President Bush Strikes Out At Steroids

[sana]

Re: Special Interest

Originally posted by springman1
Your right Hollywood--it is his job to discuss all issues in this country. Lets see he missed cigaretts, alcohol, unprotected sex, crack and cocain addiction, and corporate embezzelment. I voted for both Jr. and Sr. and still think he is our best option right now but why roids with so many of our family and friends die daily from tobacco, and drug abuse. I know few people who die from gear intake or the use of ephedra. I just know the government has no problem with items that kill people as long as special interest groups are involved. I will get off my political soap box now, just tired of them interfering in our personal lives. Preacher:angel:

if you listened carefully enough to the speech, you'll see that he addresses drugs before steroids, and abstinence to avoid STD's after. go to CSPAN and read the text of the speech, it's much more balanced than you're making it out to be.

also, if you read the text, you'll see that he's basically saying that the use of steroids in sports is cheating - b/c it is against the rules currently set - and that anyone who uses it in sports to advance is getting an unfair advantage and cheating. which - i agree with. it's more about encouraging fair play than anything else.

[Cory]

Re: Re: Special Interest

Originally posted by sana
if you listened carefully enough to the speech, you'll see that he addresses drugs before steroids, and abstinence to avoid STD's after. go to CSPAN and read the text of the speech, it's much more balanced than you're making it out to be.

also, if you read the text, you'll see that he's basically saying that the use of steroids in sports is cheating - b/c it is against the rules currently set - and that anyone who uses it in sports to advance is getting an unfair advantage and cheating. which - i agree with. it's more about encouraging fair play than anything else.

Yes, but do you actually think he gives a shit....he just has to say these things because he is in that position....he's just a babbling face...a puppet if you will. And to think, people actually buy into this crap. :rolleyes: I don't waste my time watching those silly speeches. They are nothing but social events for everyone to have something to talk about. Nothing actually changes as a result of them.

[sana]

Re: Re: Re: Special Interest

Originally posted by Cory
Yes, but do you actually think he gives a shit....he just has to say these things because he is in that position....he's just a babbling face...a puppet if you will. And to think, people actually buy into this crap. :rolleyes: I don't waste my time watching those silly speeches. They are nothing but social events for everyone to have something to talk about. Nothing actually changes as a result of them.

it's not for me to think whether he gives a shit. all i can see is whether he or his administration is putting into action the things they talk about.

the clintons talked about healthcare for 8 years, and nothing happened. bush talked about healthcare and enacted a medicare bill - though it falls short on many fronts, it's still happened. it's about taking steps towards a goal, i see that he has succeeded in doing what he set out to do. whether or not you agree with his policies, i'd rather see a president doing something than someone who just talks.

and to call the state of the union address a social event is (IMHO) the type of political inaction which lead us to the last election fiasco - the country is so split b/c no one really cares anymore.

that's why dean seems so refreshing - he's trying to energize the voting public. his rhetoric may be strong and too liberal sometimes, but he's trying to create and instill energy into the process.

[Hollywood]

Well said Sana:)

[redsquirrel]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Special Interest

Originally posted by sana
it's not for me to think whether he gives a shit. all i can see is whether he or his administration is putting into action the things they talk about.

the clintons talked about healthcare for 8 years, and nothing happened. bush talked about healthcare and enacted a medicare bill - though it falls short on many fronts, it's still happened. it's about taking steps towards a goal, i see that he has succeeded in doing what he set out to do. whether or not you agree with his policies, i'd rather see a president doing something than someone who just talks.

and to call the state of the union address a social event is (IMHO) the type of political inaction which lead us to the last election fiasco - the country is so split b/c no one really cares anymore.

that's why dean seems so refreshing - he's trying to energize the voting public. his rhetoric may be strong and too liberal sometimes, but he's trying to create and instill energy into the process.

I'm sorry....I think you may be at the wrong board. You are too articulate and edu-ma-cated for us. Please leave and go to:

www.harvardMBA.com....HA HA HAAHA:rofl:

I don't agree with his policy on same sex marriages. On that issue, why bother? Sure, let's uphold the sanctity of marriage. Living in sin is so much better. Gays and lesbians are trying to show their relationships are legitimate and true. Homosexuals are becoming more and more prevalent each day because they feel a tiny bit comfortable that they won't be ridiculed or terrorized. With unaccepting comments like that, what reason would they have not to still live in fear?

What's interesting to me about Reagan, Bush 1 & 2 is there always seems to be a recession,or some sort of economic downfall. I do believe Clinton helped the economy tremendously while in office. Unemployment was at it's lowest ever, which in turn makes low inflation. Bush bumped himself by talking about tax cuts. Well, the tax refunds some of us may have recieved due to that action we WILL HAVE TO PAY TAXES ON!!! It's a vicious cycle.

I do not trust Bush for the reasons he told the American people as to why we were invading Iraq. There has been no evidence of WMD. Even Colin Powell was apprehensive before invasion because there was no concrete evidence. When his former treasurer says Bush was planning this long before 9/11 ever happened, (I'm sure partly because Hussein had a hit out on Bush1) I am filled with disgust. After umpteen years of genocide against his own people, it's only the hit on his father that sparked the "invasion" per se. Don't get me wrong- I'm elated he is finally captured and that he has been removed from power.
All I'm saying is that I don't like being told one thing and the opposite is done.

Dean is very refreshing. His energy and passion for politics in second to none. Unfortunately, I don't think any of them would serve our country well....or have enough charisma to sway voters away from Bush. What could be even more of a landslide for Bush would be if he chooses Condoleeza Rice as his VP (It's possible due to Cheney's health). It is truly disheartening to see such a majority of Republicans in the Senate and Congress because many Americans don't believe their wants and needs are being fought for. Which can only lead to less and less of voter turnout. I believe this country's foundation is best served with somewhat equal views and political backgrounds.

On that note...I NEED A DRINK!! LOL:rofl:

[sana]

i'm not going to defend bush nor dean as i support neither. i'm decidedly economically conservative and socially liberal. there's really no candidate in any part who i can truly say i agree with.

the only comment i do have is that i feel as if the bush administration got sacked with a back economy from clinton. the recession started in '99 when he was still in office. the artifically inflated employment figures were a sign of the bubble which burst. the corporate misdeeds were all done while the clintons were in office. so IMHO, though there was a time of great "wealth" experienced by this country, it was not necessairly sound. the recovery may be slow and nothing similar to what the boom of the go-go 90's but i'd rather see a slow recovery based on real world economics then the speculative wealth from the 90's.

[redsquirrel]

I am in agreeance on the Dean, Bush, and Clinton issues. As well as the economic and social standpoints.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is how issues are amicably and respectfully argued...Even on something as heated as politcs.

Sana, again, you articulate your points extremely well, and it was a pleasure debating this issue.

[sana]

thank you, now it's time for me to go back to eating raisinettes :staypuff: