The Song Fight Bulletin Board

The Sober Irishman wrote:I am fucking disgusted by the stupidity of 51% of Americans. If you voted for Bush, you are either A: Fucking stupid, or B: one of the few greedy bastards benefitting directly from the crooked-ass operations of this administration. There is no other reason. 99% of Bush voters fall under A.

It is this mentality that pushes Middle America away from the Democratic Party. Telling people that their opinion makes them either dumb or greedy doesn't really endear them to you.

Perhaps there's something to be said about the fact that Bush caters to rural folk. Farmers are the perhaps the most important people in America (or any country) when it comes to the well-being of everyone. Name members of any other profession, and I'm willing to bet that we could do without them as long as we still have farmers, but not vice-versa.

So if Bush is keeping them happy, I guess that's sort of a good thing for all of us.

The worst part about that is that one of the ways he keeps them happy is by catering to their religious beliefs, something that no one in government should be doing.

So if we want better leaders, maybe it would help to educate the farmers--not neccessarily booksmart-wise, but socially. Make it apparent that different lifestyles (i.e., ones that don't cater to fundamentalist Christianity) can be okay, and even good.

Correct me if I'm wrong, folks who know farmers, but as I understand it, farming is no longer the noble profession it once was, and is now controlled, like so much else, by a few very large, very greedy corporations with questionable business practices. What were once called farmers are now mostly custodians of farms managed and owned by these corporations.

And remember, argiculture is a major consumer of petroleum products. Modern farms today cannot operate without oil. Not just to run the machinery and move the product around the world, but also because most pesticides and fertilizers, without which modern farms would not yield enough crops to feed us all, are petroleum products. Our dependence on oil is so deep it's terrifying.

And don't get me started on the utter sham that is bio-diesel fuel...

So, farmers are... bad?

Jim of Seattle wrote:

jack shite wrote:

Jim of Seattle wrote: I want to publish a bumper sticker that says "JESUS WAS A LIBERAL" because it's true. The Democratic party needs to take back common-sense (meaning non-fundamentalist) religious folks because their ideology is, in reality, much more in line with the democratic party.

and many ministers, pastors, priests would probably disagree with you, as they obviously did. it's easy for you to write off the word Jim, but what it stands for isn't so easy to write off.

What word are you talking about? Family values? (that's 2 words) OK, so what DOES it stand for? I have a family, and we don't value things the Republicans value. Don't we count?

now you're just talking stupid. try not to take things so literally. or personally. i'm confident that whenever the term is used, nobody is thinking..."hm, that Jim of Seattle's family values". and as much as you'd like to deny it, i'd bet that you and your family and the republican party share alot of the same values. the things that divide are ideological, but they make up a very small part of what we are and "value" as humans.

i'm not a republican. far from it. but i have friends that are and that doesn't diminish my respect for them, or make me think they are "stupid fucking idiots". it just means we have a difference of opinion. and it's a fine place we live that something like that is tolerated. encouraged even.

15-16 puzzle wrote:So, farmers are... bad?

....not the ones I know. My job is supported by fish farmers, my family on my mother's side are independent cattle farmers, and I love leaf farmers!!

The thing about rural people (where I live is considered rural by the way) is that they are merely people who don't have close neighbours. The farm hands for example, on the "big corporate" farms, or the fish farmers (not the mulitnationals that own them) are the ones who do this work, day in, day out, and they... ah fuck trying to defend them... if anyone here can't understand that people have different opinions and fears, well.

Hey Sober, Canada rocks. You can still change your country though. If Bush goes crazy and starts going for broke, creating and implementing policies that drive fear into everyone's hearts, you impeach 'em.

You know, if EVERYONE just said no to something, it wouldn't happen. It seems far fetched, but if you think about the base morals of many societies, this DOES happen. Americans (all of us actually) have to escape the ADVERTISING. I read a story about a doctor in Florida (Damn now I sound like Kerry!!) anyway who was voting Kerry. He was a guest on a radio talk show for weeks, and as the election got closer, he started to change his view. Even though Kerry's policies and ideas were in line with his own, he was gonna vote Bush. Why? Because he heard that Kerry "flip flopped" too much. (ironic eh?) IT was pointed out that his area was heavily bombarded with "Kerry Flip flops" ads. HE WAS BRAINWASHED. He sacrificed (if he did end up voting Bush) his morals and idealogies for an advertisment.

That's scary.

Another good joke I heard recently:

"In the states, everyone's trying to protect their leader from assasination... in Canada, we'd be like "Martin? Oh, he's over there...."

We just don't take shit too seriously here... it's not that we take our freedom for granted, we just like to enjoy it.

Jim of Seattle wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, folks who know farmers, but as I understand it, farming is no longer the noble profession it once was, and is now controlled, like so much else, by a few very large, very greedy corporations with questionable business practices. What were once called farmers are now mostly custodians of farms managed and owned by these corporations.

And remember, argiculture is a major consumer of petroleum products. Modern farms today cannot operate without oil. Not just to run the machinery and move the product around the world, but also because most pesticides and fertilizers, without which modern farms would not yield enough crops to feed us all, are petroleum products. Our dependence on oil is so deep it's terrifying.

And don't get me started on the utter sham that is bio-diesel fuel...

What's your point? We still need farmers, and moreso than any other profession.

jack shite wrote:

Jim of Seattle wrote:

jack shite wrote: and many ministers, pastors, priests would probably disagree with you, as they obviously did. it's easy for you to write off the word Jim, but what it stands for isn't so easy to write off.

What word are you talking about? Family values? (that's 2 words) OK, so what DOES it stand for? I have a family, and we don't value things the Republicans value. Don't we count?

now you're just talking stupid. try not to take things so literally. or personally. i'm confident that whenever the term is used, nobody is thinking..."hm, that Jim of Seattle's family values". and as much as you'd like to deny it, i'd bet that you and your family and the republican party share alot of the same values. the things that divide are ideological, but they make up a very small part of what we are and "value" as humans.

i'm not a republican. far from it. but i have friends that are and that doesn't diminish my respect for them, or make me think they are "stupid fucking idiots". it just means we have a difference of opinion. and it's a fine place we live that something like that is tolerated. encouraged even.

So what ARE family values? Name some. Specifically, name some that Republicans espouse and Democrats don't.

"Traditional" family values don't exist. They're a made-up entity by people who insist on believing that things used to be better when they were young, because, (in most cases, they didn't have as clear a view of the world back then) and that we ought to somehow "return" to this made-up era. The biggest change in the family in the last 50 years has been women's entry into the workplace, something which now is an economic necessity for most double-income families. It's not a value. It's economics. That's a huge change, of course, and has spawned a domino effect of lot of other changes in its wake, but it's not a change in "values". Other than that, I don't see anything that is really much different in families than it ever was.

But I'd love to hear you name some. I might be wrong.

i'm talking shared, not mutually exclusive. give it a rest already. i'm going to.

My original point was that the Republicans' assertion that they stand for something called "family values" and the Democrats don't holds no weight whatsoever for me, and is another example of callous and dishonest pushing of the public's buttons for political gain.

Jim of Seattle wrote:My original point was that the Republicans' assertion that they stand for something called "family values" and the Democrats don't holds no weight whatsoever for me, and is another example of callous and dishonest pushing of the public's buttons for political gain.

hey, no argument here. unfortunately, dirty politics often wins (nice guys finish last...) and if there is anyone more despicable than dick cheney to me, it's karl rove.

Jim of Seattle wrote:My original point was that the Republicans' assertion that they stand for something called "family values" and the Democrats don't holds no weight whatsoever for me, and is another example of callous and dishonest pushing of the public's buttons for political gain.

There are foreign words and phrases that have no decent translation into other languages.

There are also English words and phrases that are untranslatable into English words. Like "irony" and "family values" and "pornography". You can't really explain what it means, but you can give examples. And there are lots of examples that everyone can agree upon, but lots that no one can agree upon.

So you want to move to Canada...

and

Living Poor, Voting Rich

There is a large population of single-issue voters who just can't get past their issue, whether it's positive or negative, real or imagined: abortion, school prayer, gay marriage, Bin Laden, tax cuts, flip-flopping, creationist science, throwing war medals, homeland security, gun control...

They may share many other beliefs with us. They live and work among us. Use the same organic shampoo. Demonstrate that they're intelligent neighbors. But their issue had its day yesterday. And everything else is pretty much background noise.

jesus... in order to continue liking you guys, i'm staying the fuck away from this thread

oh, and here...

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtm ... ID=6704292

So I don't suppose you want to go ... here?
Plus, if you were paying attention, Hoblit posted your link on the previous page.

I think that Jim may have been trying to make a point along the lines of: When Bush "helps farmers" with tax cuts and subsidies, he's in fact helping agribusiness corporations like Monsanto, ConAgra, etc. (if I had my copy of "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser handy I'd list some more, and if you haven't read that book yet give it a try). You've got to examine the legislation he's sponsoring and the Congress is passing to find out who really benefits. The news probably will just gloss over details like whether "farmers" means people or corporations.

Yeah, and those tobacco farmers who produce a product that--when used as designed--kills as many people a year as having a 9/11 every day for 156 days*. Must be good for the economy, though, so it's OK.

* (ok, had to look it up and based this on the CDC's numbers as of 1999)

15-16 puzzle wrote:

The Sober Irishman wrote:I am fucking disgusted by the stupidity of 51% of Americans. If you voted for Bush, you are either A: Fucking stupid, or B: one of the few greedy bastards benefitting directly from the crooked-ass operations of this administration. There is no other reason. 99% of Bush voters fall under A.

It is this mentality that pushes Middle America away from the Democratic Party. Telling people that their opinion makes them either dumb or greedy doesn't really endear them to you.

Word.

jack shite wrote:i'm not a republican. far from it. but i have friends that are and that doesn't diminish my respect for them, or make me think they are "stupid fucking idiots". it just means we have a difference of opinion. and it's a fine place we live that something like that is tolerated. encouraged even.

Again, word.

roymond wrote:Yeah, and those tobacco farmers who produce a product that--when used as designed--kills as many people a year as having a 9/11 every day for 156 days*. Must be good for the economy, though, so it's OK.

Bah. If you get lung cancer from 1st-hand smoke, it's your own goddamn fault. Everybody knows it's bad for you, and everybody knows someone who's died of it.

That's not to say I don't want them to get taxed into oblivion, or I'd be upset if their crops dried up. But I'm much more concerned with fuckers like Monsanto. I wish Osama would specifically target those guys instead of the US economy in general.

c hack wrote:

roymond wrote:Yeah, and those tobacco farmers who produce a product that--when used as designed--kills as many people a year as having a 9/11 every day for 156 days*. Must be good for the economy, though, so it's OK.

Bah. If you get lung cancer from 1st-hand smoke, it's your own goddamn fault. Everybody knows it's bad for you, and everybody knows someone who's died of it.

Perhaps my sarcasm isn't blatant enough. And what, just because its so common it doesn't hold any significance? I'm just saying that ... you know ... all those banned Lawn Darts, and anthrax. I mean eight people died! EIGHT!

I wish Osama would specifically target those guys instead of the US economy in general.

Osama has such a friend in Bush as far as bankrupting America goes.

roymond wrote:So I don't suppose you want to go ... here?
Plus, if you were paying attention, Hoblit posted your link on the previous page.

psst, it was Jim of Seattle...but yeah...still...