NationStates Jolt Archive

Support our President... vote George Bush!!!

The point of elections is not to support the current pres., or every pres. would be elected twice.

Support our President... vote George Bush!!!
Support our ex-President go Bill Clinton!
Seeing as they both were Presidernts at one time they deserve same respect for being a president.

oh and go Kerry!

Why?

You know, there are hundreds of other people who say this without needing to make a new thread for it.

I wanted to though...

I wanted to though...
May God Have mercy on your soul....

and I'm not even religious, but I'm betting you are.
:headbang:

Four more years. Clinton lying cheating scumbag ditto kerry

I hope that he loses.

Go George W. Bush!

bush is a lying criminal

Please cite the law that he broke, or I will cite the law Kerry broke.

Four more years. Clinton lying cheating scumbag ditto kerry
R E S P E C T, I will tell you what it means me, respect! Where is yours for the President?

Go George W. Bush!



Please cite the law that he broke, or I will cite the law Kerry broke.

It is a federal offense to mislead Congress. Bush misled not only Congress but the world.

How did he break the law? I'll tell you. Because hes a Republican. You know, when Clinton went to war in the Balkans, which was not sponsered by the UN, I didnt hear a word of complaint. Did you?

How did he break the law? I'll tell you. Because hes a Republican. You know, when Clinton went to war in the Balkans, which was not sponsered by the UN, I didnt hear a word of complaint. Did you?
When did Clinton lie about why we went to Balkans? Wait, he didn't? Must be why there was no complaint...

and I'm not even religious, but I'm betting you are.
:headbang:

Yeah, stereotyping is cruise control for cool, and is the best way to win an argument.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/953.html

Kerry explained to Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman J. William Fulbright in a question and answer session on Capitol Hill a year after his Paris meetings that the war needed to be stopped "immediately and unilaterally." Then Kerry added, "I have been to Paris. I have talked with both delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PVR)."

However, both of the delegations to which Kerry referred were communist. Neither included the U.S. allied, South Vietnamese or any members of the U.S. delegation. The Democratic Republic of Vietnam was the government of the North Vietnamese communists and the Provisional Revolutionary Government was an arm of the North Vietnamese government that included the Vietcong.

When did Clinton lie about why we went to Balkans? Wait, he didn't? Must be why there was no complaint...

What? If this is the typical "Bush Lied, Babies Died" post, whatever, but how is saving one country from a terriost leader right, when doing the same thing on a much higher scale wrong? I dont understand, we are still saving Muslims, the left's second favorite religion(after athiesm), its probally because we were killing Christians in the Balkins, instead of some evilier(is that a word) group of Islamic Fundemetalists in Iraq. Or maybe just because a Republican was president.

Go George W. Bush!



Please cite the law that he broke, or I will cite the law Kerry broke.

Drunk driving..
Lying.
Drugs.
w00t.

And having children. It's bad for the world when retarded people have offspring. Did I mention that he takes anti-depressants?

Sorry, I already cited the law Kerry broke. And let's not mention the treason...

What is with everyone in America fearing Communism like it's a virus and spreads around until it would conquer everything? Wouldn't any other system have the same possibility to do the same?

Capitalist BS.

Sorry, I already cited the law Kerry broke. And let's not mention the treason...
Care to actually back any of this up with data?

Drunk driving..
Lying.
Drugs.
w00t.

And having children. It's bad for the world when retarded people have offspring. Did I mention that he takes anti-depressants?

His Wife's legal issues:
Murder (well documented but got off, say it on Oprah lol) Also its in a new book going to be written about her. The woman is pro-her but she doesn't think its Ms. Bush's fault since she was drunk lol.

Drunk driving (why she killed someone)

Ran a red-light

Parents of her: Bribery (but police acepted it as well as family to drop charges.)

Care to actually back any of this up with data?

Back up yours, liberal! I gave you a link and what Kerry said to the Senate is undisputed!

Back up yours, liberal! I gave you a link and what Kerry said to the Senate is undisputed!

And how exactly is talking to nations that have different views than our own treason again?

Sorry, I already cited the law Kerry broke. And let's not mention the treason...

Actually you must of missed it.. I beat you to it on the first page what current law Bush broke. You can say he didn't mislead the Congress all you wish.. say the Congress had all the same Intel he did.. Well the facts don't back that up, explain the 9/11 Commission and a little problem about daily Intel briefs that NO ONE in the Congress got to see?

Misleading Congress is a FEDERAL offense!

Treason: Engaging in military action against the United States or providing aid and comfort to those who do

Actually you must of missed it.. I beat you to it on the first page what current law Bush broke. You can say he didn't mislead the Congress all you wish.. say the Congress had all the same Intel he did.. Well the facts don't back that up, explain the 9/11 Commission and a little problem about daily Intel briefs that NO ONE in the Congress got to see?

Misleading Congress is a FEDERAL offense!

I noticed that post. Steph, if George Tenet, MI6, the Russians, the Jordanians and others are telling you that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, what are you going to do?

Drunk driving..
Lying.
Drugs.
w00t.

And having children. It's bad for the world when retarded people have offspring. Did I mention that he takes anti-depressants?


Hmmm, Teddy Roosevelt-drunk driving and murder-no complaint from you. Drugs, well, he was in college, and Clinton, Gore, and many other Democrats have been caught with them to.

Lying? Wow, yet again-"Bush Lied, Babies Died" Bohooo. I also like the "Bush is stupid, but also convinicgly lies to us for years without anyone finding out about his insanly brilliant oil conspirarcy, but man is Bush stupid!"

Treason: Engaging in military action against the United States or providing aid and comfort to those who do

Have there really been any major conflicts with those countries in the last couple of years?

Treason: Engaging in military action against the United States or providing aid and comfort to those who do
No comfort nor aid was given by Kerry.
Kerry didn't fight against his country so your argument sounds like a falacy.

Misleading Congress is a FEDERAL offense!
Any specifics as to what the misleading has to be about? :p

Treason: Engaging in military action against the United States or providing aid and comfort to those who do
Got two witnesses attesting to that?

well then we'd better round up and kill every president and all of their aides and staff members in the last 50 years, for trying to negotiate with Russia.

Negotiating with the enemy = treason? That, sir, is a big steaming crock of BS.

Ooh, here's another one: Bush is guilty of treason, because the Iraq invasion will be such a boon to terrorist organizations (every time we kill an innocent civilian, three of their relatives join a militia).

Look, whatever you think of Kerry, he's automatically better than Bush for one reason: Kerry won't send us into TWO UNWINNABLE WARS DURING A RECESSION!!

Hmmm, Teddy Roosevelt-drunk driving and murder-no complaint from you. Drugs, well, he was in college, and Clinton, Gore, and many other Democrats have been caught with them to.

Lying? Wow, yet again-"Bush Lied, Babies Died" Bohooo. I also like the "Bush is stupid, but also convinicgly lies to us for years without anyone finding out about his insanly brilliant oil conspirarcy, but man is Bush stupid!"
I would never vote for Teddy unless he admit he is sorry. Bush never admits he is sorry thus he doesn't deserve my vote.
Cocoine causes brain damage, Pot is debateable (mostly lung cancer), but boith are illegal yes.
Clinton never smoked it, he ate it in Brownies. "I didn't inhale" Its not illegal to eat it I think... but posession might be.

Whether John Kerry's well-witnessed testimony was aid and comfort could be a subject of dispute despite the fact tht I am right, but what happened in Paris?

Negotiating with the enemy = treason? That, sir, is a big steaming crock of BS.

No, it's a felony for private citizens.

Hmmm, Teddy Roosevelt-drunk driving and murder-no complaint from you. Drugs, well, he was in college, and Clinton, Gore, and many other Democrats have been caught with them to.

That doesn't make the offense lighter just because they did it, not that drugs really matter anyway.

But really, the violent cheating football playing jock can go drunk driving again and then maybe they'll make a half-assed high school movie about it..


Lying? Wow, yet again-"Bush Lied, Babies Died"

Who cares about the babies? It's the lying part that's bad. He lied to Congress and got our entire nation to go to war with a country just so he could get some revenge for his daddy. I don't particularly think most of the soldiers really like being used by him either.

Well his supposed breaking of that code is non existant as for one, the US government did not recognize either the Democratic Republic of Vietnam or the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PVR) as foreign governemnts.

as to his alleged Treason, for one, you must prove that his words were ment to INTENTIONALLY harm the US Overseas and aid our military enemies.

So, you know, a good thing might be to ya know, think before you spout your mouth....

Welcome to the forums! I'm sure you'll be embarassed about that first post some day when you're a conservative!

Who cares about the babies? It's the lying part that's bad. He lied to Congress and got our entire nation to go to war with a country just so he could get some revenge for his daddy. I don't particularly think most of the soldiers really like being used by him either.
Lying is bad. Like making up reasons as to why Bush went to war. Decrying him for lying to Congress and then putting up another reason with no backing in the same sentence is entertaining. :)

Welcome to the forums! I'm sure you'll be embarassed about that first post some day when you're a conservative!

Well that's probably true at least. People do tend to lose brain cells and things when they start getting older..

Welcome to the forums! I'm sure you'll be embarassed about that first post some day when you're a conservative!

I wont be as embarrased as i would have been if i had assumed that our governemtn had rocognized the north veitnamese as a nation and claimed that John Kerry had then broken the US Code.

Lying is bad. Like making up reasons as to why Bush went to war. Decrying him for lying to Congress and then putting up another reason with no backing in the same sentence is entertaining. :)

I don't really need to give backing, do I? There are plenty of soldiers that would be happy to tell you about all the fun they're having shooting civilians for no reason and how this is a pointless war.

I would never vote for Teddy unless he admit he is sorry. Bush never admits he is sorry thus he doesn't deserve my vote.
Cocoine causes brain damage, Pot is debateable (mostly lung cancer), but boith are illegal yes.
Clinton never smoked it, he ate it in Brownies. "I didn't inhale" Its not illegal to eat it I think... but posession might be.


First of all, Bush didnt kill anyone when he drove drunk, and I am not saying any of these things arent good, but I am just noting the hypocrisy of some on this forum. Anyway, Bush in effect did apologize when he became a "born again" Christian. Infact, I recently read or heard something about how Bush rarely even drinks anymore. While Bush is apologizing for what he did, Clinton makes excuses, and claims(but why would you believe him) that he didnt "inhale", and he doesnt know what "is" is.

Lying is bad. Like making up reasons as to why Bush went to war. Decrying him for lying to Congress and then putting up another reason with no backing in the same sentence is entertaining. :)

See the important thing is, that well, hes not really misleadign congress by making an supposition as to possible reasons for Bush entering the Iraq war. Not that i think the President Intentionally Misled congress, he just seemed quite cavalier about sending our troops into battle and its economic costs.

I don't really need to give backing, do I? There are plenty of soldiers that would be happy to tell you about all the fun they're having shooting civilians for no reason and how this is a pointless war.


Which is why a large majority of the armed forces always vote Republican for their Commander in Chief, right?

I don't really need to give backing, do I? There are plenty of soldiers that would be happy to tell you about all the fun they're having shooting civilians for no reason and how this is a pointless war.
Give me your proof as to why Bush went to war for revenge for his Dad rather than for WMD.

I don't really need to give backing, do I? There are plenty of soldiers that would be happy to tell you about all the fun they're having shooting civilians for no reason and how this is a pointless war.

Already talking about randomly shooting at civilians? You're already on the road to Washington, my boy!

Give me your proof as to why Bush went to war for revenge for his Dad rather than for WMD.

We havn't found any WMDs? Did they just dissappear into thin air?

We havn't found any WMDs? Did they just dissappear into thin air?
That means the premises were untrue, not that he didn't go to war because of those premises - and nor does it indicate, in any way, that he went to war for revenge.

Already talking about randomly shooting at civilians? You're already on the road to Washington, my boy!

All right! I can get a nice job doing some government thing and try to get a bill passed mandating a moral test that would be studied over by many psychologists for presidency! Yay!

We havn't found any WMDs? Did they just dissappear into thin air?

No, they dissappeared into other countries.

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_1.html

I am a republican. I will never question John Kerry's war record because of the fact that he did serve. I do not like the way he refered to his fellows after the war however. I am also sick of every saying that Bush misled the country and the world. Three independent studies all came to the same conclusion: Bad Intelligence is to blame, not Bush, not Blair, and not Congress. However I belive this election will come down to one thing however, Security. In the end many people will simply ask the question that Zel Miller asked last evening: "Who do I trust to protect my family." No matter what your personal answer is on this question the basic facts are simple. We are at War. Unlike many belive it is not our fault that we were attacked. It is not our fault that people hate us. It is not our fault that others hate our society. President Bush has done what many presidents before him failed to do, He fought back against the terrorist. He went on the offensive. As for other issues. Bush has done more for AIDS in Africa than any other president. Bush has reformed education, a reform that has already shown drastic improvments. Bush's Tax cuts benefiet all Americans (not just the wealthiest 1%), in fact the Wealthiest got the smallest tax cuts. Now many single mothers and others living in poverty no longer pay taxes. Allen Greenspan has come out and said the tax cuts have saved the economy. We have created 1.5 million jobs (not including those that have been created by those that started self employed buisness) since last August and are enjoying one of the strongest economies in the history of the USA. Wether people want to admit it or not the Swift Boat veterans and other such groups have only spent about 2 million in advertising (As of mid august), however Move on (wich still swells on the 2000 election) and other liberal groups have spent 160 million in anti Bush ads, even several that compare him to the Monster Adolf Hitler. Go the Holocaust Musuem in Washington DC, see what that bastard Hitler did, and then honestly compare him to Bush. In my opinion being called Hitler is worse than having your military record questioned. I could go on and on and on, but Zel Miller basicly summed up my feelings last evening.

Which is why a large majority of the armed forces always vote Republican for their Commander in Chief, right?

Large majority still leaves plenty of people to say otherwise.

Show me a man that I can trust with our national defense and the war on terror, and i'll show you a man that i'm voting for.

If i believed John Kerry would be an effective Commander and Chief, and would honestly put all his effort into protecting my family, my job, my hard earned money, and my values... i'd vote for him, but i don't. John Kerry wants to take away my pay-check, John Kerry wants to take away Armaments from the service memebrs that protect me, and John Kerry opposes a majority of my free-market beliefs.

Thats why i support Bush

John Kerry can throw money around because he's got plenty of it. It won't matter to him if he has to pay extra taxes, because it will never be an issue to him. It doesn't matter to a man who owns five residences (all costing over 3 million dollars) He can $AFFORD$ to be a socialist, I cannot.

That means the premises were untrue, not that he didn't go to war because of those premises - and nor does it indicate, in any way, that he went to war for revenge.

Yep, you are correct, we cannot truely know all of the reasons why anyone does anything, it is best to assume that the premises that were given was the overarcing reason, but, now heres the rub, when you go to war over a claim that turns out to be false, you have to recognize that you are at war. the main tenent of Economics is that everything you do has a cost, wars have a monetary and a human cost, as well as a cost of time and manpower. now that we are in Iraq, we cannot respond to other military threats as quickly and decisively. but also, its a large resourse drain. thats why, thoughout the whole history of civilization until now, commanders in cheif have raised taxes during times of increased military activity. that is the big reason bush needs to go, for our "CEO Commander in Cheif" he really should understand basic economic principles better

on the eve of this final nite of the convention , let this former liberal say:


GO PRESIDENT BUSH!!!

If i believed John Kerry would be an effective Commander and Chief, and would honestly put all his effort into protecting my family, my job, my hard earned money, and my values... i'd vote for him, but i don't. John Kerry wants to take away my pay-check, John Kerry wants to take away Armaments from the service memebrs that protect me, and John Kerry opposes a majority of my free-market beliefs.


Wow, reading up on the republican talking points i see.

Well firstly, we cannot support the armaments of those who protect you without raising taxes. basic economic theory.

Now the thing is, that John Kerry has voted many times to raise taxes and cut spending for the sole reason of balanceing the budget, something that makes your paycheck larger and gives better support to the troops. and, much more importantly, is a tenent of free markets.

Speaking of Kerry's money, if he's such a bleeding heart and cares so much about the less fortunate then why does he average under $1000 dollars in charity a year (including his wife's money) and Bush averages around $24,000!
That is taken from both of their tax records, I heard it on the news several weeks ago. One year Kerry donated only $320, and Bush donated $32,000! I ask you, who really cares about those beneath them?

Show me a man that I can trust with our national defense and the war on terror, and i'll show you a man that i'm voting for.

If i believed John Kerry would be an effective Commander and Chief, and would honestly put all his effort into protecting my family, my job, my hard earned money, and my values... i'd vote for him, but i don't. John Kerry wants to take away my pay-check, John Kerry wants to take away Armaments from the service memebrs that protect me, and John Kerry opposes a majority of my free-market beliefs.

Thats why i support Bush

John Kerry can throw money around because he's got plenty of it. It won't matter to him if he has to pay extra taxes, because it will never be an issue to him. It doesn't matter to a man who owns five residences (all costing over 3 million dollars) He can $AFFORD$ to be a socialist, I cannot.
He is cutting taxes on top 10%, that you? Dude, you are how rich? Bill gates rich?

Alan Greenspan is a republican so that can't be too trustworthy.

Soffish, it doesn't have proof he moved it. Just it might be possible. Mostly just raises questions it said.

Speaking of Kerry's money, if he's such a bleeding heart and cares so much about the less fortunate then why does he average under $1000 dollars in charity a year (including his wife's money) and Bush averages around $24,000!
That is taken from both of their tax records, I heard it on the news several weeks ago. One year Kerry donated only $320, and Bush donated $32,000! I ask you, who really cares about those beneath them?

You can't group Kerry with his wife, there money is kept seprate. Yes she is that kind of girl. She Made him sign a Prenup. Yes, his wife can be cheap, but Kerry isn't that rich with a campiagn going on.
After all Bush started out richer.

yo woah yo dang doh. Just kidding. Anyway, Bush is a flaming idiot. Kerry is a stoney faced jackass. Both did/ are doing stupid things. Example, Kerry overturned a bill that was going to equip ALL U.S. soldiers with the latest PSGAT helmets and the latest and greatest personal armor system (body armor to you). This resulted in the majority of U.S. soldiers not having any armored vests at ALL for 3 months (and a "lucky" few having at best a 60's era flak vests, which do NOT stop bullets btw). Now all U.S. soldiers have full personal armor systems. Reason this pisses me off, my dad is a soldier in Iraq. Right now. While you and me are staring at our computers and relaxing at home. He hates it. He did it so he could go to college. And not be a truck driver, like his dad. Hes a budgeting consultant at a major international firm. Maybe youve heard of em. Procter and Gamble. Anyways, reason I dont like Bush (I might not like Kerry, but I FRIGGEN HATE BUSH), he sent my dad. Dont like either of em. Damn bastards, why cant they have nominated other people than George Bush and John Kerry? :confused:

This may be a pointless war, but I can assure you that the majority of U.S. soldiers dont shoot civilians for no reason. Maybe brandishing a AK and shooting at you isnt enough for you? You would be dead in 5 seconds flat, fuck head. Just like most of us civilians. But then again, its not our job to march around in the army, is it?

Move on (wich still swells on the 2000 election) and other liberal groups have spent 160 million in anti Bush ads, even several that compare him to the Monster Adolf Hitler.

Well, if you had done some research, you would have found that those two ads were for the "bush in 30 seconds" contest, and made at the cost of their creators not in coordination with moveon.org. Furthermore you would have found that moveon took those ads off its site ((with hundreds of ads made by hundreds of people for free receving no compensation from moveon.org)) the second they found out about them.

Anti-Bush people: I totally agree with you that the schmuck has to go, but you're going about it the wrong way. There's no reason to argue semantics and little stuff. Bush screwed up BIG.

TWO wars. Neither of them will be ending any time soon. Billions and billions of dollars down the drain. Thousands dead, Hundreds of thousands of American lives disrupted, Millions of Iraqis and Afghanis ticked off like never before. All this during a recession.

Any idiot knows you don't start any conflict, no matter how small, when your economy is shaky. Yet our great leader did. TWICE! Once is boneheaded. Twice is Hyperspeed boneheaded.

Bush has NOT earned re-election. He has, however, delivered on his campaign promise to be a Complete Dumbass. Do you expect him to suddenly grow a brain in the next few months??

Three independent studies all came to the same conclusion: Bad Intelligence is to blame, not Bush, not Blair, and not Congress.

By who?


However I belive this election will come down to one thing however, Security. In the end many people will simply ask the question that Zel Miller asked last evening: "Who do I trust to protect my family." No matter what your personal answer is on this question the basic facts are simple. We are at War. Unlike many belive it is not our fault that we were attacked. It is not our fault that people hate us. It is not our fault that others hate our society.

So who's fault is it? They must hate us for some reason, it's not like they just started hating us out of thin air. If it was for the fact that we have so much money and power why not just attack a different, smaller country? It would be easier to cripple it and you would be fairer matched. But they didn't attack because of that, they attacked because of our ideals. Like training terrorists and giving them weapons and support...like the very people we are hunting.


President Bush has done what many presidents before him failed to do, He fought back against the terrorist. He went on the offensive. As for other issues. Bush has done more for AIDS in Africa than any other president. Bush has reformed education, a reform that has already shown drastic improvments. Bush's Tax cuts benefiet all Americans (not just the wealthiest 1%), in fact the Wealthiest got the smallest tax cuts. Now many single mothers and others living in poverty no longer pay taxes. Allen Greenspan has come out and said the tax cuts have saved the economy. We have created 1.5 million jobs (not including those that have been created by those that started self employed buisness) since last August and are enjoying one of the strongest economies in the history of the USA.

I bet we could have an even stronger economy if we didn't waste 80 billion dollars in a war that wasn't even UN sactioned. Or was that 88 billion? The drain of resources just keeps on continuing.

So wait are you saying that we shouldnt have gone to war after the terrorist killed 3,000 Americans?

So wait are you saying that we shouldnt have gone to war after the terrorist killed 3,000 Americans?
No he meant won Afganistan fully before attacking Iraq. Afganistan lost everything to warlords but the capital, mission unaccomplished.

Please cite the law that he broke, or I will cite the law Kerry broke.Bush obtained about $600,000 through his role in a company called Arbusto (later called Bush Exploration Oil Company) that took in money through investments instead of by providing goods or services [Harper's Magazine, Feb 1, 2000]. That kind of a company is called a pyramid scam or a Ponzi scam and is illegal.

During a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into Bush's sale of Harken stock, Bush withheld a letter he had received from Harken lawyers warning him about insider trading [Washington Post, Nov 1, 2002]. That's illegal and also indicates that Bush had taken part in insider trading when he sold his stocks 2 months before the company posted $20 million in losses.

And there's that drunk driving thing.

So wait are you saying that we shouldnt have gone to war after the terrorist killed 3,000 Americans?

I certanly think we should have. I think we should have as we did, pund the loving bejessus out of the taliban and as we didnt do, capture bin laden and kill the mother.

my complete and total hatred of bin laden however, does not mean i cannot see the problems with not funding this war and pushing tax cuts through or not finishing the job. Afghanistan does not have adiquate security measures. they have not been able to create a working governement with elections. and much more importantly, BinLaden remains a free man.

But, we, in sending troops make an economic choice, the thing about wars is they cost money, to pay for them, we devert funds and we increase taxes. when we dont do these things, we run deficits and debt, both of which severely damage the long term economic security of our nation.

So wait are you saying that we shouldnt have gone to war after the terrorist killed 3,000 Americans?

Not when most of the world thinks we shouldn't. Not that it really matters now anyway.

So wait are you saying that we shouldnt have gone to war after the terrorist killed 3,000 Americans?

Oh, just SHUT THE FUCK UP already.

That bullshit has been debunked MORE then enough times.

Iraq DIDN'T ATTACK US. Is it that hard to fucking understand? Dear GOD, what kind of dumbass are you?

OBL attacked us. So we went after him. Only, then we left Afghanistan for Iraq. So now Afghanistan is WORST off then before, potentially MORE dangerous, terrorism has RISEN, we PISSED AWAY the world sympethy after the terrorists attacked...

You know what? Just don't talk. Again. Ever.

Wow, reading up on the republican talking points i see.

Well firstly, we cannot support the armaments of those who protect you without raising taxes. basic economic theory.

Now the thing is, that John Kerry has voted many times to raise taxes and cut spending for the sole reason of balanceing the budget, something that makes your paycheck larger and gives better support to the troops. and, much more importantly, is a tenent of free markets.
Good thing we have intermediate and advanced economic theory. Running deficits, especially in the situation that the USA is in, is an option.

Good thing we have intermediate and advanced economic theory. Running deficits, especially in the situation that the USA is in, is an option.

Ahh, but cutting taxes during war is possibly the stupidest move to make ever. you know, because, wars cost money, and the govenrments gets that money from taxes...

Oh, just SHUT THE FUCK UP already.

That bullshit has been debunked MORE then enough times.

Iraq DIDN'T ATTACK US. Is it that hard to fucking understand? Dear GOD, what kind of dumbass are you?

OBL attacked us. So we went after him. Only, then we left Afghanistan for Iraq. So now Afghanistan is WORST off then before, potentially MORE dangerous, terrorism has RISEN, we PISSED AWAY the world sympethy after the terrorists attacked...

You know what? Just don't talk. Again. Ever.

You know, I was wondering about that..

Since when was our enemy really ever Iraq? It was Osama that attacked, not Saddam. But, you know, because Osama was in Iraq, and Saddam was in Iraq..it makes sense, right?

Ahh, but cutting taxes during war is possibly the stupidest move to make ever. you know, because, wars cost money, and the govenrments gets that money from taxes...
Most of everything the government does costs money. One could say cutting taxes at any time is stupid because things like education and welfare cost money. We're not at war all the time, true, but even without the war we'd still be running a deficit.

"So wait are you saying that we shouldnt have gone to war after the terrorist killed 3,000 Americans?"

Yes, that is exactly right. We should have performed an OPERATION to apprehend those responsible. Awesome/daring commando-raids punish the guilty, but wars punish everyone who happens to be in the same country. Wars in this day are universally stupid. Two of them are exponentially stupid. Wars during a recession are Ultra-Stupid. TWO WARS DURING A RECESSION IS THE DUMBEST THING A COUNTRY CAN DO.

"No he meant won Afganistan fully before attacking Iraq. Afganistan lost everything to warlords but the capital, mission unaccomplished."

Point 2. We can't even make boneheaded moves right- the US military is safe within sight of Kabul. You go outside that area, you will not live for very long if you look like an American. Afghanistan has collapsed into an anarchy of warlords, far, far worse than anything the Taliban had to offer.
But, you know what? Who cares. Two wars during a recession.

"Running deficits, especially in the situation that the USA is in, is an option."
I'm not going to respond to this, because it doesn't matter. Bush led us to two wars, during a recession. He should be impeached, but I'll settle for no re-election.

9/11 commision, Senate intelligence Commision, and teh British intelligence agency, plus Russia said that Iraq most likely had WMDs.

Why Blame America for us getting attacked! These people hate everyone that isn't part of their religion! Most of their hatred started in the middle ages (The crusades, the Driving of the Muslims from Spain). The weapons and such were given to Iraq and the othe rnations because of the old thought that The Enemy of our enemy is our friend. Wich is a crock.

As for the 80 so billion dollars spent on a war. It's a freakin war! What do you excpect us not to spend money?! Screw the UN, why do I want permission that had countries like Cuba as head of Human rights? We don't need permission to defend our country. I know your response will be that Iraq didn't pose a threat. yet in ten or so years when a Iraqi nuke blasted Jerusalem or another friendly country people like you would be the first to say "Why wasnt anything done?" I dont want my little girl fighting this war! I dont want my future children to suffer through this war, Do you want your family or future children Fighting this war? Of course not! Grow some balls and figure out that this war needs to be fought now. If not for my little girl then i would put on the uniform myself and go where ever on this planet that my commander in chief sent me to fight.

Wow. All europeans. You would be dead or not having a very fun time if it werent for the U.S. during the cold war. In all strategic tests, it would take the soviet 1st guard brigade 5 days to obliterate mainland europe CONVENTIONALY. Yep. The french army (if it would even try and put up a pathetic fight) would be smashed, along with the english battletank divisions and all west german soldiers. Then the rest of europe would have been easy. All resistance would have been put down by armed shock troops and the wonderful "civilian disciplin" units that used flame throwers and flachette cannons. Along with a fearsome combo of tanks and airpower. You were weak and pathetic after 2 consecutive wars by your foolish grandfathers (especialy you germans!), thinking that you could take over the world. And then the glorious colonial wars in africa. Between raping the land and raping my people, you argued with south africa about how bad their racial policies were. Then you proceded to get your asses liberaly kicked by nomadic tribesmen and then pulled out. But you decided to destroy most of the infrastructure and all important buildings first. You know portugal, that tiny pleasant nation on the atlantic, where all the english "bifes" go? They were some of the worst, filling the sewer system with concrete and destroying all powerstations. Know you wonder why africa is so so weak and poor. You europeans you fucks. It is probably 80% your fault, and 20% dictators and fools. AIDS might not have spread like wildfire had you left intact their hospital systems and school systems. They hated you, so you wanted to make sure that they would regret kicking your ass. Good job fuckheads :mad: , good job. (yes I am African American.)

I'm not going to respond to this, because it doesn't matter. Bush led us to two wars, during a recession. He should be impeached, but I'll settle for no re-election.
I don't see how going to war while in a recession is so bad as you say it is.

Most of everything the government does costs money. One could say cutting taxes at any time is stupid because things like education and welfare cost money. We're not at war all the time, true, but even without the war we'd still be running a deficit.

Ahh, but wars cost more than the cost of just holding an army, and i agree its tupid to cut taxes without cutting spending. deficits can be run for a short time, under extreme conditions. when we go to war however, there is an additional cost that we dont havwe when the army is in base not at war.

Ahh, but wars cost more than the cost of just holding an army, and i agree its tupid to cut taxes without cutting spending. deficits can be run for a short time, under extreme conditions. when we go to war however, there is an additional cost that we dont havwe when the army is in base not at war.
We do, as I said, we're not always at war and its an additional cost. Deficits can be run for more than a short time under any conditions, though (although it wouldn't be unreasonable to say that two wars and a recession aren't extreme). If you have a gripe with the deficit, don't blame going to war, blame not cutting spending, as I said even without the war we'd still be in a deficit situation.

Afghanistan worse off than before?
What the fuck are you talking about?!
They are getting ready for free elections this year! Ask anyone from that nation if their life is better now or WITH the Taliban and power and they will probably just laugh their asses off at you.

As for the 80 so billion dollars spent on a war. It's a freakin war! What do you excpect us not to spend money?! Screw the UN, why do I want permission that had countries like Cuba as head of Human rights? We don't need permission to defend our country. I know your response will be that Iraq didn't pose a threat. yet in ten or so years when a Iraqi nuke blasted Jerusalem or another friendly country people like you would be the first to say "Why wasnt anything done?" I dont want my little girl fighting this war! I dont want my future children to suffer through this war, Do you want your family or future children Fighting this war? Of course not! Grow some balls and figure out that this war needs to be fought now. If not for my little girl then i would put on the uniform myself and go where ever on this planet that my commander in chief sent me to fight.

Refer to teh previous posts about Iraq never being the attacker anyway, as it was OBL. You know, the extremeist fundamentalist that attacked a nation just because he didn't like them? Just like Bush?

We do, as I said, we're not always at war and its an additional cost. Deficits can be run for more than a short time under any conditions, though (although it wouldn't be unreasonable to say that two wars and a recession aren't extreme). If you have a gripe with the deficit, don't blame going to war, blame not cutting spending, as I said even without the war we'd still be in a deficit situation.

I blame cutting taxes and not cutting spending. not the war. and for a long peripod of time, deficits are bad. why? because that money needs to be paid off, the longer we run deficits, the worse the dollar becomes in trade. and the worse the US economy does as its products are not worth as much in trade as they would be otherwise.

I blame cutting taxes and not cutting spending. not the war. and for a long peripod of time, deficits are bad. why? because that money needs to be paid off, the longer we run deficits, the worse the dollar becomes in trade. and the worse the US economy does as its products are not worth as much in trade as they would be otherwise.
A weaker dollar means that our exports are cheaper while imports are more expensive, meaning our economy does better.

He is cutting taxes on top 10%, that you? Dude, you are how rich? Bill gates rich?
Me??? Bill Gates Rich???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHA

No sir, I am a working Class citizen. I am a college student who works full time for minimum wage to help pay off his student loan. Are my parents Rich? Far from it. My father is a victim of the crashing telecommunications industry, and has been in and out of jobs for the past 5 years. And was i spoon fed my parents politics? No.. while my parents are bush supporters, they are also moderates. I am an un-apolegetic conservative. I believe in the American system. And so does my father, because he knows that his failng industry will recover in a republican free-market system. And its doing just that.

Not to mention Bush cut taxes in the upper tax bracket because they are the ones that pay the most. People in the lower tax brackets pay a low or fair amount of taxes... and some even recieve money back.

Wow, reading up on the republican talking points i see.

Well firstly, we cannot support the armaments of those who protect you without raising taxes. basic economic theory.

Now the thing is, that John Kerry has voted many times to raise taxes and cut spending for the sole reason of balanceing the budget, something that makes your paycheck larger and gives better support to the troops. and, much more importantly, is a tenent of free markets.

It may make my pay-check larger, but more of it goes to the government anyway. Raising taxes is not a tenent of the free-market system.

Refer to teh previous posts about Iraq never being the attacker anyway, as it was OBL. You know, the extremeist fundamentalist that attacked a nation just because he didn't like them? Just like Bush?


Right, now clear this up for me...it is the War on Terror, right? Not just the war on Osama. Saddam is a terriost, and he sponsers terriosm, yes? You know what a theater of war is, yes? The war against the Al Quedi branch of terriosm was a theater of the war on terror. Whats so hard to understand here?

"I don't see how going to war while in a recession is so bad as you say it is. "

then you should not be posting in political threads, if you don't know what you're talking about. Allow me to educate you:

Wars are Murder on an economy. In addition to the "80 Billion dollars", we're out a big piece of the best members of our workforce. This doesn't even take into account the redirection of funds from military research to more immediate applications, increased veterans benefits, compensation to families, etc.

In the short run, there is little effect because the loss of workforce and the benefits have not yet made their mark. But within just a few years, our current recovery period will be derailed by these factors.

Remember, everyone using a gun is someone who's not in the workforce.

Two wars in a recession, no re-election.
(hey, that was easy, I wonder if I can get hired writing slogans for the dem's?)

A weaker dollar means that our exports are cheaper while imports are more expensive, meaning our economy does better.

Jesus christ, thats the stupidest thing ive ever heard! take some damn economics and you will find that trade benifits both nations. our economy does better whne our trades are strong. if the japanese pay a bunch for american goods and we dont pay a lot for japanese goods, that means our companies make more money in profits.

goddamn, i dont see how hard this is

I noticed that post. Steph, if George Tenet, MI6, the Russians, the Jordanians and others are telling you that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, what are you going to do?
Let the UN inspectors do their job?

However, Bush would have none of that. Why?

Because there were no WMD, and if the UN inspectors had finished their job, Georgy boy wouldn't have been able to invade Iraq.

I rest my case.

You know what OBL got away. We are still hunting him. We started the Iraq war after Afghanistan had a stable goverment. The fact is that you couldnt win the war on terror without removing Sadaam. He funded terrorist, remmember the palistinian suicide bombers who's familys he funded? Every major intelligence agency in the world said he had WMDs. The only Reasons France, Germany, and Russia didn't want to fight in the war was because of their sweet oil deals with Iraq. The coalition put together was larger than that of the Gulf War, wich Kerry was against btw. Sadaam was a cruel bastard that killed thousands of his own people. Why the hell should a man like that be left in power? I know that many others like him are still in power. Honestly though, can you tell me that with Sadaam and the Taliban removed from power doesn't make a better world?

Right, now clear this up for me...it is the War on Terror, right? Not just the war on Osama. Saddam is a terriost, and he sponsers terriosm, yes? You know what a theater of war is, yes? The war against the Al Quedi branch of terriosm was a theater of the war on terror. Whats so hard to understand here?

How do you have a war on an abstract concept?

Afghanistan worse off than before?
What the fuck are you talking about?!
They are getting ready for free elections this year! Ask anyone from that nation if their life is better now or WITH the Taliban and power and they will probably just laugh their asses off at you.
The area around Kabul is getting elections. The rest of the country is busy making opium. Which, by the way, the Taliban had stamped out.

No sir, I am a working Class citizen. I am a college student who works full time for minimum wage to help pay off his student loan.
How are you enjoying your $300? Did it even pay your car insurance for 6 months?
Not to mention Bush cut taxes in the upper tax bracket because they are the ones that pay the most. People in the lower tax brackets pay a low or fair amount of taxes... and some even recieve money back.
Don't care, doesn't matter. Two wars in a recession.



It may make my pay-check larger, but more of it goes to the government anyway. Raising taxes is not a tenent of the free-market system.
See above.

Right, now clear this up for me...it is the War on Terror, right? Not just the war on Osama. Saddam is a terriost, and he sponsers terriosm, yes? You know what a theater of war is, yes? The war against the Al Quedi branch of terriosm was a theater of the war on terror. Whats so hard to understand here?
Yeah Saddam was so important that Bush took most of the soldiers out of Afghanistan to fight against a defenseless country. BTW, where is Bin Laden?

BTW, 15 of the 19 terrorists who fly into buildings in the US were from what country???

SAUDI ARABIA!!!!

It may make my pay-check larger, but more of it goes to the government anyway. Raising taxes is not a tenent of the free-market system.

Ahh, but you dont understand, the tenent of free market systems is having a balanced budget.

say for example, you get 100$ a week now, and pay off 10% of it in taxes, giving you a net pay of 90$.

now, say you are starting to make 110$ a week but insted pay 15% in taxes. thats a net pay of 93.5$. more net money.

and thats a comparatively low increase in your pay and a comparatively high increase in taxes.

"I don't see how going to war while in a recession is so bad as you say it is. "

then you should not be posting in political threads, if you don't know what you're talking about. Allow me to educate you:

Wars are Murder on an economy. In addition to the "80 Billion dollars", we're out a big piece of the best members of our workforce. This doesn't even take into account the redirection of funds from military research to more immediate applications, increased veterans benefits, compensation to families, etc.

In the short run, there is little effect because the loss of workforce and the benefits have not yet made their mark. But within just a few years, our current recovery period will be derailed by these factors.

Remember, everyone using a gun is someone who's not in the workforce.

Two wars in a recession, no re-election.
(hey, that was easy, I wonder if I can get hired writing slogans for the dem's?)



Wars are murder on an economy. I guess your right. I mean, just look at the US economy after World War 2, coming out of the Great Depression and all. Wars call for more jobs and more products to be made, thus more job creation, less unemployed, and higher economy. I mean, have you been paying attention to the economy at all the last couple of years? The way the economy has skyrocketed after the inherited decline, and 9/11? You sir are a fool.

You know what OBL got away. We are still hunting him. We started the Iraq war after Afghanistan had a stable goverment. The fact is that you couldnt win the war on terror without removing Sadaam. He funded terrorist, remmember the palistinian suicide bombers who's familys he funded? Every major intelligence agency in the world said he had WMDs. The only Reasons France, Germany, and Russia didn't want to fight in the war was because of their sweet oil deals with Iraq. The coalition put together was larger than that of the Gulf War, wich Kerry was against btw. Sadaam was a cruel bastard that killed thousands of his own people. Why the hell should a man like that be left in power? I know that many others like him are still in power. Honestly though, can you tell me that with Sadaam and the Taliban removed from power doesn't make a better world?
Yes I can, but I will agree with Taliban scattered it seems better. Many Taliban men escaped Afganiatan... so your argument is a falacy to lump them together. Its called a false dilema or false choices.

How do you have a war on an abstract concept?
Obviously, with abstract bombs.

Also, remember when we won the War on Drugs? That was great. Reagan was all like, "We'll destroy drugs!" or something, and then within a few years there were no more drugs anywhere! That's something we can all agree on.

You know what OBL got away. We are still hunting him. We started the Iraq war after Afghanistan had a stable goverment. The fact is that you couldnt win the war on terror without removing Sadaam. He funded terrorist, remmember the palistinian suicide bombers who's familys he funded? Every major intelligence agency in the world said he had WMDs. The only Reasons France, Germany, and Russia didn't want to fight in the war was because of their sweet oil deals with Iraq. The coalition put together was larger than that of the Gulf War, wich Kerry was against btw. Sadaam was a cruel bastard that killed thousands of his own people. Why the hell should a man like that be left in power? I know that many others like him are still in power. Honestly though, can you tell me that with Sadaam and the Taliban removed from power doesn't make a better world?

What about all the other nations that have corrupt dictatorships and leaders killing their citizens? Are we going to seriously fight to disarm every other single nation like this? And that must mean we should also help friendly nations out with all of their terrorist problems while trying to wage war on several other countries at the same time.

Yeah Saddam was so important that Bush took most of the soldiers out of Afghanistan to fight against a defenseless country. BTW, where is Bin Laden?

BTW, 15 of the 19 terrorists who fly into buildings in the US were from what country???

SAUDI ARABIA!!!!


Where is Bin Ladin? Hiding in a cave somewhere scared for his life. Why do you ask?

So attack Saudi Arabia then.

Go George W. Bush!



Please cite the law that he broke, or I will cite the law Kerry broke.


GO BUSH! Without him, we are lost! I am going to join the Marine Corps. I would rather have W as my Commander-in-Chief rather than that coward and traitor Kerry.

Are we going to seriously fight to disarm every other single nation like this?
Republican: "We invaded to save the Iraqi people."
Me: "Ignoring the fact that that is a load of bologna, Sudan."

Wars are Murder on an economy. In addition to the "80 Billion dollars", we're out a big piece of the best members of our workforce. This doesn't even take into account the redirection of funds from military research to more immediate applications, increased veterans benefits, compensation to families, etc.

In the short run, there is little effect because the loss of workforce and the benefits have not yet made their mark. But within just a few years, our current recovery period will be derailed by these factors.

Remember, everyone using a gun is someone who's not in the workforce.

Two wars in a recession, no re-election.
(hey, that was easy, I wonder if I can get hired writing slogans for the dem's?)
Actually, I don't see how thats muder on the economy. We took away the National Guard and Reserves from the economy, but then other people are stepping right in, seeing as how we have more workers than jobs. Its no more suicide to the economy than making other jobs on the government's payroll would be.

Jesus christ, thats the stupidest thing ive ever heard! take some damn economics and you will find that trade benifits both nations. our economy does better whne our trades are strong. if the japanese pay a bunch for american goods and we dont pay a lot for japanese goods, that means our companies make more money in profits.

goddamn, i dont see how hard this is
What? I never said trade didn't benifit both nations. You said a weaker dollar hurts the US though, which I was disputing.

How do you have a war on an abstract concept?

By killing terriosts. And keep on killing them. Bush told the world that it wouldnt be easy, but nothing worth anything ever is.

Wars are murder on an economy. I guess your right. I mean, just look at the US economy after World War 2, coming out of the Great Depression and all. Wars call for more jobs and more products to be made, thus more job creation, less unemployed, and higher economy. I mean, have you been paying attention to the economy at all the last couple of years? The way the economy has skyrocketed after the inherited decline, and 9/11? You sir are a fool.

The difference between World War II (which was a rightly fought war in my book), and this war, is that with WWII it created many factory-level positions creating and assembling armaments for our troops. This war focouses mainly on dropping bombs and other highly advanced technology, in which a small group of people work with automatic assembling plants. So not only are there fewer jobs created in WWII, it costs more overall because of how much each specialized weapon costs.

GO BUSH! Without him, we are lost! I am going to join the Marine Corps. I would rather have W as my Commander-in-Chief rather than that coward and traitor Kerry.
Why a "traitor"? Do even know what a "Traitor" defination is?


By killing terriosts. And keep on killing them. Bush told the world that it wouldnt be easy, but nothing worth anything ever is.
Bush also said we can't win war on terror so I wouldn't believe everything he says.

Republican: "We invaded to save the Iraqi people."
Me: "Ignoring the fact that that is a load of bologna, Sudan."
Want us to restart the draft, or else perhaps you can tell me where the manpower would come from? We're not restarting the draft, I'll tell you that, so that leaves us with a manpower problem, so unless you know where we could find these troops, thats the most glaring reason we're unable to be in Sudan right now.

Where is Bin Ladin? Hiding in a cave somewhere scared for his life. Why do you ask?

So attack Saudi Arabia then.
Yeah go ahead and attack even more countries, until you have a true bloodbath on your hands. The US had her hands tied by a fairly defenseless country (Iraq), and with George War Bush, you will have more wars. got to keep the unemployment down?

Personally speaking, I think the US will regret ever invading Iraq.

By killing terriosts. And keep on killing them. Bush told the world that it wouldnt be easy, but nothing worth anything ever is.

But the only terrorists we've attacked are ones that didn't even have anything to do with the original bombing. Where are the plans for invading Korea or Saudi Arabia?

What about all the other nations that have corrupt dictatorships and leaders killing their citizens? Are we going to seriously fight to disarm every other single nation like this? And that must mean we should also help friendly nations out with all of their terrorist problems while trying to wage war on several other countries at the same time.
Yeah, we should fight and disarm every single nation like that.

What? I never said trade didn't benifit both nations. You said a weaker dollar hurts the US though, which I was disputing.

A weaker dollar hurts the US by impactign the value of our goods in trade. I beleve i said that earlyer. When you have a weak dollar, your exports cost less and other nations imports cost more, as you put it yourself. If you dont see how that hurts the US economy, maybe you should run for public office.

Want us to restart the draft, or else perhaps you can tell me where the manpower would come from? We're not restarting the draft, I'll tell you that, so that leaves us with a manpower problem, so unless you know where we could find these troops, thats the most glaring reason we're unable to be in Sudan right now.
More Bush = More Wars = Draft

Want us to restart the draft, or else perhaps you can tell me where the manpower would come from? We're not restarting the draft, I'll tell you that, so that leaves us with a manpower problem, so unless you know where we could find these troops, thats the most glaring reason we're unable to be in Sudan right now.

Well if the 'War on Terror' was such a great and noble cause, then where are all the other countries helping to fight terrorists?

Actually, I don't see how thats muder on the economy. We took away the National Guard and Reserves from the economy, but then other people are stepping right in, seeing as how we have more workers than jobs. Its no more suicide to the economy than making other jobs on the government's payroll would be.
When you have people in the military... those people are not helping the economy. In fact, have to pay them to be unproductive!

By killing terriosts. And keep on killing them. Bush told the world that it wouldnt be easy, but nothing worth anything ever is.
That sounds good at first, until one of our peacekeepers (standing at a busy street corner) gets shot at by a sniper for the third day in a row. Now he has two choices: Let the enemy escape again to come back and try again tomorrow, or open up in that direction. So he fires, and some stray bullets kill an innocent civilian. Now all of that innocent's friends and relatives hate us. Whoops.

We're making terrorists faster than we can kill them!

Yeah, we should fight and disarm every single nation like that.
and where is this money and troops to do this going to magically come from?

Yeah, we should fight and disarm every single nation like that.

I guess if he's re-elected we'll just have to see how many terrorist countries he chooses to 'free'.

A weaker dollar hurts the US by impactign the value of our goods in trade. I beleve i said that earlyer. When you have a weak dollar, your exports cost less and other nations imports cost more, as you put it yourself. If you dont see how that hurts the US economy, maybe you should run for public office.
The US is a NET importer of goods so when the US dollar goes down, so will the US economy?

and where is this money and troops to do this going to magically come from?
From the fiscally responsible Republican Congress???? :eek:

More Bush = More Wars = Draft
Bush won't go to war unless he has the troops to.

Well if the 'War on Terror' was such a great and noble cause, then where are all the other countries helping to fight terrorists?
Complaining that going to war would ruin their lucrative oil contracts err... I'm not sure. We don't need them, though, if they want to have people like Saddam in power, thats their choice, but we're not going to respect their choice and neither should we. Just because a cause is noble dosen't mean people will sign up to fight for it.

When you have people in the military... those people are not helping the economy. In fact, have to pay them to be unproductive!
But is it really muder to an economy? Was there a huge recession during Vietnam, Korea, and WWII, when tons of troops were out of the country?

A weaker dollar hurts the US by impactign the value of our goods in trade. I beleve i said that earlyer. When you have a weak dollar, your exports cost less and other nations imports cost more, as you put it yourself. If you dont see how that hurts the US economy, maybe you should run for public office.
I don't see how that hurts the US economy. It means American consumers buy more domestic goods and foreigners buy more American-made goods, helping US companies, allowing them to hire more and expand.

and where is this money and troops to do this going to magically come from?
Personally, I say by trimming some social programs. Obviously this is tougher for a politican, but there's plenty of room for belt-tightening in the US Government, especially once re-election isn't a worry.

I just said that Bush should get four more years... how did we get on economics?

From the fiscally responsible Republican Congress???? :eek:
Where have you ben lmao

The difference between World War II (which was a rightly fought war in my book), and this war, is that with WWII it created many factory-level positions...
Well heck, even more than that, Germany and Japan were actual military threats! al-Quaeda will NEVER be able to _invade_ us. Thus it is a criminal organization, NOT a military organization. Our response is like shooting a machine gun at a soup cracker.

Want us to restart the draft, or else perhaps you can tell me where the manpower (for helping Sudan) would come from?
Ah, but my point is just that: It is impossible for us to intervene in humanitarian affairs, BECAUSE we cannot intervene in all of them.

Was there a huge recession during Vietnam, Korea, and WWII, when tons of troops were out of the country?
Yes, there was!
-WWII had a small post-war depression which was destroyed by the end of rationing (and subsequent consumer spending)
-Korea was too small of a war to have a major impact, but times were so good (because of 50's consumption) that the economy didn't even notice.
-Vietnam cost us $1 Billion per day. That helped accentuate the recession that Carter got stuck with.

Complaining that going to war would ruin their lucrative oil contracts err... I'm not sure. We don't need them, though, if they want to have people like Saddam in power, thats their choice, but we're not going to respect their choice and neither should we. Just because a cause is noble dosen't mean people will sign up to fight for it.

I was under the impression that the US would be the highest impacted nation if oil were to suddenly dissappear. Because, you know, other nations walk or bike to their destination a lot more often than Americans do, and they generally have better public transportation and are less defensive about incorperating alternative energy sources into their lifestyle..

HELLO!!!
I just want to know who supports Bush..... how again did we get on economics?

Well heck, even more than that, Germany and Japan were actual military threats! al-Quaeda will NEVER be able to _invade_ us. Thus it is a criminal organization, NOT a military organization. Our response is like shooting a machine gun at a soup cracker.

I was responding more to the suggestion that this war has created more jobs just like WWII..although those other points are to be taken into consideration as well.

Well heck, even more than that, Germany and Japan were actual military threats! al-Quaeda will NEVER be able to _invade_ us. Thus it is a criminal organization, NOT a military organization. Our response is like shooting a machine gun at a soup cracker.
Al-Qaeda was harbored and worked with the Taliban government, in control of most of Afghanistan. It did have facets of it that did could be taken out via military action, which we did.

Ah, but my point is just that: It is impossible for us to intervene in humanitarian affairs, BECAUSE we cannot intervene in all of them.
Just because we can't intervene in all of them means we shouldn't intervene in any? Thats quite twisted logic to me. We should do as much as we can, and if we can't do it all, so be it, but that shouldn't stop us from doing anything.

Yes, there was!
-WWII had a small post-war depression which was destroyed by the end of rationing (and subsequent consumer spending)
-Korea was too small of a war to have a major impact, but times were so good (because of 50's consumption) that the economy didn't even notice.
-Vietnam cost us $1 Billion per day. That helped accentuate the recession that Carter got stuck with.
Korea was too small of a war to have a major impact? I hope you know that the amount of troops in Iraq is one of the smallest wars relative to the size of the USA that it has ever fought, and Korea was no small affair. Its often forgotten, but it had more American casualties than any other way, I think, besides WWII and the Civil War.

Well if the 'War on Terror' was such a great and noble cause, then where are all the other countries helping to fight terrorists?


Hmmm, well the ones without illegal oil connections are with us. You know-
Afghanistan
Albania
Angola
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain(well before it went socialist)
Turkey
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan

To name a few in Iraq alone. You know, every continent, and every major race, ethnicity, and religions are represented.

And to clarify a point from before, Saddam broke 17 UN Resolutions, another reason we liberated Iraq instead of other countries.

I was under the impression that the US would be the highest impacted nation if oil were to suddenly dissappear. Because, you know, other nations walk or bike to their destination a lot more often than Americans do, and they generally have better public transportation and are less defensive about incorperating alternative energy sources into their lifestyle..
The US didn't and does not get a significant amount of its oil from Iraq.

Hmmm, well the ones without illegal oil connections are with us. You know-
Afghanistan
Albania
Angola
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain(well before it went socialist)
Turkey
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan

To name a few in Iraq alone. You know, every continent, and every major race, ethnicity, and religions are represented.

And to clarify a point from before, Saddam broke 17 UN Resolutions, another reason we liberated Iraq instead of other countries.

How is afganistan with us? They are stil rebuilding their country? Are you sure about this list? South Korea kicked us out of military bases though...
America isn't with us, they are us.
I have doubts about that list...

What? I never said trade didn't benifit both nations. You said a weaker dollar hurts the US though, which I was disputing.

Well, its really the way the american economy is set up. It can't survive without a strong dollar. If a weak dollar was better than why doesn't the government make it lower artificially? They could easily.

It has to do with the fact that the US is a major importer and that Japan specializes in exporting. I'm not learned in mechanics of economics so I can't give a decent explanation, but that's why it is like it is.

The US didn't and does not get a significant amount of its oil from Iraq.

We were talking about why other countries wouldn't join the war on terror. And another reason just got put on the list to invalidate opposing views.

Al-Qaeda was harbored and worked with the Taliban government, in control of most of Afghanistan. It did have facets of it that did could be taken out via military action, which we did.
Yeah, but we didn't need to. We knew where bin Ladin was, and he was the only person we were after. He was the only priority. Invading the country (or otherwise punishing those who aid criminals) could have come later, after our economy was back on its feet and we had more expendable income.

Just because we can't intervene in all of them means we shouldn't intervene in any? Thats quite twisted logic to me. We should do as much as we can, and if we can't do it all, so be it, but that shouldn't stop us from doing anything.
That is the most non-conservative stance _possible_ on that issue.
Seriously, wtf? I, a raving liberal, am arguing Against aid to 3rd-world countries, while conservatives are arguing For it?? IT'S A MADHOUSE!

Korea was too small of a war to have a major impact? I hope you know that the amount of troops in Iraq is one of the smallest wars relative to the size of the USA that it has ever fought, and Korea was no small affair. Its often forgotten, but it had more American casualties than any other way, I think, besides WWII and the Civil War.
Then if Korea was a large war that adversely effected our economy, that only helps prove my point.

Spain(well before it went socialist)


How can Spain be a current ally in the 'War on Terror' and have troops stationed there if it USED to be allied? And aren't some of those countries so small that we would only get a couple thousand or so troops from them?

Well, its really the way the american economy is set up. It can't survive without a strong dollar. If a weak dollar was better than why doesn't the government make it lower artificially? They could easily.

It has to do with the fact that the US is a major importer and that Japan specializes in exporting. I'm not learned in mechanics of economics so I can't give a decent explanation, but that's why it is like it is.
We are lowering it artificially, to a certain extent. But if we were just going to print massive amounts of money to do such, it would end up hurting our economy more than it helps due to the massive inflation that would happen and the subsequent things that follow from economic irresponsibility in regards to inflation. The fact is, a lower dollar will help the US, because it will boost exports and cut imports, if it gets weak enough for long enough. "That's why it is like it is" dosen't cut it for me.

Please cite the law that he (Dubya?)broke, or I will cite the law Kerry broke.


Last time I checked, DUI's are still a crime. Ditto for cocaine use and insider trading.

Yeah, but we didn't need to. We knew where bin Ladin was, and he was the only person we were after. He was the only priority. Invading the country (or otherwise punishing those who aid criminals) could have come later, after our economy was back on its feet and we had more expendable income.

Did we really know where Bin Laden was? We knew he was in Afghanistan. Flying around with helicopters and going into enemy territory isn't exactly the safest or best way to get things done. Look at Vietnam or Somalia. Given that we didn't really know where OBL was, specifically, and if we did by the time we got the information it could be outdated, its not a particularly valid strategy.

Then if Korea was a large war that adversely effected our economy, that only helps prove my point.
But you yourself said it didn't hurt the economy, and I'm only going by your words, I didn't even address whether that part of your post was true or not, besides the fact that Korea was a large war, but you couldn't show how it hurt the economy.

HELLO!!!
I just want to know who supports Bush..... how again did we get on economics?


His economic policies are important in deciding whether or not to support him.

It seems the thread has taken a life of its own. Oh well, enjoy the ride. Its not like you can do anything about it now.

Ok, first off, Just because alot of people died in Korea dosn't make it that big of a war, crunch the numbers and youll see, it was a drop in the bucket compared to th.

Secondly Bush is self rightous. Thats generally a bad thing. Self rightous people tend to see what they want to see, Thats fine for you all but not for a world leader. As an example look to his retoric, the BS on the Middle East hating us for our freedoms. They hate us because we support the goverments that oppress them.

Thirdly, short of turning the entire middle east into a radioactive parking lot, military action will not end this war. Ever. Sooner or later they will strike again, and it will be worse.

On the subject of World War II, you should have learned somthing; Repair a country does not mean giving Cheney's Chum's at halburtin No-Bid Contracts to rebuild the oil industry. It means massive, CONSISTENT, humanitarian aide as well, and a COOPERATIVE populence. we dont have, or arent doing, those things.

And lastly, the left may be BS a lot of the time, but the right's delusional. Progress will continue, and your beliefs will eventually be dust. So will ours, but at least we'll have been headed in the right direction.

Ok, first off, Just because alot of people died in Korea dosn't make it that big of a war, crunch the numbers and youll see, it was a drop in the bucket compared to th.
Crunch the numbers and you'll find the War in Iraq is relatively small compared to past wars as well, especially relative to the population of the US at the time.

Not really realvent to the point, but yeah, it does mean the iraq war isnt doing shit for the economy.

Another Point. Bush's Coalition of the Willing? Have you looked at those countries? Half dont even have militaries, and some are argueably worse then iraq.

Ok, first off, Just because alot of people died in Korea dosn't make it that big of a war, crunch the numbers and youll see, it was a drop in the bucket compared to th.

Secondly Bush is self rightous. Thats generally a bad thing. Self rightous people tend to see what they want to see, Thats fine for you all but not for a world leader. As an example look to his retoric, the BS on the Middle East hating us for our freedoms. They hate us because we support the goverments that oppress them.

Thirdly, short of turning the entire middle east into a radioactive parking lot, military action will not end this war. Ever. Sooner or later they will strike again, and it will be worse.

On the subject of World War II, you should have learned somthing; Repair a country does not mean giving Cheney's Chum's at halburtin No-Bid Contracts to rebuild the oil industry. It means massive, CONSISTENT, humanitarian aide as well, and a COOPERATIVE populence. we dont have, or arent doing, those things.

And lastly, the left may be BS a lot of the time, but the right's delusional. Progress will continue, and your beliefs will eventually be dust. So will ours, but at least we'll have been headed in the right direction.

Welcome to the forums :D

Ok, first off, Just because alot of people died in Korea dosn't make it that big of a war, crunch the numbers and youll see, it was a drop in the bucket compared to th.

Secondly Bush is self rightous. Thats generally a bad thing. Self rightous people tend to see what they want to see, Thats fine for you all but not for a world leader. As an example look to his retoric, the BS on the Middle East hating us for our freedoms. They hate us because we support the goverments that oppress them.

Thirdly, short of turning the entire middle east into a radioactive parking lot, military action will not end this war. Ever. Sooner or later they will strike again, and it will be worse.

On the subject of World War II, you should have learned somthing; Repair a country does not mean giving Cheney's Chum's at halburtin No-Bid Contracts to rebuild the oil industry. It means massive, CONSISTENT, humanitarian aide as well, and a COOPERATIVE populence. we dont have, or arent doing, those things.

And lastly, the left may be BS a lot of the time, but the right's delusional. Progress will continue, and your beliefs will eventually be dust. So will ours, but at least we'll have been headed in the right direction.

1.Korea was an important war, not miltarily, but politically. It also showed that we could hold off the Chinese army, and we created ourselves another ally in the Far East.

2.The Islamic Fundementalists hate us because we are Americans, Christians, and white. We can not change their views through diplomacy, only through force.

3.Terriosm will never stop, but it is possible to tremendiously reduce it through military means.

4. We dont have a cooperative populace, because during WW2, the Republican leaders were willing to except defeat politically over militarily. The Democratic leaders are not willing to do that today, and they are influincing their party members.


Lastly Im sorry, but I believe that the Right's belief in the goodness of America, freedom, God, humanity, hard work, and the rest of the values that make America America will never die.

P.S.-Now Im off to sleep, I need my rest, season opening football game tomarow.

I just said that Bush should get four more years...
I AGREE!!!!

But those 4 years should be in jail. Abu Grahib would be a great place too!!

I AGREE!!!!

But those 4 years should be in jail. Abu Grahib would be a great place too!!


Nah, Send him to Gitmo!

You guys should try and regain some respect from the rest of the world. You cannot let Bush get 4 more years disturbing peace and pretending to rule the universe and put himself and the US higher than the UN. I wouldn't say "Vote Kerry" but in your idea of democracy you only get a couple of choices so honestly well meant: Vote anything else than Bush. Which then means Vote Kerry. Save the world from this raving lunatic. Thank you, bye.

You guys should try and regain some respect from the rest of the world. You cannot let Bush get 4 more years disturbing peace and pretending to rule the universe and put himself and the US higher than the UN. I wouldn't say "Vote Kerry" but in your idea of democracy you only get a couple of choices so honestly well meant: Vote anything else than Bush. Which then means Vote Kerry. Save the world from this raving lunatic. Thank you, bye.

Yeah, lets vote for the guy who will ask for a permission slip from the UN before he does anything....good thinking there.

I think my main problem with W is that he's so completely one-sided. Maybe it's just the state of politics today, but he doesn't seem to realize that republicans aren't his only constituents. Fine, you got "elected" in 2000. As President of the US, you are accountable to the entire nation, not just those who will blindly follow you because they believe it's un-American to question anything the government does.

It is a federal offense to mislead Congress. Bush misled not only Congress but the world.

i thought it was only illegal to lie to congress, not to mislead. If its a crime to mislead, thered be alot more criminals because people always lead into the unknown, which makes them mislead sometimes.

I think my main problem with W is that he's so completely one-sided. Maybe it's just the state of politics today, but he doesn't seem to realize that republicans aren't his only constituents. Fine, you got "elected" in 2000. As President of the US, you are accountable to the entire nation, not just those who will blindly follow you because they believe it's un-American to question anything the government does.

Yeah right now its a problem with politics in general, because look at kerry: He's doin the same thing pretty much.

You guys should try and regain some respect from the rest of the world. You cannot let Bush get 4 more years disturbing peace and pretending to rule the universe and put himself and the US higher than the UN. I wouldn't say "Vote Kerry" but in your idea of democracy you only get a couple of choices so honestly well meant: Vote anything else than Bush. Which then means Vote Kerry. Save the world from this raving lunatic. Thank you, bye.
Perhaps someone who's name is extremely close to "Burundi" would know about the atrocities commited in the region even while the UN is peacekeeping? (Somewhat recently there was an article posted about another refugee camp massacre right under the UN's nose).

Yeah, lets vote for the guy who will ask for a permission slip from the UN before he does anything....good thinking there.

It is a far, far better thing to move with our allies rather than without them.

One of my biggest problems with Dubya (and most Rupublicans of his ilk) is his fool-headed, stubborn pride. Pride is a sin (yet he proclaims to be Christian). Pride comes before the fall, as the saying goes.

The United States needs to learn humility, lest our little empire fall.

Bush and his achievements.


Between January 20 2001 and September 10 2001 Bush mentioned Al Quaida once. He mentioned Iraq or Saddam Hussein 104 times.
He never mentioned Osama Bin Laden in any State of the Union address - although he mentioned terrorism 73 times, and Saddam, Iraq and regime (change) 83 times.
there were 140 Saudis,including members of the Bin Laden family, evacuated from the USA immediately after 9/11.
The Saudi Arabian ambassador to the USA has given a painting worth $1 million to the Bush presidential library.
Bush cut $10 million from the Immigrationand Naturalization Service terrorism budget.
Bush is spending more than $401 billion on the war in Iraq.

Unfortunately, he allocated nothing for port security in the USA last year.
There are 22,600 planes carrying unscreened cargo landing in New York each month.

Bush has attended no memorial services for anyone killed in Iraq, and has refused to allow returning coffins to be photographed.
62 per cent of gas marks issued to american soldiers don't work. there are 40,000 soldiers in Iraq without bullet-proof vests. 90 percent of biological weapons detectors issued to soldiers in Iraq don't work.
80 per cent of Humvees are incapable of stopping Ak-47 rounds or protecting against roadside bombs and land lines.

Halliburton (Dick Cheney's company) has received $4.7 billion worth of contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Kenneth Lay, who took some $300 million from Enron before it collapsed, losing share-holders $60 billion, has still not been charged but, since he's a friend of Bush, that's not surprising.

Bush gained $30,858 as a result of his own tax cut.
87 per cent of American families received nothing from the tax cut.

2.3 million more Americans became unemployed during the first three years of Bush's presidency.
4.7 million bankruptcies were declared during Bush's first three years.
However,10 of his friends have been given important positions either in his cabinet or on the White House staff.
There are 35 million poor and hungry Americans. $300 million has been cut from the federal aid programme to poor families.


92 per cent of Iraq had access to drinkable water before the war. It's 60 per cent now. Unemployment in Iraq stood at 55 per cent before the war. It's 80 per cent now.
There are no principal civilian or Pentagon staff members engaged in planning the war with immediate family members serving in Iraq.



GET THIS CORRUPT, DANGEROUS MAN OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE NOW!

Perhaps someone who's name is extremely close to "Burundi" would know about the atrocities commited in the region even while the UN is peacekeeping? (Somewhat recently there was an article posted about another refugee camp massacre right under the UN's nose).

Just to get it straight: Buur is my IRL name, I do not support what the banana states go around doing in Africa.

I guess I just don't get your idea of democracy. I mean, if a citizen is basically a democratic socialist - like most european countries - who does he vote for? You have to choose between two right wing parties and if you vote for the 3rd guy you only move votes from the balance between the 2 guys.

Anyway, that's how you do it over there - it works for you. In acceptance of that I sincerely hope that everyone will go and not vote for Bush. I too have a problem with Kerry, but since that's how you do it I just say: Anything but Bush. You are losing the respect of other countries while building up a self centered idea that you can be policemen for the world under the excuse that you are defending yourselves. It's not working.

Sorry for my english, I had to go to school to learn your language...

there were 140 Saudis,including members of the Bin Laden family, evacuated from the USA immediately after 9/11.

So?

Halliburton (Dick Cheney's company) has received $4.7 billion worth of contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Kenneth Lay, who took some $300 million from Enron before it collapsed, losing share-holders $60 billion, has still not been charged but, since he's a friend of Bush, that's not surprising.
Actually, he was charged.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3875297.stm
He pled not guilty.

Bush gained $30,858 as a result of his own tax cut.
87 per cent of American families received nothing from the tax cut.
Every American who pays taxes got a tax cut, but you can lie through your teeth if you want to.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/TaxFacts/TFDB/TFTemplate.cfm?Docid=211

92 per cent of Iraq had access to drinkable water before the war. It's 60 per cent now. Unemployment in Iraq stood at 55 per cent before the war. It's 80 per cent now.

Have anything to back the statistics up? Or how about something to back up most of your statistics?

i'm behind president Bush all teh way

i'm behind president Bush all teh way

Never mind, if you're lucky you'll grow up one day. Or develop a brain. ;)

So?


Actually, he was charged.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3875297.stm
He pled not guilty.


Every American who pays taxes got a tax cut, but you can lie through your teeth if you want to.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/TaxFacts/TFDB/TFTemplate.cfm?Docid=211
Not if they don't have any capital gains or dividends they don't - Even Bush can't make Americans pay taxes on money they don't receive (though he's probably working on that ...)


Have anything to back the statistics up? Or how about something to back up most of your statistics?

Try the National Audit Office. It's all a matter of public record.


Perhaps you would be kind enough to tell me who owns the Bechtel Corporation?
Because they've secured $2.8 billion worth of contracts in Iraq.

Bush's cabinet members are worth an average of $10.9 million each. On average they received $42,000 as a result of cuts in capital gains and dividend taxes.

The average amount allocated per American in the first round of homeland security grants if $3.29.
Except in Wyoming, Dick Cheney's home state, where it's $36 per person.
and in New York State - $17.
In New York itself? Just $5.87.
For some obscure reason, it's $94.40 in American Samoa!
And more than $44 in New Haven, Connecticut - where Yale University is.


Re enron - yes I apologise for the error. It was 30 months after the collapse of the company when Lay was charged and pleaded not guilty.


I take it you have no objections to the cut in federal aid for poor families, or the fact that the US trade deficit in 2003 was, at £489 billion, the worst in history for a single year? (There was a $5.6 trillion national surplus forecast when Bush took office - my that boy's good at turning things round! You gotta admire him for something. )

You want more?

43.6 million Americans are without health insurance.
2.4 million of them lost their health insurance in Bush's first year in office.
50 per cent of workers at Ground Zero now have long-term health problems. Unfortunately, most of them are among the 43.6 million without health insurance. Guess they'll die, then.

The US is first worldwide - in emitting greenhouse gases. It is responsible for a quarter of all worldwide carbon dioxide emissions. There are no environmentalists on Cheney's Energy Task Force. There are, however, 62 (out of 68) who are linked to corporate energy interests. Bias? What bias?
Oh, and Cheney's ETF had investigated Iraq's oil reserves six months before the invasion - pity the insurgents keep blowing up that pipeline, or he might be making lotsa money by now.


Israel, Iran, North Koream, the USA and Iraq, in that order, were considered to be the greatest threats to world peace in 2003. Well, you certainly sorted one of those out. I'll guess you'll go after Syria next ... Oh, except that even the USA can't afford to do that, hasn't a big enough army to do that, and it's verrry unlikely even the dumbest American is going to let Bush schmooze him into another unnecessary and illegal war to make the USA safe for freedom - oh, except that it hasn't, has it?

(PS 85 per cent of young Americans can't find Israel, Iraq or Afghanistan on a map - must be a helluva shock when they join the Army and are sent there ...)
Mind you, nearly a third of young Americans can't find the Pacific Ocean on a map. Which is a bit sad. No. It's almost as sad as the 11 per cent who can't find the USA ON A MAP!

Try the National Audit Office. It's all a matter of public record.
I see, you're telling me to look it up because you can't provide a link to the statistics yourself?

Perhaps you would be kind enough to tell me who owns the Bechtel Corporation?
Because they've secured $2.8 billion worth of contracts in Iraq.
Riley Betchel does.

Bush's cabinet members are worth an average of $10.9 million each. On average they received $42,000 as a result of cuts in capital gains and dividend taxes.

As people who invest a lot in stock would.

The average amount allocated per American in the first round of homeland security grants if $3.29.
Except in Wyoming, Dick Cheney's home state, where it's $36 per person.
and in New York State - $17.
In New York itself? Just $5.87.
For some obscure reason, it's $94.40 in American Samoa!
And more than $44 in New Haven, Connecticut - where Yale University is.
So? Small states will obviously have a higher per-capita amount of money. The fact of the matter is, you don't need the same amount of equipment per capita to cover a small area (New York) as you do a huge one (Wyoming), even if there are more people there.

I take it you have no objections to the cut in federal aid for poor families, or the fact that the US trade deficit in 2003 was, at £489 billion, the worst in history for a single year? (There was a $5.6 trillion national surplus forecast when Bush took office - my that boy's good at turning things round! You gotta admire him for something. )
I don't like the deficit.

43.6 million Americans are without health insurance.
2.4 million of them lost their health insurance in Bush's first year in office.
50 per cent of workers at Ground Zero now have long-term health problems. Unfortunately, most of them are among the 43.6 million without health insurance. Guess they'll die, then.
Backing? or is this just something I'll have to find on my own?

The US is first worldwide - in emitting greenhouse gases. It is responsible for a quarter of all worldwide carbon dioxide emissions. There are no environmentalists on Cheney's Energy Task Force. There are, however, 62 (out of 68) who are linked to corporate energy interests. Bias? What bias?
Oh, and Cheney's ETF had investigated Iraq's oil reserves six months before the invasion - pity the insurgents keep blowing up that pipeline, or he might be making lotsa money by now.
We know the US is first worldwide in emitting greenhouse gases. The US also did more to cut emissions, IIRC, than most of the Kyoto signatories did, even though we didn't even sign the treaty. The US has the largest economy in the world, naturally we would have the things which that entails.

Israel, Iran, North Koream, the USA and Iraq, in that order, were considered to be the greatest threats to world peace in 2003. Well, you certainly sorted one of those out. I'll guess you'll go after Syria next ... Oh, except that even the USA can't afford to do that, hasn't a big enough army to do that, and it's verrry unlikely even the dumbest American is going to let Bush schmooze him into another unnecessary and illegal war to make the USA safe for freedom - oh, except that it hasn't, has it?
Any list which puts Israel on the top of threats to world peace, IMO, deserves to be chucked in the dustbin. I couldn't care less what a bunch of people on the streets think, cause frankly, they're wrong.

Mind you, nearly a third of young Americans can't find the Pacific Ocean on a map. Which is a bit sad. No. It's almost as sad as the 11 per cent who can't find the USA ON A MAP!
It is. Good thing Bush has increased education funding more than any other President in the history of the USA (and most of Clinton's increases came at the behest of a Republican Congress, before that came in his funding record was lacklustre).

Yeah, thanks for the welcome.

1.Korea was an important war, not miltarily, but politically. It also showed that we could hold off the Chinese army, and we created ourselves another ally in the Far East.

2.The Islamic Fundementalists hate us because we are Americans, Christians, and white. We can not change their views through diplomacy, only through force.

3.Terriosm will never stop, but it is possible to tremendiously reduce it through military means.

4. We dont have a cooperative populace, because during WW2, the Republican leaders were willing to except defeat politically over militarily. The Democratic leaders are not willing to do that today, and they are influincing their party members.


Lastly Im sorry, but I believe that the Right's belief in the goodness of America, freedom, God, humanity, hard work, and the rest of the values that make America America will never die.

P.S.-Now Im off to sleep, I need my rest, season opening football game tomarow.





I think all the extra lead that W.'s let into our drinking water has gotten to you. We created a dictatorship in south Korea, and who the hell did we need to prove we could defeat china to??? If anything, THEY proved that they could drive US to a stalemate, thus forcing US to take them seriously.
Islamic Fundamentalists Hate us because we basically mess with them. Alot.
Consider the fact that most of these countries were once Colonies. Then consider What we're doing There. If anyone cares to look it up, theres a really interesting quote by the britsh general who took over Bagdad in the '20's. I will try to paraphrase it "We come not as conquers, but as liberators", there was more but I cant remember it. This quote was repeated almost verbamitin by the US commander who did the same. Now, with the Britsh "Liberation" still in living memory, how do you expect them to feel about us. For them Terrorism is the only means to fight back. Im not trying to justify it, but to explaine it.

History has shown the Use of force never sloves the problem with terrorism. If you want an example, ask yourself why we lost in vietnam with vastly supirior hardware.(and skip the political BS about it being the protesters fault, I dont want to even get into that.)
Your Forth point is also incredably stupid. If you studied your history, you'd know that the republican party DID challenge FDR in the presidential elections... IN THE MIDDLE OF 1944.

The rest of your crap is laughable. You think the left are all tratorous sabatours simply because they question the way your great leader has gone about NOT catching OSAMA? SELF RIGHTOUS INSULAR IDIOTS LIKE YOU ARE THE REASON WHY WE HAVE TERRORISM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

And onto my next point. I have an aunt, who is a conerl in the army, and was in Iraq. She attented a medical confrence there. somthing like half the Iraqi delegets did not show up, BECAUSE THEY WERE AFRAID OF GETTING SHOT. Now, last time I checked, when conditions like that exist, the situation is generally going down the craper.

I don't like the deficit.

Any list which puts Israel on the top of threats to world peace, IMO, deserves to be chucked in the dustbin. I couldn't care less what a bunch of people on the streets think, cause frankly, they're wrong.



Ok most o the stuff mentioned here uses statistics which can be used to prove anything either way. Your response on the defict is laughable. "I don't like it" Just because you dont like it dosnt make it run away and hide. Thats what problems are, things we dont like, but generally stating the fact that we dont like them dosnt make 'em dissapear.
Same thing with isreal, just because you dont like it, dosnt mean its going away. Think about isreal's position in the world. Before Iraq I heard alot more crap going down there then anywhere else. Isreal has nukes, and the entire arab world, already unstable as hell, hates it. We're not talking right or wrong here, Its just that isreals very existence dose more to disrupt then any other country in the world.

Ok most o the stuff mentioned here uses statistics which can be used to prove anything either way. Your response on the defict is laughable. "I don't like it" Just because you dont like it dosnt make it run away and hide. Thats what problems are, things we dont like, but generally stating the fact that we dont like them dosnt make 'em dissapear.
Same thing with isreal, just because you dont like it, dosnt mean its going away. Think about isreal's position in the world. Before Iraq I heard alot more crap going down there then anywhere else. Isreal has nukes, and the entire arab world, already unstable as hell, hates it. We're not talking right or wrong here, Its just that isreals very existence dose more to disrupt then any other country in the world.
What would you want me to say about the deficit? I agree with you, Bush and the Republicans have been bad on that point in the last 4 years. Out of all your points, most of them were BS, one I agreed on you with. I don't like how he's handled the deficit.

Same thing with isreal, just because you dont like it, dosnt mean its going away. Think about isreal's position in the world. Before Iraq I heard alot more crap going down there then anywhere else. Isreal has nukes, and the entire arab world, already unstable as hell, hates it. We're not talking right or wrong here, Its just that isreals very existence dose more to disrupt then any other country in the world.

Of course Israel's existence pisses off the rest of the middle east. Muslims and Jews hate each other. That's why Israel was allowed to have nukes. If not, there wouldn't be an Israel today. They would have been run out a long time ago.

As for Osama, he's dead. Unless anyone can provide me a link to a VIDEO tape of him since the Afghan war, you'll not convince me otherwise. If the voice "experts" in Washington can't, neither can any of you. He was seen in Tora Bora moments before it was turned 4000 degrees. He's the dust settling on a cave somewhere in Afghanistan.

I hope that he loses.


Which John Kerry will you vote for..... the one who supported this or that, or the John Kerry who opposed this or that?


Cheney said it best.... John Kerry himself as to go to Google to find out what he stands for, today.

Wow, I wasn't aware that there was some sort of magical law that if you hated Bush, you must love Kerry (and vice versa). Me? I hate them both. Neither are fit for office.

The sociopolitical arena is much more complex and dynamic than the typical black & white stereotypes and generalizations that people tend to make.

It's a damn shame people don't realise there are other, better options out there.

43.6 million Americans are without health insurance.
2.4 million of them lost their health insurance in Bush's first year in office.
50 per cent of workers at Ground Zero now have long-term health problems. Unfortunately, most of them are among the 43.6 million without health insurance. Guess they'll die, then?
Just trying to help out here for Kwangistar:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/10/earlyshow/contributors/emilysenay/main572586.shtml

(CBS) Many of the estimated 30,000 to 40,000 people who volunteered or worked at Ground Zero in the aftermath of Sept. 11 have reported developing health problems that still persist today.......

Also, many with health problems from exposure to the dust at Ground Zero are struggling because their worker's compensation are being processed slowly. Some men and women are using whatever resources at their disposal. Some, however, have lost their jobs as a result of their ailments, which may compound the problem.


http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9811/13/no.health.insurance/

According to a new census bureau report, 43 million people are without coverage, the highest in five years.

Lewis Gregory suffered a heart attack two years ago that left the family mired in debt.

"We have absolutely no way to even dream of paying $125,000. At that rate it would have been cheaper for me to die," he said.

Bush is running on a more "compassionate" program huh?

Actually you must of missed it.. I beat you to it on the first page what current law Bush broke. You can say he didn't mislead the Congress all you wish.. say the Congress had all the same Intel he did.. Well the facts don't back that up, explain the 9/11 Commission and a little problem about daily Intel briefs that NO ONE in the Congress got to see?

Misleading Congress is a FEDERAL offense!
Reaaaaally?

Notwithstanding the ludicrous charge of "misleading" anyone (in order to "mislead" someone, you have to be personally aware that what you're telling them is false,) I would love to see exactly where you get the "law" that says lying to Congress is a crime. After all, a certain French-looking senator has lied repeatedly to Congress, starting sometime in 1971, and he has yet to be hauled in front of a court.

Now, lying to Congress when under oath, IS a Federal offense; which again, reminds me of a certain French-looking senator back in 1971...

Treason: Engaging in military action against the United States or providing aid and comfort to those who do
Which is what a certain senator from Massachusetts did when he provided testimony to Congress in 1971, regarding things he claimed to have witnessed in Vietnam. After all, the North Vietnamese used his testimony as the Muzak in the infamous Hanoi Hilton, trying to get American prisoners to betray their country.

(CBS) Many of the estimated 30,000 to 40,000 people who volunteered or worked at Ground Zero in the aftermath of Sept. 11 have reported developing health problems that still persist today.......

Also, many with health problems from exposure to the dust at Ground Zero are struggling because their worker's compensation are being processed slowly. Some men and women are using whatever resources at their disposal. Some, however, have lost their jobs as a result of their ailments, which may compound the problem.
Have anything on it more recent than a year ago so the current status could be seen? On the second article, have anything more recent than 6 years ago?

Wow, reading up on the republican talking points i see.

Well firstly, we cannot support the armaments of those who protect you without raising taxes. basic economic theory.This oughta be good...

Now the thing is, that John Kerry has voted many times to raise taxes and cut spending for the sole reason of balanceing the budget, something that makes your paycheck largerYou really do believe that your paycheck gets bigger when taxes are raised? You must be on welfare, since those on welfare are the only ones who get more every month when taxes are raised. Even better, do you really believe you have more purchasing power when taxes go up? Guess who pays the tax on, for example a loaf of bread you buy...nope, it isn't your local producer of bread, nor is it the market where you bought the bread...surprise, it's you who pays the tax! When taxes go up, producers have to find a way to maintain their profitability, so do the markets. Guess who pays the bill...
and gives better support to the troops. and, much more importantly, is a tenent of free markets.
A Big Brother Government a tenet of free markets? Have you ever heard the term "oxymoron"? You need to study economics a little more, but lay off the theory, and actually look at what happens in the "real world." However, I will agree with the point of higher taxes supporting the troops...in theory. Normally, higher taxes go to pay for whatever pet project is in the administration's mind.

Have anything on it more recent than a year ago so the current status could be seen? On the second article, have anything more recent than 6 years ago?
This is from October 2003:

http://www.cbpp.org/9-30-03health.htm

The ranks of those without health insurance grew from 41.2 million in 2001 to 43.6 million in 2002, according to new data the Census Bureau has just released.[1] The percentage who lack insurance rose from 14.6 percent in 2001 to 15.2 percent in 2002.


This is from August 2004:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/08/26/census.poverty.ap/

Nearly 45 million people lacked health insurance, or 15.6 percent of the population. That was up from 43.5 million in 2002, or 15.2 percent, but was a smaller increase than in the two previous years.

Also from the same article:

Approximately 35.8 million people lived below the poverty line in 2003, or about 12.5 percent of the population, according to the bureau. That was up from 34.5 million, or 12.1 percent in 2002.

The rise was more dramatic for children. There were 12.9 million living in poverty last year, or 17.6 percent of the under-18 population. That was an increase of about 800,000 from 2002, when 16.7 percent of all children were in poverty.

As far as poverty is concerned, the US ranks 17th out of the 17 OECD countries.

http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/indic/indic_28_1_1.html

Ahh, but you dont understand, the tenent of free market systems is having a balanced budget.

say for example, you get 100$ a week now, and pay off 10% of it in taxes, giving you a net pay of 90$.

now, say you are starting to make 110$ a week but insted pay 15% in taxes. thats a net pay of 93.5$. more net money.

and thats a comparatively low increase in your pay and a comparatively high increase in taxes.
Do you have any inkling about economics?? Sheesh, it's too easy for you to be muddling it up this bad. While in your example, you might wind up with $3.50 more per paycheck ("now don't go spend it all in one place...,") reality dictates that everything you spend on will also be more expensive, because it also got taxed higher, therefore your buying power just went down exponentially.

When did Clinton lie about why we went to Balkans? Wait, he didn't? Must be why there was no complaint...
Yeah, but there was complaining about Bush before any lie allegations came out. Plus, Clinton lied UNDER OATH. Hmm....

This is from October 2003:

http://www.cbpp.org/9-30-03health.htm

The ranks of those without health insurance grew from 41.2 million in 2001 to 43.6 million in 2002, according to new data the Census Bureau has just released.[1] The percentage who lack insurance rose from 14.6 percent in 2001 to 15.2 percent in 2002.


This is from August 2004:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/08/26/census.poverty.ap/

Nearly 45 million people lacked health insurance, or 15.6 percent of the population. That was up from 43.5 million in 2002, or 15.2 percent, but was a smaller increase than in the two previous years.
So the number of uninsured, with a larger population and following a long recession, is slightly above the number that it was back in November of 1998, in the middle of the boom, even with a larger population? That dosen't seem too particularly damnig to me.

Approximately 35.8 million people lived below the poverty line in 2003, or about 12.5 percent of the population, according to the bureau. That was up from 34.5 million, or 12.1 percent in 2002.

The rise was more dramatic for children. There were 12.9 million living in poverty last year, or 17.6 percent of the under-18 population. That was an increase of about 800,000 from 2002, when 16.7 percent of all children were in poverty.

As far as poverty is concerned, the US ranks 17th out of the 17 OECD countries.

http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/indic/indic_28_1_1.html
And according to the HDI from the same site, the USA ranks 7th in the OECD. Perhaps poverty, an arbitrary term defined multiple different ways by different people, isn't as damning as it seems. If the poverty line is high and a ton of people are in poverty, the number in and of itself isn't condemning. America's poor, relative to countries that spend fortunes on it with socialist programs, aren't that bad off.

The sociopolitical arena is much more complex and dynamic than the typical black & white stereotypes and generalizations that people tend to make.

It's a damn shame people don't realise there are other, better options out there.

Well said, Heathengrad. Viewed from Scandinavia where I live it's not just in the election process. During the whole Iraq scandal everything was black or white. No grey zones. "You don't support what America is doing - then that must mean you think Saddam is the good guy" NO!

"We were attacked - then we must defend ourselves" NO!

"We have the worlds greatest democracy - so should the rest of thew world if they want it or not" NO Way, thanks.

Denmark was one of your allies. It was Denmark, Spain, UK, US Vs. Saddam - and I have never been more ashamed of my country. As opposed to in the USA our version of a president will sufffer from having mislead the population claiming he knew Iraq had WOMD. Off he goes. Which is good, IMHO.

You have to get that man away from power. Please?

Yeah, but there was complaining about Bush before any lie allegations came out. Plus, Clinton lied UNDER OATH. Hmm....
Which complaining, specify I'm not sure which you mean...
Clinton lied about a personal matter that wasted American taxpayer money just so republicans had dirt on him.
You can't tell me that it had anything important to do with running a country, can you?

Go George W. Bush!



Please cite the law that he broke, or I will cite the law Kerry broke.
Treason? *cough, Valerie Plame, cough*

DUI?

Cocaine usage?

AWOL from the friggin Texas National Guard during Vietnam?

umm...if you know about Harken and Specter, he definetly was guilty of insider trading before the regulations on it were tightened up.

more?

Which is what a certain senator from Massachusetts did when he provided testimony to Congress in 1971, regarding things he claimed to have witnessed in Vietnam. After all, the North Vietnamese used his testimony as the Muzak in the infamous Hanoi Hilton, trying to get American prisoners to betray their country.
that's an extremely facist way of viewing free speech.

Treason? *cough, Valerie Plame, cough*

DUI?

Cocaine usage?

AWOL from the friggin Texas National Guard during Vietnam?

umm...if you know about Harken and Specter, he definetly was guilty of insider trading before the regulations on it were tightened up.

more?


Funny.... you point out W's drug use when you worship Bill "I smoked pot, but never inhaled" Clinton.

And so what if W served in the National Guard? It's a hell of a lot more than Clinton ever did..... he ran to Canada to avoid the Draft.

Funny.... you point out W's drug use when you worship Bill "I smoked pot, but never inhaled" Clinton.

And so what if W served in the National Guard? It's a hell of a lot more than Clinton ever did..... he ran to Canada to avoid the Draft.
What kind of nonsense is that? Clinton fled to Canada? Perhaps you have inhaled too much?

Have anything on it more recent than a year ago so the current status could be seen? On the second article, have anything more recent than 6 years ago?


Just a question. Does it matter?

I am not surprised about the numbers. There is a great deal of unhealthy stuff that goes into making a building.

I admire the people that made the sacrifice working around ground zero. Many of them knew what they would be inhaling and did it anyway.

4 more years President George W. Bush, and after Bush 8 more years
President Jeb Bush Republican Governor of Florida, he will get the hispanic
vote nationaly, he is from Miami the Cubans like him oh well, he speaks
perfect fluent spanish, he is married to a Mexican, his son speaks perfect
fluent spanish and looks 100 Percent hispanic. He is a popular Florida Governor.

Kriyona you will like this,
Bill never inhaled because he was to busy smoking pot.
Win President George W Bush.

Just a question. Does it matter?

I am not surprised about the numbers. There is a great deal of unhealthy stuff that goes into making a building.

I admire the people that made the sacrifice working around ground zero. Many of them knew what they would be inhaling and did it anyway.
Yes it does matter. If there was something implemented in the past year to deal with it, such as a new program, it would change things.

bump

How did he break the law? I'll tell you. Because hes a Republican. You know, when Clinton went to war in the Balkans, which was not sponsered by the UN, I didnt hear a word of complaint. Did you?


Well you see that was a short war, while Iraq is a never ending conflict.

You've thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain't worth the blood
That runs in your veins

How much do I know
To talk out of turn
You might say that I'm young
You might say I'm unlearned
But there's one thing I know
Though I'm younger than you
Even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do

Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul


I'll tell you what, Hitler had more of a reason to go to war than Bush. At least Hitler FOUGHT in a war. Bush has no idea what war is like. All he's ever done is take money from his daddy and spend it on whatever he pleases. Bush is probably a step below Hitler in most areas. Luckily they're still democrats in this country that will fight against his tyranny.

I can see through your masks. YOUR FAKE WARS. YOUR FAKE "MORALES."
Bush has lied, cheated, stolen MURDERED, and broken the constitution on numerous occasions. At least he hasn't cheated on his wife.

Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain


You fasten the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you set back and watch
When the death count gets higher
You hide in your mansion
As young people's blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud


As "relegious" people you conservatives should know who Judas was. Bush is worse. Put a sheet over his head and you won't be concealing his identity. Rather you will be revealing it. You ignorant closeminded repbulicans probably won't even bother reading this post. So why am I writting it, I'm wasting my breath.

And I hope that you die
And your death'll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I'll watch while you're lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I'll stand o'er your grave
'Til I'm sure that you're dead

Support our President... vote George Bush!!!

Haha, goooo Washingston! He was a president, hey why not support someone elses president whilst your at it! The Bush team is a team of, as we say in latin, dorkus malorkasis.

A president should run for reelection on the platform that, in their first term, they have done enough "good" things to have earned the priviledge to be elected again.

Bush however does nothing of the sort. Instead his stump speeches are filled with what he "will" do, as if he couldn't have been doing it the last four years, but I guess I can understand because, as he puts it, "being the president is very hard."

Four years under Bush has given us a net decline in the economy, the armed forces stretched to the breaking point because of the, as it turns out, absolutely unnecessary and illegal (according to the UN, World Court, and about 90% of the world's population) invasion of Iraq. But he has also relentlessly attacked environmental standards, granted tremendous benefits to many industries (further consolidation rights to media stations, not requiring chemical plants to be analyzed so as to better protect people if terrorists decide blow up a sulfuric acid factory) and added trillions of dollars to the national debt, with no possible way in sight to pay it back.

He has spent more money that any normal person can even imagine, and at the end we are worse off. Has he earned a second term? Hell no. Any president who's strongest claim is that he "fought terrorism" by invading a country which was, incidentially, hated by terrorists (for being secular) should be ashamed to show his face in public.

How many people have to die, how many countries have to despise us, how much money must be thrown down the rathole, before some of you people realize that Bush has not made America a better place than before when he was elected?!

Don't knock the War on Terror untill you are willing to fight it. I am joining in a little over a year and a half (when its legal to). I don't care about my life, just the lives of my countrymen. So remember, people like me are willing to die for the freedoms of people like you. Support our troops even if you don't support the CIC.

I wanted to though...

Good. Thank you! :)

Support our President... vote George Bush!!!

Are ya crazy? Or just another criminal?

Support our President... vote George Bush!!!
Why? Has he done one thing right? :confused:

Vote John Kerry
Because he's not President Bush!

Treason: Engaging in military action against the United States or providing aid and comfort to those who do
Is negotiating with your enemies the same as "providing aid and comfort" to them? And I noticed in the law you cited, the private citizen may talk to a foreign government if given the authority of the United States. Are you sure Kerry was not given this permission?

Is negotiating with your enemies the same as "providing aid and comfort" to them? And I noticed in the law you cited, the private citizen may talk to a foreign government if given the authority of the United States. Are you sure Kerry was not given this permission?

1) Yes, negotiating FOR your enemy is aiding and abeting them
2) NO, he was not
3) he deserves to be charged for treason for this

When did Clinton lie about why we went to Balkans? Wait, he didn't? Must be why there was no complaint...

Clinton lied under oath, thats a federal offense, he almost got impeached. That was even a non-political lie, god else what else he's lied about.

They have Clinton on record for lying 216 (6^3) times about Chinagate (leaking nuclear secrets to the PRC)