It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

republicans have finally blew it..

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   
the republicans are a dying breed. they have been since 92. Im not here to defend clinton, but, after 8 years in office and numerous attacks against him, they got nothing. an impeachment? over a b-j? please. that was the best you could do? pathetic. but it was enough for the masses. all the sudden, dubya sounded good to everyone. never underestimate the ignorance of the public, i suppose. but now that all the lies have been exposed (and more will be, the closer to novemeber we get) the tide is shifting.

i saw f/11 yesterday. i own a copy of "dude,wheres my country" (stood in line 2 hours to have moore autograph it, btw) it is pretty much the book onscreen. it may be hard to digest all the info at once, but if you buy that book and take your time with it, it will all become abundantly clear.

so heres my point. i would like to propose a challenge. a very simple one at that(since we all know the simplicity of the republicans). give me, or should i say, us, one reason. just one. to vote for bush in november. i would love to hear what it would be. ive tired to come up with one, but cant. maybe you can help...




posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:21 AM
link   
A valid question and one that I would like to answer with a question (not something I would normally do).

What do you think Gore or Kerry would have done after 9/11?



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:26 AM
link   
well, its kind of hard to speculate, but i think gore wouldnt have been on vacation for over half of his first year in office, thus probally intercepting an attack, but again this is speculation. we do know how bush "handled" it though. ignore this. ignore that. somehow, gore seems more like a hands on president. probably never would have left white house for four years. perhaps would have read a memo or two. you never know though...



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
well, its kind of hard to speculate, but i think gore wouldnt have been on vacation for over half of his first year in office, thus probally intercepting an attack, but again this is speculation. we do know how bush "handled" it though. ignore this. ignore that. somehow, gore seems more like a hands on president. probably never would have left white house for four years. perhaps would have read a memo or two. you never know though...


And what of Kerry?



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:45 AM
link   
again, speculation. and i loath speculation. who knows. but ill answer your question with one my self. do you think kerry would have been worse? this is missing my point though, which is, ONE REASON TO VOTE for bush.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
Im not here to defend clinton, but, after 8 years in office and numerous attacks against him, they got nothing. an impeachment? over a b-j? please. that was the best you could do?


Actually it wasn't over a b-j. It was for lying under oath to the Grand Jury. I just love how you bleeding heart dems make it seem like he was impeached for receiving oral sex. Get your facts straight. Clinton is a lawyer and knows you can't lie to the Grand Jury, no matter how small.

Oh yeah and if I'm not mistaken, Clinton was one of only two presidents in our history to go through impeachment hearings. So if you think that was no big deal, let me repeat that for you, one of only two presidents in our over 200 year history to go through impeachment hearings. No big deal huh?

Edit: grammar

[edit on 7-5-2004 by nyarlathotep]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:04 AM
link   
yes lying to grand jury is bad.... however bush wouldnt know about that, well, actually he does. is that the reason he wouldnt testify to the 9/11 commission under oath, or to the lawyers investigating the internal leak of a cia's agent name under oath? clinton may have lied to a g.jury about oral sex. bush lied about the death of 3000 americans and counting. one mans lies got him impeached, the other mans lies almost guaranteed him a secnond term. however bush didnt technically lie did he? he wasnt under oath right? oh yea, one more thing, why wouldnt he testify without cheney by his side? hmmm i wonder... oh yeah..still waiting for a reason to vote for him......



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:16 AM
link   
I like how you just brush away the facts and then go into your speculative rant about Bush. So Sublime, you first said it was no big deal, and now lying to the Grand Jury is bad. Which is it? No big deal, or what?

Now about your speculation about Bush lying about 3000 dead Americans. It is nothing more than that, speculation and your opinion. Do you have any proof? At least with the Clinton scandal, we know it is fact.

I can sit here all day ranting about this and that, but without any kind of proof, it means nothing. SHOW US SOME STINKING PROOF THAT BUSH KNEW ABOUT 9/11 PRIOR TO 9/11!



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:34 AM
link   
so i should vote for bush because ...clinton lied? oh wait, you still cant seem to give me a reason. oh yeah, your right, bush never lied to a grand jury, because HE WONT TESTIFY UNDER OATH. its not a lie if your not sworn to tell the truth. however, i am not going to let you make this a clinton defense argument, instead, im going to stick to my original question, which is" CAN YOU GIVE ME ONE REASON TO VOTE FOR BUSH? but i think you may have answered me. so far all i think you want me to vote for bush because clinton lied? oh wait, no, you think i should vote for bush because he didnt lie "under oath" so its better? no, that doesnt make any sense either. hmmm... ill wait



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:41 AM
link   
First of all Sublime, why do you need other people to give you reasons to vote for Bush? I will vote for him again because I personally have had a very prosperous 4 years. There you go, there is a reason. Notice how the reason is personal? I don't give a rat's what other people think and why other people vote for their respective candidates. You should too. Cast you vote for your own reasons, don't let other people sway you.

BTW, I wasn't turning this into a Clinton thing. I just had to point out that that you made it seem like he was impeached for receiving oral sex, that is a lie. I hate when people post their opinion and back them up with lies, that's all.

So the next time you post lies, even if it has nothing to do with the thread topic, be prepared to defend your lies with some FACTS.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   
one more thing. as for your proof of bush lies? www.practicalradical.com...

you can start there but i can post more if you need. that should keep ya busy though



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   
www.practicalradical.com...


Great site, not! Are you kidding me? The practical radical huh? Pure drivel. I read most of it, but became pretty disgusted when the author had to resort to name calling to get his point accross. Those of us in the know have long recognized that our Commander-in-Thief is a sniveling coward.

As soon as the name calling strats to fly, I know that it's complete BS as that is what most people will resort to when they can't prove a point.

Anyway, I gave you my reason to vote for Bush again. I am pretty much done with this silly thread.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 11:58 AM
link   
well i should correct myself. he was impeached for lying about oral sex. yup like any man wouldnt lie about cheating on his wife. oh well. as far as your prosperous four years, congrats! im happ for ya. ive been on a good roll for while myself. its the rest of the world i feel for, apparently you do not. thats your right i suppose. i mean, who needs any sort fo forethought as to what the future may bring, right? you got a kid in the military? prob. not. hope you dont have any young ones, they might not have choice if they want to serve. they may just have to, but hey, its not your problem, right?

just remember this, despite clintons lies about his PERSONAL LIFE, one fact remains in place: if just one of the 200 or so FBI agents assigned to investigate everything from white water, to white stains on blue dresses, had been in the office taking phone calls from flight schools in florida, there wouldnt be 3000 dead americans.

instead the republicans were so pissed that the democrats had the power, they spent 8 years stopping any sort of real governing from happening, instead they clogged time by trying to stop every democratic posistion. any throwing "scandal" after "scandal" trying so desperatly to find something...ANYTHING.. to get him out... didnt work though, did it? instead it backfired, HUGE! oh well. see ya in november...



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 12:02 PM
link   
I would vote for Bush because he has saved me alot of money. By waisting trillions of taxpayer dollars and not really paying attention to our economy it has allowed the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates ridiculously low and the stockmarket to keep on climbing.

I haven't really read about his involvement in 9/11 but Bush has also done a fabulous job of transporting terrorism back to the middle-east where it belongs with professional military to deal with it. As long as the car bombs and beheadings stay in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and not over here im a happy camper.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Sublime -> just curious, are you (or were you) asking this question from the perspective of someone looking for political debate, or from genuine curiosity and a desire to understand the other side of the political spectrum?

I'm no Bush supporter, and there are many reasons I'm probably going to vote Libertarian, but I can understand the reasons why at least 45% of the country will vote for the man. So, assuming you're genuinely curious, here's my guess at why people will say they're voting for him:
-Most economists admit that the tax cuts helped the economy recover from the mini-recession and 9/11.
-There hasn't been a major terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11.
-The Taliban are no longer in power. Saddam is no longer in power. Some people think the world is 'safer' because of this. (I acknowledge that this point is debatable)
-A drug 'benefit' was added to Medicare.


Now, as I'm a swing voter who's currently leaning Libertarian, I challenge you to tell me some reasons to vote for Kerry. I can be swayed. And please don't say "anybody but Bush." I vote FOR candidates, not AGAINST them.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
again, speculation. and i loath speculation. who knows. but ill answer your question with one my self. do you think kerry would have been worse? this is missing my point though, which is, ONE REASON TO VOTE for bush.


I think that both Gore and Kerry would have been a failure.

They both feel that we have to bow down to the u.n.

1.) His handeling of 9/11. He could have nuked a large part of the middle east creating a large glass paved parking lot.

2.) The economy is on the upswing.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Good post HoonieSkoba, I agree. Please sublime4372, give us one reason to vote for Kerry. I also do not vote against an individual, I vote for an individual. I take no sides and have voted both Republican and Democrat. So I am interested in your response. But please provide an intellengt one, I don't care for the slamming of individuals.

I believe your topic was listed as "republicans have finally blew it". Since your bashing Bush, perhaps it should have been labeled "Bush has finally blew it". I know of both Democrats and Republicans that are patricularly brainless as well as intellegent. You make it sound as if all Republicans bad and all Democrats our saviours. I do not vote by political party. It is the individual that counts.

[edit on 5-7-2004 by aTwistofReality]



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 01:50 PM
link   
well this is my dilemma. i dont really have a reason to vote for kerry, other than the fact that he is not bush. but that one reason, is still more than i have when i considered bush. i actually supported him until iraq started up again. then every day your hit with something new (i.e. torture,wmds,etc..) just makes my head swim. seems to me, however, when i debate a republican on this, i have to end up defending clinton, or something similar). the liberals seem to offer opinions, based on facts and seem alot more reasonable.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 02:33 PM
link   
im voting for bush because he wont bend to the terrorist like france did to the nazis before wwII broke out. and why vote for somebody who says he didnt vote for somethig, the says he did for for it? why vote for some one who will probally downsize the already dangerously smalll US military? might as well hand the country over on a silver platter.



posted on Jul, 5 2004 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Sublime...

If you don't have a reason to vote for Kerry, but don't like Bush, I'd strongly recommend you search for someone who stands for something you support. There are registered Third Parties from all sides of the political spectrum - Constitution Party, Libertarians, Greens, even *gasp* Socialists. Missouri, my home state, actually had 7 candidates on the presidential ballot in 2000!


Things will never change if we keep voting against candidates instead of for them.

(Twist - I like the B.F. quote.
)



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join