BEST OF GOING
Going. For People Who Love to Go Out.
politics
It could be called "public service" or "elected office", so it goes, this group is called Politics.
Call your City Election Office and find out how to gather nomination papers and make your own Committee to Elect!
Kindly substantiate what you say here. Include things like article LINKS/URL's from places that have their writers do actual fact-checking. Mentioning the newspaper from that day without a link to the article is a bit vague, no?
Puppet accounts that would post here should observe section #7 of the Going Code of Conduct and post elsewhere.
CONSIDER YOURSELF INFORMED THAT THIS GROUP IS FOR DISCUSSING 'POLITICS'. THOSE WHO COME HERE TO TROLL WILL BE DOCUMENTED AND REPORTED FOR ABUSE. IT IS BECAUSE OF DISRESPECTFUL SHAM ACCOUNTS IN THIS GROUP THAT THIS OBVIOUS POINT MUST BE STATED.
View the Conventions and Debates on C-SPAN and C-SPAN2. No commercials and the coverage of the spin-room after the debates is one of the most entertaining parts of the election. Someone just deleted my post saying as much, dangerous stuff.
Maintainers: Toby
Past Events
(45) view all|post an event
1
Troubl
Fuck the Troops + -
Patriotism? Are you serious?
“Support our troops†has become the unshakable mantra that ultimately pacified the American people into accepting this atrocity of a war when all other lies failed. Remember WMDs? How about the Hussein-Bin Laden 9/11 connection? Or what about liberating the Iraqi people from tyranny to bring about a stable democracy and effectively destroying the safe haven of “terrorists�
All of this was shoved into the American consciousness by government policy led by the fourth branch, the media. Later we discovered this mountain of evidence to be 100% good old-fashioned American bullshit.
I fondly remember country songs about patriotism, never forgetting, and freedom fries while people waved their little flags made in China.
After the truth finally came out, a new excuse was needed to keep the “Everyone is a Hero†t-shirt enterprise afloat. The “Support our Troops†fundraising campaign was pushed to the forefront; after all, no matter how you feel about the war almost every person knows someone involved whom they love and wish to support. It’s the ultimate twisted grassroots agenda to keep the holy war rolling.
Who in their right mind would speak against the brave men and women who fight to protect our country, keeping us safe from…whoever? If you are referring the children, primarily of the lower class, who are trained to kill other poor people in lands that most Americans can’t pronounce, let alone locate on a map, and die for a cause drilled into them through severe conditioning in exchange for money or a college education, then we should all have something to say about this.
The formula of church hand in hand with the state is most dangerous when the communities choose to declare a spiritual war on heathens over 7,000 miles away. They scream love, compassion and Jesus as they back up their prayers with the real life hell fire of bullets and bombs. In the process of teaching the world about morality, over 100,000 Iraqis were killed, millions were displaced from their homes, and countless others will live the rest of their lives permanently disabled.
Ironically, this just created a haven for terrorism with a new generation of pissed off people who have a fresh pool of now justified hatred boiling to the surface. Not only all of that, but we are responsible for the murder of 4,000 of our own and tens of thousands who are now permanently maimed or psychologically scarred. Our compassionate government not only sent them over without proper equipment or a coherent plan once they took control of the city, they refuse to provide these honored veterans with the medical care they need when they reach home.
But, please remember to support our troops by keeping this war going, after all its great for our failing economy.
Troubl
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Jim
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Don't shoot the messenger. He/She is doing what they are being commanded to do by our misguided Executive Branch.
Saying "F*** the Troops" is, in my opinion, being entirely disrespectful of these people. Do you think they really want to be there? If you have to say anything about this, say something like F*** Cheney and Rumsfeld for getting us into this mess, and George W. Bush for allowing it to happen.
Toby
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Jim
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
And yes, I took the bait.
I also realize that there is a very slim chance of me winning this or most any other argument with Troubl. I've encountered troubl-makers on this site before.
However, this post REALLY pissed me off, and I couldn't hold my tongue.
Good luck "Troubl", whatever your intentions are.
Toby
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
What a lot of peace-loving people don't understand is that we acquired our own chunk of real estate through the use of the military and keep hold of it that way.
A schoolkid can figure out that Afghanistan was appropriate to invade and that international law was broken in attacking Iraq. As dumb as Bush sounds (or tries to sound) one must accept that as civilians we have a limited amount of information. We are told to work out our differences amicably, yet our government attacks others without provocation. It's an example that doesn't correspond with our lives. Maybe it was all a ploy to prepare for China...
Nevertheless, you and I exist in this place, living the dream of the founding fathers or not, because we reap the benefit of military effort. I understand your frustration, but I suggest that you take down your posting. I'm going to leave it up and let http://going.com decide whether to yank your account or be passive.
Troubl
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Troubl
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Toby
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Let me clarify: you aren't using your real name/identity and that is/was against the Going/HLG Use Policy, you are welcome to contribute to discussion but I will delete your commercial advertisements at my discression. If the next person has something meaningful to say and pitches their sex-ed site, like Moxie did, I will probably help with sales.
Sensationalism, cliches, and escalatory language that goes .5 inch under the surface of the topic is worse than radio silence.
Use your real name, say what you have to say, and maybe we will look at your website for the right reasons.
Troubl
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
I also assume that I know where your sparklers are
Toby
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
I'm not making assumptions about your lack of meaning. It's clear that you swept up a bunch of hysterical, cry-baby collateral of your own for us knee-jerk, liberal Northeast types to find immediate agreement. The reason I'm leaving your post up is for other people to learn from it.
You and SUV are violating parts 2 and 7 of the Going Code of Conduct and the proprietors of this site should take notice.
It's two different things making statements anonymously and staking your name on what you say. I encourage you to be not so careless with your words.
SUVs R wasteful
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
1) First the speech is determined "unappropiate" by an authority by who knows what means.
You and SUV are violating parts 2 and 7 of the Going Code of Conduct and the proprietors of this site should take notice.
2) Then ownership rights are used to circumvent the First Amendment.
Great example of how the FCC and Corporate Media work together to suppress free speech.
:-|
Maria
RE: Support the Troops + -
Going's Code of Conduct.
Troubl
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Maria
RE: Support the Troops + -
Toby
RE: Support the Troops + -
offensive, it's clearly our turn to supervise him until the sitter
gets back.
I bet "Troubl" is some focus group trying to get wimpy, Northern
cry-babies to start chanting some nonsense along with them.
ferrin
RE: Support the Troops + -
"If you don't have the intelligence to be able to separate that supporting the troops is different from supporting the idiots who are currently hold the executive office, then I feel sorry for you. The best way that we can support our troops is by bringing them home safely."
I agree wholly!
Toby
RE: Fuck the Troops + -
Toby
View the Conventions and Debates on C-SPAN + -
Please welcome C-SPAN editorial staff to this group.
This is the third time I have had to post this message after some fool deleted it.
Toby
RE: View the Conventions and Debates on C-SPAN + -
Toby
Awesome Republican National Convention! + -
On Tuesday I'd never seen a large group of people look so cold and lifeless. We kept changing the channel to watch Ice Road Truckers on the history channel and a Dirty Harry movie from 1972.
Highlights of the convention: they made a big deal out of the Pledge of Allegiance and my friend said they sounded like a herd of cattle. Personally, I loved the blond woman who who was head of the Minneapolis Fire Dept who compared the collapsed bridge there to Hurricane Katrina. Sister, not spending to repair bridges before they collapse is not comparable to an 'act of God'.
RNC's have seemed bad in the past and the Republicans still won. They could have a complete PR failure and still win because Republicans are only about winning and don't stand for much else. Crooks and cronies. To his credit, McCain has been better than the rest of his cohorts, thus calling himself a party "reformer", but that's still not so constructive or persuasive. If his campaign manager can even approach being competitive in this election it will be a miracle.
robert
RE: Awesome Republican National Convention! + -
I have a feeling that there's not much going on for the repubs this election, except finally putting a woman on the ticket --- over 20 years after the democrats...
I didn't get excited about the DNC, but this is more boring. The RNC speakers aren't even talking about issues!
Toby
RE: Awesome Republican National Convention! + -
Yes, indeed.
> I didn't get excited about the DNC, but this is more boring. The RNC speakers aren't even talking about issues!
They don't have any successes to brag about so they are trying the standard hot air that gets a response from their base. It has been a while since they attacked the press as being "liberal", too. If the Dems screw this up...
EvilTwin
Failed + -
Toby
RE: Failed + -
http://www.informationweek.com/news/inter...
You're failing to talk about politics in this group and you're failing to have a life, apparently, since you are compelled to write about this group instead.
You're writing from a sham account, no one really knows you that we know, and I doubt you could talk about banking regulation, either.
I'm reporting you for abuse for GCoC#7, being antagonistic and having nothing to contribute. Copied my journalist friend on this incident, like the others, for his article.
EvilTwin
RE: Failed + -
Toby
RE: Failed + -
EvilTwin
RE: Failed + -
Toby
RE: Failed + -
Paul
Nader again + -
according to Jeff's stats, with just 77% of the precincts reporting in Mississippi, Barack Obama has received 179,743 votes. Hillary Clinton received 121,864 votes.
In the 2004 presidential campaign, Independent candidate, Ralph Nader received a total of 465,650 in the ENTIRE COUNTRY.
Now population-wise, Mississippi is not one of our largest states, but even here, in a very close race, each of these candidates recieved a third of what Nader did in the whole country.
More states:
In the oh so flaunted Ohio, Obama lost with 979,025 votes more than twice that Nader did nationally.
In Texas, Barack Obama, once again the 2nd place candidate, had 1,354,672 votes -- a whoping 3 times that of Nader's nationwide results in 2004.
Paul
RE: Nader again + -
Here's my question. I know that folks here have said that they want a third party (and even to have a second party), but how is it best to go about it?
I also know that people have said that voting for a candidate "sends a message" to the Washington politicians that Americans want a change. But does it really?
I mean, come on now, in 2004 Ralph Nader received a 465,650 in the ENTIRE COUNTRY!!! Is that really sending a message? ...or is the message that most american's don't care?
There have been other Independent or third party candidates in the past (Nader - 2004 & 2000, Perot - 1992 & 1996, Anderson - 1980), but have they really been able to change anything or have they just been a distraction or a spoiler?
If you want to change things, how would you suggest real change could happen (without resorting to personal rants or quoting irrelevent essays)???