google fun [Archive]

Catila Amano

12-06-2003, 11:07 AM

At the risk of being labeled a "fanboi..."

I can't help but to wonder by what measuring stick "failure" is being measured. If the current administration is a "miserable failure," the previous administration must have been an "incredibly gigantic amazingly collosal failure." I just can't see where this administration has failed.

After being attacked on September 11th, the anti-terrorist policies and actions taken by this administration has lead to the removal of two oppressive, terrorist-sponsoring governments, freeing tens of millions of people living under their rule.

In contrast, the previous administration did absolutely nothing after the World Trade Center was bombed. The previous administration did absolutely nothing when the USS Cole was bombed. The previous administration was offered Osama Bin-Laden up on a silver platter not one, not two, but three times and did nothing (and we see what happened as a result). The previous administration turned tail and ran from Somalia after getting a bloody nose (which was caused because the administration refused to support the troops with the necessary equipment and personnel needed to execute the mission). The lack of response to any of these attacks resulted in leading the terrorists to belive that the US is weak, which lead to September 11th.

In addition to the terrorist problems, the current administration also inherited an economy that was going into the tank. The stock market boom that occurred in the '90s was killed by the economic policies of the previous administration. The downslide can be directly linked to the prosecution of Microsoft by the Justice Department. If you look at the stock market, you can see that it started sliding when Microsoft's stock started falling, which was caused directly by the judgements against Microsoft.

The current administration inherited that sliding economy, and then September 11th compounded the problem by completely shutting down the economy for several days. The Bush-proposed tax cuts have helped to jump-start the economy. Tax cuts work because when people don't have to send as much money to the government), they have more money to spend, which leads to economic growth (spending leads to more demand for products, which leads to needing to hire more people which leads to more spending, which leads to more demand, which leads to more hiring...).

So, after inheriting what he did and doing what he has to turn things around, I don't see how Bush can possibly be considered a failure by anyone with any intellectual honesty.

Serresrelic

12-06-2003, 11:17 AM

oy... politics.

The only thing I am going to say is that I disagree that the tax-cuts "jump started the economy". If you go by what bush says, then yes it did. But if you take a look around and actually see how many layoffs are going to be occuring in the next couple months, how many people are without work, and how large our deficit is growing, well I can't help but say that I see absolutely no proof whatsoever that our economy was jump started. Yes the unemployement rate went down 1/10th of a percent, but I can hardly call that jump starting.

/shrug
but then again I don't watch CNN 24 hours a day, so what do I know....

Karimi

12-06-2003, 12:27 PM

WAHAHAHAHAHA OMG LOL.

Tadashya

12-06-2003, 12:38 PM

neither word is on that page

I am not amused :?

(-=Phoenix=-)

12-06-2003, 12:44 PM

Bah, you know its hilarious, Tad =P

Wooleen Shadowraith

12-06-2003, 01:29 PM

ROFL, Saad.

FuzzyBear

12-06-2003, 01:42 PM

try "weapons of mass destruction"

EvilIguana966

12-06-2003, 01:47 PM

I'm quite amused, but I'm also disguisted. Everything Catila said is on the money, and these far out liberals who pull these stunts are barely any better than the terrorists they defend. Now i'm sure they don't like terrorists any more than the rest of us, but the fact is they put politics over national security in a heartbeat. It doesnt matter that Saddam is a bad man and Bush was RIGHT to depose him if doing it supports the republicans. I mean my God, don't these shitheads have any moral conscience at all? I'm willing to give democrats credit when they do the right thing. For example you'll find that many conservatives agree with how JFK handled foreign policy (after his mistake with the bay of pigs), and thought that he made a pretty decent president.

I mean, how can you say that you want to defend America from terrorism, but not support us being in Iraq? I mean... what about all the TERRORISTS THAT WE ARE ****ING FIGHTING AGAINST OVER THERE? Wait... those aren't politically convenient terrorists to the left, and god knows any terrorists this administration fights aren't the right ones.

Serresrelic

12-06-2003, 01:58 PM

I consider myself a democrat. Does that make me a "shithead" too?

(-=Phoenix=-)

12-06-2003, 02:03 PM

I mean my God, don't these shitheads have any moral conscience at all? I'm willing to give democrats credit when they do the right thing.

thats a matter of opinion. i dont support the war at all. neither does my family, whom are all democratic.

last time i checked, we have morals. we have a strict "tell no lies" policy. we are all very open and honest with eachother. we are not violent, nor are we cruel. we donate to the poor, and help with puplic services.

we're not shitheads. we're pacafists.

Satarus

12-06-2003, 02:18 PM

here is one that actually is programmed into google, enter "the answer to life the universe and everything" and hit search

Tadashya

12-06-2003, 02:25 PM

Nope I really dont find it funny... really...

I am not up for picking on a person just because you disagree with their viewpoint. I also find a great deal of bashing in any direction comes across as funny simply because its "in" to do so. Often when I see people bash they really havent first clue as to the whys and the whats about it. They are uninformed.

You want to make a political statement.. for goodness sakes back it up with facts. For being such a large source of information.... Googles ignorance is sure showing :?

Velenka

12-06-2003, 06:05 PM

Hooray, I'm a shithead. :roll:

Somebody's rabid political views are showing.

EvilIguana966

12-06-2003, 06:06 PM

I was a bit steamed after reading some of the anti bush links there, and I stand by my insult that those callous, angry, ignorant folks aren't worthy of breathing my oxygen. But alas they are free to their opinions, no thanlks to any effort they put forth. The absolutely vitriolic hatred for Bush disguists me, and I'm quite aware that this violent ignorant hatred exists only from a small minority of really vocal asshats who try to sway public opinion by using their dirty tricks.

I disagree with Democrats, but I understand that the average liberal means well just like the average conservative (although the haters would have you beleive we are selfish, money grubbing, nature killing, rich boys), and I respect that, but I dont respect that google trick.

Pacifism.... I hate to say it but pacifism is wrong. Loving peace is good, but apathy towards the evil of the world, unwillingness to fight for what you beleive in, ignoring dangers to you and your people, is dangerous. It's especially dangerous when you go out of your way to impose your supposed moral superiority on others who are trying to make the world safer (or in the case of France, impose a guise of moral superiority that is actually a thin veil over your economic interests with said evil parties)

last time i checked, we have morals. we have a strict "tell no lies" policy. we are all very open and honest with eachother. we are not violent, nor are we cruel. we donate to the poor, and help with puplic services.

Last I checked those were the hallmarks of conservative family values, the difference is that we want parents teaching their kids these things, not the government controlling it. And that is a big problem anymore. Liberals tend to want the government to control these aspects, and that is a very dangerous proposition.

Last but not least, please don't be offended by my political views, because we can still enjoy our games, and we share at least a *sort* of friendship. It's just my style to be blunt and uncharismatic )

I'm sorry for the length and verbosity of this rant, but hopefully it will be read in full, and not skimmed misquoted or taken out of context.

Velenka

12-06-2003, 06:10 PM

Sorry sweets, but I do not consider you a friend, and your untempered, insulting way of voicing your own hatefull opinions is a little more than "blunt" and "uncharismatic". Portray your views in a little more mature manner, and maybe people won't skim/ignore your posts.

Tadashya

12-06-2003, 06:24 PM

I believe I stopped at 'arent worthy'

I agree with Velenka.

I dont care if someone dislikes Bush. What I do dislike is if the conversation goes something like this :

"Bush is an idiot"
"Well.. why?"
"Well because of the economy and the war"
"Well what about the economy and the war?"
"Well he ruined the economy. And the of course he got us into this pointless war for oil"
"Oh really.. how exactly did he ruin the economy? And how is it exactly you've come to this conclusion...?"
"Everyone knows we're in this war for oil and his money interests"
"Oh really explain to me how this works exactly?"

if the person follows up with anything other than intelligent facts at this point I become aggravated. If it turns into a resepectfully intelligent sparring I am all up for it. What's unfortunate is that many people (from both sides of the fence) are too willing to just follow the party line. Those folks arent much worth arguing with... certainly, because there is no possible concession or resolution -- but throwing bile over more bile just makes the need for a larger emisis basin.

Kaylen

12-06-2003, 07:13 PM

Pacifism is not "wrong." However, when people are blowing up your country, you should not mistake the words "Pacifism" and "Apathy." I support the war, because the governments Bush has ousted have been led by very bad people. Hussein's reign should have ended over a decade ago.

But I cannot logically believe someone can be a pacifist when there is a war going on around them. There cannot be peace - we are fighting religious fanatics who will never come to a peaceful resolution until every American is dead.

I am just afraid of where this war may go. I am afraid that it will reach beyond the borders of the Middle East.

I honestly do not pay much attention to politics. I do not know the difference between a liberal and a conservative, or a democrat and a republican. I am more afraid of the Patriot Act than I am of a terrorist killing me. But if someone were to believe Saddam Hussein should still be in power, then I would label them more unknowing of the world than I am.

This isn't directed at you, Phoenix - just the word pacifism.

And Iguana, you may want to tone it down a bit. You're coming off as overly hostile.

EvilIguana966

12-06-2003, 07:31 PM

Perhaps if you read what I wrote you'd notice I was calling anyone here a shithead, but rather those people who's websites clogged up that google list. Nothing but a bunch of ignorant and inflammatory idiots, to which I responded with anger. And don't give me that stupid "Oh youre dropping yourself to their level" type thing, because quite frankly, in the real world, it does matter "who started it".

And guess what, I'm not afraid to share my opinions to combat that drivel. Which is yet another of the prmary differences between the left and the right. Here we value honest, blunt, truthful opinions, where as the left will attack you for not being "nice" about it. And I'm guessing that you have decided I'm probably a mean person, which you can go on thinking because thats one less person I have to worry about impressing. I mean, the world isnt about impressing people, it's about getting stuff done. Impressing people people is best left for the arts, wheras this subject, politics, very significantly affects the stability of the whole world.

I'm not going to change anyones opinion, i'm not a good debater. I have absolutely no skill in social situations. But I spend a helluva lot more time learning from the world around mew and just *thinking* than most people. Thats part of why I can't sleep well, why I can't concentrate well, why I can get bored so quickly. But my specific medical conditions are irrelevant at this point. What is relevant is that I try to share some insight with the world, which people can do with what they please.

That open sharing of ideas is basically gone from the US now. Now if you want to suceed in politics you have to stoop to the level of your opponent, and only say some of what you know, because if you are honest and open, your opponent goes and does the dirty, crowd pleasing approach. IE they pull a Bill Clinton: Worthless human being with high CHA modifier.

Now please, I beg you to counter my response with more personal assaults. Because I should have known better than to use English which *could* be interpreted to be an insult to somone it wasn't directed at. Well i guess that's a side affect of using a language rather than alegbra.

Kaylen

12-06-2003, 07:46 PM

No one wants you to be afraid to share your opinions. This just isn't the place for hostile flaming, of anyone.

Serresrelic

12-06-2003, 08:00 PM

Evil, the problem with the way you're sharing your opinion is that you're being offensive, and quite frankly, several of the things you've said offend me. There's no reason you can't share you're opinion without name calling and making arguments that are as baseless as the "shitheads" you claim to be so mad at.

As far as the rest of the argument...

I consider myself a democrat. I'm not really super liberal, but I tend to agree with more democrat positions than republican. I guess that makes me a conservative democrat? I don't know *shrug*.

Anyway, even though I consider myself a democrat, I voted for Bush. I just really didn't like Gore's platform. Anyway. I am definitely all for the war on terrorism, and I agree with going into Iraq. The problem I have is the reasons for going into Iraq. The entire argument that Bush made for attacking Iraq was the supposed WMD's. We've been in Iraq how long now and still no WMD's, or even remnents of WMD's or their creation? Frankly, I feel lied to. I feel like I was personally decieved by Bush for making such claims. If Bush wanted to go in simply to free the people of Iraq from such a terrible tyrant, I would have been all for it. But that's not happened, and now I'm terribly disappointed in Bush and at this point I more than likely won't be voting for him next election.

Kaylen

12-06-2003, 08:12 PM

In all honesty, their intelligence could've suggested Hussein had WMDs. Hussein's actions suggested he had WMDs - he would not cooperate with U.N. inspectors. So it is entirely possible that Bush honestly thought Hussein had WMDs.

Serresrelic

12-06-2003, 08:19 PM

That is a point that I considered, however, prior to us going to Iraq, Hussein did allow UN Inspectors back in, and Blix's report did say that they were cooperating with the inspectors. I guess I was just one of those people who thinks the inspectors should have been given more time. But then again, I'm sure Bush still would have gone into Iraq, and we'd be in the same position we are in now.

And secondly, if our intelligence suggested that they had WMD's and we still can't find them, what does that say about the quality of our intelligence?

Keiran

12-06-2003, 08:46 PM

It merely says that our intelligence is not omniscient. Everyone makes mistakes, and attempting to obtain knowledge that you're not supposed to have is one of the more difficult things to do in this world.

Ciarin

12-06-2003, 08:53 PM

Well. I'd like to point out that Google doesn't think bush is a miserable failure. The "I'm feeling lucky" is based on how many hits that website gets after searching with those words. I guess a few people just repeated the search over and over again to put the bush bio page at the top ranking.

And this whole thing was just a crap joke. No need to get all political (which is becoming more prevalent in the threads lately).

btw, I like bush, I agree with going to war with Iraq. And I wish I could be over there right now.

Serresrelic

12-06-2003, 08:55 PM

True, but if we know our intelligence is so unreliable then how can we justify killing thousands of their people and more than a hundred of ours, as well as spending billions of dollars for a war that is based on information that we know may be wrong?

I'm sorry but when you're talking about a war and the deaths of thousands of people the "everyone makes mistakes" argument is not justifiable to me. Especially when Hussein did start cooperating with inspectors and there was a chance to settle the issue peacefully.

When you're taking a chance on such high stakes as peoples lives, you better damn well be sure that the information you have is accurate.

Edit: Just to reiterate, I am not against the invasion of Iraq, I'm against the fact that we did it based on reasons that had such terrible intelligence to support it. I think we should have kicked Hussein out a decade ago, but for reasons that actually have supporting evidence.

Ciarin

12-06-2003, 08:58 PM

We need to thin the herd, or else disease and famine will do it for us.

Screw hussein.

rimedragona

12-06-2003, 09:00 PM

I've read every one of these posts so far... and I'm not going to involve myself in a discussion in which I will surely be quickly in over my head. I don't follow politics. I know just enough about the platforms of each runner to make a semi-informed vote, but I don't care enough to want to wade through the cesspool that I consider politics to be.

I consider myself a moderate, with liberal leanings, and I found myself quite offended. And I realize that it wasn't intended to be directed at us. But, in a way, it still was. Those of us who are Democrat-inclined, but who are also part of this group, are then made all right? That doesn't make any sense. Unless I missed something, or have forgotten peices already. (which could very well have happened... my title isn't my title for nothing... *says she of the faulty short term memory*)

And of course, there's another problem, ne? Any conversation that includes politics, and has more than one view represented, quickly becomes something less than polite. At least, any conversation that I've had the (not?) pleasure of listening to. No one is going to be changing anyone's opinions, and if someone does come up with a better argument, it seems to make the person who was bested even more venomously lean in the direction they were tending.

So. I have my opinions on Bush and the war, and so does everyone else. Most likely, none of them are entirely accurate, and it won't benefit anyone to go around in circles getting nowhere with each other. Besides... confrontations make me cry. I can always hold that in reserve if things get to be too much. <<< joke, people, geez....

One last thing, which I could probably have fit in elsewhere, but I don't want to go back and rework something that has already been reworked beyond its limits... being 'nice' isn't about impressing people. It's about treating others as you would want them to treat you. I think that's something that is forgotten a lot these days. Isn't that the Golden Rule? (or is that to say 'please' and 'thank you'... ?)

Something to consider.

I'm getting the feeling that I should have just kept my big mouth shut. *sigh* *presses sumbit tentatively*

EDIT: BTW - I just now did the whole 'miserable failure' with I'm feeling Lucky... all I got was a biography on Bush. A rather nice, one, actually. which makes me wonder why it came up, since it doesn't mention either word... *confused*

Tadashya

12-06-2003, 09:08 PM

my point was.. there is no point arguing with someone who is completely caught up in hostility/rage/fear... whatever their motivation. Its really a fruitless discussion. Its not about 'stooping'. Its about being able to push the 'submit' button on a post w/o having my andrenaline gland pumping.

/shrug

And if it wasnt Google then I apologize to the Google peoples for misunderstand how their meta crawler works.

Keiran

12-06-2003, 09:10 PM

Heh, I won't give arguments to support one side or the other, Serres, just wanted to point out that intelligence gathering is difficult. Both sides may use that point as it pleases them. :)

I try to avoid taking sides in topics like this anyway, for the same reasons Rimedragona gave.

(Where'd your avatar go, Rimedragona? Bring it back!)

rimedragona

12-06-2003, 09:26 PM

I don't have an avatar? .... O.O *cries*

*rushes to put it back*

Keiran

12-06-2003, 09:31 PM

Err, was it me? It's there now...

rimedragona

12-06-2003, 10:08 PM

well, no.... I rushed to put it back. *points* ^_^

Keiran

12-06-2003, 10:09 PM

Ahh, heh, thanks for confirming my sanity. ;)

stuman89

12-07-2003, 12:22 AM

ok well im a republicain and my problem and what so many other republicans have a problem w/ are democrats. u bastards!

lol. jk. i think there are 2 types of democrats, as there are 2 types of republiancs but i will be focusing on the demacrats.

one type is the well informed, mature democrat who is smart and will debate w/ and argument other than bush just wanting oil.

the other is the person who votes democratic even if a donkey runs for president [thats how clinton came to be] these types have been swayed by the ultra-liberal media [dont even try to deny it it is. it would be more subtle if it had flashing neon lights that said 'were liberal and we let that affect everything we say!' o wait they already did that]

they dont no anything really other than what they capture from the commercials for the news while watchin reruns of 'wild police chases of speeding celebrities'

they all seem to be very head strong even though they no NOTHING at all and its annoying to argue ur way through 400000 of them everytime u speak to the dumb assed people

im very aware that there will be republicans of this calibre, but they r fewer and less far between. because we are right and they r wrong

and by the way i totaly hate potitical correctness because i think that our society has become far to soft and will take offence to far to many things.

suck it up and have some balls. i take criticism standing up and lookin the person straight in the eye............ or LCD

o and by the way im only 14 and i no far more about the world and how it actualy works than most adults, but im totaly 100% horrible w/ relationships [not getting a gurl. ive got that down pat] because god has to handicap the smart people some how

Sarius

12-07-2003, 04:12 AM

I havent read all of the posts but try:

Weapons of mass destruction

and "im feeling lucky"

its pretty clever :D

Edit - oh nevermind started to read through, someone already posted it, well if you missed it here it is again

Devis

12-08-2003, 08:08 AM

This thread is getting a little too serious for what it started out as, soo..

Go to www.googlism.com and put in your name, it's worth a bit of a laugh every now and then; some of the things it finds are just insane.

devis is immune to magic sleep spells and effects

devis is one palya

devis is a leading master of the "conversation piece"

devis is a bottom

Ho ho ho.

Catila Amano

12-08-2003, 09:10 AM

Sorry to have started the hot political arguments here. I just wanted to make the point that the evidence that Bush is a "miserable failure" just isn't there (and is more aptly applied to the previous administration).

There are ways to argue and ways to debate, and they shouldn't mix. Arguments usually lead to hurt feelings whereas debate shouldn't (they may even to intellectual enlightenment).

I'll just leave it at that, since I don't want to get into any arguments here.

Edit: Ciarin, I know what you mean about wishing you were still in. Ever since September 11th, I wish I were still in the Navy, but alas, a medical discharge (bad knee) tends to make that not possible. :(