48 replies to this topic

[Waser Lave]

Normally I would never 'plagiarize' another's work (keep in mind, I credited Farshad, have a link to my forum on my signature where his real name/username are synonymous), but I'm getting ready to sleep and don't have time to write a whole dissertation on the fallacies of capitalism.

I didn't say you 'plagiarized' anything, you said it was somebody else's post. I just didn't think it was right to say that you had your say when what you posted what actually somebody else's words.

[Hater_Boxden]

Cant wait for super duper tuesday.....
I hope Gullianni makes some progress but he is off to Florida for now i guess...

Oh yea and NH has what is called an Indirect Primary, in case any are wondering what exactly its called.

[Tetiel]

those are both northern states, i said he'll lose southern

No, but what I was I guess meaning is that I don't think it means too much yet as it's such a little difference. I'd like to think the south isn't THAT racist but I suppose I hope not to be proven wrong?

[RandomNameIgnoreIt]

In that case, PM them to me rather than hiding under your snide remarks. I'm off to bed, expect a reply tomorrow in the midday.

Oh very well. I was going to read your long post, but after seeing all the beheading videos that come from Al Qaeda, I know as an American that reading a long winded rant about capitalism and the West could never end well for me, so thanks but no thanks.

[pyke]

those are both northern states, i said he'll lose southern

Well, you can probably apply the same rules to Clinton as well, which leaves Edwards for the most part. Wouldn't be too bad of a thing.

[Fatal]

Cant wait for super duper tuesday.....
I hope Gullianni makes some progress but he is off to Florida for now i guess...

Oh yea and NH has what is called an Indirect Primary, in case any are wondering what exactly its called.

any reason you like cross-dressing Giuliani ?

Well, you can probably apply the same rules to Clinton as well, which leaves Edwards for the most part. Wouldn't be too bad of a thing.

no I think clinton will do better than obama though. edwards has no chance IMO unless Clinton/Obama really fuck up

Edited by Fatal, 08 January 2008 - 09:46 PM.

[pyke]

any reason you like cross-dressing Giuliani ?

It's pretty easy to take one particular oddity and make someone sound like a freak. Though I'm be much more concerned with someone BEING A RACIST than dressing up like a chick.

[Fatal]

And instead of being in the Fox debate, he ended up on Jay Leno last night.

Which would you prefer- 14 minutes purely devoted to you? Or being bombarded with questions with the spotlight on others.

and did a 1 hour town hall thing




EDIT: McCain: I would have started Iraq war regardless of WMD

http://digg.com/2008...gardless_of_WMD
http://rawstory.com/..._Iraq_0106.html

Edited by Fatal, 08 January 2008 - 10:10 PM.

[Lawivido]

If Hilary becomes president, I'm bouncing. All I gotta say.

[Fatal]

If Hilary becomes president, I'm bouncing. All I gotta say.

everyone says that every election, very few do it

Edited by Fatal, 08 January 2008 - 11:30 PM.

[phalkon]

i'm actually pulling for Ron Paul. he's pretty kickass

but if it looks really bad for him, i might just go with obama... bleh. i dunno. i've given up a lot of hope for government

[Nick]

I could only dare to guess why

Actually, see I know what you're thinking already. It has absolutely nothing to do with gay rights, so stop thinking that. I am completely against his closed borders/immigration pollicies. And like other republicans, exluding Ron Paul, his views are constantly changing, flipflopping. I also don't appreciate how he's fooled the evangelist population of America by taking a religious standpoint to many issues, when really his only interest is getting into the oval office, regardless of what bullshit he has to spew out of his fat mouth.

those are both northern states, i said he'll lose southern

In the last election, Iowa was a Bush state, and they've been known for the high concentration of conservatives.

[Hawk]

A good analysis and comparison of the hand count versus Diebold. There's absolutely no question the elections were rigged. It's not just the machines, but also hand counts in some areas; I think Paul's a piece of shit, but with the amount of people testifying their (and their family's) votes for the candidate contrasted to the amount he supposedly received in Sutton (zero votes) for example is very, very suspicious.

Yeah, right. Clearly its the way that they were counted that caused problems.

Correlation does not imply causation. I thought you'd know this.

[Hawk]

Completely unacceptable.

You're right, because people are always perfect. I bet you've never made a mistake.

Did you read the article you posted by the way?

The effect is far smaller when comparing similar districts, but probably not enough to arrest the fears of conspiracy theorists. In the end, Clinton won because she was more popular in the large precincts which happen to be tallied by Diebold machines. Correlation, not causation seems more likely to me.

There are so many variables in an election result that to put Hillary’s win down to jiggery-pokery without any real evidence is over the top. Demographics of the turnout and McCain siphoning Independents away from Obama at the last minute are infinitely more likely to have affected the than Diebold skullduggery.

So just quit spreading BS

[Fatal]

In the last election, Iowa was a Bush state, and they've been known for the high concentration of conservatives.

since when was Bush black? my point is southerners wont like Obama, if you read any of my other posts/replies above you'd know that

Edited by Fatal, 09 January 2008 - 03:30 PM.

[nox]

support for ron paul, at this point is inadvertently ensuring a hrc or gop win. those who have normally supported obama are now for in it forever with ron paul, assured that the internet straw polls will lead to a "amazing come around with a swooping victory!" leaving obama without support he'd normally get, which gives hillary more votes along with a bigger lead. since their strongest demographics are the same, at 18-25 - it hurt him even more.


it's time that people realize that 5th place wins every time is only cementing his loss, so if you're still riding this like a lot people are you need to understand that he's 99% sure he won't. if he does maybe it could be another story, but until that time comes facing reality is imminent to protect neocon1(hillary clinton) or neocon2-4(huckabee, mccain, romney) from becoming president.

Edited by nox, 09 January 2008 - 03:58 PM.

[Alex]

It's been confirmed: Now the district of Sutton is reporting an error after the uproar and they're now saying there's been 31 votes. Jennifer Clark of Sutton said that they were "left off the tally sheet" and it was human error. Completely unacceptable.

I was reading about that earlier before they reached any conclusive evidence, do you have a link?

[Black Flame]

Mmmm I'm kinda neutral about McCain winning(I'm neutral about all the republican candidates except for Ron Paul really), but Hillary is alright. I much rather prefer Obama, but I'm fine with Hilary winning. I still think Obama has the biggest chance of getting the democratic nomination right now. As for the republican bid right now, I'd like to see Ron Paul get it but...I'm slowly losing hope and thinking Mitt Romney might get it. But there's still the Michigan primaries(Hillary is guaranteed to win that), South Carolina, Nevada, Florida, and of course Super Tuesday, so Ron Paul is still in this I think.

[redlion]

It's been confirmed: Now the district of Sutton is reporting an error after the uproar and they're now saying there's been 31 votes. Jennifer Clark of Sutton said that they were "left off the tally sheet" and it was human error. Completely unacceptable.

Diebold machines have proven to be faulty time and time again. Why are their products being trusted to handle the fate of a world superpower?

While I agree that faulty machines should not be used for elections, why is it any of your business? I don't interfere in Canadian politics, and I don't speak out against your premier, who probably has a less than immaculate record. I don't understand why you speak out against American 'policing the world' or whatever, yet you want to interfere in the affairs of foreign countries. You're Canadian: not American, and not Palestinian. Why speak out so vehemently for something that doesn't directly affect you? Especially when it involves violating a countries sovereign rights.

I don't understand this recent anti-capitalist nonsense simon. Its a little bit depressing.

[pyke]

STM, what would you want to be done to fix things?

[pyke]

Without killing the execs and bourgeoisie? I think it's important that America have free press (which so far is limited to the internet), and every student and worker study communism.

Well, hopefully a coup of epic proportions wouldn't be required . I disagree with making people learn about communism, unless you're going to teach them about capitalism and other systems as well though.

America is probably one of the better countries for free press though. While news stations clearly have some sort of agenda, it's more than probably 85+% of the rest of the world can boast.

[Hawk]

This part of your post illustrates clearly shows a lack of research on your part. Reporters Without Borders in 2007 had published its second world press freedom ranking, and placed America in 32nd.

Well that puts us in the 83rd percentile. Pretty accurate guess if you ask me.

Edited by Hawk, 09 January 2008 - 08:21 PM.

[pyke]

Rather, but not enough - it's not necessarily free press when you have networks such as Fox and CNN limiting debate, using double-speak and time constrains to sway votes and excluding candidates such as Ron Paul (dirty capitalist) when he meets the criteria for the event comparably to others included. This isn't a democracy - this is an oligarchy by the media execs. They are choosing your candidates for you. It's funny how the same free market capitalist system Ron Paul advocates is the same one keeping him down. The free market has spoken .

I wouldn't blame the problems on the fact that it is a capitalist state, more so because the wrong peoples interests are being entertained. Big businesses use these media outlets to their own ends, which obviously isn't how the american system would ideally work.

Most political systems are fundamentally flawed, due to mankind, that's just how it is. Look at the result of Russia, post revolution. They had a communist state and everyone was equal, for a little while. Just like history would suggest was going to happen though, key individuals abused the system to meet their own ends.

Even if America turned communist or whatever, it would not take long for someone to screw everything up.

[Ives]

I'm not dissapointed by Paul's run as well. It's kinda lame if you ask me. It's like saying Kinky Friedman was going to win Governor of Texas. Way too ahead of the times, the only thing they can do is influence a generation of young people, who will end up voting for a half assed version of that message when they put up the bong and give a shit enough to actually fucking vote. (For more information, see Barry Goldwater.) As for the two who won, I dislike Hillary. She's a fraud who will only let down her guard to get votes. McCain at least went through some shit and used to be a sane reasonable person, and is one of the most sane when it comes to immigration policy and moving more towards an open border idea.

Alright, I'll bite, really quickly - just came to set my Amarok alarm..

The flaw in capitalism is the fact that, as I quoted Farshad on, true political freedom doesn't exist in a system where capital is the major economic force, because the upper class has a huge amount of political power contrasted to that of the proletariat. That those in the upper class will continue to gain capital while those below will continue to be exploited:

"In one way or another," states Lenin, "all official and liberal science defends wage-slavery… To expect science to be impartial in a wage-slave society is as foolishly naïve as to expect impartiality from manufacturers on the question of whether workers' wages ought not to be increased by decreasing the profits of capital."

It is the "market economy" of capitalism that is exploitative. Peace! \/

I disagree. The idea of wage slavery is bullshit. With capitalism, it's not sufficent for true freedom, but at least I do have the most available options. Middle way and otherwise tries to help level the playing field, but it just doesn't work. Government is naturally corrupt, and trusting in it to the extent economically many economists do is just baffling to me. I do think a government should exist - maintaing of roads, for example, is a purposeful function of government. Antitrust laws and some child labor protections are also good, but when you get too many you end up doing more harm for the bottom classes and secure more for the upper class then you would if you had a true free market system.

The fact people willingly abuse themselves to jobs they hate is a lack of values. That's a moral concern of society, and shouldn't be dealt with government handling of the economy. Usually, they do have options, they're just not hungry enough to find the options and go for them, and fucking compete. The other thing capitalism does is end up increasing the condition of the poor a ton. Poor people in 2008 vs rich people in 1898, theres a significant reason you'd choose the former, with all the technology (which is also a result of capitalism) and ease of work since then.

Edited by Athean, 09 January 2008 - 10:24 PM.