posted on Sep, 16 2004 @ 02:51 PM
In terms of the lesser of two evils, I want to hope that Kerry doesn't have quite as dangerous as an agenda as Bush does.
That comment that spewed from Cheney's pie hole pisses me off royal. I suppose it shouldn't though, because it only confirms what we've been saying
all along: they're guilty for September 11 and a whole slew of other things. I have to admit his excuse for what he said was humerous..."uhh..no...I
said um if Bush doesn't stay...his policies won't stay and the terrorists will get us." UH HUH...nice retract. What he REALLY meant to say
was..."....and if Bush isn't elected, I can give you a 100% gauruntee that the terrorists will attack. I know this because they're on my payroll
and I'll put in a call."
It's all a bunch of crap and I am sickened that the Supreme Court was ALLOWED to install a president. The Supreme Courts role, is not deciding who
won, it is judicial review. The court case that decided that was Marbury v Madison...or the case of the midnight judges. All they needed to answer
was: did the lesser court follow the rules. Either yay or nay. But remember, the PRESIDENT appoints the judges (which should be done away with) and
thus, they follow his agenda. LAME LAME LAME.
So what terror act should we anticipate in Kerry's victory? Where do you think it'll be this time? New York and DC are too obvious. They need
something dramatic and new, something that'll shock the people. Here's my opinion: when Kerry is elected, be prepared for 4 years of terror...maybe
fake warnings, maybe real stuff. But Bush is like a 4 year old child...he wants the White House, and if he doesn't get it, he'll throw a tantrum.