If the election where held today....
- Thread starter far_right
- Start date
dick_wilderness
New member
It's certainly isn't fair to say "are we better off than 4 yrs ago?" regarding the presidency. Bush had 9/11, Clinton had a sex scandal. Meek in comparison.
After 9/11 everybody I know was down with pre-emptive action, which I thought would have prevented the attacks. Now everyone says "who are we to act first?" ............ Short memories
After 9/11 everybody I know was down with pre-emptive action, which I thought would have prevented the attacks. Now everyone says "who are we to act first?" ............ Short memories
TwistedCU
New member
Kerry voted against every increase in budgeting or spending for the military. Now he criticizes Bush for inadequately equipping the troops. That's typical John Kerry. I'm very disappointed that the Bush administration, who ran on a "smaller Gov't" ticket in '00, has kind of taken advantage of our current situation to make Gov't bigger. This said, I'll still vote for Bush over Kerry. This is a 12 year Union guy saying that :wink:
K_K_PSI_GUY
New member
Well, smaller gov't was his campaign in '00. The whole world has changes since then. All the promices that Bush had made can basically be thrown out the window, in order for him to do what he has to do to take care of our country. Most of us can offer a different and "better" way of doing things than the current person in charge. That is human nature. dick_wilderness, makes a good point. First the polititians are crying and pointing fingers as how we could have prevented this, and now that we act on "military intelligence" or " CIA intelligence", we critisize the Bush administration. I have been in power of a much smaller organization,and I know how hard it is to make the right decision with limited resources, and while at the same time, trying to predict the future. President Bush made and informed decision, acted on it, and completed the task. Because of our own media, and our own people, the world is calling President Bush a liar. Well exuse me! Just becuase they have not been able to find the WMD in all that land, does not mean that they are not there, or that they where not there. The man (Saddam Hussein) had his resources, and he was pretty clever, so I am not at al surprised that we have not found anything. In my opinion, the WMD are probbly in the hands of terrorists somewhere (neighbors of Iraq?), or they are still burried under the sand somewhere in Iraq. Give the President a break, and support the man. If we would not have removed Saddam from power, he would have been terrorising the people of Iraq, and supporting anti-USA groups.-al
K_K_PSI_GUY
New member
BTW, my family has always been traditional Democrats. I beleive that making an informed decision on who you vote for is very important. ps, Kerry will have a very hard time getting elected, and most of his votes will be "anit-Bush" votes, like it was said earlier.-al
Jeepster05
New member
I agree with letting Dubya finish the job. I'm not a fan of Kerry just way too liberal. I can't vote for a guy who serves a tour in Nam then rotates back to the "world" only to go back with Jane Fonda to supply the enemy.
mingez
New member
Why would I vote for Kerry? Why wouldn't I vote for Bush.
I think the arguement "let him finish what he started" is what all incumbant supporters say (both parties), as if 8 years is a "magic" number for success. If that were the case, presidents would have to be in office for 20 years to see any of there policies take effect.
Kerry isn't anti-military, he's anti "irresponsibly spending" for the military. It hasn't been efficient since the 1950's. Efficiencey in spending is just plain responsible.
Kerry is a combat vet, Dubya is not. Bush's obvious pub stunt landing on that carrier was sooo transparent.
Kerry will pursue environmental concerns. I am no treehugger, but it's an important issue. Bush ignores the environment.
Create jobs, don't give the rich taxbreaks. Bush hid behind the tax refunds he gave to the middle class, in a way to devert attention from the ridiculous disproportionate breaks those who make the most get excused from. Flat tax.... Neither candidate supports that.
Of course, this is equally the falt of the current legislature as well.
Kerry is articulate, Bush is not.
Bush has embarrassed the US by being completely ignorant of the world, making him the least respected president in terms of his world view. Hard to buy into his world policy platform when he refers publicly to the Japanese as "Japanites". I still can't believe that one.
And let's face it Kerry is more intellegent than GW. That'll show during the upcoming debates. Kerry has proposed more debate, GW is scared and wants less air time shared in tha forum. Because he knows he'll look silly.
I think we give G W too much props for 9/11. IMO, ANYONE would have done what Bush did after 9/11. He did do a good job I agree, but who on this board wouldn't have responded the same way Bush did? Does that make each of us qualified to run the government?
To me, he was just 'fortunate" to be in office at the time. He's taking full advantage, as he should, but I ain't buying it.
Bush doesn't keep his promises. (see Copper's above post)
Bush is too conservative for me, and (in my opinion) too intrusive in terms of social governing.
The Bush strategy is clear. Use wedge issues to divide America. Work overtime to distort John Kerry's record. And use Bush's campaign war chest to try to cover up his failed record. We as a people, must come together, not focus on the issues which divide us.
Economically, I think the platform Kerry sits on is more logical. For once, the conservative is fiscally irresponsible. Wierd.
Not that I believe the president, soley responsible for economic climate, but I do believe many of his policies have contributed to much of the current situation:
AGAIN, Congress is responsible as well.
Education needs more support, and we need to focus there by cutting unnecessary wastes in spending-- the money is there, but not by cutting necessary areas. We need to invest in our people. An educated middle class is a scary thing for the richest 1%.
I am not a member of either party BTW.
Both have agendas and constituents not that of the american people. I simply chose the proverbial "lesser evil."
I think the arguement "let him finish what he started" is what all incumbant supporters say (both parties), as if 8 years is a "magic" number for success. If that were the case, presidents would have to be in office for 20 years to see any of there policies take effect.
Kerry isn't anti-military, he's anti "irresponsibly spending" for the military. It hasn't been efficient since the 1950's. Efficiencey in spending is just plain responsible.
Kerry is a combat vet, Dubya is not. Bush's obvious pub stunt landing on that carrier was sooo transparent.
Kerry will pursue environmental concerns. I am no treehugger, but it's an important issue. Bush ignores the environment.
Create jobs, don't give the rich taxbreaks. Bush hid behind the tax refunds he gave to the middle class, in a way to devert attention from the ridiculous disproportionate breaks those who make the most get excused from. Flat tax.... Neither candidate supports that.
Of course, this is equally the falt of the current legislature as well.
Kerry is articulate, Bush is not.
Bush has embarrassed the US by being completely ignorant of the world, making him the least respected president in terms of his world view. Hard to buy into his world policy platform when he refers publicly to the Japanese as "Japanites". I still can't believe that one.
And let's face it Kerry is more intellegent than GW. That'll show during the upcoming debates. Kerry has proposed more debate, GW is scared and wants less air time shared in tha forum. Because he knows he'll look silly.
I think we give G W too much props for 9/11. IMO, ANYONE would have done what Bush did after 9/11. He did do a good job I agree, but who on this board wouldn't have responded the same way Bush did? Does that make each of us qualified to run the government?
To me, he was just 'fortunate" to be in office at the time. He's taking full advantage, as he should, but I ain't buying it.
Bush doesn't keep his promises. (see Copper's above post)
Bush is too conservative for me, and (in my opinion) too intrusive in terms of social governing.
The Bush strategy is clear. Use wedge issues to divide America. Work overtime to distort John Kerry's record. And use Bush's campaign war chest to try to cover up his failed record. We as a people, must come together, not focus on the issues which divide us.
Economically, I think the platform Kerry sits on is more logical. For once, the conservative is fiscally irresponsible. Wierd.
Not that I believe the president, soley responsible for economic climate, but I do believe many of his policies have contributed to much of the current situation:
AGAIN, Congress is responsible as well.
Education needs more support, and we need to focus there by cutting unnecessary wastes in spending-- the money is there, but not by cutting necessary areas. We need to invest in our people. An educated middle class is a scary thing for the richest 1%.
I am not a member of either party BTW.
Both have agendas and constituents not that of the american people. I simply chose the proverbial "lesser evil."
To start. Kerry being a combat vet does not mean he knows how to run a country during war. If that's the case my grandfather is presidential material. Bush was a pilot in the guard, Just because he saw no combat doesn't mean he does not know how to defend the country. Besides i want to know what Viet Nam has to do with the 2004 election? nothing. Every time national security comes up with Kerry it always goes back Nam.
-"We need to get some things done in this country: affordable health care, rolling back tax cuts for the wealthy, really investing in our kids. That's why I'm running for president," Kerry said.
Rolling back the tax cut will only put a burdon on our business' and have us lose our jobs because those wealthy people employ all of us working class men and women. Having to shell out more money has to come from someplace and that's going to be done by lay offs, and companies moving to other countries for cheaper labor. Kerry doesn't know what working class is, he marries into money. He has quite a few million dollar homes the average working class home isn't even worth near a million dollars.
-Hughes said Kerry "has railed against the Patriot Act, against the No Child Left Behind education reform, against free trade and NAFTA. Yet, he voted for all three of them."
See, just he cannot make up his mind on things. That's somebody we don't want to run our country. No child left behind, seems he really does care about our children.
As for the graph. The economy isn't as its peak, Bush is working with the hand he was dealt. The tragedy of 9/11 impacted our economy, even if Clinton was in office during that the economy would still have dropped greatly. If you had pulled a graph that shows the projected growth for the 2004-2008 period you would see quiet robust growth. Cutting taxes isn't a fast process, it takes time, doesn't happen over night. Where was that graph pulled from?
When that does happen we'll see Kerry spin off and not answer any question directly, Its what he's good at. Bush is no better and i'm sure both will look like fools at some point during the debate.
I'm a democrat and most likely always will be. But Kerry is not the man for the job. Bush has shown where he stands on the important things and he's not backing down. That's what we need, somebody that's not afraid to do what's right.
Topics like this will always never end. Thanks Far_Right
quotes from Foxnews.com
-"We need to get some things done in this country: affordable health care, rolling back tax cuts for the wealthy, really investing in our kids. That's why I'm running for president," Kerry said.
Rolling back the tax cut will only put a burdon on our business' and have us lose our jobs because those wealthy people employ all of us working class men and women. Having to shell out more money has to come from someplace and that's going to be done by lay offs, and companies moving to other countries for cheaper labor. Kerry doesn't know what working class is, he marries into money. He has quite a few million dollar homes the average working class home isn't even worth near a million dollars.
-Hughes said Kerry "has railed against the Patriot Act, against the No Child Left Behind education reform, against free trade and NAFTA. Yet, he voted for all three of them."
See, just he cannot make up his mind on things. That's somebody we don't want to run our country. No child left behind, seems he really does care about our children.
As for the graph. The economy isn't as its peak, Bush is working with the hand he was dealt. The tragedy of 9/11 impacted our economy, even if Clinton was in office during that the economy would still have dropped greatly. If you had pulled a graph that shows the projected growth for the 2004-2008 period you would see quiet robust growth. Cutting taxes isn't a fast process, it takes time, doesn't happen over night. Where was that graph pulled from?
When that does happen we'll see Kerry spin off and not answer any question directly, Its what he's good at. Bush is no better and i'm sure both will look like fools at some point during the debate.
I'm a democrat and most likely always will be. But Kerry is not the man for the job. Bush has shown where he stands on the important things and he's not backing down. That's what we need, somebody that's not afraid to do what's right.
Topics like this will always never end. Thanks Far_Right
quotes from Foxnews.com
mingez
New member
Yeah thanks Far_right!!! :lol:
Trust me, I know. Just go to the other debate thread.
Don't get me wrong, THEY BOTH SUCK. LOSER or IDIOT, that 's your choice.
Not once did I say: "He was in Vietnam, thus he can run the country." Its a misnomer that Kerry is flagrantly against military spending, that was my point. It's all about efficiency.
But it's also an issue of credibility with Bush. The guy is not bright. Nobody on this board can win that arguement. GW isn't exactly the shapest knife in the drawer, plain and simple. He's proved it over and over again. His grasp of the English language (or lack therof) is legendary. He's a freakin' slack-jawwed yokel, who's family has some money. (no offense to yokels)
Wealthy people employing the middle class is a myth. Companies and big business go public, thus it's the shareholders that employ most of the middle class. And taxing personal income equally based on percentage is a just method. And as consumers, it means the middle class has more disposable income to purchase goods and services from those shareholders. It's a sort of "pump priming tactic" to place $ into the middle of the nation. It's spurts growth, and every good econ major will tell you that's 101 stuff. It's a cycle where the economy is at it's healthiest with movement. Keeping $ within the hands of a chosen few is bad for the economy, but good for those who have it.
And for the record, NEITHER Bush nor Kerry know what it's like to be a working class person... I'm sure all will agree.
Kerry IS flakey, but if you want to place money on the debates... GW will flame out like Quayle after the famous Bentson/Quayle debate. "You're no JFK". That was hillarious, and so too will Bush's debate ability be.
Just note that all I am saying is that I pick the lesser of two evils. That's all. If you're asking me to get passionate about Kerry well--- I just can't do that.
I can, however, get passionate about GW trying to tell the nation right from wrong. That's total BS and perhaps the biggest reason I won't vote for Hitler-- I mean, GW. :lol:
But it's like y'all GW supporters have anything to worry about. He'll win, unless he keeps up with the Anti-gay-morality-censorship crusade. That could cost him the election.
Here we go again guys, hee hee!!!
LGR, how's the XJ hunt going BTW. :?:
TC, what up GEE!!!
Trust me, I know. Just go to the other debate thread.
Don't get me wrong, THEY BOTH SUCK. LOSER or IDIOT, that 's your choice.
Not once did I say: "He was in Vietnam, thus he can run the country." Its a misnomer that Kerry is flagrantly against military spending, that was my point. It's all about efficiency.
But it's also an issue of credibility with Bush. The guy is not bright. Nobody on this board can win that arguement. GW isn't exactly the shapest knife in the drawer, plain and simple. He's proved it over and over again. His grasp of the English language (or lack therof) is legendary. He's a freakin' slack-jawwed yokel, who's family has some money. (no offense to yokels)
Wealthy people employing the middle class is a myth. Companies and big business go public, thus it's the shareholders that employ most of the middle class. And taxing personal income equally based on percentage is a just method. And as consumers, it means the middle class has more disposable income to purchase goods and services from those shareholders. It's a sort of "pump priming tactic" to place $ into the middle of the nation. It's spurts growth, and every good econ major will tell you that's 101 stuff. It's a cycle where the economy is at it's healthiest with movement. Keeping $ within the hands of a chosen few is bad for the economy, but good for those who have it.
And for the record, NEITHER Bush nor Kerry know what it's like to be a working class person... I'm sure all will agree.
Kerry IS flakey, but if you want to place money on the debates... GW will flame out like Quayle after the famous Bentson/Quayle debate. "You're no JFK". That was hillarious, and so too will Bush's debate ability be.
Just note that all I am saying is that I pick the lesser of two evils. That's all. If you're asking me to get passionate about Kerry well--- I just can't do that.
I can, however, get passionate about GW trying to tell the nation right from wrong. That's total BS and perhaps the biggest reason I won't vote for Hitler-- I mean, GW. :lol:
But it's like y'all GW supporters have anything to worry about. He'll win, unless he keeps up with the Anti-gay-morality-censorship crusade. That could cost him the election.
Here we go again guys, hee hee!!!
LGR, how's the XJ hunt going BTW. :?:
TC, what up GEE!!!
mingez
New member
-Hughes said Kerry "has railed against the Patriot Act, against the No Child Left Behind education reform, against free trade and NAFTA. Yet, he voted for all three of them."
Yeah, but that's a blanket statement. He (Kerry) supports much of those things, but there are aspects of all of them (which are not issue-related) that he is against. The nuts an bolts such as funding, etc. are what he may have issues with. The "hows", "froms" and "whos".
A good analogy might be:
"The Twisted Copper Jeep Modification Act"
---- We all agree that it's a good thing that Twisted Copper mods his Jeep... Right? But the policy states that in order to do so, we need to sell LGR's jeep to pay for it. Rob Peter to pay Paul so to speak.
Please vote "yes" or "no". -- I'm assuming LGR, you'll vote "NO"
--If you vote "NO" then all of a sudden everyone is saying that you are against "The Twisted Copper Jeep Modification Act"
Why? It's a good cause!! How could you!!! :shock: :lol:
Heheheheheheheee. :lol: :lol:
I know, I'm a dork.
Yeah, but that's a blanket statement. He (Kerry) supports much of those things, but there are aspects of all of them (which are not issue-related) that he is against. The nuts an bolts such as funding, etc. are what he may have issues with. The "hows", "froms" and "whos".
A good analogy might be:
"The Twisted Copper Jeep Modification Act"
---- We all agree that it's a good thing that Twisted Copper mods his Jeep... Right? But the policy states that in order to do so, we need to sell LGR's jeep to pay for it. Rob Peter to pay Paul so to speak.
Please vote "yes" or "no". -- I'm assuming LGR, you'll vote "NO"
--If you vote "NO" then all of a sudden everyone is saying that you are against "The Twisted Copper Jeep Modification Act"
Why? It's a good cause!! How could you!!! :shock: :lol:
Heheheheheheheee. :lol: :lol:
I know, I'm a dork.
dick_wilderness
New member
One question......
Where are all the great men?
Where are all the great men?
mingez said:Yeah thanks Far_right!!! :lol:
Trust me, I know. Just go to the other debate thread.
Don't get me wrong, THEY BOTH SUCK. LOSER or IDIOT, that 's your choice.
Not once did I say: "He was in Vietnam, thus he can run the country." Its a misnomer that Kerry is flagrantly against military spending, that was my point. It's all about efficiency.
But it's also an issue of credibility with Bush. The guy is not bright. Nobody on this board can win that arguement. GW isn't exactly the shapest knife in the drawer, plain and simple. He's proved it over and over again. His grasp of the English language (or lack therof) is legendary. He's a freakin' slack-jawwed yokel, who's family has some money. (no offense to yokels)
Wealthy people employing the middle class is a myth. Companies and big business go public, thus it's the shareholders that employ most of the middle class. And taxing personal income equally based on percentage is a just method. And as consumers, it means the middle class has more disposable income to purchase goods and services from those shareholders. It's a sort of "pump priming tactic" to place $ into the middle of the nation. It's spurts growth, and every good econ major will tell you that's 101 stuff. It's a cycle where the economy is at it's healthiest with movement. Keeping $ within the hands of a chosen few is bad for the economy, but good for those who have it.
And for the record, NEITHER Bush nor Kerry know what it's like to be a working class person... I'm sure all will agree.
Kerry IS flakey, but if you want to place money on the debates... GW will flame out like Quayle after the famous Bentson/Quayle debate. "You're no JFK". That was hillarious, and so too will Bush's debate ability be.
Just note that all I am saying is that I pick the lesser of two evils. That's all. If you're asking me to get passionate about Kerry well--- I just can't do that.
I can, however, get passionate about GW trying to tell the nation right from wrong. That's total BS and perhaps the biggest reason I won't vote for Hitler-- I mean, GW. :lol:
But it's like y'all GW supporters have anything to worry about. He'll win, unless he keeps up with the Anti-gay-morality-censorship crusade. That could cost him the election.
Here we go again guys, hee hee!!!
LGR, how's the XJ hunt going BTW. :?:
TC, what up GEE!!!
SKYNARD FOR PRESIDENT
Mingez, no offense, it was just one of the longer posts to quote.
I see a lot of arguments based on Terrorism, which is a big thing, lost 3000+ lives, as well as the war in Iraq, loss of 400 American lives.
But no one talks about Domestic Violence and how it Claimed Thousands of American lives last year
No one talks about Obesity, millions of americans are morbidly Obese. and die cause of this.
How about the rapid , unchecked manner, that diabetes is infecting teenages. 10 years ago, a 18years old would never have type 2 diabetes, currently in 2003, people between the ages 15-25 made up of 30% of all new type 2 diabetes cases
Education funding is at it's lowest! (our teachers for both education and higher education in Boston have been with out contracts for 4 years)
How about federal funding for Police or fire departments, most are suffering in lack of funding to the point were safely performing their job is near impossible.
There are a hundred more topics that I never hear a candidate address, This is why I am not registered to vote, and it is why none of the candidates impress me, ever!
First of all, Bush all the way. Finally, a christian man is leading a country that was founded by christians who intended for a christian man to be second in charge at all times... second? Cause God is first. In God we trust. He may not be the most articulate man (Japanites, that's pretty funny), but he's one of us in a position of great power and surely comes under stress. However, he knows his morals and knows how to stick to them.
As far as the nation's deficit... we should just cancel all our debts to dumb countries like Japan and say, "what you gonna do about it?" I mean, first we bomb them at Hiroshima, then say, "oh, I'm sorry 'bout that. Here's $50 Billion to rebuild." And $50 Billion is not an exaggeration.
Then we have this quote:
That's like telling the baby you just aborted that it's his fault the sperm found the egg before you were ready. Nobody wants to take responsibility anymore. Maybe if we had to go to 4 different stores to get groceries, clothes, toys, and motor oil (instead of Wal-mart) and maybe if we still had to go outside to piss, maybe then we wouldn't be so fat.
"These cigarettes gave me emphysema, so now I'm suing you cause I'm gonna die."
"This coffee was too hot when you gave it to me so when I spill it, you can pay for my burn treatments."
"This fastfood has too much saturated fat and now I have health issues because I'm obese. Here's my bill."
What a load.
C
{stepping down from the soapbox}
As far as the nation's deficit... we should just cancel all our debts to dumb countries like Japan and say, "what you gonna do about it?" I mean, first we bomb them at Hiroshima, then say, "oh, I'm sorry 'bout that. Here's $50 Billion to rebuild." And $50 Billion is not an exaggeration.
Then we have this quote:
What!? Who cares about fat people? Stop going to McD's and Hardee's and all-you-can-eat buffets and instead of watching Oprah and Springer and Judge Judy each night, go for a walk, ride a bike or for Pete's sake, have sex! It's exercise, ya know?! I don't ever want to hear someone in this country blame someone else for being fat, or obese or whatever you want to call it.
That's like telling the baby you just aborted that it's his fault the sperm found the egg before you were ready. Nobody wants to take responsibility anymore. Maybe if we had to go to 4 different stores to get groceries, clothes, toys, and motor oil (instead of Wal-mart) and maybe if we still had to go outside to piss, maybe then we wouldn't be so fat.
"These cigarettes gave me emphysema, so now I'm suing you cause I'm gonna die."
"This coffee was too hot when you gave it to me so when I spill it, you can pay for my burn treatments."
"This fastfood has too much saturated fat and now I have health issues because I'm obese. Here's my bill."
What a load.
C
{stepping down from the soapbox}
I did a Google search for any mention of Bush saying "Japanites" and I couldn't find anything. Is this just another urban legend?
All I could find is that Japanite is a synonym for Pennine - which is a mineral described as "A variety of Clinochlore or A pseudo-trigonal variety of Clinochlore." And Clinochlore is (Mg,Fe2+)5Al(Si3Al)O10(OH) With an origin of - Clinochlore from the Greek klino - "oblique" and chloros - " green." Ripidolite from the Greek rhipis - "fan" and lithos - "stone." Pennine from the Pennine Alps, Italy
Is Bush an expert in minerals and we didn't know it?
(Some useless trivia for Mingez :lol: )
All I could find is that Japanite is a synonym for Pennine - which is a mineral described as "A variety of Clinochlore or A pseudo-trigonal variety of Clinochlore." And Clinochlore is (Mg,Fe2+)5Al(Si3Al)O10(OH) With an origin of - Clinochlore from the Greek klino - "oblique" and chloros - " green." Ripidolite from the Greek rhipis - "fan" and lithos - "stone." Pennine from the Pennine Alps, Italy
Is Bush an expert in minerals and we didn't know it?
(Some useless trivia for Mingez :lol: )
Similar threads
