# This should clear up some questions



## FLOWTORCH (Mar 5, 2004)

Thanks for the info, doesn't surprise me though.


----------



## esp (Jun 13, 2004)

that information is quite telling. that is why we appear to be an elitiest group. so since there are far fewer college educated americans than are not, how dow succede at communicating our well thought out and throughly analyzied ideas? this is OUR problem. until we figure this out i am afraid that this nation will continue down its current path. A republican will win again in four years. i just hope that person is not as misguided as bush. i am not trying to be demeaning here, but i would like to think it could be accomplished with out having to sound like bush. its funny the rights accuse of being extreme, but at the end of the day, it was our camp that lacked the emotion. we appealed only to reason, which was our failure because the majority of this nation opperates on instinct and emotion. we have all always been tought that. remember in school, when we were filling out those scan tron tests?, "if you are not sure of the correct answer go with your first instinct". well now the reprocussions of such a practice has become deadly. open your test booklets please and correctly decide the direction of american foreign policy. you have two hours to do so. do not leave any questions blank, if all else fails choose the answer C. thats how the majority of americans have been trained to make decisions. 

we're screwed


----------



## goatboater (Oct 18, 2003)

esp- I couldn't agree with you more, I'm glad someone was able to put all that into some words that make sense. It really comes down to people not being able to (or maybe they just don't even consider doing it) analyzing all the stuff they hear on tv and the radio and from other people. If everyone would take a minute to analyze everything that the Bush administration says, I don't see how he could poosibly come out ahead of Kerry. Our entire country needs to start taking everything they hear from Bush with a big old grain of salt.

Ben


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

Well, I don't know what this has to do with the forum, since there is great kayaking in all of the above, if one is smart enough to find it. Of course all kayaking is great, compared to boob-tubing!

The data reminds me of the story of the airplane that was going to crash, with one to few parachutes for all of the passengers. One of the passengers insisted that he should be allowed to jump, because he was the smartest man in the world. So grabbing a bag, he jumped out. 

The remaining passengers were reassured when it was determined that the smartest man in the world jumped out having grabbed the backpack of a hippie that was on the plane. 

Reminds me also, why some kayak and some canoe- Kayakers kayak, because they don't have to determine which end of the paddle goes in the water. I tried canoeing one time, and found it very confusing. The paddle was not the main problem however. The biggest problem was I could not tell which was the bow, and which the stern. Could not tell whether I was coming or going, and I have been told that I have above avg. IQ. So, shows what IQ proves! At least kayaks have seats so that you can tell where you are going, and where you have been, if you gets turned around.

So I guess if it tells anything, it says it takes a WW kayaker to post this sort of data, and think that it is significant dribble! Comes from banging the head full of brains on the boney stream bottom once to many times!

Good thing the future of this country is not based on IQ! or those who think they got it, and the others don't!


Peace, Tinkerntom, aka KnesisKnosis, Life, Live it!


----------



## esp (Jun 13, 2004)

just thinking out loud here...

when our nation was in its infant stages, life and communications were much different. the electoral college was set up to not reflect the popular vote. in fact there was no such thing. if any body could come up with the numbers i would be interested to hear them... so i am guessing here... given that we were a rural agrarian nation with little more than guys on horses as a means of communications, i figure we had very low voter turn out, and i cant imagine how ill informed the voting public must have been. for some, i can imagine the treck to the polls taking days. so i am guessing it was mostly the well educated who voted and the electoral college was devised to account for the few 'blip' states who had a good voter turn out. the electoral college was designed to favor the educated vote. just look at the red and blue on the map. pretty damn close in electoral votes considering the see of red and the 3.5 million gap between bush and kerry.

my point is our ability to communicate has far out paced our ability to educate. where previously only the educated that lived at the city centers who had access to the polls, we now have given access to everyone, which is how it should be. but a vote should be a commitment and a privlidge, not just a right. make the commitment to make an informed educated decesion. we, all of us have herd stories from our friends and co-workers saying, "i didnt even know who i was going to vote for till i started to fill out the ballot" to take that point a little further, i too was guilty, i didnt know any of those judges we voted yes and no on. university of colorado board, that was an uneducated decision on my part. 

hopefully we can start to become more proactive and less reactive.

sorry for the ramblings


----------



## esp (Jun 13, 2004)

KnesisKnosis,

i think you mised part of my point, those same tests that are used to determine iqs are quite faulted as we all know. those tests are designed to tell us who are good guessers. as far as the iq numbers there is nothing definitive about them as was stated at the bottom of the original post. there is some correlation that may give us some insight to help us figure out these voting trends. dont be typical by writing off the analysis of those numbers.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

esp, 

I doubt that I am being typical. I just know that stats lie, and those who manipulate them have ulterior motives. To make a correlation between certain observable facts, and the outcome of a political debate, is the fools playground. If you want to play, have fun, but don't confuse facts with fantasy. Fantasy is much to much fun to be confused with the facts.

As for myself I prefer to play in the waterpark! Sometimes I am discovering the source of the Nile, and other times playing like Jacque Cousteau, upside down in my submersible. But the fact is I am still in some runoff puddle in Colorado. The fantasy is much more enjoyable.

Again I am glad that we are able to select a president, not because he is suave, debonaire, and an elite intellectual, but because he puts his pants on one leg at a time like the rest of us. And unlike a previous president, knows how to keep them on! That's the moral value part that no one seems to be talking about, but which I expect made the difference to the average American. We were not ready for another Jiggelowe!

Peace, Tinkerntom, aka KnesisKnosis, Life, Live it!


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

I notice some mention of the end of Bush in 4 years. I think you might be overlooking one thing. It would appear that they are grooming Jeb Bush to run in 4 years.


----------



## bigboater (Dec 10, 2003)

The Monarchy continues.


----------



## esp (Jun 13, 2004)

gh, you just ruined my weekend. say it isnt so!!!


----------



## Livingston (Jan 8, 2004)

Good one KnesisKnosis, you got me good. You took a jab, let me try to reply, all in good fun of course...

Your well thought out and applicable correlation between canoeing/kayaking and the average IQ of the 50 states really put me in my place. I would respond to it but it really made no sense. And the equally relevant airplane bit reminded me of the 3rd grade when I first heard it. Did that come from your fool's playground?

Whoever told you that you had an above average IQ was just being nice.

As for stats, yes they can be manipulated. But ignoring all statistics, facts, or relevant data is absurd. Would you prefer to make all decisions based off of intuition? Or how about letting the Bible influence your decisions, there aren't any contraditions in there! I guess it has worked for W who has repeatedly said just that when describing himself, he has a good "gut feeling."

I made no analysis of the data that started this post, just listed it. What it means is up for debate, but from your defensive posture I believe you came to the same conclusion as the rest of us.

Yes I am biased on this election (because I was paying attention), and have only posted information bashing Bush. The Republicans in the audience are free to do the same but you may notice a lack of "facts" in their posts. Instead, they are replaced with subjective opinions and values. The only respectable response I've heard from someone who voted Republican was for financial reasons and he admitted feeling guilty for doing so.

Is it a coincidence that the state most affected by terrorism voted Blue? No, they understand the situation better than the toothless, mullet totin', sister f_ckin', hill jacks in all those Red states who think we should kick every Arab's ass whether they were involved in 911 or not and think that a gay marriage ban is a hot presidential topic.

Making correlations is what makes us an intelligent species. The IQ and electorate results does have too many variables to be cut and dry. Some correlations are better than others. Roads have cars, cars go fast, stand in road, you might get hit. Deer and Cows don't get that correlation. Without trying to make correlations and make sense of the world we live in makes you cattle. My playground is full of scientists and engineers. Not sure what playground you are in but I'm pretty sure you took a short bus to get there.

-Darren


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

Sorry ESP but I read something a while back that stated that is why the brothers ran for Governor in different states. Using their fathers coattails to help get elected then running for president at a latter date. I had heard that Jeb was going to run in 08 no matter what happened in this election. I suggest you start thinking of something more pleasant like abundant runoff in the spring, what new boat you will buy, etc. I have been surfing for a new boat to ease my mind.


----------



## esp (Jun 13, 2004)

thanks for bringing me back, i can take solace, in the coming of 4 new drops at our amazing playpark here in rebublicanville(BV). my one last problem is the new boat. my size 14s are killing me.

peace!


----------



## Id725 (Nov 22, 2003)

Hey guys.

Deep Six the beta about the IQ's - seriously.
Look, I despise W., but the numbers are bogus.
The mention of that book was bogus, and the Economist and the St. Petersburg Times or whatever it was got burned by running those numbers.
Bad numbers.
I'm looking to try to find good ones, but I can't find current state IQ averages anywhere.
Yes - I believe that ignorant people bought W.'s propoganda and elected him - but this list of data doesn't prove it.
As for the guy who said it's good to have a president who puts his pants on one leg at a time like the rest of us, what the hell does that mean? Do you know anybody who jumps into them two legs at a time?
Of course you mean that Bush is a "regular guy" -- right? Well, that's ridiculous. He was the President's SON! He's been rich, and plugged into the powerful people of this country, since birth.
How regular do you think he is?
He's not regular, he's filthy rich and dangerously powerful.
But what he ISN'T is very intelligent. Listen to him speak when he's not reading a speech. It's pathetic - the man's a doorknob.
And personally, when it comes to THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD, why the heck would you want an average guy of average intelligence in that position?
Personally, I want a president to be vastly more intelligent than me and my paddling buddies - he's got a job I'll never be smart or motivated enough to do.
I don't want the average Joe being president, I want the fate of this nation in more capable hands, thanks.
I'll paddle with the average Joe, but can't we elect somebody a little smarter for the presidency?

Whatever. Four more years of environmental destruction (hello, bad for paddlers AND NRA-loving hunters - yes, W. is bad for hunters because his policies pollute the rivers and tear up the forests. He's an oil man, not a hunter).
Four more years of our credibility in the global community going down the tubes - for more years of dissolving alliances and greater hatred of America worldwide (Oh, and the more people that hate us, the more people that bomb us, right?)
Four more years of Idealogical crap.
B.S.

Whatever. I'm done with it.
Let's go paddle.


----------



## cstork (Oct 13, 2003)

Time to Get Religion
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

If Democrats want to know how to win again, they have a model. It's the British Labor Party.

When I studied in England in the early 1980's, the British Labor Party seemed as quaint and eccentric as Oxford itself, where we wore gowns for exams and some dons addressed the rare female student as "sir." Labor was caught in its own echo chamber of militant unions and anti-American activists, and it so repulsed voters that it seemed it might wither away entirely.

Then Tony Blair and another M.P., Gordon Brown, dragged the party away from socialism, unions, nuclear disarmament and anti-Americanism. Together they created "New Labor," which aimed for the center and aggressively courted Middle Britain instead of trying to scare it. The result is that since 1997, Mr. Blair and Labor have utterly dominated Britain.

The Democrats need a similar rebranding. But the risk is that the party will blame others for its failures - or, worse, blame the American people for their stupidity (as London's Daily Mirror screamed in a Page 1 headline this week: "How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB?").

As moderates from the heartland, like Tom Daschle, are picked off by the Republicans, the party's image risks being defined even more by bicoastal, tree-hugging, gun-banning, French-speaking, Bordeau-sipping, Times-toting liberals, whose solution is to veer left and galvanize the base. But firing up the base means turning off swing voters. Gov. Mike Johanns, a Nebraska Republican, told me that each time Michael Moore spoke up for John Kerry, Mr. Kerry's support in Nebraska took a dive.

Mobilizing the base would mean nominating Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2008 and losing yet again. (Mrs. Clinton has actually undertaken just the kind of makeover that I'm talking about: in the Senate, she's been cooperative, mellow and moderate, winning over upstate New Yorkers. She could do the same in the heartland ... if she had 50 years.) 

So Democrats need to give a more prominent voice to Middle American, wheat-hugging, gun-shooting, Spanish-speaking, beer-guzzling, Bible-toting centrists. (They can tote The Times, too, in a plain brown wrapper.) For a nominee who could lead the Democrats to victory, think of John Edwards, Bill Richardson or Evan Bayh, or anyone who knows the difference between straw and hay.

I wish that winning were just a matter of presentation. But it's not. It involves compromising on principles. Bill Clinton won his credibility in the heartland partly by going home to Little Rock during the 1992 campaign to preside over the execution of a mentally disabled convict named Ricky Ray Rector.

There was a moral ambiguity about Mr. Clinton's clambering to power over Mr. Rector's corpse. But unless Democrats compromise, they'll be proud and true and losers.

So what do the Democrats need to do? Here are four suggestions:

 Don't be afraid of religion. Offer government support for faith-based programs to aid the homeless, prisoners and AIDS victims. And argue theology with Republicans: there's much more biblical ammunition to support liberals than conservatives. 

 Pick battles of substance, not symbolism. The battle over Georgia's Confederate flag cost Roy Barnes his governorship and perhaps Max Cleland his Senate seat, but didn't help one working mother or jobless worker. It was a gift to Republicans.

 Accept that today, gun control is a nonstarter. Instead of trying to curb guns, try to reduce gun deaths through better rules on licensing and storage, and on safety devices like trigger locks.

 Hold your nose and work with President Bush as much as you can because it's lethal to be portrayed as obstructionists. Sure, block another Clarence Thomas, but here's a rule of thumb: if an otherwise qualified Supreme Court nominee would turn the clock back 10 years, approve; back 25 years, vote no; back a half-century, filibuster. 

"The first thing we have to do is shake the image of us as the obstructionist party," notes Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, who manages to thrive as a Democrat in the red sea. He says Democrats must show a willingness to compromise, to get things done, to defer to local sensibilities. "We have to show the American people," he says, "that Democrats aren't going to take away your guns, aren't going to take away your flags."

Rethinking the Democratic Party will be wrenching. But just ask Tony Blair - it's not as wrenching as sliding into irrelevance.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

Livingston and Id725, 

No offense taken, no offense meant, just having fun, of course at the expense of them "Loser" Dems (Thankyou Arnold)! And like Kerry said, we all wake up the next day, and we are still all Americans! Ain't it great! 

"I made no analysis of the data that started this post, just listed it. What it means is up for debate, but from your defensive posture I believe you came to the same conclusion as the rest of us. "

Now on to the discussion -you acknowledge that you did not analyze the data, and that what it means is up for debate. Well I did not analyze it either, and did not come to any particular conclusion except that implied by the original compiler. I do not feel the need to defend anything, or anyone. I was just poking fun at the foolishness of this thread, in this forum, and those presenting pseudo-data, and trying to imply some startling revelation, and their ability to analyze it. I never made that claim, but you did, so the ball is in your court, to analyze it, or back off!


"Yes I am biased on this election (because I was paying attention), and have only posted information bashing Bush. The Republicans in the audience are free to do the same but you may notice a lack of "facts" in their posts. Instead, they are replaced with subjective opinions and values. The only respectable response I've heard from someone who voted Republican was for financial reasons and he admitted feeling guilty for doing so. "

I am glad to meet someone who acknowledges their bias, though to imply that those of us who are not on your side are not paying attention, is shortsighted at best. The Dems lost, by a significant margin, and unless they are willing to find out were the majority is on the major issues, they will not win, where it takes a majority to win. So how can they pretend that they are paying attention. They only deceive themselves, which is fine with me because they will continue to lose. They say they hear, but the American voter has spoken, and the Dems squeal their protests.

If you really believe in your issues, stop deceiving yourselves. I love fresh air, and clean water. I think that it is good to take care of the feeble and ill with good health care. I would love to look forward to a carefree retirement. I hate the war in Iraq, and that our soldiers are over there fighting and dieing. I would love to bring them home. I would love to live with safe harbors and safe skies. Where everyone is employed, and there are at least two kayaks on every roof rack!

But if these carrots are just held out in front of us to buy votes, with no substance where is the benefit. We can have beautiful pipe dreams and Plans to save everyone. Sounds good. But I heard no hard plans how this was going to be brought about, except to raise taxes on the rich upper class. 

I would love to move from the middle class to the upper class, but not to pay higher taxes. Where is the motivation for me to start a profitable corporation that employs many, with an above minimum pay scale, health and retirement benefits. Vacation time to enjoy the fresh air and clean water. I'll just stay here and let Uncle Sam take care of me with all his programs and Plans. 

Of course the programs will dry up when there are no more rich to tax, so then he will tax me. Maybe not with the IRS, but with inflation brought on by all the government programs. My dollars will buy less, and I won't be able to afford the roof rack, besides the two kayaks on top. I've been there before during JFK, LBJ, Carter, and Clinton! And I certainly did not want another JFK!

But then on the other hand, I will be guaranteed all the health care I need and can handle in second rate health facilities. With a shortage of doctors, because the potential doctors decided to stand in the dole lines with me to get their hand outs, instead of being rich doctors being taxed by the benevolent Uncle.

Now, am I a Conservative? You bet your biffy!! Have I quoted any facts, or have I been presenting my subjective opinion and values? Gut-feeling and intuitive? You bet!!! I lived through liberal eras and programs, and I saw the results, I don't need a whole lot of fact checking when I am getting a whole lot of gut-checking!. I also see what President Bush is doing, and there is nothing subjective or wishful about his Plan. He went out and did it, that's fact. Now you may not like what he has done, but that is a different matter. I am not here to bash Dems because I am a Republican, and they acknowledge their propensity to bash.

Personally I prefer to fight the terrorist, in their back yard. If there were not WMDs, great, otherwise we could have lost many more of our soldiers. Would 30 or 40,000 been acceptable battlefield losses if they had used WMD. We went there to depose a leader who had killed million of his own people, and was a continuing threat to that region and to world peace, and that is expensive. Was there a breakdown in intelligence, obviously, but that does not mean we scrap the whole operation. We just found out what we did not know and what we needed to know. 

The basic plan is still the same, to pursue the terrorist, who are nothing more than international criminals, willing to kill their own as quickly as a US soldier. Allow them no sanctuary, and develop a place where other civilized free people can live in peace and security. 

Are there benefits to us, of course? Their oil works as good in our technology as Saudi, Russian, or Mexico, or Alaska. We drive our cars, our 4x4s in the mountains to some remote launch site, to say nothing of that new play boat and all our other toys made of petrochemicals. Even the computers that we message on demand hugh supplies of oil to power manufacture, deliver, and operate. Should we go back to the stone age to protect the environment? I doubt any want that. 

So we compromise, and find ways to work together to protect the environment as much as possible, and still get to play with our petrochemical toys. I have yet to see a WW kayaker floating down the river in a bark canoe or log raft! That spiffy GPS that works off a satellite, manufactured and launched with great energy, and many jobs. 

Have jobs been lost, certainly? Have you seen any coopers recently, or weavers, or whatever. Technologies change, and change quickly in our world. We live in a complex world, where we all depend on each other. Do we outsource jobs? Yes, and yet we still ship more goods out than most of the other countries combined. Certainly there are problems, it just depends on whose ox is getting gored at any particular time. 

I do not make apologies for the financial reasons for which I vote, nor do I feel guilty. I want to be a rich man, and then I will not need the government programs. I can take care of my family health and retirement. Nothing to feel guilty about. I even am able to help others as I choose. Just get the government off my back. 

"Is it a coincidence that the state most affected by terrorism voted Blue? No, they understand the situation better than the toothless, mullet totin', sister f_ckin', hill jacks in all those Red states who think we should kick every Arab's ass whether they were involved in 911 or not and think that a gay marriage ban is a hot presidential topic. "

Again, for someone who is paying attention, you miss the point. That is not a nice or polite (politic) way to talk about the majority, if you really expect to win them to your way of thinking. In addition I believe, you have not truly identified why those in NY went blue. Not that I am going to tell you, but instead, I am going to work on turning the blue, red. 

Nore do I think, that we should kick every Arab ass, I have good friends who are Arab. On the other hand neither do I think that we should start kissing all the UN ass, especially French and German, who would not support our Irag efforts, but instead were cutting special deals under the table, while mouthing UN platitudes. Kerry, for someone concerned about outsourcing, sure seemed willing to go to his cadre of Liberal approved UN outsources. 

"Making correlations is what makes us an intelligent species. The IQ and electorate results does have too many variables to be cut and dry. Some correlations are better than others. Roads have cars, cars go fast, stand in road, you might get hit. Deer and Cows don't get that correlation. Without trying to make correlations and make sense of the world we live in makes you cattle. My playground is full of scientists and engineers. Not sure what playground you are in but I'm pretty sure you took a short bus to get there. "

And in this case, the Dems got run over by the Convoy, the majority, and it sounds to me like some of them have yet to figure out what happened! Who is not making the correct correlation?

"Yes - I believe that ignorant people bought W.'s propaganda and elected him - but this list of data doesn't prove it. "

I agree that there are plenty of ignorant, uneducated people to go around, and some voted for President Bush, but do not conclude that only such voted for Him, or you will certainly isolate yourself in a Liberal utopia of intellectual elitism.

"As for the guy who said it's good to have a president who puts his pants on one leg at a time like the rest of us, what the hell does that mean? Do you know anybody who jumps into them two legs at a time? 
Of course you mean that Bush is a "regular guy" -- right? Well, that's ridiculous. He was the President's SON! He's been rich, and plugged into the powerful people of this country, since birth. 
How regular do you think he is? 
He's not regular, he's filthy rich and dangerously powerful."

He is a regular guy, as all of us are regular guys- he is an American! That is the only requirement for Presidency. We don't have Gods or Kings. Regarding the "monarchy" all you have to do is elect someone else. There is no entitlement to the Presidency because you are a Bush, a Clinton, Gore, or your initials are JFK. In fact the chances of successive terms of Bushes is completely against the odds. You would have a better chance of being the next President than Jeb!

As far as being rich, certainly you have heard of the Heinz fortune.

"But what he ISN'T is very intelligent. Listen to him speak when he's not reading a speech. It's pathetic - the man's a doorknob. 
And personally, when it comes to THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD, why the heck would you want an average guy of average intelligence in that position? 
Personally, I want a president to be vastly more intelligent than me and my paddling buddies - he's got a job I'll never be smart or motivated enough to do. 
I don't want the average Joe being president, I want the fate of this nation in more capable hands, thanks. 
I'll paddle with the average Joe, but can't we elect somebody a little smarter for the presidency? " 

He would be the first to admit, that speaking is not his forte, but then neither is mountain biking. And I doubt that he is a much better paddler. His strength is that he is a good politician, at least better than JFK, or so the polls would indicate. As to intelligence, one last story:

Einstein, was ask how many feet in a mile, and he did not know. When questioned how this could be, he said, " I don't know, but I know a book that will tell me!"

It seems to me that President Bush is willing to share the limelight with a lot of others who know the details, and he is willing to bear the responsibility of his position. I don't see him trying to micro manage the battlefield in Iraq, or the Dept of whatever here. He has included minorities, women, life time bureaucrats and diplomats. And lots of regular folk who believe in and are willing to work very hard for his programs. Besides, lowly doorknobs are good for opening the largest doors to access where people live. 

"Whatever. Four more years of environmental destruction (hello, bad for paddlers AND NRA-loving hunters - yes, W. is bad for hunters because his policies pollute the rivers and tear up the forests. He's an oil man, not a hunter). 
Four more years of our credibility in the global community going down the tubes - for more years of dissolving alliances and greater hatred of America worldwide (Oh, and the more people that hate us, the more people that bomb us, right?) 
Four more years of Idealogical crap."

Yes, there are four more years! 
There are always four more years! Get use to it, and get somebody on your side who we the majority can vote for, and you will get your four years to save the world, the rivers, the rain forest. And I"ll enjoy to good life with you. So Paddle on! Or should I say sail on with all this hot air!

Peace, Tinkerntom, aka KnesisKnosis, Life, Live it!


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

Thank you Cstork, But don't tell them to much what to do, they may do it!

But then again, from what I have been hearing the last couple of days is a bunch of finger pointing, using various fingers. So they may yet self-implode!

Peace, Tinkerntom, aka KnesisKnosis, Life, Live it!


----------



## blutzski (Mar 31, 2004)

KnesisKnosis and cstork, nice posts. I was beginning to think Livingston's IQ stat for Colorado was a bit high.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

blutzski, 

I was thinking the same thing about the whole thread, but then I admitted having trouble with the canoe and canoe paddle. That's why I like kayaking, you don't have to worry about which end of the paddle to put in the water, which way is forward or backward, or up and down. 

You don't have to be brilliant to be a kayaker or voter, that is why we all qualify. I love America!

Thanks, Tinkerntom, aka KnesisKnosis, Life, Live it!


----------



## Livingston (Jan 8, 2004)

KK,

Since you can forsee the future with that gut feeling of yours, please let us all know who to vote for in four years.

-d


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

You won't need a psyhic to tell you who to vote for in TWO years or in four years. Just pay attention and remember that the candidate with an "R" after his or her name will likely favor giving big oil, timber, financial services, mining, pharmaceutical, and media conglomerations anything they want, regardless of whether its actually in the best interest of the American people. This is based on the notion that if you increase business' bottom line, its always a good thing regardless of whether we degrade the population's quality of life in the process. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that - think about air pollution control which may be expensive to install and operate but saves the public 2 or 3 dollars in medical costs, not to mention prevents suffering and early deaths, for every dollar spent on the controls (this estimate is from Bush's own accounting folks, not tree huggers).

The candidate with the "D" after his or her name will most likely favor keeping environmental safeguards (if there are any left by then) in place, restricting corporations' abilities to screw citizens, & favor a woman's right to choose. Other things the "D" folks generally favor are expanding educational opportunities for middle class and poor people, ensuring health care is available to more people, and making government policy making more transparent rather then secretive (think about Bush's energy policy in which oil companies got to write most of the rules). The "D" folks generally have the opinion that government can be used to improve the lives of citizens by building infrastructure such as roads, schools, and water treatment plants, and regulating the profit-by-any-means activities of corporations. 

If you pay attention in the next couple of years to what's coming out of Congress and the White House that will be the biggest thing to help you make up your mind.

If you REALLY want to express your conscience make sure you vote in the primaries. Then vote for who your primary candidate supports in the main election. Those who don't do politics get done by politics.

-Andy


----------



## Livingston (Jan 8, 2004)

Just a little more fuel for the fire...

--------------------------------------------
Americans believe Saddam terror link
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles
24 April 2004

A majority of Americans still believes Saddam Hussein was in cahoots with al-Qa'ida and that Iraq either had weapons of mass destruction or a programme for developing them, according to a new opinion poll.

The poll, conducted by the University of Maryland, showedmost respondents were unaware of the testimony of David Kay, the administration's chief weapons inspector, that he had found no weapons, or that of Richard Clarke, the former counter-terrorism tsar whose book Against All Enemies has been the talk of Washington.

A staggering 82 per cent of respondents believed most experts supported the notion that Iraq was providing \"substantial support\" to al-Qa'ida - a contention that President Bush has been forced to disavow. Almost 60 per cent were unaware that world opinion was against the war in Iraq, with 21 per cent saying the world was behind the US-led invasion and 38 per cent saying views were \"evenly divided\".

The poll also showed a correlation between people's ignorance and their political affiliation. Among those who believed WMD had been found in Iraq, 72 per cent said they would vote to re-elect Mr Bush in November and 23 per cent said they supported his Democratic challenger, John Kerry. Among those who knew that no WMD had been found,74 per cent supported Mr Kerry and 23 per cent backed the President

--------------------------------------------------------------------
FYI, a similar poll I saw on PBS said 62% belived Sadam had link to Al Quida and 41% that he had part in the 9-11 attacks (from an October poll).
--------------------------------------------------------------------

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancey, 1816. ME 14:384 

"Convinced that the people are the only safe depositories of their own liberty, and that they are not safe unless enlightened to a certain degree, I have looked on our present state of liberty as a short-lived possession unless the mass of the people could be informed to a certain degree." --Thomas Jefferson to Littleton Waller Tazewell, 1805. 

"No nation is permitted to live in ignorance with impunity." --Thomas Jefferson: Virginia Board of Visitors Minutes, 1821. ME 19:408 

"Light and liberty go together." --Thomas Jefferson to Tench Coxe, 1795. 

-----------------------------------

Question, if ignorance is good for the republican party, how many kids can we expect to be left behind?

-d


----------



## mike a (Dec 16, 2003)

Good posts, KK.

I'm afraid that you (we) are speaking into a liberal echo chamber, though. Chocked full of brilliant, tolerant, and open-minded individuals!-)

Just taking my own jab, thanks. 

There does seem to be alot of confusion on the Dem side regarding their recent losses. After three straight, I would think that the Dem party would be trying to come around to America's point of view, but haven't seen it yet. I keep reading these articles about why the dems lose. They blame gay marraige, evangelicals, and all manners of people, but don't even mention terrorism. How can you talk about this election and not even give a passing nod to terrorism. I laughed at this in some article posted on another thread, and now today see that a nation wide poll showed terrorism as the driving force at the polls. Dems have lost a serious toe hold with the American public, and without some careful insight will lose all hope in coming elections. 

Here is what will likely go on in '08: Gulianni vs Clinton II. If this goes down, watch for a serious blow-out that even the liberal media won't be able to make out as a close one.

I think that Gephart could have beat Bush, but he wasn't pretty enough. And we know how those intelligent states like the pretty ones. Ha ha. Mobilize the base, right? As for who voted for whom, check out this site, it shows the election county by county:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm
For fun, look at my home state, MT. If you can figure out who resides in the blue counties, you can see who tends, in MT, to vote for Dems--no matter who they put up for office. I propose to you all that if MT was one big city (our entire population isn't even that of a big city), then our different counties would represent different suburbs. Guess what suburbs vote mostly for Bush and which for Kerry. Who did Cherry hills vote for? How about Aurora? Maybe we can get a volunteer to go door to door with some IQ tests, and find out for certain who's is biggest!

Take comfort, KK. As Churchill (also a controversial leader in a time of war, and judged fondly by history) said: "If a man of 20 is not a liberal, he has no heart. If a man of 40 is not a conservative, he has no brain." 

Your resident ignorant ******* mullet-toting hick dumb ass,
Mike

ps my iq aint that big, either.

pps it wasn't by accident that our founding fathers set up the electoral collage--they had the foresight to know that cities would control the vote over rural areas, and tried to formulate a system that would equal this out.


----------



## mattyb (Oct 31, 2003)

*"Moral Majority"*

A point by point rebuttal with no facts and just as much partisan lean? I want the time it took to read that back. Sounds like you're old enough to know better that to come back with that drivel. 

And kenosis... Anybody paying attention here? KK just admit you voted for little george for "moral" reasons and be done with it.

And what's your problem with JFK? Little chip on your shoulder? And no, I don't have any other real admiration for JFK besides the women he poked. Go and make sure the "Boycott Jane Fonda" sticker is straight on the SUV. 

...And I am very involved at my church.


----------



## Livingston (Jan 8, 2004)

Mike,
Didn't mention terrorism? Read the post directly above yours. Yes, terrorism was a big issue in this election and the fact that it was misunderstood by the majority of the population is absurd to me. If people are really that concerned, why don't they learn about it. I don't think the reason we were attacked in a suicide bombing was because they "are jealous of our freedom."
-d


----------



## h2oxtc (Sep 16, 2004)

Your right, they didn't do it because they were jealous of our freedom, they did it because freedom is infectious and they don't want their little ilk infected with something that would render them useless.


----------



## esp (Jun 13, 2004)

we were attacked because of our reckless foreign policy. when we create the iran contra -affairs, and one year support sadam and the next invade, and only support the Israelis, and shot first and ask questions later, and all other insistences of inconsistent foreign policy, we tend to make MANY, MANY enemies along the way. 

Democrats, Independents, Moderates, are seeking a better solution. We are not ignoring, and we are afraid (though it does not consume us) of terorisom. We believe that you must go to the source of the problem, not treat the symptoms. That is why a fundamental change in foreign policy must be made. Killing people only temporally saciates our need for revenge while giving cause to those who are looking for it.

Are you aware of how JFK handled the Cuban missile crisis? That is an excellent example of someone making every effort to avoid war.

Interesting concept, MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO AVOID WAR!!!


----------



## matobs (Nov 26, 2003)

Partisan politics and those who peddle parties over ideas are killing this country. There are good ideas on both sides of the aisle unfortunately too many people would rather cheer their team, than an idea. 

Regarding any notion that majority won; therefore it follows they must be right. That line of thinking is dangerous. 

Peope would do well to remember all the stupid shit that has happened in this country b/c "the majority" (at the time) thought it was a good idea. Segregation and racism is a prime example. I hate to think what society would look like today if some "activists judges" did not step in and say hey Mr. and Mrs. Majority I don't give a rat's ass what you think: This is wrong, fix it. 

For our countries sake I sincerely hope Bush and "the majority" are right. I hope invading Iraq was the right call. I hope running up huge deficits and cutting taxes is a smart policy. 

My gut tells me they are wrong, but I hope it is me that turns out to be wrong.


----------



## JimmyMcG (Jun 3, 2004)

IMO, matobs is absolutely correct.

I doubt that most people agree completely with either party platforms, yet it appears that most of the folks posting stand behind whatever their 'team' does. That's too bad

Jim


----------



## mike a (Dec 16, 2003)

Liv,

Sorry, I am not the quickest at the computer, and your (and Andy's) posts were up only after I started to post. Anyhow, the point stands that on another thread I read some peice about the election that carried on blaming Kerry's loss on all sorts of social issues without even the mention of terrorism. Out of touch...

Matty,

point by point? Are you responding to my post? If so, read it again. And try to figure out where in MT the blue counties are. Perhaps someone has some IQ info on these counties. :? 

For fun, I saw some jerk on the news a couple of weeks ago who studies IQ levels. He said at 22 Bush had an IQ of something like 125. He estimated Kerry at 120. Wow, that told us alot, didn't it? :roll: 

And Matty, I don't think many of us are making alot for our time here. Sort of silly alltogether--the exact reason I try to avoid this type of thing. I mean, I'm not going to win you over, am I (are you the one who has so little in common with me?)? Whatever, the election is over, and I'm satisfied by the outcome, although the local elections here could have gone better--alot better. We'll just have to see how things turn out.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

*More Loose ends*

Hey guys, I was away from the 'puter for a bit, and you guys must have got back from your weekend paddles. You are just having too much fun, and not so much fun!

Too many loose ends to get to all, but I'll try. Yeah, I'm older, and have gone around in the washing machine a few times! I have seen each side win and lose, and come back and do it all over again. When one side claims the mandate and thinks that they have it all figured out, it is time for the other to remind them, that we live in America. All bets are off every four years!

A warning to those Raskily Republicans, don't get a big head over winning this time, claim the mandate, but then you have to live up to the responsibility! Part of which is to reach out to the Dems lest they feel disenfranchised from the American democratic process. I am distressed that some of the Dems feel that it is time to go to Canada. I am not saying to change what you stand for, but as good Christians we are to love our enemies, so should we not also love our neighbors who disagree with us?

On the other hand, I did hear Kerry give a concession speech. I have yet to hear some of you do the same. You only have to concede the next four years, and then we can do it all again. Like in AA, it is said to go one day at a time, and I am sure you will survive.

Now I hear that you hate Bush. I have never met him, and I don't know him personally, but those who have, say that he is very personable. I don't know the source of your hate, maybe he did something to you that you could share. What did he do to you, to make you feel so strongly? Otherwise maybe that is too strong a word. You may dislike his policies, which is a different matter, but even then, which of his policies directly affected you. Or is it PC to say "I hate Bush!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" For some I have found they say that because they have nothing better to say. Talk about voting from your gut! if they actually voted at all!!!

Yeah, I believe character matters, and that moral values are a part of character. There has been a lot of noise about MVs, but the ones that matter most to me are not marriage issues, abortion, and gay, and lieing about military service, and what one did or didnt say, nor economy, or terrorism. In the mud slinging, these Facts are bandied about like some talisman, that if enough power and noise is generated, then you win the election.

I believe that the majority of Americans vote from their heart, ( the gut.) And that GW made contact with the majority, he won the popular and the electoral vote, and Kerry did not! That now is a fact. You may not like it, you may have a hard time swallowing that pill. But the Dems need to consider that it is not having a long list of hate facts that will connect with the people. You have four years to get started, and it seems that you are off to a bad start!!!

Pouting and throwing temper tantrums, wont do it. Calling folks names, and being nasty, and hateful doesnt win us over. Being intellectual elite snobs, who know better than I, how to run my life. But the main thing is being disrespectful of the President. He represents us all. Dis the President, you Dis us, the majority, and you will lose again in four years.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

*A little more on loose ends*

!) Livingston, I'll be glad to tell you who I think is the best candidate, but you have to decide who you vote for. You can also check with Andy H.

2) Livingston, an impressive ref to TJ. Read all his stuff, and get back to us in four years. We could all use the education! I'll read Hamilton!

3) Mike A, thanks for the encouragement, Gulianni vs Clinton II, interesting, Hey Livingston what do you think?

4) mattyb, what is wrong with partisan lean, sorry, can't give your time back, but I'll listen to your response!

5) Liv, terrorism would have been a much larger issue, if they were still bombing our buildings and trains. Not that it could not happen, but most felt relatively safe, and credit President Bush. Otherwise our collective memory is pretty short, - that is short, not pretty!

6) Right on h2oxtc, and that is why they are still fighting so hard even tonight in Fallugah!

7) esp, I am familiar with the Cuban Missile crisis, having jumped under my desk in a Houston grade school, and practiced Duck and Cover. Scared this ten year old spit-less. No kid should grow up with that fear. That is why we must stop the tyrant before they get nuclear and WMD. 

JFK1, I heard him say "Ask Not..." and the age of hope was born, He was closer to GW in a lot of his conservative policies, than Kerry. Then I saw it crushed by protest, and Vietnam, while the Dems sung about Camelot, a classmate of mine was killed by the national guard. Then LBJ, pushed us deeper into Vietnam, but tied the hands of the Military, and it became a political war, not to be won, but to be talked about. Let us win the current war, not just talk about it! I lost to many friends in Vietnam, let us not do that again.

JFK 2 tried to use the initials of JFK 1 to rebuild Camelot, even to being a PT boat commander, happily it failed. The great society has already cost much to much, with little to show for it but some Lady Bird flower pots, and a few less billboards, and a whole lot more welfare dependent victims.

9) Matobs, Politics is partisan, to complain about partisan politics is to imply that somehow if we all agreed with you we would no longer be partisan, and that would sure be boring. I agree with you though that the majority is not always right. The lady, that first told me about Jesus, was a black woman, Matty, when I lived in Houston, early '60, when there were still separate restrooms and water fountains for the colored. Try to explain that to a 10 year old. I was raised as an atheist, I still love and thank God for Matty!

10) JimmyMcG, You are correct also, most don't agree completely, but you have to take a stand where what you do believe is best represented. That is why we call it representative government.

11) Finally Mike A, back to the IQ thing, indeed silly, especially if after all is said and done, we are not smart enough to figure out how to paddle together. That is what I have found I appreciate the most about Paddlers. The current takes us all to the same place.


----------



## matobs (Nov 26, 2003)

KK

You missed my point.

I am not saying that we all need to agree at all times, nor that somehow without partisan politics everything would be happy. What I am saying that this us versus them mentality hinders the development of good ideas, and hence good government. 

This is not a new notion. In fact when our country was founded there was a deep distrust of political parties and that is one reason why we have the electoral college. The founding fathers in trying to devise a system of electing a president believed that political parties were "mischievous if not downright evil." Here's the link on the history. http://www.fec.gov/pdf/eleccoll.pdf

In large part, I agree. Unfortunately I see very few redeeming qualties of having political parties and lots of problems. 

I understand that this is an idealistic point view and that political parties are not going away, but my main point is that it extremely unfortunate that our country has two political parties whose sole purpose ostensibly consists of two things: 1) advancing their agenda; and 2) stifling the other parties agenda. Such positions tend to make compromise difficult and good ideas get either killed by the other party who would hate see someone be credited with the idea, or they take far too long to implement. 

Frankly I fail to see how such thinking is "good" for or country. 

I'll admit there are a few politicians who seem able to rise above the partisan cess pool, but there are only few. The great majority are more concerned about their team staying in power than they are about helping people. When you have some Republicans calling Karl Rove the meanest son of bitch they've ever met you have to wonder what his real agenda and motivation is? This R v. D mentality is further perpetuated in the media as well with shows such as Crass Fire and Hannity & Colmes, Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, Michael Moron. They argue for the sake of entertainment and always toe the party the line; their team is somehow always right and the other side is always wrong. It's ridiculous and it is a very sophmoric mentality that harkens back to high school. We don't want the other team to score any points now do we. That is the reality, it is pervasive in politics, the media, and society in general, and frankly I think it is pathetic. 

Anyhow, I'm done, I accept the fact the Bush is the President and wish him well and hope he does a significantly better job this time around. I hope he views this as an opportunity and not as a vindication. I hope the the Republicans can reform social security so I can invest my own my money . . . if the Democrats don't kill it.


----------



## Steve Kahn (Apr 17, 2004)

*so many opinions*

dear buzz:

as the season has been falling off, i haven't been checking flows and forums so much, but now and then i've been checking back in on you guys. i admit that i was very surprised to see so much ranting and raving, not about favorite runs, sneak moves, or secret local surf spots, but POLITICS, of all things. guess that's just telling of how amped america is on this election. i think that we can all agree that the lone fact that there is SO much emotion (as seen by the various rantings) out there is good for america, and it is refreshing to see so many people so into it, and concerned about what they believe is best for america. i also believe that it is out of hand when i am reading about buzzers wanting to fight each other, over insults that remind me of grade school. 

although now that i think about it, seems like there were some pretty heavy insults about the M-dorks and who said what, when, in front of whom, and who is a pro and who is a soul man and who cares? so what happend to all those good vibes i've felt, following masters down various III/IV runs as my bro's and i are earning our own wings? seems like you folks are some of the most non-elitist, friendliest, nurturing group of sports enthusiasts (relatively). 

in any case, the whole reason i am writing is this. i was wondering if there was any concencus in the buzzers? i would assume that outdoorsy kayakers would be pro-kerry, but realizing that we are in colorado, and looking thru the various rants/raves, seems like there is quite a spirited debate out there. so what i am asking is for someone who is just way too bored at work to log the pro right and pro left positions. i would be interested, and i bet the ranters and ravers would also be interested in seeing the count. how many of the buzzers are pro right and pro left? realizing that this would be quite unscientific, and really with no repercussions other than satisfying curiosity. how about a count of the pro right and pro left positions from the various ranting forums? 

come on - bored enough anyone???


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

I dont see how its that easy. I classify myself as both. Some issues I am pro-left and some pro-right. I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I thought that having a Dem in the whitehouse would be critical for Supreme Court nominations and to quit spending so much money liberating a country that the vast majority hate us and want us out of their lives so a simple poll wouldnt cover it.


----------



## Steve Kahn (Apr 17, 2004)

*buzz count*

i agree gh - it is a complicated issue. however, from my check of the rants/raves, it was pretty easy to tell if people were pro or con BUSH. even if you are right, that buzzers couldn't be put in a right or left box very easily, that would be interesting to see. in any case, i don't really agre with you that it would be too hard to tell. 

please someone - take up the cause! - what's the numbers???


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

The pro or con Bush poll I can take. Con Bush.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Bush is a Con (man).


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

*More Loose ends*

gh, "fiscally conservative and socially liberal", sounds like you want it both ways! But again one of those PC things to say!

Fiscally conservative, means you don't want the government to collect and spend your money, on government programs! No problem there.

Socially liberal, means you are willing to have the government collect and spend other peoples money, on government programs! A big problem there.

Being conservative, or liberal has to do with how you see the government being involved in our lives. I think the less the better. The less involved, the less of our money it will need. Social programs cost money. To say you support Kerry health care, and are willing to have the other guy pay for it, is short sighted. Eventually a program comes along, where you are the other guy. 

If you can assure me that you are willing to always be the other guy, I will accept the handouts of your money! 

Actually, that is not true either, when Uncle Sam gives us money, he then likes to tell us how to spend it. Another problem, so you can keep your money as far as I am concerned, I will do it my way on my dime.

Actually, that is not true either, and this is where it gets complicated. We all benefit from government programs. It becomes an issue of which programs we believe in, and which we choke on. Have you driven on a DOT highway recently, or listen to FCC controlled radio or TV, flown on an FAA regulated airline. But then there are Bridges that go no where, and airline routes that are unprofitable, and HDTV that is going to cost a bunch when our old TV no longer works. 

Of course there is Dept of EDucation, necessary, probably! All of it no.
Health, the same, and then there is the Military, not so simple. Do you think we should go to the Sudan and help save those refugees. Maybe we should just send some Drs and Nurses with a bunch of food and med. 

I believe conservatives should be compassionate, but not liberal. Let me decide how much of my money to donate (taxes). I might not like it, but if I make the decision, It will be easier to live with.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

*Counting the loose ends*

SK, I can tell that we are about split even of those who have participated in the political threads. 

The problem is that does not count those silent voters out there who choose not to be involved. I respect their silence, and their unwillingness to be counted and become just another number to be projected into some meaningless poll. The only poll that counts, is the one on Nov 2nd, and the results are in.


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

KnesisKnosis, not really interested in you putting words in my mouth. I will expand if it matters. It's really not that hard to understand. I hear everyone bitch about Kerry' health care plan but I am smart enough to know that he would never get that through a Republican congress but I would venture to say that it would be cheaper than a 200 billion dollar war. I have never really considered my stance to be that PC. Frankly it takes a lot of thought and consideration to vote on someone other than looking for the one with the 'D' or 'R' by his name. I have voted Republican and Democrat in my life and will do so again based on what I think is best. I don't like Bush. If you do then be happy.


----------



## mattyb (Oct 31, 2003)

*you are old...*

Just as you are fond of spouting that the Democratic party is no longer the party of the common man, as it once was. (I don't argue that the Dem party has lost touch with its roots). The Republican party has nothing to do with small government. The last time that rang true under Reagan and only barely then.


From the American Conservative Union Foundation:
http://acuf.org/


The results under different presidents are illuminating. Not surprisingly, President Reagan was the only recent president under whom domestic discretionary spending was actually reduced, by a -1.3 percent average per year during his term, according to Club for Growth data. Surprisingly, the second ranking president under whom spending was restrained was Jimmy Carter, when it increased by only 2.0%, basically limited by economic conditions. Under Bill Clinton spending only increased by 2.5% per year average, especially restrained after the GOP took control of the House in 1994. Spending under the first president George H.W. Bush increased by a sharp 4.0% per year and under Lyndon Johnson it increased by only a bit more, 4.3 % (entitlements were another matter). The really big spending increases took place under Republicans: Richard Nixon with a 6.8% boost per year, Gerald Ford with 8.0% and, the most, under George W. Bush with an average 8.2% increase per year.

The swelling in non-defense discretionary government spending under the current president has been more than three times higher than the average for the Bill Clinton years. No wonder public perceptions have changed. Entitlements, too, have increased more under President Bush than any president since Johnson, with the new Medicare prescription drug entitlement creating $7 trillion in new long-term unfunded liability, about the same as that for all of Social Security. In general, Congressional Republicans only seem to remember their limited government roots when there is a Democratic president. While defense was upgraded marginally last year and there were some impressive social conservative victories, such as passing a partial birth abortion bill, spending on liberal-created health, welfare and education programs and entitlements exploded. There was very little for small government conservatives to crow about in 2003.

© 2003 American Conservative Union Foundation 1007 Cameron Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 Tel: 703.836.8602


----------



## mattyb (Oct 31, 2003)

*the above is for kinesis kenosis*

the above is for kinesis kenosis


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

Excellent article Mattyb.


----------



## matobs (Nov 26, 2003)

it's always interesting watching conservatives defend a liberal agenda.

spending is out of control under bush and republican congress. not one veto in four years? some check and balance. 
they'll say its all related to terrorism, but that as mattyb points out that is only half the truth. aside from medicare, the dept. of education budget has went up about 25%. 

and let's not forget about the liberal war -- this notion of freeing other countries so they too can enjoy fruits of democracy and freedom. i'd expect such stuff from liberals but conservatives???

the hypocrisy is rank


----------



## esp (Jun 13, 2004)

KK,

Are you strictly a republican voter? when was the last democrat you voted for president? I ask out of respect to you and your beliefs. But i guess I would be a bit dissapointed if you voted based on party lines, without truely and fairly evaluating the other non Rebublicans. 

What I gather, and I might be wrong, is that most of the non Bush posters are people who have voted both R&D along the way. So we may be slaming Bush, and those who are blindly folowing him, but we are not actually talking partisan politics. Like I said in a previous post, I voted for that SOB the first time. 

I believe that all Americans should re evaluate every four years, where is the country, and where does it need to go, both domestically and internationally. Not, lets look for the reasons to not change our minds. we should look for and embrace the oppertunity to be able to change courses as history dictates. We should be proud to say that we were not so stuborn, too honestly evaluate the alternitives. 

we must take every oppertunity to humble ourselvs and say, I certainly could have been, or am currently wrong. open the box to those possibilities.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

*Pro Bush?*

Dear paddling friends,

I have never attended an R function. I put no R sign on my yard, or bumper sticker on my car! No one would know how I voted by listening to me before Nov 2. No poll would identify that I had any interest in politics. I appear deaf to the daily rants and raves of politicians about this fact, and that detail. I am the silent majority. Sometimes I have voted R, and sometimes D, look at who has won in the past.

Recently, Ds did not find me, or appeal to my reason, or excite my emotion. And so they did not get my vote. They ignored me, and they now call me names, and fly over me with disdain. As long as they persist with this foolishness, I will not support their issues and concerns by voting for them. 

They may assail me with their brilliance, or Buffalo me with BS, but they will only convince me that there is a better way than their way.

I am happy, with my choice. It was not a perfect choice. It has plenty of failings. But it was the best choice, and it was my choice. Their offering was sad, and if this is the best they can offer, what choice do I really have? 

And now they ridicule me for my choice! Am I free to choose as long I choose them? What kind of freedom is that? How do they ever expect to win my attention, besides my vote! I am the silent conservative majority, and there are very many of us, and we each have one vote, and we vote!


----------



## mattyb (Oct 31, 2003)

*too good to resist*

From The Morning Call in Allentown, PA or the Conservative Heartland.
I'll bet this guy puts his pants on one leg at a time; when he wears pants, that is.
http://www.mcall.com/

*Jesus speaks through the Republicans*

I hope the election of George W. Bush is seen as a wake-up call to all the liberal Democrats who oppose God's will. 

It is His doing that George W. Bush is still our president. Millions of born-again Christians helped win this election through our prayers and votes. Jesus speaks through the Republicans.

The Democrats will not be able to win elections until they renounce their sinful ways and stop encouraging abortions, gayness, and trying to take away our guns.

Earl Balboa

Washington Township


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

KnesisKnosis, nice job of continuing with the us vs. them mentality. I disagree with your choice, so what. I am glad you are happy with it but please save me from the rhetoric of silent majority. You can make a lot of claims but I don't think silent is one of them.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

*Silence is sometimes bliss!*

gh, I have only recently been motivated to speak up. Prior to Nov 2, I held my counsel (most of the time). However, since then, and on the MB forum, and on only a couple of threads have I made my presence known. I suspect there are more like me. If you really desire to make inroads into the majority, silent or not, you need to acknowledge, that we are out here. Otherwise you will continue to be blindsided in the vote count.

I am not saying, that all you are concerned about is unimportant. In fact I would say that there are serious issues that need to be addressed. Not that I would choose to address them the same as you, but I agree that closing our eyes and sticking our head in the sand, does not really help solve important issues. 

The simplistic approach is not satisfactory either. These are serious, complex issues, that need more exposure, more conversation. I am not particularly happy with those who impart GOD's name as a magic talisman, and claim to have a corner on GOD because they are in a particular religious corner, and think that solves all the problems. My understanding is that GOD calls us to act wisely. Wisdom seeks truth in solving the difficult issues of life.

However it does not help for us to start throwing rocks at each other either. At the end of the day, the issue will remain, and we'll just have lumps on our head.

Name calling and intimidation is unproductive. If a thread were to start, and be allowed to present only one side of the discussion, as it seems some would desire, it may appear that the unchallenged presentation is being accepted. However I think that it is more than likely being relegated, by the silent majority, to the realm of insignificant rants. Written off, and any real potential productive interchange of ideas lost. 

You are right, I no longer choose to be silent, nor am I intimidated by loud noises from the other side. So, I do not choose to give anyone a free pass to ride the merry-go-round with out me.


----------



## goatboater (Oct 18, 2003)

Only a fool would believe everything they are told.
Only a completely ignorant person would not take the time to analyze the things they hear on the news or in the paper or on the radio or from another person.
Only a fool wouldn't consider the posibility that with so many possible alterior motives, the Bush administration is most likely lying.
Only a fool would support a pointless "war" in Iraq. 
Only an ignorant person wouldn't look back and see that all of the reason's Bush gave for the "war" turned out to be untrue- just consider all the connections between Bush and Cheney and oil and Iraq. 

Only a fool would vote for a ninkempoop like Bush for president of our country.

I guess that classifies the majority of our country as ignorant and foolish, and yes, that includes the silent majority that isn't politically active. If people would just take a minute to analyze what the goverment tells them, we wouldn't have a lier as pres. It's sad, really, but I'm starting to believe that IQ thing.


----------



## gh (Oct 13, 2003)

KnesisKnosis, as long you are thinking and you think you made the right choice then thats cool by me. The decision was made, I have done my part of the bitching about it without, hopefully, offending anyone. I am moving on.


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

*re Believing everthing we're told?*

Goatboater, your avatar says a lot about how you think! He's cute, but that is not why you chose him. 

You are free to choose whomever you decide, and we choose whom we choose. You have your reasons, and we have ours. Does not mean we believe everything, or that we are ignorant. Does not mean we do not listen to or analze what we hear on the radio, TV, or newspaper. Does not mean we do not consider the nature of politics and government in the affairs of the world. In this world we often have to choose between the lesser of evils.

It just means that when we got to the bottom line, we felt we did not need to feel intimidated by those who go through life letting their intimate parts hang down for everyone to see! And being embarassed for you, if you have no sensitivity for the viewing audience, like we only exist to be the victim of your exposure. 

Flashing, whether physical, mental, or political is intended to intimidate, and we choose to no longer be a victim, and sit quietly by.


----------



## goatboater (Oct 18, 2003)

KK- dood, it's a squirrel with big nuts. It's not meant to intimidate anyone, but if it's intimidating you thats cool I guess. It's supposed to be FUNNY.... Laugh, my friend, it's good for you. We all need to chill out a little. We all voted for what we believed in- that's what makes our country so awesome. 

I have a proposal. I'm going to make a new post that's a poll so we can all re-vote. Anyone who feels the need to express there political views can do so, and then that will be the end of all political post. I'm getting tired of this.

Ben


----------



## Steve Kahn (Apr 17, 2004)

so how about that M-wave?


----------



## erdvm1 (Oct 17, 2003)

I was wondering.........can someone post explicit directions to the M-wave? latitude/longitude will be fine. Thanks ...... Oh yeah I almost forgot .................. which Airline accepts boats?


----------



## KnesisKnosis (Mar 21, 2004)

Goatboater, decent and sensitive of you to pull the avatar. I love to laugh, and enjoy life. I am not a prude, and I certainly understand the facts of life. I am not intimidated as in fear, but as in life is so wonderful, and beautiful, why is it necessary to by crude and crass. I am glad to see that you found that it is not necessary.

It is also not necessary to say,"Only a fool would vote for a ninkempoop like Bush for president of our country." We are all Americans, however we vote, we live in a great country, and any candidate is probably some of the best of the best. You are right on this, "We all voted for what we believed in- that's what makes our country so awesome. " Every vote counts, every vote is important!

Now there is a lot pf paddling to be done, and made up for, so let's paddle on, and know that I would still throw you a life-line!


----------

