or Connect
Cycling Forums › Forums › Other Stuff › Your Bloody Soap Box › Evangelical Disconnect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Evangelical Disconnect - Page 26

post #376 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bro Deal
Hillary's team revealed it to torpedo him as a possible vice presidential candidate? Possible. I am not sure how probable Edwards was of being chosen as VP. He was not very effective as Kerry's choice. It might not make sense for the Clintons to damage him. Then again, the Clintons have always been extremely vindictive, and Bill is angry as hell that he has been tarred with the racist brush.

McCain has to be a little worried about this. He has a long history of cheating on his wives, right up to the present.
I sincerely do not get why we as a people think a politician's personal affairs are our business. I'm not married to the guy, so I couldn't care less whether he's cheating on his wife. As long as he's doing his damn job to the best of his abilities . . . that's all that matters to me. Whether or not Bill Clinton is getting hummers in the Oval Office has no bearing on my life, unless it interferes with his ability to do his job. Heck, if it cleared his mind so he could think more clearly regarding some big decision . . . have more Bill.

Instead, we made it a collosal affair so that the entire "scandal" SURELY weighed on his mind and interfered with his abilities to do the job we actually paid him to do.
post #377 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndbiker
I thought he was on a crusade because of oil now it's about religion? I do not remember the president ever saying one word against the religion of Islam only against those who use the religion as justification for blowing up buildings or other people.
It's about oil when it"s convenient, and religion when it's convenient.I never remember a government policy of the Bush adm based on religion.But then I never hang around coffee shops drinking latte and following the gospel of a frustrated university professor. *I am too busy enjoying the benefits of a capitolist society that America provides.
Benefits such as this lunch yesterday............
Texas............Black Angus............Brown eyed Latino women......... A guy just has to love this country.


* Of course, I occasionlly have to explain to my two 20 something daughters that restraint is called for when enjoying the capitolist system.
post #378 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by C'dale Girl
I sincerely do not get why we as a people think a politician's personal affairs are our business.....
Unwillingness to keep a contract says a lot about one's character.
post #379 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by garage sale GT
Unwillingness to keep a contract says a lot about one's character.
Then McCain's in trouble. How many affairs in wedlock has he had?
post #380 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
With due respect Lim and nothing personal intended... NNS was not saying that the US "saved civilisation" in my interpretation. She was paraphrasing your allegation and making a rebuttal explaining the rationale behind the viewpoints of the US people you were describing.

Also... I think her point was that the US generally cop flack and criticism for a lot of their foreign policy and actions on the world stage (some of that criticism being justified she admits)... but the appreciation for the good and help the US has provided is awfully quiet in comparison.

The Allied forces won WWII. But the American assistance, both in soldiers and military supplies, was a very important factor that arguably tipped the balance significantly. You obviously are fully aware that GB (and Ireland) were fighting to save their own countries from German Nazi rule. The German invasion threat to America's soil was practically and realistically nonexistent (despite Hitler declaring war on the US... which seems about as crazy as Japan bombing Pearl Harbor in hindsight). America was there in major part to help a friend IMO (world political ramifications of Nazi European dominance notwithstanding).

I am in agreement with you on most subjects that come up in this forum Lim. I think that US foreign policy can be arrogant... as well as the attitude of some of it's loudest citizens and political figures. But I think European arrogance that Europeans know more about world history than any other country's peoples is also prevalent... as well as the Eurocentric bias to "world" history that Europeans seem to have... as a generalisation. You make personal judgments about NNS' knowledge that betray a tendency to stereotype US people. I agree that the UK and France have had a long history of colonization and have learnt a lot about occupation of other countries. But a lot of Europe's current generation ride on the coattails of that history I feel, without having any direct experience themselves. From my experience living in the US... the country has some extremely diverse viewpoints from different people within it's citizenship.... and until you live here IMO... it is easy to generalize too much on a uniform US trait/viewpoint (which I was guilty of doing before I came here).

Also... it is fairly obvious that you generally dislike America and Americans from your past posts in other threads. That may be affecting your objectivity a little...
Ireland did not fight and maintained neutrality throughout WW2.
post #381 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by C'dale Girl
I sincerely do not get why we as a people think a politician's personal affairs are our business. I'm not married to the guy, so I couldn't care less whether he's cheating on his wife. As long as he's doing his damn job to the best of his abilities . . . that's all that matters to me. Whether or not Bill Clinton is getting hummers in the Oval Office has no bearing on my life, unless it interferes with his ability to do his job. Heck, if it cleared his mind so he could think more clearly regarding some big decision . . . have more Bill.

Instead, we made it a collosal affair so that the entire "scandal" SURELY weighed on his mind and interfered with his abilities to do the job we actually paid him to do.
I think many people still think personal character and decisions provide evidence of how people will behave and act in their public roles. Bill Clinton exemplifies this. His philandering and harassment of others was a symptom of his overall character flaws which did carry over into public life. Despite this, was he still a good president? That's up for debate.
post #382 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by fscyclist
Ireland did not fight and maintained neutrality throughout WW2.
Thanks. I remembered a post where Lim mentioned that many Irish soldiers fought for Britain... (but not on behalf of their own country) and I confused it. IIRC. But you're right about the country staying neutral.
post #383 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
With due respect Lim and nothing personal intended... NNS was not saying that the US "saved civilisation" in my interpretation. She was paraphrasing your allegation and making a rebuttal explaining the rationale behind the viewpoints of the US people you were describing.

Also... I think her point was that the US generally cop flack and criticism for a lot of their foreign policy and actions on the world stage (some of that criticism being justified she admits)... but the appreciation for the good and help the US has provided is awfully quiet in comparison.
The rationale behind the viewpoint, that America saved Europe, is a (mis)perception which seems to be shared by a considerable amount of Americans.

My point was that as soon as current American foreign policy is questioned by non-Americans, some Americans get extremely defensive about their country's current foreign policy being questioned and they start harking back to events like WW2.

Anyone who has read the political/military/historical facts concerning WW2 would recognise that American input to WW2 was not the decisive factor
in the outcome of WW2.
That doesn't mean that Americas contribution was neglible.
Far from it.
But to suggest that US involvement in WW2 saved Europe or that America saved Europe in the aftermath of WW2 is incorrect.
And that's why I challenged NNS on this.
Maybe NNS did not intend to make that point - but reading the posts, it seemed lear to me that that was the point being made!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
I think that US foreign policy can be arrogant... as well as the attitude of some of it's loudest citizens and political figures. But I think European arrogance that Europeans know more about world history than any other country's peoples is also prevalent... as well as the Eurocentric bias to "world" history that Europeans seem to have... as a generalisation. You make personal judgments about NNS' knowledge that betray a tendency to stereotype US people. I agree that the UK and France have had a long history of colonization and have learnt a lot about occupation of other countries. But a lot of Europe's current generation ride on the coattails of that history I feel, without having any direct experience themselves. From my experience living in the US... the country has some extremely diverse viewpoints from different people within it's citizenship.... and until you live here IMO... it is easy to generalize too much on a uniform US trait/viewpoint (which I was guilty of doing before I came here).

Also... it is fairly obvious that you generally dislike America and Americans from your past posts in other threads. That may be affecting your objectivity a little...
I know nothing about NNS - save that NNS told us that she is 41!

As regards America, I definitely do oppose the foreign policy of the US, particularly it's 21st century foreign policy.
post #384 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
The rationale behind the viewpoint, that America saved Europe, is a (mis)perception which seems to be shared by a considerable amount of Americans.

My point was that as soon as current American foreign policy is questioned by non-Americans, some Americans get extremely defensive about their country's current foreign policy being questioned and they start harking back to events like WW2.

Anyone who has read the political/military/historical facts concerning WW2 would recognise that American input to WW2 was not the decisive factor
in the outcome of WW2.
That doesn't mean that Americas contribution was neglible.
Far from it.
But to suggest that US involvement in WW2 saved Europe or that America saved Europe in the aftermath of WW2 is incorrect.
And that's why I challenged NNS on this.
Maybe NNS did not intend to make that point - but reading the posts, it seemed lear to me that that was the point being made!




I know nothing about NNS - save that NNS told us that she is 41!

As regards America, I definitely do oppose the foreign policy of the US, particularly it's 21st century foreign policy.
You may be right about America... I can't really comment... because the subject of WW2 hasn't arisen in conversation yet. My knowledge of WW2 is sketchy, but If any one country had the platform to claim a major influence on the defeat of Nazi Germany, it was perhaps the Russians. Realistically that was Germany's main focus with at least 75% of it's forces deployed on the eastern front. The war was probably ideologically underpinned primarily by Nazi Germany vs. Communist Russia AFAIK. However the US funneled billions of dollars I believe to Russia to support their war effort.

Like you say... it was a combined Allied effort. It also pisses me off a bit when the English sing that they won both world wars at football games against Germany.

Realistically... all countries should be aware IMO, that history can be skewed in it's retelling to favor the storyteller. And the natural instinct of wanting one's own country to have a glorious past doesn't help the objectivity of the listener.
post #385 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by fscyclist
I think many people still think personal character and decisions provide evidence of how people will behave and act in their public roles. Bill Clinton exemplifies this. His philandering and harassment of others was a symptom of his overall character flaws which did carry over into public life. Despite this, was he still a good president? That's up for debate.
I am wondering if a Republican congress had anything to do with the strong economic situation we had when Clinton was President?
What policies did Clinton actually put in place while in office?
When we look at how our government operates, as far as the relationship between President and Congress, I personally think the standing President gets too much credit.
post #386 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfix
I am wondering if a Republican congress had anything to do with the strong economic situation we had when Clinton was President?
What policies did Clinton actually put in place while in office?
When we look at how our government operates, as far as the relationship between President and Congress, I personally think the standing President gets too much credit.
I think government, generally, is given too much credit for influencing the economy. But if you want to single out congress as an important determining factor... we have the perfect comparison sample between 1994-2006. Twelve years of Republican congressional reign... the first half with a Democratic president... the second half with a Republican president. One could argue that the period betwen 2000-2006, the Republicans had the capability to enact Republican policy in congress with a Republican President. However the first six years was arguably more prosperous than the last six years with a Bush Presidency.

For me... there are too many other factors that come into play.... the internet boom/bubble... which had little to do with Clinton and would have occurred no matter who was the President... and the huge costs of wars and Homeland Security spending post 2001 (albeit that Bush/Republican arguably had a big influence on causing war expenses).
post #387 of 432

Re: yes, this is true,

Quote:
Originally Posted by limerickman
I'm not surprised by this response.

Is that what they teach you over there?
That your country saved civilisation?

With respect, you haven't got the first clue about what events saved civilisation.




And loads of people are still alive because of the many men/women - throughout the ALLIED nations in many locations - who fought throughout WW2.

You do your argument no favours at all by trying to claim credit for something which you, yourself, took no part in.
Not suprisingly, your response falls back in to the same defensive opinion exhibited by some Americans when their country's foreign policy is questioned.




Really?

I have two relatives who fought with US during WW2.

Never during any conversation with these people, have they tried to claim any credit for what they did.

Unlike you - they would never try to make grandiose claims about "saving civilisation" either.

You do your points no favours, NNS.
****** aye!!!! Stick it to the silly seppo cow.
post #388 of 432

Re: yes, this is true,

Quote:
Originally Posted by nns1400
...but I would argue that the reaction to that goes to an opposite "extreme" so to speak, that the US shouldn't ever do anything unilaterally, and that the blessing of other nations is somehow...required...for American action. I'm sorry, I don't want a President who thinks that way either. (That ultimately sunk John Kerry, IMHO...) Or who thinks we should apologize for being the most powerful country in the world atm...
Nutjob.
post #389 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
With due respect Lim and nothing personal intended... NNS was not saying that the US "saved civilisation" in my interpretation. She was paraphrasing your allegation and making a rebuttal explaining the rationale behind the viewpoints of the US people you were describing.
Captain obvious is back in town!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankfeet
Also... I think her point was that the US generally cop flack and criticism for a lot of their foreign policy and actions on the world stage (some of that criticism being justified she admits)... but the appreciation for the good and help the US has provided is awfully quiet in comparison.
Broad sweeping and completely useless generalization.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
The Allied forces won WWII.
Aye aye Captain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
But the American assistance, both in soldiers and military supplies, was a very important factor that arguably tipped the balance significantly.
your opinion based on......a hunch????


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
You obviously are fully aware that GB (and Ireland) were fighting to save their own countries from German Nazi rule. The German invasion threat to America's soil was practically and realistically nonexistent (despite Hitler declaring war on the US... which seems about as crazy as Japan bombing Pearl Harbor in hindsight). America was there in major part to help a friend IMO (world political ramifications of Nazi European dominance notwithstanding).
Last time I checked American companies profited greatly by supplying Nazi Germany during WW2. While my family died.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
I am in agreement with you on most subjects that come up in this forum Lim. I think that US foreign policy can be arrogant... as well as the attitude of some of it's loudest citizens and political figures. But I think European arrogance that Europeans know more about world history than any other country's peoples is also prevalent... as well as the Eurocentric bias to "world" history that Europeans seem to have... as a generalisation. You make personal judgments about NNS' knowledge that betray a tendency to stereotype US people. I agree that the UK and France have had a long history of colonization and have learnt a lot about occupation of other countries. But a lot of Europe's current generation ride on the coattails of that history I feel, without having any direct experience themselves. From my experience living in the US... the country has some extremely diverse viewpoints from different people within it's citizenship.... and until you live here IMO... it is easy to generalize too much on a uniform US trait/viewpoint
Look out its Dr Phil giving us a lesson on historical geopolitics delving insightfully into the psyche of sovereign nations.... No stereotypes here....


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crankyfeet
(which I was guilty of doing before I came here).
It would appear not much has changed.
post #390 of 432

Re: Evangelical Disconnect

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfix
I am wondering if a Republican congress had anything to do with the strong economic situation we had when Clinton was President?
What policies did Clinton actually put in place while in office?
When we look at how our government operates, as far as the relationship between President and Congress, I personally think the standing President gets too much credit.


o0o
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Your Bloody Soap Box
Cycling Forums › Forums › Other Stuff › Your Bloody Soap Box › Evangelical Disconnect