No More Pres. Bush: 2004 Election & His Tax Cut

  • News
  • Thread starter Turtle
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the upcoming 2004 election and the hope that President Bush does not win. His tax cuts are seen as only benefiting the wealthy and there are concerns about his support of Senator Santorium and his use of 9/11 for his campaign. There is also discussion about the current state of the Democratic Party and the potential for a shift in the defining issues of the two major parties. Some suggest a need for a change in the two-party system, but others believe it is unlikely to happen. Overall, there is uncertainty about the future of the parties and the outcome of the election.
  • #36
The race thing is off-topic...(but, if people keep telling you that you might be racist...try to err on the side of caution next time, ok? If you have anything else to say on this, start a different thread, or catch me in a PM, ok?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
lol funny censor... i wonder what i would say for **** , **** , or bastard hehehe
 
  • #38
The implication that pure racism is purposeless would probably be correct. However actualistic racism is a very positive outlook. It serves purpose on many levels, and is a very succesfull way of viewing a population from the terms of safety issues, which is important in regards to the illegal immigrant problem.
 
  • #39
Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
The implication that pure racism is purposeless would probably be correct. However actualistic racism is a very positive outlook. It serves purpose on many levels, and is a very succesfull way of viewing a population from the terms of safety issues, which is important in regards to the illegal immigrant problem.

Off-topic, bud...
 
  • #40
Mattius, I like your style of analysis. You're right, it is capitalism, folks. States are already raising fees and levying taxes, while laying people off. It's what- a service economy? Here's what will happen a-la Mattius's progression:

1) rich and not-rich (defined as <3E5$)invest in big movers like Worldcom and Bechtel. Investment income soars.
2) burden for infrastructure maintenance (teachers, all govt employees&contracts) shifted to state level, paid for by such fees as vehicle registration and minimum wage overtime. Government cuts funds to "non-essential" components s/a EPA, and internal security.
3) Government debt soars! Interest on debt wipes out national wealth.
4) Stock market plundered by Worldcom and Bechtel. Joke on Saturday night Live is not funny.
5) World Bank fails! Distribution centers in 3rd world countries controlled by al-Qaeda.

Muhallo
 
  • #41
Originally posted by Turtle
In the 2004 election I hope Pres.Bush does not win. His tax-cut would only benefit the weathly. He is not for all americans ie. his support of senator santorium. When it comes to his campaign Bush will use the murder of people on 9-11 for his own good.


Bushes tax cut will benefit the wealthy more, and the democrats will benefit the poor.

I am in the "wealthy" category. You must be in the poor, or average. You won't ever get a democratic president in those two parties. Look for a runner who wants a flat tax % for all. Obviously, it's the only way to be "fair" as they say.

Also, I don't think that Bush will be able to use the war in Iraq in his favor too much, as he did not kill Saddam Hussein, so current news says anyways.

It all depends on who he runs against. Believe me, both major opponents will be as nasty, ruthless, powerhungry, egomaniacal, and anti-humanitarian as ever...
 
  • #42
It's the nature of power, that one would seek to obtain power only to empower oneself.

It doesn't make sense that one could have such a drive to obtain power only to use it for others.
 
  • #43
Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
It's the nature of power, that one would seek to obtain power only to empower oneself.

It doesn't make sense that one could have such a drive to obtain power only to use it for others.

I agree that it's the general nature of humanity to gain power for one's own sake, but I disagree with you when you say that it doesn't make sense to have asuch a drive to obtain power only to use it for others. There is a thing called conscience.
 
  • #44
Double 'D',
I took it to mean there's no such thing as altruism. In that context even the 'conscience' you spoke of shows that taking power is done with an inward focus.
 
  • #45
Originally posted by BoulderHead
Double 'D',
I took it to mean there's no such thing as altruism. In that context even the 'conscience' you spoke of shows that taking power is done with an inward focus.
Hmm... But I think there is a difference between power to beget power, and power to eventually benefit the self. I think that power alone without the application of power is useless. In fact, it does not make sense to gain power only to continue the road for more power, if at one point you do not gain some benefit, even indirectly, from it. Not everyone wants to be powerful...
 
  • #46
You guys are going pretty far afield on this...
 
  • #47
I've got something - if you want to see some real cracks at the whole administration, type "wayne madsen" into google. Hey, I'll do it for you:
wayne madsen
 
  • #48
Okay, for those of you who wish to discuss racism, discuss it here:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2562

This is to avoid getting off topic in this thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #49
What an idiotic statement.

I think the democratats,if they win,will assuredly spark WWIII. We will all be little fried Americans, radiating enough energy to light up LA.

The democrats want to tax the living sh*t out of all of us. They only give lip service to the poor. Their real aim is to subjugate us all with oppression, to tax us so hard we become subsistant upon the government, unable to live w/o the handouts of OUR OWN MONEY that it agrees to give. The democratic party seeks to enslave us as assuredly they enslaved the Africans of the last century - yes, the dixiecrats are the progenitors of the modern democratic party!
 
  • #50
Originally posted by Ganshauk
What an idiotic statement.

I think the democratats,if they win,will assuredly spark WWIII. We will all be little fried Americans, radiating enough energy to light up LA.

The democrats want to tax the living sh*t out of all of us. They only give lip service to the poor. Their real aim is to subjugate us all with oppression, to tax us so hard we become subsistant upon the government, unable to live w/o the handouts of OUR OWN MONEY that it agrees to give. The democratic party seeks to enslave us as assuredly they enslaved the Africans of the last century - yes, the dixiecrats are the progenitors of the modern democratic party!
OK, now pull the other one.
 
  • #51
The democrats want to tax the living sh*t out of all of us. They only give lip service to the poor. Their real aim is to subjugate us all with oppression, to tax us so hard we become subsistant upon the government, unable to live w/o the handouts of OUR OWN MONEY
NO! The military contractors will be mooching off of OUR tax money with no limit. YOU think this is about democrats vs. republicans but it is not. It's just about naked exploitation and lies to cover theft. If you're making up to 13 bucks an hour, you don't get no $1000/child credit so vaunted by our glorious leader.
You must know that Republicans are more notorious for raising taxes than any other group except communists.
 
  • #52
It seems interesting that the only defence we have for the president is irrational fear as to what the democrats would do. Speaks a lot about the two party system...
 
  • #53
Two WHAT system?
 
  • #54
You know what two parties!

The radical fundamentalist Christian Republicans, and the centrist republicans who we currently call 'democrats'.
 
Back
Top