someone should start a thread to debate the 2004 elections...oh I just did

Sweet90SC said:
Yea but you never voted on my good vs evil avatar Jay!!!!!!!!

I didn't see a ballot!


LightY3arZ said:
hahaha... you and I should start the official SCCOA post-whoring crew. Good luck with the game.

Oh I can get paid for doing this? Thanks, we mercied them in the 2nd 9-1! Finals next week :cool:
 
Going backwards reply post!

Thanks, we mercied them in the 2nd 9-1! Finals next week
Sometimes I wonder what's more humiliating: getting a mercy or getting slaughtered by a large margin. At least let them TRY to make a comeback...or is it a mutual decision?

Oh I'm glad you are concerned about McCain. Maybe you will take his advice and vote for Bush then. You do know that McCain has repeatedly announced on national television that he is running the Bush reelection campaign in Arizona. Maybe John McCain didn't hear the same smears that you heard. The funny thing is it's been in response to Kerry talking about having McCain as his VP. Kerry knows that his and his party's message is such a loser that he's talking about taking a republican as his VP just to get some respect LLLOL!!!!!
McCain was my choice for 2000 even over Gore. And McCain WAS smeared hardcore, not by Bush, but by Karl Rove (who was running Bush's campaign). In South Carolina, during the primaries, Rove's call team called as many registered Republicans as they could come up with and essentially asked them if knowing that McCain has a child of mixed race would make them reflect positively or negatively on McCain. Rove was trying to paint McCain's adoption of a young child from impoverished southeast Asia as another Jefferson/Hemmings fiasco. This is as dirty as it gets. I would never vote for ANYONE who would use someone's child against that person no matter the political leanings. As far as Kerry teaming with McCain, that's just something churning in the rumor mill and has absolutely no basis to it. It's just some conservative nut's attempt at smearing McCain further for his centrism (read by some as liberalism). However, it WOULD be a good ticket in my book. I like McCain.

A note on how our government works
The president DOES have a hand in writing laws. I don't know what they told you in your goofy government class, but a president CAN write legislation and subsequently pass it to the legislature for a vote. They can vote it out just like the president can veto. A couple of you guys are guilty of this one.

That being said...
How could you say that, Clinton did such a good job with the economy you'd think the military would forgive him for ignoring the problem of Saddam.
It's people like you that say that Clinton did nothing for the economy and then turn around and tout Bush's tax cuts as the cause of the economic "boom" we've had the past 2 months. As far as Clinton's military escapades, Clinton's administration thwarted over 200 terrorist attacks during his 8 year tenure. The only complaint that LEVEL HEADED people have about Clinton's anti-terror effort was that he focused on bin Laden too much thus making him stronger and a bigger anti-American figurehead. He should have taken out al-Zawahari or whatever his name was. He's the Tony Blair to bin Laden's Queen Elizabeth.

It seems to me that Sadaam put himself in power. Did you know that he even shot one of his teachers in grade school, then later in life to gain control of the country assassinated his own uncle or something like that? Forgive me if I mixed up those facts a little, but at least I'm admitting it ;-)
Dead first-grade teacher or not, we gave material backing to his coup because he was anti-communist.

Are you saying he got the buzzer-beater? That's a pretty silly way to look at it if you think about it...yeah, try that, think about it.
This is a very common practice. Republicans AND Democrats do it...and when they do they are ALWAYS more than happy to take credit. This is nothing new and one of the things that make our system interesting.

I specifically asked you to cite one or more specific lies from him, and you still haven't typed any, surprise surprise. I'm sure your score-keeping there would not be biased either and be based on everything both of them have ever said, sheesh.
Of course you're always right when all you do is point at the other person and yell "liar!" However, I DID give you specific instances just on his ads that www.factcheck.org had to rebut. Every entry regarding an ad made by Bush or Kerry was represented. All others from the parties or other political groups were disregarded. So no matter what you call it, Kerry had 7 screw-ups since 02/01/2004 to Bush's 12. Please read the entire content of my post before posting boloney like this. Just because you didn't read it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means you're lazy.

Wrong, what about madrid spain, turkey, isreal, kuwait, iraq now, indonesia, many more. Don't forget about the other religious icons they bomb too like that giant buddha that used to exist...please get your facts straight.
::sigh:: Spain was attacked due to a combination of their previous administrations support of America and their participation in the American led crusade in Iraq. Turkey supports America. America supports Israel (which is one of many reason they don't like us), Kuwait is bosom buddies with America's oil industry, Iraq because it is swarming with American troops and Indonesia because it is flushing out it's Muslim extremist population at America's behest. They're not threatened by democracy, per se. They're threatened by America.

Wrong, what about madrid spain, turkey, isreal, kuwait, iraq now, indonesia, many more. Don't forget about the other religious icons they bomb too like that giant buddha that used to exist...please get your facts straight.
Ignorance at its worst. I am clear, concise and complete. If you can't handle it, don't respond.

i'm voting for Bush. id rather not see our country turn into a heeping pile of crap.
It already is. I don't see how maintaining the same leadership will change that. Bush has accomplished next to nothing. Clinton broke the record for the best performing domestic economy. Bush broke the record for most vacation days taken by a president in the first year ever. If he likes Crawford, Texas so much, let's see to it that he gets to spend a LOT more time there.
 
You know what?? Im going to go back to playing Command And Conquer: Generals....why? cause I'm the Americans.....and I am slaughtering the GLA...GLA = Terrorists....anyway...back to the game. thanks for the reading everyone.
 
92TBurnSC said:
Sometimes I wonder what's more humiliating: getting a mercy or getting slaughtered by a large margin. At least let them TRY to make a comeback...or is it a mutual decision?

Should I have worried about their feelings instead? Are you trying to smear me because we wanted the playoff win a hell of alot more than the other team and were much more prepared and willful than the other team? Are you one of the mindset that especially childrens' sports shouldn't keep score for hurting the feelings of the slower children at the expense of the throwing away winning teams earned self respect? Don't read this as anger, I'm calmly asking you this question. Some people believe that way and that's the way I understood your question. Anyway, the reason I think this country is so far ahead of all others in all realms is that for a couple hundred years, every individual had the right to attempt to win in all aspects of life, and even more importantly, had the right to fail too. Extreme government sponsored over-entitlement will breed laziness, and will ultimately destroy this great country if something isn't done about entitlement abuse soon, mark my words.


92TBurnSC said:
McCain was my choice for 2000 even over Gore. And McCain WAS smeared hardcore, not by Bush, but by Karl Rove (who was running Bush's campaign). In South Carolina, during the primaries, Rove's call team called as many registered Republicans as they could come up with and essentially asked them if knowing that McCain has a child of mixed race would make them reflect positively or negatively on McCain. Rove was trying to paint McCain's adoption of a young child from impoverished southeast Asia as another Jefferson/Hemmings fiasco. This is as dirty as it gets.

I'm surprised you would support a republican, especially over a democrat nominee, but I applaud your open-mindedness. McCain is a good man. I think McCain-Feingold law is impotent and unconstitutional, but I think he's an honest guy. One thing though, those are all big boys and are playing hardball. It's ironic to me that the liberal spin-doctors are quick to label every ad put out by a conservative as an attack and smear ad. All the while the democrats had ads against bush like the one implying it was bush's fault that that poor black man, robert byrd I think his name was, was dragged to death behind a truck in texas. Would you consider that a smear ad? How about the newt gingrich health care "wither on the vine" ad and others like it outright lying and taking phrases out of context claiming that republicans are against health care for the elderly. Attacking bush about made-up and disproven accusations about bush being AWOL from the national guard which is entirely false and many many other smears from the "innocent" left. I'm not saying the right doesn't go negative, just that the left is actually much worse and dirty about it. Also, if you could, please give me a link to the story so I can read exactly what it was that Carl Rove Said about McCain. I expect that it was just more of the typical dishonest finger-pointing from the left-wing. Please prove me wrong on that one though, I'm a big fan of the truth. Seriously, if Rove, Cheney, Bush, Powell, Ashcroft are all so bad, show me specific true facts and I will salute you for it. I say purely honestly though, in all the attention I pay to what's going on in the world every day, all these accusations I see being thrown around about the Bush administration are half lies, and the other half only half of the truth, and trust me I don't like crooked politicians from any party. In Massachusetts here for example, the last two governors were republicans, and to me, they were terrible, didn't care about the state, couldn't run their own lives right even, I'm talking about Paul Celluci and Jane Swift. Lucky for us now we have probably the best man in government (not the best politician, I hate when people care about that) I've ever seen in Mitt Romney(He ran the summer olympics in what 2002 I think if he sounds familiar).

92TBurnSC said:
I would never vote for ANYONE who would use someone's child against that person no matter the political leanings.
Aren't there much more important reasons to decide which candidate gets your vote than that, like policy ideals?

92TBurnSC said:
As far as Kerry teaming with McCain, that's just something churning in the rumor mill and has absolutely no basis to it.

No, not the rumor mill, Kerry is repeatedly dropping McCain's name as his best friend in the senate and quoted more than once saying McCain as Veep, out of Kerry's own mouth.

92TBurnSC said:
It's just some conservative nut's attempt at smearing McCain further for his centrism (read by some as liberalism). However, it WOULD be a good ticket in my book. I like McCain.

A note on how our government works
The president DOES have a hand in writing laws. I don't know what they told you in your goofy government class, but a president CAN write legislation and subsequently pass it to the legislature for a vote. They can vote it out just like the president can veto. A couple of you guys are guilty of this one.

The point is that article wasn't quoting what Bush I voted for, it just quoted what he said a particular law would do, not whether he thought it was good policy or not. Maybe that is what he meant, but you must admit, the article didn't say that at all. Seems to me if they would have had Bush saying in that statement that he was for those cuts that writer would have included it seeing how anti-bush pro-kerry he was writing in that article. Correct or no? Am I making sense on these points or is this wasted typing. I'll concede you valid points, and I hope you can mine too. That's why I started this thread I just want to get the truth out to the uninformed because I think this election is so important to the future of our country which I believe is the greatest in the world because of it's freedom and many other reasons which are also disappearing.
 
Last edited:
92TBurnSC said:
That being said...

It's people like you that say that Clinton did nothing for the economy and then turn around and tout Bush's tax cuts as the cause of the economic "boom" we've had the past 2 months. As far as Clinton's military escapades, Clinton's administration thwarted over 200 terrorist attacks during his 8 year tenure. The only complaint that LEVEL HEADED people have about Clinton's anti-terror effort was that he focused on bin Laden too much thus making him stronger and a bigger anti-American figurehead. He should have taken out al-Zawahari or whatever his name was. He's the Tony Blair to bin Laden's Queen Elizabeth.

Well I think I've proven that I'm at least fairly level-headed here, as I think you seem to be for the most part. I do though disagree with every sentence of the last paragraph, especially implying that there has been a 2 month boom. 9/11 and the following few months the economy went from gradually getting bad over the previous couple years to quickly getting bad. For whatever reason, tax-cuts, or aftershock from clinton releasing reserve oil barrels or whatever reason it was, the economy, revenue, and job numbers have all been getting better every month for the last two years or so. That is a fact.

92TBurnSC said:
Dead first-grade teacher or not, we gave material backing to his coup because he was anti-communist.

That may be. But it is no reason to give Saddam a pass for threatening the USA which he did many many many many....many times.

92TBurnSC said:
This is a very common practice. Republicans AND Democrats do it...and when they do they are ALWAYS more than happy to take credit. This is nothing new and one of the things that make our system interesting.

Agreed, politicians from either party who take credit for a winning vote are being dishonest, unless they were powerful enough to twist arms and they really did push it through with intimidation. Then they should be in jail. -D or -R next to their name.




92TBurnSC said:
Of course you're always right when all you do is point at the other person and yell "liar!" However, I DID give you specific instances just on his ads that www.factcheck.org had to rebut. Every entry regarding an ad made by Bush or Kerry was represented. All others from the parties or other political groups were disregarded. So no matter what you call it, Kerry had 7 screw-ups since 02/01/2004 to Bush's 12. Please read the entire content of my post before posting boloney like this. Just because you didn't read it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means you're lazy.

That I do apologize for, but I checked out the slate.com link, but not the factcheck.org links yet. I only have so much time to put into reading and responding. I will check those out soon and give you my thoughts on them too if you promise to give honest consideration to my points, which I am to yours and hopefully and maybe you really are to mine. I am familiar with what has often been mis-classified as bush lies which are from what I've seen generally false accusations by the spin-doctors that work for the left-wing(yes I know there are right-wing spin-doctors too, this is all natural).

92TBurnSC said:
::sigh:: Spain was attacked due to a combination of their previous administrations support of America and their participation in the American led crusade in Iraq. Turkey supports America. America supports Israel (which is one of many reason they don't like us), Kuwait is bosom buddies with America's oil industry, Iraq because it is swarming with American troops and Indonesia because it is flushing out it's Muslim extremist population at America's behest. They're not threatened by democracy, per se. They're threatened by America.

I don't understand how the oil industry is so evil. Maybe you could explain it to me a little. Funny people don't mind the Kennedy's coming to power through illegal bootlegging during prohibition and organized crime ties all over the place, but be a successful legal oil entrepreneur and you are the evil rich. Go figure.

92TBurnSC said:
Ignorance at its worst. I am clear, concise and complete. If you can't handle it, don't respond.
To say that I am ignorant and/or can't handle the truth is laughable at best. I think it's obvious that I am quite informed about many of the topics we are discussing. Open-mined might I add too.

92TBurnSC said:
It already is. I don't see how maintaining the same leadership will change that. Bush has accomplished next to nothing. Clinton broke the record for the best performing domestic economy. Bush broke the record for most vacation days taken by a president in the first year ever. If he likes Crawford, Texas so much, let's see to it that he gets to spend a LOT more time there.

No comment on that stuff other than....Bush has accomplished next to nothing? Now that sounds much more like ignorance than I've typed here. Seriously though, no hard feelings at all. May the truth be shown to all through our honest debating of the truths from each of our perspectives, or as John Kerry insincerely said before he started whining about mean republican campaigning, "Bring It On!" :rolleyes: ;)
Ok I gotta go to bed, take care.
 
Last edited:
1BADSC said:
The real Dream Team would be Bush and former mayor Giuliani for 2004 :)
Bush wouldn't be able to survive without Cheney firmly grasping his marionette strings. I think it was The Daily Show (I love that show) in which Jon Stewart commented that when Bush and Cheney testify together before the 9/11 commission that they should make Cheney drink water whenever Bush speaks to make sure he's not pulling some vantriloquist act. Needless to say I laughed my tail off.

Oh, Shooter, as for the mercy call in the hockey game, it was a sarcastic/rhetorical question. Down boy.

More substance after I get back from work. S3ars pwns m3.
 
92TBurnSC said:
Bush wouldn't be able to survive without Cheney firmly grasping his marionette strings.
Again a lame smear, the guy was a jet pilot, has a MBA from harvard, and became president. Obviously he's a moron, just like his father, reagan, oh wait is cheney smart or dumb, you made him sound smart there. Funny how all the dems are smart and angels and all the republicans are all dumb and evil, talk about ignorant. Nice issue...

92TBurnSC said:
I think it was The Daily Show (I love that show) in which Jon Stewart commented that when Bush and Cheney testify together before the 9/11 commission that they should make Cheney drink water whenever Bush speaks to make sure he's not pulling some vantriloquist act. Needless to say I laughed my tail off.
I agree Jon Stewart is very funny on that show, him and the guy that does the fed-ex and mr. goodwrench commercials too. But those are jokes man. And at that, they are jokes not based in reality, just a fun target. You are seriously citing the Jon Stewart show?

92TBurnSC said:
Oh, Shooter, as for the mercy call in the hockey game, it was a sarcastic/rhetorical question. Down boy.
Clever, you really got me there begala...Here's one for ya...hey you should visit my home state soon, prolly legal for you to get married here now. How about we keep it real einstien ok?

92TBurnSC said:
More substance after I get back from work. S3ars pwns m3.
More would imply some right? Or are you counting the Jon Stewart show references and the bush is a dummy stuff?
 
Did anybody hear Al Gore's speech the other day?

Damn scary that that psycho was only a couple of electoral votes away from being our president right now!!!!!!!!!!!!! Funny you don't hear anything kerry has to say because he says the same things as gore when he does speak. Sounded like gore had a howard dean moment there.
 
To be perfectly honest, I was never a big Gore fan. He has always had good points in his speeches, yet, as this one turned out, he didn't know how to present them to people who actually needed to wake up to it. He did a good job at speaking to folks who are going to vote Democratic no matter what (just like Bush does for the Republicans) but probably pushed the fence-riders the other way. If I was one I would be turned off by him.

However, it seems 1BADSC can't take the high road for even once in his insignificant life. Gore should be tried for treason? (Deleted by Admin, George Davenport)

I try to have civilized and open-minded political discourse with you, 1BADSC, and all you do is spout ignorance. As you can see, I am done with you.
 
Gore made the entire democratic party look bad in his speach. He is a socialist. Maybe he can run for office is Russia.
 
Well it's easy to get sidetracked with name-calling and lie accusations. That wasn't my intention for this thread, though I'm a bit guilty of it too. What i really wanted to do is debate issues, philosophies, and ideals etc..

I'll start by dispelling some common mud thrown at bush/cheney. Haliburtin(sp?)...Now it's always a big deal about no bid contracts right? Those contracts were to put out fires in oil wells. As in oil spewing out of the ground like a giant old faithful but on fire. There are only two companies in the world that are capable of putting out these fires. Also these fires cost millions of dollars per moment plus spew major pollution into the air obviously as they burn. To hold off on putting them out to wait for companies to bid on putting them out would be irresponsible and assinine. Haliburtin is an oil services company like no other in the world. A legal company with no evidence of crooked business practices.

Also there was griping about the overcharging for oil from kuwait during the 92 gulf war lately. The deal with that was the kuwaities signed a contract to guarantee oil delivery at a set price for a set time in a war zone. Applying simple common business sense will tell you that you are not going to pay normal prices for this. And they were only like a dollar a gallon over regular prices which seems pretty reasonable to me under the circumstances.

How about the current oil prices? Between china booming along with their oil consumption, as well as india and other places, plus all the different blends required by law in the states now(42 different blends mandated now I heard somewhere), and thanks to extreme environmental policies we can't increase our own drilling by drilling off the cali coast, gulf of mexico, anwr alaska, while our economy is growing, is it any wonder the gas prices are going up? Also can some people outside the US give some gas prices where you are? It seems to me that europe pays much more for gas than we do, but I'd like some real numbers.

Any comments directly disputing what I have said here would be great. I'm just trying to learn and spread the truth of what is good for our country. The way I look at our country is it's like we as citizens are all on the same big bus and we all have a hand on the steering wheel. The sad thing is that too many people are jerking at the wheel without paying attention to where we came from and where we should be going. MORONS! //honk// lol
 
George Bush is not the conservative that conservatives would wish. Is he about special interests and big corporations? I guess I don't see he is any more such than any other Republican. Yet he has a side that drives many Republicans nuts. He is increasing government not just in defense (Dept of Homeland Security), but he is increasing human services with the Medicare Prescription drug program, the fully funded No Child Left Behind act to name a couple items.

An ideal conservative, no. But a good President? Thus far I would say yes.

But does that mean he should automatically get another 4 years? I would say no. But for me to be willing to change I would need a better alternative. I liked Joe Lieberman but I have found that the Democratic party is no longer one that I can align myself with. With organizations like MoveOn.org, and the hate, disdain, and disrespect shown the President of this Nation I feel that they are a lost group.

Yet I wouldn't be voting for a group. I would be voting for a President. So.

Why I won't vote for John Kerry:

Welcome to JohnKerry.com! I'd say welcome to my website, but this isn't my website alone - it's your website - and your chance to change America. I’m running for President because George Bush has taken America in a radically wrong direction with a Presidency that serves powerful special interests instead of everyday Americans. From the moment I take office, I will stand up to those special interests and stand with hardworking families so that we can give America back its future and its ideals.

I'm not sure how John Kerry expects anyone to believe what he is saying here. It seems he is trying to imply that George Bush is only about helping the rich get richer. Yet it seems the reality is that George Bush is about America getting stronger so that all are better. Not just a specific group. And I've yet to see John Kerry show by his votes that he stands up against special interests. The last politician we had in Washington that would even try to stand up against special interests died in a plane crash on the way to a political stop in Minnesota. I may not have agreed with Paul Wellstone, but he was as close to a stand-up guy as they get in Congress. John Kerry isn't even close.

In my first 100 days as President, I will revoke every Bush executive order that favors polluters and the special interests.

Is that not in itself serving a special interest? Would John Kerry allow for entire industries to be damaged? There must be balance and such a statement as Senator Kerry's does not show an understanding of such things.

My first major bill to Congress will be national health care reform, taking on the insurance industry to hold down costs and cover all Americans.

This could be the worse thing to happen in America. Insurance companies are not the cause of high heath care costs. The American citizens are the cause of the high costs of basic health care. Is it the fault of insurance companies that American's refuse to take responsibility for their own actions?

I am running for president because we need a President who is ready and willing on day one to make tough stands and fight the hard battles. I am prepared to fight with all my energy in these next months and provide solutions – not just slogans – to get America back on track

Does Senator Kerry truly feel that President Bush has not been taking the tough stands and fighting the hard battles? I feel good about our Nation and feel that we are doing what needs to be done to ensure our security, and the security of our allies.

The air that we breathe during much of the day is the air that circulates in our schools, hospitals, factories, and offices. Unfortunately, many of us are spending our days breathing stale, and sometimes dangerous, indoor air - with harmful allergens, molds and chemicals. The Bush Administration has virtually ignored this threat to our health, despite periodic reports of “sick” buildings and serious mold issues.

The issues of Mold and "sick" buildings is one that is blown out of proportion and John Kerry's comments on it is pandering to special interests, something he claims to be wanting to fight.

Work With International Community to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The U.S. must join the international community to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Junk science at its core. Again, pandering to special interests. Joining together as one with the International Community will only ensure nothing meaningful is accomplished.

Kerry supports higher funding for agriculture conservation programs and the value-added development grant program, which can help rural communities grow their economies and protect their environment

Ah yes, more government subsidies to not grow things. That'll solve the problems. Again it seems Senator Kerry has found a special interest to talk to.

Small farmers deserve a fair chance to sell their livestock on the open market. John Kerry supported a ban on packer ownership of livestock, which drives small- and family-owned producers out of business. And he has voted to limit the proliferation of animal confinements, which produce more pollution and put family operations at a disadvantage.

If the market cannot sustain the family farm. Why must Government step in to artificially sustain it for them? I thought we want what is best for American's. John Kerry seems to be interested in promoting a process of wanting what is best for that -> group of American's over there. And that -> group of American's over there. Not those <- American's over there, but yeah, let's help those -> American's over there. Has the government done such things in the past? Yes. Does the government still do such things today? Yes. Does that mean doing more of such things is a good idea? No.

Americans in rural areas face special challenges when looking for quality health care. John Kerry fought to restore cuts to rural health care programs and will work to address inequitable Medicare reimbursement rates that hurt rural hospitals, healthcare providers and seniors. Kerry proposed increasing funding for community health centers and rural health clinics so that rural communities have greater access to health care services.

I hate to point it out. But there has to be a balance between helping viable communities and supporting communities that are un-sustainable. Simply because an area is rural, does not mean it is in the best interests of the Nation that such areas are supported. The problem of rural regions in our Nation are much more complex than the simple efforts that John Kerry states will help.

Internet access in rural areas still lags far behind that in suburbs and urban areas, particularly when it comes to broadband access that can bring much needed education and health care resources to rural communities. John Kerry has been a leader in advocating federal policies to bring broadband technology to rural communities, including the E-rate program designed to help poorer school districts afford technology and Internet access.

So the farmers can surf for Porn as fast as the city folk? I just really don't want to see the federal government getting involved in telecommunications. The FCC has already messed it up enough as it is.

Kerry has also supported federal funding to help rural communities provide clean drinking water and proper waste disposal

Rural communities have had clean drinking water and have had "proper" waste disposal. The problem seems to be the EPA keeps moving the target of what "proper" is. Creating government mandated requirements that can't be easily supported by rural tax bases. So Kerry's fix appears to be taking my suburban tax money and giving it to the rural communities so they can meet the needs of the new EPA regs. How about modify some of the EPA requirements that are questionable so that so much money isn't needed in rural areas? Oh, that's right it might piss off the special interests of the environmentalists.

Under the Bush Administration, cops are being taken off the street to pay for more tax cuts for billionaires and critical homeland security needs have been unmet

As Penn & Teller would say: ****. It isn't the Federal Governments job to be policing my street. If there is a lack of "cops" on the streets, it's the fault of local governments, not anything the Federal Government is or isn't doing.

Ninety Percent of Cities Have Not Received Funding. "A study last fall by the U.S. Conference of Mayors showed 90 percent of cities had not received

And it just goes on and on. No where does John Kerry describe how he could do better. As we have seen over the years. Giving the Federal government money to get the job done is one way to ensure that the job won't get done, and it will cost more to not get it done than first expected.

John Kerry's entire section on how he would handle the foreign policy scares me. It seems that he has determined the best way to handle things is to go back to the U.N. crawling on our proverbial knees. The UN had their chance and they choose not to be involved. George Bush is currently working with the U.N. in supporting the ongoing efforts that will be needed in Iraq once power is turned over to the people.

I've read a lot, and I can't comment on it all. But I can almost say that I disagree with everything John Kerry feels he needs to do. I feel that what he is writing/saying and what he will actually do are two different things. I feel that he chooses only to rail against special interests that are not interested in him. Yet he seems to have no problem supporting special interests that he thinks will further his chance at becoming President.

I wish the Democratic party would have stuck with Joe Lieberman. But in the end it appears that the party has moved away such that even Joe Lieberman doesn't fit with their goals.
 
Very good post.

What is really funny is that Kerry will go against Bush no matter what Bush says or does. It is really comical. Bush has started to talk with the U.N. again (which Kerry thought we should do too) but now Kerry is flipping and saying that he would never do that.

He then went on to say that we need to be Strong without being Stubborn. Which can be translated as, we need to protect ourselves until France or Germany gets upset. Then we have to call it a day. Wonder why they didn't want to get rid of Saddam.... because they were getting bribe money from Saddam and they were taking it. Worthless French.


Did anyone see the Tennis player moon the French today during the match?
 
Back
Top