Presidential Predictions

[The Voice of Reason]

Just for the record, I completely blame Bush for the passage marriage amendments..... He made this an issue and fought against it, scaring people into believing that same sex marriage would somehow magically devalue their marriages.

In fairness to Bush, the truth of the matter is that Karl Rove is the person that made this call. Once his pollsters decided that this issue would swing a certain percentage of votes, and motivate a certain percentage of the religious right to vote (that normally would not have), it was a done deal. Bush, himself is nothing more than the hand puppet that lipsyncs the issues that Rove has determined to be the most divisive.
After contemplating deeply, I think that the sad truth of this issue is that there are enough homophobic bigots out there that are susceptible to the fear whipped up by the religious right, that we will not see justice done for a long time (if in our lifetime). It's just too easy to divide people into an "Us vs. Them" attitude on this issue, and there simply aren't enough of "Us".

I wonder just how far he'll take us towards a theocracy.

Simple answer: as far as politically expedient. Again, I put this issue in the same category as Gay Marriage - whatever Rove and his team can determine will help the right wing cause the most, that is where it will end. In all honesty, the only thing that now stands between American democracy and an American theocracy is the courts. And with Bush having the opportunity to appoint between one and three Supreme Court Justices, it's gonna be tough. The good news is that it will take a while for most of the cases that will allow a theocracy to become established to work their way through our judicial system. Hopefully, by the time they get before the Supreme Court, we will have more moderates in power in the legislative and executive branches.

You're right Maize...if he'll invade someone as

upstanding as Saddam Hussein, he'll invade just about anybody!

Spinkles (and Ceridwen) - I understand that both of you voted for Bush, and I'm glad that you took the time to vote - especially at your age. I sincerely congratulate you on the fact that your candidate won (even at the expense of my vote). That (more than any other thing) is what makes America the greatest nation on earth. That right to vote for whatever candidate, or however you choose on an issue that you think is best.
I know that you are both still in college, and are still young enough that over time your ability to discern political rhetoric will continue to evolve and improve - that is a by-product of age and intelligence. I may be wrong, but I honestly think that one day in the future, you will look back on this particular election and determine that you voted for a man that did not lead us in the direction that you thought he would, or that the result is not what you thought it would be. The truth is, this has almost certainly happened to all of us over the age of 40 at one time or another. My life experience tells me that Bush is going to be one of those presidents.
I hope (desperately) that I am wrong, but I believe that over the next four years, you will see the economy suffer even further - deficit spending to the tune of trillions of dollars will have a negative effect - and almost certainly, a large one. If this is not controlled (by either raising taxes or curbing spending) the result will be that unemployment will rise, along with interest rates. Since you didn't experience what double digit inflation does to an economy (mid to late 70's), you have no idea how ugly that can get.

The war in Iraq will cost the life of someone you know, sooner or later. At that point, the war will become personalized for you, as it already has for over 1000 American families. That will make you question the true reason for the war.

Again, I hope that your votes were cast for an administration that will live up to your hopes and expectations. For myself, I fear that such will not be the case. I see four years of political heavy handedness, erosion of the rights which made America the greatest nation on earth, and a federal deficit that will put this country on the brink of disaster. I've never wanted to be so wrong in all my life.

Here's to George W. Bush - may he demonstrate great wisdom and compassion over the next four years.

TVOR

 

[Green Gaia]

You're right Maize...if he'll invade someone as upstanding as Saddam Hussein, he'll invade just about anybody!

The point is, there was no immediate threat from Hussein. Why invade? It doesn't make sense.

 

[jewscout]

The problem with Vietnam was there were no fronts. In WWII we had front and lines of advancement and things that people could grasp and see that we were making progress. Vietnam was a guerrilla style war that lacked this and though we were beating the pants off of Charlie the TV back home didn't make it seem that way. Without clear gains the constant Guerrilla warfare made it seem like we were losing.
Bush needed to show people that we were doing something in this War on Terror and Saddam had been a thorn in our side for a long time, maybe not a threat but a definite nuisance. So you throw him in with the "Axis of Evil" (we're like superheroes!:biglaugh: ) and since he's the easiest to beat and the Pentagon knew we'd suffer a low casualty rate the White House gave the green light for invasion. We had real fronts and "liberated" an entire country and the President looked good and Americans felt good on the whole. This gives Bush something he wouldn't have had had he just fought the War on Terror, he has real results that he can say "See look what I did!" as opposed to something like killing and arresting terrorists (which would actually be the smart thing to do) which is more difficult to keep in the public eye and on CNN and Fox News than a real live war.
It was an easy win regardless of what is going on now and you have to admit that. My cousin is in the 101st Airborne and he said the Iraqi military was joke. He compared their uniforms to Halloween costumes.

 

[robtex]

I went back to CNN and got this

BUSH 254
KERRY 252

NM and IA are still tallying but up to right now Bush has got a slight edge in both states.

Ohio is having problems and is going through a recount.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/

 

[Sunstone]

The Associated Press reports that Kerry has called Bush to concede the election.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The point is, there was no immediate threat from Hussein. Why invade? It doesn't make sense.

In 1933, when Hitler began to rebuild Germany's military forces in defiance of the Treaty of Versailles which ended WWI, he was not an "immediate threat". On September 10, 2001, the Taliban were not an "immediate threat".

The fact is, our aircraft were being periodically shot at in the No Fly Zone, Saddam had unaccounted for WMD, and missiles with ranges in excess of 150km. He was in violation of the ceasefire agreement of the Gulf War, and he was in violation of several U.N. mandates. He was pursuing nuclear weapons, and it was impossible to know for sure how close he was to a nuclear weapon without Saddam's full cooperation with inspectors--which he consistently refused to give. Saddam's intentions were clear: develop a nuke, and then hold other countries hostage with it. Saddam himself said that his greatest failure was invading Kuwait before he had completed his first nuke (which he was very close to finishing at the end of the Gulf War, but fortunately we damaged his nuke program heavily--thanks, Israel). The invasion has eliminated the threat of Saddam and, by intimidation, reduced the threat posed by other regimes.

War is horrible, I agree....but sometimes force is necessary to preserve peace. The Atlantic and the Pacific will not protect us anymore. As 9/11 made painfully clear, the world is an ever-more interconnected global community. Just as force is sometimes required to preserve peace within local communities, so is it increasingly required to preserve it in the global community.

jewscout-- Bush's popularity was at a record high during and after the invasion of Afghanistan. He didn't need to bolster his popularity with the war in Iraq....in fact, if he hadn't mentioned Iraq and kept the focus on Afghanistan, he probably would have walked into the White House with no contest this past election.

TVOR-- Thanks, I appreciate it. For the record though, Ceridwen is 16 and still in high school...but I'm sure she voted in spirit. I agree with you--I may one day look back and decide I should not have voted for Bush. I admit I'm young and inexperienced.

But in a number of years, if the economy is growing because of tax cuts (which in turn, increases tax revenue); and if other regimes are finally persuaded to abandon pursuits of nuclear weapons; and if Iraq has become a thriving free nation, with a free press and other countries in the Middle East have followed suit; and if the rise of democracy leads to enough goodwill among peoples in that region to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; and if all of this, combined, leads to a dramatic reduction in international terrorism....then perhaps my friend you will look back and decide I made the right choice after all. Only time will tell, of course.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Ceridwen is 16 and still in high school...but I'm sure she voted in spirit.

Screw you--I'm 17 and don't you forget it!

I did vote in spirit. Everyone at school voted in a mock election, in which Bush won by a landslide.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

But in a number of years, if the economy is growing because of tax cuts (which in turn, increases tax revenue); and if other regimes are finally persuaded to abandon pursuits of nuclear weapons; and if Iraq has become a thriving free nation, with a free press and other countries in the Middle East have followed suit; and if the rise of democracy leads to enough goodwill among peoples in that region to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; and if all of this, combined, leads to a dramatic reduction in international terrorism....then perhaps my friend you will look back and decide I made the right choice after all. Only time will tell, of course.

Spinkles,
IF these things come to pass, I can assure you that Sunstone, Pah, myself, and the vast majority of those that voted against Bush will be elated. We will also be more than happy to admit we were wrong, and that Bush was one of the best President's to ever hold office.
Here's hoping that we have to eat our words.
TVOR

 

[Sunstone]

First, TVOR is right to say that I would be overjoyed if events prove me to be wrong about George Bush. If his policies result in a peaceful Middle East, adherence to the Constitution, social justice, a sound environment, and a booming economy here, then I'll be so relieved that I'll sing his praises. I'd probably even return to the Republican party.

Second, I strongly suspect that Ceridwen snuck into a polling booth and voted despite being only 17. It's exactly the sort of highjinks she'd be guilty of, IMHO. Come on Ceridwen, fess up!

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Susntone -

I think you are selling Ceridwen short. My guess is that she voted at least three times - Ohio, New York, and Florida. Knowing Spinkles, I'd be willing to bet that he drove her to the polls.
Scoundrels and scalliwags.

TVOR

 

[Sunstone]

I agree, Voice. It's hard to put anything past those two. I'm willing to bet they got onto the internet and hacked the electronic vote in at least six states. Personally, I'm ashamed that this election was thrown by two members of the Religious Forums working in cohoots with each other. Scoundrels and scalliwags, indeed!

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Scoundrels and scalliwags, indeed!

Quick Ceridwen, destroy the evidence! These two are on to us...we'd best stay in my secret hideout until this thing blows over.

 

[Ceridwen018]

Yes! To the EMACHIN at once! We shall hole ourselves up and continue our global takeover from underground!

Muahahahaha! TVOR and Sunstone, you shall reap the day you ever crossed us!

*Doors slam and tires squeal*

Sh**! Spinkles, come back!

TVOR and Sunstone: Heh, heh. You were saying?

 

[Quoth The Raven]

Vietnam was a guerrilla style war that lacked this and though we were beating the pants off of Charlie the TV back home didn't make it seem that way. Without clear gains the constant Guerrilla warfare made it seem like we were losing.

Actually, if you read some of the things that have been written post Vietnam by members of the news services, there was quite a bit of manipulation of information going on by the military higher ups that made things look like they were going better than they were.
I don't know that you can say 'the good guys' were beating the pants of anyone, given that we all had to get out of there in very big hurry when it all turned to sh*t.