ampage Tube Amps / Music Electronics	For current discussions, please visit Music Electronics Forum.

ampage archive

Vintage threads from the first ten years

Presidential Election 2004

:

8/4/2003 2:41 AM

Presidential Election 2004

I know politics is one of the "hot-button" issues around here. I also know a lot of you guys don't support the current administration's direction, here is a guy that might be worth a look.

http://www.kucinich.us/index.htm

If you're going to vote for President in 2004, please do me a favor and take 5 minutes to look over this website. Or, just look over the Ten Key Issues here.

http://kucinich.us/issues/issue_10key.htm

I volunteered to help his campaign and I think that a lot of you guys might be into what he has to say. Thanks for checking this out!

Brian

8/4/2003 1:59 PM

Kucinich Donor List "Like Hollywood Guest List."
Now that instilled confidence in me! Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon are my political heroes.

Whats needed is a resurgence of organized labor,
Yes! Unions are the answer to all of our nation's evils!

Universal Health Care with a Single Payer Plan
Yup, he's a socialist, comrade.

Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K through College ... and in particular : Education must emphasize creative and critical thinking, not just test-taking.
Bwahahahah! [cough]

Overall, he seems like a nice, left-wing, bed-wetting liberal. What is so different from this guy that we won't see from Hillary? This is really where you want our country to go? No-worry health care and more unions? Do you know how bad (not to mention expen$ive) these two options are? Any clue at all? I bet in your dimly-lit world you imagine a bunch of 'rich' people paying for this stuff for you, so you can kick back at home, make your $16,000/yr, smoke all of the dope you can, and play PS2 games until you pass out.

Flashwater

8/4/2003 5:22 PM

I was hoping to get at least one intelligent comment before the flame war erupted. Oh well, let me skip the bits you chose to single out and attack. I would assume that any competent adult would take a few moments to evaluate say, Kucinich's 10 key issues in their entirety instead of taking a few minor ones out of context and attacking them.

As for your personal insults, I will respond with some personal information. I am an engineering student. Right now I'm taking Differential Equations and I'm carrying a 100 average through 3/5 of the class. I also just barely passed Engineering Statics this summer with an average of 98%. In case you haven't had any math lately, that's an A+. I made the Dean's List last semester with a GPA of 3.8 including an A+ in calculus-based Physics 2 and an A in Calculus 3. You said,

"I bet in your dimly-lit world you imagine a bunch of 'rich' people paying for this stuff for you, so you can kick back at home, make your $16,000/yr, smoke all of the dope you can, and play PS2 games until you pass out."

My response is that the illumination in my world is just fine, thank you. It wouldn't be a stretch to imagine that my world is in fact better lit than yours. Furthermore, do a little research and let me know what professional engineers are making in your neck of the woods. Don't bother telling me, I already know. For anyone else who is interested, rest assured that engineers make quite a lot more than $16,000/yr. Oh, and I don't own a PS2, I spend my free time studying advanced math, physics, and engineering. Although sometimes I do play guitar.

You are a coward. A fact which is reinforced by the lack of your real name and an email address. Furthermore, your methods of constructing an arguement against Mr. Kucinich are flawed. i.e. Remove bits from their context and then attack them. Then of course, you use the elegant tactic of name-calling to further support yourself. Your methods tell me that you have no capacity for rational or analytical thinking. In simple words that you can understand, you are an idiot. I'm sure you reply seems clever and well written to you, but it is really just a collection of bullshit that reflects poorly on your own mental abilities. Perhaps if you had any creative or critical thinking skills, you would see your "response" for the horseshit that it is. Don't bother responding with something like "it was only a joke, dude" either. Until you can make reasonable arguments and discuss things intelligently, you will have to sit at the card table with the rest of the kiddies and leave the political discussions to the adults.

Brian

8/4/2003 7:44 PM

I appreciate your advanced understanding of differential equations. You have proved to all of us that you are indeed very smart. I have never, and will never, understood any advanced mathematics, so kudos to you.
I expect you could start out in the $35K range yearly when you get out of school. I hope your candidate gets elected, and you can watch your take-home dwindle to almost $16K with all of the social programs he espouses. Maybe then you'll get your playstation and your bag 'o weed.

BTW - did one of your instructors at school turn you on to this guy? just curious.

Kucinich Donor List "Like Hollywood Guest List."
Now that instilled confidence in me! Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon are my political heroes.
I'm not sure how out of context this one was. Hollywood is a breeding ground for extreme liberalism. Preached to the American public by folks who just don't understand what paycheck-to-paycheck means. A sorry rallying point for a presidential candidate if you ask me. But I guess that appeals to the "Extra" hollywood news show mentality.

Whats needed is a resurgence of organized labor
Yes! Unions are the answer to all of our nation's evils!
OK, I left out part :What?s needed is a resurgence of organized labor, and a Kucinich administration will tenaciously defend the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively.
Again, how are unions the answer? Well, as I see it, unions mostly vote democratic. It's a slam-dunk political tactic to ensure future constituents for a left-wing administration.
Also part of the pro-union paragraph was the old liberal saw of "And it?s time to reverse tax cuts that benefit the already well-to-do, and retain an estate tax". And he went on to say that by taking money away from those who create jobs in this country, we could spend this half trillion dollars on more social programs (bridges, schools, environmental programs, ports, etc).

Universal Health Care with a Single Payer Plan
Yup, he's a socialist, comrade.
That single payer would be everyone in America. Since when is it my responsibility to pay for your AADD medication? And Governmental regulation of health care : We think prices are high now? let the gov't run healthcare for a decade.

Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K through College ... and in particular : Education must emphasize creative and critical thinking, not just test-taking.
Bwahahahah! [cough]
I was laughing at the line about critical thinking - that's another way of saying "Tests just show how bad of a job we are doing at teaching our children rudimentary skills, like reading and writing"
This paragraph talks about spending more money on public schools. Well, more money does not equal more education.
http://www.lpgeorgia.com/pr072401.html

The city of Atlanta public schools spend more per child than most other large cities, yet rank nearly dead last.
Education reform needs to come from parents, and parents who view school as free daycare are not going to have kids that do well. But that's my uneducated take.

Brian, please convince me that I am wrong. Notice I have not called you any names or insulted your intelligence. Take a minute to explain to a simpleton like me how backwards I am, and how my politcal views are way off.

8/4/2003 8:39 PM

Ah, now we are getting somewhere. Initially, no, I haven't spoken to any of my professors about political candidates. I was first made aware of Mr. Kucinich when he came out against the Bush Administration's war fever following 9-11. I saw Mr. Kucinich on C-SPAN last night and made my way to his website. Although I have visited his Congressional website, so I had a little bit of an idea about what kind of guy he is.

Hollywood celebrities. I agree with you that political endorsements from Hollywood are bullshit. I don't care what actors have to say about anything. Frankly, if they were intelligent people we would have decent movies to go see for $9 a pop. What I fail to understand is how does an endorsement from Hollywood make Mr. Kucinich a poor candidate? Should he have refused to accept their money and the free publicity that comes along with it? While I'm with you and could give a hoot about celebrity endorsements, I just don't see how it makes him less qualified to run for President.

What you left out of the organised labor I feel is important to a full explanation.

"American workers are working longer and harder for less pay than 20 years ago. What’s needed is a resurgence of organized labor, and a Kucinich administration will tenaciously defend the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively. Since the purchasing power of the minimum wage has dropped 21% in two decades, it’s time for living wages, not minimum wages. And it’s time to reverse tax cuts that benefit the already well-to-do, and retain an estate tax. Investing $500 billion to rebuild schools, roads, bridges, ports, and sewage, water and environmental systems will do more to stimulate our economy than tax breaks for the wealthy."

I think it reads quite a bit differently in context, don't you? The important part in my mind is that someone is willing to back the workers of America instead of the CEO's and corporations of America. I would have to agree with what he claims about putting money into the public and public works stimulating the economy better than giving rich people tax cuts. Rich people tend to hold onto their money and they sure as hell don't want to spend it on anything that would benefit the general public.

Healthcare. Look at the 10 Key Issues page.
It says;

"It would be publicly-financed health care, privately delivered. It would provide affordable prescription drugs, thanks to bulk purchasing. The General Accounting Office of Congress has concluded:

'If the U.S. were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs would be more than enough to offset the cost.'"

Maybe some of the Canadian AMPAGERS could comment on their satisfaction or lack of such with their health care system.

I agree with you that more money does not equal more education either. However,

"The federal government spends only 2.9% of its budget on education. "

How much did we spend on the military last year? What do you think pays higher dividends to society in general, lots of military hardware or more schools? Furthermore,

"Education must emphasize creative and critical thinking, not just test-taking. Schools need money to decrease class size, increase teachers’ salaries, renovate decaying facilities, and include hands-on job training for those not going to college. Pre-K and after-school programs will get increased funding, and the soaring costs of college will be reversed."

Throwing money at the problem doesn't guarantee a solution, but decreasing class sizes, rennovating schools and increasing teacher's salaries might be a step in the right direction, don't you think? My university is going through some pretty rough budget cuts as it is, my student bills keep going up though. Funny, I don't hear about the administrators taking any paycuts to help out. Also, do you think our current President would have been interested in the job if it only paid what a teacher makes? For that matter, do you think any of our high level Gov. officials would be doing their jobs for what teachers make?

Now, you did insult me and my intelligence when you assumed that I was some sort of minimum-wage making, pot-smoking, PS2-playing, "bed-wetting" liberal. Well, you didn't call me a "bed-wetting liberal" that's what you called Dennis Kucinich. I'll refer you to your first post to confirm the rest of it, though. Naturally, I have a lot of pride in my academic record, so I wanted to defend myself however I don't feel that book-smarts necessarily equate to real-world smarts either. There are plenty of people much smarter than me whose political opinions I avoid. I agree with a lot of what you have brought up. Maybe not totally, but I've tried to make it clear which parts I agree with and which parts I don't. My biggest beef with your response was that "Bwahahahah!" does not constitute proof of falsehood. Inferring that the supporters of Mr. Kucinich are low-wage workers who smoke pot and play video games while expecting the "rich" of this nation to care for them was dishonest. Also, you failed to bring up a few other key points:
1)Kucinich advocates re-structuring taxes and Social Security so that American workers can retire at age 65.
2)He advocates withdrawing from NAFTA and the WTO. This makes sense to me. Keep jobs in the states and keep Americans working. I'm all for that.
3) Repeal the Patriot Act. You mentioned that you don't want Gov. running Healthcare. Do you want them watching what you read, watch on TV, monitor your banking transactions? Gee, I'm not too excited about that kind of stuff.
4)Kucinich also wants to commit to higher environmental standards and renewable energy resources. Do you think our involvement in the Middle East would affected if we didn't depend on them so heavily for oil? Hell yes. Do you think Bush's motivation for ANY of his actions stem from ties to the oil industry? Hell yes. I think we would be smart to get away from Middle Eastern oil.

"It's time for America to resume its glorious journey. Time to reject shrinking jobs and wages, disappearing savings and rights. Time to reject the detour towards fear and greed. Time to look out upon the world for friends, not enemies. Time to counter the control of corporations over our politics, our economy, our resources, and mass media. Time for those who have much to help those who have little by maintaining a progressive tax structure. Time to tell the world that we wish to be their partner in peace, not their leader in war. Most of all, it is time for America to again be the land where dreams come true because the government is on the side of its people.

Unfortunately, America now leads the world in categories we should not be proud of. America is now the world’s leading jailer with an incarceration rate higher than China. We lead the industrialized world in poverty and in the growing gap between rich and poor. And we are the only industrial nation not to provide national health care."

I don't back all of his policies 100%, but I do like most of them. How do you feel about the ones I've brought up? Would you rather Bush and Co. keep on trucking down the road we're on? I think we're headed in the wrong direction and while Mr. Kucinich may not be the complete answer, I think his ideas are steps in the right direction.

Looking forward to your response,
Brian

8/4/2003 10:40 PM

good replies, Brian.

I still don't feel that the entire paragraph on "American Workers" changes the context any. I still think Kunich is pandering to unions for thier vote. IMHO, the time of unions was 60 years ago, when 12 yr olds worked for pennies a day in squalid conditions. Witness the airline industry for an example of why unions are bad. Also, the tax cuts we currently have do no go far enough. (understand, by tax cuts, I mean a rebate of taxes you actually paid. If you got more money back than you paid in it is a 'rebate', and accounts for nothing more than income redistribution -bad,bad,bad) I feel that payroll withholding should be repealed, and the American people should have to write a check every year for all of the actual taxes owed. Check out : http://www.cato.org/dailys/4-13-98.html for a simple explanation of hidden taxes. As far as your point about public works projects vs. Rich folk's tax cuts, I disagree. These 'evil rich' are the very same people who drive this economy. These are the people who invest the money that creates jobs. They start companies, buy goods, pay an ass load of taxes. The 'rich' (those who make $128K/yr or more - i.e. top 5%) pay around 56.5% of all taxes, yet only earn 35.3% of the income. Now, as an engineering student, if you have any skills and ambition when you leave college, you could easilly be in that bracket in 10 years. Would you like an even higher burden? ( data : http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincometable.html)

Your argument of 'How much did we spend on the military last year?' has nothing to do with education. I bet we spent bucketloads of money on the military last year, just as we have done for the last 50. Why does education suck so bad compared to even 20 or 30 years ago? I don't see a correlation between high military spending and poor education results. My point on education is that money is not going to fix it. Our education trouble in this country is a result of a major cultural shift. We have moved away from a time when moms stayed home with the kids all week, when parents stayed together and played an active part in thier kid's development. Not to be a sentimental bonehead, but I firmly believe that this is the core issue of education erosion. Changing class sizes, paying teachers more, ethernet in every class - all of these are blind stabs at fixing a problem that has fundamental roots. School is becoming more and more a government-run daycare camp.

Your bullet points:
1)I don't think it's my responsibility to plan for your grandpa's future. I'm sure your grandpa is a great guy, but it's not my fault if he did'nt save enough money to pay for his retirement. As far as SS privatization : I don't have the stats in front of me, but the stock market has outperformed the growth rate of the money in SS. why not privatize it?
This point is provided my Dennis merely to scare old folks into voting. Anyone remember Robot Insurance?
( http://www.robotcombat.com/video_oldglory_hi.html )

2)I have no opinion on NAFTA or WTO. I have not read enough about either to make any.
3)Patriot act. I dunno, the US government has had most of these abilities for decades with the war on drugs. How is this different?
4) I don't buy the whole " GWB is from Texas, and we all know that Texas is big oil; so he invaded Iraq for the oil " argument. If we wanted to invade a country for oil, why not Canada? http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/petroleum_supply_monthly/current/pdf/stable3.pdf looks like we import at least 3 times the crude from our Northern friends as we do Iraq.

Would you rather Bush and Co. keep on trucking down the road we're on?
No
I think we're headed in the wrong direction and while Mr. Kucinich may not be the complete answer, I think his ideas are steps in the right direction.
Also No.

Niether republican nor democrat is the answer to our country's problems. To me, they are two shades of the same color. Thier policies or politics don't really differ much, except on the finer points - which really don't add up to much.

Do yourself a favor, try this :
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html

8/5/2003 12:38 AM

Flash,
If that's your REAL name!

Ha Ha (couldn't resist) You make some good points. While I don't necessarily agree with you, I can respect your opinions. These are pretty complex issues we're talking about and it's difficult to say what course of action, if any, can provide a solution. I'm behind your ideas 100% about educational problems as well. I was in the Dean's office a few weeks ago talking about a few things and he mentioned people becoming mature enough to realize that their life is their responsibility. Sadly, a lot of people don't ever take that responsibility seriously. I agree that throwing money at that problem won't help, but the point I was trying to make was that maybe spending a little less on aircraft carriers and ICBM's and a little more on school programs would be a good thing for us. I think there are people who just need an opportunity to succeed but never get one. I've seen the self-gov quiz and to be honest, I support the Libertarian Party more than Democrats and definitely more than the Republicans. However, I voted Green in the last election and got jammed with W. The downside of our system is that 3rd parties are almost excluded from major elections on a monetary basis. However, the Dems took notice when they lost the last election and I think Kucinich has incorporated a lot more progressive ideas into his platform to try and win that 3rd party vote. So, like I said, while I don't support all of his stances, he looks a lot better to me than Bush. Also, I know people equate Dems with higher taxes for their social programs and on and on, but didn't this country experience the highest rate of economic growth in it's history under a Democratic President? Maybe the two are unrelated, but it's still a fact. I appreciate you opening up and expressing your opinions. I'd be interested to know who you favor in the upcoming election. You could email me if you'd rather not say here.
Good luck,
Brian
ps-I can't resist a parting shot on the Bush-oil connection. He's a former oil-man, Cheney is a former oil-man, Condoleeza Rice is a former oil company executive. There have been numerous reports of deals in Afghanistan. But even if none of the overseas stuff is true, there have been some ugly rumors at home relating to Enron and closed door meetings on Federal Energy Policy. I think the reason Bush went to Iraq was to eliminate Hussein, but as for some of his other policies I think maybe the interests of the oil and energy corporations were "greasing the wheels" if I may.

Also, there are more issues outlined here:
http://www.kucinich.us/issues.htm
Progressive ideas on the drug war, and the fact that Kucinich claims he doesn't take money from PAC's are two more reasons I like him. Check out some of these if you have a moment.
pps-If you're in Atlanta please go to Fat Matt's Rib Shack (1811 Piedmont Ave NE) for me and have some real BBQ!

Page 1 of 7