John Kerry beat the dog crap out of boy George on the debates. Kerry was focused on the main issue of National Security while boy George was scattered and unorganized as usual. Since the U.S. Supreme Court appointed boy George President: Record Clinton budget surpluses have turned into record Bush budget deficits. http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ Bush ignored the Clinton administration and Richard Clark warnings of Osama bin Laden determined to attack in the U.S. until it was too late. http://www.bartcop.com/he-knew-failure.jpg North Korea has developed NUCLEAR Weapons of Mass Destruction. Iraq was found to not have Weapons of Mass Destruction. More than 1000 U.S. military personnel have been killed in an oil invasion that was not necessary, and over 200,000 military personnel have been discharged because of disabilities caused by the Iraq war. http://icasualties.org/oif/ Even more civilians have been killed or wounded in a country that DID NOT ATTACK US. http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_page1.htm Al Qaeda, the real enemy, has grown stronger and is recruiting more than ever. http://www.bartcop.com/aq-support.jpg The Economy has gotten worse. Millions of jobs have been lost. The middle class has shrank by 1.3 million middle class Americans who have slipped below the poverty level. And all boy George has promised is MORE OF THE SAME. ************************************************* Vote for John Kerry. America can do better. Clinton proved that. http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html *************************************************
Why the fuck did you post this in multiple forums? I think it belongs in the politics forum numbnuts!
Max, do you know what a Guideline is? I can tell you are a real letter of the law type, unless of course it's your opinion. Don't worry though. If you ever grow up and get a website of your own, I probably won't be interested in going there.
Max, it's interesting to see you have "village idiot" under your name. I commend you on your courage to be honest with everyone here. Inagodada, even though I realize you have the right to be here...I sincerely wish that you would just go away. Please go away. PLEASE!
The way I read the guidelines, it looks like double posting is against the rules. If you've come to a different conclusion, by all means enlighten me. As for my site, see my sig, but you probably wouldn't be interested in any website that doesn't blaringly reiterate your ideas and opinions.
Shit, I thought this was gonna be a thread about that faggot cocksucker Kerry taking little boys to a woodshed to molest them. How'd he prove that? By being such a piece of shit that anyone could do better than he did? You're right. John Kerry and Bill Clinton: both shitwads who believe that government should control the lives of the people. -Jeffrey
When you post inflammatory, juvenile bullshit like Bush superimposed on a nazi flag, you prove what a numbnuts shithead you are. Just like a typical liberal pansy to have to resort to contrived fantasy bullshit in order to try to take down his opponent. Name calling? You're no doubt the biggest expert here -- you're a liberal, ain'tcha? You have to be, 'cause that's all liberals have. -Jeffrey
For what it's worth, this is my analysis of the debate: I thought the President was passionate about his core convictions; he is plain-spoken like Harry Truman was. Kerry is all flash, and no substance. Bush is no flash, and all substance. However, what sucks is that the average American voter MIGHT be fooled by a fraud like Kerry because he speaks more beautifully than Bush does. But like Harry Truman before him, George W. Bush has a backbone forged in steel. Harry Truman was plain-spoken, and the "elite" of his day ridiculed him as the "elite" today condemn Bush as a moron. Again, context: Lincoln, Eisenhower, Truman and Reagan were all dismissed by the "elites." Bush is in good company. Even Churchill was called a "gadfly" by those on the Left in 1940. Nice. And what is Chamberlain's position in history now? Bush is utterly Churchillian in his view of freedom over tyranny. Remember this Churchill quote: "I have nothing to offer but blood, tears, toil, and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask what is our policy? I will say: It is to wage war, by sea, by land, and air with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask what is our aim? I can answer in one word--victory--victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival. Without victory, there is no survival." Winston Churchill Speech before Parliament May 1940 Just because George W. Bush can't articulate his thoughts as pretty as Kerry...okay, well, maybe I'm just weird, but I actually find it endearing that Bush is plain-spoken and mangles his words. It shows to the rest of the country that he is a regular guy. Oh, I know, I know...Kofi Annan and the rest of the "world elite" think different. Who cares, really? Other than those folks who vacation on Martha's Vineyard. Call the folks in Paris, and ask them. Cowboy. That's what they would say about Bush. But I digress. Anywho... I say this next statement with absolute conviction: George W. Bush is a Mount Rushmore-type President. Just like Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan. History will show this. Trust me. In the final analysis, Bush is going to win. Being a good debater does not predicate whether one will be a good commander-in-chief or world leader.
I have been reading the posts on this page, and I don't want to sound insensitive, but all of you are intellectually lazy. No one bothers to read facts or valid information; it appears, however, to me at least, that all of you choose to be blinded by Leftist ideology. And your ideology acts as a mental straitjacket. It blinds adherents to reality, breeds fanaticism, and rationalizes dishonesty. It makes smart people stupid. Ideology provides a way for lazy people to respond to issues, ideas, people, and events without thinking. In the final analysis, you all aren't necessarily rigorous thinkers. You hate Bush so much that it clouds everything you do, say or think. You are all intellectual morons. And I say this with all the sensitivity I can muster, because I do want to be PC.
Thanks for your input, oh wise one. We appreciate you bringing your genius to all of us at the hip forums. Now let me go sulk in my corner because some smart-ass wants to make me think I am not near as intellectual as him...my world is crumbling down around me. Good thing I don't listen to the blanket statements of every closed-minded individual I come across...
Max, that guideline was talking about mulitiple posts in the same thread, not in other forums. I've never read the guidelines, but I'm sure the latter is accepted, as it's not considered flooding. Yeah, George Bush stays strong in his conviction and his idea on the war. But, this is nothing to be proud of, as he took us to war under false pretenses, very lacking information, some of it most influential from anonymous sources Curveball and Meridian, without actually investigating them. You don't go to war on tips. You exhaust your country's investigative powers, something that wasn't done. When he doesn't find the "imminent threat" that he claimed, he changes the threat to "weapons related activities". This was plainly and simply a war under false-pretenses. Can a Republican on this board show me the information linking Saddam Hussein to Al-Queda, besides his link to Muhammed El-Shabatt of the Mujahideen forces in 1991? I'd really be interested in seeing it, but you won't find it. Saying that it shows dignity to stubbornly back a war with no factual basis is like saying it shows dignity that the D.A. stubbornly held the wrong man in custody even though he didn't have reason for arresting him in the first place, and has found him to not have commited the crime. We've subsequently found ourselves trapped in a quagmire of guerilla warfare with a country against whom we have no incriminating evidence. It's really clear how much better at guerilla warfare we've gotten since the North Vietnamese stormed the palace in Saigon in 1975 and we lost a war in which we were involved for the sole purpose of saving face in the cold war. Plainly and simply, Bush and his private interests have trapped us in a terrible situation, and diplomacy, more U.N. involvement and multi-lateral talks with more people than England and Poland is clearly the only way we're going to settle the situation in Iraq. I just hope we can rectify a problem this large at this point. We had something like 9,000 initial troops from England, and 2,450 troops from Poland, and 1,450 troops between Spain and Honduras, three of of whom had "special interest" clauses in the agreement made that if each were to be attacked by terrorists, they'd pull out, which happened in March, and April for our token Phillipine "help", and this isn't a coalition. We need much more support than what we have. Bush has made that simply impossible at this point. Bush's domestic policy is pretty much non-existent. Iraq and 9/11 are his two concerns, more aptly, connecting the two, and keeping less-than-educated Americans believing they're connected is the main concern. 1,000,000+ jobs lost since his being elected, according the the Bureau of Labor Statistics, hundreds of thousands of jobs being shipped over seas for purposes of finance for big businesses, and large tax breaks (Jobs and Growth Act 2003) for big businesses who ship American jobs over seas is not acceptable. Blocking bipartisan talks on Canadian medication drug imports for his own private interest in the Pharmaceutical industry is not what I call a solid-healthcare program. I would discuss his energy program, but... it doesn't exist! As for the debate, Bush didn't answer what I consider to be very important question, that being "Do you think there will be another terrorist attack if John Kerry is re-elected?". Bush stood there backing his "coalition", and his less than copious information for his basis for war like a broken record. In my opinion, John Kerry was the only person really debating at all. Kerry was confident, and collected, but he would have lost my vote after this debate if it weren't for the fact that anyone is better than George Bush. Why would he have lost it? Because he was against the war at the beginning of the debate, then said "I have always had a clear stance and that is that there is a right way to go about the war and a wrong way, and Bush went about it the wrong way". You can't be Jim and John Kerry. I'm disinfranchised with the whole process, but he's going to get my vote on November 2nd nevertheless. By the way, randomly quoting Winston Churchill isn't going to prove Bush is a good commander. And don't compare World War II with Iraq, please. Britain had reason to be at war with the Nazis. They attacked them during operation Falcon, and later (during the middle of the war) during Hermann Goering's operation Eagle, and while it failed to bring down London, it was still an attack by a real enemy. America was attacked by Japan and therefore had justified reason for entering the war. America was not attacked by Iraq, and it's fairly obvious that the connection of Saddam Hussein to Al-Queda wasn't and can't be found beyond dated relations that can be found in Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia also. Like I said, I would like to see the proof. If Bush couldn't conjure it up, I doubt anyone on Hipforums will be able to either. Plainly and simply we're at war and losing lives for a fight for private interests under false-pretenses. It's nothing like World War II.
I have been reading the posts on this page, and I don't want to sound insensitive, but all of you are intellectually lazy. No one bothers to read facts or valid information; it appears, however, to me at least, that all of you choose to be blinded by Leftist ideology. And your ideology acts as a mental straitjacket. It blinds adherents to reality, breeds fanaticism, and rationalizes dishonesty. It makes smart people stupid. Ideology provides a way for lazy people to respond to issues, ideas, people, and events without thinking. In the final analysis, you all aren't necessarily rigorous thinkers. You hate Bush so much that it clouds everything you do, say or think. You are all intellectual morons. And I say this with all the sensitivity I can muster, because I do want to be PC.
Talk about lazy, that's like the second time you've posted that EXACT post in this thread, plus you have posted it in other threads too. This is spam.
Sera Michele--The reason I posted it in various forums is because all I read is drivel from you folks. I have only seen one or two intellegent postings in ALL of the forums; therefore, my statement is needed in various places. It was good enough the first time, why not all the time?
Hayduke--You don't think Truman or Reagan are Mount Rushmore material? If not, then whom would you choose?