I guarantee you there are plenty of Americans who 100% disagree with the way Bush is doing things. I'm one of them. Without a doubt the news media has also become part of the problem as well. I've seen news articles critical to Bush and US policies vanish within minutes off CNN. I have seen headlines go from speaking the truth to being watered down in a few minutes as well.

The United States now has military presence in over 140 countries around the world. But even though the US has almost total global influence, the US still puts it's own selfish needs above the rest of the world. There lies the main problem. The United States wants all the control over the worlds economy and vital resources yet wants none of the responsiblity to make sure people in other countries are not starving to death.

When was the last news report you saw on the 35,000 children that die every day from starvation and it's related disease? 10 word trade centers worth of deaths every single day and we only spend about 1.5 billion on world hunger. Bush has literally spent over 100 years worth of US aid to starving countries on the Iraq war.


Greg

>I fully agree,
>
>As an european I simply don't understand the commotion. Nudity is considered fairly normal up here and we certainly don't understand the hypocritism of the US. It is allright to broadcast the most violent scenes, but.. oh my, when a few brests are shown on the screen little kids gets nightmares... and before we know it mr Bush will launch a campain against sex.
>
>I know this is off topic, but when I as an european look at the US I certainly get the impression that the average american has the brains of a peanut. They speak so high about human rights, but they don't realize they are violating that rule on numerous fronts (eg. the prisoning of al-quida soldiers), they attack a country with arguments that could not be proven and they knew it was likely false. The US citizens don't realize mr bush is just finishing the job of his father. Why iraq, while the're are much bigger issues like the palistinian question, north korea etc. DIRTY POLITICS !! How about the ever increasing depts of the american government? I know in the short term it is stimulating the economy, but you've got to pay the bill someday. Of course mr bush itself is going to pass the debts to the next one...
>
>And all they are taking about is the scandal of JJ showing her brest, and the resistance of GAY marriage.
>
>sigh....
>
>Walter,
>
>
>
>>In some countries, the human form is considered a work of art. Only in amerika do people confuse sex with a nudity. Only in amerika, killing and maiming is okay for children, but nudity is not.
>>
>>I didn't see the super bowl and rarely watch US news - but JJ has a bod shaped by god! Why not? Elmer Fudd can kill wabits - Chuck Norris can kill anyone with dark skin - but JJ's booby is a no-no?
>>
>>Hmmmm! I prefer the boobies:-)
>>
>>>I watched the superbowl and it was clearly visible as well as the little star pasty she had stuck on as well. I didn't appreciate it one bit considering my 12 year old daughter was watching with me. She gasped and asked me "Can they do that on tv?" Who knows how many younger children were watching with their parents. She insists that it was all intentional or else Janet Jackson would not have been wearing a start sticker... My feelings are pretty simple: keep it off the tv and definitely keep it off of primetime or earlier programs. I really don't think the superbowl was rated for it (the vchip stuff) to allow parents to keep their children from viewing partial nudity if they wished. It was unexpected and should not be allowed unless the producers are willing to have their program rated for partial nudity. It is definitely not the most important issue today nor on the hot list period but it is definitely time they started enforcing fcc rules...
>>>
>>>Having said all of that I find it amazing that she is taking the majority of the slack for it and not Justin Timerlake who after all pulled off the clothing!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Dean,
>>>>
>>>>There's a store on Toronto's main drag with the letters "F", "C", "U" and "K" each about a foot (or more) tall on a big sign. It is a trademark.
>>>>
>>>>I don't know if things were visible better on HDTV, but the Janet Jackson debacle, at least as seen on live regular TV, was merely a whitish spot that suggested that the breast might be visible. How the population of the U.S. has blown that so out of proportion is something to behold!
>>>>
>>>>Now gay marriage is on the front burner. When are the PEOPLE going to get to things that are REALLY WORRISOME??? The media and your politicians can distract the PEOPLE at will. WMD non-existence is now a non-issue, loss of personal rights is now a non-issue, the pre-emption policy is now a non-issue. So many things that REALLY matter are relegated to the background for the sake of trivial matters that have little bearing on people's day-to-day lives.
>>>>
>>>>cheers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Yes. But it was implied and expressed clearly.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi Elmer.
>>>>>>>I knew that. But I couldn't believe the "F" word went pass the screening process... if there is a screening process.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>it didn't. if you look closely you'll see the f-word was never writen.