Actually, for someone that claims to be so intelligent, and claims to be a provider of perfect information you would know that labeling the US as a representative democracy is accurate, but not precise, and must in fact concede that the most precise label for the US form of government is in fact Republican. But perhaps you just prefer generalizations?
This is purely your opinion, nothing more.
Again, purely your opinion, showing your bias.
There may be a trend here...what's that...biased opinions, opinions, opinions.
Oh really, the definition of bias is an inclination of temperament or outlook; especially: a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment.
Let's take one more look
This is your perception of things, your biased view of how things are.
Someone else’s biased view may be that liberals attempt to buy the votes of weak and down trodden by making them dependent on their handouts while telling them it's not their fault, so they never take personal responsibility for their socioeconomic position. Thus creating a society that believes they are entitled to what others have worked for.
Please, please, do!... but make sure you provide all the US macro and microeconomic variables which are beyond the executive branches direct influence. Make sure you also provide global economic variables, as well as all confounding geopolitical variables. Global climactic data would also help. I would also ask that all of your data come from a government or true academic source. That means .gov or .edu. not .org, .com, or .net. And please, please give me something with teeth, some thing that statistically proves causation, not correlation, because someone of your intellectual superiority knows that correlation to one variable without eliminating all other confounding variables is absolutely worthless. Please no post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Ceteris paribus is not an option in this argument.
This is merely your opinion, please academically prove this claim. Stating the fact that the tax cuts under Regan are commonly labeled Regan’s proves what?
Outside of defense spending please, show the massive increase of spending in relation to the GDP as compared to past administrations. Again I ask for academic resources.
In actuality, this is perhaps the scariest thing you’ve said so far! Seriously, you are kidding me right! Gore would have put in place Clinton’s strategic defense policy...well, let’s take a look at what that would have looked like based on Clinton’s track record.
The first terrorist attack on World Trade Centers on February 26, 1993, resulted in no response from Clinton.
The second terrorist attack was on the Khobar Towers in June of 1996, Clinton response nothing.
The third terrorist attack was in 1998 on the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Clinton response: cruise missile strike.
The Forth terrorist strike October 12, 2000 on the U.S.S. Cole…nothing.
Is this the plan you’re talking about? I must concede that Clinton’s administration had taken notice of Al Queda and was collecting intelligence, but when it came to taking military action to prevent future terrorist attacks the administration just didn’t have the mettle. In the fall of 2000 Predator drones transmitted real time video of Bin Laden at the Tarnak Farm, resulting in no action from the Administration. Never mind the fact that the Sudanese government had attempted to offer Bin Laden on a silver platter in the late 90’s, but again the Administration failed to attack
First off, were you at these meetings? Do you have Top Secret clearance and first hand knowledge of these meetings, or is this merely more speculation, more hearsay?
Actually, you’ve already stated that Gore would’ve taken the same approach to the terrorist attack as Clinton had in the past. Which means we’ve might have seen some cruise missiles at best. However the past record really suggests that there would have been some strong rhetoric, with little action.
Again you are trying to present things in a vacuum, without taking into account all of the confounding variables that apply to your juxtapositions. It would have been quite interesting to see what Gore would have done after loss of tax revenue from the crash of the internet boom, and the economic fallout of 9/11. The only way he could have balanced the budget would’ve been by reducing government allocations to social programs…which you and I know he would have never done.
Keep telling yourself this! And keeping spewing this blather, it shows your bias.
That ballot design was approved by Democrats as well as Republicans so where is the big conspiracy there? I also find your bigoted assertion that blacks were not intelligent enough to understand the ballot layout deplorable at best.
Again, merely your biased opinion.
Yes, talk about your bias
