an election where people didn't claim that. A guy I work with claims he was disenfrachised when he didn't get to vote in the 2004 elections because he missed the registration deadline.

In 2000, after the fact, many independent groups and media outlets recounted ballots and depending on how you counted determined who won. It depended on how strict you were as to who won. This inconsistency is why the Supreme Court stopped the count.

Here's the Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000

So I guess the 2004 election was manipulated as well?
 
FoolKiller
Yes, the controversial election. I remember that one. In the end all that you listed did not matter because it was a US Supreme Court decision that brought about the end and decision.

Yes, but didn't Clarence Thomas' wife work for the Bush transition team, at the time? I wonder how he was able to cast his vote without feeling there was a conflict of interest there.
 
speedy_samurai
Yes, but didn't Clarence Thomas' wife work for the Bush transition team, at the time? I wonder how he was able to cast his vote without feeling there was a conflict of interest there.

Considering that GW and Kerry and their wives could vote, I really don't see how that's any problem at all.
 
speedy_samurai
Yes, but didn't Clarence Thomas' wife work for the Bush transition team, at the time? I wonder how he was able to cast his vote without feeling there was a conflict of interest there.

Considering that he's untouchable now that he's on the supreme court (and the best justice at that)? I'd think it would be easy. Nobody has leverage over him (minus blackmail or something like that).
 
Hey this is quite old but the whole world needs to see this (This is just a picture) How Can a plane do this?

I mean Obviously a plane has wings and this is a perfect cut.
Theres no proof becuase the pictures take one photo each second and this came right between the picture. So theres no proof

2.jpg


if you need that site for the video just tell me and ill gadly give to you.
Its quite long but its worth the wait
This video will really show you what their hiding
 
Do idiots just fall from the sky or do they grow someplace ? Often they just seem to appear as if by magic....has anyone even noticed this ?
 
Remington, this is simply bunk.

The pentagon is a MILITITARY instillation. That everyone knows is there. Do you think for two seconds it's not designed to handle impact in a specific way? Just like the twin towers, they were DESIGNED to collapse straight down. Much like the pentagon is designed in specific setions. Look at the very picture you posted. It looks like a wall or section break of some point. Why couldn't a plane do that?
 
Swift
Remington, this is simply bunk.

The pentagon is a MILITITARY instillation. That everyone knows is there. Do you think for two seconds it's not designed to handle impact in a specific way? Just like the twin towers, they were DESIGNED to collapse straight down. Much like the pentagon is designed in specific setions. Look at the very picture you posted. It looks like a wall or section break of some point. Why couldn't a plane do that?
i would recomend watching the 9/11 movie...you'll learn alot from it

ill post the link soon because i dont now where it is, ill ask my bro.
 
There are actual pictures floating around of the wrecked plane inside the Pentagon.
 
Swift
Not getting this post. :boggled:
I'm not sure why there's a space between the A and the M. It should read "SCREAM", which is what I want to do whenever anyone suggests that the fabled "9/11" video has the real story.
 
kylehnat
I'm not sure why there's a space between the A and the M. It should read "SCREAM", which is what I want to do whenever anyone suggests that the fabled "9/11" video has the real story.

you mean "United 93"? Well, since we have some evidence of what happened on that flight, it's probably as close to the real story as we'll get.
 
Ya I just don't understand, the US was attack by terrorist...not by our own military. Although if any of you have ever seen the show The Lone Gunman, you can see where one would get the idea.
 
Oh for (insert deity here)'s sakes, not (insert expletive here)ing "Loose Change" AGAIN...

remington - don't search for a link. Search THIS SITE for the extensive debunking of this mindless pap.
 
Swift
you mean "United 93"? Well, since we have some evidence of what happened on that flight, it's probably as close to the real story as we'll get.

I'm guessing kyle meant fahrenheit 9/11 and remington meant united 93.
 
Famine
Oh for (insert deity here)'s sakes, not (insert expletive here)ing "Loose Change" AGAIN...

remington - don't search for a link. Search THIS SITE for the extensive debunking of this mindless pap.
^THIS is what I was getting at :)
 
Just a side note... I find that anytime someone mentions Michael Moore the answer is always "he's been exposed for the liar he is" or something to that effect. Outside the US, or at least here in Spain, he's still seen as someone who is right and brave for acting against the so-called imperialist system.

Would anyone be so kind as to point me or link me to websites/articles which uncover his "lies"? And please don't include Michael-Moore-bashing websites, just fact-based ones if you're able.

Thanks :)
 
Only thing that makes me second guess everything Michael Moore says is his biase and hatred. I actually appreciated films like Columbine and Fairenheit, it does bring up many good points. I just take it with a grain of salt.
 
Michael Moore tends to use facts, but he often falsely links them together to form conclusions that shouldn't really be made. I thought Fahrenheit 9/11 was thought-provoking, but I remember saying "boy, that's a stretch" to a lot of the conclusions he reached.

However, I think that people too quickly dismiss anything he says as liberal bullcrap, because he brings up valid points now and again.
 
What I hate about Moore is how he tends to edit his films to make everything agree with what he is saying. He's pretty uncrediable with information and I don't take anyone seriously who thinks his movies are a good source of information. Also in his film Rodger and Me is made GM look like it was bringing Flint, Michigan down. Growing up not far from Flint I can tell everyone that the only reason Flint is still afloat is due to GM.
 
So other than hearsay and plain assumptions, there's no real facts to backup people's claims that Moore is a liar?
 
Back