NationStates Jolt Archive

In a bold move, Zell Miller slams Presidential Candidate John F. Kerry!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,131185,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/01/gop.main/index.html

He believes in a strong National Security and does not Like the Kerry's stance on it. My friends, Zell Miller is a Democrat from GA and he is supporting GWB for FOUR MORE YEARS!

This means he is a Moderate pretending to be a democrat, a Republican masscarading as a democrat, or delusional.

Wow I am stunned.

After listening to:

"Hi! I am Zell Miller. I am a democrat and I support the President"
"Hi! I am Zell Miller. I am a democrat and I support the President"
"Hi! I am Zell Miller. I am a democrat and I support the President"
"Hi! I am Zell Miller. I am a democrat and I support the President"
"Hi! I am Zell Miller. I am a democrat and I support the President"
"Hi! I am Zell Miller. I am a democrat and I support the President"
"Hi! I am Zell Miller. I am a democrat and I support the President"
....


I am just amazed that he would slam Kerry and support the Shrub!

The Repubs have Spector and the Demos have him.

[/sarcasm]

Fuck Miller. He hasn't been a Democrat for years now, and he's gone so far afield in the last year that he's been removed from all leadership positions in the Senate and isn't allowed to caucus or discuss strategy because he was passing along strategy notes to the Republicans.

To the Republican party--you want Miller? Take him. I wouldn't piss down his throat if his heart was on fire.

This means he is a Moderate pretending to be a democrat, a Republican masscarading as a democrat, or delusional.

Or, you know, he could be right...

*runs away from the oncoming hoard of Bush-haters*

:P

and so it begins. Some one states something bad about Kerry and the bashing starts!

He is still loyal to the Democratic Party but he does not believe that John Kerry is the right man for the job.

Or, you know, he could be right...

*runs away from the oncoming hoard of Bush-haters*
A delusional man isn't lying , he thinks he is right too.

He is still loyal to the Democratic Party but he does not believe that John Kerry is the right man for the job.
Actually he is against the party in general not just Kerry if you heard the speech so no he isn't still lotal.

:P

and so it begins. Some one states something bad about Kerry and the bashing starts!

He is still loyal to the Democratic Party but he does not believe that John Kerry is the right man for the job.

No not really, he was saying that stuff and pulling his antics before Kerry said he was running.

Fuck Miller. He hasn't been a Democrat for years now, and he's gone so far afield in the last year that he's been removed from all leadership positions in the Senate and isn't allowed to caucus or discuss strategy because he was passing along strategy notes to the Republicans.

To the Republican party--you want Miller? Take him. I wouldn't piss down his throat if his heart was on fire.
That is just sooo sad. This is the hatred spewed by the left. Keep up the good work, your maaking America love your party.

Or, you know, he could be right...

*runs away from the oncoming hoard of Bush-haters*
LOL... it's funny how so many of the Bush supporters automatically assume that disagreement with the POTUS and his political stances are equivalent to hatred of him. I dislike his policies immensely, but that isn't the same thing as hating Bush himself. Sure, there are those that do so, but there are those who disagree with, say, Clinton or Kerry, that hate them as well. But not everyone who disagrees with them hate them either.

That is just sooo sad. This is the hatred spewed by the left. Keep up the good work, your maaking America love your party.

WOWWWWWWW

You speak for America?

[/sarcasm]

:P

and so it begins. Some one states something bad about Kerry and the bashing starts!

He is still loyal to the Democratic Party but he does not believe that John Kerry is the right man for the job.
Loyal to the Democratic party? Find the last time he voted with the Democrats on anything. This has nothing to do with Kerry and everything to do with Zell Miller. He's a chicken hearted traitor who doesn't have the balls to change parties. I say again--fuck him. You guys want him, you can have him.

In a bold move, Zell Miller slams Presidential Candidate John F. Kerry!

Yeah, it's really bold of him to slam Kerry when he's already been, for all intents and purposes, thrown out of the party.

Some of you "young" posters might want to look up Miller's keynote address at the Democratic convention in 1992. The ultimate flip-flop. He's no more a Democrat then Al Sharpon is a Republican! It's bullshit at it's worse or best? I haven't decided!

Loyal to the Democratic party? Find the last time he voted with the Democrats on anything. This has nothing to do with Kerry and everything to do with Zell Miller. He's a chicken hearted traitor who doesn't have the balls to change parties. I say again--fuck him. You guys want him, you can have him.

Probably because he believes in America and what it stands for? I've seen what the Dems have done in the Senate, namely nothing. He is doing what he feels is best. Just because he does not vote the party line does not make him a Republican in sheeps clothing.

i made it through 15 minutes before i had to turn the channel. its not right to be alone in the house yelling at the TV.

i must be a democrat, pretty much everything he said that was "bad" about kerry made me go "HELL YEAH"

Some of you "young" posters might want to look up Miller's keynote address at the Democratic convention in 1992. The ultimate flip-flop. He's no more a Democrat then Al Sharpon is a Republican! It's bullshit at it's worse or best? I haven't decided!

Everyone knows that Al Sharpton is not a republican but I know where you went to with this comment. I am a young person, I'm 21 and proud of it. I can't wait to get back home from the University and get my absentee ballot and get it in so that my vote will count. I will be voting Bush, I will be voting for Specter, as for the local races, I pretty much made up my mind for whom I'm voting for and no, its not straight Republican.

Some of you "young" posters might want to look up Miller's keynote address at the Democratic convention in 1992. The ultimate flip-flop. He's no more a Democrat then Al Sharpon is a Republican! It's bullshit at it's worse or best? I haven't decided!
In the immortal words of leftist fools everywhere, "It not flip-flopping, it's nuanced decision making!"\

Kerry Fled

In the immortal words of leftist fools everywhere, "It not flip-flopping, it's nuanced decision making!"\

Kerry Fled
Kerry never fled, but I wish you would with that stupid slogan.

Probably because he believes in America and what it stands for? I've seen what the Dems have done in the Senate, namely nothing. He is doing what he feels is best. Just because he does not vote the party line does not make him a Republican in sheeps clothing.No, it makes him a Democrat in name only. Zell Miller is as much a Democrat as George W. Bush is.

And as far as the Senate is concerned, the Democrats have done just fine this year. They've done what they're supposed to do--be an effective opposition party that keeps the majority from fucking up the place too badly.

No, it makes him a Democrat in name only. Zell Miller is as much a Democrat as George W. Bush is.

And as far as the Senate is concerned, the Democrats have done just fine this year. They've done what they're supposed to do--be an effective opposition party that keeps the majority from fucking up the place too badly.

By blocking Judicial Nominees? Not giving them up or down votes? Blocking agendas that would've benefitted our country? Many bills were killed because of Democrats either blocking or filerbustering items that would've benefitted our country to no end.

By blocking Judicial Nominees? Not giving them up or down votes? Blocking agendas that would've benefitted our country? Many bills were killed because of Democrats either blocking or filerbustering items that would've benefitted our country to no end.
You say they would have benefitted the country. I say they would have fucked it up worse. For me, the filibustering was exactly what needed to be done, and I'm glad they had the balls to do it.

By blocking Judicial Nominees? Not giving them up or down votes? Blocking agendas that would've benefitted our country? Many bills were killed because of Democrats either blocking or filerbustering items that would've benefitted our country to no end.
Namne a bill that you think would have helped to "no end" basically infinity?

Zell Miller is a Democrat in name only.

He's a Repugnican in my book.

What a weasel the man is. I wonder how the poor sods who voted for him feel? Presumably they thought they were voting Democrat. We have turncoats like that here and they disgust me, whatever political flavour they are. How can you trust a politician who insults his constituants this way?

Zell Miller's book, A National Party No More describes his reasoning for being a Conservative Democrat.

It is well known, and not suprising that he supported Bush, as he supported the war in Iraq and was one of the biggest critics of Gore.

You say they would have benefitted the country. I say they would have fucked it up worse. For me, the filibustering was exactly what needed to be done, and I'm glad they had the balls to do it.
You think you can manage a post with out an F-bomb? There are youngins 'round here. I know you are upset because this is the second candidate you have slavishly devoted your credibility to, only to see him crumble, but really, leave the nasty language out of your post, man.

Kerry Fled

So what exactly is a democrat? Someone who blindly follows the partisan policy on everything? We elect politicians to lead, not fall in step behind what a party says their stance is.

I'm a conservative democrat - I voted for Clinton, and this election I'll be voting for Bush. Miller seems to be the same way - someone who wishes the Democratic party still made sense, but knows that with Kerry and Edwards at its front, this isn't the way we want our party to go..

Miller, and I, are waiting for the party to come to its senses on a lot of issues. Unfortunately, I wish Bush and the republicans would get a few things right too - I don't support them completely, but when you have a choice between two parties, you have to pick one - and on the most important issues to me, it's a clear choice for me to make.

But hey, that's just me - and a few million others.. I don't expect to change anyone's vote any more than I expect anyone elses' comments to change mine. When it comes down to it, we're all in this together.

-GSilroc

What a weasel the man is. I wonder how the poor sods who voted for him feel? Presumably they thought they were voting Democrat. We have turncoats like that here and they disgust me, whatever political flavour they are. How can you trust a politician who insults his constituants this way?

This is ridiculous....SO You vote along party lines??

You vote based on the party, not the politics of the candidate??


He is a well known conservative, its not like he hide the fact until now. Anyone who bothers to read up on the people they are going to support in a senate, gubernatorial, or presidential election should known that much about their candidate.

Good work Zell.

This is ridiculous....SO You vote along party lines??

You vote based on the party, not the politics of the candidate??


He is a well known conservative, its not like he hide the fact until now. Anyone who bothers to read up on the people they are going to support in a senate, gubernatorial, or presidential election should known that much about their candidate.

Anyone who stands for election should not renege on the deal after he or she has got the votes. It has nothing to do with voting along party lines, many honourable representatives have voted against their party. When I vote for someone, I do not expect them to betray my trust. That person should have the integrity and dignity to 'cross the floor'.

So what exactly is a democrat? Someone who blindly follows the partisan policy on everything? We elect politicians to lead, not fall in step behind what a party says their stance is.he doesn't have to vote with the Democratic platform on every issue. However, a senator who blindly follows the Republican platform has good reason to register as a Republican. The people who voted for Zel Miller ended up with a politician who doesn't lead, but falls in step with what the Republican Party says his stance is.

By blocking Judicial Nominees? Not giving them up or down votes? Blocking agendas that would've benefitted our country? Many bills were killed because of Democrats either blocking or filerbustering items that would've benefitted our country to no end.

You guys act like hundreds of judicial nominees were blocked. There were like 6 out of like 300. Do you really think that was all a party trick when they had no problem confirming over 250 nominees? Or could it be that the contested nominees were extremists with a history of legislating from the bench that have no place in the courtrooms they were being appointed to? Hmmmm.

Kerry never fled, but I wish you would with that stupid slogan.

Ignore him. Awhile back he started calling everybody Karl. We figured it was a Marx reference and ignored it.

He will get bored and stop.

Anyone who stands for election should not renege on the deal after he or she has got the votes. It has nothing to do with voting along party lines, many honourable representatives have voted against their party. When I vote for someone, I do not expect them to betray my trust. That person should have the integrity and dignity to 'cross the floor'.

then you should respect Zel Miller! He is a conservative Democrat who doesn't like what the Democratic party is becoming. Just because he's conservative, doesn't mean he has renege on anything. It means that he believes in what his Party should become and not what it has become. He's a conservative Democrat in a Liberal Democrat Party. Not easy place to be in.

By blocking Judicial Nominees? Not giving them up or down votes? Blocking agendas that would've benefitted our country? Many bills were killed because of Democrats either blocking or filerbustering items that would've benefitted our country to no end.

You know just swap Republican with Democrat and it's deja vu.

Both sides do it so why are you offended.

You think you can manage a post with out an F-bomb? There are youngins 'round here. I know you are upset because this is the second candidate you have slavishly devoted your credibility to, only to see him crumble, but really, leave the nasty language out of your post, man.

Kerry Fled
i see you still think adding kerry fled to every topic makes you look intelligent and important, you have also yet to verify and justify that statement

You guys act like hundreds of judicial nominees were blocked. There were like 6 out of like 300. Do you really think that was all a party trick when they had no problem confirming over 250 nominees? Or could it be that the contested nominees were extremists with a history of legislating from the bench that have no place in the courtrooms they were being appointed to? Hmmmm.

Does the 9th Circuit Court tell you anything? They are extreme on the left to be sure. The most overturned court in the land if I remember right so saying things about extremists legislating from the Bench does not hold water. Sorry to disuade you of that but fact is fact.

Federal Judges of both parties have legislated from the bench and that needs to stop. They can declare laws unconstitutional but that is for the US Supreme Court to decide not the local federal Courts. I say that both sides need to stop legislating from the Bench however that'll never happen till Congress cracks down on it on all sides but that won't happen either

You know just swap Republican with Democrat and it's deja vu.

Both sides do it so why are you offended.

I'm offended when they all do it. I've complained about Clinton's nominees being blocked. That offended me when that happens, and I've been complaining when Bush's was blocked and I'm offended by that too.

Kerry fled? I don't know about that. I do know he went in the first place.

Does the 9th Circuit Court tell you anything? They are extreme on the left to be sure. The most overturned court in the land if I remember right so saying things about extremists legislating from the Bench does not hold water. Sorry to disuade you of that but fact is fact.

Federal Judges of both parties have legislated from the bench and that needs to stop. They can declare laws unconstitutional but that is for the US Supreme Court to decide not the local federal Courts. I say that both sides need to stop legislating from the Bench however that'll never happen till Congress cracks down on it on all sides but that won't happen either

God bless them!

It actually brings issues to debate!

he doesn't have to vote with the Democratic platform on every issue. However, a senator who blindly follows the Republican platform has good reason to register as a Republican. The people who voted for Zel Miller ended up with a politician who doesn't lead, but falls in step with what the Republican Party says his stance is.


Bush Has Sex With Goats

Are you on speaking terms with Miller? Did he tell you he was waiting to hear from the GOP on what his stance that day was? Or even better, maybe it was his Zionist Master? :)

I never heard anything about a big shock with Miller switching - he was steady on his morals and the people who voted for him knew what they were getting. If he happens to coincide more with the GOP at the moment than his fellow democrats, maybe he *should* consider switching - but at the same time, maybe they should consider where they changed. It works both ways.

Oh and is that goat comment supposed to make me think your opinion is worth more? I mean, debate is one thing - hatred is another. I dislike Kerry's principles, and would fear for our safety if he gets elected - but I wouldn't go around saying he had an affair with a male panda bear. There are lines, especially if you want to be taken seriously.

-GSilroc

God bless them!

It actually brings issues to debate!

HAHAHA!!! I think half of them need to be removed. They are legislating from the bench Black Forrest. That is the legislature's job. The US Supreme Court should be the only court to override the Federal Legislature, NOT an appelent court. They are also the Most overturned Court in the land. What does that tell you?

HAHAHA!!! I think half of them need to be removed. They are legislating from the bench Black Forrest. That is the legislature's job. The US Supreme Court should be the only court to override the Federal Legislature, NOT an appelent court. They are also the Most overturned Court in the land. What does that tell you?
They're a tool. And yes, it needs to stop on BOTH sides. Judges and courts are for deciding whether a person violated a law - NOT for using "creative interpretation" to set "precedent" and re-write laws, bending and breaking the spirit in which they were written.. There are methods to change laws if the American public disagrees with them - this is not the way to do it.

-GSilroc

I just heard David Gergen speaking with Larry King on CNN. Gergen painted the Miller speech as 'venomous' and a viscious attack that may have crossed the line of 'calling the Democratic Party "treasonous". He pointed out that Zell got his start as a partisan of Lester Maddox, and that his background is the politics of hatred.

As Gergen was an advisor to Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Clinton, I think his views on the subject have more than a little bit of merit. I'd agree with him that it has the potential to backfire on the Republicans and their stated desire to run a clean campaign.

HAHAHA!!! I think half of them need to be removed. They are legislating from the bench Black Forrest. That is the legislature's job. The US Supreme Court should be the only court to override the Federal Legislature, NOT an appelent court. They are also the Most overturned Court in the land. What does that tell you?

"Legislating from the bench" is a repub term.

The system is doing what it is designed to do.

The courts have handled issues in the past where the legislature was ignoring or was wrong.

The legislature is not absolute!

They may be overturned a great deal but they have also "legislated" some valid issues.

According to the ACU, Zell Miller has a lifetime Conservative rating of 65. That means he sided with the conservatives (according to the ACU) - by far most of the time Republicans - 65% of the time. Compare this to Senators for the GOP such as Jeff Sessions of Alabama (98), Georgia's other Senator, Saxy Chambliss (94), or even John McCain (84), and the "Republican Puppet" accusations should fall through the floor quickly.

Does the 9th Circuit Court tell you anything? They are extreme on the left to be sure. The most overturned court in the land if I remember right so saying things about extremists legislating from the Bench does not hold water. Sorry to disuade you of that but fact is fact.

So you're saying that since there are bad judges on both ends of the spectrum that we should just let them all in?

Federal Judges of both parties have legislated from the bench and that needs to stop. They can declare laws unconstitutional but that is for the US Supreme Court to decide not the local federal Courts. I say that both sides need to stop legislating from the Bench however that'll never happen till Congress cracks down on it on all sides but that won't happen either

Actually, the Federal courts are supposed to declare things constitutional or unconstitutional and the the supreme court reviews their decisions.

But please explain to me why you say both sides should stop legislating from the bench, but get mad when some are blocked?

Anyone who stands for election should not renege on the deal after he or she has got the votes. It has nothing to do with voting along party lines, many honourable representatives have voted against their party. When I vote for someone, I do not expect them to betray my trust. That person should have the integrity and dignity to 'cross the floor'.


Zell Miller did not suddenly switch. The man has been in politics since before many of the people on this forum's parents were born. The man has always been a Conservative Democrat.

Within the Democratic party there exists two camps, the Clinton and Gore camp. Zell Miller might have supported Clinton, but none of Clinton's policies interfered with the main policy of the Bush Administration. He is not changing point of views, nor opinions, just supporting the person who suits him the best.

He is a man who is tired of his parties constant neglect of his home, the south, and his party's politics in reference to special interests.

For as long as I have known Zell, it has been as a Conservative Democrat.

According to the ACU, Zell Miller has a lifetime Conservative rating of 65.
He also has the nickname of "Zig Zag Zell" in Georgia, so it's not like he has the moral high ground when it comes to calling Kerry a 'flip-flopper'.

He also has the nickname of "Zig Zag Zell" in Georgia, so it's not like he has the moral high ground when it comes to calling Kerry a 'flip-flopper'.
That doesn't *need* a whole lot of high ground. I mean, really.. A waffle could get away with it and come out clean. I don't dispute the man's war record and try to insult anyone's intelligence on that - please don't insult anyone's by trying to pass off his own quotes "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it..", etc.., as anything but a worse set of flip-flops than Miami beach sees.

And frankly, Zell may flip flop. I would even take your word for it, for argument's sake. Miller isn't running for the most important job in America. Kerry is - and that, first and foremost among all my reasons, is why I feel unsafe at the thought of President-Elect Kerry.

-GSilroc

"Legislating from the bench" is a repub term.

Funny, I've heard some dems mention it during their efforts to stop them and you know what? Most of them got appointed anyway thanks to the letter of the law. Unfortunetely, its not permanent but I'll take what I can get. And before you say anything, All presidents make recess appointments. Its how the game is played.

The system is doing what it is designed to do.

Clear to clarify this statement some? I'm curious to know what you mean and how you ment it.

The courts have handled issues in the past where the legislature was ignoring or was wrong.

True and I agree with most of them. However, it has moved far beyond this and now you pretty much have to be a liberal to get on the bench. It has moved beyond the point where the Courts stopped being courts and have moved towards legislation.

The legislature is not absolute!

Never said it wasn't! LOL!

They may be overturned a great deal but they have also "legislated" some valid issues.

and was promptly overturned by SCOTUS! Remember, the 9th circuit court is the most liberal of all the circuit court of appeals. What they hold is not necessarily what others hold. Most of the time it isn't even close. Take 'Under God' for instance. The 9th ruled it unconstitution and on a technicality, SCOTUS tossed it back to the lower court. SCOTUS doesn't want to rule on it. However, I have a feeling that they will and that they will up hold it because it is NOT a prayer.

Ignore him. Awhile back he started calling everybody Karl. We figured it was a Marx reference and ignored it.

He will get bored and stop.
So This is how a child debates? Making up lies? Can you actually show any post where this happened? Lying really does run on the left.

Kerry Fled

True and I agree with most of them. However, it has moved far beyond this and now you pretty much have to be a liberal to get on the bench. It has moved beyond the point where the Courts stopped being courts and have moved towards legislation.
Let's not forget the worst part of this - Forum Shopping. Having a court like the 9th Circuit CoA is bad enough, but when people from all over can have their cases heard there solely because their attorney's know they'll go a certain way is just ridiculous.

Can we all just settle down for a minute. It seems like tensions on this thread are sparking up faster than a fork in the microwave. We can all talk like civilized adults and/or mature teenagers without trying to smear the other persons reputation. I mean we aren't politicians.

We all have things to bring to the table, good points and bad, valuable insight or not. We should respect what each other has to say for now, and treat each other with dignity, regardless of how we might disagree with them.

I always suspected it but it's more than just Miller that really don't like John Kerry. Miller's speech will have the same effect as his 1992 specch did. As long as Bush doesn't make some huge gaffe (knock on wood) he's got Kerry cooked. The floodgates are going to open on his fickle voting record, his atrocious testimony to Vietnam (hey, he's the one who shoved his service down our throats; now he's go the Swifties to deal with), and his vote against the Persian Gulf War. Kerry's done. The only intrigue left will be watching Dick Cheney take John Edwards apart at the V.P. debate and Bush blast Kerry's abysmal 100% liberal voting record. 4....More....Years. It'll be nice watching the liberals twist some more after losing to a man they all think they're smarter than.

Now the Kerry campaign has conceded that when PCF3 hit the mine, Kerry fled the area up river.


http://www.useless-knowledge.com/articles/apr/aug212.html


Kerry Fled

Can we all just settle down for a minute. It seems like tensions on this thread are sparking up faster than a fork in the microwave. We can all talk like civilized adults and/or mature teenagers without trying to smear the other persons reputation. I mean we aren't politicians.

We all have things to bring to the table, good points and bad, valuable insight or not. We should respect what each other has to say for now, and treat each other with dignity, regardless of how we might disagree with them.
Hear hear. Or is that here, here..? I always get that mixed up - dyslexia of the quote, I guess.

Regardless, debate = good, hate/insults = bad, not to mention pointless - you won't accomplish anything with it, the person you insult already has their mind made up, just like you do.

-GSilroc

Funny, I've heard some dems mention it during their efforts to stop them and you know what? Most of them got appointed anyway thanks to the letter of the law. Unfortunetely, its not permanent but I'll take what I can get. And before you say anything, All presidents make recess appointments. Its how the game is played.

You still have yet to explain why you applaud conservative judges that legislate from the bench being appointed, but rant about liberal ones. Sounds more like following the party line than having a true objection.

You still have yet to explain why you applaud conservative judges that legislate from the bench being appointed, but rant about liberal ones. Sounds more like following the party line than having a true objection.
The Conservative justices don't legislate, they interpret, which it what they are supposed to do. The liberal nutjobs are the ones throwing out the laws against sucking half-born childrens brains out.

Kerry Fled

I cannot understand how anyone comes to the conclusion that conservative judges are legislating from the bench by reviving the original meaning of laws... :headbang:

ok! Most of us have gotten off topic here, me included.

This thread is about Zell Miller slamming Kerry. This is going to hurt Kerry because now Kerry is getting smacked on his voting record.

Kerry BROUGHT an amendment to CUT 6 billion Dollars to intel after the 1st WTC Bombing!

Said don't vote for the war unless your going to fund it. Votes FOR the war and AGAINST funding it. Now he is for the war. What is it next week? Against? LOL.

Miller was right in his speech regarding Kerry's voting recording. I say put him in a campaign add. That'll be great to see! :)

The Conservative justices don't legislate, they interpret, which it what they are supposed to do. The liberal nutjobs are the ones throwing out the laws against sucking half-born childrens brains out.


Ok, so only judges that agree with you politically can be viewed as interpreting. The liberal judges are interpreting the Constitution. You may disagree with their interpretation, but it is still interpreting.
The judges that Bush was appointing would take a law that they didn't like and "interpret" it in such a way that it was essentially a completely different law. If the law said "Abortions can occur under these certain circumstances," the judge would claim that those certain circumstances absolutely positively never ever happened (despite being confronted with those circumstances), would tack on extra requirements not stated in the law, and would never allow it, thus taking a law that gave a freedom and pretending it said there was no freedom. *This* is truly legislating from the bench.

I cannot understand how anyone comes to the conclusion that conservative judges are legislating from the bench by reviving the original meaning of laws... :headbang:

So the original meaning of:

"This is allowed sometimes." is:

"This is never allowed."

Yeah, that's really clear.

Said don't vote for the war unless your going to fund it. Votes FOR the war and AGAINST funding it. Now he is for the war. What is it next week? Against? LOL.

If you would actually look at the issue, you would know that this is nothing but Republican propaganda. Kerry voted against one particular bill for funding. There were other ideas out there as to how exactly it should be funded.

Suppose you wanted to go to the mall and there were three roads you could take to go there. Whoever was with you said, "Let's take Main Street," but you though Cherry street would have less traffic. Does that mean you justed voted against going to the mall?

Seriously, don't be an idiot and take the crap you're being fed. THINK about it first.

Fuck Miller. He hasn't been a Democrat for years now, and he's gone so far afield in the last year that he's been removed from all leadership positions in the Senate and isn't allowed to caucus or discuss strategy because he was passing along strategy notes to the Republicans.

To the Republican party--you want Miller? Take him. I wouldn't piss down his throat if his heart was on fire.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH HHAH...

That was great! That just sent me laughing to the floor! Very nicely put :D.

ok! Most of us have gotten off topic here, me included.

This thread is about Zell Miller slamming Kerry. This is going to hurt Kerry because now Kerry is getting smacked on his voting record.

Kerry BROUGHT an amendment to CUT 6 billion Dollars to intel after the 1st WTC Bombing!

Said don't vote for the war unless your going to fund it. Votes FOR the war and AGAINST funding it. Now he is for the war. What is it next week? Against? LOL.

Miller was right in his speech regarding Kerry's voting recording. I say put him in a campaign add. That'll be great to see! :)
when you think about that, yes i suggested that you actually think about something, cutting 6 billion AFTER the incident makes some sense. obviously the problem isnt in the funding, so why keep feeding them billions and billions of dollars if they arnt going to do their job effectively and correctly. throwing money at the problem isnt fixing it, so why keep throwing money at it


lets try and fix the bullshit in your second paragraph. war was NEVER declared, the power to invade iraq was given to the president, look it up. kerry voted FOR that, and has sicne stated he would do it again, that is give the president that power. THEN he voted against ONE funding bill, he voted for ANOTHER bill that would've funded the war by repealing parts of bush's tax cuts that are screwing over our national debt


mmm ignorance, tastes like cherries...

Zell Miller is a democrat from the old days of Roosevelt when there was true bipartisanship when both republican and democrat could stand together. The democrats of today should look to him as what a democrat could be then they might win the election.

when you think about that, yes i suggested that you actually think about something, cutting 6 billion AFTER the incident makes some sense. obviously the problem isnt in the funding, so why keep feeding them billions and billions of dollars if they arnt going to do their job effectively and correctly. throwing money at the problem isnt fixing it, so why keep throwing money at it

So you applaud cutting 6 Billion Dollars from the Intellegience Budget? My god! That has to be one of the worst things you could've said. Luckily, the US Senate voted THAT amendment down. As for throwing money, that would explain our education system. The problem is with the district so why are we spending billions on education when it isn't doing a bit of good?

lets try and fix the bullshit in your second paragraph. war was NEVER declared, the power to invade iraq was given to the president, look it up. kerry voted FOR that, and has sicne stated he would do it again, that is give the president that power. THEN he voted against ONE funding bill, he voted for ANOTHER bill that would've funded the war by repealing parts of bush's tax cuts that are screwing over our national debt

Your right! It wasn't declared. Just like the Korean War was not a declared War, Vietnam was not a declared war, Persain Gulf War was not a Declared War (Kerry voted AGAINST this too I might add). Panama was not a declared war. They are all wars non the less, with the exception of Panama. Why? Because the President had authorization from CONGRESS to wage it. That is all the President needs to engage in war. This is a war in a technical since. He voted FOR the authorization of FORCE then voted against funding the said operation. This after he said, you shouldn't vote for the war if your going to vote against funding it. He voted FOR IT then Voted AGAINST Funding IT.

mmm ignorance, tastes like cherries...

I sure hope you liked them because your ignorance has shown through!

I don't dispute the man's war record and try to insult anyone's intelligence on that - please don't insult anyone's by trying to pass off his own quotes "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it..", etc.., as anything but a worse set of flip-flops than Miami beach sees.

-GSilroc

If this soundbite makes Kerry a flip-flopper, then so is Bush.
Kerry voted for one bill, that bill was changed, he then voted against it. Bush did the same thing by threatening to veto the bill, which he originally supported.

The problem with the Bush\Cheney campaign is that it relies on misleading the supporters with lies about what Kerry has said or done.

You should look at the dailyhowler.com sometime. It is liberal leaning, but they give you the rest of the quote and context on things like the "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it.." talking points. At least then you won't look like an idiot for blindly spewing out the Republican lies.

I think a lot of people vote along party lines but don't want to admit it, so they pawn off some soundbite as justification for their vote. If you really want to be informed, you have to read more than the party literature and watch more than the O'reilly factor.

I realize this thread is about Zell Miller, so I apologize for this off topic posting. I just hate to see lies spread as fact.

You think you can manage a post with out an F-bomb? There are youngins 'round here. I know you are upset because this is the second candidate you have slavishly devoted your credibility to, only to see him crumble, but really, leave the nasty language out of your post, man.
Sure I can, but there are times when f-bombs are not only appropriate, they're necessary, and this os one of them. And honestly, do you think that anyone who comes to this site hasn't heard or even dropped an f-bomb of their own? It's a word--that's all--and if you can't handle it, tough.

Loyal to the Democratic party? Find the last time he voted with the Democrats on anything. This has nothing to do with Kerry and everything to do with Zell Miller. He's a chicken hearted traitor who doesn't have the balls to change parties. I say again--fuck him. You guys want him, you can have him.
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to use the "t" word. Not very long, as it turns out.

I saw the speech. It was very good and well written. I think kery is in real trouble now. He was before, but this is even worse for him.

As an aside....the Swift Vets said they would stop all their ads against Kerry if he would apologise for his testimony in 1971 that they feel branded them war criminals and he had the perfect chance to when addressing the American Legion (which I am a member of) but he did not. So the ads go on and Kerry will be hurt more by them.

So you applaud cutting 6 Billion Dollars from the Intellegience Budget? My god! That has to be one of the worst things you could've said. Luckily, the US Senate voted THAT amendment down. As for throwing money, that would explain our education system. The problem is with the district so why are we spending billions on education when it isn't doing a bit of good?
know i said it is sensibly explainable. BINGO, throwing money at the education system isnt helping, well not in the way its being applied. the teachers need to be paid more, and the schools need to be equally funded, not funded the way they are, and districts are drawn horrible to begin with, i think people close their eyes and draw shapes on an etch-a-sketch to make districts for stuff.
and yes 6 billion from the intelligence budget, what is the intelligence budget anyway? and the problem isnt funding if the world trade center bombing occurred, its obviously either a beauracracy problem or people problem



Your right! It wasn't declared. Just like the Korean War was not a declared War, Vietnam was not a declared war, Persain Gulf War was not a Declared War (Kerry voted AGAINST this too I might add). Panama was not a declared war. They are all warsnon the less. Why? Because the President had authorization from CONGRESS to wage it. That is all the President needs to engage in war. This is a war in a technical since. He voted FOR the authorization of FORCE then voted against funding the said operation. This after he said, you shouldn't vote for the war if your going to vote against funding it. He voted FOR IT then Voted AGAINST Funding IT.
listen you fucking idiot, it is not an official war, the ONLY vote held by Cognress was to give the power to the president to invade iraq if it was thought to be a danger. that was the ONLY vote held. Kerry voted for this and has SINCE stated he believed that is a power the president should have.
i dont see how you can continually argue with such blatant ignorance. you are trying to attack kerry on a stupid wording generality when you have to consult the specifics in order to attack him, but if you do that you have no case, so i guess you have to be an ignorant git huh?

and he voted FOR funding, by repealing some of the tax cuts instituted by bush that are bankrupting our country even further.



I sure hope you liked them because your ignorance has shown through!
rofl my ignorance lets see


1) you think throwing money at a problem makes it magically go away, you are an idiotic republican through and through

2) you think authorization of force is the same as an actual declaration of war. ie you are attacking kerry for voting for a declaration of war, which NEVER happened, it was an authorization of force for the president which kerry has explained. too bad you are too stupid to even know what you are saying

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to use the "t" word. Not very long, as it turns out.It's no less than what the Republicans were saying when Jim Jeffords became an independent--at least Jeffords had the balls to get out of the party he said had left him behind instead of staying a member and actively working against it. I stand behind it--Zell Miller is a traitor to his party, plain and simple. I've got no problem with someone switching parties--I've done it myself--but man up and switch. Don't act like a self-righteous little bitch about it.

It's no less than what the Republicans were saying when Jim Jeffords became an independent--at least Jeffords had the balls to get out of the party he said had left him behind instead of staying a member and actively working against it. I stand behind it--Zell Miller is a traitor to his party, plain and simple. I've got no problem with someone switching parties--I've done it myself--but man up and switch. Don't act like a self-righteous little bitch about it.

Miller is just working to change the Party from the inside. I thought libbies admired those of courage who stand up in the face of adversity for what they believe is right. I guess I was wrong.

Miller is an old-school Democrat who is basically saying, "Dude, where's my Party?" He grew up a Democrat, he rose through the ranks of the Democratic Party, he was elected as a Democrat, and says he will die a Democrat. And he is rewarded for his loyalty and efforts by having the Party apparatchiks call him a traitor. That's sad, but typical of leftists. They've always placed "Party loyalty" above principle.

Miller is a man of conviction who is standing by his convictions. For that he should be admired....not ridiculed. If John McCain was to do the same for Kerry the Dems would be touting him as a man of conviction too, but they ridicule Miller. Such is the nature of the political beast I guess.....

know i said it is sensibly explainable. BINGO, throwing money at the education system isnt helping, well not in the way its being applied. the teachers need to be paid more, and the schools need to be equally funded, not funded the way they are, and districts are drawn horrible to begin with, i think people close their eyes and draw shapes on an etch-a-sketch to make districts for stuff.
and yes 6 billion from the intelligence budget, what is the intelligence budget anyway? and the problem isnt funding if the world trade center bombing occurred, its obviously either a beauracracy problem or people problem

Teachers need to be paid more? Where I'm from they strike for weeks. Thank God we have a 30 day law that says they can strike for 30 days but then its back to work as negots take place. However, these strikes should be considered illegal because it takes away from our Children's Education. Its not how the money is applied though that is the problem. Its the Curriculm as well as discipline in the Class Room. Principals and teachers have no control anymore because it'll hur the kids self-esteem if they get in trouble. Don't believe me? I could give you a prime example of it.

listen you fucking idiot, it is not an official war, the ONLY vote held by Cognress was to give the power to the president to invade iraq if it was thought to be a danger. that was the ONLY vote held. Kerry voted for this and has SINCE stated he believed that is a power the president should have.
i dont see how you can continually argue with such blatant ignorance. you are trying to attack kerry on a stupid wording generality when you have to consult the specifics in order to attack him, but if you do that you have no case, so i guess you have to be an ignorant git huh?

Thanks for dropping the F-bomb! You've just shown that you have no intellegience what so ever. As for the vote, do you have proof of it? I know I can dig through Senate records like nothing flat. That is what Kerry is saying but alas it is inaccurate. Besides, Kerry said he would've voted to Authorize Combat again anyway. For it, then against it, then For it again. I hope he makes up his mind.

and he voted FOR funding, by repealing some of the tax cuts instituted by bush that are bankrupting our country even further.

Sorry dude, but that does not fly with me. Just because he voted for it before he voted against it, doesn't mean crap. He voted against Funding that is all that matters.

rofl my ignorance lets see


1) you think throwing money at a problem makes it magically go away, you are an idiotic republican through and through

Never said I believed that. You just quoted me out of Context. And again, thanks for the character assassination. You truely do have a very limited vocabulary.

2) you think authorization of force is the same as an actual declaration of war. ie you are attacking kerry for voting for a declaration of war, which NEVER happened, it was an authorization of force for the president which kerry has explained. too bad you are too stupid to even know what you are saying

In a way Chess Squares it is the same thing! Remember Persian Gulf? War was not Declared there either. All Bush 41 had was authorization from Congress to kick Hussein out of Kuwait. No Declaration of war but yet attacked and we all know what happens next. And now that you have exhausted your attacks on me, your ignored till you stop with the insults.

For those who want to read historical Zell, his '92 speech lambasting the GOP is Here (http://www.google.com/groups?q=+%22Zell+Miller%22+%22Listen+to+this+voice%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=active&scoring=d&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=3&as_miny=1988&as_maxd=10&as_maxm=9&as_maxy=1993&selm=1992Jul16.061335.24598%40cc.gatech.edu&rnum=1)

Last night he was complaining that the Dems wouldn't protect his Grandkids. In 1992 he said the same of the GOP.

LAst night he trotted out the list of old presidents and their accomplishments. In 1992 he did the same.

Last night he hated Carter. In '92 he loved hime.

In '92 he repeated that GHWBush "didn't get it". By last night, GHW had aparently had an entirely diferent presidency.

Zell Miller - the Flop-Floper that everyone pretend Kerry is.....


So, you see, I know what Dan Quayle means when he says it's best for
children to have 2 parents.

You bet it is!

And it would be nice for them to have trust funds, too.

But we can't all be born rich, handsome and lucky--and that's why we
have a Democratic Party.

My family would still be isolated and destitute if we had not had
FDR's Democratic brand of government.

I made it because Franklin Delano Roosevelt energized this nation.

I made it because Harry Truman fought for working families like
mine.

I made it because John Kennedy's rising tide lifted even our tiny
boat.

I made it because Lyndon Johnson showed America that people who were
born poor didn't have to die poor.

And I made it because a man with whom I served in the Georgia
Senate--a man named Jimmy Carter--brought honesty and decency and
integrity to public service.

But what of the kids of today?

Who fights for the child of a single mother today? Because without
a government that is on their side, those children have no hope. And
when a child has no hope, a nation has no future.

I am a Democrat because we are the party of hope.

For 12 dark years the Republicans have dealt in cynicism and
skepticism. They've mastered the art of division and diversion, and
they have robbed us of our hope.

Zell Miller has also proved that he's another religious moron. He praised Bush for "his belief that God is not indifferent to America." What an idiot.

For those who want to read historical Zell, his '92 speech lambasting the GOP is Here (http://www.google.com/groups?q=+%22Zell+Miller%22+%22Listen+to+this+voice%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=active&scoring=d&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=3&as_miny=1988&as_maxd=10&as_maxm=9&as_maxy=1993&selm=1992Jul16.061335.24598%40cc.gatech.edu&rnum=1)

Last night he was complaining that the Dems wouldn't protect his Grandkids. In 1992 he said the same of the GOP.

LAst night he trotted out the list of old presidents and their accomplishments. In 1992 he did the same.

Last night he hated Carter. In '92 he loved hime.

In '92 he repeated that GHWBush "didn't get it". By last night, GHW had aparently had an entirely diferent presidency.

Zell Miller - the Flop-Floper that everyone pretend Kerry is.....

Wow....look at this. I will ask the same question asked of those who questioned Kerry's constant changes of mind.

Can a politician NOT change his mind? ;)

Face it...we SURVIVED Clinton and now are paying the price for his incompetance.

For those who want to read historical Zell, his '92 speech lambasting the GOP is Here (http://www.google.com/groups?q=+%22Zell+Miller%22+%22Listen+to+this+voice%22&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=active&scoring=d&as_drrb=b&as_mind=12&as_minm=3&as_miny=1988&as_maxd=10&as_maxm=9&as_maxy=1993&selm=1992Jul16.061335.24598%40cc.gatech.edu&rnum=1)

Last night he was complaining that the Dems wouldn't protect his Grandkids. In 1992 he said the same of the GOP.

LAst night he trotted out the list of old presidents and their accomplishments. In 1992 he did the same.

Last night he hated Carter. In '92 he loved hime.

In '92 he repeated that GHWBush "didn't get it". By last night, GHW had aparently had an entirely diferent presidency.

Zell Miller - the Flop-Floper that everyone pretend Kerry is.....

Zell actually supported Clinton because of his ideals. Kerry doesn't hold those ideals. That is why he is supporting GWB! He's a conservative dem in a liberal Dem party! Not good place to be.

Teachers need to be paid more? Where I'm from they strike for weeks. Thank God we have a 30 day law that says they can strike for 30 days but then its back to work as negots take place. However, these strikes should be considered illegal because it takes away from our Children's Education. Its not how the money is applied though that is the problem. Its the Curriculm as well as discipline in the Class Room. Principals and teachers have no control anymore because it'll hur the kids self-esteem if they get in trouble. Don't believe me? I could give you a prime example of it.
YES TEACHERS NEED TO BE PAID MORE, baby sitters get paid more dman money than a school teacher does. and the rest of the bullshit you say doesnt even relate to them being paid more.



Thanks for dropping the F-bomb! You've just shown that you have no intellegience what so ever. As for the vote, do you have proof of it? I know I can dig through Senate records like nothing flat. That is what Kerry is saying but alas it is inaccurate. Besides, Kerry said he would've voted to Authorize Combat again anyway. For it, then against it, then For it again. I hope he makes up his mind.
at least i can follow a line of thought, do you even stay on topic? oh wait, NO. for the love of PETE, he was NEVER opposed to giving the president of the united states the ability to invade another country that is a threat to this one, any president. and THAT WAS WHAT THE VOTE WAS FOR.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?vote_id=3201&can_id=S0421103



Sorry dude, but that does not fly with me. Just because he voted for it before he voted against it, doesn't mean crap. He voted against Funding that is all that matters.
yeah, good job, you can half assed read, too bad you can't count. he voted for funding AND he voted against funding, it was COINCIDENCE that the one he voted against passed. hey your ignorance is showing, it does matter that he voted for it before it he voted agaisnt it, because the fact remains he voted FOR the funding, its just the republican controlled congress that overruled him



Never said I believed that. You just quoted me out of Context. And again, thanks for the character assassination. You truely do have a very limited vocabulary.
HOW CAN I QUOTE YOU OUT OF CONTEXT?! IM QUOTING WHOLE DAMN PARAGRAPHS



In a way Chess Squares it is the same thing! Remember Persian Gulf? War was not Declared there either. All Bush 41 had was authorization from Congress to kick Hussein out of Kuwait. No Declaration of war but yet attacked and we all know what happens next. And now that you have exhausted your attacks on me, your ignored till you stop with the insults.THE PERSIAN GULF WAR WAS NOT A FUCKING WAR, it was a policing action, we call it a war for SIMPLICITY, actually it was more of a single operation. yeah he has permission to kick saddam out of kuwait, which is what he did, he didnt go cowboy into iraq and start blowing up hussein after he was done. just because we call it a war DOES NOT MEAN IT IS A WAR< anytime troops are sent into soemthing does not mean it is a war, we just call major operations "wars" for simplicity

Personally, I have no problem with Miller's stance. All of you leftists are always blowing your trumpets about "freedom to choose" and liberety crap, but you brand one of your own a traitor when he excercises these values.
Miller has never been consistent with wis voting ( he voted for Ike in '52, Gore in '00) so it makes little sense why the lefty hordes choose now to gripe.
Besides, Kerry is a liar, whose "convictions" mirror the results of opinion polls.
Nader's motto might as well be "Antagonizing a large corporation near you".
:headbang: Ugh! You liberals make me sick!

And i think Bush IS the RIGHT man for the job.

Zell Miller has also proved that he's another religious moron. He praised Bush for "his belief that God is not indifferent to America." What an idiot.

Do you think all people of faith are "morons" and "idiots"?

This is a clear representation of the drift of the south from Democratic to Republican since the Civil Rights Act. Miller is, at best, a Democrat in name only.

For those regarding Iraq:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:5:./temp/~c107gdohvu::

CLEARLY AUTHORIZES FORCE on Iraq!

And yea, it was not a war but then why is it called the Persain Gulf WAR? It was a war. A fight of country against country only it was a one-sided war. Kerry voted Against the 1st Gulf War. He voted for this war then Voted against funding it. "I actually voted for the 87 Billion before I voted against it" That has to be one of the most stupidest lines he's ever said. Kerry then said he was against this war. He proceeds to Bash Bush on it now he says he would've voted yes again. Also stated that if he had the same intel Bush had, he too would've gone to war. Ok! Now that I have that out of the way, Miller was actually right on the ball with what he said. Hopefully people listened to what he had to say.

For those regarding Iraq:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:5:./temp/~c107gdohvu::

CLEARLY AUTHORIZES FORCE on Iraq!

And yea, it was not a war but then why is it called the Persain Gulf WAR? It was a war. A fight of country against country only it was a one-sided war. Kerry voted Against the 1st Gulf War. He voted for this war then Voted against funding it. "I actually voted for the 87 Billion before I voted against it" That has to be one of the most stupidest lines he's ever said. Kerry then said he was against this war. He proceeds to Bash Bush on it now he says he would've voted yes again. Also stated that if he had the same intel Bush had, he too would've gone to war. Ok! Now that I have that out of the way, Miller was actually right on the ball with what he said. Hopefully people listened to what he had to say.


Actually voted for it... before voting against it.


Damn that was a dumb line to say. It has been the primary sound bite of fodder that the Republicans point out to show a flip flop.

The thing is, Kerry DID vote for the appropriation to provide needed equipment for the service men and women servine in Iraq.

What he voted against was the ammendment that changed the funding for this - which in effect simply added it to the national debt rather than pay for it at the time through a defined revenue stream.


He didn't vote against funding the equipment needed right now. He voted against making his grandchildren fund the equipment needed right now.


In effect, the GOP decision to introduce the ammendment to download the funding of this equipment on their kids are the ones who really voted against funding this equipment. They wanted the soldier to have what they need (as did Kerry), they just don't think they should have to pay for it. Kerry was voting FOR funding this initiative right now - both times he cast his vote.



Ah well, the hell with the kids right? It's not like they get to vote now anyway.....


Voted against providing this equipment to the soldiers? Kerry? Not a chance.


Voted against sticking future generations of Americans with the bill? Abso-frickin-lutely!

Actually voted for it... before voting against it.


Damn that was a dumb line to say. It has been the primary sound bite of fodder that the Republicans point out to show a flip flop.

Yeah...it's not like politicians don't do that very often, but when they do.....watch out.

Wow....look at this. I will ask the same question asked of those who questioned Kerry's constant changes of mind.

Can a politician NOT change his mind? ;)

Face it...we SURVIVED Clinton and now are paying the price for his incompetance.


I threw that comment our because I am so tired of the "Flip-flop" mantra that the GOP has tried to paint on Kerry. Pulling a vote out from the 80's when even Cheney was complaining that the armed sevices were not being cut enough after the end of the cold war, and looking at it through today's optics.

That is where Governers have a distinct advantage in Presidential politics. They don't have the length of record to look over and dissect.


As for "surviving" Clinton, that is another thread. The question for this election is how much and for how long will you have to pay for Bush's incompetence?

For those regarding Iraq:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:5:./temp/~c107gdohvu::

CLEARLY AUTHORIZES FORCE on Iraq!

And yea, it was not a war but then why is it called the Persain Gulf WAR? It was a war. A fight of country against country only it was a one-sided war. Kerry voted Against the 1st Gulf War. He voted for this war then Voted against funding it. "I actually voted for the 87 Billion before I voted against it" That has to be one of the most stupidest lines he's ever said. Kerry then said he was against this war. He proceeds to Bash Bush on it now he says he would've voted yes again. Also stated that if he had the same intel Bush had, he too would've gone to war. Ok! Now that I have that out of the way, Miller was actually right on the ball with what he said. Hopefully people listened to what he had to say.

you get ignored too, you have the same intelligence and logic as biff pileon, which is that of a retarded squirrel

Do you think all people of faith are "morons" and "idiots"?

Galtania, no I don't believe all people of faith are morons or idiots. But I DO if they believe that God choses or favors one country over another. So, both Bush and Miller fall into this category.

I threw that comment our because I am so tired of the "Flip-flop" mantra that the GOP has tried to paint on Kerry. Pulling a vote out from the 80's when even Cheney was complaining that the armed sevices were not being cut enough after the end of the cold war, and looking at it through today's optics.

That is where Governers have a distinct advantage in Presidential politics. They don't have the length of record to look over and dissect.


As for "surviving" Clinton, that is another thread. The question for this election is how much and for how long will you have to pay for Bush's incompetence?

Well....lets see. What has Bush actually done that is so terrible? He took the fight to those who would destroy us. He decided to fight our enemies in their house and not ours. Clinton would not take the fight to them, so they brought it to us. Yes, 9-11 happened after Bush took office, but it was being planned in 1996 under Clinton.

So i think what we are paying now under Bush is just the cleaning up of what SHOULD have been done earlier. But what the hey, Clinton had a fat chick to take care of. ;)

Actually voted for it... before voting against it.


Damn that was a dumb line to say. It has been the primary sound bite of fodder that the Republicans point out to show a flip flop.

Well he did say this and it is accurate. He DID NOT vote for the bill because the amendment was excluded. Thus, He voted for it before he voted against it. Doesn't matter what he voted for, its the final version that counts. Since he voted against funding our troops in Iraq AND Afghanistan, he actually went against another one of my most favorite quotes, "Don't vote for the war if your going to vote against funding it." He voted for the war then voted against funding it.

The thing is, Kerry DID vote for the appropriation to provide needed equipment for the service men and women servine in Iraq.

And which bill will that be? Or more importantly, which bill would that be that he actually showed up to vote for?

What he voted against was the ammendment that changed the funding for this - which in effect simply added it to the national debt rather than pay for it at the time through a defined revenue stream.

He still voted against Funding our soldiers when the final bill came up. That is really the only vote that matters Zepp. Sorry if you don't understand that but its really the final bill that counts.

He didn't vote against funding the equipment needed right now. He voted against making his grandchildren fund the equipment needed right now.

Ok? Not 100% sure where your going with this one. If your talking about the Amendment, the tax cuts are for the PEOPLE not for the GOVERNMENT! The PEOPLE deserve the money they make back. By taking it away, why that would be unconsciable.

In effect, the GOP decision to introduce the ammendment to download the funding of this equipment on their kids are the ones who really voted against funding this equipment. They wanted the soldier to have what they need (as did Kerry), they just don't think they should have to pay for it. Kerry was voting FOR funding this initiative right now - both times he cast his vote.

Can you provide proof of this? I don't remember this amendment. Come to think of it, the only amendment I can think of at the moment is the one that would roll back some of Bush's tax cuts to provide funding. Sorry Zepp, that didn't happen and thus Kerry voted no.

Ah well, the hell with the kids right? It's not like they get to vote now anyway.....

Parents provide for the Kids. If they don't have money to do this, then they can't. Keep the tax cuts.

Voted against providing this equipment to the soldiers? Kerry? Not a chance.

He did! Voted against funding our troops.

Voted against sticking future generations of Americans with the bill? Abso-frickin-lutely!

Voted against funding our forces in a warzone is what he did Zepp.

Fuck Miller. He hasn't been a Democrat for years now, and he's gone so far afield in the last year that he's been removed from all leadership positions in the Senate and isn't allowed to caucus or discuss strategy because he was passing along strategy notes to the Republicans.

To the Republican party--you want Miller? Take him. I wouldn't piss down his throat if his heart was on fire.


I take it that you are a Democrat? So is this representative of the liberal party where open discourse is encouraged? The party of tollerance? Odd (and amusing) how the Democrats have become the party of hatred.

Galtania, no I don't believe all people of faith are morons or idiots. But I DO if they believe that God choses or favors one country over another. So, both Bush and Miller fall into this category.

So you're calling the vast majority of Muslims morons/idiots? Are you inviting Jihad on yourself?

I take it that you are a Democrat? So is this representative of the liberal party where open discourse is encouraged? The party of tollerance? Odd (and amusing) how the Democrats have become the party of hatred.

HAVE become? Man, where have you been? ;)

So you're calling the vast majority of Muslims morons/idiots? Are you inviting Jihad on yourself?

If the shoe fits, no matter the religion.

Galtania, no I don't believe all people of faith are morons or idiots. But I DO if they believe that God choses or favors one country over another. So, both Bush and Miller fall into this category.

This is a misinterpretation of what Miller said. He said God is "not indifferent" to America. This doesn't mean he thinks God favors America over other nations, only that God does care what happens here, that people of faith should strive to remain true to their God so the nation will be blessed and not punished.

(NOTE: I am not religious, just defending their First Amendment rights.)

So you're calling the vast majority of Muslims morons/idiots? Are you inviting Jihad on yourself?


If they have no problems waging it on innocent civilians why not?

Well he did say this and it is accurate. He DID NOT vote for the bill because the amendment was excluded. Thus, He voted for it before he voted against it. Doesn't matter what he voted for, its the final version that counts. Since he voted against funding our troops in Iraq AND Afghanistan, he actually went against another one of my most favorite quotes, "Don't vote for the war if your going to vote against funding it." He voted for the war then voted against funding it.

.....

Voted against funding our forces in a warzone is what he did Zepp.

Voted against deficit funding of the forces at a time when the government felt that the right thing to do was increase expenses at the same time as decreasing revenues. It makes no sense. Like your parents providing for the kids by putting all of their expenses on credit cards and then handing the bills to the children when they are done college.

But then, I guess that responsible government really isn't a primary issue for you...

Conservatism is supposed to include the basis tenants of smaller government, fiscal responibility, balanced budgets leading to lower taxes.

This incarnation of Republicanism seems to be premised on larger government, fiscal foolishness, record deficits, and still lowering taxes when their own policies make that irresponsible.

Had enough people stood up for good government then Kerry would have got what he wanted: equipment for the troops paid for via intelligent and responsible government practices. The revenue streams would have had to be brought online to pay for it because the troops needed the equipment.

You can try and spin the vote your way if you like, but what this really involves is a polititian doing what he is supposed to do - look out for his constituents to try and pass a smart bill instead of just the bill as written. It is the reason why the ammendment process is there - to get agreement on ALL aspects of the bill.

It is about the ways and means, not just the outcomes.

Your translation of this to mean that he did not want the troops to get the equipment is completely disingenuous, but it makes a nice little talking point so I'm sure you won't drop it.

Even if it completely bogus.

-Z-

Well....lets see. What has Bush actually done that is so terrible? He took the fight to those who would destroy us. He decided to fight our enemies in their house and not ours. Clinton would not take the fight to them, so they brought it to us. Yes, 9-11 happened after Bush took office, but it was being planned in 1996 under Clinton.

So i think what we are paying now under Bush is just the cleaning up of what SHOULD have been done earlier. But what the hey, Clinton had a fat chick to take care of. ;)


Oh right... you mean like when Clinton tried to assassinate Bin Laden and the Republican's accused him of it being a stunt to try to distract the world from that afforementioned fat chick and really important matters like stained dresses?

I suppose you really think that if Bill had gone to the Republican controlled houses in '96 and asked to go to war to invade Afghanistan to get at Al Qaeda that they would have been right there behind him? Hell - they gave him crap for everything he did try and do.

Interesting how the Republicans hold Bush blameless for 9-11 under the "who could possibly have known" concept, but here you lambaste Clinton for also not knowing and acting pre-emptively. Should I remind you that the CIA did not even make a determination that the Cole WAS the work of Al Qaeda until AFTER Bush won the election?

And we won't bother going into the fact that the bulk of the war on terror has revolved around putting Saddam in Jail instead of Osama.... you remember him right? The real threat?


Nice revisionism though Bif....you are really trying to have it both ways here....

Oh right... you mean like when Clinton tried to assassinate Bin Laden and the Republican's accused him of it being a stunt to try to distract the world from that afforementioned fat chick and really important matters like stained dresses?

I suppose you really think that if Bill had gone to the Republican controlled houses in '96 and asked to go to war to invade Afghanistan to get at Al Qaeda that they would have been right there behind him? Hell - they gave him crap for everything he did try and do.

Interesting how the Republicans hold Bush blameless for 9-11 under the "who could possibly have known" concept, but here you lambaste Clinton for also not knowing and acting pre-emptively. Should I remind you that the CIA did not even make a determination that the Cole WAS the work of Al Qaeda until AFTER Bush won the election?

And we won't bother going into the fact that the bulk of the war on terror has revolved around putting Saddam in Jail instead of Osama.... you remember him right? The real threat?


Nice revisionism though Bif....you are really trying to have it both ways here....


Well, lets see...Clinton blew up an aspirin factory and bombed an abandoned training camp. He SHOULD have sent in the troops, but that fat chick was calling for another cigar. ;)

As for the Congress, I think they would have gone along with it, but Clinton blew a LOT of his clout with Congress and the military with his very first action after taking office and his "personal" daliances.

And we won't bother going into the fact that the bulk of the war on terror has revolved around putting Saddam in Jail instead of Osama.... you remember him right? The real threat?

Of course we remember OBL, we will never forget him. There are plenty of forces in Afghanistan looking for him, along with the cooperation of the Pakistanis on their side of the border. Iraq and the hunt for OBL are different situations calling for different force mixtures. What is needed most in Iraq are conventional combined arms manuever elements and civil affairs units, to fight an insurgency. The hunt for OBL calls for Special Forces to fight an unconventional enemy.

This stupid idea that we can't do both at the same time is completely disingenuous.

Well, lets see...Clinton blew up an aspirin factory and bombed an abandoned training camp. He SHOULD have sent in the troops, but that fat chick was calling for another cigar. ;)

As for the Congress, I think they would have gone along with it, but Clinton blew a LOT of his clout with Congress and the military with his very first action after taking office and his "personal" daliances.

Well, one could then argue that the aspirin factory should have been GW's first clue as to how good the CIA's Middle Eastern group's intelligence was before touting it so highly.

And the camp was NOT abandoned. It was in current use and many people died that day - just saddly not Osama who was there but left shortly before the Tomohawks hit.

And please clarify - are you saying that congress would have gone along with military action? Or not but that Congress would have been justified in not going after terroists then...because of a blow job?

Well, one could then argue that the aspirin factory should have been GW's first clue as to how good the CIA's Middle Eastern group's intelligence was before touting it so highly.

And the camp was NOT abandoned. It was in current use and many people died that day - just saddly not Osama who was there but left shortly before the Tomohawks hit.

And please clarify - are you saying that congress would have gone along with military action? Or not but that Congress would have been justified in not going after terroists then...because of a blow job?

Maybe you are right on that one.

The camp was empty. I saw the news interview a man who lived near it and he was wondering what all the noise was about. Noone was killed in that attack, the camp was empty. I do remember our command post being activated that night and we thought we might be going somewhere.

Of course we remember OBL, we will never forget him. There are plenty of forces in Afghanistan looking for him, along with the cooperation of the Pakistanis on their side of the border. Iraq and the hunt for OBL are different situations calling for different force mixtures. What is needed most in Iraq are conventional combined arms manuever elements and civil affairs units, to fight an insurgency. The hunt for OBL calls for Special Forces to fight an unconventional enemy.

This stupid idea that we can't do both at the same time is completely disingenuous.


Oh right - the Pakistanis who supported the Taliban and who turn out to have been the ones handing out WMD technology - especially relatig to nukes - to whever asked.

Our trusted allies in the fight to rid the world of the terrible menace of WMD....I'm sure that they really ARE doing everything in their power.


:rolleyes:


You know, with all those people looking.... you'd think it would take less than three years to catch ONE guy. Hell - it only took a few months to track down Saddam.

Maybe it was that other 120,000 ground troops in Iraq that made the difference.... just maybe.

Oh right - the Pakistanis who supported the Taliban and who turn out to have been the ones handing out WMD technology - especially relatig to nukes - to whever asked.

Our trusted allies in the fight to rid the world of the terrible menace of WMD....I'm sure that they really ARE doing everything in their power.


:rolleyes:


You know, with all those people looking.... you'd think it would take less than three years to catch ONE guy. Hell - it only took a few months to track down Saddam.

Maybe it was that other 120,000 ground troops in Iraq that made the difference.... just maybe.

Yep, Pakistan is hardly an "ally." They are probaby hosting OBL at tea parties as I write this.

Maybe you are right on that one.

The camp was empty. I saw the news interview a man who lived near it and he was wondering what all the noise was about. Noone was killed in that attack, the camp was empty. I do remember our command post being activated that night and we thought we might be going somewhere.

Actually, the Taliban themselves issued a statment regarding that camp the next day including a figure of 20+ dead and 30+ wounded, and we all know that they must have hated to have had to do that. I don't know what an interview with Achmed LocalPoppyfarmer might have said....

(edit - sorry, the Taliban said 21 dead and 30 wounded. Sourced below.)

http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSStrikeAtTerrorism/aug21_sources.html
A spokesman for Afghanistan's ruling Taliban regime, Wakil Ahmed Akhumzada, said 21 people were killed and 30 injured at the Zhawar Kili Al-Badr base

Actually, the Taliban themselves issued a statment regarding that camp the next day including a figure of 20+ dead and 30+ wounded, and we all know that they must have hated to have had to do that. I don't know what an interview with Achmed LocalPoppyfarmer might have said....

Now THINK about this for awhile. The Taliban would say that. Where they goofed up was in not saying that OBL had been killed.

They may have lied....cause the pictures sent back did not show much of anything there to begin with and they found no bodies and the Taliban did not produce any either.

Now THINK about this for awhile. The Taliban would say that. Where they goofed up was in not saying that OBL had been killed.

They may have lied....cause the pictures sent back did not show much of anything there to begin with and they found no bodies and the Taliban did not produce any either.


WHO found no bodies?

The US did not get to inspect there until 2001 - three years later.

As to trusting the Taliban, of course I don't. Indeed - at first they said the missiles missed the camps. Then the US published before and after satellite shots at which point the Taliban admitted that the missiles HAD hit the target, but gave this very low damage estimate. That lends better credence to the idea that they were lowballing the numbers - not highballing them.

But if you want to state that the camps were abandoned without sourcing this fact... well you go right ahead. If it's alright with you though, I'll stick to what I can actually find in available news sources....

the democrats are just mad because zell whooped up on their man.......not to mention the sufficient pounding that schwartzeneggar gave then...

Oh right - the Pakistanis who supported the Taliban and who turn out to have been the ones handing out WMD technology - especially relatig to nukes - to whever [sic] asked.

Our trusted allies in the fight to rid the world of the terrible menace of WMD....I'm sure that they really ARE doing everything in their power.
Where did I say "everything in their power"? Would you rather we had no help at all from Pakistan? FACT IS, they have 70,000 troops in South Waziristan, with one of their missions being the search for OBL.
You know, with all those people looking.... you'd think it would take less than three years to catch ONE guy.
The larger the group you're searching for, the easier they are to find. Simple fact.
Hell - it only took a few months to track down Saddam. Maybe it was that other 120,000 ground troops in Iraq that made the difference.... just maybe.
Or maybe it was the difference in terrain...just maybe. Or maybe it was just straight out lucky.

But alas, I tire of your "derisive snort and dismissive wave of a hand" style of "discussion". Cya.

Oh right - the Pakistanis who supported the Taliban and who turn out to have been the ones handing out WMD technology - especially relatig to nukes - to whever asked.

Notice the past tense of the word Supported! They no longer support them. As for terror, having Museraff nearly assassinated TWICE as well as a couple of other people, have opened up the government's eyes that no one is immune. They have gone into Tribal Regions where Pakistani soldiers haven't been in like 100 YEARS!!! They are trying to find him just as much as we are and they are in cooperation with US! Sorry if you don't understand that Zepp. Maybe Canada doesn't broadcast this or Al Jazerra.

Our trusted allies in the fight to rid the world of the terrible menace of WMD....I'm sure that they really ARE doing everything in their power.


:rolleyes:

:rolleyes: Zepp you really need to get with the times. I don't mind if your stuck in a Pre-9/11 world just don't show it often. Pakistan IS doing all they can in the search for Bin Laden. They are doing all that they can however, there are some that think WMD should be in the hands of terrorists and they are doing what is necessary to give it to them. General Musserauf can't stop it all by himself. Sorry if you don't understand that either.

You know, with all those people looking.... you'd think it would take less than three years to catch ONE guy. Hell - it only took a few months to track down Saddam.

Problem, OBL knows the terrain. He has people in the Border Region helping him. Thus we may never find him no matter how many troops we have looking for him. The only thing we could do is bomb every nook and cranny of the mountains but how many civilians will get hurt by this? How much money will this cost? What would be the International Response to this?

Maybe it was that other 120,000 ground troops in Iraq that made the difference.... just maybe.

Not to mention that someone RATTED HIM OUT!! I guess you didn't get that memo either.

the democrats are just mad because zell whooped up on their man.......not to mention the sufficient pounding that schwartzeneggar gave then...

Zell is an idiot trying to perpetuate that idea that because Kerry voted against one yearly defense appropriations bill in the early 90s that this can be translated to wanting to cancel all of the weapons programs.

Who really wanted to cut the military the most back then?

Dick Cheney!

"We have to get on with the business of cutting…We have to cut out those things we don't need. We have to cut out those things that we can do without in the military area, that we can do without in terms of the complex that is the Department of Defense…Over the course of the last year, since I've been Secretary, I've recommended terminating, cancelling, shutting down 20 separate weapons programs." - Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, 4/30/90

"The F-14B, of course, we're terminating in '90. There's no new money in it for '91. The AHIP, the Phoenix missile, the F-15 aircraft, et cetera -- all of those are being terminated in '91…The Apache helicopter, of course, ends in '91. The M1 tank, we're proposing to shut down the M1 tank production lines in '91.” - Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, 2/1/90

Defense Secretary Cheney tried "to reduce active-duty troop strength" from 2.2 million to 1.6 million while making "deep cuts in the Reserves and National Guard." - NY Times, 8/4/91

If President Reagan "doesn't really cut defense, he becomes the No. 1 special pleader in town…The president has to reach out and take a whack at everything to be credible [meaning] you've got to hit defense." - U.S. Rep. Dick Cheney, 12/16/84


As for Arnie?

Hey - he went on and on about how it was Nixon that made him want to be a Republican.

Nixon!

I think that says enough right there.....

Where did I say "everything in their power"? Would you rather we had no help at all from Pakistan? FACT IS, they have 70,000 troops in South Waziristan, with one of their missions being the search for OBL.

and the one time they found a terrorist camp, they eventually backed off because it was annoying the local warlords. The border area is NOT under their control nor are they trying to make it so.

The larger the group you're searching for, the easier they are to find. Simple fact.

OK, so which "group" is bigger?

Saddam vs. Osama.

Not getting your point there....


Or maybe it was the difference in terrain...just maybe. Or maybe it was just straight out lucky.

Or maybe it was the difference between 140,000 troops with complete control of the country as compared to under 30,000 troops and counting on the Northern Alliance to do a lot of the work in many areas.

Why can you not concede the point that the effort in manpower to get the guy who actually caused 9-11 is far less than the manpower devoted to the guy who didn't? Hell, it's pretty damn obvious to most of us!

But alas, I tire of your "derisive snort and dismissive wave of a hand" style of "discussion". Cya.

Your choice. Go right ahead and snort, wave your own hand, and head for the door.... I'm sorry of actually providing links to sources to back up my assertions is too contemptuous a debating technique for you.....

:rolleyes:

So This is how a child debates? Making up lies? Can you actually show any post where this happened? Lying really does run on the left.

Kerry Fled

It was a guess from the old boards. A certain person argued like you. One liners and statements. He would also work to annoy people with phrases like Karl.

BTW: I am a centerist so your labeling is wrong.

Bush was AWOL

:rolleyes: Phrases are lame.....

The Conservative justices don't legislate, they interpret, which it what they are supposed to do. The liberal nutjobs are the ones throwing out the laws against sucking half-born childrens brains out.



:rolleyes:

I saw the speech. It was very good and well written. I think kery is in real trouble now. He was before, but this is even worse for him.

As an aside....the Swift Vets said they would stop all their ads against Kerry if he would apologise for his testimony in 1971 that they feel branded them war criminals and he had the perfect chance to when addressing the American Legion (which I am a member of) but he did not. So the ads go on and Kerry will be hurt more by them.

It's just a ploy.

They won't stop running them until the election is over.

The repubs like having them run.

Miller is a man of conviction who is standing by his convictions. For that he should be admired....not ridiculed. If John McCain was to do the same for Kerry the Dems would be touting him as a man of conviction too, but they ridicule Miller. Such is the nature of the political beast I guess.....

It's funny.

When conservatives are faced with a liberal republican they more or less make the same claims the demos have made against Zell.

But a conservative standing for his pricincples is to be admired?

I am just shocked.

Bush was AWOL

Pay records indicate otherwise

Teachers need to be paid more? Where I'm from they strike for weeks. Thank God we have a 30 day law that says they can strike for 30 days but then its back to work as negots take place. However, these strikes should be considered illegal because it takes away from our Children's Education. Its not how the money is applied though that is the problem. Its the Curriculm as well as discipline in the Class Room. Principals and teachers have no control anymore because it'll hur the kids self-esteem if they get in trouble. Don't believe me? I could give you a prime example of it.


Think of the CHILDREN!!!!!!

Well I can't speak for other states. But the Repubs did in our education system. Taxes BAD!!!!!!!

For it again. I hope he makes up his mind.
Well at least he shows he thinks about.

The shrub gets his advice from God.

Let's not forget "He tried to kill my daddy!"

Pay records indicate otherwise

No they don't.

A member here has a husband who was paymaster for Ft. Hood in 1966.

He said back then it would be very easy to disappear and yet still collect your pay checks.

No they don't.

A member here has a husband who was paymaster for Ft. Hood in 1966.

He said back then it would be very easy to disappear and yet still collect your pay checks.

If you dont work, you don't get paid. Same as it is in the National Guard. Don't show up, you don't get paid.

Miller did what he thought is right. There is no law against what he did. The liberal Left is just upset that he is not supporting John Kerry. He doesn't believe John would be the best to lead our country in a time of war.

God Bless Zell Miller, God Bless GWB, and God Bless America!

Well....lets see. What has Bush actually done that is so terrible? He took the fight to those who would destroy us. He decided to fight our enemies in their house and not ours. Clinton would not take the fight to them, so they brought it to us. Yes, 9-11 happened after Bush took office, but it was being planned in 1996 under Clinton.


LIke I say 1000 years from now they will still blame Clinton for the problems of the day.

Al-Q's planning does involve who is President.

Finally, yes Bush took the fight to them which is nothing special. Even Clinton would have taken the fight to them. Why? Think about it. Many Conservatives blast him for a poll following President. Guess what? THe people were for it so Clinton would have done it.

The Shrub shows his incompetance by the fact the world was in his hands after 9/11. There were few countries that didn't want to help us.

He blew that all with Iraq. He has yet to prove that Saddam was a Clear and Present danger to the US.


So i think what we are paying now under Bush is just the cleaning up of what SHOULD have been done earlier. But what the hey, Clinton had a fat chick to take care of. ;)

Actually Poppy Bush didn't finish the job with Saddam.

I take it that you are a Democrat? So is this representative of the liberal party where open discourse is encouraged? The party of tollerance? Odd (and amusing) how the Democrats have become the party of hatred.

:rolleyes:

Fuck Miller. He hasn't been a Democrat for years now, and he's gone so far afield in the last year that he's been removed from all leadership positions in the Senate and isn't allowed to caucus or discuss strategy because he was passing along strategy notes to the Republicans.

To the Republican party--you want Miller? Take him. I wouldn't piss down his throat if his heart was on fire.


No....Miller is just the only Dem with the balls to say it like it is and not just say "You're right, Sen. Kerry....anything you say Sen. Kerry".

He does not confine himself to singing the Party Song.

the democrats are just mad because zell whooped up on their man.......not to mention the sufficient pounding that schwartzeneggar gave then...

Again. everybody expected Zell to follow the shrub.

Nobody is surprised by his actions.

If you dont work, you don't get paid. Same as it is in the National Guard. Don't show up, you don't get paid.

Again. They paymaster of Ft. Hood.

Or should I write it off to Liberal lies?

Miller did what he thought is right. There is no law against what he did. The liberal Left is just upset that he is not supporting John Kerry. He doesn't believe John would be the best to lead our country in a time of war.

God Bless Zell Miller, God Bless GWB, and God Bless America!

Yet again. I really doubt ANYBODY in the Democratic party is stunned that Zell supports the shrub.

Again. They paymaster of Ft. Hood.

Or should I write it off to Liberal lies?


I saw an ad for 60 Minutes, and supposedly they are going to have an interview with the man that 'got GW into the Texas Air National Guard'. He's doing this because he 'cannot live with the guilt any longer'. Should be interesting.

Miller's speech was filled with hate and vile, that's not how you reach a swing/undecided voter. He was preaching to the already converted and or choir. His impact will be nothing.

Lets wait for the debates. That is where the undecided voter will make up their minds.

LIke I say 1000 years from now they will still blame Clinton for the problems of the day.

Maybe, he sure made enough of them.

Al-Q's planning does involve who is President.

Yes, and their planning was during Clinton's watch wasn't it?

Finally, yes Bush took the fight to them which is nothing special. Even Clinton would have taken the fight to them. Why? Think about it. Many Conservatives blast him for a poll following President. Guess what? THe people were for it so Clinton would have done it.

Whats the sign of a true leader, someone who does what he KNOWS is right and needs to be done regardless of whether it is popular, or someone who does what he thinks is the more popular thing to do whether it is right or not? Remember, Clinton used a poll to decide where to go on vacation, and he looked freaking miserable. ;)

The Shrub shows his incompetance by the fact the world was in his hands after 9/11. There were few countries that didn't want to help us.

Yeah, sure. The world was with us as long as their back door deals were not exposed. Once that was done all bets were off weren't they? The world can take care of itself and let us take care of ourselves for a change.

He blew that all with Iraq. He has yet to prove that Saddam was a Clear and Present danger to the US.

Some things are just not going to be explained, but something had to be done with Saddam and now the point is moot isn't it?

Actually Poppy Bush didn't finish the job with Saddam.

Poppy Bush went along with the coalition and the UN. Had he not done so you would blame him for that too woudn't you?

Miller's speech was filled with hate and vile, that's not how you reach a swing/undecided voter. He was preaching to the already converted and or choir. His impact will be nothing.

Lets wait for the debates. That is where the undecided voter will make up their minds.

Oh come on....he was really good.

I am anxious for the debates as well. I can't wait for Kerry to try and explain what he has done for 20 years. The guy is weak and now the Emperors clothes are going to be seen for what they are....

Ding ding ding!

Steph wins the prize.

It will be interesting!


You think the shrubs handlers are doing word exercises so he can say Nuclear! ;)

Maybe, he sure made enough of them.

Yes, and their planning was during Clinton's watch wasn't it?

Come on now. You know that line of reasoning is not valid. The same could be said that the shrub didn't prevent 9/11 since it was on his watch.


Poppy Bush went along with the coalition and the UN. Had he not done so you would blame him for that too woudn't you?

To which I use your own words.

"Whats the sign of a true leader, someone who does what he KNOWS is right and needs to be done regardless of whether it is popular, or someone who does what he thinks is the more popular thing to do whether it is right or not? "
:p

Zell Miller sucks... period.

Come on now. You know that line of reasoning is not valid. The same could be said that the shrub didn't prevent 9/11 since it was on his watch.

Yeah, one could SAY that if we did not know that the planning was done in 1996 and it took 5 years to carry out.

To which I use your own words.

"Whats the sign of a true leader, someone who does what he KNOWS is right and needs to be done regardless of whether it is popular, or someone who does what he thinks is the more popular thing to do whether it is right or not? "
:p

Yep, but there is also discretion being the better part of valor too. Clinton just wanted to be popular and thought he could coast through and leave some great legacy based on his "leadership." Yeah, he left a legacy alright....a trail of soggy cigars and a new definition of the words "sex" and "is." ;)

Zell Miller sucks... period.

Well, thank you for clearing that up, oh All-knowing Grand High Exalted Poobah.

Yep, but there is also discretion being the better part of valor too. Clinton just wanted to be popular and thought he could coast through and leave some great legacy based on his "leadership." Yeah, he left a legacy alright....a trail of soggy cigars and a new definition of the words "sex" and "is." ;)

Yup!

And what is funny is with all his antics, he is still very popular!

Must drive most conservatives bonkers to hear that! ;)

Zell Miller sucks... period.

Are you suggesting he is gay?

Tell us what you really think! ;)

Yup!

And what is funny is with all his antics, he is still very popular!

Must drive most conservatives bonkers to hear that! ;)

He is popular with some it is true. He is reviled by the military and a lot of others as well.

He will pass into history and his presidency will be a footnote in history books someday. ;)

Yup!

And what is funny is with all his antics, he is still very popular!

Must drive most conservatives bonkers to hear that! ;)

No more bonkers than Reagan's still-overwhelming popularity drives liberals.

Or the fact that Fox News SLAYS all the liberal media outlets in the ratings. :p

I wonder who would be on which side if Lincoln Chafee adressed the DNC. :)

I cant wait till the debate when Bush takes Kerry, chews him, and spits him out. And if by some miracle, Kerry does become president, he's gonna get us all nuked.

I dont mind democrats and Zell Miller (awesome speech last nignt- wanted to make me go kick some liberal booty) is a TRUE democrat. Not the false and hypocritical liberals who call themselves democrates.

But I can't wait till the election is over, Bush is back at the White House, all this mess will be over, and kerry will be ruined.

me and my dad were driving ont he left side of the road and some guy fromt he right lane cuts us off and then slwoly drifts back to the right lane and then goes back to the left. My dad was like "what the heck"

I said "it must be Kerry in the car, he can't decide which lane to go in." - True story

I cant wait till the debate when Bush takes Kerry, chews him, and spits him out. And if by some miracle, Kerry does become president, he's gonna get us all nuked.


Hey get it right. Your President can't say that word!

"he's gonna get us all nu...cull...lerred"


I dont mind democrats and Zell Miller (awesome speech last nignt- wanted to make me go kick some liberal booty) is a TRUE democrat. Not the false and hypocritical liberals who call themselves democrates.


Oh this should be good!

Ok let's hear it. Define what it a true democrat!

From Zell Miller's speech:
"Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations.

Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending. I want Bush to decide. John Kerry, who says he doesn't like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security. That's the most dangerous outsourcing of all. This politician wants to be leader of the free world."


From Sen. Kerry's speech:
"I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President. Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response. I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military.

We will add 40,000 active duty troops – not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended, and under pressure. We will double our special forces to conduct anti-terrorist operations. We will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives – and win the battle. And we will end the backdoor draft of National Guard and reservists."


How do these people get away with lying? It's fine to disagree with people's politics or how people would run the country, but to claim that someone said the opposite of what they did and have it believed by most of the people that are listening.. it just doesn't make sense.

a true democrat is a conservative democrat without all the amorality of a liberal.

Miller's speech was filled with hate and vile, that's not how you reach a swing/undecided voter. He was preaching to the already converted and or choir. His impact will be nothing.

and Bashing Bush doesn't get you any swing voters either so its mutual. If anything, it is having the opposite effect. Kerry's numbers are going down and Bush is going up. Attack ads are having an effect. As for Miller's impact, we'll see just how much it is. I think he knows what Kerry has done in the Senate than anyone of us.

Lets wait for the debates. That is where the undecided voter will make up their minds.

This is undoubtably true.

Hey get it right. Your President can't say that word!

"he's gonna get us all nu...cull...lerred"

lol yeah....that was pretty funny i thought. But hey we all make mistakes, even the president...some more than others like Clinton.

From Zell Miller's speech:
"Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations.

Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending. I want Bush to decide. John Kerry, who says he doesn't like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security. That's the most dangerous outsourcing of all. This politician wants to be leader of the free world."


From Sen. Kerry's speech:
"I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President. Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response. I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security. And I will build a stronger American military.

We will add 40,000 active duty troops – not in Iraq, but to strengthen American forces that are now overstretched, overextended, and under pressure. We will double our special forces to conduct anti-terrorist operations. We will provide our troops with the newest weapons and technology to save their lives – and win the battle. And we will end the backdoor draft of National Guard and reservists."


How do these people get away with lying? It's fine to disagree with people's politics or how people would run the country, but to claim that someone said the opposite of what they did and have it believed by most of the people that are listening.. it just doesn't make sense.

Zell and all of the other Republicans (Zell is not a democrat) get away with such blatant lies because Americans are mentally lazy and poorly educated as well as politically apathetic. The minority that actually knows the truth are not heard because they are just that... a minority. They don't get heard because the supposed liberal media does nothign to show the contraditins to their verbal diarreah.

the media is disgustingly liberal. Sometimes I want to take a shotgun to it or just watch Fox News.

As for Zell Miller and the entire thing bout God and America...I agree with him 100% Bieng a Born-Aagain Christian, I think Bush is in office because of God's will. If Kerry is elected into office, I won't hate it or despise it becuase it was God's will. i will still be proud to be American and always will be. The Bible says not to rebel or hate your government, even those you don't agree with. We should respect our leaders.

Zell and all of the other Republicans (Zell is not a democrat) get away with such blatant lies because Americans are mentally lazy and poorly educated as well as politically apathetic. The minority that actually knows the truth are not heard because they are just that... a minority. They don't get heard because the supposed liberal media does nothign to show the contraditins to their verbal diarreah.

And the democratic party doesn't lie? Trust me Sumamba, everyone lies. Politicians more than others. This is a fact of life. No such thing as an honest politician but I'll take as close to this as I get. That being GWB and not JFK!

the media is disgustingly liberal. Sometimes I want to take a shotgun to it or just watch Fox News.

i dont doubt that.... you rebpublicans seem very angry, hateful and violent. Always wantign wars and doing what you can to step on the little guy. FOX news is like a pacifierto you consevatives who can't handle a more balanced viewpoint.

im not angry, im not violent, im not hateful. All the conseratives and republicans I know dont hate kerry or the liberals or democrats. I'm not saying the majority of us do but I know the Christian half holds no hate on you guys.

I respect your guys opinions and beliefs.

Take a look at the RNC and then reflect back on the DNC. All I heard there was pretty much hate about the president, the republicans, and conservatives.

At the RNC, I've heard some of that but I heard more joy and optimisim abotu the future.

I went on a chat room last night and everyone was saying how much they hate Bush and blah blah blah. Yet you dont here all the coservatives go around saying I hate Kerry, Kerry sucks unlike the ALL the Liberals who go around saying I hate Bush, bush sucks, so and so forth.

Frodo for President!

i hear sheep is pretty good tasting, i think its time to go fire up the bar-b and go kill some republicans

im not angry, im not violent, im not hateful. All the conseratives and republicans I know dont hate kerry or the liberals or democrats. I'm not saying the majority of us do but I know the Christian half holds no hate on you guys.

I respect your guys opinions and beliefs.

Take a look at the RNC and then reflect back on the DNC. All I heard there was pretty much hate about the president, the republicans, and conservatives.

At the RNC, I've heard some of that but I heard more joy and optimisim abotu the future.

I went on a chat room last night and everyone was saying how much they hate Bush and blah blah blah. Yet you dont here all the coservatives go around saying I hate Kerry, Kerry sucks unlike the ALL the Liberals who go around saying I hate Bush, bush sucks, so and so forth.

Frodo for President!
oh please, there are keeping the republican nazis far away from the convention and toning down anything from the few nazis they are letting speak so they sound moderate and almost human. if you would look past this obviously weak viase to the core of the problem you would realise its the nazi resembling republicans who hold power in this country and the moderate republicans who have no say. most republicans are NO different than the democrats, they just listen blindly to republican lies about higher taxes and general evil that will come if we even let a democrat talk to you

heh heh nazi's. Soup nazi.

anyways....to me this entire thing does seem pointless. Im gonna stop arguing cause when it all goes down the the wire...who cares??

I dont care if I die...if it means I will be Heaven...I would like to die right now. But int he mean time, I will still love my country and proud to be American. Despite if my leader is Republican or Democrat. This entire election is in God's hands.

BTW the reason why I didn "answer" your question cause nothing was true bout it...kind alike kerry. :P

i dont doubt that.... you rebpublicans seem very angry, hateful and violent. Always wantign wars and doing what you can to step on the little guy. FOX news is like a pacifierto you consevatives who can't handle a more balanced viewpoint.

angry, hateful , and violant? ever see the war protests? ever listen to moveon.org ads, ever listen to these people on the liberal democrat side. they make republican rhetoric look like a kindergarden class. calling conservatives nazis, fascists, evil, and liars day after day. you are obviously too partison to see this though. stepping on the little guy? what like me and the tax cuts i got? like how 4/5 ths of republican voters are middle class and proud of it? and fox news, as I have seen, is running those moveon.org ads on it's commercial breaks. It has had more democrats on thsi week then cnn did. that's personal observation. and why are you so threatened by fox news and president bush? why all the agitation? because you realize that even though you are relentless in your hatred of the president, he is not losing this election, no matter how much you badmouth fox news, it is beating cnn in the ratings, and no matter how much you make Rush Limbaugh into a bad guy, he has the highest ratings in radio. you don't get those sorts of things without the respect of the same little guy you say the republicans step on. The little guy is a Republican, supports the President, and rejects the left wing fanaticism represented by the protestors and increasingly , the democratic party itself.

^ - now thats the truth!! Exactly what we need in this day of liberalism lies ^_^

angry, hateful , and violant? ever see the war protests? ever listen to moveon.org ads, ever listen to these people on the liberal democrat side. they make republican rhetoric look like a kindergarden class. calling conservatives nazis, fascists, evil, and liars day after day. you are onviously too parison to see this though. stepping on the little guy? what like me and the tax cuts i got? like how 4/5 ths of republican voters are middle class and proud of it? and fox news, as I have seen, is running those moveon.org ads on it's commercial breaks. It has had more democrats on thsi week then cnn did. that's personal observation. and why are you so threatened by fox news and president bush? why all the agitation? because you realize that even though you are relentless in your hatred of the president, he is not losing this election, no matter how much you badmouth fox news, it is beating cnn in the ratings, and no matter how much you make Rush Limbaugh into a bad guy, he has the highest ratings in radio. you don't get those sorts of things without the respect of the same little guy you say the republicans step on. The little guy is a Republican, supports the President, and rejects the left wing fanaticism represented by the protestors and increasingly , the democratic party itself.
maybe you are too deaf and or blind or just too stupid to see all the people on the right blaring away at the liberals and democrats for insulting them with fairly accurate accusations, oh thats right, you cant see it because YOU ARE DOING IT YOU IDIOTIC HYPOCRITE, god if i ignored every fucking stupid, brainless conservative i wouldnt have to debate anyone any more, because apparently all of them here are like that: corneliu, biff pileon, this dipshit

maybe you are too deaf and or blind or just too stupid to see all the people on the right blaring away at the liberals and democrats for insulting them with fairly accurate accusations, oh thats right, you cant see it because YOU ARE DOING IT YOU IDIOTIC HYPOCRITE, god if i ignored every fucking stupid, brainless conservative i wouldnt have to debate anyone any more, because apparently all of them here are like that: corneliu, biff pileon, this dipshit

Chess Squares, STOP INSULTING PEOPLE! Either stop it now or get out.

^ - now thats the truth!! Exactly what we need in this day of liberalism lies ^_^
listen with your earlier post i was starting to hope you wernt a sheepish, incompetent, half-wit buffoon, but apparently you are a little brainless follower. go blow the president and shut up already, no one wants to hear your simpleton dribble about how right all the hypocrites are about being their hypocritical selves

maybe you are too deaf and or blind or just too stupid to see all the people on the right blaring away at the liberals and democrats for insulting them with fairly accurate accusations, oh thats right, you cant see it because YOU ARE DOING IT YOU IDIOTIC HYPOCRITE, god if i ignored every fucking stupid, brainless conservative i wouldnt have to debate anyone any more, because apparently all of them here are like that: corneliu, biff pileon, this dipshit

you just proved my own point, I am laughing.......you managed to call me and conservatives:
deaf
blind
stupid
idiotic
hypocrite
fucking stupid
brainlessdipshit

see what I mean everybody? how amny names did I call this person?

maybe you are too deaf and or blind or just too stupid to see all the people on the right blaring away at the liberals and democrats for insulting them with fairly accurate accusations, oh thats right, you cant see it because YOU ARE DOING IT YOU IDIOTIC HYPOCRITE, god if i ignored every fucking stupid, brainless conservative i wouldnt have to debate anyone any more, because apparently all of them here are like that: corneliu, biff pileon, this dipshit

lol thats the most iditoic and stupid things ive heard today!!!
congrats!!

listen with your earlier post i was starting to hope you wernt a sheepish, incompetent, half-wit buffoon, but apparently you are a little brainless follower. go blow the president and shut up already, no one wants to hear your simpleton dribble about how right all the hypocrites are about being their hypocritical selves

and i have succeeded in making you mad...my day is gladdened.

you just proved my own point, I am laughing.......you managed to call me and conservatives:
deaf
blind
stupid
idiotic
hypocrite
fucking stupid
brainlessdipshit

see what I mean everybody? how amny names did I call this person?
and you proved every point i have in your previous statement, you NEVER make a point, NEVER. you just sit around berating the left for doing exactly what you are doing in more direct terms, you think im too stupid to see what your doing? try again, im one of the few intelligent ones who do, thats why im not a simpleton republican


2 more idiots on the dipshit list

and you proved every point i have in your previous statement, you NEVER make a point, NEVER. you just sit around berating the left for doing exactly what you are doing in more direct terms, you think im too stupid to see what your doing? try again, im one of the few intelligent ones who do, thats why im not a simpleton republican

neither do you. alll you say if you'r f-ing stupid and put people down. I have yet to seriously put you done. I have jested with you in a humorous and not-even-serious manner but I have yet to seriously insult you and I don't intend to cause I don't want to lower myself down to the liberals level.

Elessar, hier to the Throne of Isuilder shall rise again and be crowned king. May his days be blessed.

and so anyways I really liked Zell Millers speech as well as Arnolds and Guillianis

Zell Miller is a longtime Dixicrat and a racist, who blsted LBJ for his support of the Civil RIghts act.

He has been voting with the Rethugs for years, and a democrat in name only for the past 6. He's only doing this now because he's retiring and doesn;t have to try to get re-elected.

good f**king riddance.

He has been voting with the Rethugs for years,

Rethugs? Thats new and childish

Zell Millers speech was so damaging to the Kerry campaign, that the democrats had to put John Edwards on the air immediately after the convention convened, to do damage control for the democratic party.
The fact that the dems are using someone that far up in the campaign for damage control shows how desperate they and how out of touch they are, not only with mainstream America, but even with many of their own constituents.

Zell Miller is a longtime Dixicrat and a racist, who blsted LBJ for his support of the Civil RIghts act.

He has been voting with the Rethugs for years, and a democrat in name only for the past 6. He's only doing this now because he's retiring and doesn;t have to try to get re-elected.

good f**king riddance.
yes, good riddance cause after November, we won't have to hear anymore lies or slanders from the Kerry group and hopefully, the democratic party will collapse and fade in to the ash heap of history. After Bush wins his landslide.

yes, good riddance cause after November, we won't have to hear anymore lies or slanders from the Kerry group and hopefully, the democratic party will collapse and fade in to the ash heap of history. After Bush wins his landslide.
holy crap man your intelligence is on fire put it out!

Zell Miller is a democrat.
Zell is from the democratic south.
Georgia is a democratic state.

Zell isn't stupid though Metro Atlanta is heavily Republican.

To win in Georgia you better be a conservative Democrat or a Republican.

Zell sees the light Republican policies have been embraced for two decades now and you can't win the presidency denouncing Republicans. Watch for Zell to throw in his hat in 2007.

try again, im one of the few intelligent ones who do, thats why im not a simpleton republican

So what kind of simpleton are you?

Ok, enough! Knock off the petty insults! All of you. Warnings will be handed out if it doesn't stop!

Stephanie
Game Moderator

You guys, this senetor is obviously a relic from another era. You may love or hate his politics, but most of the party has pretty much disowned him for being so over-the-top. Just for an example of over-the-top, how many of you saw Chris Mathews Hardball interview with him last night. The Senator said he wished he could challenge Chris to a DUEL and threatened him repeatedly. Obviously whatever his politics, the guy has a few issues!

Chris Mathews Hardball interview with him last night. The Senator said he wished he could challenge Chris to a DUEL and threatened him repeatedly. Obviously whatever his politics, the guy has a few issues!

Haha, funny you should mention that, he more then seemed a little off his nut with CNN as well. You could see the three political reporters sort of rolling their eyes when he tried to go way out in left field with the papers (his speech) he kept pulling out of his pocket. Hey, as long as we have to put up with this farce of a convention that doesn't even represent the people in power, we might as well get some comedy value out of it. I'm not sure who made a bigger fool of themselves though, Miller or Bush's daughters..lol :P

I really don't think it matters to be discussing this anyway.

Forgive me Stephistan, for talking about something treasonous, but it just has to come up sometimes. (oh, and yeah, I am a young'n, but I am a Poli Sci Major, and have delved very deeply into the world of politics. Zell isn't a flip-flopper though. He is a practicer of RealPolitik. He throws his support wherever he thinks the victory will be.)

OK, on to what will happen if Bush is reelected.

1. Rioting in the streets
2. Assassinations
3. Militias rising in an attempt to destroy the Republican Party
4. Massive Arson campaigns (of which I may be involved in. I think it would be cool to see a Republican's house burning down.)
5. Police and Military retaliations for the violence
6. Massive casualties on both sides of the law
7. Conservatives taking up arms to fight the liberal mobs
8. Liberals taking up arms to defend themselves from the conservatives
9. Legislation to attempt to stop the Liberal militias
10. A civil war in which there is no forseeable front (although it will tend to be more heavily liberal or conservative in certain areas.)
11. Bush (if he hasn't been assassinated yet) using nuclear weapons on New York, Boston, Seattle, Portland, L.A., Chicago, and any other city that would have a liberal uprising in it.
12. The spontaneous destruction of America, Canada, and possibly Europe.



Granted, this is all speculation, but there are enough people who are willing to fight for the death of the Republican party, that the initial spark will be struck. I can guarantee that the rioting in the streets will happen. And I can also guarantee that there will be multiple assassination attempts. The uprising of the militias will be less likely, as it would be difficult to pull off covertly enough. And the Arson campaigns have already started, at least in my city anyways.

Comandante, the rioting might happen, but nothing else.

And if liberals took up arms against republicans, I would be the first to take up arms....



against them.

You see, if a war broke out, the conservatives would win easily. A liberal stance is NO gun ownership. Ten bucks at least 80% of gun shop owners are right-wing. And the hunters (like me) are most likely right-wing. And Hunters are marksman, so good luck trying to get rid of a bunch of snipers.

Liberals would fail if a civil war broke out, I can tell you that right now.

Comandante, the rioting might happen, but nothing else.

And if liberals took up arms against republicans, I would be the first to take up arms....



against them.

You see, if a war broke out, the conservatives would win easily. A liberal stance is NO gun ownership. Ten bucks at least 80% of gun shop owners are right-wing. And the hunters (like me) are most likely right-wing. And Hunters are marksman, so good luck trying to get rid of a bunch of snipers.

Liberals would fail if a civil war broke out, I can tell you that right now.
im pretty sure i can shoot a bunch of idiots. and a large majority of the black people are democrats, and a lot of black people are in gangs, and alot of gang members have a lot of guns

ZELL MILLER RULES!!!!!

Comandante, the rioting might happen, but nothing else.

And if liberals took up arms against republicans, I would be the first to take up arms....



against them.

You see, if a war broke out, the conservatives would win easily. A liberal stance is NO gun ownership. Ten bucks at least 80% of gun shop owners are right-wing. And the hunters (like me) are most likely right-wing. And Hunters are marksman, so good luck trying to get rid of a bunch of snipers.

Liberals would fail if a civil war broke out, I can tell you that right now.

im pretty sure i can shoot a bunch of idiots. and a large majority of the black people are democrats, and a lot of black people are in gangs, and alot of gang members have a lot of guns

However, the question is where will the military fall? They are mostly republicans. I'm not sure about you but do you want to go against someone that is heavily armed with most of the state of the art equipment? Someone that has eyes in orbit? Someone that can silently destroy? Not me no way. The Republicans would win because 1) The Pacifists will stay out of it and they are democrats anyway. 2) The military is heavily republican. They would use their training to defeat the enemy. 3) The militias would cause havoc on both sides but they really will be pretty much a non factor. 4)The gangs will just shoot people at random and no one will trust the police departments because they don't know what side they'll be on. Many factors but the Liberals will lose because all the conservatives, be it rep or dem would fight them.

I beg to differ. There are actually quite a large population of liberals that hunt because they think it is a more ethical way of getting meat. You should see my Greenpeace friend go duckhunting. He is a fiend. Ducks call him, El Muerte. And I am pretty handy with a gun too. Plus I'm well stocked up with lots and lots of granular bullets. The way I shoot, I figure, at least 50 cops would be dead before I was killed. granted, granular bullets are pretty much one-shot kills anyway. They tear through flesh and body armour like it was nothing at all.

Also, you have to factor in the Communists and Anarchists that sit in the left. They are some scary fuckers. These fools can make a bomb big enough to destroy a police station in about 1 hour. You definitely have to factor in that the extreme left is good with things that go boom. Plus, one more thing, there wouldn't be any room to use high-tech weaponry, most of the battles would be Guerilla style, and fought in the cities. I'm still thinking a zealous left will be able to defeat a somewhat indifferent right.

he doesn't have to vote with the Democratic platform on every issue. However, a senator who blindly follows the Republican platform has good reason to register as a Republican. The people who voted for Zel Miller ended up with a politician who doesn't lead, but falls in step with what the Republican Party says his stance is.

Zell Miller was appointed, not elected. The Senator from Georgia died, I think it was a stroke...

there wont be any rioting
there wont be any shooting
there wont be any assassinations
there wont be any revolutions
there wont be any nukes

we will just bitch and moan like we always do and be very thankful that he cant run a 3rd time

we've survived worse than a second bush presidency.

zell miller's speech was powerful. All the talk in the world cannot deny it.

everyone's slamming him about him calling himself a democrat. they're doing that so that everyone will forget that everything he said was absolutely right.

See ya Kerry! :upyours:

BUSH FOR PRESIDENT '04!

It means that he believes in what his Party should become and not what it has become. He's a conservative Democrat in a Liberal Democrat Party. Not easy place to be in.
Actually, in the past fifteen years the Democrats have moved further to the right. I'm amazed that people call them a left-wing party.

That is just sooo sad. This is the hatred spewed by the left. Keep up the good work, your making America love your party.
What party is that? Does only the left spew hate, as opposed to the angelic and completely honest right? Are you a Republican?

"All liberals are traitors and they hate America" (paraphrase) - Ann Coulter


Bush Doped

there wont be any rioting
there wont be any shooting
there wont be any assassinations
there wont be any revolutions
there wont be any nukes

we will just bitch and moan like we always do and be very thankful that he cant run a 3rd time

we've survived worse than a second bush presidency.

I don't think so dude. There are so many people now that are feeling such radical hatred towards Bush, that there is almost certain, at least with the far left, to be violence. As the left starts to get persecuted because of the actions of radicals like myself, more and more will start joining in the violence. You know as well as I do that the worst four years are yet to come. What we have seen is Bush moderating himself so far. Plus, the Assault Weapons Ban is about to come to a close, and many will take advantage of this. LOL, that would be so funny! Republican agenda working against itself!

President Bush is the first President in 75 years to loose major ammounts of Jobs. The Republican Party are using Moderates to Represent a party of fat whitemen who are scared of change (and yes i am cacusion). In my state there is a horrible Republican Running, Named Alan Keyes, he is so conservative and brings his horibbly corrupt religous views to campaign with him (religon is not wrong but he is interprtating it wrong). The Republican party as of now, is horrible party. We need a strong President who will work the UN and not go it alone so our boys dont die. This man is John Kerry.

COME ON DEMOCRATS NEXT 4 YEARS, Remember the Clinton years? Gah those were great.

Actually, in the past fifteen years the Democrats have moved further to the right. I'm amazed that people call them a left-wing party.

Kerry is the most liberal senator in the US Senate with Edwards being the 4th! The party has moved to the LEFT not the RIGHT. Sorry Siljhouettes but that is a fact.

What party is that? Does only the left spew hate, as opposed to the angelic and completely honest right? Are you a Republican?

The party he's talking about is the democratic party. Question 2 is no but the left pretty much has a market on it than the right does though both parties spew hate on eachother.

"All liberals are traitors and they hate America" (paraphrase) - Ann Coulter

Nice Paraphrase though I really don't believe it.

Zell Miller was appointed, not elected. The Senator from Georgia died, I think it was a stroke...
Then he replaced Paul Coverdell, one of the most conservative members of the Senate (he was also a Republican).

President Bush is the first President in 75 years to loose major ammounts of Jobs. The Republican Party are using Moderates to Represent a party of fat whitemen who are scared of change (and yes i am cacusion). In my state there is a horrible Republican Running, Named Alan Keyes, he is so conservative and brings his horibbly corrupt religous views to campaign with him (religon is not wrong but he is interprtating it wrong). The Republican party as of now, is horrible party. We need a strong President who will work the UN and not go it alone so our boys dont die. This man is John Kerry.

COME ON DEMOCRATS NEXT 4 YEARS, Remember the Clinton years? Gah those were great.

Unless you were in the Military. As for Alan Keyes, I like him. Sorry if you don't like his politics but no need to insult him on religion. Did you know he's black? So now that you insulted him, I should call you a racist because you hate him and called him horrible.

Mr. Bush is an idiot Republican, The Republican party is going to colapse because you see i am not going to Iraq for President Bush, Iraq is just a vietnam in a different sence, we have created more terroism in Iraq. And here is my Political leanings obviously democratic.

DEMOCRATS THANK YOU FOR CONTROLLING ILLINOIS, ONE OF THE GREATEST DEMOCRATIC STATES, THANK YOU FOR MAYOR DAILY, THANK YOU SEANTOR BARACK OBAMA AND THANK YOU PRESIDENT KERRY
Alan Keyes is an idiot
George Bush is an Idiot
John Ashcroft is an Idiot
Donald Rumsfield is an Idiot

John Kerry is intellegent
John Edwards is Intellegent
Barack Obama is Intellegent

Uh, actually, hehe, I just came from being a military brat. My mom works with the DOD as a teacher for the Army's children that live on bases. You know what is really funny? SOLDIERS HAVE IT WORSE UNDER BUSH RIGHT NOW!!! I would know, I was there when their pay and benefits started getting cut. Oh, you know what is interesting? The Military is Socialist!!! ROTFL!!! They all have free healthcare, housing, and food! Except, now they are losing those benefits. Quite a few of the officers and experienced enlisted (sergeants and so forth) are a bit concerned, because they had it great under Clinton. And not because they weren't getting shot at either. Trust me, they don't care about that, and for good reason. It's their job.

Really he insulted Cheneys daughter, ALSO he said Hilary Clinton was an idiot for running in a state she isnt from..
For those of you wondering where Keyes is from... its MARYLAND what a hypocrite, and the Republican Party even said what he said is horrible.

And if i was a Racist would i be voting for Barack Obama? Wow dude i am from Chicago, there is no way id be a racist.

As for Alan Keyes, I like him. Sorry if you don't like his politics but no need to insult him on religion. Did you know he's black? So now that you insulted him, I should call you a racist because you hate him and called him horrible.

*sigh*

Keyes is nothing more then a scammer. I like how he starts inflecting like Martin Luther King when he gets on a role. :rolleyes:

He was also questioned about his comments about Hillery moving to New York to get elected and then he was asked "Aren't you doing the same thing in Illionios?

"NO I am not. I was asked to move here and run"

Sure Alan that makes it different. :rolleyes:

I will smile when Obama kicks his butt.

Hmmm I wonder if he will move back when he looses! :rolleyes:

I know he's black so does that make me a Clan member? :rolleyes:

Black Forest, you are a very intellegent person, and i dont hate all Republicans, Like John Mcain, but you must undertstand that the Republican Party is wrong on many things, Like a womans right to choose, and on Gay marriage, its state marriage, not Religous marriage, so religon has nothing to do with this. Marriage in this essence is by the state Judge.

There is soo much anger on these forums. What ever happened to acting like sensible people who can calming talk about issues?

I once heard it said that people who swear just aren't intelligent enough to phrase their argument in a convincing manner. Of course, my high school lit teacher could have been wrong...

Mr. Bush is an idiot Republican, The Republican party is going to colapse because you see i am not going to Iraq for President Bush, Iraq is just a vietnam in a different sence, we have created more terroism in Iraq. And here is my Political leanings obviously democratic.

So what your saying is that if your CO tells you your being deployed to Iraq, you'll refuse? Good job. I'll see you in a military court someday then because disobeying a direct order from a superior officer is a court-martial offense. This is not Vietnam. Not even close to vietnam. Some things are settling down in Iraq now that there's a peace deal between the government and Al Sadr thanks to Sistani. Iraq is also a warzone thus there will be terrorism. Don't you think there was no terrorism when Germany took over France? Nazis using terror to drive the allies and soviet russia out of Germany? Japanese using terror to drive us out of Japan? That happened. I'm not surprised that there is terrorism in Iraq. It will settle out soon as well when they start to lose support and I believe that is already happening.

DEMOCRATS THANK YOU FOR CONTROLLING ILLINOIS, ONE OF THE GREATEST DEMOCRATIC STATES, THANK YOU FOR MAYOR DAILY, THANK YOU SEANTOR BARACK OBAMA AND THANK YOU PRESIDENT KERRY

He's not president yet and Obama is not a senator yet. They both still have to be elected and I'm not Sure there will be A president Kerry when this is all said and done.

Alan Keyes is an idiot
George Bush is an Idiot
John Ashcroft is an Idiot
Donald Rumsfield is an Idiot

Hatred noted now move on.

John Kerry is intellegent
John Edwards is Intellegent
Barack Obama is Intellegent

Obama is intellegent, I'll give you that. As for the other 2, Edwards would've been a one-term Senator and Kerry has spent to long in the Senate missing Intel meetings so I don't think I'll call that intellegent but you are entitled to your opinion.

ZELL MILLER RULES!!!!!

hello, do you want to become best friends?

Or something more...? :fluffle:

jk.

But really, he is awesome.

His speech was awesome, he was right. Kerry is an ass. No one who sees that speech can talk against it.

Actually voted for it... before voting against it.

Damn that was a dumb line to say. It has been the primary sound bite of fodder that the Republicans point out to show a flip flop.

The thing is, Kerry DID vote for the appropriation to provide needed equipment for the service men and women servine in Iraq.

What he voted against was the ammendment that changed the funding for this - which in effect simply added it to the national debt rather than pay for it at the time through a defined revenue stream.
I agree. I reckon Kerry said that when he forgot that most people don't understand how Congress works. That there are many versions of bills presented.

People conveniently forget that there are many Republicans who voted against the $87 billion when it was due to take money from taxes from the rich. They didn't dare endanger the precious tax cut.

Sir , i respect your right to your views, i was merely stating that i know Barack will become Seantor, and i know Kerry will get elected. can you tell me you are better off now then you were in the Clinton Years?

You know how Democrats always say,

"Hey, Bush supporters, watch Farenheit 9/11!"

Now we can say something.

"Hey, Kerry supporters, watch Zell Miller's speech!"

And as for military court, i would register as a Conscious objector, now there are two different things here. Afganistan i agreed with, but iraq i did not, and i have a right to disagree, also i dont know your views on the Patriot act but i have conservative friends who also agree it fringes on our rights as American Citizens.

The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40% of the bombs in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom.

The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.

The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi's Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.

The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's Capital and this very city after 9/11.

I could go on and on and on: Against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein's scud missiles over Israel, Against the Aegis air-defense cruiser, Against the Strategic Defense Initiative, Against the Trident missile, against, against, against.

This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces? U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?

Man, I wish he'd talk more often.

But what the hey, Clinton had a fat chick to take care of. ;)
And Bush has fat cheques to take care of. ;)

I don't think so dude. There are so many people now that are feeling such radical hatred towards Bush, that there is almost certain, at least with the far left, to be violence. As the left starts to get persecuted because of the actions of radicals like myself, more and more will start joining in the violence. You know as well as I do that the worst four years are yet to come. What we have seen is Bush moderating himself so far. Plus, the Assault Weapons Ban is about to come to a close, and many will take advantage of this. LOL, that would be so funny! Republican agenda working against itself!

i have an example to show that you are wrong

when tim mcveigh (*spits*) bombed the federal building in OKC the ultraright nutcases expected it to be the start of the next american revoluion. there were many many thousands of people in the militia movement that were expected to take up arms.

the entire country reacted in horror and it destroyed the militia movement. only the most hardcore nutcases remain.

if YOU went out and shot the newly elected george bush, the reaction would be the same. no army of ultraleft nutcases would come out to join you.

you would be hunted down and executed.

we dont have the will or the stomach for revolution

What I am wondering though, is why did anyone start talking about the draft? I strongly doubt that even Bush is stupid enough to reinstate that. There is no need, and if it was actually started again, I am sure that things would get pretty militant. Remember that whole me speculating about revolution thing? Yeah, I'm eluding to that again. I'm not obsessed with it, it would just be really cool to see and participate in.

Miller is a man of conviction who is standing by his convictions. For that he should be admired....not ridiculed. If John McCain was to do the same for Kerry the Dems would be touting him as a man of conviction too, but they ridicule Miller. Such is the nature of the political beast I guess.....

Hell, the Dems did tout McCain as a man of conviction when he criticized Bush's decision to cut taxes while we were at war, when he came out against the proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman, when he defended Kerry's service record in the wake of the Swiftboat Vets ads and etc. McCain, of course, became a political hack in the eyes of the Dems when he endorsed Bush.

Evidently, one is only a "man of conviction" when he agrees with the left. According to the Democrats, that is.

To me its just so annoying, glad i dont live in texas (no offence to texans implied) but i am glad i live in for all things a Liberal to Moderate State. The Republican Party in Illinois is Virtually non existant, huh in the land of LINCOLN. If lincoln were alive to day i doubt he would be a Republican. Just throwing some ideas around.

i have an example to show that you are wrong

when tim mcveigh (*spits*) bombed the federal building in OKC the ultraright nutcases expected it to be the start of the next american revoluion. there were many many thousands of people in the militia movement that were expected to take up arms.

the entire country reacted in horror and it destroyed the militia movement. only the most hardcore nutcases remain.

if YOU went out and shot the newly elected george bush, the reaction would be the same. no army of ultraleft nutcases would come out to join you.

you would be hunted down and executed.

we dont have the will or the stomach for revolution



Why don't we? Timothy McVeigh did something that nobody in their right of mind had ever thought about before. He attacked a thing that he thought was a problem, but most people were totally indifferent to.

On the other hand, the bitterness, hatred, and fear that the Left is feeling right now are just as intense. Many people feel the same way. Where with Timothy McVeigh, there was one guy pissed off at the system, here and now, there are hundreds of thousands of Leftists who are just as pissed off, and have been quietly musing about revolution.

Don't you tell me that hundreds of thousands is an exaggeration. There are 290 million people in this country, and an exaggeration would be that maybe 10 million feel this way.

Black Forest, you are a very intellegent person, and i dont hate all Republicans, Like John Mcain, but you must undertstand that the Republican Party is wrong on many things, Like a womans right to choose, and on Gay marriage, its state marriage, not Religous marriage, so religon has nothing to do with this. Marriage in this essence is by the state Judge.

Eh?

If you think I run aliases on this board, you are mistaken. I only have one account.

I am not a fan of the Republican Party.

I am middle class so I am not one of their interests.

The Christians have taken it over and the Neo-Cons are infecting it.

Are all Republicans bad? Off course not.

I do not and will not support the Shrub nor that nasty SOB Cheny.

To me its just so annoying, glad i dont live in texas (no offence to texans implied) but i am glad i live in for all things a Liberal to Moderate State. The Republican Party in Illinois is Virtually non existant, huh in the land of LINCOLN. If lincoln were alive to day i doubt he would be a Republican. Just throwing some ideas around.

The Republicans of today are not the republicans of Lincoln.

Their other favorite son Teddy probably wound not support them as well.

I think you might have misunderstood me i said your right and that i agree with you.

...you must undertstand that the Republican Party is wrong on many things, Like a womans right to choose, and on Gay marriage, its state marriage, not Religous marriage, so religon has nothing to do with this.

Even if you take the issue of gay marriage out of the realm of religion, so what? It's interesting to hear the proponents of gay marriage claim they are being somehow repressed by the current definition of marriage.

If we were going to go with a distorted, "marriage is an equal right which should be enjoyed by all" argument, what of bigamists? What of people wanting to marry relatives? Hell, what about allowing those of the majority to marry folks who have just hit puberty? Shouldn't they be allowed the right to marry?

Sure, there is a religious component in many arguments against gay marriage. But, don't pretend like that's the ony component.

I read the first few posts and that's it. Not going to read 15 pages. And my response is....and?

Zell Miller is a Democrat merely for election purposes only. He wouldn't have been elected as a Republican so he is a Democrat and gets to run around saying bad things about other Democrats.

I've proposed the trade before....Republicans can have Miller and we'll take Lincoln Chafee or Olympia Snowe.

lets get John Mcain to, Hes a good guy

a true democrat is a conservative democrat without all the amorality of a liberal.

Yes and you described a republican? Think about it did you or didn't you? a cobnservative democrat is a democrat who thinks using republican values thus a republican. Unless you can describe a difference between conservo repubs and conservo dems.

the media is disgustingly liberal. Sometimes I want to take a shotgun to it or just watch Fox News.

As for Zell Miller and the entire thing bout God and America...I agree with him 100% Bieng a Born-Aagain Christian, I think Bush is in office because of God's will. If Kerry is elected into office, I won't hate it or despise it becuase it was God's will. i will still be proud to be American and always will be. The Bible says not to rebel or hate your government, even those you don't agree with. We should respect our leaders.

Do you hate america? We rebelled against our Government and formed a more perfect nation, endowed by its creator, and given certain unalienable rights among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Apparently our forefathers didn't listen to God's will?

Comandante, the rioting might happen, but nothing else.

And if liberals took up arms against republicans, I would be the first to take up arms....



against them.

You see, if a war broke out, the conservatives would win easily. A liberal stance is NO gun ownership. Ten bucks at least 80% of gun shop owners are right-wing. And the hunters (like me) are most likely right-wing. And Hunters are marksman, so good luck trying to get rid of a bunch of snipers.

Liberals would fail if a civil war broke out, I can tell you that right now.
Someone doesn't know there history: Guess who won the civil war? the Yanks! So republicans stand little chance.

You know how Democrats always say,

"Hey, Bush supporters, watch Farenheit 9/11!"

Now we can say something.

"Hey, Kerry supporters, watch Zell Miller's speech!"
Watched it and didn't like it. so what else is there to talk about?

Even if you take the issue of gay marriage out of the realm of religion, so what? It's interesting to hear the proponents of gay marriage claim they are being somehow repressed by the current definition of marriage.

If we were going to go with a distorted, "marriage is an equal right which should be enjoyed by all" argument, what of bigamists? What of people wanting to marry relatives? Hell, what about allowing those of the majority to marry folks who have just hit puberty? Shouldn't they be allowed the right to marry?

Sure, there is a religious component in many arguments against gay marriage. But, don't pretend like that's the ony component.

Actually when you get downto it laws against bigotry are unconstitutional but we won't get into that. We don't allow marriage of people under age beause parents have legal right to say they can't.

About 1910, the politics of the Democratic and Republican parties switched. Before this date, the Dems had always been capitalists, anti-federalists, and advocates of small government. The Republicans were protectionists, federalists, and were interested in a larger government.

If we were going to go with a distorted, "marriage is an equal right which should be enjoyed by all" argument, what of bigamists? What of people wanting to marry relatives? Hell, what about allowing those of the majority to marry folks who have just hit puberty? Shouldn't they be allowed the right to marry?


EWWWW pretty strawman!

I am surprised you didn't mention marrying animals!

Someone doesn't know there history: Guess who won the civil war? the Yanks! So republicans stand little chance.

Uh, so? Really, explain that point.

About 1910, the politics of the Democratic and Republican parties switched. Before this date, the Dems had always been capitalists, anti-federalists, and advocates of small government. The Republicans were protectionists, federalists, and were interested in a larger government.

Don't forget another major idiological change.

Truman chasing out the Dixicrats.....

Al-Q's planning does involve who is President.

I don't think so. I think all Americans are the same to them. Even if Al-Qaeda publicly state a preference for president, I never believe their lies.

Uh, so? Really, explain that point.
Well, the South is primarily considered republican, thus the north is Democrats/Yanks. The Yanks won the Civil war thus Democrats would beat Republicans if history is a clue/evidence.
I can go farther but you can understand that point, no?

EWWWW pretty strawman!

I am surprised you didn't mention marrying animals!

Nah. None of those, "I oughta be able to marry mah dog" arguments.

Hell, take the underage folks out of it. Why not just allow any consenting adults to marry whomever they want and how often they want?

Society draws lines, is why. If one was to believe the gay marriage proponents, one would think that's the only group prohibited from marrying. That's not the case at all.

Uh, so? Really, explain that point.

I will be willing to explain it. Just because there was a zealous and conservative, well armed south, the Yankees were more than willing to go and stomp them. I mean, even quakers were willing to kill those Dixie bastards. The only difference now is that the number of liberals to conservatives is equal, but the liberals tend to be more youthful (and thus in better fighting condition) more zealous (and thus in better fighting condition) more healthy from all the organic food (and thus in better fighting condition) and more idealistic (and thus in better fighting condition)

So all in all, I think one liberal would be able to, out of sheer ability, kill three conservatives in battle. Liberals have been seen to leave pacifism aside as soon as they deem it necessary. (I.E. the riots in Seattle and Miami at the meetings for NAFTA)

I don't think so. I think all Americans are the same to them. Even if Al-Qaeda publicly state a preference for president, I never believe their lies.

Actually that was a mistake. It was supposed to say doesn't

They are patient planners and don't work to a schedule but their own.

Thanks for catching that......

Well, the South is primarily considered republican, thus the north is Democrats/Yanks. The Yanks won the Civil war thus Democrats would beat Republicans if history is a clue/evidence.
I can go farther but you can understand that point, no?

Actually, I was hoping you weren't suggesting political ideology was the determining factor in the outcome of the War Between the States. However, that's not the case.

If we turn to history, we see the South was an agrarian society with a small population fighting an industrial nation with a considerably larger population. The South was simply ground down by superior technology and numbers. Political ideology had little to do with it.

Things have changed a lot since the 19th Century.

Why the hell are we talking about a civil war, anyway?

I don't think so. I think all Americans are the same to them. Even if Al-Qaeda publicly state a preference for president, I never believe their lies.


I beg to differ. Terrorism is fanatical, but it is also political. Terrorism is the attempt to change policy by causing governments to cave in to threats of death. It has been pretty effective in the past, and as such, it is still used. I don't think we will ever be attacked again if we just break the back of the Texas Oilmen.

Actually, I was hoping you weren't suggesting political ideology was the determining factor in the outcome of the War Between the States. However, that's not the case.

If we turn to history, we see the South was an agrarian society with a small population fighting an industrial nation with a considerably larger population. The South was simply ground down by superior technology and numbers. Political ideology had little to do with it.

Things have changed a lot since the 19th Century.

Why the hell are we talking about a civil war, anyway?


Has the south changed much since then? I do believe it is nowhere near as industrialized. However, I doubt that if there was a civil war, that the lines would be drawn along the North/South. It would probably be more like City/vs suburb and country. The supply lines would be concentrated in the hands of the liberals (as supplies tend to come into the city, before being spread out into the surrounding area) but the spread of the liberal forces would be limited, as there would be ambushes and roadblocks created by the conservatives.

Oh, we are talking about civil war because we think that there is the possibility that one could start if Bush is reelected. You may not know many liberals, so you may think this is hokey, but I live in a city, and there has been a lot of talk about organized civil disobedience if Bush is reelected. You guys may think liberals are pussies, but the truth is, they are idealists, and they are young. They are far more dangerous than you think they are. We think Conservatives would be pussies in battle, because they would be old and out of shape. Superior firepower aside, and that would change pretty quickly anyways.

Seeing as Al-queda know America will vote Bush if attacked, if they attack you know who Al-queda is voting for, hehe.
Everyone I know admits if they are attacked so they aren't like Spain they would vote Bush. So seeing as we expacting attack, I'm betting Al-queda wants Bush to be there to rally Muslims gainst him...
BNut then again what do I know except the truth...

Yes we Liberals are not pussies we just find it unnesscarry to be as mean as cold harted and non understanding as conservatives.

agreed. And we are more than likely to go Memociding Conservatives if they decide to attack us. We always wonder what the U.S. would be like without you guys, and we would like to make thatt a reality.

by the way, memocide is the act of trying to make extinct an entire belief system or religion.

by the way, memocide is the act of trying to make extinct an entire belief system or religion.


There is an interesting paradox in the two recent posts by Comandante.

People who have the agree with us or leave (or the similar I wish we could find a way to get rid of you) additude should probably think about their own belief system a little more. Isn't democracy about a group of different people coming together and exchanging ideas? Probably one of the biggest threats to democracy would be a lack of opposing ideas to keep the balance.

There are issues that have no simple right or wrong answers. There are positions held by both "right" and "left" that are damaging our nation. There are positions held by both that would greatly help our nation.

Can we not be strong and empathetic at the same time?