PDA

View Full Version : A quest for an unbiased assessment...a challenge to all!


Mosbonian
10-14-2004, 10:31 PM
Having mostly watched, but occasionally participated, in the many political posts here I would like to issue a challenge to anyone willing to take on this task.....

So far I have challenged 3 people who are supporters of John Kerry/John Edwards to outline the reasons that they support him, other than the "I hate George Bush" mantra that seems to drive several on this board. Thus far I haven't had the courtesy of a reply.....

To make things fair I issue this challenge:

From supporters of both candidates I would love to see you be able to give a fair assessment of your candidate, strengths and weaknesses and put them in writing here.

I have seen some pretty good discussions from people on here who are truly undecided....quite frankly they have been better at giving assessments of both candidates than those who claim to be staunch supporters.....

So, let's see how well you know your candidate....

mmaddog
*******

Mosbonian
10-14-2004, 11:22 PM
C'mon now....for all the rhetoric going on here no one has the gumption to step forward and speak for their candidate?

mmaddog
*******

Taco John
10-15-2004, 12:06 AM
You put too many rules on it.

Basically, I think Bush is the worst president of my generation. And that's saying a lot, because he had to beat out his dad.

I'm getting my ballot next week. I'll look at the Washington state polling numbers, and if it's close, I'll cast a vote for John Kerry because he's not Bush. A lot of Libertarians feel this way. (http://www.reasontofreedom.com/indexlfkg.html)

If it's as I expect, and Kerry has the state locked up, I'll cast my vote for Michael Badnarik. He's also not Bush.

Mosbonian
10-15-2004, 12:25 AM
You put too many rules on it.

Basically, I think Bush is the worst president of my generation. And that's saying a lot, because he had to beat out his dad.

I'm getting my ballot next week. I'll look at the Washington state polling numbers, and if it's close, I'll cast a vote for John Kerry because he's not Bush. A lot of Libertarians feel this way. (http://www.reasontofreedom.com/indexlfkg.html)

If it's as I expect, and Kerry has the state locked up, I'll cast my vote for Michael Badnarik. He's also not Bush.

Too many rules?

All I asked for was a fair assessment of their candidate....doesn't sound like too much of a rule to me.

There has been so man accusations of people being "sheep", I just wanted to see if those doing the accusing were sheep themselves. It appears that I am right.

mmaddog
*******

Mosbonian
10-15-2004, 12:29 AM
You put too many rules on it.

Basically, I think Bush is the worst president of my generation. And that's saying a lot, because he had to beat out his dad.

I'm getting my ballot next week. I'll look at the Washington state polling numbers, and if it's close, I'll cast a vote for John Kerry because he's not Bush. A lot of Libertarians feel this way. (http://www.reasontofreedom.com/indexlfkg.html)

If it's as I expect, and Kerry has the state locked up, I'll cast my vote for Michael Badnarik. He's also not Bush.

Seems a little odd....why wouldn't you vote for Kerry in the first place regardless of the polling numbers? If Badnarik is truly your choice, then why not vote for him?

For me, it doesn't seem sensible to vote for for Kerry, just because you hate Bush.....

mmaddog
*******

Logical
10-15-2004, 12:50 AM
I like Bush's tax policies.

I dislike his spending policies on many issues.

I dislike his social policies

I like his stated policy on where he wants to go on SS but dislike his lack of action.

I like his foreign policy and military policy.

I dislike his social welfare tendencies.

I would say he has not gone far enough in rolling back envirionment over-regulation.

I hate his anti-gay marriage ban amendment proposal.

I don't think he has any real plan to solve the medical expense issue, tort reform is a tiny step in the right direction but is not the answer.

I like his leadership and strong compass for following the direction he sets out.

BroWhippendiddle
10-15-2004, 01:18 AM
I like Bush's tax policies.
I disagree on some of his spending policies.
I like his stated policy on where he wants to go on SS but need to see some more concrete plans.
I like his foreign policy and military policy.
I agree with his anti-gay marriage ban amendment proposal. I think the gay issue is one of choice and not deserving of special treatment or minority classification.
I agree that he might not have any real plan to solve the medical expense issue, Kerry doesn't have a plan either, but the President's tort reform is a tiny step in the right direction will not handle the whole package. Putting a clamp on the insurance companies that control charges and moving it to standard and acceptable charges by doctors. State (Government) controlled healthcare is not the answer.
I like his leadership and strong compass for following the direction he sets out. His leadeer ship is one that shows clear, mature and measured responses.
His core values have not changed since he took office. Kerry has changed his core values based on politically motivated arenas.

Both candidates are wealthy beyond what many of us could ever imagine and not really in touch with "our world", but the President has a closer ability to relate to the "little guys". Kerry seems to be only in touch when he is talking to groups of people.

Kerry has no experience as a leader. I discount his military career due to his actions after he returned from Vietnam.

|Zach|
10-15-2004, 01:51 AM
I discount his military career due to his actions after he returned from Vietnam.
ROFL

Taco John
10-15-2004, 03:59 AM
For me, it doesn't seem sensible to vote for for Kerry, just because you hate Bush.....




I think Bush is probably a good guy. Hate isn't a good word for my feelings toward him. I don't dislike him. In fact, there are plenty of things that I *do* like about him. But his ability to lead the nation isn't one of them. I think he's a terrible leader domestically, and an even worse leader internationally. Like I said before, I believe he's the worst president my generation has ever seen. He's great for the people who exchange money on levels that I'll never even begin to imagine. But since I'm not one of those people (nor want to become one), I will vote to remove him from office.

I will vote for Kerry only if it is needed to achieve the goal of swinging my state against Bush. While my politics and principles line up closer to Badnarik, I have no problem voting for Kerry. I see him as more capable and a better option than Bush. However, I do want my voice to be heard as part of the Libertarian vote, which when all is said and done, will also be counted this year as a vote against Bush. I'll look at the polls and make my decsision based on what I think is the best option for getting Bush out of office first, and satisfying my party leanings second.

Seems a little odd....why wouldn't you vote for Kerry in the first place regardless of the polling numbers? If Badnarik is truly your choice, then why not vote for him?

It's simple. I'm Libertarian. Bush is the worst thing to happen to the Libertarian cause since FDR. A lot of Libertarians feel this way (http://www.reasontofreedom.com/indexlfkg.html). And while none of them are thrilled about the idea of having a Massachusetts democrat in office, the alternative is Bush, who is the most reckless spender in presidential history.

I believe that Bush's simplistic view of the world is dangerous for Americans, both domestically and internationally.

As far as Kerry goes... Well, at least he believes in liberty and walks the talk. Bush talks about freedom and liberty, but when it comes to brass tax, he's just another person who wants to force his view of the world on others and force them to submit to his interpretation.

No thanks.

Jenson17
10-15-2004, 06:50 AM
ROFL

Apparently Zach is comfortable with sKerry's borderline treasonous activities when he returned from 'Nam.

Jenson17
10-15-2004, 06:51 AM
I think Bush is probably a good guy. Hate isn't a good word for my feelings toward him. I don't dislike him. ....

You are SOOOOOOOOO FOS, it's pathetic.

Jenson17
10-15-2004, 06:52 AM
...while my politics and principles line up closer to Badnarik, I have no problem voting for Kerry. ..

There's a principaled man for you.

KCTitus
10-15-2004, 06:54 AM
Two words:

Supreme Court

TJ talks about 'forcing his views on the world', well that's the only way the liberal agenda gets advanced--by this body.

This supposed 'conservative' court has legalized systemic discrimination and limited the first ammendment. I really hate to think what would happen if we had an activist court.

The rest of this is stuff is noise as long as the govt operates in the way that allows a 9 person oligarchy to basically do the work of the other 2 bodies.

Saulbadguy
10-15-2004, 06:59 AM
1. He's not George Bush
2. I believe he will gracefully distribute the costs of this war among other countries
3. No question on Social issues.
4. State controlled health care is a good idea everywhere else, why not here? People keep saying we have "EXCELLENT" health care here..well i'm not buying it. I also am now hearing unsubstantiated claims of the high cost of health care is caused by trial lawyers and lawsuits. BS. That certainly plays a part in it, but its not the reason, not even the biggest reason. Sorry, but I don't see any suffering doctors or practices.

All of this being said, if Bush was a good president, this race wouldn't be close. Kerry is not that likeable of a candidate. I think it speaks volumes about Bush that the main reason people are voting for Kerry is "He is not Bush."

DonksRCrap
10-15-2004, 07:14 AM
1. He's not George Bush
2. I believe he will gracefully distribute the costs of this war among other countries
3. No question on Social issues.
4. State controlled health care is a good idea everywhere else, why not here? People keep saying we have "EXCELLENT" health care here..well i'm not buying it. I also am now hearing unsubstantiated claims of the high cost of health care is caused by trial lawyers and lawsuits. BS. That certainly plays a part in it, but its not the reason, not even the biggest reason. Sorry, but I don't see any suffering doctors or practices.

All of this being said, if Bush was a good president, this race wouldn't be close. Kerry is not that likeable of a candidate. I think it speaks volumes about Bush that the main reason people are voting for Kerry is "He is not Bush."

Who pissed in your Wheaties? If you think Kerry will be a good President, you are delusional. Seriously delusional. I hope, for both our sakes, we don't get a chance to find out. If we do, God help us.

jcl-kcfan2
10-15-2004, 07:14 AM
I think Bush is probably a good guy. Hate isn't a good word for my feelings toward him. I don't dislike him. In fact, there are plenty of things that I *do* like about him. But his ability to lead the nation isn't one of them. I think he's a terrible leader domestically, and an even worse leader internationally. Like I said before, I believe he's the worst president my generation has ever seen. He's great for the people who exchange money on levels that I'll never even begin to imagine. But since I'm not one of those people (nor want to become one), I will vote to remove him from office.

I will vote for Kerry only if it is needed to achieve the goal of swinging my state against Bush. While my politics and principles line up closer to Badnarik, I have no problem voting for Kerry. I see him as more capable and a better option than Bush. However, I do want my voice to be heard as part of the Libertarian vote, which when all is said and done, will also be counted this year as a vote against Bush. I'll look at the polls and make my decsision based on what I think is the best option for getting Bush out of office first, and satisfying my party leanings second.



It's simple. I'm Libertarian. Bush is the worst thing to happen to the Libertarian cause since FDR. A lot of Libertarians feel this way (http://www.reasontofreedom.com/indexlfkg.html). And while none of them are thrilled about the idea of having a Massachusetts democrat in office, the alternative is Bush, who is the most reckless spender in presidential history.

I believe that Bush's simplistic view of the world is dangerous for Americans, both domestically and internationally.

As far as Kerry goes... Well, at least he believes in liberty and walks the talk. Bush talks about freedom and liberty, but when it comes to brass tax, he's just another person who wants to force his view of the world on others and force them to submit to his interpretation.

No thanks.

TJ earlier you said Kerry is the better candidate. MD asked you to outline why. I thought a libertarian would be scared sh*tless of a socialist like Kerry, I know I am.

Personally, I am wondering what you base the part I bolded upon?

I like bush because, his stance on terrorism and the way he responded on it the days following 9/11. His want of a stronger USA.
I like bush because he is cutting my taxes, letting me spend and invest more. Also that he is in favor of a nat'l sales tax.
I like bush because he has a plan for SS. (Kerry doesn't really have one).
And last...

I like bush because I am a guy, duh!!!

unlurking
10-15-2004, 07:22 AM
Not voting for Bush, but some of the reasons I am voting for Badnarik.

Agree with privatized SS.
Agree with privatized health care.
Agree with privatized education.
Agree *somewhat* with isolationism.
Agree *somewhat* with open immigration.
Agree with military control of border management.
Don't know about the abolishment of the IRS, but don't think it would pass congress anyway.
Agree with the end to the war on drugs.
Agree with civil rights and civil liberties.
Agree with victim's rights.
Agree with stance on gun control.
Agree with free trade.
Agree with minimalizing the federal government while strengthening local governments.

No I will not be voting for Kerry or Bush. I know Badnarik could never win, but the more votes he gets the more recognition he brings to the party.

Saulbadguy
10-15-2004, 07:22 AM
Who pissed in your Wheaties? If you think Kerry will be a good President, you are delusional. Seriously delusional. I hope, for both our sakes, we don't get a chance to find out. If we do, God help us.
Haha..and this is the defense tactic I LOVE from the right.."If Kerry gets elected, god help us.." Yeah, like the world will suddenly stop spinning if Kerry gets elected. I'm not preaching doom and gloom if Bush gets reelected, nor should I. Get bent.

DonksRCrap
10-15-2004, 07:26 AM
Haha..and this is the defense tactic I LOVE from the right.."If Kerry gets elected, god help us.." Yeah, like the world will suddenly stop spinning if Kerry gets elected. I'm not preaching doom and gloom if Bush gets reelected, nor should I. Get bent.

I seriously worried about the future of our country. Although Bush hasn't been great, Kerry could do a great deal of damage. Those of you whining about the "damage" Bush has done--you ain't seen nothing yet; he's made the best of a bad hand dealt him. On the other hand, Kerry would screw things up so badly it would take years, if not an entire decade to "recover."

Cochise
10-15-2004, 07:28 AM
Hmmm... still nothing yet saying what John Kerry had over other primary candidates other than 'not bush'.

That's quite a ringing endorsement.

Saulbadguy
10-15-2004, 07:29 AM
I seriously worried about the future of our country. Although Bush hasn't been great, Kerry could do a great deal of damage. Those of you whining about the "damage" Bush has done--you ain't seen nothing yet; he's made the best of a bad hand dealt him. On the other hand, Kerry would screw things up so badly it would take years, if not an entire decade to "recover."
So..you agree, if Bush was a good president, Kerry would have no chance, right?

Saulbadguy
10-15-2004, 07:30 AM
Hmmm... still nothing yet saying what John Kerry had over other primary candidates other than 'not bush'.

That's quite a ringing endorsement.
I agree. Its not a very good endorsement of Kerry, because I will admit he is not a great candidate.

It also says ALOT about Bush. If Bush was so great like many of you say, this race would not be close at all.

DonksRCrap
10-15-2004, 07:37 AM
...It also says ALOT about Bush. If Bush was so great like many of you say, this race would not be close at all.

I don't think I read many people here at all say "Bush is great." Most of us seem to be of the opinion, he's been dealt a difficult hand, and done as well as one might expect given the circumstances. If Kerry wins, you will see how well because things will not be good under a Kerry Presidency. Mark my word.

Taco John
10-15-2004, 10:11 AM
All of this being said, if Bush was a good president, this race wouldn't be close. Kerry is not that likeable of a candidate. I think it speaks volumes about Bush that the main reason people are voting for Kerry is "He is not Bush."



A fantastic point...

Taco John
10-15-2004, 10:14 AM
TJ earlier you said Kerry is the better candidate. MD asked you to outline why. I thought a libertarian would be scared sh*tless of a socialist like Kerry, I know I am.



It's actually the other way around... (http://www.reasontofreedom.com/indexlfkg.html) Bush is the worst thing to happen to Libertarian politics since FDR. He's a tax-cut and spend conservative who hasn't vetoed a single spending bill. With a republican congress, that's a dangerous thing.

Mosbonian
10-15-2004, 05:36 PM
Hmmm... still nothing yet saying what John Kerry had over other primary candidates other than 'not bush'.

That's quite a ringing endorsement.

Agreed....there hasn't been a Liberal yet who has truly done what I asked......and that is truly point out the strength's AND weaknesses of their candidate!! TJ came close to doing what I proposed, but still he didn't go as far to admit the weaknesses that Kerry has.....

Still waiting for a fair-minded Lib to weigh in.....

mmaddog
*******

Frankie
10-15-2004, 09:03 PM
Who pissed in your Wheaties? If you think Kerry will be a good President, you are delusional. Seriously delusional. I hope, for both our sakes, we don't get a chance to find out. If we do, God help us.
I'm confused by this post:

1) "Who pissed in your Wheaties?"- I always thought that was a response to an angry post here. I saw no anger in Saul's post.

2) "If you think Kerry will be a good President, you are delusional. Seriously delusional. I hope, for both our sakes, we don't get a chance to find out. If we do, God help us."- You say that with so much conviction that it seems you must have witnessed the "bad" Kerry presidency. Fess up. Are you that "man from the future" that I read about yesterday in a tabloid while I was standing in the grocery line? If you are, please, please tell us why Kerry's presidency turns out bad.

stevieray
10-15-2004, 09:07 PM
I agree. Its not a very good endorsement of Kerry, because I will admit he is not a great candidate.

It also says ALOT about Bush. If Bush was so great like many of you say, this race would not be close at all.

I disagree, the population is as polarized as it was four years ago.

Hydrae
10-15-2004, 09:26 PM
Personally I am voting for Kerry because, sorry to say, he is not Bush. As simple as that. I wish the Democrats had put up someone reasonable but in the end it does not matter to me, the most important issue this election is to get a dangerous man out of the White House.

I voted for Gore 4 years ago for 2 reasons. First, I felt that as a worker in high tech, Gore (whether he invented the internet or not ROFL) would be more friendly to my industry and more interested in protecting my livelihood.

The second reason I voted for Gore was that I was afraid that Bush would open his mouth and say the wrong thing and get us into a war. I was wrong about how it happened but I was right that he took us into war. I know a lot of people will say that the war was forced on him by 9/11. In reaction to 9/11, Afghanistan was correct IMO. Iraq was wrong from the get go. Again, IMO.

As to the current candidates, I liked a lot of what Kerry had to say about working to regain our position in the world as a whole during the first debate. In the second debate, all I really heard was how both candidates planned to spend MY money. The last debate went to Bush simply because I do not like the spending ways of the Democrats.

Also, thanks in part to KCWolfman, I will be voting for any and all Libertarians on the ballot (other than for President) in an attempt to help that party get some credibility. Russ has been correct in that they need to start by winning some lower positions in order to be taken seriously on the larger stage. Thanks Russ, you have helped to solidify my political beliefs! :thumb:

KCWolfman
10-15-2004, 09:28 PM
Personally I am voting for Kerry because, sorry to say, he is not Bush. As simple as that. I wish the Democrats had put up someone reasonable but in the end it does not matter to me, the most important issue this election is to get a dangerous man out of the White House.

I voted for Gore 4 years ago for 2 reasons. First, I felt that as a worker in high tech, Gore (whether he invented the internet or not ROFL) would be more friendly to my industry and more interested in protecting my livelihood.

The second reason I voted for Gore was that I was afraid that Bush would open his mouth and say the wrong thing and get us into a war. I was wrong about how it happened but I was right that he took us into war. I know a lot of people will say that the war was forced on him by 9/11. In reaction to 9/11, Afghanistan was correct IMO. Iraq was wrong from the get go. Again, IMO.

As to the current candidates, I liked a lot of what Kerry had to say about working to regain our position in the world as a whole during the first debate. In the second debate, all I really heard was how both candidates planned to spend MY money. The last debate went to Bush simply because I do not like the spending ways of the Democrats.

Also, thanks in part to KCWolfman, I will be voting for any and all Libertarians on the ballot (other than for President) in an attempt to help that party get some credibility. Russ has been correct in that they need to start by winning some lower positions in order to be taken seriously on the larger stage. Thanks Russ, you have helped to solidify my political beliefs! :thumb:

Damn, now I have to look at my local candidates again. I guess I can help the cause (other than my school district and POTUS).

whoman69
10-15-2004, 09:32 PM
Apparently Zach is comfortable with sKerry's borderline treasonous activities when he returned from 'Nam.
You were born more than a dozen years after the war ended. Your dad might even be too young to remember Vietnam. You have no idea of the emotions that ran on both sides. You also throw around a very powerful accusation rather easily.

COCKRINGLEADER
10-15-2004, 09:36 PM
TJ earlier you said Kerry is the better candidate. MD asked you to outline why. I thought a libertarian would be scared sh*tless of a socialist like Kerry, I know I am.

Personally, I am wondering what you base the part I bolded upon?

I like bush because, his stance on terrorism and the way he responded on it the days following 9/11. His want of a stronger USA.
I like bush because he is cutting my taxes, letting me spend and invest more. Also that he is in favor of a nat'l sales tax.
I like bush because he has a plan for SS. (Kerry doesn't really have one).
And last...

I like bush because I am a guy, duh!!!


please don't describe Kerry as a socialist.

Donger
10-15-2004, 09:38 PM
please don't describe Kerry as a socialist.

Why not?

COCKRINGLEADER
10-15-2004, 09:40 PM
Why not?


jesus donger, take a freakin' class. This notion that every body left of Goldwater is a freakin' socialist is moronic. And don't spout the Bush line of socializing medicine... that is crud also. It is as stupid as calling Bush a facist.

Hydrae
10-15-2004, 09:44 PM
jesus donger, take a freakin' class. This notion that every body left of Goldwater is a freakin' socialist is moronic. And don't spout the Bush line of socializing medicine... that is crud also. It is as stupid as calling Bush a facist.


So you are saying that Kerry does not seem to feel that the government can do a better job than private industry in many areas? Sounds like the classical (albiet broad) definition of socialism to me.

KCWolfman
10-15-2004, 09:45 PM
jesus donger, take a freakin' class. This notion that every body left of Goldwater is a freakin' socialist is moronic. And don't spout the Bush line of socializing medicine... that is crud also. It is as stupid as calling Bush a facist.
Labels are bad he said from his faux name.

Donger
10-15-2004, 09:45 PM
jesus donger, take a freakin' class. This notion that every body left of Goldwater is a freakin' socialist is moronic. And don't spout the Bush line of socializing medicine... that is crud also. It is as stupid as calling Bush a facist.

I don't need to "spout the Bush line."

Merriam-Webster's line does just fine:

Socialism: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership.

Donger
10-15-2004, 09:46 PM
Labels are bad he said from his faux name.

You're killing me. You really are.

Donger
10-15-2004, 09:46 PM
So you are saying that Kerry does not seem to feel that the government can do a better job than private industry in many areas? Sounds like the classical (albiet broad) definition of socialism to me.

Come to the dark side Hydrae.

whoman69
10-15-2004, 09:47 PM
Who pissed in your Wheaties? If you think Kerry will be a good President, you are delusional. Seriously delusional. I hope, for both our sakes, we don't get a chance to find out. If we do, God help us.
What makes you think Bush is a good president? He states the cost of the war to be the cause of the deficit and then states we've hardly spent anything on the war. He has taken the idea of tax cuts to the extreme while raising spending more than 5 times the level of inflation. Every country in the world knew that we were going to war with Iraq during the diplomacy stage so there was no diplomacy stage to speak of. Instead of attracting alliances, he mandated their appearance. He went to war without sufficient troops which meant that conquered territories were left to fend for themselves. There was total chaos in that country after we went in and in many ways its getting worse. Their expectations to be greeted by the Iraqis like the liberated French were pie in the sky. He changes his excuse for going to war as soon as the old reasons are debunked. Since we have been there we have experienced some sort of new disaster almost weekly.
The amount of secrecy and responsibility taking brings me back to the days of Nixon. They did not want to convene the 9/11 commission, did not want any of their people taking part and George had to have Cheney hold his hand for him when they went to testify before the committee. The lack of grasp on the issues that he has shown thru the debates casts grave doubts for me as to whether he is really even in charge.
You can believe all the right wing spin about how bad Kerry is going to be, or you can just look at the record of the last four years.

Hydrae
10-15-2004, 09:49 PM
This election year has made me realize that I agree more with the Republicans fiscally and more with the Democrats on foreign policy. Not exactly sure where that leaves me. :shrug:

Donger
10-15-2004, 09:51 PM
This election year has made me realize that I agree more with the Repulicans fiscally and more with the Democrats on foreign policy. Not exactly sure where that leaves me. :shrug:

Considering that the Republican's are spend-crazy and the Democrats are Europe-crazy, nor do I.

Taco Bell
10-15-2004, 10:03 PM
I'm confused by this post:

2) "If you think Kerry will be a good President, you are delusional. Seriously delusional. I hope, for both our sakes, we don't get a chance to find out. If we do, God help us."- You say that with so much conviction that it seems you must have witnessed the "bad" Kerry presidency. Fess up. Are you that "man from the future" that I read about yesterday in a tabloid while I was standing in the grocery line? If you are, please, please tell us why Kerry's presidency turns out bad.

Remember, you asked:

Yes, I am the man from the future. The reason a Kerry presidency would turn out bad is as follows:
1. Kerry will fail to win support of "allies" to help in Iraq.
2. The insurgency will be emboldened by a pacifist President who is weak on Defense spending, strong on "social" spending. Consequently, conditions in Iraq will worsen...I know many of you socialists don't think that is possible, but it's true.
3. Kerry will announce an "Iraqitization" plan to turn things over to Iraq, and bring home our boys. Insurgency and terrorist activities will escalate even further to expedite the withdrawal.
4. Once withdrawn, Iraq will descend into a bloody civil war that the US is unwilling to intervene in, and the UN is incompetent and unwilling to act on.
5. Shiite forces, supported by Iranian aid will win the day; another Shiite extremist state will be established next door to Iran.
6. Together, Iran and Iraq will threaten the balance of the middle east, and, yes, the world's oil supply. Oil prices will sky rocket; inflation will soar.
7. Kerry will appoint two or three liberal justices to the Supreme Court. Over time, the first amendment will be gutted by "campaign finance reform," the institution of marriage will be denegrated and destroyed by "gay rights," abortion on demand will become law of the land, victims will be marginalized to accomodate civil liberties for criminals, and all references and manifestations of God and "religion" will be removed entirely from public life and schools.
8. Kerry will attempt to nationalize healthcare. Giving "coverage" to everyone...but quality of care and standards will descend to the level in Canada? Need surgery, get on the list and wait a few years--if you aren't too old or too sick. It's called "rationing."
9. Social Security has to be saved, right? Done, but we have to raise taxes...significantly, to maintain current benefits.
10. To pay for increased social spending federal taxes rates will increase 50% over five years....doubling in ten years.
11. Increased taxes will lead to increased unemployment, less discretionary spending and increased disparity of wealth.
12. As the economy tanks, the government will take over crucial utilities and "businesses." Airlines, communications companies, transportation networks, and hospitals.

Welcome to socialist Utopia.

There ya go.

COCKRINGLEADER
10-15-2004, 10:11 PM
I don't need to "spout the Bush line."

Merriam-Webster's line does just fine:

Socialism: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership.


holy shit you can read.

but, alas, you are wrong. You are the type of guy that hated communist without having any idea what the ideology was. you would buff out your chest, and say it is "us against them," never understand what the proletariat dictatorship was... You want to see socialism? check with your goodfriend Tony Blair, you moron.

Donger
10-15-2004, 10:13 PM
holy shit you can read.

but, alas, you are wrong. You are the type of guy that hated communist without having any idea what the ideology was. you would buff out your chest, and say it is "us against them," never understand what the proletariat dictatorship was... You want to see socialism? check with your goodfriend Tony Blair, you moron.

Wow. Kind of like arguing with the wind.

Taco Bell
10-15-2004, 10:15 PM
Wow. Kind of like arguing with the wind.

Or pissin' in it....

KCWolfman
10-15-2004, 10:23 PM
holy shit you can read.

but, alas, you are wrong. You are the type of guy that hated communist without having any idea what the ideology was. you would buff out your chest, and say it is "us against them," never understand what the proletariat dictatorship was... You want to see socialism? check with your goodfriend Tony Blair, you moron.
You know what. I don't like that my neighbor parks his car on his lawn, but he is still my friend. What a stupid reason you use.


For those of you stating socialism is so great, please have your foreign wealthy buddies leave this country for the medical treatment they don't want from their own physicians. They evidently aren't as smart as you.

Donger
10-15-2004, 10:29 PM
You want to see socialism? check with your goodfriend Tony Blair, you moron.

Upon further review, no thanks.

I escaped the UK (thankfully) and came here so that my family and my children would not have to be subjected to socialism. I've seen, with my own eyes, what it does to people. And it is a very unattractive beast.

I do NOT want to see my country go the way of socialist Europe. And, in my opinion (based on Kerry's own words), that is John Kerry's "vision" for America. I do not want John Kerry to be POTUS of the United States of America based on that alone.

Taco Bell
10-15-2004, 10:35 PM
Upon further review, no thanks.

I escaped the UK (thankfully) and came here so that my family and my children would not have to be subjected to socialism. I've seen, with my own eyes, what it does to people. And it is a very unattractive beast.

I do NOT want to see my country go the way of socialist Europe. And, in my opinion (based on Kerry's own words), that is John Kerry's "vision" for America. I do not want John Kerry to be POTUS of the United States of America based on that alone.

I LOVE this man!

whoman69
10-15-2004, 10:36 PM
Remember, you asked:

Yes, I am the man from the future. The reason a Kerry presidency would turn out bad is as follows:
1. Kerry will fail to win support of "allies" to help in Iraq.
2. The insurgency will be emboldened by a pacifist President who is weak on Defense spending, strong on "social" spending. Consequently, conditions in Iraq will worsen...I know many of you socialists don't think that is possible, but it's true.
3. Kerry will announce an "Iraqitization" plan to turn things over to Iraq, and bring home our boys. Insurgency and terrorist activities will escalate even further to expedite the withdrawal.
4. Once withdrawn, Iraq will descend into a bloody civil war that the US is unwilling to intervene in, and the UN is incompetent and unwilling to act on.
5. Shiite forces, supported by Iranian aid will win the day; another Shiite extremist state will be established next door to Iran.
6. Together, Iran and Iraq will threaten the balance of the middle east, and, yes, the world's oil supply. Oil prices will sky rocket; inflation will soar.
7. Kerry will appoint two or three liberal justices to the Supreme Court. Over time, the first amendment will be gutted by "campaign finance reform," the institution of marriage will be denegrated and destroyed by "gay rights," abortion on demand will become law of the land, victims will be marginalized to accomodate civil liberties for criminals, and all references and manifestations of God and "religion" will be removed entirely from public life and schools.
8. Kerry will attempt to nationalize healthcare. Giving "coverage" to everyone...but quality of care and standards will descend to the level in Canada? Need surgery, get on the list and wait a few years--if you aren't too old or too sick. It's called "rationing."
9. Social Security has to be saved, right? Done, but we have to raise taxes...significantly, to maintain current benefits.
10. To pay for increased social spending federal taxes rates will increase 50% over five years....doubling in ten years.
11. Increased taxes will lead to increased unemployment, less discretionary spending and increased disparity of wealth.
12. As the economy tanks, the government will take over crucial utilities and "businesses." Airlines, communications companies, transportation networks, and hospitals.

Welcome to socialist Utopia.

There ya go.
Supposition and scare tactics. Not one truth involved in the whole scenario.

Frankie
10-15-2004, 10:39 PM
Having mostly watched, but occasionally participated, in the many political posts here I would like to issue a challenge to anyone willing to take on this task.....

So far I have challenged 3 people who are supporters of John Kerry/John Edwards to outline the reasons that they support him, other than the "I hate George Bush" mantra that seems to drive several on this board. Thus far I haven't had the courtesy of a reply.....

To make things fair I issue this challenge:

From supporters of both candidates I would love to see you be able to give a fair assessment of your candidate, strengths and weaknesses and put them in writing here.

I have seen some pretty good discussions from people on here who are truly undecided....quite frankly they have been better at giving assessments of both candidates than those who claim to be staunch supporters.....

So, let's see how well you know your candidate....

mmaddog
*******

Here's a few of my reasons:

1- Character: Despite the heavy propaganda against it, I consider Kerry a man of integrity and character. I actually think his post Nam activities were very noble and indeed add to that image. The man did go to Nam. And the man did come back and call out the leadership and the mentality that saw precious human life as mere numbers. If Kerry saved a soldier's live in Nam, he may have saved many more by outing how wrong and needless that war was. Bush, to me is diametrically opposite and his history seems to verify that.

2- I met Kerry briefly. He is impressively well-read, well-educated and overall well informed. I think that showed well in the debates. While Bush's slightly more successful last debate wreaked of intensive coaching, Kerry's demeanor was that of one who knows what he is talking about himself.

3- I think health care reform is way past due. I think the drug companies are extremely greedy. And I don't buy the BS that they have to charge us the ungodly amounts for our pills because of the cost of research and development. R&D is expensive, but it seems extremely unproportional. And BTW, "frivilous lawsuits" is a Bush cry only since "the evil trial lawyer" John Edwards is on the ticket. I'm far more skeptical of "corporate lawyers" that the Bush family know a thing or two about.

4- I do not like the Bush family's and their close associates' (including the Saudis) historically heavy involvement in oil and defense contracts, both of which I saw as clear conflicts of interest when they flim-flammed us into the Iraq war.

5- I do not like the hypocricy of acting like they are for the troups and send them to combat without all the necessary equipment. If they respect the warriors why do they reduce VA benefits? If they respect the warriors, why do they hide the flag-draped coffins, only unloading them in the dark of the night. The audacity of the campaign ads blaming Kerry for not voting for a bill that included the bullet-proof vests makes me want to vomit. Because this president saw fit to send them to war without the vests more than a full year before that $78 million bill was voted on.

6- I do not like the fact that the radical religion faction is behind Bush. I still get nauseated when I remember Jerry Falwell's brash smirk (on Donahue, I think) shortly after the '04 mis-Election when he declared that the evangelical right is dedicated to 8 years of GW and 8 more of Jeb. It shows their true intention of dynasty-building to advance their agenda. That cannot be healthy for America.

7- Bush's overall domestic policy is bad, but to give credit where it's due, his overall foreign policy is.....terrible.

8- I don't like Bush's team (Powell excluded despite the fact that he sold out). Rummy, Wolfy, Cheney, Condi and Ashcroft. What a bunch of two-faced snakes in the grass!

9- I don't like the tax policy that shuts you up with $200 and then has you shell out $2000 for the resulting raised prices of goods. I think the idea of taxes, if done correctly, is correct and necessary. If you live in your own house, you pay mortgage. If you live in a rented house, you pay rent. If you live in America, you have to pay something for upkeep. The Repubs scare you from taxes like it is extortion! I do see a lot of merit in Kerry's promise of rolling back the tax cut of the top 2% to pay for things.

10- I'm for some sort of gun control. My father had a gun, point blank, on his 7 year old's chest and about to pull the trigger when he caught himself realizing it was only me stumbling to my parents' bed after a midnight bad dream. And I hate the notion of "Guns don't kill people, people do." Yeah, but guns make it possible from a distance. Thank you very much.

I'm sure I can think of many more reasons but for now these ten should tie you over.

Jenson71
10-15-2004, 10:43 PM
You were born more than a dozen years after the war ended. Your dad might even be too young to remember Vietnam. You have no idea of the emotions that ran on both sides. You also throw around a very powerful accusation rather easily.

Hey! Look a little closer next time!

(I knew that SD guy would get me into trouble someday. It's all fun until someone gets hurt, right?)

Jenson71
10-15-2004, 10:43 PM
Also, I don't think I have a problem with people voting for a person just because they aren't the other person.

stevieray
10-15-2004, 11:30 PM
Here's a few of my reasons:

1- Character: Despite the heavy propaganda against it, I consider Kerry a man of integrity and character. I actually think his post Nam activities were very noble and indeed add to that image. The man did go to Nam. And the man did come back and call out the leadership and the mentality that saw precious human life as mere numbers. If Kerry saved a soldier's live in Nam, he may have saved many more by outing how wrong and needless that war was. Bush, to me is diametrically opposite and his history seems to verify that.

2- I met Kerry briefly. He is impressively well-read, well-educated and overall well informed. I think that showed well in the debates. While Bush's slightly more successful last debate wreaked of intensive coaching, Kerry's demeanor was that of one who knows what he is talking about himself.

3- I think health care reform is way past due. I think the drug companies are extremely greedy. And I don't buy the BS that they have to charge us the ungodly amounts for our pills because of the cost of research and development. R&D is expensive, but it seems extremely unproportional. And BTW, "frivilous lawsuits" is a Bush cry only since "the evil trial lawyer" John Edwards is on the ticket. I'm far more skeptical of "corporate lawyers" that the Bush family know a thing or two about.

4- I do not like the Bush family's and their close associates' (including the Saudis) historically heavy involvement in oil and defense contracts, both of which I saw as clear conflicts of interest when they flim-flammed us into the Iraq war.

5- I do not like the hypocricy of acting like they are for the troups and send them to combat without all the necessary equipment. If they respect the warriors why do they reduce VA benefits? If they respect the warriors, why do they hide the flag-draped coffins, only unloading them in the dark of the night. The audacity of the campaign ads blaming Kerry for not voting for a bill that included the bullet-proof vests makes me want to vomit. Because this president saw fit to send them to war without the vests more than a full year before that $78 million bill was voted on.

6- I do not like the fact that the radical religion faction is behind Bush. I still get nauseated when I remember Jerry Falwell's brash smirk (on Donahue, I think) shortly after the '04 mis-Election when he declared that the evangelical right is dedicated to 8 years of GW and 8 more of Jeb. It shows their true intention of dynasty-building to advance their agenda. That cannot be healthy for America.

7- Bush's overall domestic policy is bad, but to give credit where it's due, his overall foreign policy is.....terrible.

8- I don't like Bush's team (Powell excluded despite the fact that he sold out). Rummy, Wolfy, Cheney, Condi and Ashcroft. What a bunch of two-faced snakes in the grass!

9- I don't like the tax policy that shuts you up with $200 and then has you shell out $2000 for the resulting raised prices of goods. I think the idea of taxes, if done correctly, is correct and necessary. If you live in your own house, you pay mortgage. If you live in a rented house, you pay rent. If you live in America, you have to pay something for upkeep. The Repubs scare you from taxes like it is extortion! I do see a lot of merit in Kerry's promise of rolling back the tax cut of the top 2% to pay for things.

10- I'm for some sort of gun control. My father had a gun, point blank, on his 7 year old's chest and about to pull the trigger when he caught himself realizing it was only me stumbling to my parents' bed after a midnight bad dream. And I hate the notion of "Guns don't kill people, people do." Yeah, but guns make it possible from a distance. Thank you very much.

I'm sure I can think of many more reasons but for now these ten should tie you over.

I only see three reasons. character, well read, and going after the top 2%.

Taco Bell
10-15-2004, 11:34 PM
Hey! Look a little closer next time!

(I knew that SD guy would get me into trouble someday. It's all fun until someone gets hurt, right?)

San Diego guy? WTF?

Frankie
10-15-2004, 11:41 PM
It's actually the other way around... (http://www.reasontofreedom.com/indexlfkg.html) Bush is the worst thing to happen to Libertarian politics since FDR. He's a tax-cut and spend conservative who hasn't vetoed a single spending bill. With a republican congress, that's a dangerous thing.

(yellow flag)

15 yards for illegal use of the words "Bush" and "FDR" in one sentence.

Frankie
10-15-2004, 11:52 PM
Supposition and scare tactics. Not one truth involved in the whole scenario.
Agreed, totally.

Taco Bell
10-15-2004, 11:56 PM
Agreed, totally.

I thought you and Taco were butt buddies; maybe it's you and whoman?

Phobia
10-15-2004, 11:59 PM
There has been so man accusations of people being "sheep", I just wanted to see if those doing the accusing were sheep themselves. It appears that I am right.

I'm a total sheep. Baaaaaaaaaah!

I'm stuck with 2 choices. I have little confidence in either.

However, I feel safer under George Bush. Kerry hasn't convinced me that he's committed to continuing the war on terror with a fervor.

With GWB, I know what I'm getting. GWB is sending a worldwide message - Don't mess with the USA.

I wish I weren't a sheep in this case, but it's the best my country is offering at the moment.

Frankie
10-16-2004, 12:00 AM
I thought you and Taco were butt buddies; maybe it's you and whoman?

Don't be jealous. I have a lot of love to go around. ;)

Frankie
10-16-2004, 12:13 AM
However, I feel safer under George Bush. Kerry hasn't convinced me that he's committed to continuing the war on terror with a fervor.

The die is cast. Like it or not the American 'Iraq' policy is set, regardless of who's president. So the war will go on untill some victory is achieved or a face-saving way to pull out is found. Also Iraq has little to do with our feeling safe. Al Qaede and the related terror groups do. I don't see Bush doing anything of substance in that area. I honestly think Kerry will pay more attention to it than this guy.

Phobia
10-16-2004, 12:17 AM
The die is cast. Like it or not the American 'Iraq' policy is set, regardless of who's president. So the war will go on untill some victory is achieved or a face-saving way to pull out is found. Also Iraq has little to do with our feeling safe. Al Qaede and the related terror groups do. I don't see Bush doing anything of substance in that area. I honestly think Kerry will pay more attention to it than this guy.

Who said anything about Iraq? I'm talking specifically about Afghanistan and the Dept of Homeland Security. I like what we've done in these areas under GWB.

irishjayhawk
10-16-2004, 12:24 AM
Neither are good. Kerry though is the lesser evil, IMO.

whoman69
10-16-2004, 09:00 AM
Who said anything about Iraq? I'm talking specifically about Afghanistan and the Dept of Homeland Security. I like what we've done in these areas under GWB.
Problem is that Bush was against the Dept of Homeland Security, has used its alarm system to further his own political needs, and has created more terrorists in Iraq, while pulling troops out of Afghanistan for an invisible enemy in Iraq.

stevieray
10-16-2004, 09:06 AM
Problem is that Bush was against the Dept of Homeland Security, has used its alarm system to further his own political needs, and has created more terrorists in Iraq, while pulling troops out of Afghanistan for an invisible enemy in Iraq.

and you accuse others of scare tactics?

whoman69
10-16-2004, 09:08 AM
and you accuse others of scare tactics?
I guess you're afraid of Bush's record too, huh?

KCWolfman
10-16-2004, 09:14 AM
I guess you're afraid of Bush's record too, huh?
Actually, Steve had a valid point. You complain about others using supposition to incite fear and you just did the exact same thing.

stevieray
10-16-2004, 09:19 AM
I guess you're afraid of Bush's record too, huh?

No, more like you can't respond without deflecting to Bush.

Just like all the bleeding hearts criticisms about the War will cease if Kerry wins.

KCWolfman
10-16-2004, 09:26 AM
No, more like you can't respond without deflecting to Bush.

Just like all the bleeding hearts criticisms about the War will cease if Kerry wins.
Steve - Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays they state the war will cease.
Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays they state we will send in more troops.

They have adopted their candidates style.

Phobia
10-16-2004, 12:40 PM
Problem is that Bush was against the Dept of Homeland Security, has used its alarm system to further his own political needs, and has created more terrorists in Iraq, while pulling troops out of Afghanistan for an invisible enemy in Iraq.

"invisible enemy" Please explain. Does that mean that the body count is all a giant misunderstanding?

2bikemike
10-16-2004, 01:52 PM
My vote will go to Bush for the following reasons.

1.) Leadership after 9/11. I think he did an outstanding job following the attack on our country. As far as Iraq goes I was pleased that somebody finally stood up to Saddam and said enough is enough. I liked the way he called out the UN and highlighted who our true allies are. The UN was unwilling to enforce the very resolutions they enacted we were not.

1a) I don't believe Kerry would be so resolute in standing up for the US interests and would Kowtow to other foriegn leaders (UN). And this is from listening to Kerry himself and not from bi partisan attacks.

2.) Health Care is a serious problem. I think it is a step in the right direction to enact tort reform. My sister pays 30k a year in medical malpractice insurance. The system is a mess and the less the Govt. is involved the better.

2a) Kerry insists he will ensure that every child has health care and that how ever many millions of people will be covered under his "plan". Well that means the Govt will be buying it and providing it. He says they will be able to buy into the same system he is in. Well if they can't afford health care now how are they going to buy into his system? For those of you who want socialized medicine ask somebody from a country who has Govt. ran health care and see what they pay in taxes. I just talked to a girl from Norway who pays 41% of her pay in taxes.

3.) Integrity. I believe that Bush has a lot of integrity. He strongly believes that a free Iraq will make this world a better place. He does not waver on the Abortion issue. The Gay marriage issue. No matter how unpopular they may seem he sticks with his beliefs and does not compromise them.

3a) Kerry on the other hand appears to blow with the political wind. I think that is dangerous for a leader to do. Thats not leadership that is trying to please everybody and that just can't be done. And again this is not from the talking heads this is from listening to Kerry himself.

4) Environment. I believe that there is way too many environmental laws that are applied without common sense. I have seen examples with regard to my work and applied through out the state and county where I live. I am for drilling in the ANWR. This is not a place that I will ever visit and I would be willing to bet that nobody else is planing a trip to see it soon. It is 10 million acres of barren featureless landscape that is for the most part pretty inaccessible. Bush wanted IIRC to allow development of a 2,000 acre tract which is pretty minimal compared to the 10 million acres comprising the ANWR. We bitch about the price of gas and our dependence on OPEC but we are unwilling to tap into some of our resources.

4a) Kerry's "plan" does the exact opposite of what I believe needs to be done. He is against drilling the ANWR. He offers little to no incentive for business such as ours to modernize or improve our exhaust emissions. He just wants it improved regardless of cost which we in turn would pass on to our customers. Which is in fact you and I.

The things I hate about the Bush administration is the runaway spending and I would like to see better border security and tougher immigration laws and enforcement.

As far as spending goes I blame the house and senate as much as I blame the pres. It takes all 3 to spend our money.

Baby Lee
10-16-2004, 02:18 PM
holy shit you can read.

but, alas, you are wrong. You are the type of guy that hated communist without having any idea what the ideology was. you would buff out your chest, and say it is "us against them," never understand what the proletariat dictatorship was... You want to see socialism? check with your goodfriend Tony Blair, you moron.
And you're the type of guy who heard so many people like the guy you are describing that you reflexively assume that anyone who uses the terms doesn't know what they mean.

Calcountry
10-16-2004, 02:37 PM
Supposition and scare tactics. Not one truth involved in the whole scenario.
Taht was one of the most well thought out, cogent rebuttals that I have ever seen.

Calcountry
10-16-2004, 02:40 PM
The die is cast. Like it or not the American 'Iraq' policy is set, regardless of who's president. So the war will go on untill some victory is achieved or a face-saving way to pull out is found. Also Iraq has little to do with our feeling safe. Al Qaede and the related terror groups do. I don't see Bush doing anything of substance in that area. I honestly think Kerry will pay more attention to it than this guy.
Then you are blind, we have killed 75% of known Al Qaeda, and counting.

whoman69
10-16-2004, 06:48 PM
"invisible enemy" Please explain. Does that mean that the body count is all a giant misunderstanding?
Invisible enemy, no WMDs, no ties to 9/11. All the reasons for going to Iraq have been debunked and replaced by excuses.

whoman69
10-16-2004, 07:02 PM
Actually, Steve had a valid point. You complain about others using supposition to incite fear and you just did the exact same thing.
The only point of contention for supposition would be the ties of the terrorist threat status to Bush's place in the polls.

Inciting fear is VP Cheney stating that if Democrats are elected that another attack on America is a certainty. Inciting fear is to state that Kerry has raised taxes 350 times, have to drop that figure to 98 and still know that number is too high. Inciting fear is using partisan figures to say the government will totally take over health care and saying the deficit will rise when you have presided over the largest deficits in American history. Inciting fear is using words like "sensitive" and "global test" out of context in order to twist the meaning behind the original statement.

Stating that President Bush has taken several wrong moves in the war on Iraq and the war on terror and not wanting to see the same "things are going great in Iraq" strategy continue would hardly be called fear mongering.

BroWhippendiddle
10-16-2004, 09:02 PM
Invisible enemy, no WMDs, no ties to 9/11. All the reasons for going to Iraq have been debunked and replaced by excuses.

At the time we went into Iraq, the intelligence reports (that I'm sure you have never seen, only heard about) indicated that there were WMD's in Iraq. The president acted on the intelligence on hand at the time. In his speech to the people of America and the world after 9/11 he said (not his exact words, but this is the basic jist of what he said) "If you harbor terrorists (IRAQ DID), if you allow terrorists to train in your country (IRAQ DID), if you support terrorism (IRAQ MAY HAVE), we are coming.

What you fail to see is that they were 1) Warned and 2) given 48 hours to capitulate, they thumbed their noses at the U.S.

Now with your 20/20 hindsight, you agree with those that have been against the war for any reason, that it was all lies and there was no reason to depose SH.

You fail to use what common sense you were born with. If you are anit-war, be anti-war. Don't use any and every excuse to damn the actions of the President, it makes it look like it is a personal vendetta of the democratic party.

Did you notice the debates? It didn't matter what the President did, good or bad, Kerry attacked everything and while doing that had no viable alternatives. Each and every program that Kerry had as a PLAN were going to cost the taxpayers more in taxes. There is no way that he can make everything he has promised to fruition without blasting every American with higher taxes.

Kerry has changed his position as the political wind blows, at least we can see the steadfast committment that the President has. Kerry promises to hunt down OBL and kill him. That would be quite a job for the president of the U.S. (I know he meant that he would have it done, but his words say otherwise.)

Are you one of the people that promise to leave the U.S. if Bush is re-elected? Some of the actors that promised that in 2000 reneged, I'd guess you would as well.

BroWhippendiddle
10-16-2004, 09:10 PM
The only point of contention for supposition would be the ties of the terrorist threat status to Bush's place in the polls.

Inciting fear is VP Cheney stating that if Democrats are elected that another attack on America is a certainty. Inciting fear is to state that Kerry has raised taxes 350 times, have to drop that figure to 98 and still know that number is too high. Inciting fear is using partisan figures to say the government will totally take over health care and saying the deficit will rise when you have presided over the largest deficits in American history. Inciting fear is using words like "sensitive" and "global test" out of context in order to twist the meaning behind the original statement.

Stating that President Bush has taken several wrong moves in the war on Iraq and the war on terror and not wanting to see the same "things are going great in Iraq" strategy continue would hardly be called fear mongering.

Do you have a link to the claim of 350 times raising taxes? I have studied the 98 times, some of those were multiple votes of yes on the same tax bill after it had been changed to keep the democrats happy and he still voted for it. To say that he voted yes 98 times on tax raises could be considered true, but your point is known and acceptable. So with that in mind how many times did he vote to raise taxes when you take out the second votes on the same bill?

The supposition that terrorists would attack if Kerry were elected may not be a factual comment, but if you think about Kerry and his anti-war mentality, don't you think that the terrorists would test his administration to see if they would react? My gut feeling is that Kerry would capitulate and give in to the desires of the terrorists in form of extortion and negotiating with terrorists for release of known terrorists that are currently in lockup. Like I said, that seems to be the mentality of the terrorists and after 9/11 they know what kind of action that President Bush would take.

Ash
10-16-2004, 10:35 PM
Are you one of the people that promise to leave the U.S. if Bush is re-elected? Some of the actors that promised that in 2000 reneged, I'd guess you would as well.

Is half the country going to need to leave if bush is re elected?Because thats about how many disapprove of his actions.

Taco Bell
10-16-2004, 10:49 PM
Is half the country going to need to leave if bush is re elected?Because thats about how many disapprove of his actions.

No, no....

I'm hopin' the half that are pacifist, commie, pinko, homos are goin' to LEAVE...because about half of us would friggin' PUKE if that dickweed from MA gets elected. :)

whoman69
10-16-2004, 10:51 PM
Do you have a link to the claim of 350 times raising taxes? I have studied the 98 times, some of those were multiple votes of yes on the same tax bill after it had been changed to keep the democrats happy and he still voted for it. To say that he voted yes 98 times on tax raises could be considered true, but your point is known and acceptable. So with that in mind how many times did he vote to raise taxes when you take out the second votes on the same bill?

The supposition that terrorists would attack if Kerry were elected may not be a factual comment, but if you think about Kerry and his anti-war mentality, don't you think that the terrorists would test his administration to see if they would react? My gut feeling is that Kerry would capitulate and give in to the desires of the terrorists in form of extortion and negotiating with terrorists for release of known terrorists that are currently in lockup. Like I said, that seems to be the mentality of the terrorists and after 9/11 they know what kind of action that President Bush would take.
Go to the gop site, they just ran the commercial here during the news for a link. That ad is still using the 350 times to raise taxes figure.
The GOP has done its job well in indoctinating you to the fear of Kerry.

whoman69
10-16-2004, 10:54 PM
No, no....

I'm hopin' the half that are pacifist, commie, pinko, homos are goin' to LEAVE...because about half of us would friggin' PUKE if that dickweed from MA gets elected. :)
Damn, were back to the Nixon day of "America, love it or leave it." Only the version of America we have to love is yours.

Taco Bell
10-16-2004, 10:57 PM
Damn, were back to the Nixon day of "America, love it or leave it." Only the version of America we have to love is yours.

Isn't that what Ash was suggestin'?

Ash
10-16-2004, 11:13 PM
No, no....

I'm hopin' the half that are pacifist, commie, pinko, homos are goin' to LEAVE...because about half of us would friggin' PUKE if that dickweed from MA gets elected. :)

I am not a pacifist,commie,pinko,or homo as you so elequently state as your demographic for deportation.So do I still need to leave? Please come up with another hatefull noun in witch to label me so that I may vacate this country with a more proper definition.

Perhaps you could just deport the people who read and understand what a cluster f%ck the current admin has gotten us into while lying to us to propagate it.

Deport the informed people we are dangerous!

BroWhippendiddle
10-17-2004, 07:00 AM
Go to the gop site, they just ran the commercial here during the news for a link. That ad is still using the 350 times to raise taxes figure.
The GOP has done its job well in indoctinating you to the fear of Kerry.

I don't fear Kerry, I think he is a lying POS. He is not going to look out for you as a middle classer. He is going to look out for himself and his friends.

I didn't think you'd provide a link.

BroWhippendiddle
10-17-2004, 07:02 AM
Is half the country going to need to leave if bush is re elected?Because thats about how many disapprove of his actions.

The jist of what I said, and actual wording can be found in the quote in your response.

There were people that swore that they would leave the country if Bush was elected in 2000, they are still here. I was just inqiring if that same situation was going to happen. I'm willing to keep the list and remind them after the election.

Frankie
10-17-2004, 11:21 PM
Then you are blind, we have killed 75% of known Al Qaeda, and counting.
Link please.

Frankie
10-17-2004, 11:27 PM
Link please.
Oh sorry. I guess B:bong:SH said that a few times in a couple of debates.

BroWhippendiddle
10-18-2004, 02:36 AM
Link please.

You desire for a link seems to be a wasted thought. Facts are that if you look up the members of Al Queda that were listed as knowns, there are over 75% of them dead or captured.

Just to piss you off, I hope that OBL is captured in the days before the election. The appearance of WMD's would be just as harmful to Kerry's election bid.

Now, take your blood pressure medicine before you pop your cork. Then respond.