Viewing Thread:
"The Romans and their 'oh so clever' lead piping."

Anyone else noticed how America is headed for some serious internal troubles?

Apparently 50 percent of the countries population cannot afford medical insurance. How long is this going to be tolerated?

How long is the corruption in the government going to go unchallenged?

Basically what i'm saying is the country seems to be eating itself up from within. I predict a lot of violence and unrest in the future.

Basically what i'm saying is however i try to imagine Americas domestic future all I can see is violence.

Hedfix wrote:
> Someone tell me how Amercia isn't going to implode in violence.

I think you are over-reacting. The U.S has already had several cases of this; namely the Civil War and the Black Rights movement. Both included serious violence but the country never completely collapsed but in fact has become ever stronger since. And while it is the greatest economic power it will probably be able to stave off domestic concerns with its reliance on patriotism of the large majority of the population. Besides I don't think things like not having a national health service will lead to collapse; this nation had a national health service but the main source of violence was the IRA and until the 1980s militant Unions.

Someone tell me how Amercia isn't going to implode in violence.

Can some explain to me how a country full of gun owners, with growing health care and race problems can hope to stave off eruptions of violence and public dissent?

Despite what has been said I still feel America is in for some tough, violent times brought about by it's own citizens reacting to the state the country is in.

Practical Magic wrote:
> Rubbish, there is ample evidence of television networks being
> manpulated euring the election in the USA of trying to fix the result
> in Gore's favour. It's just the Republicans don't have a college
> dropout to promote the idea...


I'd be interested to hear more on this. If it has / will come up in Light's new thread, please disregard this post. Cheers.

> RoJ wrote:
> Ack. We aren't talking about Romans any more. How frustrating.


Ah...very good point. My apologies.

RoJ wrote:
> Ack. We aren't talking about Romans any more. How frustrating.

Well if you want you could start your own topic.

Let me interject with my wise words of wisdom.

The US election were "rigged" (in the loosest sense of the word) by Bush's brother (I think he was the governor of Florida) and by the rigorous voting statutes that existed whereby persons of "dubious" character were denied their voting rights through no fault of their own. Democracy eh? Pah!

That is all.

Practical Magic wrote:
> And Light sidesteps the thorny issue of attempts by certain networks
> to ensure Gore got it... as I said, promoting your cause is hard
> without a loud mouth college dropout.

I was wondering when you'd start echoing the accusations levelled at yourself...it's your standard approach really, isn't it?

> Point: Bell does this

> Bell's Counterpoint: So do you


~sigh~ Okay Bell, tell you what; I'll post the complete story of how the election was stolen and you can attempt to debunk it, and I'll address the fairy tale that you believe. Then we can let this one drop if you like?

Or, you can continue to prove what an abject failure as a human being you are by running away sobbing whenever confronted with an argument that doesn't acknowledge you as correct. Again, either way I'm happy.

I thought in the run up to the election some Networks were for one candidate or another and some of their programmes and their election coverage reflected this.

Hedfix wrote:
> ERM? I thought each party holds sway with quite a few different
> networks?
> A network is going to pander to whomever it's viewers are going to
> vote for.

Nope. Wrong.