My name is Tim. I'm actually more interested in music than in politics. I'm active in two High School Bands (Jazz and Symphony) and 2 High School Choirs (Jazz and Concert). I play trombone, piano and guitar. That may be the direction I go after High School. My oldest brother was, however, very good at arguing and convincing people to do things and he is on his way to being a lawyer. Maybe he rubbed off on me... My grandpa was also a senator, but now he is very stubborn and grouchy. He fought in the Korean War and he is incredibly racist. Contrary to popular belief, I don't know a whole lot about politics. I just read the paper and learn in school. I don't know a lot about the politics behind the headlines or the details of government. I am interested in learning about war, so I keep up to date in the paper with the latest news. That's about it. I probably wouldn't be a good President because I'd bash my opponents too bad in political commercials... :)

TGP,

In agreement with so many others here, I would like to echo that it is great to see someone so young taking a real interest in learning about these things for himself and forming his own opinions. I recall when I was your age that most of my friends simply sided with whatever beliefs their parents held and kept those into adulthood. Kudos to you for deciding for yourself!

I think most of what you refer to as the "spoon-feeding" of the masses comes from an incongruous disillusionment of Americans in the last half century. Americans are so confused that they latch onto whatever they are told without question. I think it's important to keep some things in mind in today's society:

1) Freedom does not equal Want
Many in America have come to associate freedom with getting whatever you want whenever you want it. This leads to a feeling of entitlement. While we are entitled to certain "inalienable human rights" as outlined by our forefathers, we have misconstrued this to mean that we have a right to have our Big Mac and fries in under 3 minutes without the worry of clogged arteries. We have the right to not only drive our SUVs, but not have our rampant overconsumption of oil affect gas prices. As John Stossel says, "Gimme a break!"

2) Patriotism does not equal Nationalism
These are two terms that are easily confused, and that confusion is often used by an administration to support its platform. Patriotism is having a love and respect for your own country. Nationalism is blindly ascribing yourself to whatever your country does simply because you are a citizen of that nation. Patriotism tends to breed loyalty and contentment whereas nationalism tends to breed contempt and fear. Patriotism comes as a personal choice whereas nationalism comes as a mandate.

This country was founded by men and women seeking to get out from under the heel of oppression, but today many feel that if you don't support the administration you are "unpatriotic." This is inherently opposed to what the founders of this nation strove to build. This country was envisioned as a place where people could question their leaders without fear so that those same leaders would be kept in check. There is nothing wrong with speaking out against our leaders when we feel they are not operating in the best interest of this nation; as a matter of fact, it is defined as a duty. It is when we work to subvert this government that we become unpatriotic.

Republican is in office = we'll hear a lot from Michael Moore. Notice he was pretty silent under Clinton's administration.

Democrat is in office = we'll hear a lot from Rush Limbaugh. Again, notice he's been pretty quiet through Bush's administration. Save for his whole painkiller fiasco, Rush hasn't been a loud voice. (Bush...Rush? Creepy!)

I'm so pleased this discussion has come up as the political conventions are coming up pretty soon, and the election is closer than most of us realize. Now, you're really gonna get my two cents:

I completely understand people not liking Bush, I fall into that camp myself, but I keep talking to people who want to vote in Kerry simply because they feel he is the Anti-Bush, not because they know or care about Kerry's platform. Let me put forth that it is inherently irresponsible to vote for someone simply because they are of a different political affiliation than the incumbent you are disappointed with. If the pendulum keeps swaying wildly, then this country can make NO progress. The cycle will repeat: 4-8 years Republican, 4-8 years Democrat; the preceding is destroyed and rebuilt only to be destroyed again when the parties change.

I'm not going to tell you to vote for Bush, Kerry, or Nader. I'm not going to tell you to vote Republican, Democrat, or Green Party. I'm going to tell you to find out what these people stand for apart from their opponents and make your choice based on this. Far as I can tell, Kerry is just as pompous and out of touch with my middle-class station in life as Bush is. Both have led very priveleged lives and probably can't relate to my week-to-week worries, so my true candidate simply does not yet exist, and I do not forsee one until we get out from under this cyclical two-party system which was never intended under the Constitution.

So my perfect candidate isn't out there, am I gonna vote? Bet yer sweet little bippy I will. Disenfranchising myself only hurts this nation. To me, that is the first step to becoming unpatriotic.

Well, there it is. The blowhards rule, and if we all act like sheep and don't stand up and do something about it, it will continue. I offer up heartfelt gratitude to all who have the gumption to stand up for their beliefs and speak them proudly regardless of the situation or who is in power.

Sean (...my manifesto will be released shortly...Ted Kaczinsky has already endorsed it...) ;)

Yes, TGP, I will also vote for you for President in twenty years (that is if they let me have an American citizenship one day). I don´t know any other 15 year olds who are this intelligent and articulate. What are you going to do after high school?

Do you have a name?
Sasha

>>>>1) Neglected to mention how he got his "facts" and "statistics";
2) Neglected to place his "facts" and "statistics" in proper contexts (for example, his lists the number of gun murders in various countries, but he doesn't list the years during which those murders took place...for all we know, he could've been comparing Japan in 1950 to U.S.A. in 1995);
3) Reversed cause-and-effect situations so that he makes the effects looks like the causes (VERY misleading and atrocious, even if certain events are linked). <<<

OK, OTHER THAN THAT..........

>>>we need people like Moore on the other side to counterbalance it. <<<

I thought Rush was the counter-balance to CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, most "news"papers, our radical-left schools, Time, NewSpeak, and Useless-snoose.
I find Rush to be talking about the same things all the time. Try dennis Prager if you don't like Rush. Mike Moore is more like Michael Savage's evil twin, than Rush's-in my opinion.

>>>>I hope I will not be considered a hater of the U.S. >>>
If I had a nickel for everytime my beliefs have been held up as being pure evil!([:.(]

>>>Michael Moore is a liar.>>>
That's what I hear. He should try one of those diets too.

TGP, in 20 years, I'll vote for you for president.
____________________
|...***...TGP'24...***...|
----------------------------
~~
-Matt~~~
another worm heard from~~~~~~:p

"After Mr. C. was elected by millions of votes less than G.W. Bush..." --mra

In the 1992 Presidential election, Clinton won with far more votes than the incumbent Bush the elder; but because it was a three-way race with Perot in the running, no candidate received a majority of the votes cast. It was in the 2000 election that Gore received more votes than Bush the younger but lost anyway.

Fox News likes to write its own history. I only watch the "News Hour" on PBS with Jim Lehrer, a program that goes so far out of its way to be completely fair and balanced that the paranoid right thinks it's a conspiracy against them.

John

>>>>>...Fox News shoving their conservative and biased views in programs that they label "fair and balanced" down our throats...<<<<<<

Hmmmm...
When they say "fair and balanced", I believe this is sarcasm at the other networks who were the only guys in town for DECADES. They always claimed to be unbiased, but when you see that almost all of the reporters for those networks actually voted for the twice-impeached ex prez, well it is such a breath of fresh air to have a second opinion on TV for once. I don't see how they are shoving anything down our throats when 99.99% of the people with FOX News can get something else by pressing a button on their remote from the luxury of their couches. This is why Rush caught-on so quickly. When he started, he was the only conservative voice in town. This is also why FOX News is pounding CNN in the ratings. CNN has to share their TV audience with CBS, NBC, and ABC.
I remember, when President Reagan was elected, the next day there were 3 million homeless suffering on TV every night. After Mr. C. was elected by millions of votes less than G.W. Bush, they just remakeably vanished. Yea-hah!

I remember watching Rush on his TV show around ten years ago. He usually had a segment where a Democrat would say something, then, less than 24 hours later, would be saying the exact opposite to another group of people. 8)

Moore represents a counter balance to the conservative voice of this country. Call him a liberal or call him a liar but as this is America, every voice should be heard, whether you agree with him/her or not. When you have Fox News shoving their conservative and biased views in programs that they label "fair and balanced" down our throats, it is good to see someone else shove back.

When the Abu Ghraib scandal came out, Rush Limbaugh actually defended what the soldiers did and glossed over the true facts on his show. Now any idiot with half a brain knows that what happened there is wrong. So when you have an influential voice like Limbaugh saying things that are skewed contrary to logic, it is essential that someone else should put the majority perspective back in place. I'm not saying that Moore is the right person to do it but at least someone is.

As John said, there must be balance in the "force".

Moore's goal with Farenheit 9/11 is to bring down Bush and with his win in Cannes, it will certainly give the film a big push. Go watch it and make up your own mind. "Bowling for Columbine" did not bring down the NRA and the influence of "F 9/11" might not even matter in the upcoming elections. Who knows.....

People with REAL health problems on a diet is perfectly acceptable; that's what diets were designed for. But you can imagine how, in High School, every football jock and insecure girl whether healthy or not practically starves themselves to shed a few vanity pounds. All they can talk about is how fat they are when I'm looking over and I'm worried that their muscles will cave in and they'll collapse if they don't eat something. Low carbs is one that they've all been adopting as if it'll solve all their problems.

In all respect to everyone, I don’t have an opinion of Moore either way. I’ve never seen any of his films and I don’t follow a lot of either him or Rush. I respect that people have diverse visions of what we see as a society. Moore is entitled to his opinions as much as the American President is entitled to his belief of weapons of mass destruction, even though it has no proof.

I do watch the media, however, I’m not brain washed into anything I’m being told. That being said, truth is in the heart. It’s in the reactions and opinions of my friends; like John, Sasha, TGP (Tim), Eddie, etc…

So what was this war all about in my opinion? . . . Oil!!! Plain and simple, Geogre Jr wanted to finish what his Daddy started. He took a dictator out of office, and maybe for the best, who knows? However, did it focus the light away from the terrorist of 911? . . . yes it did. As an American, I saw more attention for some dictator that actually had a country than the man who brought mass terrorism to the US. Go figure? And for what?

Gas prices at their highest ever in the US. Americans should be more pissed off at US oil companies for raising their prices at the levels of Arab oil. If US oil companies kept their prices low, they’d make an Fn fortune!!! But No! they’re a bunch of Fn idiots! Which reminds me that our countries are all run by idiots! Want proof? . . . well, look who’s governor of California as of now.

Sasha,
I don’t think you hate America and I love your opinion. What’s in your heart is respected by me. ;)

John,
You are always the man of true wisdom. I’m very proud to be your friend.

Eddie,
So, Michael Moore may not have proof behind his convictions, but, where does NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, or FOX have theris? Yeah dude, it's all a matter of what you believe and what you consieve as the truth my friend. ;)

TGP(Tim)
I don’t want to break your rein of “fad” things, and I do agree with you on some of them, however, the low carb thing is a reality. I am a person of high insulin levels and am a borderline diabetic. The Atkins diet is no fad my friend; it is the real deal. Carbs are as much of an addiction as smoking and only time will prove my point (as soon as you see “say no to carbs” on a poster). Fact is, a low carb diet does help with high blood sugar levels and has proven to keep cholesterol down. I know I’ve done it with very little exercise and it’s helped me keep trim and has lowered my blood sugar level. Trust me, when you get to my age that is a very important thing. Now . . . if you want to pick on “Infomercials” I’m all ears! :D

skspence,

>>>Political discussions always seem to degenerate into "this side, that side" arguments<<<
It seems that much of the voting in this country is negative voting. Republicans were so scared of having Gore as president, they voted for Bush jr. in the primaries because of his name recognition. Then they voted for him because the four letters in his name did not spell Gore. I assume it often works the same for the Democrats. If Bush loses this year, it will be because he was nominated for his electibility, instead of who was the best person running.

>>>politicians don't have to worry about anyone in an income bracket under Upper Class. <<<
Then why are they always spending more on newer, and "bigger and better" social programs? However I do see a HUGE problem with corporations (and unions) giving huge sums of money to parties, sometimes to both parties. I think that's why "health"care has been on such a wild ride.


TGP,
>>>I always liked CLinton because he was, at times, painfully honest. <<<
I always hated Clinton because he was, at times, painfully dis-honest.

>>>His affair with Lewinsky overshadowed all of the good things he did and no one remembers anything else. <<<
It will overshadow all the bad things he did.


As for voting...
While I agree voting is important, and I do it, some just aren't interested in, or have the time for these issues. It's sad, but I don't think flipping a coin is the answer. In addition to voting, writing your representatives, handing out literature, serving in the military or other government agency, giving time and money to chairities are excellent ways to be good citizens.