:ecu:

That's old and nasty, but what should I expect from a Bush supporter. Oh wait-- you're telling me that's what's going to happen to Dick. I got it now!

I think it's funny that the 9-11 attack was being planned and all the necessary pieces put in place for over 6 years---5 1/2 of those years Bill Clinton was in office, Bush was in office for about 7 months, getting his administration in place, and some people act like 9-11 was Bush's fault. Maybe if Clinton had spent less time with his pants down, he might have done something about it 6 years before it happened, or 5 years , or 4 years or 3 years or 2 years, or 1 years or less than one year!!!!!!!!!!! Yep, it was all Bush's fault!! :rofl:

I never mentioned 9-11.

As long as we are stirring the pot-- I'll go with this one. Bush has to be one of the dumbest American's out there. Maybe if he had spent a little time with his nose in a book instead of drugs up his nose, he could have learned some basics that would help him now.

I'm a proud Republican who voted for Bush Sr. in 1988, never voted for Clinton, voted for W. in 2000, and defended him since the day he took office.

I will not be voting for Bush in November.

He has proven to be a complete incompetent. Anyone who votes for Bush in 2004 has either been asleep for the past 4 years or is more loyal to the Republican Party than to the United States.

Time to drag the car out of the ditch and toss the keys to Kerry. If he's a bad driver, we'll vote him out in 2008. But we already know Bush can't drive...

Cane Gang Wrote:I'm a proud Republican who voted for Bush Sr. in 1988, never voted for Clinton, voted for W. in 2000, and defended him since the day he took office.

I will not be voting for Bush in November.

He has proven to be a complete incompetent. Anyone who votes for Bush in 2004 has either been asleep for the past 4 years or is more loyal to the Republican Party than to the United States.

Time to drag the car out of the ditch and toss the keys to Kerry. If he's a bad driver, we'll vote him out in 2008. But we already know Bush can't drive...

You have the right to vote for whomever you wish, but I would like to know just how (specifics please) President Bush has run the "car into the ditch".

I am a registered Republican, but not 100% loyal to the party. I have voted outside the party line in Presidential elections in the past, but I will not this time, nor did I in 2000. Oh, I have not been asleep for the past 4 years either.

GrayBeard Wrote:You have the right to vote for whomever you wish, but I would like to know just how (specifics please) President Bush has run the "car into the ditch".

1) With the help of a Republican majority in both houses of Congress, racked up record budget deficits (to the tune of over $440 billion this year alone).

2) Invaded Iraq on the premise of WMDs. Even if the administration acted on bad intelligence, the fact remains the administration rushed into the war before the weapons inspectors finished their job. Would've been handy to have waited a few more months.

3) We not only rushed to war, we pissed off the majority of our allies to do it. Even a child knows better than to piss off all their friends when going after an enemy.

4) Seems to have forgotten about some guy named Osama... the one sumbitch we should expending all this money and manpower over.

5) The Patriot Act flies in the face of personal freedom and small government - two things Republicans are supposed to hold dear. Yet, the administration (particularly Ashcroft) resists any efforts to reduce the scope of the Patriot Act.

I don't blame Bush for 9/11, I don't care if he can pronounce the word "nuclear", and I don't care if he spends more time reading Sports Illustrated than the Washington Post. I do care about his track record, and it ain't pretty.

I am definitely anti W, but unfortunately, I do not think the Kerry will be any better.

I believe this current administration is a bunch of liars and I think that the lies have been spewed since 9/11.

Like Jadakiss I want to know "Why did Bush knock down the towers?"

It's ok. The probability of me voting for Kerry isn’t real high either, but I'd take him over Bush any day. At least the man can think. I didn't vote for Bush or Gore either. (That's the only other election I've been old enough to vote in.) And before anyone tells me that I ruined the election I would like to point out that neither Bush or Gore earned my vote and the state in which I voted was won by Gore (not even close) -- though Nadar did receive like 5% of the vote or so.

The republicans are hypocrites and WAY too far to the right for my taste.

The democrats have lost sight of their past and what they have stood for. Wellstone was the last democrat that I was really "high" on, but we all know how that ended—and it’s not even how the mainstream media and Republicans made it out to be. Anyway—anyone who knows much about him would realize he was special. The Democratic party did not embrace him. He ran a grassroots campaign, hated fundraising and not afraid to take a stand.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, that's what makes the world go round, and what is best for them------and that's fine!!! For my situation I couldn't come close to affording Kerry, between a guaranteed tax increase and semi national health insurance, which no one in the world could afford, I can't afford him that's for sure. I did consider him because I figured the interest rates would go back up to a decent level faster, which I want to get higher CD rates. So you see we all have different goals, I don't want really HIGH interest rates for everyone else, but high enough for me to get out of the market and get 7-8 % for the long term!!!

Cane Gang Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:You have the right to vote for whomever you wish, but I would like to know just how (specifics please) President Bush has run the "car into the ditch".

1) With the help of a Republican majority in both houses of Congress, racked up record budget deficits (to the tune of over $440 billion this year alone).

2) Invaded Iraq on the premise of WMDs. Even if the administration acted on bad intelligence, the fact remains the administration rushed into the war before the weapons inspectors finished their job. Would've been handy to have waited a few more months.

3) We not only rushed to war, we pissed off the majority of our allies to do it. Even a child knows better than to piss off all their friends when going after an enemy.

4) Seems to have forgotten about some guy named Osama... the one sumbitch we should expending all this money and manpower over.

5) The Patriot Act flies in the face of personal freedom and small government - two things Republicans are supposed to hold dear. Yet, the administration (particularly Ashcroft) resists any efforts to reduce the scope of the Patriot Act.

I don't blame Bush for 9/11, I don't care if he can pronounce the word "nuclear", and I don't care if he spends more time reading Sports Illustrated than the Washington Post. I do care about his track record, and it ain't pretty.

[QUOTE]1. Did he squander that money on the war in Iraq or should it have just been spent on Democratic party social handouts?
2. Were those UN inspectors the same ones who stole the money from the Oil for food program in Iraq ?
3. Pissed off our Allies? Britain and Austrailia were with us. If you are talking about Germany and France, we had to fight in two wars that Germany started and we had to liberate the spineless French from those same wars. Are these the type of "allies" we really want?
4. Osama has not been forgotten, but in case you did not realize it, that is a different type of "war".
5. The Patriot Act. Do you really want to protect the "civil rights" of the terrorists who come to this country to kill us?

Sen. Kerry is rightfully proud of his short service in Nam some 40 years ago. What has he done in the meantime? Why is he afraid to talk about his career in the Senate, Lt. Gov. of Mass, Ultra liberal voting record whenever he does happen to show up for a vote.

You are right about his voting record---it would be real hard to vote for someone that only showed up for work 1/3 of the time. Yes, he has missed 2/3 of the votes in the senate. I guess a lot of people would vote to give some guy or gal a promotion where they worked, if they were only there 1/3 of the time-----personally, I would hope a guy at work like that would get fired which I presume he would at any company I ever worked for !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tulsafan Wrote:

Cane Gang Wrote:

GrayBeard Wrote:You have the right to vote for whomever you wish, but I would like to know just how (specifics please) President Bush has run the "car into the ditch".

1) With the help of a Republican majority in both houses of Congress, racked up record budget deficits (to the tune of over $440 billion this year alone).

2) Invaded Iraq on the premise of WMDs. Even if the administration acted on bad intelligence, the fact remains the administration rushed into the war before the weapons inspectors finished their job. Would've been handy to have waited a few more months.

3) We not only rushed to war, we pissed off the majority of our allies to do it. Even a child knows better than to piss off all their friends when going after an enemy.

4) Seems to have forgotten about some guy named Osama... the one sumbitch we should expending all this money and manpower over.

5) The Patriot Act flies in the face of personal freedom and small government - two things Republicans are supposed to hold dear. Yet, the administration (particularly Ashcroft) resists any efforts to reduce the scope of the Patriot Act.

I don't blame Bush for 9/11, I don't care if he can pronounce the word "nuclear", and I don't care if he spends more time reading Sports Illustrated than the Washington Post. I do care about his track record, and it ain't pretty.

1. Did he squander that money on the war in Iraq or should it have just been spent on Democratic party social handouts?
2. Were those UN inspectors the same ones who stole the money from the Oil for food program in Iraq ?
3. Pissed off our Allies? Britain and Austrailia were with us. If you are talking about Germany and France, we had to fight in two wars that Germany started and we had to liberate the spineless French from those same wars. Are these the type of "allies" we really want?
4. Osama has not been forgotten, but in case you did not realize it, that is a different type of "war".
5. The Patriot Act. Do you really want to protect the "civil rights" of the terrorists who come to this country to kill us?

Sen. Kerry is rightfully proud of his short service in Nam some 40 years ago. What has he done in the meantime? Why is he afraid to talk about his career in the Senate, Lt. Gov. of Mass, Ultra liberal voting record whenever he does happen to show up for a vote.

1. Seems hard to imagine the Democrats ramrodding pet projects through, since they're the minority in both houses. Democrats have always been "tax and spend"... my problem is with the Republicans becoming "borrow and spend" over the past 4 years.

2. They would be the ones who would've told us there were no WMDs, if given the 60 more days they needed to finish their job.

3. Britain sent troops. Australia has not, to my knowledge. Add Italy, Canada, Japan and Russia to the list. I'd also add China, but they're not as much of an ally as a trade partner. All of that doesn't matter -- we could've disagreed and gone about our business without pissing them off. It's called diplomacy, something the elder Bush and SOS Schutlz understood.

4. Glad you feel that way. I hope Bush shares your opinion. I have my doubts, based on the amount of attention the White House is paying to Iraq... and now Iran?

5. Actually, I was thinking about the rights of American citizens - right to privacy, rights from undue search and seizures... you know, small things like that. Immigration control and stomping on the Bill of Rights are two different things.

Former President George H.W. Bush got a bad rap. He was a lousy communicator but a decent president. The apple fell a long way from the tree.

TUfan Wrote:As long as we are stirring the pot-- I'll go with this one. Bush has to be one of the dumbest American's out there. Maybe if he had spent a little time with his nose in a book instead of drugs up his nose, he could have learned some basics that would help him now.

Let's throw in some facts.

Bush -- Ivy League MBA -- hardly dumb

Clinton -- impeached for cheating on his wife in the oval office -- there's your winner for dumbest American

Tech Dawgs Wrote:Bush -- Ivy League MBA -- hardly dumb

Clinton -- impeached for cheating on his wife in the oval office -- there's your winner for dumbest American

Sorry TechDawg, but all you need is the right name, a fat wallet, and a good tutor to graduate from the Ivy league now a days.

As for Clinton, perhaps 9/11 wouldn't have been such a surprise if Republican didn't push that to be a major issue.

No one has answered my and Jadakiss's question "Why did Bush knock down the towers?" Perhaps it was for a fund raiser a la "The Long Kiss Goodnight".

uhmump95 Wrote:No one has answered my and Jadakiss's question "Why did Bush knock down the towers?" Perhaps it was for a fund raiser a la "The Long Kiss Goodnight".

If you really need that question answered, then there is no hope for you! Thanks for playing though, you may pick up some nice parting gifts on your way out!

:wave:


:ecu:

Actually-- GW got in on Daddy's money and was quite dumb. He spent more time partying, boozing and doing a little on the side than he did studying. How do I know? Bosses brother in law spent lived very near him...not that it isn't public information.

Clinton-- Rhodes scholar. (He's not even running. And he, like more than half of the men in american screwed up. At least he didn't screw America by making this country in to the biggest bad guy out there. We are fighting a world war on terrorism and large segments of the world population (including our own) hate our leader and the actions of our country.)

Bush-- Booze scholar. Could call him the scholar of half-truths...ah heck, lies. He's a bigger liar than any president of my time.

TUfan Wrote:Bush-- Booze scholar. Could call him the scholar of half-truths...ah heck, lies. He's a bigger liar than any president of my time.

Liar? Do you consider Kerry to be a liar as well? He assisted in writing letters/requests to then President Clinton on why we should be pre-emptive with Saddam. And Gasp, he was using the same intel that Bush/Powell used in making our argument to go to war.

And so I guess saying "I did not have sexual relations with that women, Ms Lewisky", don't constitute as lies either?

So should we not be fighting this "world war on terrorism"? Should we go back to the days of Clinton when we look the other way, time and time again, as our citiizens are being bombed and killed by Al Queda? If that's the kind of pacisfism you want....you will fit right in in France! What has happened to France because of their pacisfism? They were occupied until we came to their rescue on more than one occasion!

One more thing, we are always considered the "bad guy" (except when rushing to the aid of that country in particular) by almost every country out there. Why? Because of pure jelousy.

Graybeard-- you need to leave the country and learn to think for yourself. You sound like a broken record-- reciting exactly what the righ-wing freaks on the radio tell you to spout.

let's see... a lie about a blow job vs. a lie about why we are really going to war, the amount of money it will take, and the strange idea of having a plan when entering into a war that is in obvious need of leadership. I'll take the blow job anyday. At least he did things for this country besides run up a HUGE debt.