4 more years

[skorpion317]

looks like bush has won, apparently. although ohio may have some provisional ballots to count, bush's lead in that state is more than the amount of provisional ballots, so there's nothing Kerry can do.

the republicans also gained control of the senate, taking out Tom Daschle in the process.

i voted for bush.

[jims69camaro]

thank god we've got a chance at a clean end to the war in iraq. perhaps even continue to clean up that area without dedicating more troops than absolutely need to be there. i say send in the seal teams (2) and the rangers (1) and the black guard from england to take out the leaders left in al-qaeda, then see how things shape up from there.

[Savage_Messiah]

He's just gonna dig us deeper into Iraq, and go after Iran next. Unless news has changed from 7 AM then Kerry still has a chance

[Tru2Chevy]

Kerry still has a mathematical chance in Ohio, but the majority of the absentee ballots that haven't been counted are from the military, which seems to strongly support Bush.

I'm just upset that Jack Ball lost here in Ewing :?

- Justin

[JL8Jeff]

I'm just upset that Jack Ball lost here in Ewing :?

- Justin

Yeah, Ewing is full of idiots that keep electing people who jack up our taxes. My property taxes have gone up 95% since we bought our house.

All I can say is we're lucky Bush was the president when 9/11 happened(thanks to Clinton) because Al Gore would have been a disaster.

[Tru2Chevy]

I'm just upset that Jack Ball lost here in Ewing :?

- Justin

Yeah, Ewing is full of idiots that keep electing people who jack up our taxes. My property taxes have gone up 95% since we bought our house.

Yea, idiots who elect idiots......Steinmen lives around the corner from me.....I think it's neat how last year, his dead end street was the only one in my neighborhood to get repaved :roll:

- Justin

[Squirrel]

Dubya finally got the power...good

[BlueFBird]

i dont get it states like ohio that lost soo many jobs overseas still vote for bush. how dumb can you be. Pennsylvania was Republicans until they lost so many job to shipping overseas now their democrats. i guess Ohio was just too stupid to realize this. Now were gona get dug in depper in the war. Now were gona be there for another 10 years while troops die. I hate Bush.

thank you for lettin me vent lol

[ar0ck]

How dumb can you be?

Our generation listens to much to the like of the Daily Show & MTV.

Bush will get us out of Iraq the right way. Kerry just wants to pull the plug in one shot. You just dont leave a country, thats what got us ****ed the last time in Iraq. And you wonder why Osama hated us so much?

In WWII the US spent 4 years occupying Germany, and still fought pockets of resistance. Did we give up then just for a few die-hard people who still wanted some action? No we stuck with it, and got Germany back on its feet.

The goal is to get Iraq on its feet. And the liberal media will not talk about the good things that US troops & Companies have done for that country. It takes time, this isnt a microwave war.










Now Im all fired up

[BlueFBird]

how many times is bush gona change his motive for iraq. first it was weapons. then saddam then osama, liberation. And why arent other countries with the UNited states......OO cause they hate Bush so much. Yes it wouldnt have been easy for Kerry to take over presidency caus eof Iraq. But he would not have turned it into a year after year conflict cause we have a war happy president.

and i dont watch mtv or the daily show

[SpeakersGoBoom]

thank god we've got a chance at a clean end to the war in iraq. perhaps even continue to clean up that area without dedicating more troops than absolutely need to be there. i say send in the seal teams (2) and the rangers (1) and the black guard from england to take out the leaders left in al-qaeda, then see how things shape up from there.

MY PLAN:
1) Send a ton of oil tankers at once to get all of the oil out of iraq.
2) Send 4 Nukes over to Iraq and blow it all to hell. Kill em all, let god sort em out.
3) Turn Iraq into a giant overflow parkinglot for an amusement park in Israel. Send all of the unemployed Americans over there, and every citizen will have a job. And give them and their families a season pass to whichever amusement park the overflow lot goes to. :lol:

[foff667]

thank god we've got a chance at a clean end to the war in iraq. perhaps even continue to clean up that area without dedicating more troops than absolutely need to be there. i say send in the seal teams (2) and the rangers (1) and the black guard from england to take out the leaders left in al-qaeda, then see how things shape up from there.

MY PLAN:
1) Send a ton of oil tankers at once to get all of the oil out of iraq.
2) Send 4 Nukes over to Iraq and blow it all to hell. Kill em all, let god sort em out.
3) Turn Iraq into a giant overflow parkinglot for an amusement park in Israel. Send all of the unemployed Americans over there, and every citizen will have a job. And give them and their families a season pass to whichever amusement park the overflow lot goes to. :lol:

id have voted for you :) lol but in this case i voted for bush...i think he handled everything that was going on the best he could under the circumbstances.

[Pat]

How dumb can you be?

Our generation listens to much to the like of the Daily Show & MTV.

Bush will get us out of Iraq the right way. Kerry just wants to pull the plug in one shot. You just dont leave a country, thats what got us ****ed the last time in Iraq. And you wonder why Osama hated us so much?

In WWII the US spent 4 years occupying Germany, and still fought pockets of resistance. Did we give up then just for a few die-hard people who still wanted some action? No we stuck with it, and got Germany back on its feet.

The goal is to get Iraq on its feet. And the liberal media will not talk about the good things that US troops & Companies have done for that country. It takes time, this isnt a microwave war.



i usually don't like to get into political arguments, but i'm tired of bush supporters thinking they can just **** all over everybody else. i think you've been watching too much o'reilly factor.

kerry does NOT want to pull the plug on iraq. he just sees what a disaster it is (something that bush would NEVER admit, just look at the number of times he's changed his excuse for having a war in the first place). osama and them hate us because we're there, not because we go there and leave. there's 2 main reasons muslim radicals hate america. one is supporting israel, the other is keeping troops in the middle east, the holy land. if you think about women's roles in the ME, they can't do anything without a man's permission, and they must be completely covered all the time. well guess what, we have women in the military, who feel like they don't have to abide by those rules. add in that they're in the middle of the "holy land", and they have a big problem with that. and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

you argue that the reason we got into this mess is becuase is because we just packed up and left once we got saddam out of kuwait, but that's not true. just look at a map of where our soldiers have been for the last 10 years, trust me we've been there.

and bringing up germany is just stupid. now, while i agree that rebuilding a country can't be accomplished in a short amount of time (which although unbelievable, was the scenario that bush gave us), there was a big difference between nazi germany and iraq, the difference being we were attacked by germany's political army. did you know that we didn't even declare war on germany after pearl harbor? we declared war on japan, and then germany declared war on us. germany was a real threat to us, they had submarines and planes, as well as the largest active military force in the world. at that point, we didn't even know anything about the holocaust.

i think the 2 main reasons that the "liberal" media focuses on the bad things that happen iraq are that 1)the media never focuses on good things, and 2)they feel that there was never a good reason for going there in the first place, and i agree with that. there are definitely better places for our military forces to be in the world right now. like how about afghanistan? we didn't finish there, because saddam was such a huge threat to our freedom and our way of life. newsflash, iraq couldn't hit us with a spitball if they wanted to. so now, instead of leaving a predictable nut case in charge and finishing what we started in afghanistan, not to mention having the military power to force ACTUAL NUCLEAR THREATS like north korea and iran to back down, we our over our heads in **** trying to clean up a mess that was the result of bush's personal vendetta against saddam.

the ONLY promise that bush made while in office that he came thru on was the tax cut. let's take a look at his track record:

rebuild the post 9/11 economy: didn't do it
capture osama: didn't do it
rebuild afghanistan: not only did we not finish there, but now afghanistan supplies 95% of europe's heroin
make our country "more secure": you can argue it either way, but i don't feel more secure at the airport. hell, you could get on the train with a bomb any day. i ride the train and path in newark/jersey city 4 to 6 times a month, and i never even see a COP there.

so kiss bush's ass all you want, but i really can't believe that there are people out there who actually think that bush is the best the republican party has to offer.

this is the first and last political argument you'll see me make on this board.

[PBodyGT87]

Repairing everything takes time. Bush got us into the mess, he needs to get us out of it. Kerry is not the man for the job.

I agree, it's a mess. But this is not Vietnam. And there's not gonna be a draft.

And personally I vote republican because of issues other than war. Everyone focuses on the war, and that's it. What about unions? My dad has had guns pulled on him from union workers and unions picketing his freelance work, and democrats support them. what about taxes? My family gets by on just enough money. Taxes don't need to be raised or else we're screwed. What about morals? But i'm not even gonna go there.

It's all a metter of personal opinion, and you can sign me up for the war before you want to draft me in it. I will fight for my country. I'm not saying anyone is wrong, i'm just telling you why I voted. If we were'nt all different, we would all be gray blobs of life that do nothing but reproduce by budding. So this is natural.

[MyLittlePony]

Honestly, I didnt' make up my mind about 5 seconds before I walked in to vote, and I voted for Bush. Bottom line, he got us into this, he needs to get us out of it. When it comes down to it, I feel safer with him staying in office. There are things he did I don't agree with, but I agree with him alot more than I agreed with anything that Kerry had to say. I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, that's just how I voted, and i'm happy about it.

[JL8Jeff]

My personal opinion about the presidency is that 4 years is too short for a term in this day and age so whoever wins should get 6-8 years and that's it. Bush had a plan when he took office 4 years ago. 9/11 happened a 1-1/2 years into his presidency so you can throw out all the plans and start over. We are better off letting Bush serve a 2nd term to complete what has happened in his 1st term. It's not worth getting into political arguments because you can't force people to change their perspective on things. I really wish we could some how come up with a strong 3 party system which would really make things interesting. The 2 party system always makes it us against them. And it always turns into "look how bad their guy is" and not "look how good our guy is".

[PBodyGT87]

My personal opinion about the presidency is that 4 years is too short for a term in this day and age so whoever wins should get 6-8 years and that's it. Bush had a plan when he took office 4 years ago. 9/11 happened a 1-1/2 years into his presidency so you can throw out all the plans and start over. We are better off letting Bush serve a 2nd term to complete what has happened in his 1st term. It's not worth getting into political arguments because you can't force people to change their perspective on things. I really wish we could some how come up with a strong 3 party system which would really make things interesting. The 2 party system always makes it us against them. And it always turns into "look how bad their guy is" and not "look how good our guy is".

i couldn't have said it better myself.

[JPiZZiJP]

There shouldn't be political parties at all. George Washington said so himself.


~Joe

[Pat]

My personal opinion about the presidency is that 4 years is too short for a term in this day and age so whoever wins should get 6-8 years and that's it. Bush had a plan when he took office 4 years ago. 9/11 happened a 1-1/2 years into his presidency so you can throw out all the plans and start over. We are better off letting Bush serve a 2nd term to complete what has happened in his 1st term. It's not worth getting into political arguments because you can't force people to change their perspective on things. I really wish we could some how come up with a strong 3 party system which would really make things interesting. The 2 party system always makes it us against them. And it always turns into "look how bad their guy is" and not "look how good our guy is".

i agree that the system is due for a change, especially when the two parties are so similar.

[SpeakersGoBoom]

One thing i dont understand...how is the war in Iraq a "war on terror"? True, saddam did murder his own citizens, but there was no proof that he was going to be a threat to us. the invasion of afghanistan is justified in my mind, but iraq...and what about the genocide in sudan? Bush is all but refusing to acknowledge that its happening. He vowed to fight terrorism wherever it may be a threat to freedom He has no plans to take action in sudan. That says one of two things. Either he doesnt stand by his principles, or we're in iraq for other reasons.

[89 Trans Am WS6]

Just so you know cops do ride planes/trains buses now they just are not in uniform..

btw..i feel better with bush in office..kerry definitly wasnt good for the job..someone who got 4 purple hearts and never had a stich..yeah ok..besides his family wanted nothing to do with the election..but then again...would you if you were the sole heir to the hinze(sp) corporation?

[SpeakersGoBoom]

Heinz

[BigAls87Z28]

First Pres since the Great Depresion to lose jobs over his 4 years, and we vote him back in.

I dont think Kerry was great, but Bush is horrible. I was more in the "anyone but Bush" colum.
We have troops involved in a war that has no basis.
Forget what Kerry would have done, you cant say anything becaue he wasnt in control...But look what Bush did.

America as a nation has no clue about Islamic belifes. We just know that they are crazy and always want to kill Americans.
I really hope that there is no draft, but with Bush throwing our Military into every cave and spider hole in the middle east, we are spreading ourselves pretty thin.
How come Bush didnt go after Osama? HE DID ATTACK AMERICA!! HELLOOOO! What did Iraq do to America?
Why didnt Bush finish what he started in Afganistan? Why doesnt he go after N.Korea? Why are we bypassing countries that have come out and shown there WMD?

Bush Sr. was right in not going into Iraq in 91. He knew he would be bogged down in a Iraq if he went after him. He had a goal, and that was to drive the Republican Guard out of Kuwait to stablize the region.
We went in with a goal, finished it off with such speed that it boggled the world, and we got results.
Now we have troops going from house to house, kicking down doors and giving the Iraqi people someone to hate.
We are getting picked off one by one by people who do not want us there. They are the Vietcong of the 21st century. Its not a matter of large losses in Iraq...its the daily "4 more died today in a car bomb" reports that slowly degrades America's morale.
On top of all of this, we have little support from countries who back in 91 followed us into the desert.
And that is just the Iraq war. Thats not economy, thats not domestic policy.

Put it this way...What exactly did Bush do right this past 4 years? Went to war in Afganastan, but has since put it on the back burner.
Has got us bogged down in a house to house battle
Loss of jobs and healthcare

Another 4 years of this...I can only hope that nothing else happens. The only good thing to come out of this is that he cant run anymore after this.

[JL8Jeff]

I'm not gonna get into stupid arguments.

[89 Trans Am WS6]

How about this guys.

THe president is human. Humans do stupid things (Read: GM discontinues fbody). Theres not one president we have had since the birth of the nation that everyone has liked. We havnt, we wont, lets all just calm down and deal with it. Lets get back to cars. 8)













































Bob Lutz for pres!

[BigAls87Z28]

I'm not gonna get into stupid arguments.

I wish every adminstration was as "bad" as Clintons.

[enRo]

^^^^Good point :-)

I dont think Kerry was great, but Bush is horrible. I was more in the "anyone but Bush" colum.

I liked both Bush and Kerrys personality in running in the election, but I was in the "anyone but Bush and Kerry for president" column... Bush made an excellent choice of protecting our freedom, but also dropped the economy significantly. Kerry seems like the Herman Munster that was gonna pull the plug on the war and stop it right there. Its almost the same as building a big engine, installing it, and adding absolutely NO fluids and expect it to run. He had big ambitions, but didnt seem to me to be the president material to do so. If I went out to vote (was too busy puking and being sick), Nader wouldve gotten mine. Thats honest opinion too... I hope Bush sees a lesson in winning this election slightly, and straightens everything out, the correct way.

[BigAls87Z28]

To think that Kerry would have just packed things up and left is insane, but I think thats the image Bush put into people's minds. Not to mention that somehow having Bush in office will stop another handfull of planes from flying into more buildings.

We are so deep into Iraq that leaving would only cause more trouble. We have no choice but to stay and fix what we broke.

Iraq doesnt need a democracy..it needs a dictator. You have warring factions of a religion that have been fighting for 1500 years. We are gunna be in Iraq for a very very long time, despite who won the election.
Its what we do now that we need to worry about. If we leave now, radical factions will take over Iraq, and we will be back in there with in a decade. We have to be there to oversee elections, and then we need to create a working police dept, not forget other things like Fire stations, and a Military.
We are going on this modern day crusade to try and fight "evil" when we dont know that by doing so, it only creates more evil.
I supported the war in Iraq when this administration paraded in front of the UN and the world about WMD and how they scared us into a war.

[JL8Jeff]

Bush didn't create the economic downturn, the previous administration left it that way. The economy picked up while Clinton was in office and he had nothing to do with it. It was the dot coms that created a false economic boom which deflated quickly when all the dot coms failed. That is Clinton's legacy.

[skorpion317]

the Afghan war is not on the back burner...it only seems that way because the media is so focused on Iraq. the soldiers there are still doing their jobs, still keeping the peace and fighting terrorists. Just because the local newspaper or TV station doesn't mention them doesn't mean that they aren't there.

[Fasterthanyou]

lol, where do you people get your facts? I don't know about you but I'd trust my government's inteligence (that doesn't leak into the media) over rumors that just so happen to make it onto TV.
I don't want to get into a fight here but if you think Bush WANTED to put soldiers in harms way for his own ambishons then please, PLEASE come up with some proof. I think that's just aweful that you think our commander in chief cares more about his own little life (which is already comfortable) than he does about his fellow Americans. He's been going after Bin Laden, who said he has stopped :roll: . Spreading too thin, can you say TERRORISTS ATTACKED US, we need to focus on them before Suddan and N.Koria. We have PLENTY of support if N.Koria wanted to attack the States. Going over there would only encourage a war, not prevent one. The Iraq war was inevitable, I think of it as preventive maintenance. Get a government in there that'll be for the people and you'll find it's easier to keep good relations. Removing Saddam should have been done in the Desert Storm war, he's nothing but a modern day Hitler.
What Islamn needs to do if they want the US to stop it's ocupation; DENOUNCE TERRORISM!!! But they don't do it because either a) they believe in it, b) they are weak from fear of a dictator, c) they need us to show them how great Capitalism is for a stagnent 3rd world economy. They would be like Isreal if they had some form or voting.
Why can't they denounce terrorism.... because they've got dictators that have had their lives threatened by terrorists. See why dictators are a bad thing in that area of the world and why we need to go over there if they aren't going to show us they aren't giving weapons to Terrorists! I'm glad we reacted and didn't wait for another 9/11 attack. Saddam is to blame for the war, he didn't keep his end of the bargon with the UN inspectors. We KNEW he had the technology for the weapons because he used them on his own people in the 90's AND we sold them to him in the 80's!!! If we can't find them now I'm still a little worried. Where did the weapons we sold him go? Anybody else a little worried about that? 4 more years of a president that doesn't give me lip service. That's the problem with Kerry, he just gives us what we want to hear and he's too much of a people pleaser. I'd rather have a guy (when we're at war) that knows how to finish what he started. I don't believe Kerry would pull out of Iraq. I just think he'd try too hard to get international support and not lead by example.

[Pat]

lol, where do you people get your facts? I don't know about you but I'd trust my government's inteligence (that doesn't leak into the media) over rumors that just so happen to make it onto TV.
I don't want to get into a fight here but if you think Bush WANTED to put soldiers in harms way for his own ambishons then please, PLEASE come up with some proof. I think that's just aweful that you think our commander in chief cares more about his own little life (which is already comfortable) than he does about his fellow Americans. He's been going after Bin Laden, who said he has stopped :roll: . Spreading too thin, can you say TERRORISTS ATTACKED US, we need to focus on them before Suddan and N.Koria. We have PLENTY of support if N.Koria wanted to attack the States. Going over there would only encourage a war, not prevent one. The Iraq war was inevitable, I think of it as preventive maintenance. Get a government in there that'll be for the people and you'll find it's easier to keep good relations. Removing Saddam should have been done in the Desert Storm war, he's nothing but a modern day Hitler.
What Islamn needs to do if they want the US to stop it's ocupation; DENOUNCE TERRORISM!!! But they don't do it because either a) they believe in it, b) they are weak from fear of a dictator, c) they need us to show them how great Capitalism is for a stagnent 3rd world economy. They would be like Isreal if they had some form or voting.
Why can't they denounce terrorism.... because they've got dictators that have had their lives threatened by terrorists. See why dictators are a bad thing in that area of the world and why we need to go over there if they aren't going to show us they aren't giving weapons to Terrorists! I'm glad we reacted and didn't wait for another 9/11 attack. Saddam is to blame for the war, he didn't keep his end of the bargon with the UN inspectors. We KNEW he had the technology for the weapons because he used them on his own people in the 90's AND we sold them to him in the 80's!!! If we can't find them now I'm still a little worried. Where did the weapons we sold him go? Anybody else a little worried about that? 4 more years of a president that doesn't give me lip service. That's the problem with Kerry, he just gives us what we want to hear and he's too much of a people pleaser. I'd rather have a guy (when we're at war) that knows how to finish what he started. I don't believe Kerry would pull out of Iraq. I just think he'd try too hard to get international support and not lead by example.

are you kidding? do you read the news or time magazine or watch tv? saddam got rid of all his weapons when we asked him to! he was bluffing with 2 7 off suit! he made us think that he had weapons, even though he said he didn't have them. what happened to bush and colin powell's irrefutable evidence of saddam's weapons? if the "war" is over, why can't they reveal their sources?

you say he hasn't stopped going after bin laden, but the majority of our forces aren't in afghanistan. wouldn't you agree that punishing the man responsible for 9/11 is a little more important then giving the iraqi people the right to vote (and IMO, they'll just elect somebody that we don't want in there anyway). remember what happened in iran in the 70's, when we placed a leader in there? he was overthrown and replaced by the current "government".

and there is NO way saddam was capable of a 9/11 like attack. why can't you just admit that going into iraq at the time we did was the wrong move? there are plenty of other things we could've taken care of (like saudi arabia, which blatantly supports and funds terrorists, not to mention the majority of the 9/11 planners and hijackers were from saudi arabia, including bin laden).

i support our troops 100%, and i think they're doing the best job that they can in a bad situation. the reason the situation is bad is because bush outplayed his hand. history repeats itself.

[SpeakersGoBoom]

Thats honest opinion too... I hope Bush sees a lesson in winning this election slightly, and straightens everything out, the correct way.

He wont. Did you hear his speech? He said something like "I am humbled by how much trust the american people have in me." Where the hell does he come up with that?! He only won by like, 2 percent![/quote]

[SpeakersGoBoom]

"I am proud to shake the hand of an Iraqi citizen who had his hands cut off by Saddam Heusein." "When I think about that real hard, it hurts right here (points to forehead)" "Rarely is the question asked, 'Is our children learning?'" "I know how hard it is to put food on your family."

Is this really who we want to run our contry for another four years?

[Fasterthanyou]

lol, where do you people get your facts? I don't know about you but I'd trust my government's inteligence (that doesn't leak into the media) over rumors that just so happen to make it onto TV.
I don't want to get into a fight here but if you think Bush WANTED to put soldiers in harms way for his own ambishons then please, PLEASE come up with some proof. I think that's just aweful that you think our commander in chief cares more about his own little life (which is already comfortable) than he does about his fellow Americans. He's been going after Bin Laden, who said he has stopped :roll: . Spreading too thin, can you say TERRORISTS ATTACKED US, we need to focus on them before Suddan and N.Koria. We have PLENTY of support if N.Koria wanted to attack the States. Going over there would only encourage a war, not prevent one. The Iraq war was inevitable, I think of it as preventive maintenance. Get a government in there that'll be for the people and you'll find it's easier to keep good relations. Removing Saddam should have been done in the Desert Storm war, he's nothing but a modern day Hitler.
What Islamn needs to do if they want the US to stop it's ocupation; DENOUNCE TERRORISM!!! But they don't do it because either a) they believe in it, b) they are weak from fear of a dictator, c) they need us to show them how great Capitalism is for a stagnent 3rd world economy. They would be like Isreal if they had some form or voting.
Why can't they denounce terrorism.... because they've got dictators that have had their lives threatened by terrorists. See why dictators are a bad thing in that area of the world and why we need to go over there if they aren't going to show us they aren't giving weapons to Terrorists! I'm glad we reacted and didn't wait for another 9/11 attack. Saddam is to blame for the war, he didn't keep his end of the bargon with the UN inspectors. We KNEW he had the technology for the weapons because he used them on his own people in the 90's AND we sold them to him in the 80's!!! If we can't find them now I'm still a little worried. Where did the weapons we sold him go? Anybody else a little worried about that? 4 more years of a president that doesn't give me lip service. That's the problem with Kerry, he just gives us what we want to hear and he's too much of a people pleaser. I'd rather have a guy (when we're at war) that knows how to finish what he started. I don't believe Kerry would pull out of Iraq. I just think he'd try too hard to get international support and not lead by example.

are you kidding? do you read the news or time magazine or watch tv? saddam got rid of all his weapons when we asked him to! he was bluffing with 2 7 off suit! he made us think that he had weapons, even though he said he didn't have them. what happened to bush and colin powell's irrefutable evidence of saddam's weapons? if the "war" is over, why can't they reveal their sources?

you say he hasn't stopped going after bin laden, but the majority of our forces aren't in afghanistan. wouldn't you agree that punishing the man responsible for 9/11 is a little more important then giving the iraqi people the right to vote (and IMO, they'll just elect somebody that we don't want in there anyway). remember what happened in iran in the 70's, when we placed a leader in there? he was overthrown and replaced by the current "government".

and there is NO way saddam was capable of a 9/11 like attack. why can't you just admit that going into iraq at the time we did was the wrong move? there are plenty of other things we could've taken care of (like saudi arabia, which blatantly supports and funds terrorists, not to mention the majority of the 9/11 planners and hijackers were from saudi arabia, including bin laden).

i support our troops 100%, and i think they're doing the best job that they can in a bad situation. the reason the situation is bad is because bush outplayed his hand. history repeats itself.
Keep believing everything the libral media sources tells you :roll: . Bluffing my ass, again, even if that were true it's still Saddam that was the instigator. Why do you keep wanting to blaim Bush for things nobody else could have predicted. Remember, Kerry ALSO wanted to go in. Or wait, didn't he also say he wouldn't have given the hind sight... yeah, wouldn't we ALL like to have 100% accurate inteligence and in Kerry's case, foreshadowing abilities, lol.
You make it out as if the media is where Bush gets his inteligence from. PLEASE tell me you don't believe everything you read. Agendias are everywhere, I just think that Bush wasn't going to war because of his. It wasn't JUST Bush that wanted to go into Iraq mind you, it was everybody (democrats included). It just so happened that Bush had to make the final say.
Would I be wrong to assume you believe the 9/11 attack was Bush's fault and not Clintons or hey, maybe Osama himself?

[Pat]

Keep believing everything the libral media sources tells you :roll: . Bluffing my ass, again, even if that were true it's still Saddam that was the instigator. Why do you keep wanting to blaim Bush for things nobody else could have predicted. Remember, Kerry ALSO wanted to go in. Or wait, didn't he also say he wouldn't have given the hind sight... yeah, wouldn't we ALL like to have 100% accurate inteligence and in Kerry's case, foreshadowing abilities, lol.
You make it out as if the media is where Bush gets his inteligence from. PLEASE tell me you don't believe everything you read. Agendias are everywhere, I just think that Bush wasn't going to war because of his. It wasn't JUST Bush that wanted to go into Iraq mind you, it was everybody (democrats included). It just so happened that Bush had to make the final say.
Would I be wrong to assume you believe the 9/11 attack was Bush's fault and not Clintons or hey, maybe Osama himself?

hey, i don't like the democratic party, i consider myself a republican if anything. that doesn't mean bush isn't an idiot, or doesn't have an agenda. give me a break.

and i don't believe everything i hear in the media. i did believe the president and colin powell when they told us that they had irrefutible evidence that saddam had weapons. well, if they had it then, and the war is over, WHERE IS THAT EVIDENCE NOW?

you know what else i believe, that we went to war to disarm saddam. that's what the president told us last march, when the war started. the message was clear: saddam has weapons, he WILL use them, and we have to stop him before they get in the wrong hands. i agree with that 100%. except, when we went in there, did we find any weapons? NO. in fact, a recent report, plus an interview in TIME with one of saddam's advisors, shows that saddam did not have weapons, he disarmed 10 years ago just like the UN wanted.

so what does our president do? instead of saying,

"we all made a mistake, saddam didn't have weapons, but it's a good thing we got rid of him anyway, he was a bad guy. now let's ask the world for help rebuilding a country that could become a key ally"

we get

"our reason for going to war was justified, the people in iraq were in trouble, and now they are free, and iraq will become a democracy because we fight for democracy."

he changed his rationalization for going to war in the first place. he forgot all about the evidence that clearly showed that saddam had weapons.

i'd rather have a man that can admit when he's made a mistake run our country than a stubborn guy who won't admit when he's wrong. and that's why other countries hate us. not because we make mistakes, it's because we can't admit when we made one.

i'm not an idiot, i don't just believe it because it's on tv...

[Tony Danza]

We pessants/citizens/voters/people, will probably never know all of the true motives for any of the government's actions. We only know whats revieled to us, but there's a problem with that; the vast mojority of news given to us is bias (this bias can be called "libral" or whatever you want to describe it as), its objective, in the least, is to get ratings- lets face it, the news is bussiness, and also thats how the country is ran. Bussinessmen are the people who run this country too.

Any action taken by the country is in its best intrests at that time. And keep in mind that no one knows the future. Without us voters being happy, there is no Bush, or his party or any other party.

Any argument between citizens is half-full, especially when it comes to details.

[Pat]

We pessants/citizens/voters/people, will probably never know all of the true motives for any of the government's actions. We only know whats revieled to us, but there's a problem with that; the vast mojority of news given to us is bias (this bias can be called "libral" or whatever you want to describe it as), its objective, in the least, is to get ratings- lets face it, the news is bussiness, and also thats how the country is ran. Bussinessmen are the people who run this country too.

Any action taken by the country is in its best intrests at that time. And keep in mind that no one knows the future. Without us voters being happy, there is no Bush, or his party or any other party.

Any argument between citizens is half-full, especially when it comes to details.

i know what you're talking about, but i'm talking about words that have come out of bush's mouth. notice how nobody addressed that...

[BigAls87Z28]

Can someone explain that if you are opposed to Bush, that you are automatically liberal?

Anyway, Pat is exactly right. We have lost focus of going after the TRUE terrorists. There are a lot of other countries, i.e., Saudi Arabia, that need a little investigation.
As for Kerry voting to go with into Iraq, if he didn't, he would have been branded as "Anti-American." Everyone watched as Powell, Bush and Cheney put images into our head that Iraq had these weapons by the metric ton just lying around, then all of a sudden under the eyes of the mighty American military, they suddenly are gone?
2 things happened
1- Big lie by the US Military to get us in to Iraq
2- Iraq snuck all these weapons out from under our spy satellites.
Where are they? Unless they are buried miles under the sand, to which they would be cease to be useful, they had to have either not be there, or not.
Either way, we came up with nada.
We keep throwing troops into any hole, but we have no plan to come back out.
Still no plan what to do with Afghanistan. Still war lords rolling around with Russian and American weapons, still causing problems.
Then in Iraq you have troops getting picked off at check points where they are targets, you have hit and run guerilla fighters, and we have a seems to be a very unorganized military with no plan.
We are walking around on egg shells over there. We have no plan but to force elections. And if you haven't picked up the hints, the population of Iraq are not big fans of America and the West. I doubt they are gunna really vote for a Pro-US leader unless America makes it that way.
Having Bush back in for 4 more years with the ability of electing a possible 2 justices to the Supreme Court combined with his religious right ways is also very scary, but I wont get into that.
Iraq is a messy place, and I think Bush bit off more then he could chew.

[Fasterthanyou]

I agree with all of you even though I'm playing devils advocate right now. My reasons for doing so is not that I'm right, or left, or independant, or somewhere in the middle. I'm just a true researcher that understands things to never be cut and dry.
I don't know where you're getting the feeling that if you oppose Bush you're a liberal. I keep hearing people that feel this way but I don't understand it, where are you getting that feeling from?
I believe the military has plans of getting out of Iraq but the media (hence we) don't know about it.
The media also focus' on the measily few in Afghanistan that are still giving us troubles. I consider both of these wars WAY better than Vietnam where we lost how many compared to the fraction we've lost in these past 3 wars!!!
I hate to say this and don't get me wrong, I hate hearing about soldiers loosing there lives but hear me out. Soldiers jobs are to fight, they are our front line of defense. We the tax payers PAY these men and women to put their bodies in harms way. You can not say that just because we're loosing a few soldiers here and there that Bush is an evil man with no plan. It's a war, it's ugly, people die and there are difficulties. I honestly never believed for a moment that the Iraq war was going to be easy but I still supported it. Knowing what we know now I wish we never had to go but that's behind us, it wasn't a mistake at the time it was Saddam being a dick head with the UN. You could look back on a lot of things and say we shouldn't have but the reality of it is this. At the time it was in our best interest (this is what our government does for a living) but in hind sight it was a bad move. The objective now is to get Iraq on it's feet as fast as possible and let them experience voting and a better quality of life. They can keep their religion but when you sit on a gold mine (oil) you'll have to deal with the western world somehow... dictators rarely express the majorities feelings, hence our occupation.
I can't tell you who would have been better at cleaning up Iraq but I don't see any harm in letting Bush staying in power.
About Bush not saying he was wrong; it's rather simple. We're top dogs, you NEVER admit that you were wrong, you just don't quit until it's fixed. That's my feeling. We don't need a leader that'll try and get international support at this point in time. America went to war with only a few friends and so we deserve the rebuilding effort (which will hopefully give us a stable oil supply and trading relations). France is in deap **** for their conspiring corrupted "food for oil" crap which has been linked all the way to their President. I have a feeling that European opinions will be changing once they deal with there own problems.
I'm glad we all could have a mature debate. I was worried after I made my first reply that people would take it the wrong way.

[Pat]

i agree with you 100% that it is a soldier's job to be put in harm's way. however, why are soldiers dying if it's unnecessary?

so here's what happened:

1. we were told saddam had WMD's and was going to use them on us if we didn't act quick
2. we went to war
3. we took over iraq real quick
4. we still to this day have not found any WMD's, in fact we now have reports that say saddam disarmed when we asked him to.
5. bush changes his tune.

bottom line: BUSH LIED. it's that simple.

and since he lied about it, the loss of soldier's lives, which may pale in comparison to past wars, is completely unnecessary. how would you feel if your brother or cousin died in iraq?

and do you really think that we'll be able to stabilize any country in the middle east in our lifetime?

[Tony Danza]

We pessants/citizens/voters/people, will probably never know all of the true motives for any of the government's actions. We only know whats revieled to us, but there's a problem with that; the vast mojority of news given to us is bias (this bias can be called "libral" or whatever you want to describe it as), its objective, in the least, is to get ratings- lets face it, the news is bussiness, and also thats how the country is ran. Bussinessmen are the people who run this country too.

Any action taken by the country is in its best intrests at that time. And keep in mind that no one knows the future. Without us voters being happy, there is no Bush, or his party or any other party.

Any argument between citizens is half-full, especially when it comes to details.

i know what you're talking about, but i'm talking about words that have come out of bush's mouth. notice how nobody addressed that...
oh ok, i get ya. Yea he isnt the greatest speaker at times....

[Savage_Messiah]

"They would be like Isreal if they had some form or voting. "

As in living their lives in more fear than Bush makes us lead our lives in, withthe necessity or having ALL people born on the country's land return for military service?

The world terrorism situation is much like the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979-80... as soon as Carter was out the hostages were freed.

[Tony Danza]

Having Bush back in for 4 more years with the ability of electing a possible 2 justices to the Supreme Court combined with his religious right ways is also very scary, but I wont get into that.
That is a very big deal to me too.......but thats just one of the issues that have to be put on the back burnner for now cause of this war.

[Pat]

We pessants/citizens/voters/people, will probably never know all of the true motives for any of the government's actions. We only know whats revieled to us, but there's a problem with that; the vast mojority of news given to us is bias (this bias can be called "libral" or whatever you want to describe it as), its objective, in the least, is to get ratings- lets face it, the news is bussiness, and also thats how the country is ran. Bussinessmen are the people who run this country too.

Any action taken by the country is in its best intrests at that time. And keep in mind that no one knows the future. Without us voters being happy, there is no Bush, or his party or any other party.

Any argument between citizens is half-full, especially when it comes to details.

i know what you're talking about, but i'm talking about words that have come out of bush's mouth. notice how nobody addressed that...
oh ok, i get ya. Yea he isnt the greatest speaker at times....

i was referring to the evidence of WMD's bush was talking about. don't even get me started on his public speaking.

[Tony Danza]

We pessants/citizens/voters/people, will probably never know all of the true motives for any of the government's actions. We only know whats revieled to us, but there's a problem with that; the vast mojority of news given to us is bias (this bias can be called "libral" or whatever you want to describe it as), its objective, in the least, is to get ratings- lets face it, the news is bussiness, and also thats how the country is ran. Bussinessmen are the people who run this country too.

Any action taken by the country is in its best intrests at that time. And keep in mind that no one knows the future. Without us voters being happy, there is no Bush, or his party or any other party.

Any argument between citizens is half-full, especially when it comes to details.

i know what you're talking about, but i'm talking about words that have come out of bush's mouth. notice how nobody addressed that...
oh ok, i get ya. Yea he isnt the greatest speaker at times....

i was referring to the evidence of WMD's bush was talking about. don't even get me started on his public speaking.
So your saying bush knowingly lied about the WMDs?

[Pat]

So your saying bush knowingly lied about the WMDs?

is there any other explanation for it? before the war he had solid evidence. where is it now?

[JL8Jeff]

i agree with you 100% that it is a soldier's job to be put in harm's way. however, why are soldiers dying if it's unnecessary?

so here's what happened:

1. we were told saddam had WMD's and was going to use them on us if we didn't act quick
2. we went to war
3. we took over iraq real quick
4. we still to this day have not found any WMD's, in fact we now have reports that say saddam disarmed when we asked him to.
5. bush changes his tune.

bottom line: BUSH LIED. it's that simple.

and since he lied about it, the loss of soldier's lives, which may pale in comparison to past wars, is completely unnecessary. how would you feel if your brother or cousin died in iraq?

and do you really think that we'll be able to stabilize any country in the middle east in our lifetime?

How do you know Bush lied? People told him that we had intelligence showing that Saddam had WMD's. Ask those people why they lied to Bush. Saddam has a past history of using WMD's against the Iraqi people. There were terrorist training camps in northern Iraq with chemical weapons found. Thousands of Iraqi people have now had there lives spared from Saddams militia. More people died in the 9/11 attacks than soldiers that have died in Iraq. Open your eyes and stop paying attention to what the media is forcing down your throat. Majority of the Iraqi people are happy we forced out Saddam. The media only shows you the bad that is happening because that's what they want to show you. And as bad as Saddam was, both of his sons were ten times as evil as him.

[Fasterthanyou]

Poor inteligence isn't the same as a straight out lie. :roll:
If you were a reporter in Iraq that was new and trying to get your company the most viewers what would you do in the following scenario; Listen to public announcements by the interm government and report on the actual polling where woman are voting OR you hear an explosion has occured in a city 100 miles away. Do you do your reporting of the good, or the bad? Hence EVERY F-n media company that's in it for profit is going to report BAD news.
As for the poor inteligence.... Bush isn't responsible for the facts he's given. The only thing Bush is responsible for is the economy (which is sucking so please focus on that and not the damn WMDs), the Supream justice rulings (judges he put in power), and the international affairs (again doing a rather poor job). The FBI has since gone through hell since 9/11 and ever since then they've been doing a serious house cleaning. Bush listened to the 9/11 council and done many (but not all) of the things they recommeded. Since 9/11 there hasn't been an attack on our homeland. You'd think that if the Iraq war was SUCH a bad idea and we are spreading ourselves thin that we'd have enraged enough terrorists to attack again.... but it hasn't happened.
I probably unconciously voted for Bush because of the war that I wish had never had to happen. Damn Saddam for being such a moron. The Iraq people deserved a little bit of our occupating their land BECAUSE they never cleaned house themselves. This brings me back to the point of Islam and their overall pathetically weak morals. Why can't they denounce terrorism out-right? WHAT good comes of it? Only more people will die. They say inocent people have died when in reality it's the terrorists that are hiding behind hostages... sometimes hostages get killed, it sucks but 1 life for a few hundred thousands doesn't sound like a bad number. Ideally I'd rather see no lives lost but until Iraq gets a democracy that'll increase the quality of life for Iraq's there will always be terrorists. They have nothing better to do over there. Jokingly; we should do an PS2 or Xbox for guns program over there!

[BigAls87Z28]

So Bush didn't lie, his people just told him information that we had, and it led us into a war that has led to many dead due to hit and run raids.

You can spin it and twist it any direction...Bush and his people lied to America, and the world about WMD. There is not iffs, ands or buts about it, they did. They said something that they were sure of, sure enough that they commited the US Army to invade another coutnry, overthrow its goverment, that btw had nothing to to with 9-11, causing the sensless death of many troops, but when they look for this "sure thing", they come up with just excuses and new motives for having gone into Iraq...

But Bush & Co. didnt lie.....
We invaded another country and toppled there goverment on basis that they had wepons that could cause harm to the US. They didnt, and now we have a huge mess on our hands.
I can name several other countries that have WMD, and they are proud to say it. I dont see us rolling M1's and employing hundreds of thousands of troops to Pyongyang and Tehran.

[Pat]

you guys are missing the point. i don't give a **** about the media.

i'm talking about bush coming on tv personally and telling the american people he had personally seen evidence that saddam has WMD's.

WHERE IS THAT EVIDENCE? DON'T REPLY WITH "DO YOU BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU SEE ON TV?"

i clearly remember bush being completely certain that saddam had wmd's.

i've seen the quotes from democrats saying that he had them. but i'm talking about bush's evidence. he claimed he had it, but couldn't reveal it because then his source would be found out.

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?

i don't want ad hominem attacks, i don't want media attacks. just tell me where the evidence is, and why bush is changing his story, and i'll agree with you.

[JL8Jeff]

You're not getting it. The "intelligence" officials gave Bush the evidence and so he came on tv saying Saddam had WMD's. The "intelligence" officials screwed that up with either bad intelligence or complete falsification. Bush had nothing to do with that. Any president would have taken that information and gone on tv saying Saddam had WMD's. Everyone in the Senate agreed that Saddam had WMD's and something had to be done about it. Bush isn't changing his story, he's explaining what happened.

[Fasterthanyou]

So Bush didn't lie, his people just told him information that we had, and it led us into a war that has led to many dead due to hit and run raids.

You can spin it and twist it any direction...Bush and his people lied to America, and the world about WMD. There is not iffs, ands or buts about it, they did.
Nope, he didn't lie, and you can't prove it, and I can't prove he didn't. So where does that leave you? Only that you believe he's a lier. You're proof being maybe Micheal Moore the anarchist :roll: . You have an opinion so yeah, it's a bunch of iffs and or buts about it. I don't appreciate you saying we can't disagree about Bush lieing to America. I find that really distrubing, that's my opinion. Oh, and if you think Bush lied to America then you think Kerry did as well. Remember, Kerry had the same exact inteligence as Bush and he agreed at the same time that we needed to go to war, only Kerry wanted to wait a while longer to increase our international support. Just chew on that for a little while and get back to me.

[Pat]

Nope, he didn't lie, and you can't prove it, and I can't prove he didn't. So where does that leave you? Only that you believe he's a lier. You're proof being maybe Micheal Moore the anarchist :roll:

please don't bring that fat POS into this conversation, nobody brought him up.

you can disagree with bush without being a liberal :roll:

[Savage_Messiah]

Any way you look at it, it's Bush's administration adn his fault that F-bodies are on hiatus :lol:

[Fasterthanyou]

Nope, he didn't lie, and you can't prove it, and I can't prove he didn't. So where does that leave you? Only that you believe he's a lier. You're proof being maybe Micheal Moore the anarchist :roll:

please don't bring that fat POS into this conversation, nobody brought him up.

you can disagree with bush without being a liberal :roll:
Let Al speak. Disagree with Bush all you want but I can only tell you that Michael Moore thinks Bush is a lier. That is why I'm asking him.
I brought him up, and I'm not a nobody.
I've already agreed with you that you can disagree with Bush without being a liberal. How about accepting that Kerry would have gone to war if he were president and instead, just tell me you voted for Kerry because of what he stands for. You know, things like health care, federal programs, etc.
I've already given you the facts that Kerry agreed with going to war, it's no secret. If he didn't want to go why did he give the President the thumbs up? This is my only arguement. I can't stand people that voted for Kerry because of Bush going to war. Tell me you don't like HOW Bush has run the rebuilding of Iraq and I'll respect every word that comes from your mouth.... just don't tell me I'm an idiot for thinking Bush didn't lie! That's my stink about all this Bush bashing BS.

[Pat]

Nope, he didn't lie, and you can't prove it, and I can't prove he didn't. So where does that leave you? Only that you believe he's a lier. You're proof being maybe Micheal Moore the anarchist :roll:

please don't bring that fat POS into this conversation, nobody brought him up.

you can disagree with bush without being a liberal :roll:
Let Al speak. Disagree with Bush all you want but I can only tell you that Michael Moore thinks Bush is a lier. That is why I'm asking him.
I brought him up, and I'm not a nobody.
I've already agreed with you that you can disagree with Bush without being a liberal. How about accepting that Kerry would have gone to war if he were president and instead, just tell me you voted for Kerry because of what he stands for. You know, things like health care, federal programs, etc.
I've already given you the facts that Kerry agreed with going to war, it's no secret. If he didn't want to go why did he give the President the thumbs up? This is my only arguement. I can't stand people that voted for Kerry because of Bush going to war. Tell me you don't like HOW Bush has run the rebuilding of Iraq and I'll respect every word that comes from your mouth.... just don't tell me I'm an idiot for thinking Bush didn't lie! That's my stink about all this Bush bashing BS.

i didn't vote for kerry because i think he wouldn't have went to war, i voted for him because i think bush is doing a terrible job of managing the mess after the war, and i think kerry could do a better job.

kerry earned my vote in the debates.

[skorpion317]

jeez, i made one post and it erupted....

I voted for bush because I didn't think Kerry could get the job done in Iraq, nor could he wage a serious war against terrorism. I believe his ideas were too soft. Also, the fact that he voted for the war, then criticized it for his own political gain made his appeal even less. He was a flip-flopper, plain and simple.

Michael Moore is a dishonest filmmaker who gets more credit than he deserves. "Fahrenheit 9/11" was full of lies and deceits, and he calls Bush a liar? that makes him a hypocrite on top of that. I would have loved to see his face when he watched Bush's victory speech.

[BigAls87Z28]

Forget Moore...he was hell bent on taking apart Bush, so he did what he could to do so.

Im talking about when Bush and his Crew said Iraq has WMD.
We went in there only to find nothing.

What do you mean I have to prove that hes lying...HE DID IT FOR ME!!

"Iraq has WMD"
...roll tanks and invade a country, overthrow its goverment, find ZERO WMD.

He said they did, and they dont. Hello? How can you think that somehow you can twist this into he wasnt lying?

To give you a example...
I said that I just picked up a Z06, and it was an awesome car. I kept coming on this site saying it was awesome and that it was so fun to drive.
Yet when I post a picture of the car, all you see is my Maxx.
Is that not lying?
Now, in Bush terms, I didnt lie, I just gave misinformation.
Did I really say it was a Corvette Z06? Did I claim any speed records or any sort of kills racing? No. There was just some misinformation that led to a little misunderstanding.
I still lied, no matter how you want to twist the truth. If Bush got misinformation, why should I trust him in another conflict to where he says that he has proof of another source of going to war? Why should I belive anything he has to say about another conflict?
Why should I belive a word the man says when he can just turn around and say "well, I had bad information."
Its BS excuse. Biggest and baddest military force in the world where a tank has more computing power then 70% of the world, and we have "misinformation".
Its ******** layerd on top of ********. Another 4 years, we are gunna be so deep in it, we wont know which way is up.

[DaytonaDan]

...You're proof being maybe Micheal Moore the anarchist :roll: .

Micheal Moore is a socialist...and the creators of southpark, matt stone and trey parker hate him...so he sucks!

seriously though, if you hate bush because of policies thats one thing, but i swear to christ if i hear one more idiot say "he dont speak good" as an excuse for hatin him, i'm gonna smack them. i dont like bush all that much, but kerry would have been useless for 4 years...lets review wut kerry has done in senate...over 20 years he's proposed and were passed...5 bills, 2 of which revolved around makin veterans day a holiday, and 2 of which involved earth day...the last one i cant remember but it was almost as ridiculous as the first 4...he wouldn't take troops out of iraq and if he did it would probably be a disaster, he wouldnt deal with north korea, and he wouldnt get u more money, all he would do is take back the rebate bush gave so the top 2% paid back more than us middle class folk and hten he would tax EVERYONE...the main point of being a liberal is that you tax people more so you can put money into programs that are useless most of the time (anyone ever hear of Midnight basketball, the program Clinton started as an example)... the point is instead of watchin CNN or readin the new york times (excellent sources of news when you arent interested in politics) or especially, especially listenin to media whores like Micheal Moore. its people like him that are makin americans hate america, and if you hate your home team, get the f@#k out...and a disclaimer, i'm not a republican, i consider myself an indepedent

[BigAls87Z28]

I dont "hate" the home team.

And Bush "dont speak well" too. Smack me if you want, but the guy just sounds like he is shooting from the hip when he speaks. He doesnt impose an image of leadership, but neither does Kerry.
If it was up to me, I would have voted in McCain. I still cant belive that he lost to Bush.
Give me McCain, and then I will feel safe and secure. That is a real war hero. You cant say jack about some mild wounds, you cant call him a draft dodger, and you cant call him soft of defence.
He is the man we need right now. I think he would have delt with 9-11 much differently, and I dont think we would be in Iraq right now.

[DaytonaDan]

i agree, someone like mccain would have been better, to tell you the truth i'd have liked to see colin powell run before this Iraq thing tainted his name...although we all know he wouldnt have run, but he would have had my vote...the speakin thing gets me though, because like kerry spoke so well during the debates, this is true, although i'd say he won the first one, but not the last 2, eitehr they were "tied" as the times and few other papers called it or bush was alittle bit ahead, but when kerry spoke, did u really believe anything he said? he is such a politician living in his own little world, i think being president was just an achievement to write home to the family about, wut else does a man with a cushy job and all the money he could need have to do to get his jollies? we all should take a lesson and marry rich, i know thats the plan for me...

oh yea and vote john stewart 08...

[Fasterthanyou]

Nope, he didn't lie, and you can't prove it, and I can't prove he didn't. So where does that leave you? Only that you believe he's a lier. You're proof being maybe Micheal Moore the anarchist :roll:

please don't bring that fat POS into this conversation, nobody brought him up.

you can disagree with bush without being a liberal :roll:
Let Al speak. Disagree with Bush all you want but I can only tell you that Michael Moore thinks Bush is a lier. That is why I'm asking him.
I brought him up, and I'm not a nobody.
I've already agreed with you that you can disagree with Bush without being a liberal. How about accepting that Kerry would have gone to war if he were president and instead, just tell me you voted for Kerry because of what he stands for. You know, things like health care, federal programs, etc.
I've already given you the facts that Kerry agreed with going to war, it's no secret. If he didn't want to go why did he give the President the thumbs up? This is my only arguement. I can't stand people that voted for Kerry because of Bush going to war. Tell me you don't like HOW Bush has run the rebuilding of Iraq and I'll respect every word that comes from your mouth.... just don't tell me I'm an idiot for thinking Bush didn't lie! That's my stink about all this Bush bashing BS.

i didn't vote for kerry because i think he wouldn't have went to war, i voted for him because i think bush is doing a terrible job of managing the mess after the war, and i think kerry could do a better job.

kerry earned my vote in the debates.
You just earned my respect, thank you, and I agree Kerry did a better job in the debates. I just didn't believe half the things he was saying. I also don't like big government (huge health care plans). Some people can't save a dime in their pocket but I know I can. That's why I usually vote Rebuplican. It's not that Rebuplicans don't want health care, it's just they want to give you the choice. It's kind of like a Union of sorts. I'd prefer to keep my Union fees and let Capitalism and my Community help me live comfortably. Others like the security of a Union for obvious reasons. :) Finally some talk about things OTHER than the damn war.

[Fasterthanyou]

Forget Moore...he was hell bent on taking apart Bush, so he did what he could to do so.

Im talking about when Bush and his Crew said Iraq has WMD.
We went in there only to find nothing.

What do you mean I have to prove that hes lying...HE DID IT FOR ME!!

"Iraq has WMD"
...roll tanks and invade a country, overthrow its goverment, find ZERO WMD.

He said they did, and they dont. Hello? How can you think that somehow you can twist this into he wasnt lying?

To give you a example...
I said that I just picked up a Z06, and it was an awesome car. I kept coming on this site saying it was awesome and that it was so fun to drive.
Yet when I post a picture of the car, all you see is my Maxx.
Is that not lying?
Now, in Bush terms, I didnt lie, I just gave misinformation.
Did I really say it was a Corvette Z06? Did I claim any speed records or any sort of kills racing? No. There was just some misinformation that led to a little misunderstanding.
I still lied, no matter how you want to twist the truth. If Bush got misinformation, why should I trust him in another conflict to where he says that he has proof of another source of going to war? Why should I belive anything he has to say about another conflict?
Why should I belive a word the man says when he can just turn around and say "well, I had bad information."
Its BS excuse. Biggest and baddest military force in the world where a tank has more computing power then 70% of the world, and we have "misinformation".
Its ******** layerd on top of ********. Another 4 years, we are gunna be so deep in it, we wont know which way is up.
You're confused.
Bush didn't lie about the WMD. He was given bad intelligence, it's not the same as a lie. It's called trusting a professional opinion (which was wrong).
Here's an example of what I'm talking about;
My car dyno's and there is a swooshing sound from under the hood. The dyno operator (a professional) assumes I have a turbo. You walk in and ask my what I have under the hood. I tell you it's naturally aspirated. You then don't believe me and ask the dyno operator. He tells you he heard a turbo swooshing. You then tell your friend not to race me for slips because you heard I had a turbo.
Did you just lie to your friend? No!! As didn't Bush. If you think he did then tell me why he has been impeached with the "proof". You know, all those guys in the intelligence agencies that just lost their jobs for giving crappy info were OBVIOUSLY telling Bush Saddam didn't have WMD :roll:
Nobody lied, get over it, just understand our government has been kind of touchy ever since 9/11 and Saddam pushed our buttons. The result was America (with Bush leading) wanting to kick Saddams ass. Even if he wasn't a threat to the US he was an evil dictator, can you say "rape rooms". I still think he was a threat to the US even if he didn't have WMD. It was only a matter of time.