ToBoGgAn wrote:
we are gonna take it in the ass and like it, cause thats what america does.

hhahahahaha

______________________________________________________________

ToBoGgAn wrote:we are gonna take it in the ass and like it, cause thats what america does.

Slo2pt2 (Projekt Unknown?) wrote:One my SON is ADHD N.O.S and Autistic Spectrum Disorder. I will nto medicate him he will battle throught this himself and learn to control it.

So whats the point of this post besides you guys bashing Bush with no facts attached to it?

I started it to point out again how stupid he is. There were facts attached. The quote he made and the article it came from.

Ah hum.... *clears throat*

BUCK FUSH!




Check Out My Domain Page!!!

Quote:

Subject: Kerry Speaks

And the Democrats think Bush says stupid things.....

John F. Kerry speaks:

"The vast majority of our imports come from outside the country."
- John F. Kerry

"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."
- John F. Kerry

"One word sums up probably the responsibility of any Governor, and that one word is 'to be prepared'."
- John F. Kerry

"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgments in the future."
- John F. Kerry

"The future will be better tomorrow."
- John F. Kerry

"We're going to have the best educated American people in the world."
- John F. Kerry

"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made."
- John F. Kerry

"We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of NATO. We have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe."
- John F. Kerry

"Public speaking is very easy."
- John F. Kerry

"A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the polls."
- John F. Kerry

"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."
- John F. Kerry

"For NASA, space is still a high priority."
- John F. Kerry

"Quite frankly, teachers are the only profession that teach our children."
- John F. Kerry

"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."
- John F. Kerry

"It's time for the human race to enter the solar system."
- John F. Kerry

Whatever source you got those from isn't very reliable at all. It's undoubtly just a bend-the-truth mud-slinging site. From now on, only go there to know what not to believe.

Some of those are Quale quotes yes, but many of those are BUSH from his years as Governor of Texas!! LOL!! And you're sourcing those to show what an idiot Kerry is!! That's just too rich!! Well Kerry IS an idiot, but not that much of an idiot. If you don't believe me, I'm going to need you to look at those quotes and THINK. I don't believe Kerry was ever governor of any state, for example. Actually, I doubt any of those where Kerry. It makes me sad to think that it's people like you believing PROPAGANDA like this, that re-elected the king of all village idiots.



But I've got some good ones here that ACTUALLY ARE FROM BUSH

Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."—Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (I honestly don't doubt the literal meaning of what he mistakingly said)

"Secondly, the tactics of our—as you know, we don't have relationships with Iran. I mean, that's—ever since the late '70s, we have no contacts with them, and we've totally sanctioned them. In other words, there's no sanctions—you can't—we're out of sanctions."—Annandale, Va., Aug. 9, 2004

That's why I went to the Congress last September and proposed fundamental—supplemental funding, which is money for armor and body parts and ammunition and fuel."—Erie, Pa., Sept. 4, 2004

"After standing on the stage, after the debates, I made it very plain, we will not have an all-volunteer army. And yet, this week—we will have an all-volunteer army. Let me restate that."—Daytona Beach, Fla., Oct. 16, 2004

More Muslims have died at the hands of killers than—I say more Muslims—a lot of Muslims have died—I don't know the exact count—at Istanbul. Look at these different places around the world where there's been tremendous death and destruction because killers kill."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 29, 20

"In my judgment, when the United States says there will be serious consequences, and if there isn't serious consequences, it creates adverse consequences."

"The recession started upon my arrival. It could have been—some say February, some say March, some speculate maybe earlier it started—but nevertheless, it happened as we showed up here. The attacks on our country affected our economy. Corporate scandals affected the confidence of people and therefore affected the economy. My decision on Iraq, this kind of march to war, affected the economy."—Meet the Press, Feb. 8, 2004

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

"[T]he best way to find these terrorists who hide in holes is to get people coming forth to describe the location of the hole, is to give clues and data."

"The ambassador and the general were briefing me on the—the vast majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and we will bring them to justice."—Washington, D.C., Oct. 27, 2003

"[W]hether they be Christian, Jew, or Muslim, or Hindu, people have heard the universal call to love a neighbor just like they'd like to be called themselves."—Washington, Oct. 8, 2003

"See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction."—Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003(note that WE have developed, improved, and built MANY weapons of mass destruction and have attacted other free nations - if you don't think so you need to open a history book)

"I glance at the headlines just to kind of get a flavor for what's moving. I rarely read the stories, and get briefed by people who are probably read the news themselves."—Washington, D.C., Sept. 21, 2003(Doesn't this scare you a little?)

"I'm so pleased to be able to say hello to Bill Scranton. He's one of the great Pennsylvania political families."—Drexel Hill, Penn., Sept. 15, 2003

"Security is the essential roadblock to achieving the road map to peace."—Washington, D.C., July 25, 2003

"My answer is bring them on."—On Iraqi militants attacking U.S. forces, Washington, D.C., July 3, 2003(well they are "bringing it on" - and that is a bad thing for our soldiers)

"I'm the master of low expectations."—Aboard Air Force One, June 4, 2003

"First, let me make it very clear, poor people aren't necessarily killers. Just because you happen to be not rich doesn't mean you're willing to kill."—Washington, D.C., May 19, 2003

"I think war is a dangerous place."—Washington, D.C., May 7, 2003

"You're free. And freedom is beautiful. And, you know, it'll take time to restore chaos and order—order out of chaos. But we will."—Washington, D.C., April 13, 2003

We need an energy bill that encourages consumption."—Trenton, N.J., Sept. 23, 2002

"There's an old saying in Tennessee—I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, fool me once, shame on—shame on you. Fool me—you can't get fooled again."—Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

"Do you have blacks, too?"—To Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

''I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe—I believe what I believe is right."—Rome, July 22, 2001

"We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease."—GW Bush, Gothenburg, Sweden, June 14, 2001(come on, the guy actually thinks the CONTINENT of Africa is only a nation?! OMG!!)

"Our nation must come together to unite."—Tampa, Fla., June 4, 2001

"I appreciate that question because I, in the state of Texas, had heard a lot of discussion about a faith-based initiative eroding the important bridge between church and state."—January 29, 2001(and I though Kerry was the big flip-flopper?)

"Natural gas is hemispheric. I like to call it hemispheric in nature because it is a product that we can find in our neighborhoods."
Austin, Texas, Dec. 20, 2000

"I am mindful of the difference between the executive branch and the legislative branch. I assured all four of these leaders that I know the difference, and that difference is they pass the laws and I execute them." Washington, D.C., Dec. 18, 2000 (not how it works)

The legislature's job is to write law. It's the executive branch's job to interpret law."—Austin, Texas, Nov. 22, 2000(DEFINITELY not how it works - the LEGISLATIVE branch interprets laws)

They misunderestimated me."—Bentonville, Ark., Nov. 6, 2000

"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some kind of federal program."—St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000(and THIS man wants to reform Social Security?!)

"The only things that I can tell you is that every case I have reviewed I have been comfortable with the innocence or guilt of the person that I've looked at. I do not believe we've put a guilty... I mean innocent person to death in the state of Texas."—June 16, 2000(which only proves he doesn't like to concern himself with unimportant details like FACTS. Records CLEARLY show that Texas has executed MANY people later PROVEN innocent - I do believe my state, IL, is second only to Texas in terms of executing innocent people)

"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it." —Reuters, May 5, 2000

GOV. BUSH: "Because the picture on the newspaper. It just seems so un-American to me, the picture of the guy storming the house with a scared little boy there. I talked to my little brother, Jeb...I haven't told this to many people. But he's the governor of...I shouldn't call him my little brother...my brother, Jeb, the great governor of Texas." JIM LEHRER: "Florida." GOV. BUSH: "Florida. The state of the Florida."—The NewsHour With Jim Lehrer, April 27, 2000

"I was raised in the West. The west of Texas. It's pretty close to California. In more ways than Washington, D.C., is close to California."—In Los Angeles as quoted by the Los Angeles Times, April 8, 2000

"Other Republican candidates may retort to personal attacks and negative ads."—Fund-raising letter from George W. Bush, quoted in the Washington Post, March 24, 2000 (a LETTER!)

"If you're sick and tired of the politics of cynicism and polls and principles, come and join this campaign."—Hilton Head, S.C., Feb. 16, 2000

"The most important job is not to be governor, or first lady in my case."—Pella, Iowa, as quoted by the San Antonio Express-News, Jan. 30, 2000

"Will the highways on the Internet become more few?"—Concord, N.H., Jan. 29, 2000

And of course one of my favorites, showing just how arogant this man really is -
"God speaks through me."—Smoketown, Pennsylvania, July 16, 2004 (first reported in the local papers, including the Intelligencer Journal and the Lancaster New Era)


To answer the stupid or retarded question. I think he's always been stupid, but his old cocain(and alcohol - who knows what else - but I'd bet that crack was one of them) habit is what made him retarded. Yeah that may have been a long, long time ago, but the damage is pretty permanent, not to mention obvious as hell.

Quote:

"I think I brained my damage!" - Homer Simpson

I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."—Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (I honestly don't doubt the literal meaning of what he mistakingly said)"


hmm when i read that, i tend to take that as meaning that the u.s. is innovative and resourceful as well. guess its all in how you read it huh.


""In my judgment, when the United States says there will be serious consequences, and if there isn't serious consequences, it creates adverse consequences."


what hea means is if the u.s. makes a threat and doesnt back it up, thats going to make it seem like we arnt a threat, and that there will be no repucussion from the u.s.
that one is pretty easy to understand.


"
"I appreciate that question because I, in the state of Texas, had heard a lot of discussion about a faith-based initiative eroding the important bridge between church and state."—January 29, 2001(and I though Kerry was the big flip-flopper?)"

he doesnt state that he thinks that will happen. he just says he's heard the view that it could. there no flip flopping here, just stating that he has been involved in discussions about it.



just never much cared for quotes like these, about anyone for that matter because when you take one sentance out of a conversation you have no real idea what the intent of the sentance is. for instance take this sentance

"these guys are a bunch of retarded rednecks"

sounds pretty bad. now here's the actual wording

"I have known these guys for several years. these guys are a bunch of retarded rednecks. they are also some of my closest friends who I love like brothers.

you can see how much the context and meaning changes by only pointing out one sentance.


as far as allot of the other quotes. their just speach mistakes. i mean if someone took a tape recorder to most of us and taped basically every word out of our mouth for 10 years time i'm sure each and everyone of us will have allot of quotes that make us all sound like utter idiots.




http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography

Quote:

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."—Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (I honestly don't doubt the literal meaning of what he mistakingly said)"


hmm when i read that, i tend to take that as meaning that the u.s. is innovative and resourceful as well. guess its all in how you read it huh.

I know what he meant, as much is obvious. But THIS part

Quote:

They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we

The literal meaning, despite intention, of what he is saying, is that our enemies never stop thinking of new ways to hurt us as a whole and individually, and we never stop thinking of new ways to hurt us as a whole and individually. LOL.

Yeah they're speech mistakes, and he makes a TON of them, ESPECIALLY for someone graduating from the Ivy League. The fact that he even received a passing grade in Jr. High English, then High School English, let alone classes in an Ivy League college, defies any explanation, except one - payoff or pressure from higher up on teachers and administrators. Most seven year olds have a better comprehension of the mechanics of the English language. There is no excuse for this.

Quote:

i mean if someone took a tape recorder to most of us and taped basically every word out of our mouth for 10 years time i'm sure each and everyone of us will have allot of quotes that make us all sound like utter idiots.

That may be true, but it only takes Bush minutes to accomplish this.

Also I noticed that you didn't touch some of the best ones, the ones that despite context, clearly show just how bad of a comprehension Bush has on how the world works.

Quote:

"I glance at the headlines just to kind of get a flavor for what's moving. I rarely read the stories, and get briefed by people who are probably read the news themselves."—Washington, D.C., Sept. 21, 2003

"We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease."—GW Bush, Gothenburg, Sweden, June 14, 2001(come on, the guy actually thinks the CONTINENT of Africa is only a nation?! OMG!!)

"I am mindful of the difference between the executive branch and the legislative branch. I assured all four of these leaders that I know the difference, and that difference is they pass the laws and I execute them." Washington, D.C., Dec. 18, 2000 - (not how it works)

The legislature's job is to write law. It's the executive branch's job to interpret law."—Austin, Texas, Nov. 22, 2000 - (DEFINITELY not how it works - the LEGISLATIVE branch interprets laws) It doesn't suprise me in the least that he believes the Executive branch has any role in interpreting law(WHCH IT DOESN'T). This explains why he gives little reguard to these laws unless he personally agrees with them, which is a serious abuse of power.

"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some kind of federal program."—St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000 - Umm I guess he thinks Social Security is a state program?! I really hope someone has filled him in by now!!

"See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction."—Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003 -

"The only things that I can tell you is that every case I have reviewed I have been comfortable with the innocence or guilt of the person that I've looked at. I do not believe we've put a guilty... I mean innocent person to death in the state of Texas."—June 16, 2000 - So then even the massive number of people who have later been PROVEN innocent are... guilty? Actually, I do personally support the death penalty. I do acknolege that the system does need fixing though(unlike Bush). Also unlike Bush, I at least have the facts straight.

You see this man doesn't know how the world works, doesn't know how our government works, and most of all doesn't know(or care?) what his role is/isn't in our government and the world. It's quite disturbing that this one man has such considerable control over these things of which he has so little understanding. More disturbing still are the many people who don't even understand(or care) why this matters.




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

How does a guy so inarticulate and obtuse get to be President? I mean, Money can only take you so far... Bush just reminds me of a guy that slept his way to the top (not as if he were f**king all the way up, I mean, look at him).. I still have a pic somewhere of Bush crashing a segway and it says "Don't Blame Bush, He's The Victim of Social Promotion" or another one that says, "He's not your buddy, he's the boss's idiot son that got promoted ahead of you... again."

Am I the only one that thinks it's a better idea to DOWNPLAY the fact that your a straight C student? Ever notice that when he's off script (or taking questions that he has to answer candidly) a cohesive thought process and the english language disintegrate like cotton candy in a hurricane?

okay.. I'm not going to knock him anymore... it's just sad that he was re-elected because his myopic domestic policies are going to bankrupt the US. And his hypocritical foreign policy will accomplish that end as well... Face it, he's committed your country to a course of action that will not end soon or peacefully.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

^^^ G-I-G-O


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

I don't know which he is, but I'm certain it's a family trait. Try to find transcripts of some of his father's speeches and you'll see many of the same type of malapropisms. It be interesting to see if his brother Jeb suffers from the same affliction



_____________________
1st gen Z24 hatch with aero package
Black
23K original miles
(need '87 Z24 hood)

Its a good thing they can only stay for 2 terms.

Bush being in office for more than 2 weeks is painful enough though.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emor8t-

I 100% agree with out. These ficken idiot cry baby liberals keep whining about loosing. It is so sad the see them wrecking our country. They whine about the nation being divieded. Its is only divided because they separate themselves when it doesnt go their way. Its like the liberals are self-destructing themselves. When Clinton was in the republicans followed along and worked with our nation as a whole. Now a republican wins hands down, does wonderful things for our nation, but yet demies aren't even willing to admit he won yet. Its an F-ed up nation and it's for one reason. Democrats who are as self oriented as we have seen in this last election.

I have several friends who are in the marines and they all like Bush. Even if they have to go and fight, or die for thier contries, At least we have a president that does somthing, and doesnt focus on tree hugging and makeing the nation the gay capital of the world. Granted I though clinton was a good president, I am not a staunch republican, I vote for what parties is obviously using common sense at the time. Clinton lead us in great ways, I followed along and was always greatful for most of the stuff he did. In this election we had a candidate that wanted to outlaw using state parks for recreation. He wanted to outlaw boats and snowmobiles from every state owned land in the country. Obviously it would never pass in senate but with Kerry's word there was no way he was speaking his mind. All he was doing was trying to please everyones view at the moment and would change when he heard the nation wanted somthing else. He wasnt a person, he was a political robot. Bush is absolute opposite. He speaks his mind. He speaks what he thinks should be done and askes for support. Whether you want to admit it or not Bush is a smarter politician that any of us. SAT scores dont mean $h!+ when running for president. My scores were super low but maybe I have one subject that I really enjoy. In Bush's case it is politics. For all I care he could have graduated on a GED and he would still be a good president. Even if he can speak clearly. It doesnt matter, at least he speaks his mind and not his lies.

I really hope this democratic party falls appart like they keep speculating. I dont wish for people to never have thier views heard, but there has never EVER been a political party that is so differing in oppinions that our current democrats. Really our society would be much better with like 8 different parties. The democratic party just needs a tearing down a rebuilding. Then I think you would see those complaints of a divided government go away. Or they could just do like the republicans and join the other side as a country when things dont go thier way.

Hopefully for all demies, you either fall apart and rebuild on a different party, or you get a strong leader, not the blasphemous attempt like Kerry. You need somthing stronger than clinton. But it wont happen. Our society, not our government, limits the ability of the people.

Rollinredcavi wrote:
I 100% agree with out. These ficken idiot cry baby liberals keep whining about loosing. It is so sad the see them wrecking our country. They whine about the nation being divieded. Its is only divided because they separate themselves when it doesnt go their way. Its like the liberals are self-destructing themselves. When Clinton was in the republicans followed along and worked with our nation as a whole. Now a republican wins hands down, does wonderful things for our nation, but yet demies aren't even willing to admit he won yet. Its an F-ed up nation and it's for one reason. Democrats who are as self oriented as we have seen in this last election.

A republican did not win "hands down" he nosed out the competition... Given that about 52% of eligible voters actually voted, keep in mind that only about 26% of people actually voted for Bush.

Liberals aren't the problem.. they're not the solution either.. and, neither are the neo-republicans, or the far right republicans. The problem is that there are too many self-interested representatives in both houses, and in the executive branch. Way too many people are in politics for the MONEY and POWER, and not enough for doing the right thing.

And, wipe your mind of the illusions... Republicans only started acquiescing to bi-partisanism when his term was ENDING. They fought bitterly (remember Newt Gingrich?), and chomped at the bit to depose Clinton all throughout Cigar-gate. I think you oughtta remove your head from the *ahem* clouds.

Quote:


I have several friends who are in the marines and they all like Bush. Even if they have to go and fight, or die for thier contries, At least we have a president that does somthing, and doesnt focus on tree hugging and makeing the nation the gay capital of the world. Granted I though clinton was a good president, I am not a staunch republican, I vote for what parties is obviously using common sense at the time.

OKay.. you're confusing me here... Clinton brought in several environmental bills and brought in the "don't ask, Don't tell" policy. Anyhow.. Bush HAS done the weird thing by extending deployments, and reeling in retirees as well as increasing funding, but not increasing enrollment allowances in all branches. I doubt there will be a draft, unless things really go south in Iraq, but at this point, your Marine buddies aren't going to be wanting for deployment pay.

Quote:


Clinton lead us in great ways, I followed along and was always greatful for most of the stuff he did. In this election we had a candidate that wanted to outlaw using state parks for recreation. He wanted to outlaw boats and snowmobiles from every state owned land in the country. Obviously it would never pass in senate but with Kerry's word there was no way he was speaking his mind. All he was doing was trying to please everyones view at the moment and would change when he heard the nation wanted somthing else. He wasnt a person, he was a political robot. Bush is absolute opposite. He speaks his mind. He speaks what he thinks should be done and askes for support.

Here I think you're patently wrong, he doesn't speak his mind because it's gibberish. Part of being a statesman, or someone worth believing (even though I am deeply cynical towards politicians as "leaders") is being able to say what you think, and say it in a way that your intended audience will be able to understand. As it stands, Bush has committed enough verbal gaffes, blunders, screw-ups and goofs to make me wonder how it was that he made it into an ivy-league school, much less out of it.

As well, I think that a lot of the actions that have been undertaken have not been for the better of the American people (on the whole, mind you) nor the people of Iraq. I find it odd that oil refineries were guarded a lot closer than the green zone in Baghdad.

Kerry, in his own right, tried to be everything to everyone... And that will not work... unless your last name is McGuinty (it's a Joke for Ontarians... If you don't get it, it's cool ). As well, I think the fact that his military credentials were attacked, and Bush's weren't, I find interesting... and damaging. Kerry had said he'd boost enrollment targets, and I think that getting people on the ground in Iraq is the best and fastest way to resolve the situation. I don't agree with a lot of other things he was promising, but then again, I tend to dance to the beat of my own drummer, at least politically.

Quote:

Whether you want to admit it or not Bush is a smarter politician that any of us. SAT scores dont mean $h!+ when running for president. My scores were super low but maybe I have one subject that I really enjoy. In Bush's case it is politics. For all I care he could have graduated on a GED and he would still be a good president. Even if he can speak clearly. It doesnt matter, at least he speaks his mind and not his lies.

Wow... that last line is ... priceless. I guess him promising that there were WMD's in Iraq (to the UN General Assembly), and that he'd find Usama Bin Laden, and that he'd fix the economy and Social Security, and.. and.. and.. There are just waaay too many promises that were unfulfilled from the last campaign, and the rest aren't shaping up too well this time 'round.

Again, if you can't sound like you know what you're doing, you have no business being at the head of anything, much less a country.

Quote:


I really hope this democratic party falls appart like they keep speculating. I dont wish for people to never have thier views heard, but there has never EVER been a political party that is so differing in oppinions that our current democrats. Really our society would be much better with like 8 different parties. The democratic party just needs a tearing down a rebuilding. Then I think you would see those complaints of a divided government go away. Or they could just do like the republicans and join the other side as a country when things dont go thier way.

The Democrats are not unified, but then again, they're not bending much either.

The Republicans were pretty fractious after GHW Bush got punted also, don't forget.

I also shudder when you say that the current party just fall apart... The same thing happened in Germany in 1936. Not to draw parallels, but it CAN happen.

Quote:

Hopefully for all demies, you either fall apart and rebuild on a different party, or you get a strong leader, not the blasphemous attempt like Kerry. You need somthing stronger than clinton. But it wont happen. Our society, not our government, limits the ability of the people.

No, people settling for less is what limits people... rather, people being sold the least objectionable (whatever) and buying into it...

That's a sad... sad thing.

BTW, you say they need something stronger than Clinton... I think they need someone that can unify as well as Clinton... it's a galvanised party that wins.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Alright I am not going to quote everything you just said... however, I think much of it is just a little "far out". When saying Bush hasnt kept any promises, he cant keep them when people dont support him. In a democratic society you must have people willing to help along the way to get things done. There is just to many demies who arnt budging from thier stance at all to get things done. I honestly think that is major misunderstanding that people have. The really really funny thing that I see is when all of these people complain about what Bush has done, and those same people complain that he hasnt done anything. That is stricktly because people are so selfish. And I dont mean this as an insult, but in this case its the democracts that are being so selfish. I think you would be pretty hard pressed to find numbers that say republicans of any form that will get so huffy puffy about thier candidate not winning the election. That is just the way most, not all, republicans are. Its more of a laid back party that does things that need to be done and lives on. The way the democrats are appearing after this election is what I see as almost like the hippy movement. They want this major reformation of the whole world and some seriously obnoxious views. Granted not all are like that but there is a suprisingly high number of these liberals. With this division that they are creating how can we possibly unite the country better? They want reform, Bush tries somthing, thinks up a plan, and demies knock it down. Watch the news or comedy shows, thats all they do is rip on Bush, yet he won hands down, yes I said it again. He won. No contest, that means hands down. Yet the idiots still try to file lawsuits and bull crap.

Now I am agreeing that Bush is not perfect. IMO there is no such thing as a perfect politician. It just cant happen. But saying that our government is going to turn into a nazi like government. That is far out. I know you were just showing the smallest form of relationship between them, but that was bad. Now from your sig and from what you wrote it appears that your from canada so I am assuming that you didnt watch on election night. Well they showed several segments where Bush was calmly watching the results come in with his family. At one point he even said somthing like "the people will chose who they think will be the best leader". I am sorry but Bush or the republicans are far from taking over a nation. That isn't going to happen. Especially by the republicans. Even if the democratic party fell apart, the true republicans would work to include democratic views into thier agenda. Yes, after the first term is when bush anounced that he would work on a bi-partisan presidency. In his first term he came into one of the fastest declining economies that we have seen since the great depression. I really want people to check their facts when they say Bush caused an econimic recession. That is so far from the truth. It started almost a year before Clinton left. I am in no way sying that it is Clinton's fault. Economies will increase and decrease no matter who the leader is. Bush came in to an already declining economy, 9/11 happend and things further went down because of this. Yet demies still blame GW for this. That is just obsurd. Now we are coming back up, whether people want to admit it or not. He has giving people the chance to spend mroe because of the tax cuts, And yes rich people spend the most money, if you cut thier taxes you will get a higher amount for them to spend. No matter how selfish they are and how much useless crap they buy, when they spend money the lower classes make that money. That is basic fact. You would have noticed a more direct impact had he cut taxes for the lower classes because each person in to lower class would have a slight bit more money. Yet they wouldnt spend it as much. It was a very good idea and HAS worked. Then JOBS. I really dont want to get into it in depth, but it is the same as the economy. It started before his term. 9/11 happened, yet people expect this to be a booming time. Bush got us out of that just as fast as any politician could have.

The only reason Clinton unified is because he was a democrat. Now exactly what I mean by that is when a demie is elected, the republicans are willing to help and follow. When a republican is in, that doesnt happen, demies are a little to selfish.

The war, I hate people complaing about that. Most of them just dont look at the big picture. Its not a little war, nor a pointless war. THe day after 9/11 Bush said that he was going to do WHATEVER it took to get something done. Well most people got butterflies when they heard him say that. It was an extremely powerful speach. Whether or not his gramar is excelent or not. Then he took it to the senate, and the senate, not bush voted to go to war. plain and simple it wasnt bush that voted for it, it was the 100 senators, including kerry, yet he comes out saying that the war was a joke. But really I dont know to many people that actually liked Kerry. Most who voted for Kerry did so because they didnt like Bush. Yet the things that they did like about Bush, Kerry supported also. Its mixed up. I know your not aguing that Kerry was good so I will leave that.

Again, you make so very valid points; however, I do feel that the most important thing I am saying is not whether Bush is good or bad, its that the way democrats are dividing us because they wont give a little here and there to get things done. That is limiting the ability of our whole society.

well, none of this matters now
he will be out of office in a few years
i just hope the deficit isnt crazy

i dont think either one of our canidates was a good one this time around

I'll quote... it's not all that hard

Rollinredcavi wrote:Alright I am not going to quote everything you just said... however, I think much of it is just a little "far out". When saying Bush hasnt kept any promises, he cant keep them when people dont support him.

Quote:

Republicans have majority control of the Senate and Congress. The support is there, he has to guide the decision making, and give both houses the direction that he wants to take the country in.

Quote:


In a democratic society you must have people willing to help along the way to get things done. There is just to many demies who arnt budging from thier stance at all to get things done.

Again, there aren't enough "demies" (you mean Ashton-chasers?!?!) to halt proceedings. Also, in a democratic society, you have to have only enough people in your control to be able to force a bill through.. misguided or no.

Quote:


I honestly think that is major misunderstanding that people have. The really really funny thing that I see is when all of these people complain about what Bush has done, and those same people complain that he hasnt done anything.

I think what he has done, and has not done speak more about his presidency than what he has promised to do. Every President will have to deal with adversity... the aftermath of the adversity will tell how well or poorly he made decisions in the moment of adversity.

Quote:


That is stricktly because people are so selfish. And I dont mean this as an insult, but in this case its the democracts that are being so selfish. I think you would be pretty hard pressed to find numbers that say republicans of any form that will get so huffy puffy about thier candidate not winning the election.

Actually, look at the 2000 elections.. it seems to me that both sides cried foul more than once... Maybe its just me, but I think it's more telling that the Dems lay down their sword (so to speak) and prepared to fight another day.

Quote:

That is just the way most, not all, republicans are. Its more of a laid back party that does things that need to be done and lives on.

Now, you've GOT to be kidding... Most republicans I know (and I know a few in the US), are some of the most uptight people I've met. Either they are wound up about something that is pretty minor, or are wound up about something they should have paid attention to a long time ago. That's just my experience though... Also, I don't try to blanket them with a statement.. some conservatives I know are pretty amicable people once you leave politics at the door.

Quote:


The way the democrats are appearing after this election is what I see as almost like the hippy movement. They want this major reformation of the whole world and some seriously obnoxious views. Granted not all are like that but there is a suprisingly high number of these liberals. With this division that they are creating how can we possibly unite the country better? They want reform, Bush tries somthing, thinks up a plan, and demies knock it down.

Wow... okay.. well, hippies are one thing, but generalizations are another. They're trying to do what they think is right, so are the republicans... they don't see eye to eye is all.. again, Republicans have control of both houses, they can push through basically whatever they want. Both sides are making uninformed decisions, and both are easily swayed by money that's used for "access to good government." This whole Us/Them slurry is a great marketing ploy by both sides.

Quote:

Watch the news or comedy shows, thats all they do is rip on Bush, yet he won hands down, yes I said it again. He won. No contest, that means hands down. Yet the idiots still try to file lawsuits and bull crap.

He won 50% of the popular vote, but only 26% of the total eligible vote. Apathy? Ignorance? I think most people want a candidate worth voting for, not just the party figurehead.

Quote:


Now I am agreeing that Bush is not perfect. IMO there is no such thing as a perfect politician. It just cant happen. But saying that our government is going to turn into a nazi like government.

Never implied that specifically.. What I was alluding to is that Hilter won 31% of the elgible vote for Chancellor Germany in 1936... Not at all convincing.. but it was merely more than the other parties (Germany didn't have Minority Government or coallition government legislation.. until 1948). The point is that the few can govern the many, only when the populace is not vigilant. Again, I'm not implying that your country will descend to the depths of aggression and depravity that Nazi Germany did, but it is possible.. your constitution is not set in stone and irrevocable... Alterations can be made (like the 14th and 15th ammendments)... and while not popular, they are law.

Quote:


That is far out. I know you were just showing the smallest form of relationship between them, but that was bad.

Got you reading didn't it? Saying something that is plausible is one thing, it has more impact when it's shocking.

Quote:

Now from your sig and from what you wrote it appears that your from canada so I am assuming that you didnt watch on election night.

It's Canada and I actually did watch because, much as I'm loathe to say it, Canada's economy is inexoribly hitched to the US economy, so what happens on your political landscape is reflected directly on ours... At least that mouth-piece and proper dolt Paul Cellucci is out of the US embassy.

Quote:

Well they showed several segments where Bush was calmly watching the results come in with his family. At one point he even said somthing like "the people will chose who they think will be the best leader".

That's rhetoric that you'd have heard from any candidate. When your mug is in front of the camera for the whole day of an election, you're not going to go and say something stupid like "Gonna make sure that f**ker is out of the Senate on Monday...." That's not "Presidential." Much as I hate to say it, the Bush camp was extremely media savvy.

Quote:


I am sorry but Bush or the republicans are far from taking over a nation. That isn't going to happen. Especially by the republicans. Even if the democratic party fell apart, the true republicans would work to include democratic views into thier agenda. Yes, after the first term is when bush anounced that he would work on a bi-partisan presidency. In his first term he came into one of the fastest declining economies that we have seen since the great depression. I really want people to check their facts when they say Bush caused an econimic recession.

Well, here's a thought for you, Bush ran as a neo-conservative... his agenda was supposed to try to tread the line between both parties, because there were a lot more Democrats in both houses... he didn't have a choice. After Sept. 11/01, things changed, and while it has been for some good, the problem is that both sides basically stopped debating (not arguing), and fell into lock-step... Only now are we seeing that there is a lot more conservative influence.

I dare not say Bush created the down turn in 2001, but he certainly didn't put the brakes to it. Clinton didn't have time after the Tech market crashed in 2000 to draw out a plan of action and put it into motion to recify the economy. Bush didn't have the support (within or without the party) to make a comprehensive plan to pull the economy out of the downturn. Again, post Sept. 11/01, things changed, but I'm not yet convinced they were for the better.

Quote:


That is so far from the truth. It started almost a year before Clinton left. I am in no way sying that it is Clinton's fault. Economies will increase and decrease no matter who the leader is.

True, but, if you influence the largest economic buying power on the face of the earth, you can definitely throw around some weight. Keynesian economics... it's a wonder.

Quote:

Bush came in to an already declining economy, 9/11 happend and things further went down because of this. Yet demies still blame GW for this.

I doubt most democrats blame dubya for 9/11/01... The problem is that the short term rebound that was experienced after the NYSE and NASDAQ re-opened was eminently short-term, there was a net loss of jobs even 2 years after 9/11/01 (I seem to remember getting into it with mrgto and pretjah or nfamous about being back at 9/10/01's jobless rate in 2003). The stop-gap measures basically made it a lot easier to move jobs overseas so companies could save money and keep jobs here... If that makes sense to you, You'd probably be able to defend Rush Limbaugh's stance on substance addiction and degnerates and how he's not either of them.

Quote:


That is just obsurd. Now we are coming back up, whether people want to admit it or not. He has giving people the chance to spend mroe because of the tax cuts, And yes rich people spend the most money, if you cut thier taxes you will get a higher amount for them to spend.

Giving people more money to spend is fine when you're covering your bills... otherwise, it's like giving your son allowance and not paying rent. Bush has pushed the US from a minor surplus to the largest defeciet position in over 10 years. The economy would recover just as quickly, but it'd be long term gains, with no more short term pains. Previous large tax cuts have been blanketed, and they've been in surplus or balanced budget years.

Quote:


No matter how selfish they are and how much useless crap they buy, when they spend money the lower classes make that money. That is basic fact.

I'm not sure what you're getting at... the lower class has little money to begin with, so less taxes isn't that big a bonus, Middle income classes will see a small benefit, and the rich are in no worse a position, because they have enough money to positively affect their money position regardless of the taxation climate... they're not staying rich for nothing y'know.

Quote:

You would have noticed a more direct impact had he cut taxes for the lower classes because each person in to lower class would have a slight bit more money. Yet they wouldnt spend it as much. It was a very good idea and HAS worked. Then JOBS. I really dont want to get into it in depth, but it is the same as the economy. It started before his term. 9/11 happened, yet people expect this to be a booming time. Bush got us out of that just as fast as any politician could have.

Getting out is one thing, but keeping out is another... esp. when jiggering the numbers... Food service is all of a sudden a manufacturing job???

Quote:

The only reason Clinton unified is because he was a democrat. Now exactly what I mean by that is when a demie is elected, the republicans are willing to help and follow. When a republican is in, that doesnt happen, demies are a little to selfish.

Does the Kenneth Starr debacle have any meaning for ya? Republicans are co-operative? Were you paying attention the whole first term or the first year of the second term? The second Newt Gingrich parked his pasty posterior in the Senate Majority Leader chair, it was a struggle to get anything democrat proposed bills to a vote.

Quote:


The war, I hate people complaing about that. Most of them just dont look at the big picture. Its not a little war, nor a pointless war.

The big picture is that the big picture isn't being looked at, and the real job isn't getting done.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11/01, and no WMD's.
The money being spent on financing could be used to better ends, or if it had to be thrown at the military, why not keep them in Afghanistan where the real threat is?

Most people knew that doing nothing was not a viable option, but most everyone wants the RIGHT thing to be done. Iraq was patently NOT the right thing to do.. it was politically expedient.

Quote:

THe day after 9/11 Bush said that he was going to do WHATEVER it took to get something done.

WHOA RIGHT THERE!!!!! You said the magic words!!!


Doing SOMETHING isn't the same as doing the RIGHT thing. I don't know if it's Texan, but doing SOMETHING isn't what you do when your country has been attacked... it's called flailling in the wind. He started out on the right course, and that I will give him. He was handled very, very well... and Not lashing out was a very very good thing. However, after all the hooplah and malarky, Afghanistan is no safer a country than it was pre-invasion, Usama Bin Laden is still at large, and Al-Queda is still very much a threat of unknown proportions.

Quote:

Well most people got butterflies when they heard him say that. It was an extremely powerful speach. Whether or not his gramar is excelent or not.

Actually, his scripted speaking is fine. It's when he's not reading and has to think on his feet that he falls apart.

Quote:


Then he took it to the senate, and the senate, not bush voted to go to war. plain and simple it wasnt bush that voted for it, it was the 100 senators, including kerry, yet he comes out saying that the war was a joke. But really I dont know to many people that actually liked Kerry. Most who voted for Kerry did so because they didnt like Bush. Yet the things that they did like about Bush, Kerry supported also. Its mixed up. I know your not aguing that Kerry was good so I will leave that.

Do you mean Congress and the Senate? (remind me, Congress is the body that can declare war, and sanction the use of Army, Navy, and Air Force troops, correct? Marines are under Presidential command?)

Anyhow... The war in Iraq was espoused as a hunt for WMD's that were an imminent threat to the US and it's people; as well as a well-deserved ass-kicking for Saddam Hussein... well, the latter was true, and the former was a wish. Kerry was stating that the war in Iraq was wrong, and, the plan that was voted on (not the one that was subsequently enacted) was the one that was voted on in the affirmative. If you read the original texts, I believe it was worded as giving the Executive Branch the authorisation to use Army, Navy and Air Force in operations against Iraq (PCS, help me out here...)

I don't pretend to know why most voters voted for Kerry, but I think it's because they wanted a better candidate in office than Bush. I guess that's difference of opinion for ya

Quote:

Again, you make so very valid points; however, I do feel that the most important thing I am saying is not whether Bush is good or bad, its that the way democrats are dividing us because they wont give a little here and there to get things done. That is limiting the ability of our whole society.

You make a lot of valid points as well, but I'm not convinced the Democrats are the root of all that ails the US's legislative branch, they're in the minority, and divisions don't happen because of the inability to compromise over a few issues (that's politics...), it happens when there's a deep rift between ideaologies. There are plenty of Republicans that don't like Bush or his policies.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Hahahaha wrote:A good portion of theose "Kerry" quotes are actually Dan Quale quotes frome a few years ago. I definately recognize

"The vast majority of our imports come from outside the country."

which was really ""The vast majority of our imports come from overseas."

and

"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made."

and

"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."


The above are definately Quale, and there may be more. If I were you I would no longer trust the source as they are obviously willing to lie about who said what.. What else will they lie about?

PAX

WHAT? kerry steals material? he lies? AHHHHHHHHHHHHH



Seems hes pretty good at lieing






































i have 3 purple hearts DURR DURRRR

96Z24Colorado (The Other Matt) wrote:WHAT? kerry steals material? he lies? AHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Dude, you completely missed the point. Have your little brother read the post to you again and try again.


______________________________________________________________

ToBoGgAn wrote:we are gonna take it in the ass and like it, cause thats what america does.

Slo2pt2 (Projekt Unknown?) wrote:One my SON is ADHD N.O.S and Autistic Spectrum Disorder. I will nto medicate him he will battle throught this himself and learn to control it.

What do you all know, Bunch of berkinstockers, go back to the 70's where the world was as corrupt as you want it to be.


You Can Do The Robot With SB

as if it's not currupt now? wake up and smell the maple-nut crunch


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

I <3 corrupt politicians.

The world can never be corrupt enough. I wish the Government would put cameras in my house to make sure I study Bush's life 24/7.......... *sigh*, Stalin and Hitler had the right Governmental idea, why can't Bush?

Quote:

And yes rich people spend the most money, if you cut thier taxes you will get a higher amount for them to spend. No matter how selfish they are and how much useless crap they buy, when they spend money the lower classes make that money. That is basic fact. You would have noticed a more direct impact had he cut taxes for the lower classes because each person in to lower class would have a slight bit more money. Yet they wouldnt spend it as much. It was a very good idea and HAS worked

Well your not quite on track here, so let me explain...

I'm not criminalizing rich people or anything, but they're generally stingier - relative to their income - than are middle/lower class people. I mean, their not rich for no reason, and spending nearly all your money is no way to stay rich. This as such lowers the economic impact of giving more to the rich. Think about this one. Who spends a greater percentage of their income, rich people or poor people? Obviously the answer is - poor people. Really though, lower income people spend nearly to completely everything they make. They save almost nothing, or nothing at all. Don't forget that most all upper income people's incomes are tied directly to companies they may own, run, or have stock in. Now when poor people have more money, and so spend all this new wealth, the companies make considerably more money, and as such so do the rich. On the grand scale, this is really better for the economy all around.

Grossly inaccurate guess-timations(but you get the point)
Upper - $100,000,000 X 25% = $20,500,000 of Net Economic Impact
Middle - $100,000,000 X 70% = $70,000,000 of Net Economic Impact
Lower - $100,000,000 X 95% = $95,000,000 of Net Economic Impact

Of course those are fictitious figures, but the concept is sound. But consider that the reality is actually worse than those fictitious figures. You see, the vast majority of the tax breaks go to only 1% of the population. And even then, I was being EXTREMELY generous to say that those in the upper income bracket actually spend 25% of their income. Only the reckless ones do that, and the reckless ones don't stay rich for too long. Yes, I already know how the rich pay more in taxes anyways, and I assure you I'm playing the world's smallest violin for them(if you can only afford 7 Ferraris this year because of burden-some taxes, I feel for your pain). Either way, a tax cut benefiting mostly the poor, actually is more beneficial for the economy, and so really benefits EVERYONE more in the long run. In reality, the economy is EXACTLY like a pyramid. And on a pyramid, if you raise the bottom, you inadvertently raise the whole thing.

Rollinredcavi - You mentioned you liked Clinton, so did I. But I'll bring your attention to one of his most controversial policies - Affirmative Action. You see, while I HATE the concept of this policy(it IS racially discriminatory), fact remains that is was a boon for our economy(at least until Bush gave it the axe - hurting both the economy, and consumer confidence among minorities). I know you're probably thinking - WTF, is he crazy or just plain stupid? - but hear me out...

Fact 1 - Minorities are statistically poorer than caucasions(and I'm caucasion btw).

Fact 2 - Affirmative action, among other things, DID result in a lower unemployent rate for minoritites, without actually hurting unemployment rates for anyone.

Fact 3 - Among poorer people, more money earned is more money spent, directly improving the economy, creating more DEMAND for goods and services, creating even more jobs, upward spiral for the economy. Everyone benefits.





I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

In times like this Ill let my sig speak for itself....




Say it with me, "Its not what you know...It's what you can prove"

I don't belong to a particular party. I'm not republican or democrat, conservative or liberal. I try to look at the person and see what his/her views are and judge for myself if I think that particular person would be a good fit for the job. It doesn't always work out that way, but I try.

I didn't vote for Bush because I didn't like what I saw in 2000. I didn't vote for him in the second round because of what I saw during the first round of him in the Oval Office. I don't think he's retarded, but I certainly don't think he's the brightest apple on the tree. I also think its' a good thing he can't run for another term, but what's bad is that Cheney could and I'm hearing rumblings that Newt Gingrich might run in 2008.

Rollinredcavy, I mentioned this earlier in a different topic directed toward you, but the Senate DID NOT vote to go to war. The Senate has absolutely no power to go to war. The Senate voted to give the president the authority to go to war. That is a huge difference, and the bottom line is no one is responsible for our troops being overseas but the man sitting in the oval office.