Vote Kerry Just Because He Is Not Bush!!!

Originally posted 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.

No wraith, i am from Houston. What does your example have to do with DC?

And, no it's not much of a stretch becasue from my example that is exaclty what Bush did.

Saddam killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis is NOTHING like a drug dealer being taken out by the Police or taken out by another country's police. When the US is threatened it will take out the threat. Saddam was a threat that had to be taken out.

Which you seem to be compleatly supportive of.

Yes, supportive of taking out the threat before the US loses another 3,000+ lives. This is what is called a WAR--ON--TERROR. Here how it works, the US finds a terrorist network, like Al Qaeda. If this group is operating out of the country we ask them to take care of it and take them out. If they can not take out the problem, then for the saftey of the US, we take it out ourselves. It is time for someone to police the world. The US found out on Sept. 11th that the world we live in is smaller than it used to be.

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.

They will when they realize what we have done for 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.

bahhhhhh bahhhhh

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.

I could give you a few pointers.

. Hell I bet no one else on this forum was "Born and raised in the USA"

Sorry i offended you wraith but i am still waiting for you to show me something. Your examples are way out of touch with what is going on in Iraq.

Wraith

No wraith, i am from Houston. What does your example have to do with DC?

It was in referance to your comment bout never feelign held hostage in the USA. Refering to the Crime in DC

Saddam killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis is NOTHING like a drug dealer being taken out by the Police or taken out by another country's police. When the US is threatened it will take out the threat. Saddam was a threat that had to be taken out.

You are right, Saddam was/is a dick.. no arguments there. Then again, there are alot of really nasty leaders out there, there are millions of people arround the world who are all beign murdered by those in command, there are whole groups of people who are being murdered for no reason other than the color of their skin, there are millions of people who are oppressed by their government all over the world.

Is it our job alone to systimaticly remove the acting governments and install the government that we chose for them?

Tell me, at what point was Saddam a threat to the USA? I believe it was AlQuaeda that was the cause of 9/11 Al Quaeda which was found in Afganistan and Saudi. Why then is it we left those and focused almost solely on Iraq?

Yes, supportive of taking out the threat before the US loses another 3,000+ lives. This is what is called a WAR--ON--TERROR. Here how it works, the US finds a terrorist network, like Al Qaeda. If this group is operating out of the country we ask them to take care of it and take them out. If they can not take out the problem, then for the saftey of the US, we take it out ourselves. It is time for someone to police the world. The US found out on Sept. 11th that the world we live in is smaller than it used to be.

So because we now get a taste of what the rest of the world has had to put up with for years. It is acceptable for us to walk into any country arround the world without real evidence and obliterate their government?

So with your logic on justifying the invasion of Iraq would it be alright for Germany to attack us because they perceve us as a threat to their countries? We obvioulsy have the means, we have proven that we have no qualms about attacking without suport of other nations, they know we are mad at them for not supporting us. So if they thought we might "liberate" Germany next would they not have the right to preemptivly attack us first?

It is time for somone to police the world, but becasue of the nature of the world it should be a collaboration of efforts. Not the biggest meanest bully on the block.

They will when they realize what we have done for them.

Ohh I think they have a pretty damn clear impression of what we are doing to them.

I could give you a few pointers.

Yes I am sure that you could. I am however quite fortunate in the ability to think for myself instead of spewing out whatever the government tells me I need to believe so I can go out and be a happy productive citizan.

Sorry but 2+2=4 and you will not send me to room 101

Sorry i offended you wraith but i am still waiting for you to show me something. Your examples are way out of touch with what is going on in Iraq.

Hahahahh no, you have not offended me. You are not cappable of offending me. You do concerne me though becasue I simply do not understand how somone.. anyone.. can be so blind to the world arround them. To be content to get information from a single source and hold on so dearly to that "truth" reguardles of it's origen.

In a way I envy how simplistic that mindset is. Without feeling the need to verify sources and seeking out a greater more accurate reality.

Almost like being envious of a puppy who's whole existance revolves arround a new squeeky toy.

My examples are way out of touch with what is going on becasue you obviously are unable to see past the example itself.

I feel like Wobbly Headded Bob.
Wraith

Originally posted by wraith30

No wraith, i am from Houston. What does your example have to do with DC?

It was in referance to your comment bout never feelign held hostage in the USA. Refering to the Crime in DC

Thats just it, what crime in DC. Bush in office is not a crime and if it were Bush would be impeached. Eitherway....

You are right, Saddam was/is a dick.. no arguments there. Then again, there are alot of really nasty leaders out there, there are millions of people arround the world who are all beign murdered by those in command, there are whole groups of people who are being murdered for no reason other than the color of their skin, there are millions of people who are oppressed by their government all over the world.

Is it our job alone to systimaticly remove the acting governments and install the government that we chose for them?

Like i said, the UN is a joke. If they do not know how to police the world the US is going to step up and do it for them for the saftey of the US of A. It isn't just America under attack it is the world. Why wait for ANOTHER Sept. 11th? Is that what you would rather do, just wait and see how many innocent people die in the NEXT attack?

Tell me, at what point was Saddam a threat to the USA? I believe it was AlQuaeda that was the cause of 9/11 Al Quaeda which was found in Afganistan and Saudi. Why then is it we left those and focused almost solely on Iraq?

Here you go Wraith, check this out. Iraq-Al Qaeda Ties...
www.weeklystandard.com...

Here is another Iraq-Al Qaeda Tie..."an article in The Weekly Standard magazine detailing a relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda based on leaked classified information."
www.weeklystandard.com...

Like i said before..."Yes, supportive of taking out the threat before the US loses another 3,000+ lives. This is what is called a WAR--ON--TERROR. Here how it works, the US finds a terrorist network, like Al Qaeda. If this group is operating out of the country we ask them to take care of it and take them out. If they can not take out the problem, then for the saftey of the US, we take it out ourselves. It is time for someone to police the world. The US found out on Sept. 11th that the world we live in is smaller than it used to be."

So because we now get a taste of what the rest of the world has had to put up with for years. It is acceptable for us to walk into any country arround the world without real evidence and obliterate their government?

Read links above.

So with your logic on justifying the invasion of Iraq would it be alright for Germany to attack us because they perceve us as a threat to their countries?

We do not pose a threat to Germany. We are not killing hundreds and hundreds of thousands of our own people either.

We obvioulsy have the means, we have proven that we have no qualms about attacking without suport of other nations, they know we are mad at them for not supporting us. So if they thought we might "liberate" Germany next would they not have the right to preemptivly attack us first?

That depends wraith, IF we had a terrorist group INSIDE the US that has attacked Germany in the past AND we (the US) did nothing to foil future plans to attack then yes, bring it Germany.

It is time for somone to police the world, but becasue of the nature of the world it should be a collaboration of efforts. Not the biggest meanest bully on the block.

You are right but we tried to get the world united but the UN (joke) didn't do its job. It is the UN's job to police the world and they are not doing it obviously so the US HAD to stand up.

Yes I am sure that you could. I am however quite fortunate in the ability to think for myself instead of spewing out whatever the government tells me I need to believe so I can go out and be a happy productive citizan.

Sorry but 2+2=4 and you will not send me to room 101

Well then, i think i will leave that one alone.

You do concerne me though becasue I simply do not understand how somone.. anyone.. can be so blind to the world arround them. To be content to get information from a single source and hold on so dearly to that "truth" reguardles of it's origen.

I use a couple different sources but thats beside the point. I think you need to look up A source before you spew your garbage on this forum. You say i get info from a single source but i havnt provided any links until this post.

Almost like being envious of a puppy who's whole existance revolves arround a new squeeky toy.
Wraith

Thats a good one wraith hahaha. Thank you, i needed a laugh. On the same note though, i feel sorry for you. You carry this hatred around with all the time. I just want the US safe for me, family, and friends. If that means doing the UNs job and taking out terrorist groups one by one than so be it. I am out of here, time to go home and put my feet up.

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix


Here you go Wraith, check this out. Iraq-Al Qaeda Ties...
www.weeklystandard.com...

On the other hand:

www.wsws.org...

Don't get me started on Monica missiles

Originally posted by Aelita

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix


Here you go Wraith, check this out. Iraq-Al Qaeda Ties...
www.weeklystandard.com...

On the other hand:

www.wsws.org...

So what is to be believed, we have evidence, then evidence disputing the evidence. We have the words of polititions, yea thats reliable.

Though there is somethign interesting.. In the first link it points out that Iraq may not have known that it was arming Al Quaeda, though that is hardly the point.

Here is the thing, Saddam may be a dick, he may have been violent dictator I have no doubt that he orderd mass killing. But he is not a compleat blithering idiot. He knows that Osama hated his secular state, and Saddam would not directly support or arm a religos zellot who is camping in neighboring countries. As was pointed out in the link from AntiPolitrix.

Saddam hated us, no doubt. But know what? in 2001 there were a number of countries that hated us. Several of them in the middle east, a couple of them known to help hide Al Quaeda members. Why then focus almost all of our energy on a country that in the past has had fuzzy if any real relationship with the terrorist group that attacked us? For humanitarian reasons? Oh give me a break, Bush could care less about the suffering populace of that country. He has shown that he does not even care about the poor in our own country why would he even give a piss about them. Also if you are so hardcore about the protection of the USA then you should be pissed that he went into annother country to "Liberate" the oppresed instead of staying focused on his so called "War on Terror"

As for evidence to back up my arguments. I don't read any links or newspapers. I rely on those arround me who are highly informed to let me know what is really going on.

Ohh and back to the living in DC.. again you missed the referance. Not political crimes, jsut the general street crime in DC. There is so much taht you feel like you are being held hostage. It was an off topic comment. I jsut think that street gangs should be handeled like small homeland terrorist factions. Then at least maybe some good will come out of all of this crap we have been put through in the last 4 years.

Wraith

Originally posted by Aelita

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix


Here you go Wraith, check this out. Iraq-Al Qaeda Ties...
www.weeklystandard.com...

On the other hand:

www.wsws.org...

Don't get me started on Monica missiles

On the Other Other Hand:
And on it goes. This conventional wisdom--that our two most determined enemies were not in league, now or ever--is comforting. It is also wrong.
www.weeklystandard.com...

Who do we believe? I will continue to search but both sides have good arguments.

My Computer is a POS!!! It keeps Shuttin Down.

Originally posted by wraith30

So what is to be believed, we have evidence, then evidence disputing the evidence. We have the words of polititions, yea thats reliable.

Though there is somethign interesting.. In the first link it points out that Iraq may not have known that it was arming Al Quaeda, though that is hardly the point.

Here is the thing, Saddam may be a dick, he may have been violent dictator I have no doubt that he orderd mass killing. But he is not a compleat blithering idiot. He knows that Osama hated his secular state, and Saddam would not directly support or arm a religos zellot who is camping in neighboring countries. As was pointed out in the link from AntiPolitrix.

Saddam hated us, no doubt. But know what? in 2001 there were a number of countries that hated us. Several of them in the middle east, a couple of them known to help hide Al Quaeda members. Why then focus almost all of our energy on a country that in the past has had fuzzy if any real relationship with the terrorist group that attacked us? For humanitarian reasons? Oh give me a break, Bush could care less about the suffering populace of that country. He has shown that he does not even care about the poor in our own country why would he even give a piss about them. Also if you are so hardcore about the protection of the USA then you should be pissed that he went into annother country to "Liberate" the oppresed instead of staying focused on his so called "War on Terror"

As for evidence to back up my arguments. I don't read any links or newspapers. I rely on those arround me who are highly informed to let me know what is really going on.

Ohh and back to the living in DC.. again you missed the referance. Not political crimes, jsut the general street crime in DC. There is so much taht you feel like you are being held hostage. It was an off topic comment. I jsut think that street gangs should be handeled like small homeland terrorist factions. Then at least maybe some good will come out of all of this crap we have been put through in the last 4 years.

Wraith

I see your point but i don't agree with the "Bush could care less about the suffering populace of that country." Bush cares but after we were attacked NO ONE knew what to do, his plans changed dramaticly on Sept. 11th. You have to understand that not even a year into Bush's Presidency we were attacked like we have never been attacked before. He went after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan which was a good desision. Then, world intel from Russia, Germany, and Britian all pointed at Saddam saying he was a threat because he was still making chemical weapons and WMD. After Sept 11th, Bush would be stupid to ignore the intel because he does not want another 3000+ Americans murdered on his watch. I do agree he should of taken more time to sift through the data on Iraqs WMD but there was also intel saying Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda. If you put both the Intel about Saddams WMD and the intel saying Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda together, that is one hell of a threat. The way i see it, it is better to be safe than sorry.

Now, we are hearing people say that Bush didn't act quick enough to stop the attacks on Sept 11th. This is where i see nothing but Bush haters, no matter what he does he doesn't do the right thing. Yes, he should of acted on the intel leading up to Sept 11th but it is a lot easier to put a puzzle together when you have a picture of the finished product.

Should he have acted on the intel leading up to Sept 11th? Yes, he might have been able to save alot of lives. Should he have acted on the intel about the ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda? Yes, especially after Sept 11th, Bush knows he should of acted on Sept 11th intel and it probably keeps him up at night. Knowing that, if i were Bush, i would have acted on the Iraq-Al Qaeda intel. Just my opinion.

Saddam was a foe of Al Qaeda, there is evidence from many sources. Al Qaeda seeks to establish a religious form of governance (califate), while Saddam was a bona fide secular dictator. Al Qaeda was a threat to him (guess what, they got it their way).

Originally posted by wraith30
Ohh and back to the living in DC.. again you missed the referance. Not political crimes, jsut the general street crime in DC. There is so much taht you feel like you are being held hostage. It was an off topic comment. I jsut think that street gangs should be handeled like small homeland terrorist factions. Then at least maybe some good will come out of all of this crap we have been put through in the last 4 years.

Wraith

As for the DC street gangs, i would hate to live in a community like that. Something should done about that but we have to look at the bigger scale. Street gangs kill a lot of people but not 3000 at a time. However, i imagine if you were to add up the death from both since Sept 11th and i bet it would be very close. Street gangs is a huge problem in this country, as well as the amount of illegals entering the US everyday. President Bush has a full plate and i think he does need to spend some of the time and effort to make the US homeland safe. Fighting terrorism abroad does make it safer here in the states by stopping the attack before it can be executed but it is not enough. We need a plan to take care of terrorist who may already be in the US. I wish Kerry and Bush would make this a center piece of their campaign, not what they did in the military 30 years ago.

Originally posted by Aelita
Saddam was a foe of Al Qaeda, there is evidence from many sources. Al Qaeda seeks to establish a religious form of governance (califate), while Saddam was a bona fide secular dictator. Al Qaeda was a threat to him (guess what, they got it their way).

Then he should of done a better job of making that clear by trying to stop Al Qaeda from entering Iraq. Having meetings with Al Qaeda operatives does just the opposite. It amazes me how people take the word of Saddam over Bush. Saddam would like us to think he hated Al Qaeda but his actions speak louder than words. Remember, an enemies enemy, is a friend.

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix

I see your point but i don't agree with the "Bush could care less about the suffering populace of that country." Bush cares but after we were attacked NO ONE knew what to do, his plans changed dramaticly on Sept. 11th. You have to understand that not even a year into Bush's Presidency we were attacked like we have never been attacked before. He went after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan which was a good desision. Then, world intel from Russia, Germany, and Britian all pointed at Saddam saying he was a threat because he was still making chemical weapons and WMD. After Sept 11th, Bush would be stupid to ignore the intel because he does not want another 3000+ Americans murdered on his watch. I do agree he should of taken more time to sift through the data on Iraqs WMD but there was also intel saying Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda. If you put both the Intel about Saddams WMD and the intel saying Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda together, that is one hell of a threat. The way i see it, it is better to be safe than sorry.

Now, we are hearing people say that Bush didn't act quick enough to stop the attacks on Sept 11th. This is where i see nothing but Bush haters, no matter what he does he doesn't do the right thing. Yes, he should of acted on the intel leading up to Sept 11th but it is a lot easier to put a puzzle together when you have a picture of the finished product.

Should he have acted on the intel leading up to Sept 11th? Yes, he might have been able to save alot of lives. Should he have acted on the intel about the ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda? Yes, especially after Sept 11th, Bush knows he should of acted on Sept 11th intel and it probably keeps him up at night. Knowing that, if i were Bush, i would have acted on the Iraq-Al Qaeda intel. Just my opinion.

A brief insight into Bush's care for people.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Yes this happend back in College. What he did is not as disturbing as the responce Bush gave to the Yale college reporters after Branding somone during a frat hazing. I know people will say that he was young and grown up now. Unfortunalty by the time you are in College you rnature is pretty much set.. you can change your demenor.. but your nature is pretty solidly set.

No, I do not think that Bush cares at all for anyone but himself, that includes those suffering in other nations or anyone here in the USA. Ohh he cares about how they view him, and how it will affect his standing and his bank account. But as for actualy caring about the masses, the people, or the dead that come back from the war.. .sorry but no.

Yes I do think that going into Afganistan was the right thing to do and I gave full support to hunting them down. However, we have been attacked to that scale before, WWII and we retaliated against Japan and that was also neccessary. Yes, I did write in aobut giving Bush a bit of flack about his non reaction in the school but I also gave a fll explination of the problems I had and that I agreed with some of the other actiaons as well.

However, the way he went about the invasion of Iraq was so unbelivabley irrisopncible it, in itself, is close to criminal. Breaking the Geniva convention laws, pissing off the UN (and reguardless of wht you think about them they are neccessary and the best way to go.) And then.. this is the kicker for me that really just blows my mind... We have all this going on.. and Bush takes an unpresidented ammount of vacation. I know people need a day off now and then but when you are the leader of a county in a war against an undefined foe, finances are going to hell, terrorists attacking, the answer is not to go golfing every weekend. He has taken more vacation in 4 years than presidents who have served 2 terms. I'm sorry but WTF!!!

Wraith

Originally posted by wraith30


A brief insight into Bush's care for people.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Yes this happend back in College. What he did is not as disturbing as the responce Bush gave to the Yale college reporters after Branding somone during a frat hazing. I know people will say that he was young and grown up now. Unfortunalty by the time you are in College you rnature is pretty much set.. you can change your demenor.. but your nature is pretty solidly set.

No, I do not think that Bush cares at all for anyone but himself, that includes those suffering in other nations or anyone here in the USA. Ohh he cares about how they view him, and how it will affect his standing and his bank account. But as for actualy caring about the masses, the people, or the dead that come back from the war.. .sorry but no.

Yes I do think that going into Afganistan was the right thing to do and I gave full support to hunting them down. However, we have been attacked to that scale before, WWII and we retaliated against Japan and that was also neccessary. Yes, I did write in aobut giving Bush a bit of flack about his non reaction in the school but I also gave a fll explination of the problems I had and that I agreed with some of the other actiaons as well.

However, the way he went about the invasion of Iraq was so unbelivabley irrisopncible it, in itself, is close to criminal. Breaking the Geniva convention laws, pissing off the UN (and reguardless of wht you think about them they are neccessary and the best way to go.) And then.. this is the kicker for me that really just blows my mind... We have all this going on.. and Bush takes an unpresidented ammount of vacation. I know people need a day off now and then but when you are the leader of a county in a war against an undefined foe, finances are going to hell, terrorists attacking, the answer is not to go golfing every weekend. He has taken more vacation in 4 years than presidents who have served 2 terms. I'm sorry but WTF!!!

Wraith

Do you have a timeline of what he was doing on these "Vacations"? No you do not, you have nothing but he takes more vacations. I am willing to bet he worked everyday on those "vacations". Bush is not blue collar worker who takes a normal vacation. When you are President, you do not have the luxury to take real vacations. You can say he took more vacations than any other President and on the same note i can also say he worked more than any other Vacationing President. My father is a VP of his company, when he takes vacation he works everyday, everyday. You need to stop believing Michael Moore. Now MM is someone who only cares about his pocket book. I am sorry you see his views as fact.

Bush 2004!!!!

[edit on 17-8-2004 by AntiPolitrix]

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix

Do you have a timeline of what he was doing on these "Vacations"? No you do not, you have nothing but he takes more vacations. I am willing to bet he worked everyday on those "vacations". Bush is not blue collar worker who takes a normal vacation. When you are President, you do not have the luxury to take real vacations. You can say he took more vacations than any other President and on the same note i can also say he worked more than any other Vacationing President. My father is a VP of his company, when he takes vacation he works everyday, everyday. You need to stop believing Michael Moore. Now MM is someone who only cares about his pocket book. I am sorry you see his views as fact.

Bush 2004!!!!

[edit on 17-8-2004 by AntiPolitrix]

I am so pleased that you think you know the films that I like to see. Just for your bit of information I have not seen MM's 9/11 film. I only recently saw Bowling for Colimbine becasue it happened to be on HBO.

Let me ask you? Do you have a timeline of Bush's vacations? No? I didn't think so. Your Dad is a VP, ... well Whoopty dooo that obvioulsy has a great deal of bearing on all of this now doesen't it.

So what can we try to derive what is most likly the case shall we? Bush has admited that he does not read the papers and gets all his info from advisers.. mark of a lazy person and somone who is not in the lest self motivaded to find out what is going on for himself. Has admited that he always gets 8 hours of sleep and is in bed by 10 and eats 3 meals a day. This was after we went to war in Iraq, he is obvioulsy not concerned to the point of losing any sleep over it.

I noteced you did not comment on Bush's tallent for Sadistic behavior. Thought it was funny to brand somone. Yea.. real great guy....

Wraith

This has all gone a little off topic, no?

I'd like to speak on behalf of 'old Europe' and say, i'd rather have anyone but that c*nt Bush.

His lack of political acumen knows no bounds. And as for his administration's foreign policies...Well we have lost count of the deaths haven't we?

Lets face it, outside of the blinkered American right wing, nobody likes this man.

Originally posted by wraith30

Let me ask you? Do you have a timeline of Bush's vacations? No? I didn't think so. Your Dad is a VP, ... well Whoopty dooo that obvioulsy has a great deal of bearing on all of this now doesen't it.

Ahh, yes it does have a "great deal of bearing on all of this", It shows that a vacation is not just a vacation. I don't have provide a timeline, i am not the one who is making FALSE statements about Bush's vacations. You are making F-A-L-S-E STATAMENTS. You don't have any proof of what Bush was doing on his "Vacations"!!

So what can we try to derive what is most likly the case shall we? Bush has admited that he does not read the papers and gets all his info from advisers.. mark of a lazy person and somone who is not in the lest self motivaded to find out what is going on for himself. Has admited that he always gets 8 hours of sleep and is in bed by 10 and eats 3 meals a day. This was after we went to war in Iraq, he is obvioulsy not concerned to the point of losing any sleep over it.

Where is a link Wraith? Or let me guess, is it nothing but hear-say. If so, leave your hear-say for your friends, we don't buy it. It would be different if you provided "some" kind proof about Bush's vacationing but then again, it is only an opinion. Unless you have proof Bush was sitting around doing nothing while on vacation

I noteced you did not comment on Bush's tallent for Sadistic behavior. Thought it was funny to brand somone. Yea.. real great guy....

Wraith

But on Bush's sadistic behavior IN COLLEGE, not a big deal. I don't care and im not sure why it is a big deal to you. Where you branded? Did Bush grap people off the street to be branded? Did he start the branding tradition? If the answers are no, no, and no then i do not care. It is not a big deal, and it is kinda sad that you think this would effect my thoughts on Bush's capability as President. I am still wondering how you get Bush's sadistic behavior in college when the thread posted is whether or not people would vote for kerry because he is not Bush.

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix
But on Bush's sadistic behavior IN COLLEGE, not a big deal. I don't care and im not sure why it is a big deal to you. Where you branded? Did Bush grap people off the street to be branded? Did he start the branding tradition? If the answers are no, no, and no then i do not care. It is not a big deal, and it is kinda sad that you think this would effect my thoughts on Bush's capability as President. I am still wondering how you get Bush's sadistic behavior in college when the thread posted is whether or not people would vote for kerry because he is not Bush.

Well Anitpolitrix, Kerry is not Bush, therefore he's less likely a sadist. People don't want a sadist in the office. So this does belong in this thread.

Originally posted by Smokersroom
This has all gone a little off topic, no?

I'd like to speak on behalf of 'old Europe' and say, i'd rather have anyone but that c*nt Bush.

His lack of political acumen knows no bounds. And as for his administration's foreign policies...Well we have lost count of the deaths haven't we?

Lets face it, outside of the blinkered American right wing, nobody likes this man.

I guess half of the American Public is a part of the "blinkered American right wing". As for the death counts, i think we are at 3000+ but thats not a big deal to rest of the world. If it wasn't for Bush, Americans might be counting another 3000+.

Originally posted by Aelita

Well Anitpolitrix, Kerry is not Bush, therefore he's less likely a sadist.

Hmm...ok, thanks for your opinion.

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix

I guess half of the American Public is a part of the "blinkered American right wing".

I guess half of America doesnt have a passport either. Look, the blinkered American right wing is not a reference to EVERY republican or hard-liner, its a slur intended for those who vote for Bush because "He's a hard talker", "He's fighting the good and noble fight" or "He's gonna whoop them tourists". Does common sense or the ability to run a government not come into it?

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix

As for the death counts, i think we are at 3000+ but thats not a big deal to rest of the world. If it wasn't for Bush, Americans might be counting another 3000+.

So lets kill a five figure quantity of Arabs? Two wrongs don't make a right, sunshine.

Can we talk about aliens now?

[edit on 18-8-2004 by Smokersroom]

Originally posted by Smokersroom


Yes, and I guess half of America doesnt have a passport either. And anyway, the blinkered American right wing is not a reference to EVERY republican, its a slur intended for those who vote for Bush because "He's a hard talker" or "He's gonna whoop them tourists". Does common sense or the ability to run a government not come into it?


So lets kill a five figure quantity of Arabs? Two wrongs don't make a right, sunshine.

No, lets kill terrorist and people who help terrorist. Saddam and Saddam loyalist are or were terrorist, they brought terror to millions and millions of Iraqis.

"Two wrongs don't make a right, sunshine." So, do we just wait for another lose of 3000 before do any thing? Come on, what are you smoking in that smokers room, da fern?