1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Republicans Rock

By TS | Crazyace ยท 30 replies
Nov 6, 2002
Post New Reply

    Looks like the republicans regain control of the house! This is great news, and I hope those damn democrats are crying their eyes out.

    I work and Massachuetts, and its amazing that the most democratic state in the country actually went Republican, how sweet it is...

    Not that I am a total republican, but I am really sick of some of these games the darn librals play.
  2. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,247   +448

    I think this is a bad thread
    Just another way to segregate people.
    What about the democrats on our forum?

  3. vassil3427

    vassil3427 TS Rookie Posts: 640

    I was so happy after I heard this morning that The Republicans control the House and the Senate...I personally believe this is a great thing for us her in America....And about segragation I dfont think so cause you're only expeiriencing what us Republicans felt when the democrats took total control 7...8...years ago....
  4. RustyZip

    RustyZip TechSpot Paladin Posts: 322

    Being in the UK i always wondered what the difference was between Republicans & Democrats??? Anyone care to explain??

    Here in the UK, we have our different political parties, but nowadys they are all too much like the same thing...(except for the raving loony party)!!!
  5. chrisa107

    chrisa107 TS Rookie

    Very briefly, the main difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the Democrats favor big and expensive government, while Republicans favor smaller and less invasive government.

    And I'm a Republican from MA too, and am SOOO happy O'Brien wasn't elected. :D
  6. TS | Crazyace

    TS | Crazyace TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 275

    democrats: favor taxs, large governments, liberal (legalize abortion, pot, teaching spanish in our grammer schools), tree hugers, peace freaks, poor, minority, immigrants, unions

    republicans: middle class, rich, less taxs, strong military, high morals, old school, close of the boarders, war against drugs, non-union

    Basically, democrates gear towards the poor, students, elderly, and immigrants for votes. They have more of a liberal stance on important issues, and absolutly no morals. Democrats are the reason why we have so many issues here in the USA with illegal aliens, welfare, and unions (which nowadays are very much corrupt). Republicans are more church minded, old school. This election was a landmark election, which now puts the Republicans in total power here in the USA, which hasn't happened in the last 100 years. This was very significant, more than most people know. Basically, republicans and democrats share parts of the senate and house of reps. Whichever is the majority obviously would gear things towards their party.

    Anyhow, I could go on forever. These are my opinions, and I hope it helps u understand a bit if your not from the USA.
  7. TS | Crazyace

    TS | Crazyace TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 275

    O- BTW

    Where from ma are u from?

    I was born in Springfield, and am looking for a new house in the suburb area.

    OBRIAN was horrible. MA is going to go though alot of changes, changes that are a long time comming.
  8. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,572   +65

    I don't like either parties... They are all just lost in their own identity as the other.

    How can you have a republican in a democracy? How can you have a democrat in a decmocracy that is actually a democratic republic?

    All these questions and more...

    I don't even vote for this (and more) reasons. But if I did, I wouldn't favor parties, just individuals.
  9. Rick

    Rick TechSpot Staff Posts: 4,572   +65

    VERY VERY subjective. Anyone who reads this (or this thread) should take it with a few grains of salt.
  10. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,247   +448

    I think it's healthy to have both parties involved - I never said I wanted it to be all democratic either. Without both parties involved there is less balance in decisions. I think that balance is a necessary part of our political processes.

  11. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,247   +448

    And one more thing.... Rick, you're the man :) You get my vote you pasty guy!
  12. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,686   +350

    I was going to write something similar. This is the type of topic which often instigates a flame war. Hopefully peoples political views can be discussed without it degrading into a flame war.
  13. Mictlantecuhtli

    Mictlantecuhtli TS Evangelist Posts: 4,345   +11

    Do you think there will be less issues with these things when republicans are deciding? And why? I don't understand how being "old school" helps here.
  14. StormBringer

    StormBringer TS Rookie Posts: 2,244

    I find myself agreeing more with Republican views than Democratic views, but I also heavily disagree with both. Usually I find that I may like an idea that the Republicans have which the Democrats oppose, but I also find problems with the idea or its implimentation.

    The Republicans pretty much want to keep everything the same way forever and the Democrats want to give everything to everyone and then put huge taxes on it.

    The way I see it, the only thing that is good about either party controlling the majority is that things get done faster, whether these will be good or bad for the country is another can of worms entirely. It just speeds up the process because there is less squabbling.
  15. running

    running TS Enthusiast Posts: 70

    I don't like Bush because:

    His father -George Bush- was in the oil business since the 50's, and was a member of the Skull and Bones secret society. This membership was used by his critics as evidence of elitism.

    His grandfather, Prescott Sheldon Bush was a banker.

    Do a little research, and you will find connections to very interesting people.

    This should already tell you where his interests are, but never mind.

    Go here and click on "The Full Harvard Watch Memo" (if you are a Bush apologist, then ignore the omissions in the Boston Globe):


    Of course, we know that the White House would never lie to the american people, right? Those stories about some president *cough* Nixon *cough* are figments of some slanderous reporters. Let's forget that Ford's pardon was pretty much the result of blackmail.

    Bush apparently is also saying that the UN is full of it, since this looks like our government is already taking steps:


    Of course, this should surprise no one since we are 100% sure that Saddam wants to throw nukes to the U.S. Good thing that Russia is broke and China is afraid (ahem): Russia doesn't have enough money to keep its scientists, so many of them went to arab countries (duh!). Even though some guy in CNN said that they are not building refrigerators, well, do we have to make a list of all the countries that didn't like us? -Starting with Russia, the list is quite long. Even with western-oriented leaders like Yeltsin or Putin, there is still resentment to be found.

    China didn't even make a decent attempt when the U.S. bombed their embassy in Serbia. An accident (?), but they did nothing -not even a diplomatic gesture. Then the thing with the spy plane. The U.S. released a list of actions to undertake if they didn't release the crew. Oppose the Olympics, take a stand with Tibet, and so on. Lo and behold, a little later the crew was released. Dude, China knows they can't mess with the U.S.

    On the other hand, the arabs and the jews (ME) have a fanatical hate toward each other, and Bush wants to go in and start a conflict that most likely will not be confined to Iraq. Russia will sell weapons to the arabs, just like they sold weapons to the vietnamese. We have to remember that America sold weapons to Afghanistan toward the end of 1986, during the conflict with the soviets.

    These two countries are waiting for a moment of distraction to stop being "2nd class world powers". China has no problem murdering their own students (Beijing, 1989), much less Americans -directly or indirectly.

    Back to America, we can see the actual social trends, and the middle class will eventually disappear. Knowing Bush's background, he cares probably as much as Reagan did. I'm no fan of Springsteen, but he did the right thing by criticizing the republicans during Reagan's presidency.

    Most americans didn't want Bush anyway -lost the popular vote.

    By the way, what can you say about a guy who couldn't even write his autobiography? ("A Charge to Keep" -written with Karen Hughes). I hear that in England they also make fun of him.
  16. TS | Crazyace

    TS | Crazyace TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 275

    I dont really like Bush that much myself either. Try reading A Pale White Horse and you'll learn alot about 'ole Bush. His father being head of the CIA for all those years gives you just a bit of a clue of where I am heading with this, but I won't go any further. So some reading on it.

    I personally believe there should be more than 2 parties.

    I think regular average americans should get elected (those that have a high enough I.Q. that is)

    There are many issues between the parties but not voting is the worst thing you could do. It's more entertaining to play in a football game than watch it, correct? And if you dont play, then don't *****!

    In closing, to be honest I voted for Gore. Now, I would never even cast a vote for another democrat for as long as I live! I have done alot of reading and listning, and that is my stance. Before you pick a side, learn about the parties and what they stand for.
  17. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 10,729   +409

    Now in response to what Running said. I'm going to have to politely disagree that China is afraid of the US, I wouldn't say they are scared about anything really (I know thats kind of an ignorant comment but..). China has the most troops of any country in the world in its military, I think that its probably a good thing that China is on the opposite side of the world than the US, if either country could just send troops by land to the other country I think something might have flared up at some point. Fortunately for the US, their military can defend its own borders not necessarly because of some overwhelming power (China could overwhelm anyone with ground troops) but because we only have Mexico and Canada as a land route into our country, no way any country could get large quantities of men over here before the US could shoot down or sink any ships.
    What the problem is for the US now is we have many enemies, and many of those enemies are working on getting ICBM's over here with nasty payloads, whether it be biological, chemical, or nuclear. Thats why the US is/was working on being able to intercept missles over the ocean before they hit a major city, or any city for that matter.
  18. running

    running TS Enthusiast Posts: 70

    You're right about the ground troops, but let's take a look at 1996. China, fearing Taiwan's independence, conducted military tests 90 miles north of Taiwan. 4 years later, Chen -an independence advocate- wins the taiwanese election. However this time China only resorts to verbal intimidation. Why? Bush mentioned that America has interests in Taiwan, we are going to defend them, and the chinese need to understand that. In the eyes of China, Taiwan is little more than a rebellious province. Why not go in, like the russians are trying to do in Chechnya?

    We can speculate, and if China takes some sort of definitive action against the U.S, I'll change my views. However I still believe that they want nothing to do with America. That's what I meant with a "good" thing, since it prevents a big military conflict.
  19. Top_gun

    Top_gun TS Rookie Posts: 59

    There is one thing US has to fear bout China....China has 16 ICBMs that can be launched and hit US targets in half and hour and the US cant do anything about it...except run. However 36 Hours later, 20 B-2 bombers will be over China airspace and kill 1/6 of the world's population....
  20. poertner_1274

    poertner_1274 secroF laicepS topShceT Posts: 4,172

    Wow it is kind of funny to keep reading this thread and see how it has moved from Republicans rock, to China vs. USA

    Good points made by all I must add.
  21. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 10,729   +409

    See now poert it is now a civilized conversation/debate, that kind of stuff is encouraged here. Running made some good points and since I was the original one to disagree with him I think its good that I acknowledge them instead of taking a different tangent and flaming him on it.
    Building on that - China doesn't want to deal with Taiwan militaristically (I'm sure there is a spelling error somewhere) because we are backing Taiwan, they don't want a conflict, the US doesn't either - the US has the most mobile military in the world right now, so even though we have to move halfway across the world its still not worth it to China to "take" Taiwan because they know they would have to fight the US for it.
    Of course this is all my opinion and I am by no means an expert in this field.
  22. Vehementi

    Vehementi TechSpot Paladin Posts: 2,704

    Heh...I'd have to say the U.S.'s #1 threat are domestic bombings, or hijacking a plane and knocking down a few skyscrapers. We really don't have much of a defense against that, despite what 'advances' we are making in the realm of plane security. Bomb in the spare laptop battery over a crowded metropolis, etc, etc.

    The US doesn't really have much to fear from them. I think they're smart enough to realize what happens to a country or organization after they specifically target the US. I.e. - Japan -> Pearl Harbor -> 2 nukes, Al Qaeda -> 9/11 -> entire world culled of the terrorists, so called 'War on Terror.'
    I also think it will take a little bit longer than 36 hrs. Shrub has to convene Congress, wait until they say yes, plan out a strategy (knowing the US' blunt tactics of course they'd carpet bomb & nuke the sushi out of all the major cities), consolidate the bombers, outfit them with weapons, launch them, then the 36 hours would start. And of course we have Chinese spies to tell us all about their plans months ahead of time, and all this is even if we don't detect the missiles launching by satellite (which we will, up to the minute) and prepare the Star Wars Missile Defense system, plus what ever SAM's we have going on the west coast.
    Besides, I'm sure Taiwan isn't worth bombing us. It's like throwing a rock at an already enraged bull.
  23. TS | Crazyace

    TS | Crazyace TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 275

    US Threat:

    I agree that our biggest threat is within. I personally disagree with the Iraq movement, because I don't thing they are a threat to us. They are a threat to Saudia Arabia, and for some reason, we kiss thier *** even though they wont let us use their airspace to bomb IRAQ. I dont understand this, and never will.

    BUSH has a personal agenda vs. Iraq, because they tried to assasinate his father. He needs to just forget about, what are the chances that Iraq can reach the USA with anyhing? Sadam and Osama are not friends, they are actually enemies!

    BUSH needs to concentrate on within, and get rid of all illegal aliens..
  24. Elcarion

    Elcarion TechSpot Paladin Posts: 169

    The core of either party's ideals does not revolve around taxes or government size. I find it very discouraging as an American when people make up there mind to vote for one party of the other just because of party lines; they both have their good and bad qualities and their good and bad people. Personally, I think the terms "Conservative" and "Liberal" poorly describe both parties. Here is my opinion and comparison of how I view the parties:

    1) Side with the religious right, strongly oppose abortion
    2) Generally oppose government control: a.k.a. Microsoft, Enron, etc... they are more trusting in the "open market"
    3) Believe that individuals who have proven themselves by hard work should be rewarded as such
    4) Believe that incentives for corporations and wealthy individuals will provide for a stronger economy for all (Reagan's trickle down economics) this in turn will help the poor.

    1) Don't tend to take sides on religious(christian) basis, believe in individual's right for an abortion possibly euthenasia
    2) Believe in social programs to help people in need directly
    3) Favor government control to promote a fairer playing field. They don't trust big business to typically play fair in the open market.

    I don't know a good political comparison of the Republican party for you guys in Europe. The Democratic Party would side somewhat with Socialist countries like Sweden, Germany, etc. with social programs but to a MUCH lesser degree. I wouldn't call them socialist. I tend to side with the Democratic Party on social issues because I think people in need deserve help directly through some form of redistribution of wealth. As human beings they deserve my help. On most other topics I tend to be somewhere in the middle. The reality is that both parties are run by a bunch of rich guys with strong ties to big business and little in common with the common man. I try to vote for the best person whether they're D or R. A democratic government is the least productive by design!
  25. Elcarion

    Elcarion TechSpot Paladin Posts: 169

    Is China scared of the US? yes
    Is the US scared of China? yes

    During the Cold War both Russia and the US were very scared of each other. Most of the fear was caused by ignorance of how the other side felt and though. The good thing is that there is dialogue between China and the US. I think that the relationship is much better than our relationship with Russia during the Cold War.

    A couple of great books relating to this subject are: "Blind Man's Bluff" and "Skunk Works". The first is about submarine espionage during the cold war. The second is about the super secret "Skunk Works" that developed the U2, the SR-71 and the Stealth Bomber among others. The history of these planes is very interesting. Blind Man's Bluff can also be found as a one hour documentary on the History Channel.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...