Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

How can you justify voting for Kerry??

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 03:40 AM
link   
I would vote for Zippy the chimp if he was the only choice against King George.




posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 12:54 PM
link   
The sad part about this is that The Colonel gets owned all day long on this forum, and he's too blinded by his own ideology and hate for Bush to even notice.



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 01:22 PM
link   
believe me, it's not limited to this forum



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by kramtronix
The sad part about this is that The Colonel gets owned all day long on this forum, and he's too blinded by his own ideology and hate for Bush to even notice.

I'll agree with you on that.
Gay marriage is an issue, I don't personally care what they do inside their home, and giving them legal rights... well raises a few eyebrows. If they obtain legal rights, then they will be able to adopt children as a couple.
Most children in America are already screwed up mentally.
This happens to be where I side with GWB on the subject.
I disagree with Kerry's take on partial birth abortions. Can't be for that.
What exactly is so wrong with Bush's platform?
And Thomas Crowne & ZeddicusZulZorander
You guys are down right hilarious.



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 01:57 PM
link   
"Look at this cornball with a hard-on for the Colonel. Why are you constantly on my jock? And just because I don't answer him promptly b/c I got other repugnant nutbars to deal with he acts like some rejected groupie bitch. Look, I'm busy ok, you'll get your smackdown in due time. You just gotta wait your turn."
More trash talk? Can't handle your own medicine?


"Now, you gotta lotta facts here of financial crimes with no link. Ok. I ALWAYS provide a link. Furthermore, these finaical crimes are not degenerate SEXUAL crimes with boys like repugnants are known for (they're good at that) which I DO PROVIDE LINKS FOR."
Well, yes...one link to some ALLEGATIONS. And, here's a few links for you since you think it's made up. Can't see the truth or don't want to see the truth?


Nick Mavroules, Massachusetts Democrat: tax evasion, accepting illegal gratuity (1992).
"I certainly apologize to my family and they have endured enormous, enormous pain," Mavroules said after his sentencing in June of 1993. "I apologize to my friends who have been loyal, strong and very steadfast. I totally accept responsibility for my actions."

Albert Bustamante, Texas Democrat: racketeering (1993).
BUSTAMANTE TO HALFWAY HOUSE Former Rep. Albert Bustamante, a Texas Democrat, is on the road to freedom after serving close to three years in federal prison for bribery and racketeering. The former Bexar County judge, who served in Congress from 1984 to 1993, still faces four months in a halfway house.

Carroll Hubbard, Kentucky Democrat: fraud and corruption (1994).
The House bank scandal keeps unfolding, but you'd never know it. Last year most media ignored former House Sergeant-at-Arms Jack Russ's embezzlement admission. On April 5, former Rep. Carroll Hubbard (D-Ky.) pled guilty to channeling campaign funds through the House bank to help his wife's political campaign. CNN and The Washington Post ran full stories, and USA Today and U.S. News ran brief mentions. But ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek and The New York Times ignored it.


That's just the first three. Free free to research the rest all you like. Try the name and add a word, like "crime". Here's the rest again:

Carl Perkins, Kentucky Democrat: fraud (1994).
Charlie Rose, North Carolina Democrat: financial-disclosure irregularities (1994).
Larry Smith, Florida Democrat: tax evasion (1994).
Walter Fauntroy, District of Columbia Democrat: financial-disclosure misdemeanor (1995).
Gerald Kleczka, Wisconsin Democrat: arrested for DWI (1995 and 1990); convicted DWI (1987).
Walter Tucker, California Democrat: extortion (1995).
Charles Wilson, Texas Democrat: paid $90,000 fine to Federal Election Commission (1995).
Joe Kolter, Pennsylvania Democrat: fraud and conspiracy (1996).
Dan Rostenkowski, Illinois Democrat: mail fraud (1996).
Mary Rose Oakar, Ohio Democrat: financial-disclosure irregularities (1998).
Austin J. Murphy, Pennsylvania Democrat: vote fraud (1999).

"Now, on gay marriage, I'm not against it nor do I support it BECAUSE I DON'T CARE. What a homo does is none of my concern but it sure seems like a concern to the repugnant. Why is that? Why is it that you need details as to how these people get along. Why are you repugnants so concerned? Why is it an issue? Is there somethig you ain't telling us?"
More name-calling? "Homo"? "Faggot"? Want to hate me so bad because I give you facts and a smack down, so you want to imply I'm a "faggot" now? You're a sad and tired "hater" monkey-boy. Don't hate the playa, hate the game. "Need details"? What are you talking about? Certainly not the issue...

"And on the "Homos in the White House," you said:
I guess you don't care much for actually having a trial do you? No, that is just messy law stuff. It is a allegation until proven in court, idiot."
Um, Bush was a CIA chief and the Vice Prez at the time; there's no way this was going to ANY court. Stop being stupid, idiot.
Ok, you win. No court means ALLEGATIONS.


"And you know what, you can talk abvout Clinton's and Jesse's mistresses as much as you like. I just wish you repugnants stop screaming Jesus and leave those little boys alone. What's wrong with you?"
Proof over allegations? What about the underage girls? Like I predicted (it's just so easy) you don't say a thing. More smoke screen. More wanna-be game.

Dance...



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 03:43 PM
link   
John Kerry.

Vietnam Veterans Truest Friend and Ally.

He has honored the memories of all vets proudly with this statement:

lists.village.virginia.edu...



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 04:08 PM
link   
somebody just got owned.


way to deny ignorance, ZEDD



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tyriffic
John Kerry.

Vietnam Veterans Truest Friend and Ally.

He has honored the memories of all vets proudly with this statement:

lists.village.virginia.edu...


It may say that from the manifesto; however, the vets don't want to support him now. Check these out.

www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com...
www.vnsfvetakerry.com...
www.vetsagainstkerry.org...

These are just a few. The most vets, do not want to support a man they feel dishonored their service, and their loved ones by returning from the war and flinging his purplehearts at the white house.



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Have you people forgot what Bush and his party did in New York?

Thats a good enough reason to vote Kerry.



posted on Mar, 14 2004 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
Have you people forgot what Bush and his party did in New York?

Thats a good enough reason to vote Kerry.

Could you please specify what exactly you are talking about... I'd appreciate it. Bush has been a lot of places.

PS Your avatar is really creepy and freaking me out. nuff said



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by cheshire cat

Originally posted by SpittinCobra
Have you people forgot what Bush and his party did in New York?

Thats a good enough reason to vote Kerry.

Could you please specify what exactly you are talking about... I'd appreciate it. Bush has been a lot of places.

PS Your avatar is really creepy and freaking me out. nuff said



Do I have to spell it out for you. 9/11, the cover up .



posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by cheshire cat

Originally posted by Bout Time
I've been wondering why all the junior Republicans have been getting so mouthy and covering the smae old same old as if it were new.

Hit search....read.....then post.


Sorry, I'm not a junior Republican, just about time I speak out. Same old same old?? That's about right. You see the US does indeed have problems, that Bush is trying to fix.
You can't tell me that Clinton left Bush his legacy of a perfect nation, especially after Clinton squandered the treasury on his own wants instead of in the best interests of the nation. It was not Bush who created the problem we have now. It was Saddam Hussein, bin Laden and others; and Clinton made it worse. Personally, I do not want my children to grow up in an America that lives in fear of biological attacks and nuclear war. Bush is trying to ensure that that eventuality does not come to pass; and we, as a nation, should all be right behind him, every step of the way

Search.. Read.. Post, what a concept, try doing a search for John Kerry or Bush and when you finish reading all of the replies let me know. The multitude is outrageous.


I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it Voltaire

ZeddicusZulZorander
Thank you for your input. It's about time a voice of reason comes to light.

[Edited on 12-3-2004 by cheshire cat]

[Edited on 12-3-2004 by cheshire cat]



Clinton and his legacy.....Bush inherited a hobbled nation in both economics and anti-terror preparedness?

How is this not the same old same old that has been completely & thoroughly refuted on ATS numerous times?
Just by the massive recall of anti-terror resources enacted by the incoming Bush Admin., you can see the emphasis on American security was not the same as his predecessors. Our AG's first budget submission requested no increases on anti-terror spending; though massive increases were requested for pornography policing.
As for economic policy - there is none, because a policy will have contingencies or fail-safes to fall back on. A upper income tax cut which brought down the economy followed by another tax cut to that same segment is not a contingency - it's pathlogical ideology.
Not even looking at the gold standard that was Clinton's economic team & policy, just staying Republican, BUsh Economics part II isn't even as competent as the Reagan or Bush I policy set. Bush I at least tried to balance the boat after Reganomics; Bush II has a "ride until the wheels fall off" mentality to economics.
It is convenient to try and categorize people under the banner "Anybody but Bush", but it's not really relevant. All horrible presidents in our nation's history did encounter that sentiment for a reason - they were unaccountable, by deed or exclusion, for reasonably improving the nation or attempting to. Most of us did the research on the two term performance as Tex. gov., and thus were opposed to Bush. We have the same horrible results for America that Tex. endured during his governance - the only difference is that there is no 9/11 scapegoat to drag out to explain the same results in Texas.
Kerry will represent a break in single party rule - the enormity of which is often overlooked. It serves neither Republicans or Democrats ( and most certainly NOT the American people) to hve the opposition crippled from voicing their points. It creates a warped and ineffectual end product - as witnessed by the Big Three - Security-Economy-Environment. There is no case of unilateralism - particularly when there was zero threat from the country we are spending nearly a Billion Dollars a week to occupy.
There is no case for giving Billions in tax breaks, bailouts and protectionist loans if we then have those same companies either lay-off 1000's of thousands of American workers or move registry overseas or both.
There is no case for clear cutting, increased allowable contaminents in our drinking water or not to force emissions standards from vehicles and factories to improve - that's why lung related illness has increased dramatically in the US recently.
This is why we need Kerry. Being a business owner and a money lovin' damn Yankee, we will never get any traction with our Customers ( e.g. THE WORLD) with the team in play now; short of having Bill Clinton as the US Economics Ambassador, the Bush team can't get world interests spending money in the US again nor can it reverse them from anti-US intitiatives, such as OPEC moving to the Euro - counter tariffs to the steel protectionism - or devaluation of their currencies to further increase or trade deficits.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 11:16 AM
link   
No, BT, it was never refuted once here, or anywhere else. Scores of words do not change the basic fact that the economy was headed south before Bush took the helm, and it does not negate the fact of what happened to the military in the eight previous years, nor does it alter the history of the intelligence raping by previously mention Clinton administration.

Kerry's bloody hand in the deaths of soldiers in Vietnam with his enemy aiding protesting and throwing someone else's medals away, his wounds that warranted purple hearts that didn't cost him any more than a bandaid and his silver star awarded by jumping out of his PBR and finishing off some poor guy who'd just been cut down by a twin 50 doesn't make him the hero of the Vietnam vets. I assure you, I know of NO Vietnam vet that is looking forward to voting for Kerry, and trust me, I know many Vietnam verterans.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Zed, glad you find humor, there has to be some in all this madness or we'll take ourselves wasy too seriously.

Colonel, don't give me any spiel about truth as you wouldn't know it if someone beat you to death with the KJV and the constitution rolled up together. I doubt you got too far with either one of them, as they are both documents on the Liberal Banned Reading Material List!
Your idea of truth is based upon assumptions, baseless allegations and all-too-flawed human feeeelings that shift like beachsand in a thunderstorm.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Vet for Kerry. I hardily cheer for what he did during the Vietnam era. He wasn't dissing vets-he was dissing the government.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   
No, he was changing direction, trying to grab ahold of the "anti" movement, positioning his political self.

Whatever you perceive him as doing then, his aid and comfort to the enemy bolstered them and gave them the will to continue.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
No, BT, it was never refuted once here, or anywhere else. Scores of words do not change the basic fact that the economy was headed south before Bush took the helm, and it does not negate the fact of what happened to the military in the eight previous years, nor does it alter the history of the intelligence raping by previously mention Clinton administration.

Kerry's bloody hand in the deaths of soldiers in Vietnam with his enemy aiding protesting and throwing someone else's medals away, his wounds that warranted purple hearts that didn't cost him any more than a bandaid and his silver star awarded by jumping out of his PBR and finishing off some poor guy who'd just been cut down by a twin 50 doesn't make him the hero of the Vietnam vets. I assure you, I know of NO Vietnam vet that is looking forward to voting for Kerry, and trust me, I know many Vietnam verterans.


Thomas it has been refuted and remains laughable when the next 'true believer' brings it up. You thing your devout adherence to dogma might be spilling over to politics, no?
Yes, the economy was normalizing after dramtic growth, so you're technically right. Though it did take another Bush putting shackles on free trade and gutting operating capital to push it into a recession.
Yeah, that military that was more swelled up than Arnold on steroids had to be maintained & increased, huh? For who? For what? That same "ruined" military has knock the snot out of whomever they're put up against since the Clinton fix - as a Super Mod you should know that there was a nice thread and or comment on how we did much more and moved greater numbers of men and did it much quicker in GW II over GW1....with Clinton's military! ( I think I posted it, BTW!
)

"Kerry's bloody hands.....", damn Thomas, are you trying to be the patron saint to the baby Neo-Cons who've been hatching on the board like lice lately!?!?


Here's my prescription:

- Take a six of Harp to the meeting of a T-Bone and Hickory wood flames & post me in the morning!



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Hey f u c k you, Colonel. go back to europe or any of the commie country you came from. any a s s hole who thinks jesus was a black man deserves the looney bin.

You liberals just dont get it do you? the USSR died in 1991. GET OVER IT. Socialism is a WASTE of time. It doesnt work, f u c k - face. So do yourself a favor and end yourself. Bush is a righteous man for times like these.

But like they say, liberalism is an ill. I advise you to seek mental help immediately. Go forth and sin no more!

[Edited on 16-3-2004 by fulibs]

[Edited on 16-3-2004 by fulibs]



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I actually have to agree with Colonel about the pigment of Jesus' skin. Even though I left Christianity twenty years ago I still remember getting in trouble for questioning all of the paintings and stained glass pictures of "jesus". If he was from what is now called Ethiopia, 2000 years in the past, how the heck did he end up white with light brown hair? I guess it's the same as "God" planting those fossils underground to "fool us" silly mortals into thinking the world has been here for billions of years.



posted on Mar, 16 2004 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by fulibs
Hey f u c k you, Colonel. go back to europe or any of the commie country you came from. any a s s hole who thinks jesus was a black man deserves the looney bin.

You truely are a small minded fool. Please, go back and finish highschool before you come and speak to the big boys. We're busy.

Oh, and while we're at it, please inform us of how you know that Jesus was a white blond with blue eyes. Is it because you saw it in church and just can't get up enough balls to say they might be wrong?

You liberals just dont get it do you? the USSR died in 1991. GET OVER IT. Socialism is a WASTE of time. It doesnt work, f u c k - face. So do yourself a favor and end yourself. Bush is a righteous man for times like these.

Ah, the blind leading the blind. I guess a righteous man would promote war that is NOT in the defense of his people. Since he cares so much about our security, why has he not closed the borders like he should?

But like they say, liberalism is an ill. I advise you to seek mental help immediately. Go forth and sin no more!

Liberalism is not an ill. But blindness sure it.

Trust me little brother, I am more conservative that you will ever be and I can see you for the fool you are.

If you even bother to rebute me, bring your A game. I have stomped bigger smarter bugs than you in a passing glance.

[Edited on 16-3-2004 by fulibs]

[Edited on 16-3-2004 by fulibs]






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join