This is the new politics thread. lets all be nice ;)
11-01-2004, 04:24 PM
#61
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Battle Creek Michigan
Posts: 1,686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by crobtex
Herb,
You forgot to add GW causing the hurricanes in Florida on your list.
Herb,
You forgot to add GW causing the hurricanes in Florida on your list.
This forum is going to be a hollacost Wed if Bush loses !!
11-01-2004, 04:42 PM
#63
Chapter President
Originally posted by herb
Once again, Mr Cobtex, it is NOT my list. Perhaps you need to back up and reread and see WHO posted it.
This forum is going to be a hollacost Wed if Bush loses !!
Once again, Mr Cobtex, it is NOT my list. Perhaps you need to back up and reread and see WHO posted it.
This forum is going to be a hollacost Wed if Bush loses !!
I just saw the quote and assumed........
I KNOW, I KNOW...............you end up the first three letters for doing that.
I'm not worried about this forum, it will survive. It's the rest of the country and Larrys blood pressure that concern me. (boy, i'm one to talk)
11-01-2004, 04:48 PM
#64
Thats MR Hoss to you buddy!
Originally posted by Lary Ellis (Top)
Proven fact that Dubya did a rain dance and was the direct cause of those hurricanes. Word has it he actually was aiming at Canada tho
Proven fact that Dubya did a rain dance and was the direct cause of those hurricanes. Word has it he actually was aiming at Canada tho
11-01-2004, 04:50 PM
#65
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Jack Thorpe
- for proving El Quieda was not in IRAQ?
This is a war on terrorism, not specifically on Osama. There are more of them out there then just him. We have 75% of his lieutenants, and have him basically pinned. We'll get him. I didn't know we were expected to win wars overnight.
This is not what he was saying when he asked for support in Congress. It is what he has to say now because there WERE no links. They hated Saddam and tried to kill him.
Intelligence issues. Already proven and been discussed before
Agreed
Haven't heard that one, but I guess it's okay for Kerry to vote against supporting them with equipment and resources?
I know it hurts to think about it but it has been common practice to put forward bills with all kinds of stuff in them so that when somebody votes against them they can be accused of opposing the good thing. Just a thought.
1.9 million new jobs last year. The economy is on the upswing. He inherited an economy on the downswing, and is turning it around. This is proven fact. Clinton had the bubble, and Bush inherited a pig. War, etc etc.
Clinton and Gore to blame for the war and the unemployment and the deficit?
I'm not sure about if he has close friends there. I was friends with people in my past who are now in jail. Does that mean I should automatically be considered a crook? You can't tell me that Kerry and his wife have never been involved with shady characters.
Senior Enron people contributed HEAVILY Bush in time and money. They were his cronnies. They were not minor players.
I would HAVE to read the newspapers. I don't get that either.
How did he LET 9/11 happen? I can't wait to hear your vast right wing conspiracy theory on this one. How did he use it?
George was floundering. He told the Whitehouse chief of security to mind his own business and focus on Iraq. Daily reports about suspicious activities involving Saudis were ignored. I saw the video taken of GWB when he got the WTC news. He did not react at all. It was when he could use PATRIOTISM as a political tool that he started to go up in the polls.
It's a hard decision to make, but he made it, and I support our president and I think we've done the right things.
The Wrong War..... etc. Osama and his ilk have received money from the US and from Saudi Arabia. Sure the US donations to him were aimed against the Russians but look at how many lives have been lost and how much damage has been done to Afghanistan, to Pakistan, and to US embassies in Africa.
You can thank Saddam for that. He's one of the main reasons why we went there in the first place. The blame lies on his shoulders. I suppose if we let him stay in power, the numbers would be in the millions eventually.
You're just absolutely wrong on this one. The talks with North Korea have been ongoing. By following Kerry's plan, we remove the pressure that China can provide in these talks. Not a good idea in my opinion.
George Bush has withdrawn forces from this area.
I'm not wealthy, and I got a tax break. What's wrong with tax breaks for the wealthy? They do afterall pay over 80% of the taxes in this country.
Not true. Most taxes are collected from the middle and lower classes. There are a lot more of them. At the turn of the century, in both of our countries, most taxes were from corporations and the very wealthy. The ratios have been reversed and George is doing everything to reverse them further. This reversal is not completely a bad thing because back in the "good old days" few common people had much income to tax.
Why do we continue to play Robin Hood with them? What is the incentive to become wealthy and build a financially secure life in this country if you know the govt. is just going to take it from you anyway? It ain't about Robin Hood. It is about justice. The wealthy derive enormous benefit from roads, police, military, economic regulation, infrastructure of all sorts. The poor just don't get as much benefit and can't realistically be expected to pay for it.
...and Kerry has a better plan? Nobody has seen his plan. He doesn't have squat except a promise to tax the "wealthy". What he doesn't tell you is that effects 475,000 small businesses who could very well die. A small business pays taxes on unreinvested taxes. The owner pays taxes on salary he pays himself. I don't get the problem.
So think about it, over 500,000 jobs in jeopardy just by raising the taxes.
Now how is he going to pay for the rest, and cover the deficit? Give me a break. He's unrealistic.
I don't have an answer for this other than to say given the climate, and the pig he inherited from Clinton, he's not done so bad.
Some pig. Eight years of rising prosperity and reduced deficits even with the Special Prosecuter doing his best to keep ***** busy. Don't sell your Republican dominated congress short. They helped pass some laws did they not??
I think that over the next 4 years, this can be turned around, and not by KErry and his social healthcare.
Someday Hillary might do it.
They've disowned him anyways, so big deal. It's not like they can find him.
Low priority. Screw Cat Stevens.
Not my type. But an indicator of how silly authority can be.
Upcoming elections, more kids in school then ever, in the process of helping them develop freedom in their country. IT's time for them to step up to the plate as well. Again, I didn't know this was supposed to happen overnight.
Most of them are competitive. Some aren't and that happened through the Clinton administration as well. If you'd actually do some research you'd know that the GAO under both administrations recommended using them without competitive bidding because there were no other companies who could provide the needed services.
Elections? Is this a bad thing?
Your opinion because you choose what you want to believe, even though the fact prove otherwise. Even CBS news knows that now.
I didn't know that was a requirement. I suppose it's ok for Clinton to dodge the draft, but not ok for Bush to serve in the guard.
- for proving El Quieda was not in IRAQ?
This is a war on terrorism, not specifically on Osama. There are more of them out there then just him. We have 75% of his lieutenants, and have him basically pinned. We'll get him. I didn't know we were expected to win wars overnight.
This is not what he was saying when he asked for support in Congress. It is what he has to say now because there WERE no links. They hated Saddam and tried to kill him.
Intelligence issues. Already proven and been discussed before
Agreed
Haven't heard that one, but I guess it's okay for Kerry to vote against supporting them with equipment and resources?
I know it hurts to think about it but it has been common practice to put forward bills with all kinds of stuff in them so that when somebody votes against them they can be accused of opposing the good thing. Just a thought.
1.9 million new jobs last year. The economy is on the upswing. He inherited an economy on the downswing, and is turning it around. This is proven fact. Clinton had the bubble, and Bush inherited a pig. War, etc etc.
Clinton and Gore to blame for the war and the unemployment and the deficit?
I'm not sure about if he has close friends there. I was friends with people in my past who are now in jail. Does that mean I should automatically be considered a crook? You can't tell me that Kerry and his wife have never been involved with shady characters.
Senior Enron people contributed HEAVILY Bush in time and money. They were his cronnies. They were not minor players.
I would HAVE to read the newspapers. I don't get that either.
How did he LET 9/11 happen? I can't wait to hear your vast right wing conspiracy theory on this one. How did he use it?
George was floundering. He told the Whitehouse chief of security to mind his own business and focus on Iraq. Daily reports about suspicious activities involving Saudis were ignored. I saw the video taken of GWB when he got the WTC news. He did not react at all. It was when he could use PATRIOTISM as a political tool that he started to go up in the polls.
It's a hard decision to make, but he made it, and I support our president and I think we've done the right things.
The Wrong War..... etc. Osama and his ilk have received money from the US and from Saudi Arabia. Sure the US donations to him were aimed against the Russians but look at how many lives have been lost and how much damage has been done to Afghanistan, to Pakistan, and to US embassies in Africa.
You can thank Saddam for that. He's one of the main reasons why we went there in the first place. The blame lies on his shoulders. I suppose if we let him stay in power, the numbers would be in the millions eventually.
You're just absolutely wrong on this one. The talks with North Korea have been ongoing. By following Kerry's plan, we remove the pressure that China can provide in these talks. Not a good idea in my opinion.
George Bush has withdrawn forces from this area.
I'm not wealthy, and I got a tax break. What's wrong with tax breaks for the wealthy? They do afterall pay over 80% of the taxes in this country.
Not true. Most taxes are collected from the middle and lower classes. There are a lot more of them. At the turn of the century, in both of our countries, most taxes were from corporations and the very wealthy. The ratios have been reversed and George is doing everything to reverse them further. This reversal is not completely a bad thing because back in the "good old days" few common people had much income to tax.
Why do we continue to play Robin Hood with them? What is the incentive to become wealthy and build a financially secure life in this country if you know the govt. is just going to take it from you anyway? It ain't about Robin Hood. It is about justice. The wealthy derive enormous benefit from roads, police, military, economic regulation, infrastructure of all sorts. The poor just don't get as much benefit and can't realistically be expected to pay for it.
...and Kerry has a better plan? Nobody has seen his plan. He doesn't have squat except a promise to tax the "wealthy". What he doesn't tell you is that effects 475,000 small businesses who could very well die. A small business pays taxes on unreinvested taxes. The owner pays taxes on salary he pays himself. I don't get the problem.
So think about it, over 500,000 jobs in jeopardy just by raising the taxes.
Now how is he going to pay for the rest, and cover the deficit? Give me a break. He's unrealistic.
I don't have an answer for this other than to say given the climate, and the pig he inherited from Clinton, he's not done so bad.
Some pig. Eight years of rising prosperity and reduced deficits even with the Special Prosecuter doing his best to keep ***** busy. Don't sell your Republican dominated congress short. They helped pass some laws did they not??
I think that over the next 4 years, this can be turned around, and not by KErry and his social healthcare.
Someday Hillary might do it.
They've disowned him anyways, so big deal. It's not like they can find him.
Low priority. Screw Cat Stevens.
Not my type. But an indicator of how silly authority can be.
Upcoming elections, more kids in school then ever, in the process of helping them develop freedom in their country. IT's time for them to step up to the plate as well. Again, I didn't know this was supposed to happen overnight.
Most of them are competitive. Some aren't and that happened through the Clinton administration as well. If you'd actually do some research you'd know that the GAO under both administrations recommended using them without competitive bidding because there were no other companies who could provide the needed services.
Elections? Is this a bad thing?
Your opinion because you choose what you want to believe, even though the fact prove otherwise. Even CBS news knows that now.
I didn't know that was a requirement. I suppose it's ok for Clinton to dodge the draft, but not ok for Bush to serve in the guard.
Jack, you missed the point here. George is not flawless. He is texas oilman who invaded the wrong country to secure oil profits. It is the old imperial thing. That is the way the world sees it and I am afraid Kerry probably won't be that much different.
I remember the Johnson-Goldwater thing and the liberal Johnson still led the US into a disasterous war.
11-01-2004, 04:57 PM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Hoss
Give me a break Hoss, you know darned well it was Jeb who brought on the hurricanes. Maybe it was Kerry because they mostly skipped Cuba?
Yeah, we did get some damage up here. Hmmmmmmmm???
11-01-2004, 04:59 PM
#67
Thats MR Hoss to you buddy!
Originally posted by Bill Tomlinson
He is texas oilman who invaded the wrong country to secure oil profits.
He is texas oilman who invaded the wrong country to secure oil profits.
Nobody here has said that President Bush is without flaw. I only know of one person who has ever walked this earth who was flawless. However, even if you just flat out hate President Bush, when you look at the options it just doesn't make sense to vote for anyone else.
That said, why do you care? You're not even a U.S. citizen. Heck....Canada wasn't even on our list of allies the last time I checked so why would we care about what you have to say anyway? No offense to you or my Canadian friends....but do you not have your own government to worry about?
11-01-2004, 05:01 PM
#68
Thats MR Hoss to you buddy!
Originally posted by Bill Tomlinson
Give me a break Hoss, you know darned well it was Jeb who brought on the hurricanes. Maybe it was Kerry because they mostly skipped Cuba?
Yeah, we did get some damage up here. Hmmmmmmmm???
Give me a break Hoss, you know darned well it was Jeb who brought on the hurricanes. Maybe it was Kerry because they mostly skipped Cuba?
Yeah, we did get some damage up here. Hmmmmmmmm???
11-01-2004, 05:02 PM
#69
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, Hoss, did you know that Lorne Green was a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reporter who was famous for his live reporting of the Battle of Britain?
He was known as the voice of doom because of the bad news he kept having to report.
He was known as the voice of doom because of the bad news he kept having to report.
11-01-2004, 05:06 PM
#71
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pa Cartwright.... A CANUCK! Watch it we are taking over. Red Green and the boys from Possum lodge. And Tom Green (the psychiatrist's make work project).
11-01-2004, 05:48 PM
#72
America is needs a healthy dose of imperialism. Whatever the U.S. does, it needs to be in our favor above all else. We have the right to be imperialistic, we have the right to secure oil for ourselves, and we have the right to go up their and conquer Canada. Not that anything up their's worth it, but a country has the right to do anything that makes it stronger, anything for its self intrest. That's how the rest of the world runs, but for some reason people think America should be doing everything to help everybody else and ignore it's own needs. Also according to these folk, when we have needs, we need to go through the UN for permission. That is placing our self intrest in the hands of other countries, and it is there self-intrest to keep us from our profits. It is best for a country to make all other countries on the planet as weak as possible; nobody cares about us if our economy falters or such. We need to worry about ourselves, and not care about anybody else's opinion on matters before our own. What we need in office is an Americanist.
The UN, right to go to war, unilateral issue alone is what I'm getting at here. We need a president who stands up for America's rights, not one who tries to make everybody happy with us. I don't care if Canadians hate us, and Europeans are going to loathe us anyways. I want America to gain as much power on the World Stage as possible. I want imperialism, good old fashioned strong armed in America's own intrest butt-kicking Europe ignoring non-politically correct let's conquer all the world and its oil because it is our right to imperialism. We need a new Bull Moose party.
The UN, right to go to war, unilateral issue alone is what I'm getting at here. We need a president who stands up for America's rights, not one who tries to make everybody happy with us. I don't care if Canadians hate us, and Europeans are going to loathe us anyways. I want America to gain as much power on the World Stage as possible. I want imperialism, good old fashioned strong armed in America's own intrest butt-kicking Europe ignoring non-politically correct let's conquer all the world and its oil because it is our right to imperialism. We need a new Bull Moose party.
11-01-2004, 06:05 PM
#74
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Suffolk Va.
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read this before you vote
A vote for John Kerry is a vote AGAINST the U.S. military personnel
who liberated Iraq -- those Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines --
who are now on the frontline defending our critical national interests
in the region against Jihadi terrorists. It is also a vote against
those who have already provided the last measure on that front in
service to our great nation.
Indeed, there is a direct correlation between Kerry's efforts to
politicize dissent against U.S. resolve in the war against terrorism
-- specifically on the Iraqi warfront -- and American and Allied
causalities on that front. Those forces, including countless Iraqis,
are being injured and killed in ever-increasing numbers because of the
political discord Kerry and his ilk are fomenting.
If you think there is not a connection between Kerry's campaign
rhetoric and U.S. casualties, read on....
Kerry has reduced the war to liberate Iraq to nothing more than
political fodder, which has emboldened our Jihadi enemies. As noted
recently by Professor Mohammad Amin Bashar at Baghdad's Islamic
University, "If the U.S. Army suffered numerous humiliating losses,
Kerry would emerge as the superman of the American people." To that
end, Abu Jalal, an influential Iraqi resistance leader, said last
month, "American elections and Iraq are linked tightly together. We've
got to work to change the election, and we've done so. With our
strikes, we've dragged Bush into the mud."
The net effect of Kerry's dissention can certainly be felt in terms of
increased numbers of American and Allied casualties. A few weeks ago,
John Edwards unwittingly provided the evidence for this very
correlation: "We lost more troops in September than we lost in August;
lost more in August than we lost in July; lost more in July than we
lost in June."
This was, and remains, the unavoidable consequence of Kerry's reckless
campaign rhetoric. The blood of those American Patriots (like the
blood of his "brothers" in Vietnam, after he used that war as fodder
for his 1972 congressional campaign), is on John Kerry's hands.
To be sure, this is the harshest of all condemnations. But it is also
the truth.
Now, Osama bin Laden, who planned the 9/11 attack killing 3,000 of our
countrymen -- men, women and children -- has emerged from his rat
hole, and issued a statement which is, unquestionably, timed to
support John Kerry.
In that light, the most challenging question that can be asked on
this, the eve of the 2004 Presidential Election, is not so much, "For
whom will you vote?" but "With whom will you vote?"
Will you vote with Osama bin Laden, Abu Jalal, Saddam Hussein and Abu
Musab Al-Zarqawi? How about Kim Jong-Il, Mohammad Khatami, Moammar
al-Ghadafi and Hu Jingtao. All of these tyrants support John Kerry.
or...
Will you vote with America's fighting forces, who, according to a
just- published Army Times poll, overwhelmingly support President
George W. Bush. In fact, 82 percent of our Armed Forces said they do
not want John Kerry as their Commander in Chief.
On Tuesday, SUPPORT OUR TROOPS -- VOTE FOR GEORGE W. BUSH!
Rick
A vote for John Kerry is a vote AGAINST the U.S. military personnel
who liberated Iraq -- those Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines --
who are now on the frontline defending our critical national interests
in the region against Jihadi terrorists. It is also a vote against
those who have already provided the last measure on that front in
service to our great nation.
Indeed, there is a direct correlation between Kerry's efforts to
politicize dissent against U.S. resolve in the war against terrorism
-- specifically on the Iraqi warfront -- and American and Allied
causalities on that front. Those forces, including countless Iraqis,
are being injured and killed in ever-increasing numbers because of the
political discord Kerry and his ilk are fomenting.
If you think there is not a connection between Kerry's campaign
rhetoric and U.S. casualties, read on....
Kerry has reduced the war to liberate Iraq to nothing more than
political fodder, which has emboldened our Jihadi enemies. As noted
recently by Professor Mohammad Amin Bashar at Baghdad's Islamic
University, "If the U.S. Army suffered numerous humiliating losses,
Kerry would emerge as the superman of the American people." To that
end, Abu Jalal, an influential Iraqi resistance leader, said last
month, "American elections and Iraq are linked tightly together. We've
got to work to change the election, and we've done so. With our
strikes, we've dragged Bush into the mud."
The net effect of Kerry's dissention can certainly be felt in terms of
increased numbers of American and Allied casualties. A few weeks ago,
John Edwards unwittingly provided the evidence for this very
correlation: "We lost more troops in September than we lost in August;
lost more in August than we lost in July; lost more in July than we
lost in June."
This was, and remains, the unavoidable consequence of Kerry's reckless
campaign rhetoric. The blood of those American Patriots (like the
blood of his "brothers" in Vietnam, after he used that war as fodder
for his 1972 congressional campaign), is on John Kerry's hands.
To be sure, this is the harshest of all condemnations. But it is also
the truth.
Now, Osama bin Laden, who planned the 9/11 attack killing 3,000 of our
countrymen -- men, women and children -- has emerged from his rat
hole, and issued a statement which is, unquestionably, timed to
support John Kerry.
In that light, the most challenging question that can be asked on
this, the eve of the 2004 Presidential Election, is not so much, "For
whom will you vote?" but "With whom will you vote?"
Will you vote with Osama bin Laden, Abu Jalal, Saddam Hussein and Abu
Musab Al-Zarqawi? How about Kim Jong-Il, Mohammad Khatami, Moammar
al-Ghadafi and Hu Jingtao. All of these tyrants support John Kerry.
or...
Will you vote with America's fighting forces, who, according to a
just- published Army Times poll, overwhelmingly support President
George W. Bush. In fact, 82 percent of our Armed Forces said they do
not want John Kerry as their Commander in Chief.
On Tuesday, SUPPORT OUR TROOPS -- VOTE FOR GEORGE W. BUSH!
Rick
11-01-2004, 06:23 PM
#75
DTR'S Chaplain
OK Guys I just realized canada dosnt even have a free press so how could Bill know he is Wrong...
In the words of the last honest Democrat Forrest Gump. Stupid is as Stupid Does..
In the words of the last honest Democrat Forrest Gump. Stupid is as Stupid Does..