Let's do the time warp again!!!!

[Darth Wong]

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=43259 "Why do you want to vote for Bush?"

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=56987 "Flat Tax Rate in the US"

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=61143 "Is Our Economy Fucked?"

It's kind of interesting to see what people were saying around here a few years ago.

[TithonusSyndrome]

Whew, the Rocky Horror Picture Show reference with your name beside it gave me an immediate "et tu brute?" reaction.

I still can't believe that people honestly thought a Bush presidency would mean lower taxes and considered Iraq and 9/11 to be handled well even in principle alone. I was in the gutter in the middle of a serious drug addiction habit at that time, and even I had enough of a grip to see that Bush could or would not deliver on any of the policies his minions touted as being close to his platform.

[Alyrium Denryle]

*steadfastly refuses to look back at what he may have posted in those threads in support of a lolbertarian political philosophy*

Dude, salt, old wounds.

[Darth Wong]

Here are some good excerpts:

Joe on "Why do you want to vote for Bush":

I'm pretty sure I'm not going to vote for him, but if I were, these would be the reasons; tax cuts, good job after 9/11, good idea on Iraq despite the awful execution, pulling out of Saudi Arabia, has hinted that we may pull out of Germany and possibly South Korea in the future (unambigious thumbs up to that), his honest, direct treatment of Kyoto was quite refreshing after Clinton's utterly pointless signing of it, I recall he suggested something about privatizing Social Security recently, and that's about it.

TheSki on the same subject:

Here is why for me...

1. Tax cuts.... everthing else being equal My share came to$800.00 more in my pocket. Our house hold picked up a total of $1700.00 extra. I wil vote for a tax cut over a non- or a increase anyday..

2. Resolve... Took a course... It has been horribly flawed but has not waviered from his vison. I will take that over a waffeler anyday

3. Leadership.. Willing to go it alone... (this is not about if its right or not) but I respect him for it...

4. Not bowing to Un pressure... Kyoto... World Court..

That is why for me...

and if someone could actully give me a reason to vote for kerry and not just "I hate Bush" I would like to hear it... I don't see to many Pro Kerry threads..

And here's Master of Ossus explaining why I'm full of shit for worrying about the economy and the debt explosion:

The US government, during the Bush administration, has responded correctly to the national trade deficit by enacting policies intended to lower the value of the dollar against foreign currencies. At the same time, America's real GDP has grown by over 3% per year--higher than Europe and even higher than many developing countries. While he has a point about the national debt, I seriously doubt that there will be a noticeable decline in American quality of life, since the nation only owes a small fraction of its total GDP, and could fairly easily make up for the difference.

Funny how today he hastens to say that GDP is not the sole predictor of economic health, but he didn't seem to have this insight three years ago. That GDP growth was fueled by bullshit and debt.

And of course, not to brag or anything, but I don't think my posts from three years ago look a whole lot different than they do today:

When you have an economy based on optimism and borrowing, something has to give sooner or later. Bragging about how "hot" this hope-based economy has become is a dangerous mentality; America's collective complacence about fiscal irresponsibility at the government level is a big part of what got Bush back into office.

[bobalot]

I made similar arguments like Darth Wong did years ago on other boards. I was laughed off. My arguments, which were often paragraphs long with sources and links were often met with one line replies like "DUh, When you cut taxes it will help the economy grow, and the debt will become a smaller part of GDP!!!" or here's a terrific one I remember: "The United States is going through to the largest industrial expansion in history under George Bush!!!".

Most of these people thought you could grow an entire economy on debt, speculation and finance. Others were simply deluded.

[Sidewinder]

I wasn't able to vote in 2004 (the Army transferred me to another base in late August, and the Postal Service lost my absentee ballot), but I would've voted for Bush because Kerry consistently made himself look like a poor leader during his campaign. There's his claim that US military servicemen regularly committed war crimes during the Vietnam War (later found to be true, but this wasn't revealed until AFTER the election, so he ended up insulting a lot of people on active duty); the infamous "I actually did vote for the [supplemental appropriation for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan] before I voted against it," bullshit; his inaction in the face of accusations from the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth, which made those accusations seem plausible to the American public... Hell, he still manages to make Bush look like a Nobel Prize Laureate in comparison!

It's possible a President John Kerry would've been a better choice in the 2004 elections, but Kerry and his campaign failed to convince voters this was so. His failure was Bush's success.

[Stark]

It's actually an amusing hobby to dig through the board archives to find stuff like this. There's been a few similar threads in testing; people have said some amusing things over the years.

[The Romulan Republic]

Looking back, I believe their were some pretty vicious attacks on this board directed at anti-war protestors when Iraq was starting up as well.

[Knife]

Meh it is interesting that even in 04 a lot weren't going to vote for bush but made an attempt to justify why they should. Anyway, I'm glad my only contribution was the flat tax bit and I'm more or less satisfied with what I posted.

[Darth Wong]

I wasn't able to vote in 2004 (the Army transferred me to another base in late August, and the Postal Service lost my absentee ballot), but I would've voted for Bush because Kerry consistently made himself look like a poor leader during his campaign. There's his claim that US military servicemen regularly committed war crimes during the Vietnam War (later found to be true, but this wasn't revealed until AFTER the election, so he ended up insulting a lot of people on active duty); the infamous "I actually did vote for the [supplemental appropriation for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan] before I voted against it," bullshit; his inaction in the face of accusations from the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth, which made those accusations seem plausible to the American public... Hell, he still manages to make Bush look like a Nobel Prize Laureate in comparison!

It's possible a President John Kerry would've been a better choice in the 2004 elections, but Kerry and his campaign failed to convince voters this was so. His failure was Bush's success.

Anyone who thinks Kerry actually looks worse than Bush, either now or back in 2004, is a blithering idiot and a fine example of what is wrong with America. Kerry has many serious flaws as a politician, but you're comparing him to the most disastrous mistake the American voters have collectively made in my lifetime.

And seriously, going after him for gaffes? Bush has made so many of them that people have become accustomed to it. They think it's part of his charm, for fuck's sake. Flip-flopping? Bush is the master of the flip-flop. His presidency has borne almost no resemblance whatsoever to his campaign promises. Scandals? Bush has been mired in scandal after scandal after scandal, many of which involve flagrant disregard for the law, not stupid shit like "not being patriotic enough". None of that shit hurt him or the GOP until Americans hit the magic 5 year mark and got tired of the Iraq war, and even that didn't hurt nearly as much as Americans suddenly discovering that they couldn't afford to buy a new H2 Hummer on bad credit after all.

[SirNitram]

Not the first time I've heard it. Some economist friends of mine from the other side of the pond swear up and down this is the reason the EU is imposing such a sweeping economic sanction of the US... It provides a very limited cushion for the impeding economic crash-and-burn.

I fully expect a massive economic crash within our lifetimes, scarily enough. I'd like to move somewhere more stable by then, but that's unlikely. Worst of all is if the current trend of ultra-partisanship has continued along it's current route the whole time.

'THE EVIL SOCIALISTS CAUSED THE CRASH! GO, CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS!'

Wow, that was accurate.

The crash is here, and I AM somewhere stable.. As stable as anywhere can be right now. More as a result of the local economy not being caught in the mayhem.

And yep, the socialism talk is here, right on schedule.

[Knife]

Oh come on. You predicted a crash in 'our lifetime' for christs sake. I'm glad you're solvent but damn don't hurt your arm with congratulations on that whooper, Nostradamus.

[SirNitram]

Oh come on. You predicted a crash in 'our lifetime' for christs sake. I'm glad you're solvent but damn don't hurt your arm with congratulations on that whooper, Nostradamus.

You're just jealous because I'm a future psychic!

But yes, it's always a trip to dig out the old posts. Even some of the stuff I argued back then, and was never contradicted on, I feel embarassed about now that I'm older and (Possibly?) wiser. I feel relatively secure that I wasn't kooky enough to believe some of that stuff.

[sketerpot]

Looking back, I believe their were some pretty vicious attacks on this board directed at anti-war protestors when Iraq was starting up as well.

It was pretty funny reading through some of the threads where people were talking about how invading Iraq was a good idea because of the weapons of mass destruction.

[Darth Wong]

Looking back, I believe their were some pretty vicious attacks on this board directed at anti-war protestors when Iraq was starting up as well.

It was pretty funny reading through some of the threads where people were talking about how invading Iraq was a good idea because of the weapons of mass destruction.

My favourite quote in that thread is from Stormbringer:

Or that the peaceniks simply offered nothing but complaints. For all they talked about stopping war they offered no viable alternatives to it.

The peaceniks never offered a viable alternative to war, eh? Perhaps the alternative was ... peace? It's interesting how this argument was so utterly confident in the presence of this WMD program that it simply assumed that there was no alternative but to invade.

[Chris OFarrell]

You know, its funny in a way.

Back in 03 when everything was building up to invasion, I was absurdly trusting of Governments.

I wasn't SO blind as to think that Iraq was going to be easy, even then I knew the place was a patchwork quilt of tribal, ethnic, religious and cultural mismatches only held together by the threat of force from Baghdad. That Sadam said 'Love your Neighbour or I will kill you' and THAT was all that kept the place together. I had read a number of books back in the late 90's like 'The Fist of God' which, while being novels, actually went into enough depth about the REAL Iraq to get me interested enough to research more.

And I was rather iffy about a lot of the WMD claims thrown around, mostly because I knew the infrastructure had been pounded to pieces in Desert Storm and years of sanctions and No Fly Zones had really impacted the place, even after a lot of the 'proof' surfaced (the one that really got me was those 'mobile weapons labs', as if you could develop bioweapons in a tiny trailer hauled along by a ute??!!).

But in the end I assumed that the US Government MUST know everything I know, they must be ready with in depth plans to take Iraq and hold it properly, with subtly and strength, probably letting the Brits take the lead given their history and knowledge of the region. That if the US was going to divert all this effort from Afghanistan to Iraq, there HAD to be a critical strategic need, we were just not being told everything, but it would all become clear in the long term, that no-one would just go to war for the sake of it.

Jesus fucking CHRIST was I taken for a ride.

[mr friendly guy]

I remember when we were told Iraq could deploy weapons, how fast was it, within half an hour or something, certainly much faster than it would take for US troops to get into Iraq in force. At this point I was wondering if Iraq had such great capabilities and George Bush had pretty much indicated Saddam was going to be replaced, then why didn't Saddam just use these WMDs given he had nothing left to lose and he wasn't exactly known as a humanitarian. Oh wait.. I guess I smelt bullshit at the beginning.

[Big Orange]

*Snip*

I was not convinced that Saddam had anything to do with Bin Laden and Saddam never seemed to be a wider strategic threat past 1991, the publically released intel obviously trumped up, but then again I was under the false impression these fuck-ups knew something we didn't know (and chose not to publically impart it) and also wrongly assumed they covered all the bases for a relatively painless occupation, while making things better by toppling a brutal dictatorship.

[irishmick79]

Re-reading some of the Iraq threads is prety interesting, and pretty embarrasing. I was embarrasingly pro-war at the time of the invasion, and I'm honestly surprised at myself, looking a back at some of the things I posted. I would never try to argue some of that bullshit now. It's easy to forget now just how strong the conservative mood of the country (and of this board) was at that time. Makes me wonder, if we fast forward 5-6 years if the mood will swing back towards the conservatives.

[Dooey Jo]

Yeah, it was pretty hard to see through the US government's bullshit. They were being really convincing with their secret documents that somehow proved that Saddam had super-WMDs, that were invisible to everyone, especially the UN experts, but the US super-intelligence. Oh that freedom-hating Saddam, hellbent on destroying the whole world. I'm pretty sure they actually even said that Saddam couldn't prove that he didn't have hidden WMDs (which was hilarious) and were going to give them to Al-Qaeda (which was also hilarious).

Even more hilarious is how large portions of the US people bought all of this. The people that might as well have invented the concept of conspiracy theories decided to trust the government, because it had secret documents. That's just awesome

[tim31]

And I was rather iffy about a lot of the WMD claims thrown around, mostly because I knew the infrastructure had been pounded to pieces in Desert Storm and years of sanctions and No Fly Zones had really impacted the place, even after a lot of the 'proof' surfaced (the one that really got me was those 'mobile weapons labs', as if you could develop bioweapons in a tiny trailer hauled along by a ute??!!).

(snip)

Jesus fucking CHRIST was I taken for a ride.

Yeah, me too. I think they based the mobile weapons labs concept on a mix between the science teams from the motion picture Twister and the ever popular Command & Conquer series.

[Drooling Iguana]

I remember when we were told Iraq could deploy weapons, how fast was it, within half an hour or something, certainly much faster than it would take for US troops to get into Iraq in force. At this point I was wondering if Iraq had such great capabilities and George Bush had pretty much indicated Saddam was going to be replaced, then why didn't Saddam just use these WMDs given he had nothing left to lose and he wasn't exactly known as a humanitarian. Oh wait.. I guess I smelt bullshit at the beginning.

I made that argument on another forum and was accused of contradicting myself as I'd also been arguing that we had no evidence that they had these weapons to begin with. I was never able to get my actual point, that it didn't matter if they actually had the weapons as an invasion was a bad idea either way, to sink in.

[Karrick]

Even more hilarious is how large portions of the US people bought all of this. The people that might as well have invented the concept of conspiracy theories decided to trust the government, because it had secret documents. That's just awesome

If by "hilarious" and "awesome" you mean absolutely terrifying. I was willing to accept the existence of WMDs at the time, but I never saw it as our responsibility to deal with that. I don't remember hearing about even a suspected delivery system for WMDs either, at least not one capable of reaching the US.

[Drooling Iguana]

If by "hilarious" and "awesome" you mean absolutely terrifying. I was willing to accept the existence of WMDs at the time, but I never saw it as our responsibility to deal with that. I don't remember hearing about even a suspected delivery system for WMDs either, at least not one capable of reaching the US.

That's what Israel's for. Conveniently located for all your panic-inducing needs.

[Adrian Laguna]

Back in the lead-up to the war as I was disgusted with the United States because I had read that the US sanctions on Iraq were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people by denying them access to appropiate nutrition and modern medicine. Me as I am now wouldn't have cared, I developed an anarchic view of international relations in the interim. The fourteen year old me was also rather not convinced that Iraq had WMD, I trusted the UN inspectors, they had "experienced the situation on the ground", as McCain would say.

I joined my first forum on October 2003, a bit before turning 15. It was dedicated to Morrowind, a first-person RPG by Bethseda Softworks, and highly liberal in retrospect. My first politically related post is still around. Here is part of it:

I wish US forces had not found Saddam, now public support for George W. Bush has shot through the roof, meaning he will win the upcoming election. Bush does not belong in the presidency, his inept management of the economy has caused a record deficit of $500.000.000.000 ($500 billion), that is about double the national debt before he became President.

My second political post was a criticism of GWB's "You are either with us, or against us" foreign policy.

I haven't seen such a stupid policy since my sister was in kindergarden (she's in 7th grade now). It was common, but somewhat understandable, that when she, or another student, was friends with two kids who didn't like each other, she would be made to choose one of them over the other. Like I said, this is understandable in a small child, but a country? You can't run a country like that! International, and any other kind of, politics can not be seen as black and white, never has, never will be.

Some of the construction and logic is rather childish, but I am happy that my main ideas have been vindicated by time.