Who will you vote for and why? (US Election) [Archive]

Conservative Front

Jul 11th, 2004, 1:30 AM

Are You a KERRORIST? Do you really want the waffle man in office who supports Murder **"He Said he agrees that Life begins at conception, and says although he disagrees with it he believes women have the right to (KILL) Choice". or how about the man who voted for the 87 billion before he voted against it. Plus theres inexperienced Edwards (i'm waiting for the moment they attack all he's done as a trail lawyer). So thats you're Choice the #1 Liberal In the Senate (KERRY) and the #4 Liberal Senator (EDWARDS) It's the most liberal ticket since Mandale. oh and 1 more thing they say they support the working class yet *!*Kerry is worth about 1 billion and Edwards is worth about 678 Million. That would make them the RICHEST ticket in American history. Where as Bush Is Worth about 15 Million and Cheney about 23 Million.

Kerry also wants to involve the U.N. in are war efforts and allow them to commandeer the troops etc... and Can we really trust them? look at the Oil For Food Scandal that should denouce there credibility. The man in charge of it all was KILLED... makes ya think what there covering there asses for.

Kerry wants to raise gas prices more then they are we wants 1.00$ Tax on all grades so not only are we paying 1.89$ Per Gallon already are you ready to pay 3.00$ per gallon?

Kerry as flip flopped on about 67 Ideas*/*. Don't you think we should have a president in office who atleast has Ideas?

Kerry would rather found science (stem cell) instead of funding the war efforts...

Kerry wants to raise the bar on Environmental standards, which in turn could threaten new corporations so no new jobs, could threaten Auto companys no new cars... You get my drift plus it would raise are taxes

Kerry wants to get rid of all of Bush's Tax cuts and Raise taxes. which in turn will make supplys go up in price if the manufacturer is being charged 50% (not exact figure) in taxes then he will raise the prices on his goods. which is not good for Normal working joes.

So Kerry and Edwards to most liberal and richest ticket in history? My opinion WRONG FOR AMERICA.

Do you know the WAFFLE MAN?

** Fox News/C-Span-Pro-Choice Rally

*1*Fox News CNN Hannity GOP

*/* GOP.com

Conservative Front

Jul 11th, 2004, 1:32 AM

The Ind. hopeful is Ralph Nader this year.

stewey

Jul 11th, 2004, 5:32 AM

Bush didn't cheat, he won fair and square, and stop popping the paranoid pills.

bbbv3.5

Jul 11th, 2004, 4:21 PM

Good luck to all members running....except kerry.

Bonafide

Jul 11th, 2004, 6:05 PM

It's pretty obvious to me the AnimeFreak probably just walked out of Farenlies 911 with his comments. At least Bush has the balls to stand up for this great country. Kerry, Gore, and any other DEM would have been peeing in their pants on 911. Lets make sure we nominate a MAN and not a BOY.

Conservative Front

Jul 12th, 2004, 12:07 AM

Well said Bonafide.

Sirius

Jul 12th, 2004, 12:55 AM

stewey

Jul 12th, 2004, 3:11 AM

I am gonna vote for a man, John Kerry, a man who was brave enough to go into vietnam, sit in a boat on many dangerous rivers, and look his enemy in the eye. What was Bush doing? Avoiding the national guard trying to help with someones campaing.

You mean how brave he was when he pumped an unconscious vietnamese man full of lead, to get his medals? Or how he disobeyed orders by sending his crew to shore? Or how he met with the enemy, and was actually honored by the north Vietnamese government? How he admitted to "being forced" to commit war crimes because of boredom? How he said he was ashamed of his fellow troops over there?

Plus, what does military service have to do with president? My grandpa was in the military, and he would make an awful president.

dutchie

Jul 12th, 2004, 4:25 AM

Cut it out, you all. I will NOT have Armageddon Online serving as a vehicle for electional propaganda for EITHER SIDE!!!

PLEASE save your dribble for ANY OTHER POLITICAL FORUM!!

DontBeAfraid

Jul 12th, 2004, 5:02 AM

Stewey you left out the part about getting three purple hearts and a bronze (or was it silver) star.

Dutchie I think the members of this board are distibuted equally enough for it to not be mere propaganda, but a fine argument. Or entertaining at the very least.

dutchie

Jul 12th, 2004, 5:07 AM

As far as I am concerned it is FINE to discuss fundamentals of politics. If this ends in dirtthrowing (and you are already eagerly participating as I see) I will NOT hesitate to pull the plug. And no, it's not even entertaining. This is not an All-American-Exclusive board: It's my board too. I don't get to vote, so I don't feel compelled to say anything on the matter.

A good discussion on fundamentals, OK. Dirtthrowers fly out. :shot:

DontBeAfraid

Jul 12th, 2004, 5:17 AM

I know its not all-america.... thats why there are soccer threads. LOL

dutchie

Jul 12th, 2004, 7:25 AM

...and I don't give a hoot about soccer too...

lotrfan55345

Jul 12th, 2004, 11:43 AM

Well you have one of two people to vote for, or else you are throwing your vote away.

OrioN

Jul 12th, 2004, 5:49 PM

Thank you Dutchie. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the bashing from both sides doesn't encourage debate, it hinders it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but debate is the primary purpose for the political forum here.

substand

Jul 13th, 2004, 4:32 AM

I'm not voting for Bush or Kerry. I would probably have been voting for libertarians except for thier retardedness after 9/11 and the fact that they basically disowned me after i agreed with the war in iraq...

as for "Well you have one of two people to vote for, or else you are throwing your vote away."... this is simply not true..

say for instance I was going to vote for libertarians and I feel republicans are closer to my ideology (or democrats if you wish)... A vote for libertarians (by all those who would rather have libertarians than anyone else) shows 1 of 2 things:

1) You republicans (or democrats) won by less of a margin than you would have won because all the libertarians voted against you. If you want to get your vote totals back up, you better adopt some of the libertarian platform.

2) You repubs (or dems) lost this election because of the margin of libertarian voters. You REALLY BETTER ADOPT part of our platform to get us to vote for you.

.......

Sure, you won't win the election, but you'll make your intention known. If you vote for someone you don't want, then you are wasting your vote- you are voting for a likely winner, to be sure. however, your vote gives them legitimacy (even if you dont want it to) and no one will ever be able to interpret your vote the way you meant it... they can only interpret it correctly if you really WANTED to vote for who you voted for, and you really SUPPORTED them.

If Kerry gets 90% of the vote, and 80% is "anti-Bush" while 20% is "pro-Kerry," he is still going to have a mandate from congress for his platform.

So vote for whom you want. If you are a Green, don't vote for Kerry because he doesn't represent what you want (see http://www.constitutionallychallenged.com/images/good_kerry_hunting_houston.jpg) (not really from houston)... if you are conservative, don't vote for bush, because its very obvious thru all the legislation he's signed (much less pushed for) that he's not conservative. If you're pro-maximizing freedom, don't vote for either candidate, because they will not represent what you want (and both thier records are clear on that)...

You only throw your vote away when you vote for someone you don't want.

substand

Jul 13th, 2004, 4:53 AM

He Said he agrees that Life begins at conception, and says although he disagrees with it he believes women have the right to (KILL) Choice".

actually, thats a good point... of all the inconsistencies of kerry, this one is most telling to me. I'm a christian and I'm not sure life begins at conception. The best I've heard so far is about 2 wks after conception... but to say "life begins at conception" and "you can have an abortion any time" surely if ridiculous. Its one thing to beleive life begins when a baby can live outside the womb, and you can have an abortion any time before that... its quite another thing to beleive life begins when a sperm penetrates an egg and you can have an abortion anytime after that. If you think life begins at point A, and think you can have an abortion past point A, then obviously you are conceeding that murder is ok.

Cut it out, you all. I will NOT have Armageddon Online serving as a vehicle for electional propaganda for EITHER SIDE!!!

Vote Bush! Vote Kerry! =P Of course all of this board could probably be considered propaganda for one side or the other... why would you take it away? =)

As for the Vietnam thing.... WHO GIVES A RATS ASS ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO? Why do I care if Kerry served honorably and Bush "worked on a campaign" 30 yrs ago? Why do I care if Kerry faked things to get medals 30 yrs ago? Its ridiculous on both sides. Bush was a drunken fool a while back... do I care about it? No.

If you want to debate morals and stuff, thats fine... but don't bring up stuff that old to prove your point. I've changed a lot in the past 3 years. I had "youthful indescretions" 7 years ago that are on record. But I've changed TONS since then. Its just stupid to bring up stuff from vietnam in either candidate's case.

dutchie

Jul 13th, 2004, 5:44 AM

As for the Vietnam thing.... WHO GIVES A RATS ASS ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO? Why do I care if Kerry served honorably and Bush "worked on a campaign" 30 yrs ago? Why do I care if Kerry faked things to get medals 30 yrs ago? Its ridiculous on both sides. Bush was a drunken fool a while back... do I care about it? No.

If you want to debate morals and stuff, thats fine... but don't bring up stuff that old to prove your point. I've changed a lot in the past 3 years. I had "youthful indescretions" 7 years ago that are on record. But I've changed TONS since then. Its just stupid to bring up stuff from vietnam in either candidate's case.
Bravo! That's exactly my idea. Stuff like that is plain dirt throwing, and I won't have it. Please do not stoop to tabloid stuff to make your point, some of you!!

substand

Jul 13th, 2004, 5:53 AM

Bravo! That's exactly my idea. Stuff like that is plain dirt throwing, and I won't have it. Please do not stoop to tabloid stuff to make your point, some of you!!

ok... see the post in the other thread and i see we're on the same page! =) in any case, good night dutchie (just past afternoon for you and early morning for me i suppose)....

dutchie

Jul 13th, 2004, 6:26 AM

Substand's making a good point there. Holland is living proof of this, as we have at least 3 parties of almost equal strength, some a bit smaller and a whole lot of little parties. Our government is usually formed by coalitions between 1 large and a few smaller parties. We choose a party that meets our POV most accurately. And the possibility that a small party comes to government within a coalition is a realistic possibility. This renders our system a lot more fair and flexible than the US system, IMO.

bbbv3.5

Jul 13th, 2004, 9:05 AM

Read the last word of what this site is called. FORUM. As long as people dont do anythign that effects race and etc. let them say whateveer the hell they want. Let them say vote bush or vote kerry or argue about who is better. This is there forum. You people just design it make sure nothing that could make someone else cry happens.

bbbv3.5

Jul 13th, 2004, 9:09 AM

Lotr.....remember what our age is. Under 18....we cant vote period. :nudge:

dutchie

Jul 13th, 2004, 11:54 AM

Because we do, we have a great forum. Pay a visit to some of the other forums around. You'll see...

Conservative Front

Jul 14th, 2004, 1:23 AM

So you're going to vote for a man the supports murdering babys? (He said in his own words that life begins at conception & he voted against the lacy peterson law) You're going to vote for a man that committed war crimes because he was bored? You're going to vote for a man who was honored by the N.V. communist? You're going to vote for a man who through out his war medals? You're gonna vote for a man who waffles all his idea's? Well if thats you're idea of a true man someone who supports the Murder of innocent children and tosses his war medals (but will be great on national security) then you're intitled to you're opinion.

---end response to sirius---

DarkAce

Jul 14th, 2004, 1:50 AM

As the forums grow we're bound to let idiots slip in, err I mean unique opinions. Unfortunately so many of the intellectuals that made conversations interesting that we originally had have been inactive/retired. The influx of idiots keeps rising while intellectuals decline. We need MD back to pounce on these people, they're getting free rein:p There were a few promising members, but all around disappointment :(

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 14th, 2004, 10:34 AM

Links! Where is the proof to back your statements?

So you're going to vote for a man the supports murdering babys? (He said in his own words that life begins at conception & he voted against the lacy peterson law) What has been left out here is that as a prosecutor, Kerry assisted in establising the first office for assisting rape victims in the country. As Senator, he co-sponsored and helped pass the "Violence Against Women Act" and voted for the "Family and Medical Leave Act". What is also left out here is that since there is no congressional designation as to when life begins, the Act could be considered un-Constitutional and could not be passed. There are also many states that have similar laws already on the books.

Since some of the regulations under the "Prenatal Protection Act" aka the "Lacy Peterson Law" would have conflicted with some of those in the Violence Against Women Act by placing the rights of the unborn above those of the mother, and since the VAWA already covered much of what was in the Peterson Act regarding violence against women, he couldnt do much more than vote against it. Also, Scott Peterson would have been charged for two murders if the law had passed. While that would not have been a bad thing, no one can decide when "life" actually begins and the case would have been buried under mountains of red tape.

What is also precarious about this Act is that it opens up some very scary legal scenarios. For example, a couple might be charged with murder for having embryos thawed and not implanted. Going farther, the problems associated with stem cell research could open up many new unjustified murder allegations brought on by pro-life groups. It would have been a legal tar pit for law makers, those who uphold the law and the medical profession. Not to forget or leave out the victims.

And yes, Kerry is pro-choice however, he also supports education and family planning.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/vawo/laws/vawa/vawa.htm
http://www.texmed.org/pmt/lel/cln/com03/arl.asp
http://www.utexas.edu/law/news/2003/060503_robertson.html
http://www.rtl.org/html/prenatal_protection_act.html

You're going to vote for a man that committed war crimes because he was bored? You're going to vote for a man who was honored by the N.V. communist? You're going to vote for a man who through out his war medals? Youre going to still talk hippies and dinosaur news? Who cares? Should we also revisit Bush's excuse for not participating? Again, who cares? Do you have any military service? Why are you not enlisted? Go over to Iraq, if you come back I will read everything you have to post about military action whether I agree with it or not. Get relevant.

You're gonna vote for a man who waffles all his idea's? Well if thats you're idea of a true man someone who supports the Murder of innocent children and tosses his war medals (but will be great on national security) then you're intitled to you're opinion. Yeah, and so is Kerry. Have you ever looked into why he allegedly tossed his medals? I imagine it might be for the same reasons my Uncle has for disgust with the government. While my Uncle was an officer at the Presidio, he was able to see exactly the kind of thinking and mentality that was behind the Vietnam War. When you see military duty yourself, others will be more capable of seeing validity in your opinion.

Interesting that you have resorted right back to juvenile behaviour. What an idea from a true man. Waffle man?

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 14th, 2004, 10:41 AM

Wow Subs, thats an awsome post! :grin

dutchie

Jul 14th, 2004, 11:40 AM

Marajadex

Jul 14th, 2004, 1:27 PM

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 14th, 2004, 6:24 PM

And yet another post from Substand that makes me think.
Good job! Very well said. :respect:

Dutchie, I so wish there was a strong 3rd party here. For the ost of the time I have been able to vote I feel like I have been casting a vote against a particular candidate then for one. :Bdevil: The lesser of 2 evils. :devsmoke: I also wish there was a strong third party as well. Im in agreement with subs post so I wrote out all the good and bad according to my opinion on each candidate. The lesser of two evils is still evil but Kerry gets my nod this time. I wish Perot wouldnt have gone out the way he did. That would have been a hell of a race and opened the doors to third parties being more likely.

substand

Jul 14th, 2004, 9:19 PM

thanks for the "good job" and "awesome post" from you two....

one thing that i meant to mention but failed to do so was that between bush and kerry, one may feel the need to get the other out of office (or prevent from entering), and thus vote for the "lesser of 2 evils." I still wouldn't personally do that, mostly for the reasons I posted above and how that would be a waste of my vote. The part I failed to mention is that

1) we made it thru the bush 41 years (for those "conservatives" who were many that didn't like bush 41, and the libs who didn't like him as well.
2) we made it thru the Clinton years for all the libertarian conservatives who voted against clinton and for republicans to whom they felt closer to and didn't want to "throw thier vote away" on the libertarian candidate.
3) we've made it thru the Bush 43 years for all the libertarians who voted against him who felt closer to Gore. For those libertarians who voted for him because they were afraid of Gore- look what you helped give us, and we would have gotten thru Gore's term as well, but instead you gave legitimacy to policies you don't support. The same is true of greens (reds without guns =) ) and every other small party supporter.
4) If Kerry gets elected, we will make it thru his mishaps. If bush gets reelected, we will as well. So really there is no point in throwing away your vote on either of them- vote your conscience and hopefully you and everyone who votes your way will help make your party larger, or at least make the major parties look at adopting your platform (or parts of it)

Sleeping_Giant

Jul 14th, 2004, 9:46 PM

substand

Jul 14th, 2004, 11:36 PM

... the idea that a strong vote for a third party, even if it is highly unlikely that it will lead to succesful election is good one idealogically but does it change anything. Substandand makes a good point (or series of them) but the problem is that the vote for anyone outside the two main parties doesn't actually make any change. Lets say Kerry wins over Bush (or vice versa) but there are a lot of votes to a third party that make it a tight race, is either president (elect) going to examine that fact when making policy in his administration? Unlikely.

Well, my point precisely was that it does make a difference. Any difference is very minor to be sure, but if everyone voted how they really wanted to, instead of voting for "lesser of 2 evils," then the impact would be more significant.

It doesn't often change the outcome of an election, to be sure... however, even though it has been said that Nader took a lot of votes from Bush as well, don't think that democrats didn't take note of it. They surely (and rightly) chalk a lot of his vote to people who wouldn't have voted anyway. But they will also take that into account this election. They won't try to make an issue of it, because doing so would alienate mainstream voters... but they will at least try not to offend the position.

And while Kerry (for example) might not notice the greens voting for greens instead of democrats (or bush may not notice libertarians voting for libertarians instead of republicans) (again, both are just small examples), I GUARANTEE the political advisors behind them and anyone else DO notice it, when it makes a difference. Of course, the only time it can make a diff is when you vote for who you want, and not "against" who you dont want.

And even if the advisors and presidents and party members don't take enough notice of it to change party platforms and what they say to get elected, your vote for someone you don't want DOES get noticed by congress as a whole, who will be willing to say "80% of the people voted for candidate X, we better pass his agenda." So even if you want someone else and your vote won't be noticed by voting for them, when you vote for a major candidate it WILL be noticed by lawmakers and it WILL be interpreted as part of a mandate, if the totals are high enough, whether you wanted it to or not.

Conservative Front

Jul 15th, 2004, 12:18 AM

Kerry said in his own words, that he believes life begins at conception**, but he still supports abortion... Would that not be murder if he agrees life begins at Conception yet he would still take a life?

The lacy peterson law, is a good law. It would not only protect the mother against violence but it would also protect the innocent lifes of children who haven't had a chance at life yet. I'm not sure of you're stance on this but I'm under the assumation that you disagree with the law. But I believe the unborn baby should have rights to life and if someone murders a pregnant women there should be two counts of murder.

I personally wouldn't have a problem if stem cell research was eradicated. I think it's disgusting and demoralizing that we'd use an unborn baby for research reasoning...

I am relevant, but Kerry is the one who keeps bringing up his military background. I'm simply using his own words against him. It's not irrelevant at all infact its just the opposite. considering Kerry accused Bush of war crimes yet he committed war crimes himself wouldn't that make him a hypocrite?

I don't see any excuse for tossing war medals.

juvenile behavior? the GOP coined the term Waffle Man...

---end response to defiant---

**- Source Fox News "the Big Story" and "You're world"

substand

Jul 15th, 2004, 12:36 AM

**- Source Fox News "the Big Story" and "You're world"

I'm glad you source your references now... I would only ask that since you are online, and it is easy to find such resources online, that you post links to such things... Its possible to find what you are talking about now, but the reader would be much more inclined to click a link than google for what you are talking about, and thus, the reader would be much more inclined to agree with you, or at a minimum, see your point.

I personally wouldn't have a problem if stem cell research was eradicated. I think it's disgusting and demoralizing that we'd use an unborn baby for research reasoning...

Perhaps you should do some research on what stem cell research is all about. They often use human dna to try to get stem cells from say, a cow's egg. Stem cell research is "cloning," but not so in the sense that we create humans and store them in the closet for later use or create a cow-human...

it also has the potential to cure many harsh illnesses, and it has nothing to do with "creating" human life or even using it (unless you beleive a human sperm and *part of* human egg infused with a cow egg membrane is human at some point... or even if you think a human sperm and egg make life at the point where a human sperm penetrates an egg (which even many christians disagree with)- its only 2 cells after the first division... and the current stem cell research doesn't go past a few cell divisions...

If you want to get into the "purpose" of sperm and eggs in creating life, thats one thing... and we'd have to ban all birth control in that case too... but at least read something about it rather than taking politicians' words for it... a good start would be at http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/06/dunn.htm (and its only a start, but it might help you start to learn what stem cells are all about)

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:07 AM

Kerry said in his own words, that he believes life begins at conception**, but he still supports abortion... Would that not be murder if he agrees life begins at Conception yet he would still take a life? No, him having his own opinion is fine. However, he is representing not just one person but many people. If they as in the people he represents have told him that they want abortion to be legal (which they did by electing him) then thats what he did. It is not unusual to be against abortion and be pro-choice. He feels that its none of his business what a woman choses. He stays out of a womans head, out of her bedroom and out of her doctors office too.

The lacy peterson law, is a good law. It would not only protect the mother against violence but it would also protect the innocent lifes of children who haven't had a chance at life yet. I'm not sure of you're stance on this but I'm under the assumation that you disagree with the law. But I believe the unborn baby should have rights to life and if someone murders a pregnant women there should be two counts of murder. It not neccessarily a "bad" law but based on technicalities it would have been a very "messy" law created alot of problems for the legal systems and victims. Why repeat more laws that are essentially covered in VAWA? What I dont understand is for someone who says they want reduced government, you would want the PPA to pass when for one, it is uneeded and therefore redundant. If you feel that VAWA is weak, propose additions to it. But to pass more laws when we have a hard enough time getting the original ones upheld?

Plus there is still is debate on when "life" begins. Again, until there is a legal definition on the books, you cannot pass laws like this and expect them to be protective of any victims. The opposing counsel would rip to shreds any basis of conviction for murder based on this alone, it would culminate in court sessions being dragged out for damn near eternity and the victim will be shredded apart in the process. Of what benefit would that be to the victim?

I personally wouldn't have a problem if stem cell research was eradicated. I think it's disgusting and demoralizing that we'd use an unborn baby for research reasoning... Im not up on this the topic of stem cell research but here again, I wouldnt see the use of stem cell research any different than using animals in a test lab. And yet again, because there is no definitive law on the books regarding when "life" actually begins, no dice. You can slam Kerry all you want, but since he is a former prosecuter hes got a pretty good idea of what will hold up in court and what wont better than you have. That translates to that as long as he is upholding our Constitution and Bill of Rights, hes clean.

I am relevant, but Kerry is the one who keeps bringing up his military background. I'm simply using his own words against him. It's not irrelevant at all infact its just the opposite. considering Kerry accused Bush of war crimes yet he committed war crimes himself wouldn't that make him a hypocrite? And the relevance is where? And your similar experience under similar conditions is where? And the fact that Bush is also a hypocrite AND liar and you dont bring that up either is interesting. Are you willing to enlist? Will you go to war? Are you willing to take charge of the lives of many men? Because everyone else is jumping off a bridge do you have to?

I don't see any excuse for tossing war medals. Maybe someday when you have served war duty in possibly a similar circumstance then you may understand the thinking behind why he supposedly did it. Until then you can comment on it but your comments dont have much weight.

juvenile behavior? the GOP coined the term Waffle Man... And just like any other lemming you have to do it too. CF, this is where we get the idea that you cant think for yourself.

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:19 AM

If you are voting for kerry cause you hate bush please throw away your vote...its then not who you want. (Making substand's great post into a sentence).

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:20 AM

Damn. DN thats three people you served in two days.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:49 AM

If you are voting for kerry cause you hate bush please throw away your vote...its then not who you want. (Making substand's great post into a sentence). Hey! Pipe down youngster! :crazy: When you get old enough to vote (which means you will be of adult age) THEN you can tell people they may be throwing away a vote. Until then you just keep focused on learning about the issues and people behind them. :rolling:

/me is laffing and means the above in jest.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:52 AM

Damn. DN thats three people you served in two days. Hehehehe, youre next. Muuwwwahahahahahaaha!!

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:53 AM

Why cant i tell them now dn??? If i were to tell you i was 23 instead of 14 what would you say???

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:56 AM

Why cant i tell them now dn??? If i were to tell you i was 23 instead of 14 what would you say??? I would say pretty much the same thing that I did. I also made it in red so you would find it easier.

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:57 AM

No it comes darker on my screen and looks like a part of your signature. :rolling:

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:58 AM

And why...your voting for kerry i assume????

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 11:09 AM

BBBv2.0 will prevent it... He has been upgreaded!!

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 1:08 PM

Hey CF..look at the place and time of your posts bashing kerry....most of them are right after dutchie says that he does not like this on his site. But you then continued on with basing kerry with the phrase "waffle man". Do you just ignore dutchies posts??? And then go on bashin kerry. Show some damn respect CF.

DontBeAfraid

Jul 15th, 2004, 2:28 PM

Dutchie is a dude.....

repentantsinner

Jul 15th, 2004, 2:56 PM

For some reason i have the feeling that after this nov., by hook or by crook Bush will still be president........just a feeling :spy:

MetalMilitia

Jul 15th, 2004, 4:29 PM

Dutchie is a dude.....

Yeah. I thought the incredibly large phallus was a dead give away.

I'm voting for Ozzy ****ing Osbourne.

http://www.drudgereport.com/ozzy.jpg

Rocker Ozzy Osbourne took Jones Beach, NY last night on what is quickly becoming a predictable Bush-bashing express.

Osbourne opened his concert with the song "War Pigs," featuring a video portrait comparing Bush to Adolph Hitler.

The video featured Bush and Hitler on the same screen, with the caption: "Same sh*t different a**hole," says a source. Footage of bombs dropping and Hitler marching flashed as Ozzy screamed and guitars screeched.

Ozzy also flashed a picture of Bush with a clown nose, caption: 'The White House Circus."

Other bands in the OZzzFest lineup, such as Black Label Society, expressed support of the war.

The lead singer told the crowd in a profanity laced tirade against the terrorist: "Those f**kers crashed the planes into the Towers."

The concert featured a few dedicated songs to the our men and women serving overseas.

No, I'm serious. I am. I can't wait to see what his foreign policy will be.

-MM- :crs:

bbbv3.5

Jul 15th, 2004, 5:02 PM

Sorry about that dutchie..just a typo.

Conservative Front

Jul 15th, 2004, 10:37 PM

Alright, Ill start putting up the link instead of sending you on a hunt for it.

I understand to some extent what stem cell is, I was using the unborn baby as more of a tool, to show what could be done with it. I think it's morally wrong that'd we'd fuss Human Dna with say a Dog. Ill say this WHERE NOT GOD.

however, I will read you're link later tonight and repost my position if I change it.

---end response to substand---

You make a good argument although, Kerry still acknowledged that he supports murder. By saying he supports Abortion, but agrees life begins at conception. He's gotten himself in a quagmire. He personally disagrees with a abortion, but he personally believes life begins at conception. To me that sounds like he disagrees with Murder but at the same time if someone wants to kill the baby he would be fine with that.

I realize that the law would be hard to pass with the way it was written up. But at the same time, when it was in senate, it was just to pass as a motion to keep debating. instead of suspending it indefinitely. So it could have been revised to not interfere with other laws.

Maybe it's time to define when life begins, personally Id like to see a law intact that would several hinder violence against preganat women. If A law like this was going to pass then Id say yes we would need to get a definition of when life begins, which with modern science isn't completely out of reach.

My problem with stem cell research is... Where not god. We shouldn't be crossing X DNA with Y DNA. It's just not right...

My relevances is Kerry is the one that brings up his military experience. Plus my brother is enlisted in the National Guard and is starting Medical school so he can go to Iraq. So yes, my best friend is about to be shipped. and I still support the war efforts.

I can think for myself, The waffleman phrase just made me laugh so I like to us it. Me and the GOP aren't always on par with the same ideas. and I formed my conservative view points before I even knew what the GOP was.

---end response to Defiant---

I realize that Dutchie doesn't like the American Political election, but this was still an on going debate that I wanted to finish before the thread died. No harm intended.

---end response to BBB---

dutchie

Jul 16th, 2004, 1:55 AM

I understand to some extent what stem cell is, I was using the unborn baby as more of a tool, to show what could be done with it. I think it's morally wrong that'd we'd fuss Human Dna with say a Dog. Ill say this WHERE NOT GOD.
My problem with stem cell research is... Where not god. We shouldn't be crossing X DNA with Y DNA. It's just not right...

You make a good argument although, Kerry still acknowledged that he supports murder. By saying he supports Abortion, but agrees life begins at conception. He's gotten himself in a quagmire. He personally disagrees with a abortion, but he personally believes life begins at conception. To me that sounds like he disagrees with Murder but at the same time if someone wants to kill the baby he would be fine with that.

Maybe it's time to define when life begins, personally Id like to see a law intact that would several hinder violence against preganat women. If A law like this was going to pass then Id say yes we would need to get a definition of when life begins, which with modern science isn't completely out of reach.

I realize that Dutchie doesn't like the American Political election, but this was still an on going debate that I wanted to finish before the thread died. No harm intended.
ConservativeFront, time to cross swords again...

I shoved the text of your post around a bit, to make it easier to adress.
From your words I gathered that you are against abortion, and call it murder with a capital M. Well, the word abortion was not invented for nothing, it's there to make a distinction between abortus provocatis (the medical term) and shooting a person through the temple.

While I agree that abortion is in itself a terrible thing, I do not think there are women in this world (the mentally retarded and totally a-social and deranged excluded) that would CHOOSE to have an abortion as a means of birth control. Abortion is no fun way to end or control pregnancy, compared to the simple joy of popping a little pink pill, or wearing a little rubber hat.
You make it seem as if women having an abortion or the doctors performing it are having a great time slaughtering off kids. I can tell you that abortion in over 90% of the cases is the last remaining option. It is choosing between two bad ideas. Bringing an unwanted child into this world CAN be worse than an abortion.

And of course this abortion should take place no later than the point where the phoetus is still no more than a little clump of cells. I agree that aborting an infant in the 4th or 5th month of pregnancy amounts to a horrible thing, and - normally - such a pregnancy would NEVER be interrupted. It ONLY happens when continueing the pregnancy would mean certain death for both mother and child.

Again you're adressing an issue you prove to have little knowledge of with an unbelieveable amount of black&white thinking. Can't you at least acknowledge the fact that a lot of women have been traumatised heavily by the abortion they chose to take? Being FORCED - maybe by parents, partner (or lack of one), or church community, you name it - into choosing this option, do you really think there are women that take this lightly?? Think before you post, CF.

Stem Cell research is not about mixing dogs with humans. It is research into the behaviour of very young cells that did not already make a "choice" of what they eventually will become. Stem cells aren't aware, they have no spirit.

They are the basic building blocks of each individual. But they CAN be used to eventually

-cure broken spines and resulting nerve damage, so people can walk again;
-re-grow and replace a missing or damaged kidney;
-repair the nerves of sight and hearing

and so on.
We're not God, I agree. But - although I am an agnostic - wouldn't you agree that if all of our collective scientific knowledge came from somewhere, God would first spring to mind as the major source in the eyes of true christians?

Last but not least:
You are so stubborn, aren't you?!?
"Dutchie does not like the American Political Election"... On a scale of stupidness that remark would rocket straight through the 10 mark. I won't explain myself for the fourth time, you pillock!

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 16th, 2004, 2:54 AM

You make a good argument although, Kerry still acknowledged that he supports murder. By saying he supports Abortion, but agrees life begins at conception. He's gotten himself in a quagmire. He personally disagrees with a abortion, but he personally believes life begins at conception. To me that sounds like he disagrees with Murder but at the same time if someone wants to kill the baby he would be fine with that. I can understand where you are coming from. However, since there is no law, no definition, no anything equating what he believes with murder, its not murder. In your opinion I can see how you feel about it but your feelings still dont add up to what the law says. By saying he supports murder, its just political mudslinging. I cant see where hes gotten himself in a quagmire since under the definition of the laws we have now, hes not done or said anything wrong regarding this. Its an invalid accusation.

I realize that the law would be hard to pass with the way it was written up. But at the same time, when it was in senate, it was just to pass as a motion to keep debating. instead of suspending it indefinitely. So it could have been revised to not interfere with other laws. That is your elected officials at work. The fear of passing, failing or even debating it during an election year and the potential outcome to the people now running for office was too great. With it suspended indefinately, theres no dirt on anyones hands since technically, its still "there". There will be alot of ugliness regarding that Act. There has been talk of just canning the whole thing altogether since they cant agree on the particulars and each state that has those types of laws has its own "nuances" that they may not be willing to give up if a fed version was passed.

I personally dont want it to pass as it is because there are too many loopholes of legal interpretation that will end up victmizing the victim even more just in legal definition alone. A victim (if alive) would see no closure for quite awhile while lawyers argued over the technicalities of it. That in itself would serve no one and could delay a conviction for years.

Maybe it's time to define when life begins, personally Id like to see a law intact that would several hinder violence against preganat women. If A law like this was going to pass then Id say yes we would need to get a definition of when life begins, which with modern science isn't completely out of reach. The only way violence would be hindered against any woman, pregnant or not is if the people who would commit these types of crimes didnt commit them in the first place. Being that wont happen, thats why VAWA was created. I wouldnt mind a more severe punishment for violence against pregnant women being added to VAWA, but I would never agree to the unborn having more rights than the woman. The addition of a more severe punishment regarding pregnant women can be done without a date/time designation of when life begins since all that would have to be proven is whether she was pregnant or not.

My problem with stem cell research is... Where not god. We shouldn't be crossing X DNA with Y DNA. It's just not right... I agree that we arent god. However, I cant disagree or take away from the people who have benefitted from this type of research. Burn victims requiring skin grafts, especially the child burn victims, have been well served by this type of research.

Thats also why I am pro-choice. If a woman decides to have an abortion, she can take that up with God in the end. Its not up to others to make that kind of decision. These legal considerations scare me. I had an abortion. There was a high probability that I would not have survived until the child was born, but no guarentee. It was a crap shoot but it was MY decision and I have no guilt over it now. Im glad I had the choice because if I hadnt, the likelihood of BOTH of us dying was great. If there had been laws on the books restricting my choice I could have wound up in court and traumitized, not only because of my condition, but because someone else could have been telling me I couldnt have an abortion because there was no guarentee I would die. I mightve ended up dying from the stress or at least losing the child because of it. My son almost wasnt born and I had to consider the option yet again. I had more luck on my side that time. My decisions are a two way street (between myself and my doctor) not a three ring circus between myself, my doctor and a courtroom. Im glad people like Kerry support this. This is also an example of less government.

My relevances is Kerry is the one that brings up his military experience. Plus my brother is enlisted in the National Guard and is starting Medical school so he can go to Iraq. So yes, my best friend is about to be shipped. and I still support the war efforts. Okay, then I agree with relevance but tell me, since you have not seen combat or endured the stress of it, how would you know how you would deal with it? People do alot of stupid crap under pressure and stress. The comparison between Kerry and Bush is almost ridiculous. If Bush HAD gone, he may have acted brilliantly and heroically. We will never know because he didnt. Kerry went, did stupid and heinous crap and also killed and saved men's lives. Bush helped with an election campaign. Who was smarter? Read farther, this turns a bit.

I had two uncles (brothers), one went in the Army, became an officer and wound up at the Presidio where he got to see what was really going on regarding Vietnam and the thinking behind it. My other uncle went in the Marine Corps, decided he didnt agree with the war as well as not liking taking orders and ran off to Canada. Who was smarter?

This is why I dont use eithers military record in my considerations. The war itself was a sham and the men and women who fought it were used as pawns and then dumped by the wayside if they returned. Using the above examples you have two obvious sides. One side did what they were ordered to do and played the game. The other side saw or knew beforehand what was happening and figured a way out of becoming pawns in the game. Either side was right in what they did in my opinion. My ex-officer uncle and I had a pretty good chuckle about the uncle who went awol because it seemed to us he took the smarter route. This is based on the information we know about regarding the politics behind the Vietnam war now.

But, there is another side, one that isnt seen. I had a cousin who also went to Vietnam. He was exposed to Agent Orange and the repercussions were terrible. First laws had to be passed to even treat the veterans since the government was balking. Then it had to be proven (and eventually was) that Agent Orange caused the terrible effects that it did. By the time all that occured it was too late for my cousin. He developed spinal cancer and also could not get an erection. He didnt feel like a man anymore and the depression to him was devastating. He hung himself in a VA hospital so his wife and adopted son wouldnt find him dead.

I frown on Bush and my Uncle for not honoring their commitments but at the same time I cant fault them for avoiding it either. This is why I wouldnt use either Bush nor Kerry's military record in my decision. I disliked Bush before because of it, but in really thinking about it as I have posted above, I can see now why he served on the campaign trail.

I can think for myself, The waffleman phrase just made me laugh so I like to us it. Me and the GOP aren't always on par with the same ideas. and I formed my conservative view points before I even knew what the GOP was. Thats understandable. But the goofy namecalling reduces the seriousness of the election for our country's leader and also further fuels the fact that while Republicans and conservatives constantly accuse the liberals and Democrats of partisan mudslinging, they cant help but to participate themselves. Hold yourself above that and set an example.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 16th, 2004, 12:58 PM

Not that Im any big fan of Bush, but he certainly doesnt need this....

Jerry Falwell Endorses Bush (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/16/politics/campaign/16jerry.html?adxnnl=1&8br=&adxnnlx=1090000002-greJxs4IPFTQSBEkh6C9Iw)

bbbv3.5

Jul 16th, 2004, 5:00 PM

DN...you still havent served me yet.....dutchie i agree with you completely about the pill vs abortion thing. Yet there are still people dumb enough to go with it over the nice little easy to gulf down no pain pill. You either after be retarted or drunk to say "I am going to get an abortion". :rolling:

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 16th, 2004, 5:59 PM

I was neither retarded or drunk, I was very sick when I said I would have mine. :nono:

knac1055

Jul 16th, 2004, 8:18 PM

Ralph Nader

knac1055

Jul 16th, 2004, 8:31 PM

Hey! Pipe down youngster! :crazy: When you get old enough to vote (which means you will be of adult age) THEN you can tell people they may be throwing away a vote. Until then you just keep focused on learning about the issues and people behind them. :rolling:

* Defiant Noquisi is laffing and means the above in jest.

Increase taxes on the rich. That is what Kerry wants to do.
I'm not rich but I know the rich our the ones that give me the money I need to live and increasing there taxes might make them want to cut back.

I know all you really want to do is pay for your special group and I know Kerry is your only hope to do that, and damn the rest of America.

NFL (No ****ing Life)

substand

Jul 16th, 2004, 8:41 PM

actually, i thought kerry wanted to increase taxes on the rich, not demolish them.
perhaps bush is just mortaging the taxes on the rich versus everyone's future earnings.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 17th, 2004, 2:56 AM

I know all you really want to do is pay for your special group and I know Kerry is your only hope to do that, and damn the rest of America. NFL (No ****ing Life) What in the world are you refering to? (No ****ing Sense)

knac1055

Jul 17th, 2004, 7:26 PM

What in the world are you refering to? (No ****ing Sense)
(NFS) stands for (no ****ing shit)

and you thought I had no sense. You must be a :alcoholic

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 17th, 2004, 7:31 PM

(NFS) stands for (no ****ing shit)

and you thought I had no sense. You must be a :alcoholic I dont get drunk, you still dont make sense, I know what the "F" meant and you have still not explained what you meant in that post. Obviously, Im not the one whos an alcholic here. :bs:

knac1055

Jul 17th, 2004, 7:49 PM

Increase taxes on the rich. That is what Kerry wants to do.

what part of this statment do you not understand.

I'm not rich but I know the rich our the ones that give me the money I need to live and increasing there taxes might make them want to cut back.

What is there not to understand.

I know all you really want to do is pay for your special group and I know Kerry is your only hope to do that, and damn the rest of America.

Should have I put special interest.

NFL (No ****ing Life)

This was not meant or directed at you.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 17th, 2004, 10:04 PM

I understand it now. However, you made no explanation in the first post of which I asked you about which is why I asked in the first place. Apparently there is difficulty in answering until asked a few times?

Conservative Front

Jul 19th, 2004, 10:57 PM

If you would have posted this about a year ago I would have probably some what sided with out. However through personal experience this year I witnessed one of my "friends" (well ex-friend now) Have a total of 4 Abortions because she refused to use the pill or a condom. She was using Abortion as a means of birth control and theres no denying this wasn't an isolated incident. I'm sure some people use it as a means of last resort. but I found one flaw in you're argument an unwanted child could become a wanted child through adaption there wouldn't be a need to murder the child because another family would want it and would raise it.

There was a report out by Brigham Young University (I believe) that a partial birth abortion the baby will still fight to stay alive. Its natural instinct for survival will try to prevent its own death.

You can't accuse me of knowing little about this. Abortion is more or less a black and white situation. I personal don't care if the mother has a hard time after an abortion, I say good. They deserve it. They took a life and should feel the consequence for it. Sure people can be under pressure but that doesn't undermined free will it's still there choice to sign the papers and its still there choice to see it through. So I don't really have sympathy for someones free will.

Playing god with undecided cells still isn't right.

I was just posting my opinion about it. from what I gathered it didn't seem as though you cared much for the American Political election.

---end response to dutchie---

It doesn't really matter whats written in the books. John Kerry said he personally believes life begins at conception. and he supports abortion. Therefor he acknowledges that Abortion is terminating a life. and terminating a life would equal out to murder.

Maybe the bill should just be dropped on the fed level. but picked up on the state level and let each indiviual state write it up how the want it. That way it could elude alot of the loopholes written in the federal level version of the bill. I still believe that this bill needs to pass in some kind of level. whether it be fed or local.

I'm not saying the unborn child should have more rights I'm just saying he should however have rights. If a pregnant women is murder it should be two counts of murder as opposed to just one.

Well, I'm going to stray far away from you having in abortion. But having an Abortion law on the books really would mean less government. Less government would be less social programs. less tax etc...

ok, I understand where you're coming from then.

I understand what your saying about the mudslinging and all but if someone throws a mudball at you you're gonna throw one back.

---end response to defiant---

DontBeAfraid

Jul 19th, 2004, 11:26 PM

Please tell me how stem cell research is playing god. Well, more so than ANY OTHER KIND OF RESEARCH.

Please tell me how MORE laws equals LESS government....

Tell me how partial birth abortions are relavent to the conversation.

Please tell me how you feel about abortions in cases where the fetus WONT survive after birth.

btw I dont believe you know anybody who has had 4 abortions this year or any other for that matter.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 4:07 AM

It doesn't really matter whats written in the books. John Kerry said he personally believes life begins at conception. and he supports abortion. Therefor he acknowledges that Abortion is terminating a life. and terminating a life would equal out to murder. Yes it does matter. You are practically equating Kerry with being a murderer because he is supportive of abortion. You want Kerry to be upheld on things that do not exist. As such, your argument carries no weight whatsoever. Since you know that your information is false based on the law, you are telling lies about John Kerry. If he is a murderer as you say, then he should be arrested and convicted. Since there are no laws, you are lying about him.

Maybe the bill should just be dropped on the fed level. but picked up on the state level and let each indiviual state write it up how the want it. That way it could elude alot of the loopholes written in the federal level version of the bill. I still believe that this bill needs to pass in some kind of level. whether it be fed or local. The bill should be dropped entirely and any additions can be made to VAWA.

I'm not saying the unborn child should have more rights I'm just saying he should however have rights. If a pregnant women is murder it should be two counts of murder as opposed to just one. I see what your saying but since you cant prove when life actually begins, you cant fix this mess either.

Well, I'm going to stray far away from you having in abortion. But having an Abortion law on the books really would mean less government. Less government would be less social programs. less tax etc... Tell me something, if there had been a law on the books and I lost in court, then I died and the baby lost with me.....how did this law protect me or my baby? Less government = less laws. Less laws = less time the government has to spend on them. Stay out of my house, stay out of my bedroom, stay out of my doctors office.

I understand what your saying about the mudslinging and all but if someone throws a mudball at you you're gonna throw one back. No, I would not.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 4:18 AM

stewey

Jul 20th, 2004, 5:28 AM

The reason I dislike John Edwards is he got rich off of Malpractice suits. Malpractice is a large part of why the cost of health care is so high.

John Kerry is also a tool, plain and simple. He changes his views daily, depending on his audience. At least Bush stands on his issues, which I respect.

I will probably end up voting Bush, as Wisconsin is a "close race" and I really do not want sKerry in office. I would prefer Libertarian, as I said in the other post, but what ya gonna do?

If you did not notice, I am against welfare and other government aid programs. All they do is "feed the flames" of the problems they try to soothe. While I agree in some countries, like post-communist eastern Europe, Socialism works while they rebuild their economies, but here in the USA I truely believe hard work and determination is the key to success.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 20th, 2004, 12:13 PM

They are all tools stewey, even Bush is a tool. A puppet even.

bbbv3.5

Jul 20th, 2004, 12:32 PM

Sorry DN....(whistle)

bbbv3.5

Jul 20th, 2004, 1:04 PM

There should be no cursing period knac1055. :grin

Conservative Front

Jul 21st, 2004, 12:38 AM

Combining undecided cells to make up for something. or combining X cell with D cell making a hybrid of the sorts. That would be playing god.

The laws that Id personally entact would be more of moral laws. But I cut back on a lot of laws. Plus Larger vrs Small governments aren't neccesarly divided by the number of laws that come into play for example say state X has 32 Murder laws and State B has 44 State B doesn't nessarly have a bigger government just more laws. I believe the Federal government should be downsized.

It was only relevant to my last post.

If it's 100% chance the fetus won't survive then it's already dead. and last I checked you can't kill something thats already dead.

Ok, well theres not much I can do to prove this too you.

---end response to dontbeafriad---

I'm saying from his own personal stance, that he'd be a murderer. He said in his own words that he believes that Life Begins at Conception. and he still supports taking that life. therefor that would make him a murder by default.

Ill look more into VAWA and decide later.

Well then perhaps we need to determine when life begins. I certainly don't see it as improbable that we wouldn't be able to determine it.

There's mistakes in every law. It'd be like an Alchoholic, theres laws on the books for how much Alcohol someone can drink but if that person dies in a car accident the law didn't protect him. Or if a drug dealer sells dope to a kid and the kid dies the law didn't protect him. You see what I'm getting at theres no way to have a complete full proof law. that and less law doesn't nessacrly mean less government.

You're one of the few who wouldn't then.

I'm not saying women should sacrifice themselves. I'm making a point that women do use Abortion as birth control.

Well from my experience and perception, I've seen adoption working quite well my brother had a kid and a family in Aspen took it. There's a foster family that lives a couple of house's down from me and they will raise the child until they move out if theres no one avalibe for them. So from my experiences with this alone There are options and resources.

---end response to defiant---

stewey

Jul 21st, 2004, 12:57 AM

They are all tools stewey, even Bush is a tool. A puppet even.

Oh I agree, but Kerry is by far more of a tool in my opinion. Neither one of them is all that bright either.

Bigsky770

Jul 22nd, 2004, 12:47 AM

Click the LINK for confirmation;

http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=36510

Halliburton hypocrisy?: Teresa profited when VP Dick Cheney was CEO
By David R. Guarino
Read Guarino's Road to Boston Blog
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
As Sen. John F. Kerry's campaign escalates charges over energy giant Halliburton's government deals and ties to Vice President Dick Cheney, there's one thing they don't mention - the Kerry family's own Halliburton payday.

Teresa Heinz Kerry liked the Cheney-run Halliburton enough to buy and sell more than a $250,000 in company stock in 1996, netting a tidy profit of up to $15,000, records show.

The Kerry family Halliburton investment is tucked in the Massachusetts senator's lengthy financial disclosure forms, reviewed by the Herald.

The records, which limit disclosure only to broad ranges, show one of the Heinz family trusts bought between $250,001 and $500,000 of Halliburton stock on May 13, 1996 - while Cheney was its CEO.

In one of many quick turnaround deals in the Heinz trusts, the Halliburton stock was sold less than two months later for a profit.

The disclosure form reports Halliburton dividends of $1,001 to $2,500 and capital gains at the sale of between $5,001 and $15,000.

Kerry spokesman Michael Meehan said the senator himself has not personally or jointly with his wife owned any Halliburton stock, saying Heinz Kerry's ownership didn't benefit her husband. He said the pair have long held separate investments and assets.

A spokeswoman for Heinz Kerry said the investments are made by professional money managers on behalf of family trusts and the senator's wife is only one of many beneficiaries.

``Any investments in 1996 have little if anything to do with investment decisions in 2004,'' said Marla Romash, senior adviser to Heinz Kerry.

The revelation comes as Kerry dispatched one of his top surrogates, U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), to hammer Cheney and President Bush [related, bio] anew on Halliburton.

Lautenberg, in a conference call to reporters organized by the Kerry campaign, seized on revelations that Halliburton is now under investigation for suspected dealings with Iran - which are illegal.

``This is the biggest scandal yet to hit Halliburton,'' Lautenberg said. ``This could result in major felony charges because it is illegal to do business with a terrorist state.''

The company denied violating U.S. laws but admitted in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that a grand jury investigation is under way into possible business done in Iran by one of its subsidiaries, located in the Cayman Islands.

``The question must be asked: did this possible violation occur between 1995 and 2000 while Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton,'' Lautenberg asked.

But Meehan said Heinz Kerry's ownership and profit from Halliburton won't temper the senator's continued criticism.

``Many Americans, John Kerry [related, bio] included, have big problems with multimillion-dollar companies receiving no bid contracts while the vice president continues to draw money from them and then they overcharge the U.S. government,'' Meehan said.

- - -I am only posting this and in so doing, asking the question? Are we being afforded viable alternatives for president of these United States? Does it really matter WHO you vote for? Rather an unsettling question/but one that needs to be addressed. . . .

- - -Submitted by Joe (Bigsky770) :vbroll:

stewey

Jul 22nd, 2004, 1:26 AM

Boston herald reporting anything pro-Bush is like Fox reporting anything pro-Kerry; if it happens, it is probably true.

Rage_Garden

Jul 22nd, 2004, 1:50 AM

I cant vote so disregard this if you want-- Voting for a third party is not a wasted vote as long as you vote for someone you really think can improve this country. Voting for Kerry because hes not Bush wont make America a better country. Democrats go around declaring your vote is wasted unless you pick one of 2 people. And people come to believe that. Some democracy. Hes a flip flopper and could seriously be as bad as Bush, but hes not Bush. Whether he turns out to be a terribly corrupt Illuminati chairman who cares, hes not Bush. Vote for someone legitimate and not tied to countless secret societies, please :Bow:

Conservative Front

Jul 22nd, 2004, 10:47 PM

In American Politics today third party really doesn't have a chance, It doesn't matter as it stands right now a vote for Ralph Nader is going to be a vote for George Bush. Plus theres the Electoral College, where a third party canidate hasn't received any significant amount of votes what so ever. So truly as it stands right now democrats have to use the tactic "anybody but Bush" and it doesn't matter if John Kerry is a waffled flip flop because he's not Bush.

(oh, and welcome to the board)

---end response to Rage---

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 26th, 2004, 11:13 PM

The reason I dislike John Edwards is he got rich off of Malpractice suits. Malpractice is a large part of why the cost of health care is so high. I meant to comment on this and forgot. While Edwards may have gotten rich off malpractice cases, have you looked into the cases enough to deem them unwarranted? Do you feel that all the doctors are innocent? Im not privvy on his cases, Im just asking. If you have researched them enough to be able to viably come up with the opinion that you have maybe you could point out a few that would be worthy of note.

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 27th, 2004, 12:05 AM

I'm saying from his own personal stance, that he'd be a murderer. He said in his own words that he believes that Life Begins at Conception. and he still supports taking that life. therefor that would make him a murder by default. No, it does not make him a murderer. He is not using anything by any means to kill anyone. He is not a murderer by law, by act or by default. You are spreading lies, you are mudslinging and you are wrong. In a similar vein, I wont say Bush went AWOL even though his duty records are missing and no one seems to remember him being there. I cant stand Bush, I almost hate Bush. But I will not willingly resort to innaccuracies to slam him or anyone else to further my cause because it wont.

I dont care how passionate you are about a Republican win, you are doing them no favors by spreading garbage and only serve to make yourself as well as the conservative platform look bad in the process. You are posting about Kerry in a similar manner that Michael Moore commented about Bush in his movie. I know you will refuse to see the similarity but it is blatantly obvious. You cannot justify your own comments while bashing someone else for doing the same thing. To someone like me who sits middle ground and can swing either way, your example causes me to want to go in the opposite direction. If you are the example of conservatism, I want to distance myself from that kind of commentary and behaviour. You could have swung me more towards a conservative platform had you used intelligence and honesty in your posts. Instead you frighten me.

Well then perhaps we need to determine when life begins. I certainly don't see it as improbable that we wouldn't be able to determine it. I see an immediate problem. Since eggs and sperm are very much "alive" how far back should we go? Think about it, if sperm and eggs arent "viable", there is no conception. This may sound ridiculous but its not. Should a person be held responsible for all the future children a woman could have had? Life doesnt neccessarily have a definitive beginning yet there is a definitive end.

There's mistakes in every law. It'd be like an Alchoholic, theres laws on the books for how much Alcohol someone can drink but if that person dies in a car accident the law didn't protect him. Or if a drug dealer sells dope to a kid and the kid dies the law didn't protect him. You see what I'm getting at theres no way to have a complete full proof law. that and less law doesn't nessacrly mean less government. So instead of making more laws why not toughen the sentances? The laws are meant to protect people but what if law enforcement isnt acting on them as I have seen in my own neighborhood? The problem isnt that more laws are needed. The problem is that we have gone soft on punishments and prisoners. I think prisoners should have some human rights, but not to the extent that life is "comfortable". Look at the state of Georgia...they wanted to bring back hard labor and everyone screamed about it. You want to write more laws, I want the laws we have upheld but no one wants a jail or prison around them. You cant answer societies ills with more laws unless its a rewrite to clarify an existing law.

You're one of the few who wouldn't then. I am unsure as to what this comment is in regards to. Why do you not add your comments WITH the quotes so that people arent chasing down what you are trying to say? Its easy and you can edit stuff out if its long as long as it doesnt change the original poster's intent. Then the reader can also compare your views to the original without wondering what its all about.

I'm not saying women should sacrifice themselves. I'm making a point that women do use Abortion as birth control. Thats understandable. But what are you to gain in sacrificing women that are in a similar position that I was in? Should innocent women and children die because of your beliefs? Can I then call YOU a murderer because of your beliefs even though there are no laws on the books that say you are?

Well from my experience and perception, I've seen adoption working quite well my brother had a kid and a family in Aspen took it. There's a foster family that lives a couple of house's down from me and they will raise the child until they move out if theres no one avalibe for them. So from my experiences with this alone There are options and resources. You arent looking at the whole picture nor are you comprehending my post. I never said there werent options. I said there were not ENOUGH options.

This is still my body and no one, let alone a man has any right to dictate to me how I am to care for it. Would you next pass laws requiring me to have surgery if you thought my breasts were too big? Maybe you should since I dont think anyone making cars takes into consideration enormous hooters and the seatbelt mastectomy I suffer from whenever I drive. I didnt get a boob job either, they are completely natural.

Conservative Front

Jul 27th, 2004, 10:37 PM

It's not mudslinging Kerry is waffling on the idea of abortion. Kerry said he supports abortion but agrees life begins at Conception. So therefor he is defining where life begins at conception and admitting that he would support taking the life.

Response to you're rhetoric, my top post is justified. Read it and understand it.

Without a beginning there can be no end. I don't see a problem with determining when life begins granite you can't say Sperm and an Egg are living because that has a slew of problems. But when an Egg and sperm meet they should be able to determine the moment life begins.

I'm all for harder punishment for criminals, Id support bringing back hard labor for the killers,rapist,etc... I think sometimes though it doesn't matter how tough the punishment is we still need some new laws or as you suggest toughen up are law enforcement.

If the baby is going to take the womens life and it's a 100% probable then yes I can see where there'd be a difference between Abortion and murder. But in most cases such as Rape and Incest women can take a Morning after pill (which I support) and not have to have an unwanted baby theres so many options for women today that they don't have to be pregnant if they don't want to be.

Would it be better if I got my conservative friend thats a girl to tell you abortion is wrong so you don't hear it coming from a man? No, I wouldn't pass a law if you're breast where to big to drive. If you're breast are too big for driving thats not my responsiblity or my worry. how about you get an SUV if thats bigger for you I'm not really sure what you're getting at here.

---end response to defiant---

LC Jeffries

Jul 27th, 2004, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by Substand
As for the Vietnam thing.... WHO GIVES A RATS ASS ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO? Why do I care if Kerry served honorably and Bush "worked on a campaign" 30 yrs ago? Why do I care if Kerry faked things to get medals 30 yrs ago? Its ridiculous on both sides. Bush was a drunken fool a while back... do I care about it? No.

If you want to debate morals and stuff, thats fine... but don't bring up stuff that old to prove your point. I've changed a lot in the past 3 years. I had "youthful indiscretions" 7 years ago that are on record. But I've changed TONS since then. Its just stupid to bring up stuff from vietnam in either candidate's case.

Originally Posted by Dutchie
Bravo! That's exactly my idea. Stuff like that is plain dirt throwing, and I won't have it. Please do not stoop to tabloid stuff to make your point, some of you!!
__________________

Kerry actually is the one who keeps bringing up the past. He keeps pushing his So called service into the face of voters. More Veterans then not despise the man.

Have you all seen the results of the Demo Convention? No one hardly watched the circus. Viewership actually dropped of more when the Clintons spoke.

Bush to me is the far better leader.

Bravo! That's exactly my idea. Stuff like that is plain dirt throwing, and I won't have it. Please do not stoop to tabloid stuff to make your point, some of you!!

Defiant Noquisi

Jul 28th, 2004, 12:50 AM

It's not mudslinging Kerry is waffling on the idea of abortion. Kerry said he supports abortion but agrees life begins at Conception. So therefor he is defining where life begins at conception and admitting that he would support taking the life. He also knows to keep his nose out of my business and out of my doctors office. At least he can be respectful enough to allow women like me THE RIGHT to decide for myself what I must do in life. Hes not some uneducated individual that feels compelled to control my life through my doctors office. At least I can count on him to allow for the fact that I have brain cells AND I can use them.

Response to you're rhetoric, my top post is justified. Read it and understand it. How can I understand anyone that wants to control my life and my thinking? You make absolutely no sense to me and there is no way I can understand someone who wants to subject me under his form of mental slavery.

If the baby is going to take the womens life and it's a 100% probable then yes I can see where there'd be a difference between Abortion and murder. What about my case where it wasnt? Would you still feel justified if both of us had died? Should I sacrifice myself for your laws? No, it is MY decision, not some stranger or court to decide my fate. There is rarely ever a 100% chance, even my 50/50 chance was considered better than the average. Since I did not get raped nor was a victim of incest how the hell can you decide if I live or die? SICK, SICK, SICK!!! And you dare call Kerry a murderer when you smuggly justify it yourself.

But in most cases such as Rape and Incest women can take a Morning after pill (which I support) and not have to have an unwanted baby theres so many options for women today that they don't have to be pregnant if they don't want to be. Ah, so you can justify murder in rape and incest cases? All the girls under certain ages that get pregnant are considered to have been raped so they would qualify too correct? Do you not see what a can of worms this is? Cant you see that you would be subjecting women such as myself to laws because of someone else? Can you not understand that it is a woman's business to decide what to do and not some stranger? Can you not understand how arrogant and quite frankly ignorant of you to think that you would know what is best for me?

Would it be better if I got my conservative friend thats a girl to tell you abortion is wrong so you don't hear it coming from a man? It wouldnt matter. I would still not allow ANY stranger to dictate what is best for me. That is between me and my doctor. Not you, not your freind, not some politician...no one but me.

No, I wouldn't pass a law if you're breast where to big to drive. If you're breast are too big for driving thats not my responsiblity or my worry. And neither is anything else about my body. Read it and understand it.

how about you get an SUV if thats bigger for you I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. Dude, I drive semis for a living. How much bigger of an SUV do you think I could get? Im just posing a hypothetical scenario for you. So you are saying you would only dictate laws for certain parts of my body? I ask this because you seem determined that you are justified in controlling some, but not all of me. Why not let me decide for myself? Please justify where you are right in telling me what I can and cant do with my own body....especially when it might mean my life.

Conservative Front

Jul 29th, 2004, 12:03 AM

That was irrelevant to what we where debating, But you don't seem to disagree anymore considering that Kerry defined where life begins. And If Abortion is outlawed then no one is going to be sticking there nose in you're doctors office because there would be no reason too you're a Statistic now that you've had an abortion.

I don't want to control you, you've turned this around and out of context this was a debate about John Kerry admitting he Supports murder, not you're ethical values.

And remember with saving your life you indefinitely ended the babys. I'm not telling you what too do I'm just telling you to evaluate what abortion is it's taking a life that never had a chance at life.

Accutally you're wrong. The legal consent age isn't nessacrly considered rape if a 14 year old and 14 year old make a baby then it wasn't rape So I do fail too see the can of worms. and my question is where the hell where the parents? And I don't think not wanting to end a childs life makes me Arrogant nor ignorant I could turn this around and say YOU are ignorant for ENDING a childs life. but I'm not.

Did the baby get a say in you're decision?

Ending abortion is not controlling a womens body. It's dicating a fate of a child that hasn't had a chance at life at. How is it that if someone decides to have a baby then they decide its inconviente for them at the time or choose to have sex and make a mistake I didn't dictate there decision to have a child but I would dictate the childs rights to live and not be murdered under a knife of a doctor and the ignorants of a women who blur the line between control of ones body and Murder by a knife.

---end response to defiant---

humanhybrid

Jul 29th, 2004, 12:46 PM

Ending abortion is not controlling a womens body. So who do you wish to end this abortion? :sardonic:

Chrisboe4ever

Jul 29th, 2004, 2:30 PM

I'm voting for Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian Candidate. He is the best candidate on the ballot. I am not going to vote for either Bush or Kerry because I don't go for that "lesser of two evils" crap. The lesser of two evils is still evil. I'm going for the one I feel is best choice for president, even if he has no chance in hell. I won't compramise my beliefs just to get "anyone but bush" into the White House. And Badnarik has some kick-ass ideas, too. He plans to get rid of the IRS and stop the Federal Reserve from distributing their non-gold backed currency.

He plans on making the guy from www.libertydollar.org the Secretary of Treasury, too. Just imagine it, liberty dollars as our currency. We'd never have to deal with inflation!

Find out more at www.badnarik.org

Conservative Front

Jul 29th, 2004, 10:18 PM

It's the states duty to protect life.

Hvyarms

Aug 1st, 2004, 5:57 AM

Gonna be real brief here so as to not make the cwazy right winged nuts kill me.

He Said he agrees that Life begins at conception, and says although he disagrees with it he believes women have the right to (KILL) Choice.

I COMPLETELY agree with that statement 100 percent. YOUR allowed to have your OWN beliefs... but the point is that OTHER PEOPLE in this country have THEIR beliefs too. And you cant step on other peoples beliefs just becuase YOU think something is right. SOME people dont consider it life at conception.. so is it right for people to have the right to choose? HELL YES. Kerry is saying, I believe life begins at conception... but even though I believe this... I understand that people should have the RIGHT to choose if their OWN beliefs and their OWN way of thinking.

Bush on the other hand is all for making the laws support EVERY one of his own views and COMPLETELY neglecting the views of the rest of the nation. He supports an AMENDMENT to the constitution to ban gay marriage when a VAST majority of the country doesnt support this, does that matter? Nope Not for bushy, he will do what he pleases when he wants.

Bush Bankrupted company after company, he lead our country into economic depression and did NOTHING to stop the outsourcing that went on. He stimulated the economy by the only way he knew how (to start a war), which worked partially... but not well. In addition to this with his (fabricated war) that was based on nuclear weapons when no such weapons exited he then afterwards said it was justified because we got a dictator out of power =p. In this process he killed HUNDREDS of american lives and also Made MANY enemys with people on the other side of the globe who will now be LOOKING for some way to hurt us. Not to mention that with his "corporate" tax cuts he fed money to the already wealthy in the country to try to help the economy, TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS DOES NOT EXIST... its a false old world theory that simply does NOT work in the world today.

Bush gave us poverty, increased terrorism, lost our friends, killed our own, made the rich more rich, lost us countless jobs forever, worked to take away peoples civil rights, and cant even freaking say "nuclear".... is THAT someone we want as our president?? Someone we REALLY want to give another 4 years?

Kerry also wants to involve the U.N. in are war efforts and allow them to commandeer the troops etc... and Can we really trust them?

Can the people of Iraq REALLY trust the US military? I say no. I would trust about 1000x more a militia made up of MANY countries then a militia of ONE. ONE country can lie about their intentions... many countries would have a hard time doing this unless they all were somehow in kahoots... which is unlikely.

Kerry wants to raise gas prices more then they are we wants 1.00$ Tax on all grades so not only are we paying 1.89$ Per Gallon already are you ready to pay 3.00$ per gallon?

Am I ready? HELL YES IVE BEEN READY FOR YEARS NOW AND WAITING. HELLO... Ever heard of PEAK OIL?? Were SCREWED if we dont change NOW... the ONLY WAY people will EVER listen is if we MAKE THEM LISTEN by making them realize HEY THIS IS EXPENSIVE IMA GET MAD AND COMPLAIN. People complain... companies realize they can cash in and work hard on alternatives, people buy alternatives, we weed our way off gas. I PRAY.. that they add a 3 dollar tax on gas imo... make it a 10 $ tax for all I care... get us off oil before its too late and our civilization collapses. I HAIL kerry for wanting to do this.

Kerry wants to raise the bar on Environmental standards, which in turn could threaten new corporations so no new jobs, could threaten Auto companys no new cars... You get my drift plus it would raise are taxes.

Wow you just have absolutely no respect for your surroundings or the future do you? If we continue to pollute the environment at our current rate in the future they will have no protection against harmful uv rays and other types of things as we do now... it will be HELL for all eternity for them if we continue at our current path. Am I willing to pay a few more dollars to help save the future? ... again HELL YES.. and anyone who isnt is a greedy selfish person who cant see past themselves or their own lives to care about anything but themselves.

Corporations shouldnt get special treatment to pollute... or get tax breaks to help them raise MORE millions... Bush disagrees... do you REALLY agree? If so then I think you need to take a look at yourself and think "am I really that selfish?".

The bush tax cuts are a joke... they are a way to help rich people get richer and poor people get shafted as always. Trickle down economics is a fallacy, if the place you want to get your money is the LOWER portion of the money scale... why give it to the top? Give it DIRECTLY to the lower portion... they need it... and they need it now.

The United States was built on beliefs that government should have a very small role in our lives. Peoples beliefs were not to be trampled upon, freedom of speech, religion, and many other things were priorities.

How on earth can anyone justify making an amendment to the constitution to ban gay marriages as being tolerant of others beliefs?

How on earth is it ok now to say it doesnt matter what you think, I think Cells are people so its murder. Is it murder to cut your hair too since your killing live cells?

How on earth is it fair for a president to stop the progression of modern medicine like stem cell research because he thinks its "immoral or wrong".... I think someone dieng from a kidney disease or heart trama would disagree.... I also think that if bush himself had a medical condition he would be thankful and gladly use organs that were grown by stemcells from himself had it existed.

Bush thinks that HIS beliefs are the way to be, the problem with bush is he cant see past himself. People in the USA believe in themselves, they believe in others, they dont believe in themselves, and they dont believe in others, and they shoud respect the fact that others may not have the same way of thinking. They key is that people have the RIGHT to think other things and do things differently... thats what makes us rich.... taking our ideas and opinions away will not unite us... it will divide us... divide us and turn us into zombies all who are forced to have the same opinions as everyone else.

Defiant Noquisi

Aug 2nd, 2004, 4:38 AM

you're a Statistic now that you've had an abortion. Your point?

I don't want to control you, you've turned this around and out of context this was a debate about John Kerry admitting he Supports murder, not you're ethical values. Since by law he is not supporting murder, nor has he ever stated he supports murder, you have turned around what he has said. My ethical values have nothing to do with it. There is no proof of when life begins, there is no law that states when life begins and therefore you have no substantiation to what you posted. Again you are making false accusations and resorting to mudslinging.

And remember with saving your life you indefinitely ended the babys. I'm not telling you what too do I'm just telling you to evaluate what abortion is it's taking a life that never had a chance at life. So what? Am I supposed to endlessly feel guilty now because I am alive? Or should I just have up and died so that BOTH of us could die? Your reasoning makes no sense.

And I don't think not wanting to end a childs life makes me Arrogant nor ignorant I could turn this around and say YOU are ignorant for ENDING a childs life. but I'm not. And of course you don't use my original comment for proof of what I said and twist around my post to suit your purpose.

Did the baby get a say in you're decision? To what are you referring to in my post? Since you don't utilize my comments in connection with your own I have no idea of where this comment came from. The only reason I can come up with why you don't include anothers quotes is that you are afraid of being proven wrong as well as it being easier for you to twist people's comments around to suit your agenda.

Ending abortion is not controlling a womens body. It's dicating a fate of a child that hasn't had a chance at life at. How is it that if someone decides to have a baby then they decide its inconviente for them at the time or choose to have sex and make a mistake I didn't dictate there decision to have a child but I would dictate the childs rights to live and not be murdered under a knife of a doctor and the ignorants of a women who blur the line between control of ones body and Murder by a knife. How can anyone understand you or reply in an educated way when you MURDER the language?

You have no right to dictate to me decisions that are mine. Maybe someday when you are older, have educated yourself more and do not view women as subjects to be under you, I will change my position. Until then, I have no respect for someone who cant even use quotes. You are getting better, but this hodge podge way you post without even citing what you are commenting about is becoming as monotonous as your miles long sentences.

MetalMilitia

Aug 6th, 2004, 5:14 AM

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_monkey.jpg

Freudian slip is amazing. Kerry also made a Freudian slip at the DNC convention. He said that the USA will unleash more "terrorist forces," when he was supposed to have said "anti-terrorist forces". These people are leading the country... scary.

President Bush offered up a new entry for his catalog of "Bushisms" on Thursday, declaring that his administration will "never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people."

Bush misspoke (no shit) as he delivered a speech at the signing ceremony for a $417 billion defense spending bill.

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we," Bush said. "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

No one in Bush's audience of military brass or Pentagon chiefs reacted. (I dropped my jaw pretty far though.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush's misstatement "just shows even the most straightforward and plain-spoken people misspeak."

What else is new?

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&u=/ap/20040805/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bushism&printer=1

Defiant Noquisi

Aug 8th, 2004, 6:38 AM

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we," Bush said. "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." The understatement of the century. :grin

substand

Aug 10th, 2004, 12:19 AM

There is no proof of when life begins, there is no law that states when life begins and therefore you have no substantiation to what you posted.

And thats exactly why I STILL maintain that Andrea Yates simply had an uberlate-term abortion!

Defiant Noquisi

Aug 24th, 2004, 3:44 AM

And thats exactly why I STILL maintain that Andrea Yates simply had an uberlate-term abortion! Its too bad that we cant see into the future so she could have been.

knac1055

Sep 3rd, 2004, 12:43 PM

I would vote for Bush!

Why? Because
1 I really don’t think raising taxes on the upper class is fare it’s kind of stupid to punish people because they have money.

2 I agree with privatizing social security and it is true what Bush say’s that the Baby Boomers are going to milk SS almost completely dry leaving my Generation X and future Generations screwed. We need to get or share of that money out of the system before it is raped.

3 I agree the US should be on the offence when it comes to terrorism having a president like Bush in office on September 11, 2001 was a godsend to have a president who was not going to set on his hand and do nothing like his predecessor did Clinton after the Cole, the Embassy booming and the first attack on the WTC.

Defiant Noquisi

Sep 3rd, 2004, 11:36 PM

Theres already two threads with the same questions and polls.

evilwill

Sep 3rd, 2004, 11:45 PM

Merged. :devsmoke:

Don't make anymore of these Bush Vs Kerry Polls, they are scattered all over the forum. Look around before you post or you'll feel the wrath of the mod cannon.

http://www.digikitten.com/playhousev2/files/evilwill/modcannon3.1.jpg

Defiant Noquisi

Sep 3rd, 2004, 11:54 PM

That is one gigantic weapon youve got there EW! :sardonic:

Thor

Sep 4th, 2004, 12:02 AM

Well, we've made it through both the Democratic and Republican conventions. Both were successes, per the media, whatever that means. I can't see how they would ever be considered failures, would that mean they failed to come up with a winner and someone from their party to run for President? Duh.

I won't get into my political beliefs because I am TOO opinionated to go there, but I would be interested in hearing from some of you about your views on the media-does "IT" really favor the Dems and is it a left wing bunch as it's rumored to be? Why do the rich movie stars,producers, directors of Hollywood fame seem to lean so far left? How can they claim to be "environmentalists" when they drive (or get driven to be more precise) around in gas-hogging SUVs, limos, etc. ? Doesn't that strike anyone as hypocritical? Personally, I think anyone who pays any credence to what a star says is a moron and has no brain of his/her own, but that's only my opinion.

What about the right wing? What is said to be allied to the right wing? Interestingly, I don't believe I've ever heard any claims that something was "right wing influenced" unless you go back to the "moral majority" thing.

Defiant Noquisi

Sep 4th, 2004, 7:25 AM

I won't get into my political beliefs because I am TOO opinionated to go there, but I would be interested in hearing from some of you about your views on the media-does "IT" really favor the Dems and is it a left wing bunch as it's rumored to be? Why do the rich movie stars,producers, directors of Hollywood fame seem to lean so far left? Uh, you might want to try talking with some of these folks (the living ones anyway)....

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b140fd711ae.htm

Danny Aiello (Act)

Kim Alexis (Act)

Denise Austin (Sports)

Alan Autry (Act/Fresno,CA Mayor)

Bob Backlund (Wrestler/Pol. candidate)

"Sir" Charles Barkley (Sports)

Jeff "Skunk" Baxter (Music)

Orson Bean (Act)

Catherine Bell (Act)

Belamy Brothers (Music)

Tom Beringer (Act)

Jan Berry of "Jan and Dean" (Music)

Clint Black (Music)

Lisa Hartman Black (Act)

Ernest Borgnine (Act)

Bruce Boxleitner (Act)

George Brett (Sports)

Jack Buck (Sports)

Jim Bunning (Sports/KY US Senator)

Delta Burke (Act)

Kirk Cameron (Act)

Drew Carey (Act) (Libertarian)

Dixie Carter (Act)

Nell Carter (Act)

Harry Wayne "K.C." Casey of "KC and the Sunshine Band" (Music)

Tom Clancy (Author)

Harry Connick Jr (Music/Act) (Democrat)

Robert Conrad (Act)

Charlie Daniels (Music)

Tony Danza (Act)

Doris Day (Act)

Bo Derek (Act)

C.C. Deville (Music)

Mike Ditka (Sports)

Shannon Doherty (Act)

Jerry Doyle (Act/Pol. cand.)

Fred Dryer (Sports/Act)

Leslie Easterbrook (Act)

Clint Eastwood (Act) (Libertarian)

Buddy Ebsen (Act)

John Elway (Sports)

Chad Everett (Act)

Brett Favre (Sports)

Glenn Ford (Act)

Haden Fry (Sports)

John Gavin (Act/fmr. Amb. to Mexico)

Crystal Gayle (Music)

Sarah Michelle Gellar (Act)

Joe Gibbs (Sports)

Mel Gibson (Act)

Melissa Gilbert (Act)

Clarence Gilyard (Act)

Rev. Billy Graham (Religious)

Kelsey Grammar (Act)

Fred Grandy (Act/Fmr. IA Congressman)

Merle Haggard (Music)

George Hamilton (Act)

Paul Harvey (Radio)

Patricia Heaton (Act)

Charlton Heston (Act)

Catherine Hicks (Act)

Hal Holbrook (Act)

Bob Hope (Act)

Dennis Hopper (Act)

Susan Howard (Act)

Dale Jarrett (Sports)

Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson (Wrestler/Act)

Jimmy Johnson (Sports)

Christine Jones

Shirley Jones (Act)

Jeff Kent (Sports)

Bobby Knight (Sports)

Yaphet Kotto (Act)

Steve Largent (Sports/OK Congressman & future Governor)

John Larroquette (Act) (questionable)

Tommy Lasorda (Sports)

Jerry "The King" Lawler (Wrestler/Act/Pol. cand.)

Al Leiter (Sports)

Meat Loaf (Music/Act)

Anne Lockhart (Sports)

Heather Locklear (Act)

Mike Love (Music)

George Lucas (Director) (questionable)

David Lynch (Director)

Loretta Lynn (Music)

Norm MacDonald (Act)

Karl "The Mailman" Malone (Sports)

Barbara Mandrell (Music)

Louise Mandrell (Music)

Jackie Mason (Comedian/Act)

Johnny Mathis (Music)

Charles McCord (of Imus In the Morning)

Reba McEntire (Music/Act)

Bernard McGuirk (of Imus In the Morning)

Don McLean (Music)

Linda McMahon (Sports)

Gerald McRaney (Act)

Al Michaels (Sports)

John Milius (Director)

Lorrie Morgan (Music)

Julianne Morris (Act)

Wendy Moten (Music)

Jim Nabors (Act)

Wayne Newton (Act)

Chuck Norris (Act)

Ted Nugent (Music)

Gary Numan (Music)

The Oak Ridge Boys (Music)

Mike Oldfield (Music)

Gary Oldman (Act)

Tom Osborne (Sports/now NE Congressman)

Ken Osmond (Act)

Marie Osmond (Music/Act)

Fess Parker (Act)

Jameson Parker (Act)

Joe Paterno (Sports)

Joe Pesci (Act)

Richard Petty (Sports/Pol. cand.)

Regis Philbin (Act)

John Popper (Music)

Laura Prepon (Act)

Nancy Davis Reagan (Act/First Lady)

Ronald Reagan (Act/Governor/President)

Dana Rohrabacher (CA Congressman)

Roseanne (Act)

Kurt Russell (Act) (Libertarian)

Pat Sajak (Act)

Pete Sampras (Sports)

Rick Schroeder (Act)

Jon Secada (Music)

Tom Selleck (Act)

Paul Shanklin (Satirist)

Ricky Skaggs (Music)

Paul Sorvino (Act)

Robert Stack (Act)

Nancy Stafford (Act)

Ben Stein (Act)

George Steinbrenner (Sports)

Shirley Temple-Black (Act/fmr. Ambassador)

Dave Thomas (Act) (SCTV, not Wendy's)

Fred Thompson (Act/TN US Senator)

Dean Torrance of "Jan and Dean" (Music)

Joe Torres (Sports)

Travis Tritt (Music)

Janine Turner (Act)

Val Venis (Wrestler)

Jimmy (J.J.) Walker (Act/Radio)

Darrell Waltrip (Sports)

Julius Caesar "J.C." Watts, Jr. (Sports/OK Congressman)

Patrick Wayne (Act)

Ann Wedgeworth (Act)

Lisa Whelchel (Act)

Reggie White (Sports)

Cindy Williams (Act)

Hank Williams Jr. (Music)

Ted Williams (Sports)

Martha Williamson (Producer)

Noble Willingham (Act/Pol. cand.)

Bruce Willis (Act)

Tiger Woods (Sports)

BeBe Wynans (Music)

CeCe Wynans (Music)

ZZ Top (Music)

Most country singers and NASCAR drivers are conservatives

95% of the PGA tour is conservative

Defiant Noquisi

Sep 4th, 2004, 8:00 AM

How can they claim to be "environmentalists" when they drive (or get driven to be more precise) around in gas-hogging SUVs, limos, etc. ? Doesn't that strike anyone as hypocritical? Some do, some dont. You are only focusing on what you hear, read, see that is most popular in the media. Actors (many of them drive themselves) Dennis Weaver and Ed Bagley Jr. drive alternative fueled cars as well as others who drive them as well. Weaver owns a house in Colorado built from used tires, aluminum cans and parasite killed lumber that is solar powered. There are also many stars who consume only organic foods.

Personally, I think anyone who pays any credence to what a star says is a moron and has no brain of his/her own, but that's only my opinion. What makes it any different for a celebrity to express their opinion than anyone else? Are they not allowed to comment on as well as support their chosen politics in this country? Im glad its your opinion because anyone that is as close-minded as you are IS a moron. Thanks for ignorantly providing the blatant proof. Im sure the people who voted and/or appointed Ronald Reagan, Fred Grandy, Clint Eastwood, Sonny Bono, Shirley Temple Black, Helen Gahagan, George Murphy, Fred Thompson and Jesse Ventura into office will be your best friend.

I highly suggest you research your chosen topics before you post wild ignorance.

:dummy::smash:

knac1055

Sep 4th, 2004, 2:00 PM

http://i4a.pocketmovies.net/movies/3d/trippingtherift_320x240.mpg

DontBeAfraid

Sep 4th, 2004, 2:24 PM

That was posted in the wrong forum

Thor

Sep 4th, 2004, 10:24 PM

Boy am I glad NOT to be a Kerry supporter. SOME of you are and I feel sorry for you. Bush will CRUSH Kerry in the next election, and you will realize you are stupid and weak. If all AMERICANS (which YOU are NOT! ) are out there campaigning for Kerry and the Dems, we're all in trouble. You are weak, anti- American Euroworshipers and most likely believe the Europeans are correct in their thinking. YOU are weak, let me say it again, WEAK, and you will lose in the end. I pity you weaklings, you are what America doesn't need. Move to Europe, especially you that think that the world owes you something. Come into the 21st century and live life as it is.

evilwill

Sep 4th, 2004, 11:49 PM

Tone it down or you'll find just how weak you are against the might of my mod cannon! :po: :grind:

Defiant Noquisi

Sep 5th, 2004, 12:38 AM

Boy am I glad NOT to be a Kerry supporter. SOME of you are and I feel sorry for you. Bush will CRUSH Kerry in the next election, and you will realize you are stupid and weak. Obviously not as much as the passionate Bush supporters who cant get beyond their own self-hatred. Whats wrong, feel like you dont measure up? I wish Id put the Kerry/Edwards sig up earlier. Initially it was only to entertain CF. Now I have you. You were much easier though. Now if you can only get past the uneducated posting we might have a really great debate going. Obviously you are vile in language because you are so completely embarrassed that I was able to answer your silly ignorant post with easy to find answers. Just like Bush. Do you have your own personal Cheney that runs things for you and tells you what to do? Fire him! He isnt doing his job.

If all AMERICANS (which YOU are NOT! ) are out there campaigning for Kerry and the Dems, we're all in trouble. You are weak, anti- American Euroworshipers and most likely believe the Europeans are correct in their thinking. Ah, another who believes themselves so omnipotent they post as if they have been to my home. Im more American than you could ever hope to be bud and unless you are American Indian dont be jealous because I am. I cant help it that your ancestors tried to wipe us out and we are still here to thumb our noses at you. Oh and by the way, Indians are much more conservative than any of your politicians could ever hope to be. And all while not being annoyingly zealous about it either.

Keep proving the ignorance! The last thing I would be doing is worshipping Europeans. Come to think of it, you might want to reconsider it yourself until you put a new heart, uh, I mean batteries in your Cheney doll.

And while we are at it, my free speech is obviously ONLY FREE when Im kissing the ass of a Republican apparently. I would have to say that censorship is very un-American. It smacks of Communism actually. You must be Communist then right?

YOU are weak, let me say it again, WEAK, and you will lose in the end. I pity you weaklings, you are what America doesn't need. Move to Europe, especially you that think that the world owes you something. Come into the 21st century and live life as it is. Hehehehe, why dont you come back to reality and read your post over again. It was YOU who lost it with all that craziness going on! The way you posted reminds me of a cat spitting and hissing. Do you realize how ridiculous that looks?

If Im so weak why did you post with such idiotic hostility? Am I that threatening to your manhood that you must attempt, although very immaturely, to try and put me in a corner? Hehehehe, you better do your homework bud because I dont fall by the wayside that easy! In fact, Im being particularly nice to you...at the moment. You are very entertaining.

Thor

Sep 5th, 2004, 6:06 PM

Thought some of you might enjoy this parody:

GORDON SWIFTFOOT
In partisan games, some of Kerry's present and future troubles could be regarded as comical, but as I read about the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, I feel sadness and even melancholy for what might have been. In that mood, I submit this song to the tune of Gordon Lightfoot's "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald." The last two lines of poetic justice are original to the song.

The Wreck of the Johnny Fitzgerald
The legend lived on in words carefully sown
Of a big hero serving his country.
But truth, it is said (to a democrat’s dread)
Turns John Kerry’s November to gloomy.
When a load of embellishment thirty years on
Showed the claims of a braggart near empty.
A tactic thought shrewd was a bone to be chewed
When the gales of November came early.

He once was the pride of the Democrat side
He would impress the vets, they all reasoned
As war stories go, his was bigger than most
So they discounted murmurs of treason
With young John O’Neil he had once traded words
So he said “Bring it on” to his breathren.
And later that month when the Swift Vets were heard
Could it be a remorse he’d been feelin’?

Their book and their ads made a tattle-tale sound
And the truth broke over the railing
And every man knew, and the candidate too,
T’was the loss of November come stealin’.
The dawn came later as the press chose to wait
When the gales of derision came slashin’.
When veterans came with their stories of pain
In the face of his anti-war actions.

Then defense was tried, yet the charges ignored, he said
Brothers, you’re all Bush’s liars.
As polling was made, his main hatchway caved in, he said
Please, George, call off all your hires.

And then it was seen truth as stubborn old thing
Put his ship and his party in peril.
And later that fall in a hurricane’s squall
Came the wreck of the Johnnie Fitzgerald.

Does any one know where the hubris arose
To assume he would stand up to scrutiny?
The pundits all say he’d have gone all the way
If he’d had more than falsified litany.

He might have corrected or apologized,
Not have said “I’m reporting for duty.”
But all that remains is the faces and names
Of the veterans who saw him more clearly.

In a musty old hall where the liberals pray
In the Anti-War Warriors Cathedral
The church bell should chime for mistakes of the times
And the thousands of names on a black wall.
John Kerry did choose not to heal the old wounds,

Rode his Swiftboat as far as he’d take her.
And all iron boats go as the mariners all know
With the Gales of November remembered.

Linda
Boise, Idaho

knac1055

Sep 5th, 2004, 11:15 PM

The thing I don’t like about Kerry is his war record.

Mr. Kerry shut up with your whining already you opened this door when you and your friends started attacking Bush now the heat is too much for your small brain and I see in your future a seat in the Senate, but not for long personally I think you screwed the pooch when you started to speak after finding out that you had won the Democratic nomination, as your good buddy Michael Moore put it at the Republican convention you are a Looser. Of course he did not say this, but he sure as hell was trying to say that to McCain who is 1000 times better than you. By the way McCain is no looser Mr. Moore.

1. If most of Kerry's fellow Swift veterans don't support him, then who were all those guys with him at the Democratic Convention? They made it appear that Kerry has the complete support of his "Band of Brothers" from Vietnam.
John Kerry has been able to convince about 13 men who served on Swift boats in the Mekong Delta to support him, 7 or 8 of whom were at various times crew members on his own 6-man boat. Those are the men the Kerry campaign so prominently featured at the Democratic Convention. The photograph we have posted at SwiftVets.com shows Kerry with 19 of his fellow Swift boat OICs (Officers In Charge) in Coastal Division 11. Four OICs were not present for the photograph. Only three of his 23 fellow OICs from Coastal Division 11 support John Kerry.
Overall, more than 250 Swift boat veterans are on the record questioning Kerry's fitness to serve as Commander-in-Chief. That list includes his entire chain of command -- every single officer Kerry served under in Vietnam. The Kerry game plan is to ignore all this and pretend that the 13 veterans his campaign jets around the country and puts up in 5-star hotels really represent the truth about his short, controversial combat tour.
The Swift boats fought in groups, so the other OICs who fought alongside Kerry know him well and can accurately describe what he did and did not do. In many cases Kerry's fellow OICs had a better perspective than his own crew members, since the latter had no way to determine whether he was following orders and how well he worked with his peers.

2. What is a Swift Boat?
A Swift Boat is a 22-ton, heavily-armed, 50-foot, shallow-draft aluminum patrol craft similar to the utility boats servicing oil platforms and other offshore facilities in the Gulf of Mexico today. These boats were known by the U. S. Navy designation PCF, short for Patrol Craft-Fast.
A Swift Boat crew usually consisted of five enlisted personnel led by one officer-in-charge. This officer was normally an Ensign or a Lieutenant Junior Grade, 23 to 27 years old. All were volunteers and almost all of them developed a fierce love for their boats.

3. Why do you want Senator John Kerry to release his entire military records?
We want Senator Kerry to tell the truth about his conduct in Vietnam to the American public. We were there. We know that there are many critical facts that Americans need to know -– facts that have not been disclosed. Releasing the complete set of Kerry's service records will provide some insight into that conduct.

4. Aren’t you nothing more than Republican loyalists who happen to be veterans?
No. Among us are Democrats, Republicans and Independents. We are acting solely as Vietnam veterans who served in Swift Boats.

5. Vietnam was a long time ago. Why does it matter today?
Senator John Kerry himself made his Vietnam service a centerpiece for his campaign for the Presidency, so questions about his service are germane. Senator Kerry’s biographer described Kerry’s total Vietnam experience as a “three-decade-long tour of duty,” so questions about his entire “tour of duty” are germane. And in his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry stated that his fellow Vietnam veterans were guilty of widespread atrocities, so questions about the veracity of those charges are germane.

6. How can I join Swift Boat Veterans for Truth?
The organization consists of, and is limited to, former military officers and enlisted men who served in Vietnam on U.S. Navy Swift Boats or in affiliated commands. Veterans can e-mail latch@swiftvets.com for more information on joining or adding their names to the list of signatures to a letter to Senator Kerry demanding full disclosure of his military records.

7. Where can I view the press conference you conducted in May 2004?
We have posted extensive excerpts and a link to C-SPAN's streaming video of the press conference on our web site. If you do not have internet access, C-SPAN has aired the press conference a number of times and you may be able to view it there or obtain a copy of the tape.

8. How can I make a donation?
You can contribute online or you can send a check to:
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
c/o Weymouth Symmes, Treasurer
PO Box 26184
Alexandria, VA 22313
Note: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Inc., is a 527 advocacy organization and contributions are not tax deductible.

9. Hasn’t Senator Kerry already released his records?
No, Senator Kerry has disclosed only a selected portion of his records. Specifically, Senator Kerry has not disclosed the records leading to the award of the three purple hearts, the Silver Star and the Bronze Star. There are also missing performance evaluations (called “Fitness Reports”) for certain periods of his service as a Navy officer. We call upon Senator Kerry to authorize the complete release of his military records by filing a simple two-page Form 180.

10. Why are you not demanding that President Bush release his records?
It is our understanding that President Bush has released his records. If there are additional facts about his conduct in the military that should be disclosed, then we hope and trust that servicemen who had served with him will come forward as we have.

http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=FAQ

Moishe3rd

Sep 6th, 2004, 1:08 PM

Well, there you go again.....
I voted for Al Gore in the year 2000, and every Democratic candidate before that.
I will be voting for President Bush this year.
Because we are at war.
We are at war with the people who shoot little children in the back as they run away from their schoolhouse.
We are at war with the people who think it is a political statement to blow up and shred children on buses as they travel to school and home.
We are at war with the people who think it is holy to massacre Nepalese who are working for Jordanians, simply trying to make a living.
We are at war with people who believe it is holy to cut people's heads off simply because they exist.
We are at war with people who slaughter commuters on trains because they used to live in that country 800 years ago.
We are at war with people who blow up nightclubs.....
Oh hell, they murder everyone.

President Bush recognizes this fact.
John Kerry; the Democratic Party; the UN; most of the EU; etcetera, seems remarkably clueless.
As Zell Miller put it - I care about my family. The Democratic party does not.

Defiant Noquisi

Sep 7th, 2004, 8:52 PM

The candidates are bad enough. However, with the kind of posting as shown above, no wonder that other countries hate us. If I was subjected to all that brainwashed hostility Id hate us too. :Bott:

I thoroughly enjoy the fact that you think Bush's lies are somehow "better" than Kerry's. BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Defiant Noquisi

Sep 9th, 2004, 5:54 PM

The thing I don’t like about Kerry is his war record.You make not like his war record but at least he made a commitment and followed through. Not that old military records should matter but just for arguments sake....

10. Why are you not demanding that President Bush release his records?
It is our understanding that President Bush has released his records. If there are additional facts about his conduct in the military that should be disclosed, then we hope and trust that servicemen who had served with him will come forward as we have. I like the "It is our understanding..." part. It leaves a huge chasm of out. Yeah, we think Bush has released his records...yada yada yada yet we KNOW Kerry hasnt released all of his.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/09/politics/09guard.html?ex=1252468800&en=121cbce660ac824f&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

Well, apparently Mr. Bush hasnt been very forthcoming either.....cmon you Bush lovers, I know youll have some really poetic justification for this.

Oh, but before you do, Im particularly partial to this paragraph....

Anticipating his remarks, Republicans worked to discredit Mr. Barnes as a partisan Democrat and large contributor to Mr. Kerry. The events created a new round of scrutiny for Mr. Bush, after a month in which Mr. Kerry's Vietnam service dominated the campaign because of veterans with longstanding anger at how Mr. Kerry, who was a decorated veteran, came home and turned against the war. With advertisements, through a book and on talk shows, the group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, leveled largely unsubstantiated accusations about Mr. Kerry's record and told how his antiwar statements had demoralized veterans.

Please note the "unsubstantiated accusations" part coming from Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Oh yeah, I like this one too...

The events unfolded a day after the Pentagon, prompted by a lawsuit filed by The Associated Press, released a series of records on Mr. Bush's service, even though the White House had said this year that it had released all the records. Uh, why did they have to sue if Bush released all of his records?

If there is substantiation of what Bartlett says, Id like to see it. :52:

Thor

Sep 9th, 2004, 6:42 PM

Okay, let's form our policies and actions around what "the rest of the World" thinks about us! Could it be that "other countries" are just jealous of America, can't do all of the things we can do, have all of the things we have? Gee, I want to see our country make decisions based on the fact that "that's what the rest of the World says to do". Screw the "rest of the world". China does whatever the Hell it wants to and I don't hear everyone screaming "you're a BAD country, that's not what the rest of the world would do!"

DontBeAfraid

Sep 9th, 2004, 7:02 PM

JackAss, the rest of the world does frown upon china.....

Thor

Sep 9th, 2004, 7:31 PM

YOU are the jackass, if YOU really care what the rest of the world thinks...I'll bet you made ALL your decisions based on what other thought of YOU. That's sad.

Thor

Sep 9th, 2004, 8:32 PM

Bush 52% to Kerry's 43%...

LC Jeffries

Sep 9th, 2004, 9:02 PM

Bush pulls ahead in the polls. Including here.

You might need to register for this sorry.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9060-2004Sep9.html

Lori

dutchie

Sep 10th, 2004, 3:31 AM

1 day to go before september 11....

That Al Quaida video sure isn't helping Bush...

dutchie

Sep 10th, 2004, 9:15 AM

You are weak, anti- American Euroworshipers and most likely believe the Europeans are correct in their thinking. YOU are weak, let me say it again, WEAK, and you will lose in the end. I pity you weaklings, you are what America doesn't need. Move to Europe, especially you that think that the world owes you something. Come into the 21st century and live life as it is.

Just a question from a European.. Why use the nick of a EUROPEAN GOD???

God, you must be thick as a brick......

I'd rather be weak then thick. Thank God I am neither. Pity for you you're both... :wlink:

Thor

Sep 10th, 2004, 9:51 PM

Gee Dutchie, now I see where YOUR prejudice comes from, you don't like my nick...LOL

humanhybrid

Sep 10th, 2004, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by Thor
You are weak, anti- American Euroworshipers and most likely believe the Europeans are correct in their thinking. YOU are weak, let me say it again, WEAK, and you will lose in the end. I pity you weaklings, you are what America doesn't need. Move to Europe, especially you that think that the world owes you something. Come into the 21st century and live life as it is. What is weak is having a president who WILL DO ANYTHING TO GO TO WAR and neglecting the world community to accomplish it. And an "AMERICAN" president who was AWOL when the other children of america served and died in Vietnam. Whats weak here????????????? It sure isn't the american taxpayer its the president of the USA plundering us taxpayers and keeping us in fear and hiding behind his desk. good day!

knac1055

Sep 10th, 2004, 10:42 PM

All I know and this is fact that Bush our pres reacted to a attach that was unprovoked just like the 1st time but Clinton was in office and Clinton did nothing but that is what they most likely thought Bush would do nothing but he did not

It would not bother me one bit if our pres slaughtered every Muslims in the Middle East you know why because I have read the Koran and I know how they think.

knac1055

Sep 10th, 2004, 10:47 PM

What is weak is having a president who WILL DO ANYTHING TO GO TO WAR and neglecting the world community to accomplish it. And an "AMERICAN" president who was AWOL when the other children of america served and died in Vietnam. Whats weak here????????????? It sure isn't the american taxpayer its the president of the USA plundering us taxpayers and keeping us in fear and hiding behind his desk. good day!

Where's my Memo I never got the memo on Bush being AWOL

Can you please resend that memo don't forget it must have the US government seal on it along with the proper encoding

knac1055

Sep 10th, 2004, 10:55 PM

At least he signed up for some kind of service most hippies did not sign up they where drafted and that draft was based on your SSN, you know how Clinton got out of it either do I all I know is Clinton like to smoke dope and Bush liked beer

and just because he was in the Air National Graud

humanhybrid

Sep 11th, 2004, 12:01 AM

George W. Bush's Military Records
Documents Obtained by Walter Robinson, Martin Heldt and other researchers through the Freedom of Information Act:
Getting into the Guard http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp Your documentation sir in military format good day!

DontBeAfraid

Sep 11th, 2004, 9:31 AM

You dont know how anybody thinks but you.... And if you attitude truely is to
slaughtered every Muslims in the Middle East then they have the same motivation to kill you.... self defense.

BTW I dont think you have read the qur'an, i think you know as much of it as your local rascist church has told you about it.

humanhybrid

Sep 11th, 2004, 10:00 AM

DontBeAfraid, Yes, self presevation. I thought a church of Jesus promoted Love and forgiveness and communication. Has things changed? Hope not! good day!

Thor

Sep 15th, 2004, 7:59 PM

So, what to believe regarding the latest Bush Reserve records? Dan Rather certainly is smarting from the most recent "fake documents" charges. Were they faked? If so, this certainly HURTS Kerry's side, seeming like Rather wanted to believe this so badly he didn't check into it far enough. Will this latest "scandal" further distance Bush from Kerry for the Presidency? Roughly a month and a half to go, what's the verdict? Bush or Kerry?

knac1055

Sep 15th, 2004, 8:09 PM

Emerald_Dragon

Sep 16th, 2004, 3:27 PM

>Thought some of you might enjoy this parody:

yeah, you and you're other logins :grin

>Could it be that "other countries" are just jealous of America,

it is a Global Economy. If you could think outside the box, maybe you could understand what that means. We all live on this planet. And when someone decides to appoint itself ruler because it can, the others aren't going to appreciate it.

>who cares if "all the other countries hate us"?

i'm beginning to believe that you are too shallow to be taken seriously. its no wonder why the U.S. is on a downward spiral, its because of you and people like you, in the right places, making the wrong decisions. Making "Me" decisions over "We" decisions. Its no wonder Americans have lost respect internationally.

Donsun

Sep 24th, 2004, 3:22 PM

I will vote for Bush because he is a very well spoken charasmatic leader. :grin No i think he is the less of two evils period. Kerry is to all over the place. Hes to unpredictable. At least with bush you know what your getting.

humanhybrid

Sep 24th, 2004, 11:54 PM

Ya! We have seen what Bush does. Lets see what Kerry will do. You know that Bush plans on invading Iran, so lets not kill unnessesarily and whimsically, lets not vote to drive the economy further into the ground, Vote Kerry! good day!

humanhybrid

Sep 26th, 2004, 5:42 PM

I will vote for Bush because he is a very well spoken charasmatic leader. No i think he is the less of two evils period. Kerry is to all over the place. Hes to unpredictable. At least with bush you know what your getting That is funny. G Bush very well spoken charasmatic leader. LOL ROLF HAAH! He is a moron of this planet. The guy is a big coward. Kerry served his country while Bush was trying to get out of it. Charasmatic leader! LOOK AT HIS PAST FALURES.
"Is it me or is Bush going everywhere Kerry goes? So far in the past week, President Bush has followed John Kerry to Davenport, Iowa; New Mexico; Las Vegas; Los Angeles; and he follows him to Portland, Oregon. The only place he never followed John Kerry was Vietnam." - Jay Leno
"President Bush is not fazed by other candidates' war records. He said, I may have not fought in Vietnam, but I created one."
— Craig Kilborn

Donsun

Sep 27th, 2004, 10:45 AM

The well spoken charasmatic part was a joke. He is niether. :toast:

DarkAce

Oct 4th, 2004, 1:55 AM

As people have stated before voting for either candidate doesn't matter much currently. I say this not because they were both part of the same fraternity years ago or whatever crap some people base this claim on but because of the issues and policies each have represented. When looked upon, they never really go into full depth of how they plan to do many of the things they state, and some things stated might be better for the short term but not for the long run. America on the homefront is screwed either way.
Bush knows what needs to be done globally, but unfortunately I doubt he'll go about solving the problems the right way. By the right way I mean both diplomatically and military campaign wise. Afghanistan...pfft, and Iraq is seemingly going to be at a loss with the way things are shaping up else where which we might have to intervene.

dreamwhiz

Oct 4th, 2004, 2:55 PM

Kerry, cause I dont like or trust Bush and I am a Democrat

Defiant Noquisi

Oct 9th, 2004, 3:31 PM

There ought to be a great crop of jokes out after these debates. It was fun watching the Shrub flailing himself all over the place to emphasize his points during the third debate. I still couldnt help it.....I kept waiting for Curious George to come out and take his hand. LOL

Thor

Oct 11th, 2004, 11:16 PM

I DO support the GOP, but I gotta admit Bush couldn't debate on a phone sex line...Kerry destroyed him in both debates, GW just doesn't have a clue when it comes to publlic speaking...Kerry indeed looks like the consumate pro...let's hope the election doesn't come down to how well the candiates did...or Bush is done for..

dutchie

Oct 18th, 2004, 2:21 AM

Funny, I always thought communicating should be the #1 skill for any president. If GWB fails in this, should he be president anyway?!?

My personal communicator top 3

John F. Kennedy
Bill Clinton
Ronald Reagan.

See? It's not about political colour, it's about skill.

DarkAce

Oct 18th, 2004, 3:12 PM

Verbal skills are important, but not that important in my opinion. Some people are brilliant yet can't communicate their ideas very well verbally. While some can have such a sweet mouth with words that flow out like honey, yet possesses such a deviant undercover. I wouldn't rely on appearances too much, but it is critical apparently in the hearts of americans even though.

dutchie

Oct 19th, 2004, 2:22 AM

I would say a POTUS should have both qualities, wouldn't you?!? A man of superior intelligence and great verbal skills. A man of integrity, honesty, ready to openly discuss his policies.

Someone that fails in these qualities should not be President.

DarkAce

Oct 19th, 2004, 2:35 PM

It'd be great if they did, (how many presidents actually had all that, honestly) but apparently the Illuminati have picked some pretty shabby representatives, heh.

niteflyer

Oct 20th, 2004, 11:13 AM

Why??? Because I feel that Kerry will bankrupt our country with his national healthcare plan, and he wont take out Iran until they get enough nukes to make it very costly for us. You gotta realize that if we done act quickly and take this oil our economy is facing a unprecedented disaster; and if China gets the ME oil, they will take over the world. Bush is on track to take care of business. Yet I was torn to vote for who I thought would be the best candidate, but I knew that by voting for him it wouldnt matter, my vote wouldnt decide anything, and it could decide something if the election is as close as I predict it will be. We need to figure a way in this country for all party candidates to get equal airtime, and break up the republicrat stranglehold, or its all pretty moot anyway, pretty much the same policies will be followed either way as it is now...

DontBeAfraid

Oct 21st, 2004, 5:07 AM

I hope you lose your health coverage right before you get appendicitus(sp).....

How many industrial class countries dont have health coverage for all?

niteflyer

Oct 21st, 2004, 10:33 AM

Actually, I get my insurance thru the federal government. I earned it, for life. I have nothing against health insurance for all, its a noble idea; but its not the governments job. Canada has universal healthcare, it dosnt work. A good friend of mine recently died; he was discovered to have blocked arteries (at 42) and was put on a list to have arterial stents. 2 years later he died of a heart attack, still waiting. Canadians pay a 55% income tax. Is that what you want here??? Because that is about what it would take to fund it... It is my contention that we need less taxes, more personal responsibility and should even all but ban welfare and most federal aid. Its not good for the population as a whole. We are encouraging the sick and defective to breed, instead of letting them die off, causing us all problems. Its simply not in the interest of the race; and the taxes to fund it would kill the economy; plain and simple.

Death Rattle

Oct 21st, 2004, 12:40 PM

I have to agree with niteflyer on this health care issue. I have a friend who lives in germany and he says basically the same thing. There taxs are very high. Sales tax alone is 16%. Not sure what income tax is. His mother needed back surgery to have two lower vertabre fused together and she had to wait a year! Meanwhile she gets to suffer the whole time. I am not sure what the answer to health care is but from what i've heard government run care is not the way.

lotrfan55345

Oct 21st, 2004, 1:52 PM

if China gets the ME oil

We will go to war with China.

It would not bother me one bit if our pres slaughtered every Muslims in the Middle East you know why because I have read the Koran and I know how they think.
:ban:

Yeah, I've started with the American ones. Me and my freinds got together and cut their Natural Gas line when they were out of their house. Then when there is some sort of spark their house will go boom. They will die, I'm sure the LORD will praise me when I die and go up to heaven, I did a very good thing. My parents made me present what me and my freinds did infront of the whole church and every one applauded me. Even Pastor Benny took me in his room the "examined" me because I was so good. The church was very proud of me, and every kid in the parish is encouraged to do the same thing. So more kids like me are planning to blow up those dirty muslims house. We are planing to eradicate every muslim in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area, and then get together with other like-minded parishes to eradicate every muslim in the country, then the world. This is the beginning of what will be a very nice era of humanity. Where everyone will have the same values and worship the correct god.

/sarcasm

niteflyer

Oct 21st, 2004, 7:52 PM

Im not sure where youre going with that lotrfan??? But it just MIGHT not be too far off the mark, I mean its like been HOW long since weve had a crusade...

Emerald_Dragon

Oct 21st, 2004, 10:12 PM

:grin he wasn't serious. he was going to the extreme. i thought it was pretty funny.

...almost as funny as Raven's headstone engraving idea.... :2fu: :headbang:

dutchie

Oct 22nd, 2004, 2:23 AM

Niteflyer, Kerry CAN'T send the USA into bankruptcy, it is bankrupt already.

The individualism and general disgust about sharing wealth with the less fortunate (invalids, unemployed, elderly people, homeless etc. etc.) is appalling. Seems like nobody ever takes the very real chance of coming into one of those situations themselves even the least bit serious.

We pay 52% income tax and 19% sales tax. Admittedly that IS a lot to pay. But it's not just being spent on healthcare, it's funding the complete set of government controlled measurements, such as 70% salary for the unemployed, welfare, healthcare, free schooling, low cost university, art subsidies, low cost public transportation etc. etc.

As a lot of you know already, I have been unemployed for over a year in the recent past, and I couldn't do anything about it.. (the company I worked for was sold off to a third party that wanted just the assets, but did NOT want the employees..).
I was very happy with the financial rescue that went into action straight away or else I would have been forced to sell my house. Now I KNOW what I had been paying for all of these years. Luckily I found another job. But what if you're not so lucky, and get fired at 58?!?

When I compare the deficit of the USA to that of the Netherlands, I can't help but :grin

DontBeAfraid

Oct 22nd, 2004, 5:59 AM

So the old lady and your canadian friend had to wait.... AT LEAST THEY WERE ON A LIST... DIPSHITS. Without health insurance, which is OUT OF THE COST RANGE FOR MOST AMERICANS, you dont even get on the list, you die painfully WITHOUT HOPE, or you go into debt for the rest of your life forsaking your children....

The flu is NOT GENETIC niteflyer. AIDS is NOT GENETIC. Car accidents ARE NOT GENETIC, but dont let the hostbital find out you dont have insurance, because bush's economy has replayced your old job with the job of door greeter for walmart, before they are done treating you....

If we can fund universal healthcare for Iraq but not ourselves there is a serious conflict of interests somewhere.

niteflyer

Oct 22nd, 2004, 10:41 AM

Are we REALLY funding Iraqs healthcare??? I didnt know that?? I know we are taking alot of oil. Dutchie, this country isnt bankrupt, as we are paying our bills on time, and confidence in the dollar is pretty strong, even though our debt has never been higher. It is my contention that with this mountain of debt, and our precarious economic conditions due to our dependence on foriegn oil that now is NOT the time to fund such an expensive program. We just cant afford the big change and economic upheaval it would cause. If this country was being managed fairly it would have been done long ago, but its not. We are deeply in debt and in trouble, we must expand our empire and stabilise the oil at this time or face economic ruin. I dont think people realise just how serious it is. I cant afford to pay that kind of tax Dutchie, I will lose MY house.....and I cant afford to pay what your paying for gas either.
Dont confuse my vote for lack of conscience; I didnt vote for who I though SHOULD be president, Im sure its gonna be Bush or Kerry, and I voted for what I thought would be the lesser evil. Either way were screwed, its just gone too far...
Also note that I personally do a lot of social work, for a couple of churches, for Habitat for Humanity, as well as alot of river clean up. If the average citizen did as much as I did, there wouldnt be serious poverty in this country.
The way I see it...war with Bush and a gamble at prosperity, or Kerry letting our enemies get stronger and plunging our country into further debt, weakening our position. But, at least we would have heath care....and be healthy when we get nuked...

DontBeAfraid

Oct 22nd, 2004, 7:20 PM

So we can fund a perpetual war machine that creates as many enemies as it dispatches or we start taking care of ourselves.... Well, I am fairly healthy.... and board most of the time..... Lets start a war.

jesterbr549

Oct 24th, 2004, 3:50 PM

Niteflyer, Kerry CAN'T send the USA into bankruptcy, it is bankrupt already.
Yup - and the American public likes it that way...

The individualism and general disgust about sharing wealth with the less fortunate (invalids, unemployed, elderly people, homeless etc. etc.) is appalling.
You have no idea - until you've lived on the street for a year...

When I compare the deficit of the USA to that of the Netherlands, I can't help but :grin
Unfortunately, when our system dumps they'll all go down together...

Chris4334

Oct 30th, 2004, 9:02 PM

DarkAce

Oct 31st, 2004, 12:33 AM

I'm not sure what you're exactly implying Chris, but what I believe Sub's intention was stating that he doesn't care much about the character of the candidates, etc. but the issues ( the real issues) at hand and where they stand on them.

Well that's what I got from it.

Defiant Noquisi

Oct 31st, 2004, 11:45 AM

Canada has universal healthcare, it dosnt work. A good friend of mine recently died; he was discovered to have blocked arteries (at 42) and was put on a list to have arterial stents. 2 years later he died of a heart attack, still waiting. Canadians pay a 55% income tax. Is that what you want here??? Because that is about what it would take to fund it.... Since the US is vastly different from Canada, I find it hard to believe that even if we did go to using universal health care, we would end up just the same as Canada. While there are many things that suck about it there are also good things that come from it.

Also, you might want to check your facts before making such outlandish claims about Canadians, what they go through and what they pay for it. Its a very common misconception that Canadians have a "flat tax" for one thing.

Im sorry about your friend, but Ive got way too many Canadian friends that have never had anything like that happen to them. The worst Ive heard them bitch about was when the Ministry wanted to change getting glasses from every year to every two years.

Depending on what source you use, the highest individual tax percentage ever paid if you include business taxes was 50% and 44.5% if it was only individual. They also have various deductions if they qualify (though not as many choices as we have). Considering that the richest Americans pay upwards of 38% in taxes, the Canadians arent paying that much more AND the majority of their healthcare costs are covered.

What Americans dont realize is that a vast majority of Canadians pay less taxes than we do.

http://www.geocities.com/rwvong/future/taxes/2004.html
http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/research/taxfacts/whopayswhat.asp
http://www.canadiansocialresearch.net/taxes.htm

Chris4334

Oct 31st, 2004, 12:32 PM

Sub's intention was stating that he doesn't care much about the character of the candidates, etc. but the issues ( the real issues) at hand and where they stand on them.

If you don't pay attention to character, how can you be sure your "real issues" will be addressed? Someone with a history of dishonesty isn't someone to trust to do as they say they will in the future.

MetalMilitia

Oct 31st, 2004, 8:44 PM

Bout time I fuckin did this (Election & Bush Rant)

When Osama's 'al-Qaeda' attacked the World Trade Center towers in New York, and the Pentagon in Washington DC, after hijacking four jetliners, it was the worst terrorist attack in Americas history.

In the War on Terror during the three years following, in large part in response to the September 11 attacks, two countries have been invaded and had their governments removed from office, more than 100,000 civilians have been killed in Iraq alone according to a study ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6354133/ ) released this week, and 1,270 coalition deaths as at Sunday comprising 1,129 Americans, 69 Britons, seven Bulgarians, etc... The United Nations and Red Cross headquarters in Baghdad have been bombed with numerous humanitarian aid workers killed, twenty-two in the UN truck bombing alone, including envoy Sergio Vieira (sp?). Numerous people from a variety of nations have been kidnapped, and many beheaded.

Hundreds of Iraqi police and National Guards have been massacred, including 49 last weekend. Nine U.S. Marines were killed Sunday.

Secondly ( after HUMAN life).... The economic drain of the United States in funding hundreds of billions of dollars in reconstruction and ongoing security commitments to Iraq and its oil fields is reflected in its staggering budget deficit. (An all time record)

But yeah, all in all it's going great.

Watch Osama be caught tomorrow in some fuckin cave, with a stockpile that reads "Saddams' WMD's" written on it.

Bush is a fuck up, any other president would have been ousted or ran out of office by now, yet somehow he gets away with it... My question : how could anyone do any worse?

Oh yeah, the other candidate is Kerry... (no rant on him, he hasnt fucked anything up yet)

Bush is a nutcase, pushing and using FAITH rather than sound logic and cold hard facts. Bush lives in a virtual bubble, where his virtuous intentions are assumed sufficient to guarantee a good outcome. Imagine a group of 'yes men' standing around the village idiot, backing him up on his ideas... thats what's going on. On the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq, the president simply told lawmakers, "I want your vote. I'm not going to debate you on this." Which means, to him "I know whatd' right, end of discussion." This amounts to a faith-based foreign policy, and it helps explain why the Bush administration never even imagined some of the worst-case scenarios we now face in Iraq. The kind of thinking that deals with reasoned deliberation and probabilities (not certainties) is foreign to a faith-based style of leadership. Do you really want to continue using that strategy!?

Number of weapons of mass destruction found? Zero.
Number of Osamas arrested? Zero.

Gotta Love Rense:

"Stupid people love Bush" new study proves According to the prestigious Southern California think tank, The Gluton Group, stupid people prefer President George W Bush over Senator John Kerry by a 4-to-1 margin. As Chief Resident Dr. Louis Friend characterized the results of the research, "the less intelligent you are, the more you like Bush." This landmark study, conducted over a 5 month period, involved 2400 likely voters bridging all economic stratas in the 17 states generally considered up for grabs on November 2nd. Participants were tested for intelligence, then asked to fill out a 12 page series of questions involving the Presidential candidates with results released earlier this week.

The consensus: the higher the IQ, the less people trust Bush and respect the job his administration has done. The lower the IQ, the more people admire his steadfastness. "It was pretty much a slam dunk. There's no nice way to say this. Dumb people like him. They think his unwavering nature is a positive personality trait. They even venerate him for never admitting mistakes, even when he's wrong. On the other hand, smart people think he's a lying bully. I mean, c'mon, you have a deserter accusing a decorated veteran of treason. Who's going to buy that besides stupid people?"

Preliminary results:

IQ Above 140: Kerry 80%, Bush 20%.

120-140: Kerry 65%, Bush 35%.

100-120: Kerry 54%, Bush 46%.

80-100: Bush 54%, Kerry 46%.

60-80: Bush 60%, Kerry 15%, Dale Earnhardt Jr. 25%.

Apparently, Bush's good-evil, black-white philosophy resonates on an inverse relationship with higher education, whereas it became evident over the period of analysis that John Kerry's nuanced arguments are only understood by people who paid attention in any class above the 5th grade.

Doctor Friend elaborated: "It has to do with intellectual curiosity. Folks see Bush in front of a stream talking about the environment and they assume he's in favor of it, even though if you read his legislation, I'd be surprised to hear him endorse shade. This also explains why Bush gets away with pretending he doesn't know how the Senate works, allowing him to call Kerry a flip-flopper."

Friend released evidence that this type of disconnect exists across the board: education, foreign policy, the economy, post 9-11 security response and State Dinner entertainment choices. Also discovered was a direct correlation between the number of preset Country Western stations on car radios and Bush's approval rating. Dr. Friend attributes this phenomena to the simplicity inherent in the messages indigenous to both. Classical music listeners were preponderantly Kerry supporters, but surprisingly, on heavy metal, the two split down the middle.

Spotting a trend, Friend cautioned, "Because of the deterioration in public education, larger and larger segments of the population are creeping downward IQ-wise, cementing the hold Republicans have on the electorate." However, if the election were held today, Bush would hold a lead of 52-48 in the popular vote, but would be virtually tied in the Electoral College, which Bush supporters argue against because the word College angers them. When contacted, a Kerry spokesman just chuckled. No Bush spokesperson was made available for comment. It was also found that Ralph Nader supporters were the brightest of all political proponents tested, but Dr. Friend dismissed them as "too smart for their own good."

In a related study, smart people prefer baseball because the pace is such that there is time to read.

I'll end this with the elections in mind "The voters decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." - Joseph Stalin

Have fun at the polls!

-MM- :crs: