Vote Kerry Just Because He Is Not Bush!!!, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 13-8-2004 @ 05:21 PM by Aelita
Originally posted by AntiPolitrix

I have few problems with Bush like stem cell reseach, gay marriage, and border patrol but the war on terror isn't one of those.



Please try to concentrate and tell us how well he is doing in the "war on terror". As is evident from all the news sources, Al Qaeda is doing quite well after almost 3 years of being supposedly hunted high and low. The alert that came out 2 weeks ago is the best evidence of that. They lost little capability. Why? Because the resources were squandered on the unnecessary (but rich with PR potential) war with Iraq, a country that posed no threat at all to the United States.



Im will vote for Bush because we need to stomp these terrorist like roaches.



Hahahaha wake up. Bush is busy propping his flagging polls, he needs the public (like you) to be scared and vote for him.


I just don't think Kerry will fight a smarter, more sensitive war on terror (whatever that means).


Maybe he won't invade another country for the PR value. That in itself would be very good.



No one has givin me any reason to back them so i will vote for the Same.




Because of lack of imagination? Sameness, sameness is your refuge.
Kerry is not likeable, but one has to think beyond that. America is now taking the toxic drug of GW Bush, and if we switch to placebo, that in itself would be a great deal.

How about cutting the criminally high budget deficit? Ending irresponsible tax cuts? Lack of funds has real and lethal effect on every facet of American life. Do you care at all?


This is not a time for change, especially with the choses we have. just my opinion.


Au contraire, mon ami, the time is ripe for change. It's time to end the ridiculous rule of the Dumb and the Greedy.

Peace.


[edit on 13-8-2004 by Aelita]


reply posted on 13-8-2004 @ 11:39 PM by Ischyros
Boss Tweed: Remember the first rule of politics. The ballots don't make the results, the counters make the results. The counters. Keep counting.

www.imdb.com...


The George W Bush election fiasco is referenced obliquely, when a politician says words to the effect that "elections are not won by the voters, but by the counters".

www.moviesite.co.za...


"Remember the first rule of politics: The voters don't make the results, the counters make the results." - Mayor of Tammany Hall, Gangs of New York

www.cozzifantutti.com...


electoral college, in U.S. government, the body of electors that chooses the president and vice president. The Constitution, in Article 2, Section 1, provides: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress.” However, no senator, representative, or officer of the U.S. government may be an elector. The electors are directed by the Constitution to vote in their respective states, and Congress is authorized to count their votes.

To win, a presidential candidate must have a majority in the electoral college. Before adoption of the Twelfth Amendment (1804), in the event that no candidate had a majority, the House of Representatives (voting by states, with one vote for each state) was to choose the president from among the five candidates highest on the electoral list. Then, “after the choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President”; in case of a tie the Senate would choose the vice president. The Twelfth Amendment, however, resulting from the confused election of 1800 (see Jefferson, Thomas, and Burr, Aaron) provided that electors vote for president and vice president separately. It also reduced from five to three the number of candidates from among whom the House was to choose—in case no candidate had a majority (only two presidents, Jefferson and John Quincy Adams, have been elected by the House).


From www.infoplease.com...

How the Electoral College Works
www.fec.gov...

Index of Problems Related to
the Electoral College
www.underdog-communications.com...


I say vote for Optimus Prime 2004 for all the good it will do you, shnoops.

"Autobots wage their battles to destroy the evil forces of the Decepticons."



[edit on 13-8-2004 by Ischyros]



reply posted on 16-8-2004 @ 09:38 AM by AntiPolitrix
Originally posted by Aelita
Please try to concentrate and tell us how well he is doing in the "war on terror". As is evident from all the news sources, Al Qaeda is doing quite well after almost 3 years of being supposedly hunted high and low. The alert that came out 2 weeks ago is the best evidence of that.


Is that why we have been attacked again, because Bush isn't doing a good job? Al Qaeda is not doing well, you have let your hatred for Bush make you think the enemy is winning. Al Qaeda has been knocked off their feet for now but they will be back. Al Qaeda is not in one location or country, they are spread out all over the world. It is not as easy as you make it sound. The US still has troops in Vietnam, Germany, Japan and other countries so quit talking like the terrorist should be dead by now. Are yyou ignorant or are you just trying to get people worked up?


They lost little capability. Why? Because the resources were squandered on the unnecessary (but rich with PR potential) war with Iraq, a country that posed no threat at all to the United States.


haha..ok Aelita, Iraq did pose a threat to the United States. Iraq might not of posed a direct threat like Iraq sending troops to the US but they did pose a threat. Saddam admitted he had chemical weapons after the first gulf war and he did not show proof he had destroyed them like the UN (joke!!!) had requested. Saddam could of easily provided a group like Al Qaeda with chemicals that could be used in a attack on the US.

Oh, hey Aelita, where did Al Qaeda members run and hide after we took out their headquarters in Afghganistan, they went to Iraq!!! And i stand by my next statement!!!

"I will vote for Bush because we need to stomp these terrorist like roaches."


Hahahaha wake up. Bush is busy propping his flagging polls, he needs the public (like you) to be scared and vote for him.


How would a terrorist attack help Bush? I think a terrorist attack would help out Kerry more than Bush. If we get attacked AGAIN on G.W. Bush's watch he WILL NOT get elected. I am not sure why Democrates and Bush hater think that. Bush better make an attempt to stop the flow of illegals crossing the border from Mexico, something like 1500 a day. I will not be suprised if we are attacked again in the near future because as of yesterday Aug. 15th, an est. 22,500 undocumented immigrants have entered the US through Southern US border. Kerry hasn't mentioned anything about it either but I am not going to vote for someone just because they are not the other guy.


Maybe he won't invade another country for the PR value. That in itself would be very good.


huh? PR Value, yea he pissed off half the country, nice PR. Do you have a clue about what your talking about? By "invading" Iraq we have freed millions of Iraqis who in the past 20 years have seen their friends and family murdered in cold blood by the hunfrds of thousands. Saddam is now be accused of the dead and missing of 1,000,000 Iraqis in his 20 year power trip.


Because of lack of imagination? Sameness, sameness is your refuge.
Kerry is not likeable, but one has to think beyond that.


Yes you do, you have to think beyond your blinding hatred for Bush. Imagination? You have an imagination? Then can you imagine the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis that died in the hands of Saddam? Not a just war? That alone is enough reason. This is problem with America today, only half of us know when we need to stand up and fight, the other half wants to wait for a death toll of 3,000+ before they act. Bush is going to stop the problem on their soil, not Americas.


America is now taking the toxic drug of GW Bush, and if we switch to placebo, that in itself would be a great deal.


If G.W.Bush is a drug, i don't want to come down. When that happens we will be attacked again and again because Kerry wants to fight a more sensitive war on terror. Damn lollygagger. How is war sensitive. Are we going to drop band aids with notes that say, "We Are Sorry, Lets Be Friends"


How about cutting the criminally high budget deficit? Ending irresponsible tax cuts? Lack of funds has real and lethal effect on every facet of American life. Do you care at all?


Aelita, we are fighting a war on terror in the 21st century. You wake up, how do you think Kerry going to fight the war, is he going to do it for free? And about the tax cuts, im not sure what kind of money you make but i want as much tax money back as i can get. These "irresponsible tax cuts" put a couple hundred bucks back in my pocket. If you don't want it send it back, or you can send it to me. Yes i do care, that is why i want MY tax money back so that i can spend it where and how i want. If you want the Gov to spend you money on what they want, send it to them, but dont speak for me, i want mine. And like i said this is not a time for change, especially with the choses we have.


Au contraire, mon ami, the time is ripe for change. It's time to end the ridiculous rule of the Dumb and the Greedy.
Peace.


Yea, So you think Kerry is going to "end the ridiculous rule of the Dumb and the Greedy". You need to step in reality Aelita, protend you do not HATE G.W. Bush for just a second and focus on the issues. Just put your blinding hatred aside and think.

No change, Bush 2004!!!


reply posted on 16-8-2004 @ 10:11 AM by Aelita
Originally posted by AntiPolitrix

Al Qaeda has been knocked off their feet for now but they will be back.



Politrix, read this statement and tell me there is no gap in logic here.



The US still has troops in Vietnam, Germany, Japan and other countries so quit talking like the terrorist should be dead by now.



US troops left Vietnam on the struts of helicopters at the end of the war in that country. Are saying the US troops are still stationed there? Please comment.



Are you ignorant or are you just trying to get people worked up?



I don't think I'm ignorant. I know that Al Qaeda found new locations in North Africa (I think Somalia is one).

Unless you prove to me that US has bases in Vietnam right now, you should consider yourself ignorant, actually. And even if they did -- the US has 140k troops tied up in Iraq right now. That more than troops in Japan and Germany combined, but that's also beseid the point.

140k troops and $100B should have been put to a better use than fix the desert.





haha..ok Aelita, Iraq did pose a threat to the United States. Iraq might not of posed a direct threat like Iraq sending troops to the US but they did pose a threat. Saddam admitted he had chemical weapons after the first gulf war and he did not show proof he had destroyed them like the UN (joke!!!) had requested.



Saddam didn't have chemical weapons to speak of. The UN inspectors were thorough and and their demands regarding the inspections were rigorous. At the end, Hans Blix was pretty sure there were no WMD in Iraq and the work of the inspectors was going to be finished. If you followed the news of that period, you'd see that the US torpedoed that one UN effort and didn't let them finish.

You are really not specific how Saddam was a threat. This is simply bullocks.



Saddam could of easily provided a group like Al Qaeda with chemicals that could be used in a attack on the US.



Saddam and Al Qaeda were not friends by any measure. Saddam was a secular dictator and in general was against any fundamentalist islamists. If Al Qaeda wanted to manufacture chemical weapons like sarin, they don't need Saddam's help -- remember the Aum Shinrikyo sect in Japan.



Oh, hey Aelita, where did Al Qaeda members run and hide after we took out their headquarters in Afghganistan, they went to Iraq!!! And i stand by my next statement!!!



You are standing by a truckload of false statements. Al Qaeda has its HQ in North Africa now, which you don't know because you don't read much and probably only watch Fox news.

It is true that Iraq may have become a recruiting point for them though courtesy of the ill conceived invasion.




How would a terrorist attack help Bush?



Because it makes people like YOU say "it's not time for a change".



By "invading" Iraq we have freed millions of Iraqis who in the past 20 years have seen their friends and family murdered in cold blood by the hunfrds of thousands.



I'm sick of this argument. The mandate given by Congress was to fight the (bogus) impending threat of Saddam deploying chemical wepons against the US, not to spread the flowers of democracy.


Yes you do, you have to think beyond your blinding hatred for Bush. Imagination? You have an imagination?


I don't hate Bush. I hade policies that undermine the standing of this country, the US of A.




If G.W.Bush is a drug, i don't want to come down.



Good bye, junkie. I pity you.




And about the tax cuts, im not sure what kind of money you make but i want as much tax money back as i can get. These "irresponsible tax cuts" put a couple hundred bucks back in my pocket.



Oh what a great occasion to celebrate. Most of the cut went to 1% of the reachest people. You got your $200 and are a happy camper. Jeez.



Yes i do care, that is why i want MY tax money back so that i can spend it where and how i want.



No I suggest you send the govt a check for a few thousand bucks to support the war in Iraq. Put your money where your mouth is.

And who's gonna cover the deficit? Oh well, you don't know much about finance either... The $200 check defines your budgetary prowess...





[edit on 16-8-2004 by Aelita]


reply posted on 16-8-2004 @ 10:44 AM by wraith30
Originally posted by AntiPolitrix
Then again, i was born and raised in the USA so i don't have a clue whether or not i would agree to your example. I say yes but i haven't been held hostage in my own country.


You obviously don't live near DC.

And, no it's not much of a stretch becasue from my example that is exaclty what Bush did. Which you seem to be compleatly supportive of. I mean hey.. like you said there are thoustands of people who are not under a dictatorship. Then again, they no longer have electricity all the time, their hospitals are full of wounded citizans becasue of the attacks against an occuping force, they have to deal with the humiliation of our troops taking pictures of the naked prisoners, food and water are becomming more difficult commadities, we have thrown their country into a state of chaos and likley civial war because we felt that they need to be a democracy, becasue we know best. I simply don't know why they are not all thanking us for "Liberating" them.

Hell, we don't even live in a Democracy. We are a Democratic Republic. But Curious Bush and Dick with a yellow hat needed some additional excuse to go there so the "spreading of democracy" seems like a good rallying idea. Looks like you jumped right onboared like a good little sheep.

You were born and raised in the USA? WELL $H!75 THE BED!!!!! I guess we all need to listen to whatever you say cause you obvioulsy know better then us.. Hell I bet noone else on this forum was "Born and raised in the USA"


Wraith
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



DEA is Investigating Montana State Legislators Over State Laws
  Posted 12 days ago with 59 member flags
The CIA in Australia: America\'s Foreign Watergate
  Posted 2 days ago with 19 member flags
Who is really behind the birthers and what is their real motive?
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags
ESF and Black op funding.
  Posted 10 days ago with 11 member flags
There is NO Media Bias in America
  Posted 10 days ago with 10 member flags