quote:

---

Originally posted by CatKnight:
i just noticed that. dumbass. thats like saying "im somewhere between reactionary and radical". you are also pretty much saying you want a huge government that controls everything you do, but you want to be totally free and do whatever you want.

p.s. communism is an economic system while liberalism is a politcal ideaology. they aren't even similar things on the same line.

---

hmm, wow, youve got a great point there ck! except one minor flaw in your argument. I NEVER SAID I WAS SOCIALIST! kuru called me one, and i said i didnt have a firm grasp on what exactly a socialist was. do you eat shit for breakfast? you brain is sure full of it.

and actually, on the scale of political ideology, when someone says theyre liberal, theyre usually about slightly left of being moderate, when compared to someone who is considered communist (i.e. believes in the communist ideals, and is therefor far far more left on the ideological scale.) inbetween these two is socialism. should i draw a picture?

code:

---

|                     |                 | |

---

do you comprehend now?

This message has been edited by Sithiee on May 29, 2001 at 03:34 AM

Another thing. Maybe it started out as a little white lie, but you along with alot of other people made him blow it up to an big one.

And I could easily swear on the Bible and lie, because I don't believe in it. I think that the Bible is a funny fairytale written by a funny man, to see how much people he could fool. If he'd been around today he would have laughed himself to death. I believe in StarWars more than I believe in the Bible. StarWars is far more realistic.

But fact is that you think it's OK to lie, when it's a little white lie. But tell me how you teel a little white one from a big fat one. If the point of view were from the one telling it, most lies would be little white lies. Because a lie only reflect the consious of the one telling it. If a big fat lie is a lie that hurts other people, then I don't believe the one Clinton told was just that. He told it to protect his family. Most people would do that. As he told it it was a little white lie, but because of the evil prying publics eyes, he had to stick with it, to maintain his apearance. And that, concludes that the guy has more spine than any of us.

So actually YOU made a little lie big. He probably didn't think it was big.

And about my political views, I can only say that they're sparks from my philosophical beliefs. I have my own and that it's not categorised under any known group. I believe that everyone is equal. And I believe and a society where EVERYONE works together for greater purposes. But this is an unrealistic thought.

About the Kyoto agreement, Just throwing it in the garbage is what pisses people off. Not even trying to find a compromize with it is spineless. Every country with a bit of selfrespect is signing that agreement. The US are just too greedy to even think about others. And if you believe in the Bible you would know that greed is as bad or worse than a lie. And you are actually not the only ones in the world. You're actually not only destroying you own home, but mine too, and that pisses me off.

This message has been edited by Kolben on May 29, 2001 at 04:33 AM

as for the united states being pussys for backing out of the kyoto protocol, it's NOT that we are being totally greedy, it's that we are suffering a SEVERE energy crisis. if your entire country was experiencing blackouts and industries were unable to function well, you would back out of it too until your had things fixed.

oh yeah and another point-the kyoto protocol is meant to reduce emmissions from high output coal power plants. our power plants are about as efficient and clean as they get, we spent billions on co2 scrubbers. the main target is older inefficient coal plants used in many developing countries which are extremely dirty in comparison. it's not that "no more pollution controls = lots more pollution", it's more like "no more pollution controls = cheaper energy with the same amount of pollution". besides the kyoto protocols there are tons of legsislation on environmental protection.

This message has been edited by CatKnight on May 29, 2001 at 05:50 AM

political ideaology scale:
reactionary - liberalism - moderate - conservative - reactionary

socioeconomic politcal systems:
communism - socialism - liberalism - conservatism - facism

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuru:
schools should be able to choose their students. oh sure, you're gonna get some idiot complaining that it's unfair to their kid because they can't get into a 'good school', but what about the really intelligent kids who are stuck in schools that are far below their ability? ....etc etc etc

---

Whats a battle?

------------------
It's not that i'm celibate, it's just i don't give a fuck.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CatKnight:
as for the united states being pussys for backing out of the kyoto protocol, it's NOT that we are being totally greedy, it's that we are suffering a SEVERE energy crisis. if your entire country was experiencing blackouts and industries were unable to function well, you would back out of it too until your had things fixed.

oh yeah and another point-the kyoto protocol is meant to reduce emmissions from high output coal power plants. our power plants are about as efficient and clean as they get, we spent billions on co2 scrubbers. the main target is older inefficient coal plants used in many developing countries which are extremely dirty in comparison. it's not that "no more pollution controls = lots more pollution", it's more like "no more pollution controls = cheaper energy with the same amount of pollution". besides the kyoto protocols there are tons of legsislation on environmental protection.

---

The Kyoto Protocal was meant to reduce the amount of CO2 produced cross the board, not just in coal power plants. Have you even read articles on the Kyoto protocal? The US and Canada through a fit when they wouldn't let us buy and sell pollution credits on the open market between countries. But that would defeat the purpose of the protocal now wouldn't it. And there is only an energy crisis in California last I looked, unless there is someplace that I've missed. We do not have a cross the board, all country energy crisis. California is just really, really, really bad at managing its power and planing for its future power needs. Why does this require the entire country to start building more coal and oil power plants? If there are other areas of the country that are experiencing the same power problems as California, then I retract this line of argument. But if I'm right, and California is the only place, then someone please explain to me how our entire country is in an "energy crisis".

you know the air quality back in the 60's was shit but once the catalytic converter was invented the air got much much better.

the socialist form of government is a democracy, which is why I don't quite get everyone's fear of socialists.