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.

 

This is exactly why republican's shouldn't vote for Bush!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix
[True Lies, name fits you well, so in your opinion we should not look at Kerry's votes against defence spending? Oh yea, you think the war on terrorism is a joke.


Can you read? She is voting Libertarian not for one of your masters hand picked candidates


[edit on 1-11-2004 by Amuk]




posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix
True Lies, name fits you well, so in your opinion we should not look at Kerry's votes against defence spending? Oh yea, you think the war on terrorism is a joke.


Your name suits you well too... Politrix? Who are you trying to kid? Your anti politrix but yet your voting Bush... master magician of.

And btw, your opinion is that you think I think that we should not look at kerry's voting record, which is bs. Obviously you haven't opened your eyes to my posts where i've posted time and time again, kerry's record stinks... Kerry's record is just as bad as Bush's.. which is why i'm voting badnarik...

the war on terror is a joke? Is it? I don't think it's a joke, I think it's a real thing, there are terrorists after us who want our heads... For bush to use this terrorism thing to advance his platform is low.
And for him to use terrorism as a means to justify the actions for all the unconsititional things he's done in this country is wrong...
you sir, obviously have no idea of what your voting in... Either i'm a crazy dillusional person, or your dillusional and crazy...

And bush's actions while being in office tell me i'm not so dillusional and crazy.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ingolf
Found on usenet,



Osama vs. Hussein

Who killed 2,992 in New York, Washington DC and in Pennsylvania on 9-eleven,
2001? Osama bin Laden

Who bombed the World Trade Center in New York City, killing six, in 1993?
Osama bin Laden

Who bombed U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, killing 217, in 1998? Osama
bin Laden

Who bombed the USS Cole, killing 17, in 2000? Osama bin Laden

Who bombed an American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12, in 2002?
Osama bin Laden

Who bombed an U.S. housing compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killing 34, in
1998? Osama bin Laden

Who has killed more Americans? Osama bin Laden

Who is in jail? Saddam Hussein

Who is not in jail? Osama bin Laden

Who is a threat to the United States? Osama bin Laden

Who went after Saddam Hussein instead of Osama bin Laden? George W. Bush

How many U.S. troops have died in Iraq since March 19, 2003? 1,111 to date.

How many innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed as a result of invading Iraq? More than 100.000 people!

Did Hussein kill 2,992 on 9-eleven? No.

Did Hussein bomb the USS Cole? No.

Did Hussein kill 217 in U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya? No.

Then who should really be in jail? Osama bin Laden

Why isn't Osama bin Laden in jail? George W. Bush could only capture Saddam
Hussein.

Why have 1,111 U.S. troops forfeited their lives in Iraq? George W. Bush
sent them there.


Geez... how can you be in doubt?

I just want to add.

Did Osama mess with Bush's daddy? No.

Does Osama have control of an oil rich country. No.

Does Osama have a country that needs rebuilding that can be contracted out to the Cheney company? No.

This shows you that Bush in only interested in himself and his people and not the US population.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueLies
It's not about kerry... It's not about bush..
It's about our country, it's about our freedoms...


All of the above actually.



By voting for Bush your advocating, bigger government, over spending, your advocating that it's ok for bush to wipe his stinky corrupt ass with the consitution by voting for him your letting them know you think it's ok...


And a safer America. Kerry stands for a bunch of lies or higher taxes. He can not come through with all his promises WITHOUT raiseing taxes. Plain and SIMPLE!!!



Ok, Jemison, keep wasting your vote, vote in someone AGAIN who is infringing on our rights... That just shows me that you don't give a flying # about this country and the people who care about it's it's core... Also you don't give a # about our forefathers...
People like you are making me extremely sick...


The feeling is mutual, it makes me sick to hear people say terroism is a front so that the government can take away our freedoms.

But lets talk about wasting a vote, voting for Kerry is throwing away your vote for three reasons.

1. Terrorism is a real threat

2. Kerry's voting record on defense spending

3. Bush is going to win

Bush 2004



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
There are at least 4-5 candidates on most ballots.

At least check them out before you caste your vote for the "lesser of two evils"


And at least educate yourself through independant research and self educating rather then going through mainstream political bs that obviously makes you look like a brainwashed political hack.

And at least check them out before you go and open your mouth...



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:30 AM
link   
The ill identified enemy hides behind its lack of identity, its civilian population, and even our own population, in order to carry out its attacks.

This ill identified enemy has killed thousands, even though you consider it ill identified.

The Patriot Act hasn't sent innocent people to the Gulags; as a matte of fact, I know of no civilian that has been dragged out of their home and into a secret prison - yet.

As far as voting is concerned, I'd trust a Christian Republican more than an ultra-elite liberal Democrat such as Kerry in everything from the war to the Patriot Act. In case you hadn't found out, the Patriot Act was the brainchild of Clinton's but he had no cause arise to use it. Hmm, I wonder what an ultra-elitist such as Clinton and Hillary were up to with such documentation and no good reason for it? Maybe Kerry will show us.

You have such great fears with Bush, you just might see the realization with Kerry.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Let me start out with, Sorry. I didn't realize we were talking about the "Third Party". I just jumped on it and kept jumping on it without noticing we were dicussing the third party.



And btw, your opinion is that you think I think that we should not look at kerry's voting record, which is bs. Obviously you haven't opened your eyes to my posts where i've posted time and time again, kerry's record stinks... Kerry's record is just as bad as Bush's.. which is why i'm voting badnarik...


Sorry for not paying attention. However, i would like to see a third party candidate with a shot at Presidency. I don't see that happening though, they just arn't close enough. In my opinion, that is a wasted vote. Bush has his problem and Kerry has bigger problems. In the polls it is showing Bush at 49 and Kerry at 47 with a 2 or 3 percent margin of error. If you do the math, that leaves about 4 percent (With margin of error) for the third party. That is why i say it is only a two party race.

War on terror is not a joke and ill be back to discuss that.



[edit on 1-11-2004 by AntiPolitrix]



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
The ill identified enemy hides behind its lack of identity, its civilian population, and even our own population, in order to carry out its attacks.

This ill identified enemy has killed thousands, even though you consider it ill identified.

The Patriot Act hasn't sent innocent people to the Gulags; as a matte of fact, I know of no civilian that has been dragged out of their home and into a secret prison - yet.

As far as voting is concerned, I'd trust a Christian Republican more than an ultra-elite liberal Democrat such as Kerry in everything from the war to the Patriot Act. In case you hadn't found out, the Patriot Act was the brainchild of Clinton's but he had no cause arise to use it. Hmm, I wonder what an ultra-elitist such as Clinton and Hillary were up to with such documentation and no good reason for it? Maybe Kerry will show us.

You have such great fears with Bush, you just might see the realization with Kerry.



If you want to believe all that gobbledygook, go ahead, eat it up..
But i'm not buying.. And again, I repeat, i'm voting badnarik, a democrat is just as bad which is why i'm not voting for either,
I find it funny republican's always find a way to justify their commander in chief's ill actions by spouting off ill actions of former democratic president's, like it's supposed to negate the facts??
Bush has done a good job of infiltrating fear into the mind's of the american public.

If your voting against Bush, it would be for the good of this country and the world, it would be a different kind of America then what we have now.

The American FP is discusting, and I truly believe that PNAC is to blame for that.

But again, you eat what you want for breakfast.. I'll eat what I want.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix
War on terror is not a joke and ill be back to discuss that.



No, it's not a joke... You can talk about it all you want, but I wouldn't waste your breath because i'm well aware of the republican argument...

Save yourself from getting carpal tunnel.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueLies
But again, you eat what you want for breakfast.. I'll eat what I want.


Your going to be eating a 747 if we do not destroy the threat before it can materialize. What is this third party going to do about terrorism? Is he going to stop the threat before it can be executed in New York, Los Angales, Detroit, or Houston? You can not fight a threat that your too blind to see. Too many, well not enough Americans remember Sept 11th. The questions we all had in our heads as we watched the second 747 fly into the WTC building, "Are we being attacked?" or "what is going on?". When the two building finally fell nearly 3,000 people died. It was not a joke and it will happen again. The only thing we can do is stop the animals that plan these attacks. Bush is the only candidate in my opinion that is willing to go after the terrorist where they live so they do not attack us where we live.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix
Bush is the only candidate in my opinion that is willing to go after the terrorist where they live so they do not attack us where we live.



Actually I bet my ass I wouldn't be eating a 747... I also bet that the next president to be inaugerated won't spend 280 billion dollars on a country that had nothing to do with 9-11....

We were going after Bin Laden the day after 9-11 and Al-Qaida
and since then we're 7.5 trillion in debt and no bin laden.

There was no Al-qaida in Iraq until we got there...
We've spent more money in Iraq rebuilding, then spending that money on intelligence trying to find the head OBL.

So as long as Bin Laden is free you can bet another attack is imminent.

It won't be on the airlines though, the security at the airports and the air marshall's ect, is great.

Their's alot of things terrorists can do even though bush is in office.

If they are apparantly here, they can easily hurt us through natural resources like water. They can use biological weapons if they really wanted to...

It's not just about the airlines...

So if your going to keep saying 3,000 people died in the wtc don't forget to add the 100,000+ troops in Iraq that didn't have to die. But we were too busy resurfacing iraq the way we wanted it...

A democracy for the Iraqi people isn't having American and world wide corporations going over there and setting up shop in their backyard...

You wouldn't like it if that happened to you. Sure they'll live with it, but the ones that aren't liking it, are fighting it.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

Can you read? She is voting Libertarian not for one of your masters hand picked candidates


[edit on 1-11-2004 by Amuk]


There is unfortunaly the minor fact that tomorrow, the votes will goin and the hammer will fall and the only thing I am 100% sure of is that either Bush or Kerry will be the victor.

Your answer will be.. but it does not have to be this way, and you are absolulty right.. it does not have to be this way.. but this is the way it is.

The only way indipendant parties will be a valid real threat to the republican and or Democratic party is to first gain some push in the house and in the Senat.

In this particular election, any vote to an independant party for the presidential seat is a lost cause.

Before you go off... I am voting independants for house and the Senat becasue that is where it has to start. Right now.. there is too much at stake and not enough influence for the presidental seat to be an independant victory.

Wraith



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by wraith30
Before you go off... I am voting independants for house and the Senat becasue that is where it has to start. Right now.. there is too much at stake and not enough influence for the presidental seat to be an independant victory.

Wraith



If you live in Georgia, you have your choice to pick from Libertarian, Dem or Rep.
He's running for the Senate.

Also if you live in Michigan, you can vote for a libertarian for the Senate.

Not sure about the other states but you can see...

And why vote independant, don't you mean libertarian? They aren't independant... At least I don't think so, they are a party. Nader is an independant.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 04:09 PM
link   
For me the issues of the Supreme Court and the march of the fundamentalist 'Christians' are probably the biggest reasons why I'd hope Bush loses tomorrow.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 04:42 PM
link   
TrueLies, if you are trying to get people to look at the libertarian website and possibly vote Badnarik you are doing a very poor job at luring people in that direction.

I understand that you are passionate about your cause and your party but calling people names and degrading them is NOT an effective recruitment technique and is the surest way to get people to think that your party is a bunch of raving lunatics who would rather hurl insults than educate.

I have seen many Badnarik supporters on ATS who have done a very good job of getting people to at least take a look at what Badnarik stands for and did so without having to resort to name calling and going for the jugular. If your goal is just to go off on people and call them stupid than I guess you are fulfilling your goal, but if your goal is to get people to open their minds to the candidate of YOUR choice I would suggest that you change your methods.

You catch more flies with honey ...

Jemison



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jemison
I would suggest that you change your methods.
Jemison



It may not fit your standards, but i'm not trying to fit my point to suit anybody.

Oh how the world would be a boring place if everybody was the same...
I like me and thats ok.

but thanks.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Dont suger coat it TL tell us how you REALLY feel


I understand your frustration, people keep saying THIS election is too important and I agree.....Its too important to vote for EITHER of the big two.

They have passed the ball back and forth since the civil war and the only thing that has changed is the Government gets bigger and more powerful every year what in HELL makes anyone think this election will be different?

The deffinition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

We as a country have been insane for over 150 years.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
what in HELL makes anyone think this election will be different?



- This time - if Bush & Co. win - you get the fundamentalist evangelical 'Christian' crazies in.

With the Supreme Court loaded in the 'ultra's' favour as the retirements start to happen.

Don't know about you but that really bothers me.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
Don't know about you but that really bothers me.


It bothers me that EITHER of them might win. Both will screw us so what difference does it make. If you really want to see change you have to break loose of the wasted vote lie and put Third parties in office



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk


It bothers me that EITHER of them might win. Both will screw us so what difference does it make. If you really want to see change you have to break loose of the wasted vote lie and put Third parties in office


Your right.
If you really want to see change you have to break through the status quo in the political arena.

[edit on 1-11-2004 by TrueLies]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join