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: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 01:33 AM
link   
well i noticed that when the one guy got all fired up at me, he started up right away with the "bleedin heart dems" crap. typical. what i cant undertstand is the blind faith people but into bush. he has failed the american people. schools closing all over the country, massive job loss/outsourcing,etc. there are no weapons in iraq, we are probably in more danger now then before the "war" with iraq. the hatred of the US is at record highs, and noone seems to care. is it possible that all the other countries are wrong? all of them? i mean, the "coalition of the willing" had countries that didnt even have a military for gods sake! outside of our lap dog, england, i cant think of any major nations would get involved in such a foolish endeavor, such as this. but my point is that it all goes back to bush. terrible negoiator, terrible president. any suggestions?




posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 07:00 AM
link   
I'm not going to get into a discussion of why "Bush Sucks." I'm not personally going to vote for the man, but I'm also not going to blame the every Iraqi hiccup on him - it's war. Sh*t happens, and no one should be surprised that it's dirty. If you think there's such a thing as a clean war, I've got a bridge to sell you on Ebay.


Your latest response suggests to me that you'd prefer to argue why Bush is 'bad' rather than to search for someone to vote FOR. While it may be fun to bash, I'll hazzard to guess that you'll gain little truth from it. I'll drop off this thread now, with a word of encouragement to "lay aside your anger" and to find someone you believe in- check out Third Paries. Good luck.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   
I have seen one right for he is doing well, and he apparently doesn't give a crap about anyone else.

I have seen one say the economy is on the upswing. Yes, many who have lost their 30,000-50,000/year job have made it all the way up to waiter or waitress under this "recovery".

One who says a drug "benefit" was passed. A new upswing in drug prices have already eaten that alive.

Everyone get your charts out. Notice the only time health care costs did not rise so dramatically was when National Health care was being run thru the gamet. Notice as soon as it was defeated onwards and upwards went the prices!!

Why would I vote for Kerry? He does realize the purchasing power of the average American has not significantly risen and in fact has decreased over the last 30 years. the only time the middle class made any significant gains was when Clinton was in office.

Kerry sees the exportation of American jobs as a minus. If NAFTA when passed had been scrutinized for environmental and wage considerations like it was supposed to the problem would not be as bad.

Kerry recongizes there are over 43,000,000 Americans without health insurance of any type.

Kerry realizes we MUST work with other nations, and cannot go it alone as the Bush administration did costing the US much, much in it's leadership position.

Kerry realizes we cannot have industies leaders reforming and writing legislation.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
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.


Sorry Ivan, Kerry has already proposed adding 40,000 troops to the military. The majority of the downsizing of the military was started in the Bush I administration.

Also, one must see the legislation that was voted for/agianst from anyone. In the bottom lines of many of these bills are amendments that can't stand on their own leg so they are attached to a major bill. Then someone votes against or for the bill because of the amendments attached and not because of the major piece of legislation.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 04:28 PM
link   
HoonieSkoba, there haven't been any attacks like 9/11 since Bush started his War on Terror? Before Bush there hadn't been ANY attacks like 9/11. Pearl Harbor may seem about right, but that was war with a real country that existed and the president didn't invade say, Chile because they might support Japan like Bush has invaded Iraq because they might have WMD's, which after a year in Iraq has proven, there were no WMD's. Also, Japan is a real country, Terrorist isn't a real country. It is like declaring war on itchy algae. You can fight it all you want in your neck of the woods, but in over countries you either let it live or do what Bush did and invade it. Now yes it was good to invade Afganistan and overthrow the government there. But Iraq? Yes Saddam was bad, but compared to the leader of Syria or Jordan or Saudi Arabia(Where most of the terrorists came from) he was nothing. Only differecne is daddy never attacked and failed in those countries.

Bush is a loon on acid. He does things that would get a middle class person the death penalty. But true, he never did lie, for he was never under oath. It would be like testifying in a murder trial but not being under oath. Since not under oath you can "truthfully" say that it wasn't the defendant but an alien from the fourth planet from the star called Urinusian in the whatever galaxy and not be lieing for you are not under oath.

But is it sad that I have to vote Kerry because he isn't Bush? Yes. I could vote independant, but I don't want to throw my vote away. If only Howard Dean was running for presidant. Now that guy had Charisma.

And for those who say Gore was a robotic version of Clinton, the bad part is what? Clinton had done what POLITICALLY that was so bad? Getting head from a intern isn't political, that is personal. But what else had he done? Nothing. Republicans know one thing, "He got head!" And thats it. Not one of the people have stated anything bad politically. Just "He got head from an ugly woman, one would think being the president you could have gotten head from some hot little blonde with fake breasts."

A vote for Kerry isa vote against corruption! Unless in Florida then if you vote Kerry it gonna be fed to an alligator in a swamp.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 09:54 PM
link   
James -> you seem to imply that I'm supporting Bush. Maybe you didn't read my post - I clearly said I wasn't voting for him. My reasons I'll save for another thread as the topic of this one was "give me a reason to vote for Bush" and I wanted to avoid another tiresome Bush-Bash.

MadMan -> thx for the post. While I don't agree with the way Kerry approaches the problems you listed, at least you were able to articulate a reason that you'll vote for him beyond him being Anti-Bush!



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Damn, not many seem to be up to the task. What has happened in this place? No longer is there any direction, there is only attack.

But I will answer the question.

It's quite simple really. Abortion.

We are closer to getting abortion outlawed than before. Should Kerry win (which is looking to be good odds, but not certain) we will be long in coming as close again for a good number of years.

I can't vote for Kerry for that reason. Somehow, he's Catholic but is running a Pro-Choice (or rather a hands off) campaign.

So there's my answer.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 01:04 AM
link   
Boy, don't start a thread and ask a question. All the crap responces we all love so much stop when someone answers it.

We all stand in stunned silence looking for the next drive by posting.




posted on Jul, 10 2004 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by BigJohn
What do you think Gore or Kerry would have done after 9/11?


Hmmm... Gore would have tried to befriend and understand the terrorists, hoping that our olive branch would convince them that we're not the bad guys.
Kerry would have gone into Afghanistan, but not Iraq -- that is, IF the United Nations gave him permission to, on its terms. Nader would have blamed it all on corporations and say that only an agrarian society is truly free from terrorism.



[edit on 7/10/2004 by ThunderCloud]




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join