dirty politics has reached a new level. Congratulations Cheney.
So now he's making threats for votes? Geez, I don't know which I'm more afraid of: A terrorist attack from outside the US or a terrorist attack from within the ****ing White House!
The answer of course is neither. **** em both, I'll kick a terrorists ass.
It seems to me that most of the people voting for kerry are self absorbed people who have not taken the time to see the bigger picture. *awaits flames for speaking ones mind*
Originally posted by ZDawg
It seems to me that most of the people voting for kerry are self absorbed people who have not taken the time to see the bigger picture. *awaits flames for speaking ones mind*
It seems to me that those who plan to Vote for Bush are the ones who refuse to look at the bigger picture. The ONLY reason that anyone has every given me on why to vote for Bush is because of the war in Iraq. Well, I don't agree with the war in Iraq, because it had nothing to do with the war on terror.
But yeah, those kind of scare tactics are childish at best :dozey:
Originally posted by ZDawg
It seems to me that most of the people voting for kerry are self absorbed people who have not taken the time to see the bigger picture. ... riiiiight. Self-absorbed.
So self absorbed I support a candidate that refuses to give into dirty politics and attack his opponents character and war record. Wow, I'm such an ***hole.
:rolleyes:
that's why I donate a lot of money to find a cure for juvenile diabetes, money that I could and would love to spend on stuff for me. I'm such a prick, I should look at the bigger picture and see that George Bush is going to turn this country into a fascist state so that the terrorists won't get in here. :rolleyes:
Originally posted by InsaneSith
... riiiiight. Self-absorbed.
So self absorbed I support a candidate that refuses to give into dirty politics and attack his opponents character and war record. dirty polotics? we are talking about the same John kerry correct? the one who recived money from communist china to be in the senate?? among a list of other things?
Originally posted by InsaneSith
So self absorbed I support a candidate that refuses to give into dirty politics and attack his opponents character and war record.
Lack of a war record my friend, Geedubya's lack of a war record. But Kerry's is so bad...what getting a Purple Heart, going back, getting another Purple Heart, going back AGAIN, and getting ANOTHER Purple Heart while rescuing his fellow man, then Kerry decides that 'Hey, I got wounded 3 times in a war that only has political repocussions, not actual world-life repocusions. This war sucks, I want it over.' He's the Devil I tells ya:rolleyes:
Where was Geedubya during Vietnam?
...*cricket*...*tumbleweed*...*owl*...*cough*...
...exactly.
I don't like Bush. I don't like Kerry. I don't like Nader.
I'm voting for Kerry. Voting for Nader is a waste, voting for Bush is stupid, not voting at all makes it hypocritcal to bash the outcome(or praise it).
And yes Dawg, DIRTY POLITICS. Cheney is saying that voting for Kerry is basically a voting for the terrorists to kill more of us off. To me, he's threatening us with terrorism. Yea, as far as politics go(which are already dirty), threatening your own people is no better than what Saddam was doing.
So either you're blinded by Bush's lies and are draped in his Cloak of Fear, or your a religious zealot who likes Bush because he's running this country with his religion(hey look George Washington, this latest President is pissing on your grave and on everything you fought for! KUDOS TO HIM!!:rolleyes: ).
Of course, this shows how stupid religious zealots are because they forget how many people ole' Geedubya killed when he was Governer of Texas...but I guess they deserved it. Because as we all know murder is alright with the Bible :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Kain
Of course, this shows how stupid religious zealots are because they forget how many people ole' Geedubya killed when he was Governer of Texas...but I guess they deserved it. Because as we all know murder is alright with the Bible :rolleyes: I wont even waste my time debating with you, because its obvious you are one of the foolish people who blame everything on religion, and take things totally out of context (I.E. "Because as we all know murder is alright with the Bible") Non-religious people blame everything on Religion, and make it in a sense, a religion in its self, to piss on anyone with any belief.
I don't think I am going to vote this year...so I'm not going to say anything. Why have we been having such low quality candidates as of late? :(
Originally posted by ZDawg
I wont even waste my time debating with you, because its obvious you are one of the foolish people who blame everything on religion, and take things totally out of context (I.E. "Because as we all know murder is alright with the Bible") Non-religious people blame everything on Religion, and make it in a sense, a religion in its self, to piss on anyone with any belief.
1: Murder isn't alright with the Bible, and I know that. Its called sarcasm. Its in most of my posts.
2: I only place the blame on religion when it is religion's fault.
3: Seperation of Church and State - look it up. Its the foundation this country is built on.
4: If you wanna call my beliefs a religion, then you're the foolish one, not I.
Lastley, I didn't take anything out of context: Bush went AWOL during Vietnam, had his military record covered up by his daddy, is a damned lush, and probably doesn't know the difference between an anecdote and an anidote. Look up any other President - you can find arrest records and any other little black marks (including militry dishonors), then try and look up Bush's. Anywhere you look it'll tell you all of his records are sealed up in Bush Sr.'s personal library.
That whole family is as corrupt and messed up as the damned Hussein's, just not as violent.
they forget how many people ole' Geedubya killed when he was Governer of Texas...
What? never heard of that... anyway, i think i'm starting to like you, Kain...
Oh, and Non-religious people blame everything on Religion
Well, religious people blame most things on the lack of religion. (You didn't have faith in god and this is your punishment, blahblahblah...)
Whoah! What's all this fighting about? How many of you can actually vote, anyway? I'm probably one of a handfull of people in this thread that can actually go vote on election day. I have no intention of doing it though, because they're both sorry mother****ers. All this debating going around about which one is better...it cracks me up. Helping elect someone to public office is like going to prison. There's a pretty good chance you'll get ****ed. All you're doing when you cast your vote, is pick which dick is going to do it.
" So now he's making threats for votes? Geez, I don't know which I'm more afraid of: A terrorist attack from outside the US or a terrorist attack from within the ****ing White House!"
Its not a threat. :rolleyes: He's saying since Kerry is "anti-war" or whatever, that terroists could easily attack us again (Althought they won't)
I'm not old enough to vote, but I usually go with the Republican Party. However, I hate both of these people. I dunno who I'd vote for if I could.
I can vote, and this year, I'm voting for Kerry.
I do have a point to make, though. I wish Both Bush and Kerry would stop talking about Vietnam. Come on, it was over 20 years ago. Focus on the present and the future! Tell us what you're going to do for the economy! Tell us what you're going to do for Healthcare and the unemployment rate! Tell us about......gah....you get it.
My man McKain isn't running for president, and that saddens me. That guy would most definately have my vote.
BTW, I'm a registered Republican.
Originally posted by obi-wan13
My man McKain isn't running for president, and that saddens me. That guy would most definately have my vote.
BTW, I'm a registered Republican.
You spelled McCaine wrong...unless you meant me...
...I'd be a kick ass President:emodanc:
Originally posted by Kain
You spelled McCaine wrong...unless you meant me...
...I'd be a kick ass President:emodanc:
Hell, I'd vote for you......
"Run for 2008 Kain! Run for 2008!"™
Originally posted by Tyrion
Hilter would be proud if he could see Cheney. Unfortunately, this type of statement completely undermines your credibility and seriousness - just as it did for people who called Clinton a 'internal enemy of the constitution' ...
Has history so trivialized Hitler that we can just toss around that attribute to anyone we don't like?
Sad ...
And, by the way, what he said was exactly what the RNC message was - 'we're at war, GWB will protect you, and Kerry won't'. Regardless of whether or not we agree with that, or whether you see a link between Iraq and the war on terror, that is the message, and a vast (by >2:1) majority of voters agree.
Mike
Originally posted by txa1265
that is the message, and a vast (by >2:1) majority of voters agree
The only problem I have with that statistic is that about 1:10,000 people have enough common sense to take what they hear in the news with a grain of salt (Not important to the main topic, but important to my point are all those idiots who hear 'gun games make killers out of children' and believe it:dozey: )
Conan O’Brien: Dick Cheney said that if John Kerry wins, there will be another attack. Then Cheney said, if Bush wins, I'll call it off.
Jimmy Kimmel: Yesterday in Iowa, Vice-President Dick Cheney warned voters that a Kerry victory in November’s election will result in another terrorist attack. He also warned that a drunk and celebrating Michael Moore could crush dozens of registered voters!
O’Brien: According to a new book, when President Bush was on National Guard duty he would sometimes sneak off to smoke marijuana and snort cocaine. When he heard this, President Bush said, “That's ridiculous. I never showed up for National Guard duty.”
O’Brien: Former President Clinton is doing well and getting better everyday. In fact, yesterday they took him off his respirator and today they took him off his nurse.
David Letterman: Dick Cheney is saying there is great risk if John Kerry wins. Yeah, the risk is that President Bush won't be able to find another job.
Letterman: Pundits are saying that Kerry's message is garbled. You know you're doing badly when you're running against Bush and you're the one who is garbled.
Relevant? probably not :D
First some of my political beliefs:
1. The war on Iraq was wrong because it was caused under false pretenses, instead of being semi-honest, saying 'we want to oust saddam because he's bad' they manipulated the citizens' fear and said that Saddam had weapons of mass-destruction he was planning to use on the U.S., he was helping terrorists, etc. with no foundation at all. Then they went
2. I personally think Bush is wrong as a president 'the terrorist are looking for more ways to harm this country, and so are we', I mean come on, do you really want this guy responisble for over 10,000 nukes?
Anyway, on to my opinion:
This is an absolute low for politics, now remember, I am currently not arguing about policy, but threatening that if someone else is elected president, more attacks will happen? WTF?
Plus, I think more attacks will happen if Bush is made president, because let's be honest, he's made more enemies outside the US, whilst Kerry is the new guy.
I live in east Tennessee.
There are a lot of ignorant people around here...
most of the stereo types are voting bush...
rednecks- guns 'n gays
christians homosexual marriage & abortion
that is basically everyone around here
Originally posted by jokemaster
Plus, I think more attacks will happen if Bush is made president, because let's be honest, he's made more enemies outside the US, whilst Kerry is the new guy. Has he? Who - France, who has always hated us? Germany, with whom we've always had a dodgy relationship? And those are our *ALLIES*?!?!? Russia has always been the enemy, and now they just want our money ...
So ... China? 3rd world dictatorships? Islamafascist states that have always hated us?
Look - I'm not defending Bush or the war in Iraq, but our last 'friendly' president single-handedly gave nuclear weapons to a state that is more dangerous and more of a threat than Iraq ever was (i.e. N. Korea). *That* is some of what Cheney alluded to in those remarks.
Mike
Originally posted by txa1265
Has he? Who - France, who has always hated us? Really, i hadn't noticed that. Why?
Originally posted by txa1265
Germany, with whom we've always had a dodgy relationship? And those are our *ALLIES*?!?!?
I thought the US had been pretty tight with germany since WW2?
Originally posted by txa1265
Russia has always been the enemy, and now they just want our money ...
Russia did indeed tend to block US actions on principle (as the US did to them) but right now putin is riding high on policies that copy bush, so i'd say he isn't that worried about bush.
Originally posted by txa1265
So ... China? 3rd world dictatorships? Islamafascist states that have always hated us?
The US has been courting China in a disgraceful manner over hte last ten years, turning blind eyes to numerous human rights abuses that they would invade other countries over... cos they want to get in on the market and make money.
From my post in the other thread:
"A new poll in 35 countries suggests that people around the world would prefer Democratic challenger John Kerry as US president over George W Bush.
Kerry scored best with traditional US allies
Only Filipino, Polish and Nigerian respondents clearly backed Mr Bush.
Most said Mr Bush's foreign policy had made them feel worse about the US since his election in 2000.
Meanwhile, a new survey of American and European public attitudes also suggested there had been a dramatic leap in the latter's criticism of US foreign policy.
More than three-quarters of Europeans surveyed in 10 countries by the German Marshall Fund of the US said they disapproved of President Bush's international actions, 20% more than two years ago.
The survey also showed sharp differences in how governments should respond to potential threats from terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.
More than 80% of Americans thought war could achieve justice - more than twice the proportion of Europeans.
"Only one in five want to see Bush re-elected," said Steven Kull, the director of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).
"Though he is not as well known, Kerry would win handily if the people of the world were to elect the US president.""
However you look at it bush has managed to annoy many people all around the world. Both traditional allies and enemies. Even those who publicly stand with bush are mostly doing so due to pressure, so i doubt they like him that much either.
Of course, there has always been a level of anti us feeling, but Bush has managed to ratchet it up a lot, and especially among the US's usual allies.
Personally I don't think it makes any difference if kerry is elected now, as the resentment has already been stirred up, but it patently isn't going to make MORE people attack the US.
Originally posted by txa1265
our last 'friendly' president single-handedly gave nuclear weapons to a state that is more dangerous and more of a threat than Iraq ever was (i.e. N. Korea).
Huh? Really? Tell more....
Think about it! Bin Laden sent only a few guys with knives and he acheived his mission. Bush on the other hand sent thousands of troops, and high tech military stuff and spent billions of dollars. .. and he FAILED HIS mission! If Bush cared at ALL about getting the terrorists, he would have GOT Osama bin laden!
he just wanted an an exuse to take over Iraq! when he took over Iraq, he surrounded the oil fields with armies and had people dig for oil!
The Iraqi people saw that the oil was the only thing we were interested in!
He sent our boys to die. then had a party with big buisness people to discuss how much money will be made on the war!
JFC! I don't belive that people can actually fall for that 'the terrorists are coming' crap!
You can't prevent terrorist attacks. Period. Not dubya, not Kerry, not anyone. Any reasonably intelligent teenager can make a chemical weapon in his friggin bathtub from chemicals he can buy at a convenience store! How do you propose preventing lunatics from doing that?
Fire the Fascist! Vote Kerry!
txa1265, your question of who the real allies of the USA are hardly deserves a reply, but here goes:
Have you ever heard of NATO? What about the half-a-hundred nation that sent fighting men to fight and die alongside the UN -and the States- in Korea? What about Afghanistan? What about World War II? Geez.:rolleyes:
That's all the reply you're getting from me. It's a lot more than you deserve, so don't say it's too little. Now cut the crap and move on.
Oh, and it's "heil", not "hiel". I see why many Americans get this wrong, but in Germanic languages like the Scandinavian tounges and German, the 'i' is pronounced like the English 'e', while the English 'i' could indeed sound like the "ei" part of "heil".
Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle
txa1265, your question of who the real allies of the USA are hardly deserves a reply, but here goes: What I was saying is that so many are looking for us to submit to the UN, and I say that the UN is largely populated and controlled by those whose interests are either not aligned or directly opposed to ours - the majority are our adversaries or enemies.
It has been demonstrably been proven that while we were trying to work with the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was paying literally billions of dollars to our supposed allies of France, Germany and Russia to oppose us. And so they did.
That is my issue.
Mike
Good points. However, I do not agree that the USA was "trying to work with the UN" as in "doing our best to stay on the good side of the UN". Bush personally critizised (spelling?) UN efforts and encouraged Americans to do the same.
As to "receiving billions to oppose the US", that is genuely interesting. Please do elaborate.
Originally posted by txa1265
It has been demonstrably been proven that while we were trying to work with the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was paying literally billions of dollars to our supposed allies of France, Germany and Russia to oppose us. And so they did.
That is a factual problem that opponents to the UN continue to cite. Hussein didn't pay those countries, he paid individuals within those countries. Nothing beyond this has been demonstrated and anything else is pure, unevidenced speculation.
so many are looking for us to submit to the UN,Submit? SUBMIT? It's supposed to be a democratic coalition of nations, mate. If you're working within it, you must ascribe VALUE to the opinions of the other nation states. This is the only way that any standard of international law can be maintained. Oh, I forgot. Neo-conservatives don't want international law, they're only interested in the manifest destiny of the US on the world stage. Pfft. :rolleyes:
Nobody's asked the US to submit to anything, except the rule of international law. Anyone who doesn't submit to the rule of law is a criminal, like it or not.
I say that the UN is largely populated and controlled by those whose interests are either not aligned or directly opposed to ours - the majority are our adversaries or enemies.Enemies? That's very emotive language. You're living in the damn cold war era mate.
It has been demonstrably been proven that while we were trying to work with the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was paying literally billions of dollars to our supposed allies of France, Germany and Russia to oppose us.Proven? Proven by what standard exactly? The Rumsfeld standard? The Fox news standard?
Honestly, I'm amazed sometimes, I really am.
Nobody's asked the US to submit to anything, except the rule of international law. Anyone who doesn't submit to the rule of law is a criminal, like it or not.
Thanks. Thanks to you too, SkinWalker.
I'd like for the USA to become a mostly isolationistic nation again (for its own sake). We'll have to wait and see, though.