I'm ashamed to be a Londoner

General chitchat, advertisements for other services, and other non-Cantr-related topics

Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department

playerslayer666
Posts: 717
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 4:27 pm

Postby playerslayer666 » Fri May 16, 2008 4:26 am

Cdls wrote:Wow...I feel for ya, we had to endure two terms with our shithead...I mean president.


Look on the bright side though...you could have gotten Bush...Im sure we would trade ya :)



:evil: BUSH RUINED MY FAITH IN AN HONEST VOTING SYSTEM! :evil:

he asked for a recount. that was ok. votes went missing. mistakes happen. but then Al Gore announced that he " accepted the decision " and thus let peoples votes get tossed aside. i can't really think of a logical reason as to why a person would sit back and let that happen.

the main point i want to make is that Bush got a recount and Al Gore didn't get a re-vote when votes went missing ( actually he didn't want it but they would not have done it anyway ). and they could have easily done it to. if they know if a persons name shows up twice then they would know who's names are missing.

Al Gore's rights as a canditate were stepped on, the voting system rules were broken, the people did not get a legitiment result and when we called him on it he just sent out checks and basically bribed the whole country.

i would go on about 9/11 but instead look up "Zeitgeist world trade center" on youtube. watch part 1 of 4. that is all you will need to see.

oh and to comment on what you said. yes he is a shithead, but doesn't anyone get that odd feeling that everything Bush did was being controlled by someone else? it never seemed like he was being honest which is why he seemed like such an idiot.
aaeeiio
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 1:28 pm
Location: Suomi

Postby aaeeiio » Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:15 am

*looks up Boris Johnson in Wikipedia*

Not bad at all to me. I can imagine why he got voted.
User avatar
dingo
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 3:39 am
Location: Australia

Postby dingo » Sat Jun 14, 2008 3:07 pm

a few quotes from Bush's speeches.

"Because the French don't have a word for entrepreneur."

"I am here to make an announcement that this Thursday, ticket counters and airplanes will fly out of Ronald Reagan Airport." --Washington, D.C., Oct. 3, 2001

"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." --interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006

"The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th." (woudlnt that make the date 11/11 instead of 7/11?)

"My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we're going to run out of debt to retire." --radio address, Feb. 24, 2001

"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully." --Saginaw, Mich., Sept. 29, 2000

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." --Greece, N.Y., May 24, 2005

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." --Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004
"The most important thing in any battle is being awake and alert" ~ Roo Avery

Real Estate Agency
User avatar
Arlequin
Posts: 495
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 2:32 pm
Location: Valencia
Contact:

Postby Arlequin » Sat Jun 14, 2008 3:34 pm

(sorry for derailing the topic)

I saw in the news here that Obama is quite well seen in the rest of the world.

I hope the "classic mindset" sector of population there don't rush to vote the opposite of what the rest of the world thinks. :|

So... just in case, "Go go McCain, Europe supports you!". :roll:
♫ bling! ♫
User avatar
Chris
Posts: 856
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 1:03 pm

Postby Chris » Sat Jun 14, 2008 3:47 pm

The British should be thankful that their right wing is not as insane as the American right wing. I read a Salon blog entry on the topic: Conservatism vs. authoritarianism: The British vs. the U.S. right.
User avatar
formerly known as hf
Posts: 4120
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: UK

Postby formerly known as hf » Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:15 pm

Ok, so Boris Johnson has finally showed his colours.

For the preamble - our old Mayor, Ken Livingstone, was well known (and often criticised by the right wingers) for getting cosy with Venezuela. The Right have a knee-jerk reaction to Venezuela - and I would be bold enough to say it's because it shows that left politics can work. They have, for cliche example, quite an amazing national health service results, especially so given the tiny amount of funding (which, on a side note, is largely down to quite hefty enforcement of preventative measures).

Now, Ken made a number of agreements with Hugo. Some were in the form of knowledge transfer (and thus growth), others in econmic and market terms.

One of these was the importation of Venezuelan oil to power London Buses. In return for assistance from Transport For London in developing public transport in Venezuela.

This allowed for those on income support - welfare - to recieve half-price tickets. I would like to hear how this is a bad thing? They are some of the poorest people in the city, who often rely upon buses because of the cost (and impracticality) of owning a car in London, and the relative expense of other forms of public transport.

Yet, apparently, this deal made some Londoners feel 'uncomfortable'. That would be the right-wingers who didn't like the deals with Chavez. Whilst there is various reasons why the US do not like Chavez (oil - he has, they want, but he's socialist... baddie), the reasons are slightly more straightforward here. He runs a largely left, socialist country which - bloody hell - does well (considering the problems they've dealt with) and thus (oh noes) prooves that socialist politics are both economically and socially viable.

This might have made Boris' voters 'uncomfortable', but to screw over the poorest people who have no other option. Way to go, welcome to Right Wing London...
User avatar
Stan
Posts: 894
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:29 pm
Location: KENTUCKY, USA

Postby Stan » Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:20 am

I would first argue with the success of Venezuela...but assuming they appear successful I would bet a dollar...if it were worth anything...Ok, I would bet a barrel of oil, that just like other dictatorships around the world the success will be limited in both scope and time.

Hey there HF! How ya' been?
Stan wrote:I've never said anything worth quoting.
User avatar
formerly known as hf
Posts: 4120
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: UK

Postby formerly known as hf » Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:30 am

Ok, so Venezuela does have some way to go to being a plural democracy. I would contend the dictatorship label, as Chavez is quite clearly not, as an elected president through (bar age) universal sufferage. However, the rule by decree is certainly an issue, as is the continued (and cmpunded by the actions of chavez) weakness of the opposition (despite the valiant help from the CIA). A democracy by name, maybe (c.f. Russia), but there are certainly moves towards democracy as we know it.

Anyway, hey! It's nice to see familiar faces in this old dump. How's tricks?
User avatar
Stan
Posts: 894
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:29 pm
Location: KENTUCKY, USA

Postby Stan » Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:09 am

I think there is no one more polar opposite to me than old HF, but I sure do like your ability to argue a point. Not to mention I would like to have a beer with you sometime.
Stan wrote:I've never said anything worth quoting.
User avatar
formerly known as hf
Posts: 4120
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 2:58 pm
Location: UK

Postby formerly known as hf » Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:01 pm

I would happily second that.

Return to “Non-Cantr-Related Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest