I don't understand you Americans anymore

[Ruderico]

I'm sorry I have to start politics on a BE board, but I just can keep my disappointment in front of me anymore...!
I always thought Americans were an enlightened people, peace-loving, friendly and full of respect toward other peoples, placing themselves as an example for the world. I still remember looking at the tv when president Clinton made Rabin and Arafat shake hands and sign a peace treaty, or at least a plan for making peace. I was full of admiration towards the American people, believing the world could change in a positive way and that the US would lead us there.

Nowadays I really have to tell myself not all Americans are the same and I have to try not to be resentful towards the Americans that are responsible for the re-election of Bush - in my eyes and in the eyes of most Europeans - the world's most dangerous moron.

Now I understand that the US is a democracy and that Americans have the right to choose whoever they want to be the president, but I just don't understand why you did it... You want World War III ??!!

I really don't understand why you find it more important that a president is talking about God all the time while he is recklessly throwing bombs and insulting allies, than that the president has clear intellectual capacities (of which the leader of the most powerful country of the world should possess these times in my opinion)

Just please tell me why you re-elected Bush, because I really want to understand this, maybe then I won't be so angry with American Bush-voters anymore.

[Wenonae]

Most of the pro-Bush voters I've spoken to or heard of being spoken to thought that there was a real problem with terrorism, so they wanted someone in office who would 'fight'.

Most pro-Bush voters are also in Southern states and 'non-educated' parts of US. The rest support tax breaks for the wealthy.

So it's mostly ignorance that has that 'loser' back in again...MOST unfortunate! At least, that's my opinion and observation.

[Glasskulan]

Hi Ruderico!

I'm not American either, I'm a swede (hopefully with a capital s...) ;D, a Swedish lady that is. I have had somewhat the same thoughts about the american elections. Perhaps people want to prove to the outside world that they're not scared, perhaps Bush has become a charismatic personality lately... (could be dangerous if that's the case...) and really learnt how to play on peoples feelings.

Who knows. I don't think that we will get the answer on this board though (about 550 members, not all Americans, not all voting for Bush?). Let's just hope that the president of the US won't lead us to a world war III! I really don't think he would, considering the possible consequences (unless he want's to destroy the whole world, including the US) although he doesn't seam to be very good at handling terrorism. Maybe it's not that easy though

I have to admit that I'm glad that I live in Sweden though... Don't be too mad at the Americans. For one thing they don't have as many options, as for example Swedes, when it comes to choosing political leaders, and they have had a rough time lately, don't you think? I'm talking about ordinary people. I will never forget when a member of one of the university courses I took, said, or almost screamed: "I hate Americans"! Very dangerous thoughts I think. She had never met an American person...

[fawnmarie]

Yeah, just remember, about half of us DIDN'T vote for Bush.

I'll tell you what, this is the first time I've voted since 1988 - and I put aside my distaste for politics for the singular purpose of voting against Bush this year.

One young man from our state of Georgia was so distraught, he drove to New York, climbed the fences and blew his brains out at ground zero.

I've heard people say they were ashamed to be Americans, now.

Some of us are very scared and depressed and can't figure out how he possibly won this election or what the future can possibly hold now that he's been re-elected.

The Canadian immigration website received about 115,000 hits the day after the election (they normally receive only 20,000 per week).

I understand your anger. If I weren't so d**ned depressed about it, I would talk about it more.

Fawn

[Ruderico]

To hear you say that makes me feel a lot better!
'Cause I could simply not understand how the people I see on my tv everyday (we see you Americans in soaps, talk shows, sex in the city etc. all day long!!) could be so different than us, people of across the ocean. On tv these modern people seem so much like us.

But then all the sudden I see a really different side of America on the news, ignorant and scarying over-religious people (at least, the way they talked about religion was giving me the creeps), who don't want to think about what kind of consequences re-electing Bush has for the world (and themselves, because even more tax-cuts mean even worse health care and they are the ones who will get into trouble, not mr. wealthy brat Bush), and then my biggest nightmare comes true:

Bush remains in the White House and many people on my tv are laughing and partying.

I was devastated. And very disappointed in the American people, although I knew a lot of Democrats did everything they could to stop this fool from re-entering a House that is way to honarable for him. And I knew a lot of them were just as angry as I was...but I just kept wondering why were there so many "normal" (= well-educated) people that made this re-election possible.
Plus, all my ideals and hopes were crushed. I really believed that if Kerry won, he could bring Europe and America back together again, and restart the peace negotiations between Palestinians and Israeli, which is a key factor in the stabilisation process of the Middle East. I stayed up all night ('till 9 am, when I had to go to college) and when I heard in the afternoon that Kerry had conceded, all my hopes went up in thin air.

But to hear that there are a lot of Americans who are not that different from us, really does give me some hope for the future!!



BTW: If religion is so important, then why do people find Bush a "better" christian than Kerry? I always learned (I'm Dutch and a modern protestant) that you need to watch out when you speak of God (especially when it comes to war and justification of any policy), because you must never use God's name idly and because you must always be prudent to to claim that God is on your side, whatever you do or say.
So I was told to be humble when it comes to religion. Accually, in Holland it is an accepted view that religion is something that would best be kept as a private matter. Does everyone in America speak so freely about their religion?

[Wenonae]

Bush's relgious proclamations are statements in hypocrciy.

*********BREAKING NEWS******

The exit polls in Ohio (an important swing state) were verified to be 70%, 30% Kerry, Bush vs. what was publicized (actually, the opposite). Apparently, tho' the poll software can not be hacked, it is inputed from a simple txt (or something) file, which can be. When it was tabulated which policies people voted for, it was more than obvious the ones for Kerry which were supported

Similar things were done in many counties of Florida.

This will not be pushed or publicized as the ones with the $ are pulling all sorts of strings to have made this happen AND because Senator Kerry has already conceded. UGH!

Well, feeling better and better..was thinking more than half of us were NUTS!! Now, it's more like 1/3..which I can better swallow.

[fawnmarie]

No, actually they don't. It's just the "Born Again Christians" that are like this, that think they can shove their religion in our faces all day. They think "Jesus" trumps anything and everything, and if THEY think Jesus wants it, it must be done. Whether it is to remove our rights to our own bodies to use birth control, whether or not it is to NOT pray if we don't want to, or whether or not it is to spend our money blowing up other countries.

I'm not sure what the deal is, but there is this strange cult of "Born Again Christians" that are just as bad as any other fanatics out there. They are the kind that blow up abortion clinics. Bush seems to be one of them.

I'm not talking about all Christians, or even all "Born Again Christians". But there are religious fanatics of all flavors out there, and the Christian flavor is just as scary as the Muslim flavor, if you ask me. They seem not to be able to view anything outside of the realm of what their intepretation of what they think Jesus would want.

I dunno, I'm a Buddhist.

I do remember reading that Jesus advised to turn the other cheek, though.

Like I said in the "off-topic" forum - Another four years of one type of religious fanatic fighting another type of religious fanatic, and we (the US) get to pay for it.

criminey!

Fawn

[artemis]

ruderico, moral superiority is not really a recent invention.

I had a conversation with someone who voted for Bush, and I couldn't believe she was saying all that stuff:
- 'the country has drifted from right/wrong traditional values,' (i.e. gay marraiges, abortion)
- and the US will do what's right - i suppose she and bush knows what that is - regardless of other nations, dropping a line about how US represents a large part of the global economy.

religion has become a platform in America.

[pammy]

I'll have to admit that I could not understand my fellow Americans that did vote for Bush (I voted for Kerry). When I did ask those that voted for Bush there reasoning's scared me, I'll admit. Mind you, I live in the southern part of the US and work around a lot of people who either knows someone or who's spouse is in the military. And they voted for Bush! When they told me who they voted for I could not believe my ears, was truly speechless. I am right in the midst of them (I call them traitors) and I still cannot believe my ears. I'm right there with you.....

I'm sorry if I offended any Pro-Bushers out there.

[LittleMiss]

Maybe it's just ignorance or maybe issues such as Iraq seem a long way away and not relevant to citizens of the US.
I can only guess that Bushs' voters must be either uninformed, missinformed or have no good judgement.
I think people here in the UK feel particuarly embarrassed that Tony Blair held Bush's hand through everything that went on with the war. I feel more positive towards Blair then Bush, I think he's a decent guy that made some very bad decisions and took some bad advice.
I think Blair feels the turmoil and anger of the British public and hopefully past mistakes will not be repeated.....I wish I felt that Bush could learn from what he's done.....but I don't think he even understands what he has done.
Its a sad situation made even sadder by the the fact that the majority of the US don't know what is going in the rest of the world.
But I have faith, the truth will always prevail and in 4 years time maybe the US will have their first female president.

LM

[fawnmarie]

www.sorryeverybody.com

[Wahaika]

Amazing.

I'm a Bush supporter. I understand why all of you liberals are whining. Conservatives thought the world was going to end when Bill Klinton was elected.

Probably a lot of confusion starts with our joke of an education system (State issue, not Federal, BTW) where we don't even learn about our own country anymore.

Example: Is the United States a democracy or a republic? (hint, you have to read the Federalist Papers for the answer)
Answer: The United States is a Republic.

You would be AMAZED at how many Americans don't know that fact, or the difference between the two, inspite of reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in school every morning as children. "...and to the Republic for which it stands..."

How about "rights" and "freedom"? Are these two terms for the same thing? Nope. You would be amazed at how many people think that these are the same thing. This is basic stuff.

When it comes to politics, there are basically two schools of thought, Conservatism and Liberalism. The two rarely understand each other but it does explain the reactions I see in this discussion.

Another thing that I find among Canadians and Europeans [at work] and even a lot of Americans (in the context of U.S. citizens) is a lack of an understanding of the religous foundation of our country. If you think that all Bush supporters are a bunch of religous zealots, it is because you are getting your information from a biased source - a liberal media.

BTW, what did President Bush say that was so religous? I am really curious about this.

Wahaika
(Resident Contrarian)

[fawnmarie]

Well, there is ONE more school of thought - Libertarian.

The Libertarians believe that adult citizens should have the right to manage their personal affairs without the intervention by government, provided that those affairs do not harm or impinge on the rights of others. This includes the right to earn a living or starve, the right to own our own bodies and take those medicines we feel are suitable, and to love and be with whomever we wish, the right to protect what is ours, the right to our own belongings (including our own money), etc.

As a Libertarian, most elections for me have been a choice between Democrats telling me what I'm allowed to do with my money, and Republicans telling me what I am allowed to do with my body. I suppose as I get older, I value control over my own body over money. After all, I continue to earn a living, and paying a little extra to feed hungry children is not such a bad thing. I might not have full use of my body for that much longer, so my priorities have changed.

What I resent is having my money used to blow up people in countries in an unprovoked invasion. I don't mind it going to feed kids, build schools, get people off drugs, etc.

The "religious basis" of our country is that of FREEDOM of religion, and the freedom to worship God in our own way without prejudice or persecution. This does not allow for a state-mandated "religion". This does not mean that the constitution is changed to institute policy because of ONE religion's beliefs. The constitution was constructed to guarantee the freedoms and rights of the American people, NOT to take them away. Amending the constitution to limit the states' authority over the acceptance of "Gay Marriage" goes against everything this country was built around. It is not, in fact "Republican". Federalizing the authority over gay marriage is a move away from a "Republic" and takes away state rights.

It's also a religious mandate, which is unconstitutional. Some religions accept homosexuality and to ban gay marriage at the Federal Level would be akin to outlawing the eating of pork because the President is Muslim. This is a dangerous precedent to set. Just because you agree with his religious views, is no reason to accept his authority to change the law based on them. It's a dangerous precedent. If we allow the liberties and freedoms of those we disagree with to be stifled based on a difference of moral priorities, then we're opening the door, and we could be next.

I don't think all Bush supporters are religious zealots - I think BUSH is a religious zealot.

I understand and respect that he feels strongly and deeply about many things. I understand that he has a strong desire to act to right things he sees as "wrong". What worries me is that he is uninterested in the will of his people - only his OWN will. I respect his desire to "fix" things and I appreciate his willingness to do what he thinks is best. What bothers me about Bush is that he doesn't seem to think anything through FIRST. Like many altruists, he acts first and thinks later. He has poor judgment and no planning skills.

As for John Kerry - well, it seemed to me that he was interested in restoring America's economy and education and domestic problems. We cannot go out and call the world's leaders to task for not being better caretaker's of their constituents health and welfare, when we ourselves have rampant unemployment, families sleeping in the street, babies going without their shots, kids going hungry. It's hypocritical.

There are hundreds of old cliches' that apply...

Physician, heal thyself.
You can't love anybody if you don't love yourself first.
Charity begins at home.

Mr. Bush is in fact, not doing anything to preserve the rights and independence of the states. If anything, we've become even MORE centrist since he came into office, and he and his "crew" are ramping up the natural American paranoia as a way to manipulate and control us.

Don't get me wrong - I don't dislike Bush. I just think he's a lousy president who makes unwise and rash decisions. There are a couple of things I actually LIKE about Bush. I think that opening federal programs to faith-based charities is a GREAT idea. I think people who have a passion to serve should be supported and I would much rather see my charity money go to some kind-hearted church with happy and willing volunteers making meals for the poor, than have it handed over to some mind-numb, give-a-nuts government employee who doesn't really give a rat's ass about doing good in the world.

George just doesn't know when to take 10 and THINK!

[Wahaika]

Ah yes, Libertarian! Conservatives are very close to Libertarian.

I suspect the reason why Conservatives don't just leave the Republican Party and join the Libertarian Party is because of the danger of parties being too close together in philosophy. Neither one win elections as the Conservatives found out when Ross Perot split the Conservative vote with his Reform party, giving the world the most dysfunctional President in the history of the country, and as the Liberals found out when Ralph Nader split the Liberal vote with the Green Party.

I don't know what the official Libertarian philosophy is on issues like Abortion Rights and Gay Rights (which there are none), but if they are pro abortion and pro gay then I would say that they are off in "left" field. (a little humor there) Other than that, it's pretty close.

Here is a pretty good synopsis on the Libertarian Party by a college prep student.

www.course-notes.org/parties/libertarian.htm

Did you know that the Libertarians did not get any electoral votes this time? I'll bet it's not because they're not a popular party. But it could be because of an article that Dr. John Hospers, the first Libertarian Party candidate for president, urged Libertarians to vote for Bush. It's interesting.

www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41116

As for the war being unprovoked, it was extremely provoked. AL Qaeda flew two planes into the World Trade Center in New York and killed more people than died at Pearl Harbor. Saddam Hussein had ties to AL Qaeda and funded other terrorists. Take a good look at your boy. Would you blow him up for $25K? Saddam Hussein paid families for doing just that. There is a whole lot more to that discussion that probably ought to be in another thread but to say that attacking Iraq was unprovoked is a little off, I would say. Just my opinion.

As for the Gay marriage issue, government stuck their hands into marriage before thinking too hard about it back in the 1800's or so. Now marriage is in the tax code and in health issues, etc., ad infinitum.

The problem is that gays are using liberal activist judges to legislate from the bench. While I also oppose amending the Constitution to fix this, I also understand why the Constitution might have to be amended to counter the activist judges.

Article IV. Section 1 states: "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. " This is why someone can get married in one state and all other states have to recognize it. So, the Constitution being the "Supreme Law of the Land", an amendment would definitely lay the issue to rest. No judge could make the ultimate claim that anti gay marriage laws are unconstituitonal.

I think that after so many states passed gay marriage bans it might not be an issue, unless anal activist judges go against the will of the people by overturning state laws on the basis of ostensively being unconstitutional. If Congress enacts law, the judges could still claim that it is unconstitutional if they wanted to push it that far. IF THAT HAPPENS, then it opens the door for all kinds of problems.

Anyway, that's the logic behind amending the Constitution. I still don't think it should be amended, but I don't see any way around it. A firing squad is more effective and efficient if you ask me.

Wahaika

[fawnmarie]

Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I wouldn't say they are closer to "either" party. And they are extremely underfunded. I didn't vote the Libertarian ticket this year. Their official website is at www.lp.org

Sadam funded Palestians to blow up Israelis. Not Americans. I don't think that is considered "provoked" unless, of course, you are Israeli.

Well, how dull it would be if we were all alike.

Fawn