Fashion Gets Political

[saad]

quite fair i have to say

 

[PrinceOfCats]

Originally posted by softgrey+May 27th, 2004 - 12:23 pm--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (softgrey @ May 27th, 2004 - 12:23 pm)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-PrinceOfCats@May 27th, 2004 - 11:48 am

I can certainly say that just because someone is a top lawyer doesn't make them clever or particularly informed - I know plenty...

In the UK:

You need a degree (not mandatory but most QCs do) from a top university to take silk and you can't bribe your way into the top establishments in the UK...Oxbridge and Durham law schools require a triple A grade as a base entry, you're daddy can't make a 'donation' etc. you need a triple A to get an interview (unless you come from a disadvantaged background).

yah....what's that got to do with the US?...or bush?...

i'm confused... [/b][/quote]
She said she lives in the UK...in the UK you do need to be intelligent for the top jobs in law...

especially when you're not exactly familiar with the circumstances under which he came into prominence.

When you draw totally erroneous conclusions from a perfectly clear line of argument it's best not to judge what others do or don't know

 

[softgrey]

prince...helena works in a law firm...i think she knows what she's talking about...and having a degree really proves nothing...i'm sorry...but it's true... ...just another harsh reality to face... ...nothing is as it seems...

 

[Orochian]

Originally posted by PrinceOfCats@May 27th, 2004 - 12:43 pm
When you draw totally erroneous conclusions from a perfectly clear line of argument it's best not to judge what others do or don't know

Thanks for the advice, but in return I'd suggest that, when all you can do is cite completely irrelevant references to support an argument about which you have no clue, it's best not to be the first to point fingers.

You raised the issue of Bush's so-called education and pedigree as a defence for his competence as a leader, only to reveal how little you knew of the less-than-noble way in which he received his degrees. I wouldn't call that "a perfectly clear line of argument", but more like a totally misinformed and ignorant statement. If not for the lack of support, I'm not sure if you'd back off your defence of Bush quite so quickly and conveniently.

I tried to be civil, but certain individuals simply have to resort to nastiness when facing a landslide of opposing views.

 

[softgrey]

...i think it's so great that two people who aren't even able to vote in the election can be so passionate on this topic...i wish more americans were this passionate about politics...

and i don't think either of you should be offended by the other...you each stated your opinioins eloquently and intelligently...

i have to admit that i too was under the impression that you were supporting bush...sweet prince...the statement you made about his education and intelligence led me to this conclusion...anyway...

this was a very good discourse...very healthy and normal for people to get excited about topics they are passionate about...and world affairs is a great topic to be passionate about!!!

 

[banana]

I can pick out major faults in both their arguments but I'm not going to bother.

The reality is that Bush is was the best candidate that represented the majority of the american people. He is basically just a frontman and like any leader must rely on his advisors to help him make decisions. This is nothing new. His appeal is that he is a recovered drug addict, a reformed christian and the fact that he is inarticulate actually appeals more to the general american population than someone who talks over people's heads. To call him an idiot is as much of a generalization as saying he is smart simply because he graduated from Harvard.

 

[Orochian]

Why, banana, I for one would love to be enlightened by your unlimited wisdom if you would just bother to pick out the "major faults" in my argument, point by point, , instead of pitching in a whole paragraph of basically meaningless, redundant information that isn't even that politically correct.

With the 2000 election's results being the way they were, it's questionable whether he really received the "majority" of votes in the first place. As for whether he is the best candidate to represent the Republican party and its beliefs, the recent splits and dissenting views within that very party should provide a hint or two.

And soft, thanks for a great round-up, we certainly need some sort of a moderating voice in debates of this nature.

 

[banana]

You're being extremely hypocritical. First, you are cutting PrinceOfCats for not providing any sources to back up his arguments when you are essentially doing the same thing. Second, stating that someone is an idiot just because he doesn't present themselves well or because you don't agree with the policies established by his ADMINISTRATION is not only ignorant, but demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of the political process involved. In any case, arguing over a person's intelligence or acedemic capabilities without knowing him personally is a moot point.

 

[faust]

As an originator of this topic, do I have the right to ask a moderator to lock this topic? No offence to anyone, but I did not expect this to escalate into another meaningless political debate. Thank you.

 

[Tupolev]

My my my, and I thought this place was safe from the clutches of American Politics.

George Bush is not a stupid man nor is he a brilliant mind. Calling him either of these extremes does not do the man justice, and turns arguments against him into a mockery. Calling him an idiot all the time softens the blow, doing it without justification gets you ignored.

Of course, there are a few good reasons why he could be known as not the greatest of all presidents.
He is the only US president ever to have a criminal record.
He lead the United states into a war which cost the American state 1 billion dollars a week.

Its justifiable, most admit, he's not been the best president around. Of course, this is speculation, but it is widely spread that he did not win the US election, that some kind of foul play occured. He disalowed UN elections inspectors to inspect the next presidential election, the only man in his position ever to do so.

However, if most Americans could do a better job, then they would be up there, there is a certain mental capacity that is required to run the worlds only superpower. Make no mistake, he is smarter than the average.

By all means, anyone can call anyone an idiot, but the intelligent individual would be a little more objective rather than resorting to "Bush is a eeeejit". I'm not saying you must justify all your opinions, people have a habit of ignoring them if you voice them with just that in mind.

Fighting fire with fire is a bad metaphore to use when dealing with idiocracy.

I'm sorry, I'm new, so don't be too harsh on me.

 

[Tupolev]

Originally posted by faust@May 27th, 2004 - 6:01 pm
As an originator of this topic, do I have the right to ask a moderator to lock this topic? No offence to anyone, but I did not expect this to escalate into another meaningless political debate. Thank you.

Ohh dear, sorry, I read the topic titel but did not understand as everyone else was talking about Bush. This is a topic on fashion after all.

In my opinion, the politics in fashion is mainly concuted by the people who sell handbags, and make clothes to sell them...

 

[banana]

Welcome Tupolev! Very wise words indeed.

 

[Tupolev]

Thankyou Banana , although I must admit, it was mainly elaborating on your points.

Thanks for th welcome, I'll try to keep it fashionable in the future.

 

[tangerine]

Originally posted by banana@May 27th, 2004 - 2:19 pm
I can pick out major faults in both their arguments but I'm not going to bother.

The reality is that Bush is was the best candidate that represented the majority of the american people. ...

Well, the reality is that Bush did not win the popular vote by the American people. He was awarded the electoral vote by the Supreme Court when they stopped the Florida recount.

Don't take my word for it. Read here.

I think faust is right though, this thread is only going to degenerate. I second the motion for locking it.

Not that I am trying to have the last word, of course.

 

[Orochian]

Originally posted by banana@May 27th, 2004 - 4:51 pm
You're being extremely hypocritical.  First, you are cutting PrinceOfCats for not providing any sources to back up his arguments when you are essentially doing the same thing.  Second, stating that someone is an idiot just because he doesn't present themselves well or because you don't agree with the policies established by his ADMINISTRATION is not only ignorant, but demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge of the political process involved.  In any case, arguing over a person's intelligence or acedemic capabilities without knowing him personally is a moot point.

Do you really want me to dig up old internet records of his self-admitted poor grades in Yale? Isn't the fact that he himself admits to having done poorly in school already sufficient proof in itself that he wasn't academically examplary, as suggested by Prince of Cats?

I was just assuming that, since he was so adamant in his defence of Bush, he'd know a thing or two about his history. But I'm prone to overestimating people. What I've stated in this thread are common knowledge even to Bush supporters, and I don't feel the need to spend hours on the internet finding concrete accounts of his academic achievements (or lack thereof).

And I'm not suggesting his's a blundering idiot simply because I don't agree with the policies set up by his administration - I took a few courses in Poli Sci and while that doesn't qualify me as an expert, I'm fully aware of the political process - but because I genuinely feel that any grown adult with the vocabulary of an 8-year-old, the eloquence of a drunk frat boy, a complete lack of awareness of environmental issues, and the absence of any integrity whatsoever witnessed in the shift of his justification for the Iraqi war, must not possess a high level of intelligence.

If you think those arguments are moot, perhaps it's time for you to come up with some concrete knowledge of the issue at hand. If you really believe that he's the "best candidate to represent the majority of Americans" because of the flaws in his character and personal record, you must either ideologically belong to the extreme right, or don't know that much about the current political climate.

 

[Tupolev]

From what I read, most of you here don't support Bush. Which is why I find it confusing that you are having an argument with each other on something so futile. I guess this is what Current politics does to people.

I'm sorry for interfering in this little battle.

 

[Spacemiu]

fashion used to be so much more political...punk was a great example of that...i used to think you could change the world through music and fashion...i've always tried to make some sort of statement with my personal wardrobe and my work...problem is...i don't think anyone's really listening or looking...they are too mesmerized by the bleached hair and bronzed boobs in the media to pay attention to real issues...

i so agree, I do belive art can change the world btu may eb we need to amke the world see.

my belief that people with power deserve respect - not admiration

I refuse to respect any oen based on power, I respect people who are intellgant, thoutful, virtuous and respectful of other, some thing bush is not.

 

[banana]

Social conservatism has been rising in the US for quite a while now which has opened doors for people like Bush. The born-again Christians I was living with at the time of the election were boasting about how "real" of a person he seemed because of his troubled past and new devotion to the church, so I don't doubt his appeal to the hardcore social conservatists that live in the states. You can say that he is a mere puppet and I will agree with you, but complete idiot I am not so sure. He did pick the opportune time to run, and has found ways to manipulate the emotions of a large portion of the American population.

He is not who I would have picked but since I am not an American citizen I really have no say. You really should focus your energy on the politics in your own country because with the election approaching here as well there is the possibility that this country might end up sliding towards the right too.

And left vs. right arguments are getting tired. People really should view politics issue by issue rather than ganging up and slandering those on the other side. Those labels are starting to lose their meaning anyway.

 

[Spacemiu]

also I woudl leik to say bush was a coked out frat boy who only got into teh colleg becuas of his father ( I knwo know this as a fact becuas I know his x roommate.)

 

[softgrey]

sorry...i just have to add...as an educated american citizen...that tangerine is in fact correct and that bush actually received fewer votes than al gore...but won the electoral college...that is how our political sytem works in this country..it is rare but possible to win the election and actually get fewer votes than your opponent...

and there is much evidence to concern many people about just how those votes were gotten and coounted...and as far as bush 'choosing' and opportune time to run...don't you think his father and his cronies were deciding that for him?...can anyone really deny that his father's influence as the former head of the cia, former vice president and former president had something to do with this guy being where he is today?...don't everyone's parents help their kids as much as they can?!?!?...it seems like a no-brainer...these are simple facts...no one can dispute them...

bush's biggest hurdle in the election was his complete lack of experience in foreign affairs...he had no established relationships with any of the leaders of the rest of the world...this has proven to be his greatest weakness as president...he seems to have no idea how to negotiate and cooperate...he's just a big bully...and has managed to alienate just about every other head of state...

that's a big problem for someone whose supposed to be leading the free world...he's trying to lead by force and people in other countries are just saying...no...we're not going to follow...we don't want to be led down this path...

and people in this country are starting to say the same thing...even those of us who didn't vote for him have been trying to be supportive and show solidarity...but no one can deny the f***ing mess bush has created in Iraq...if there is another terrorist attack in this country...i think people will go into full revolt against him....enough is enough already!!!...at least kerry has a chance of working with the UN and other countries to rectifiy the situation because no one hates him the way they all hate bush...

and these are the facts...like it or not...