Presidential Race

[jgirv17]

i dont see this as a topic, but it probably has been discussed before.

im not too afraid of getting yelled at for reposting a topic, though, since it seems no one ever visits this forum anyway.

whatever...

just wanted to know, if the election for president was today, would you vote for?


I think I'd go with Dean....but not really want him in office....hes better suited for a congress role....hes too liberal to be head of our entire country, but his ideas should be heard and listened to mainly....im just not sure if hed handle all of the power....


if not him, maybe id vote for gary coleman....hes running right?

[Shatter590]

it's sad really that the Democratic party cannot muster a recognizable candidate against Bush. There are about as many there as there were in Cali, yet none with a visible presence.

I would say either Dean or Clark. Lieberman may have experience, but he could never realistically get elected. And the others, well, they are just a big question mark.

[nards228]

The cynic in me says, "Fuck this system in which a Bush is President and a Terminator is governor," but the optimist in me says that change can only come through action. So I guess I'd vote for Dean.

Watch the Mock Con. event at W&L - we're almost always right. Bee-yotch.



Rennard

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by Shatter590
.
. Lieberman may have experience, but he could never realistically get elected.

i disagree......lieberman is moderate enough to actually draw votes from the opposite party, hes also one of the few democrats running that hasn't fallen into the socialist shit pit.....hell i'd vote for this guy, although i think the left is to stupid to Nominate him......

[jgirv17]

i agree...i wish the Dems could get someone to stand out.


its sad when Al Sharpton is normally the "stand out" at some of these debates.


imagine if he was pres...it would mark the downfall of America....but, on the bright side, it would be the most entertaining 8 years (yes, 8 years...hed be realected because by the second term people wouldnt care) of the history of America. he would say a lot of random things and make his fish face...itd be great...minus the whole "turning america into a 3rd world country" thing.

[xchrisxpootx]

yawn... that had to be the dumbest hypothetical situation i've ever heard...

bush is going to win... get over it

[popeckerwd]

You're right, Bush is going to win wheather you like it or not. 56% of the country supports him. I could never see Dean being president because he is to "Liberal" and has no idea what he is doing. The only thing Dean is good at is bashing Bush and everything Bush has done. Soon, and believe me I can't wait, Dean will have to explain himself yet with all the other Jackasses to the American people about what they would do instead of bush? How the hell are Americans supposed to support our soldiers dying for us in Iraq when some of our democrats presidential cannidates are telling the media that they will withdrawl all troops from Iraq. These democrats are just making citizens and soldiers of this country feel useless and non-existent in how they are trying to help out the world.

[open mind]

i'd vote for dean because i think he's the only one with the nads to really change the way the war an terror is being handled.

[atownplaya]

the fact of the matter is that although dean is the best, the only one with a remote chance is Clark. but i ( and every democrat for that matter) needs to come to terms with the fact that it's probablly a shoe-in for bush. arrghhh...

[jgirv17]

I agree. I don't forsee Bush losing this upcoming election. The best I can hope for is that his cabinet is strong.

[xnotedgex]

with all of the events that are sure to happen in the next year, saying that no one stands a chance against bush is not a very informed opinion...there will be hundreds of developments that will shape the election in the next year

is it likely that bush will be reelected...yes
is there a good chance he won't be...yes

it's too early to tell

[mwhpunk]

GWB IN 2004!!!!!!!!... he'd get my vote
on a side note, i HATE the f*ckin media... they are sooo democratic it makes me want to throw up on myself... GO BUSH!

[dank]

Bush supporters should be ashamed of themselves. do you see whats going on in the world? as soon as bush was elected the united states was booted out of offices in the UN. the guy is a nazi. his family has more ties with the bin ladins than most people are aware of. ever hear of THE CARLYLE GROUP? look it up. bush could single handedly destroy the world, he already F'd up texas pretty bad and has cut back 20 years of work on environmental policy. foreign relations? he's destroyed almost every foreign relation policy this country has had since WWII. our nation will fall with bush in charge, any republican for that matter. look up some statistics kids. since the reagan era citizens of this country have been getting poorer while the top 5% get richer. think about that while you and your parents work endless hours in a dead end job. the middle class carries this country and gets nothing in return. eventually we'll lose those jobs to cheap labor overseas. our pop culture has us blinded to the truth. we might be the richest country in the world and bask in glorious freedom, but we're killing ourselves and everyone else as a result.


oh yeah , gen. wesley clark will win the next election

[atownplaya]

dank more or less just said all that needs to be said. oh, and george w. bends over for his dad.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by dank
Bush supporters should be ashamed of themselves. do you see whats going on in the world? as soon as bush was elected the united states was booted out of offices in the UN. the guy is a nazi. his family has more ties with the bin ladins than most people are aware of. ever hear of THE CARLYLE GROUP? look it up. bush could single handedly destroy the world, he already F'd up texas pretty bad and has cut back 20 years of work on environmental policy. foreign relations? he's destroyed almost every foreign relation policy this country has had since WWII. our nation will fall with bush in charge, any republican for that matter. look up some statistics kids. since the reagan era citizens of this country have been getting poorer while the top 5% get richer. think about that while you and your parents work endless hours in a dead end job. the middle class carries this country and gets nothing in return. eventually we'll lose those jobs to cheap labor overseas. our pop culture has us blinded to the truth. we might be the richest country in the world and bask in glorious freedom, but we're killing ourselves and everyone else as a result.


oh yeah , gen. wesley clark will win the next election

1. bush is not a nazi

2. the bin Laden family is one of the most respected families in Saudi Arabia and have nothing to do with their son, an obvious black sheep. associating the crimes of the son with the rest of his family is ignorant.

3. it isn't bush's fault your parents work in a dead end job, its their's

4. The middle class got tax cuts, so yes, they did get something in return...

[atownplaya]

i don't care what you say, he's a still a fucking moron...

our country fell into the biggest recession in a long long time. We went from a trillion dollar surplus to the biggest debt in the history of the country. he attacked two countries, both of which are in complete shambles. and if you dare say things are well in iraq, i'll squeal cuz you haven't the slightest idea. he fucked up more international treaties than any human being ever. he withdrew from the world court of law and violated the Geneva conventions... he's made the situation in Israel a shit load worse, considering they're in the most viriolic and violent state in a while. he's the first person ever(!) to attack a sovereign country without the consent of the UN. who else would take a sense of global sadness and sympathy and in less than a year turn it into contemptment and hatred by nearly every single country in the world. although he hasn't necesarily done some of things mentioned by dank, that doesn't mean he's done any good; because he hasn't. he has essentialy failed at everything and has done absolutely NOTHING good for anybody.

oh, and while he owned the rangers he traded sammy sosa to chicago. fucking idiot.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by atownplaya
i don't care what you say, he's a still a fucking moron...

our country fell into the biggest recession in a long long time. We went from a trillion dollar surplus to the biggest debt in the history of the country. he attacked two countries, both of which are in complete shambles. and if you dare say things are well in iraq, i'll squeal cuz you haven't the slightest idea. he fucked up more international treaties than any human being ever. he withdrew from the world court of law and violated the Geneva conventions... he's made the situation in Israel a shit load worse, considering they're in the most viriolic and violent state in a while. he's the first person ever(!) to attack a sovereign country without the consent of the UN. who else would take a sense of global sadness and sympathy and in less than a year turn it into contemptment and hatred by nearly every single country in the world. although he hasn't necesarily done some of things mentioned by dank, that doesn't mean he's done any good; because he hasn't. he has essentialy failed at everything and has done absolutely NOTHING good for anybody.

oh, and while he owned the rangers he traded sammy sosa to chicago. fucking idiot.

1. we went into recession for a lot of reasons, including the 9/11 attacks. we are out of that recession and productivity and growth are the highest they've been since 1983. if you want to put all the blame on bush for the recession, then you have to give him all the credit for the recovery.

2. we could debate whether or not we should have gone to war in Iraq all day, but are you seriously gonna say we shouldn't have gone into afgahnistan?

3. he has not fucked up more treaties than anyone ever...don't just throw statements out there that have no basis in fact.

4. HE made the situation in Israel a shit load worse? are you kidding me? his road map for peace was the only thing positive to happen to the Israeli-Palestinian confilict in years...you need to check your facts.

5. actually, he is not the "first person ever" to attack a country with out UN approval...if you've ever cracked a history book you'd know that the UN hasn't been around forever....not to mention that the UN passes resolutions that they do not uphold, and therefor has become a sham of a political body.

6. he hasn't done anything good? you're a moron. he hasnt' done anything good for anybody? what about the troops he visited on thanksgiving? that wasn't good for the troops?

[dank]

I dont know if you're supporting Bush or just trying to be the smarted dude in the world. Are you taking his side or just blessing us all with your naive enlightenment?

[kidinthecorner]

Originally posted by yeat182
1. we went into recession for a lot of reasons, including the 9/11 attacks. we are out of that recession and productivity and growth are the highest they've been since 1983. if you want to put all the blame on bush for the recession, then you have to give him all the credit for the recovery.

2. we could debate whether or not we should have gone to war in Iraq all day, but are you seriously gonna say we shouldn't have gone into afgahnistan?

3. he has not fucked up more treaties than anyone ever...don't just throw statements out there that have no basis in fact.

4. HE made the situation in Israel a shit load worse? are you kidding me? his road map for peace was the only thing positive to happen to the Israeli-Palestinian confilict in years...you need to check your facts.

5. actually, he is not the "first person ever" to attack a country with out UN approval...if you've ever cracked a history book you'd know that the UN hasn't been around forever....not to mention that the UN passes resolutions that they do not uphold, and therefor has become a sham of a political body.

6. he hasn't done anything good? you're a moron. he hasnt' done anything good for anybody? what about the troops he visited on thanksgiving? that wasn't good for the troops?

1. He's right, the recession doesn't totally fall on his shoulders. It hit early and before he could really affect the economy enough to turn it around (for the worse). It is rebounding tho, and that has been the work of him and his administration.

5. Definately right there. The UN has only been around since WWII if I'm right, its late.. and they don't really do much. The only reason its held up so long is because it hasnt had its fair share of tough tests.

6. To say he's done nothing good is just wrong. Even the smallest things can help.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by dank
I dont know if you're supporting Bush or just trying to be the smarted dude in the world. Are you taking his side or just blessing us all with your naive enlightenment?

"smarted" dude? obviously your not trying to impress us with your enlightenment.....

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by dank


oh yeah , gen. wesley clark will win the next election

hes not even going to get the nomination...Dean just basically locked up the loss....!


Gore Says Dean Is 'the Only Candidate Who Has Been Able to Inspire'

NewsMax.com Wires

Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2003

NEW YORK – Former Vice President Al Gore endorsed Howard Dean for the Democrat presidential nomination Tuesday, adding momentum and political prestige to Dean's front-running campaign.
Gore said Dean "really is the only candidate who has been able to inspire at the grass-roots level all over the country." He said the former Vermont governor also was the only Democrat candidate who made the correct judgment about the Iraq war.

"Our country has been weakened in its ability to fight the war against terror because of the catastrophic mistake the Bush administration made in taking us into war in Iraq," Gore said.

Dean said it was an honor and a privilege to receive Gore's endorsement.

Gore's political impact was immediately evident at the event when Roy Neel, a longtime operative, pledged to join Dean's campaign, bringing his network of Gore supporters with him.

While praising the party's other presidential candidates, Gore said Democrats should unite behind Dean or at least stop attacking him.

"We don't have the luxury of fighting among ourselves to the point where we seriously damage our ability to win on behalf of the American people," Gore said just hours before the canidates debated in New Hampshire.

Five weeks before Iowa's kickoff caucuses, Gore and Dean were flying to Cedar Rapids, Iowa, where Dean is locked in a tight race with Rep. Dick Gephardt in the Jan. 19 Democrat caucuses.


The approval of Bill Clinton's No. 2 bolsters Dean's case that he can carry the party's mantle in November and represents more than an Internet-driven outsider relying on the support of largely white, upscale voters.

Dean hopes the coveted endorsement eases concerns among party leaders about his lack of foreign policy experience, testy temperament, policy flip-flops, campaign miscues and edgy anti-war, anti-establishment message.

"What this says is that all these Washington insiders who have been gnashing their teeth, wringing their hands and clinging to their cocktail cups can relax now. Dean's been knighted by the ultimate insider," said Democrat consultant Dean Strother. "It's game, set and match. It's over."

Other Democrats offered more cautious appraisals, but the overwhelming consensus was that Dean's coup makes him the overwhelming favorite to claim the nomination. Even advisers to Dean's rivals conceded they were stunned and disheartened by the news.

Lieberman Blindsided

"I was caught completely off-guard," Sen. Joe Lieberman, Gore's running mate in 2000 and a hopeful for the nomination, said Tuesday on NBC's "Today" show. That many of Gore's positions are opposite to those of Dean made the decision a surprise to him, Lieberman said.

"Al Gore has endorsed someone here who has taken positions diametrically opposite" of the former vice president, Lieberman said. "What really bothers me is that Al is supporting a candidate who is so fundamentally opposed to the basic transformation that Bill Clinton brought to this party in 1992," moving it to a more middle-of-the-road stance on economic policy and other areas, he said.

Asked on "Today" whether he felt betrayed by the former vice president, Lieberman said, "I'm not going to talk about Al Gore's sense of loyalty this morning."

Jenny Backus, a Democrat strategist from Washington, said Gore would help Dean gain access to "some key constituencies, African-Americans and women and organized labor, and in Iowa."

But while Dean leads in polls in New Hampshire and Iowa, the race has not taken shape beyond the initial voting states, and Gore's endorsement will not erase every doubt about the former Vermont governor. Analysts noted that Gore's uneven performance in 2000 alienated many party leaders, thus his endorsement has limited appeal, and they predicted an anti-Dean movement will eventually form behind one of his eight rivals.

Ooh, Mohammed Islam Is Miffed

Some rank-and-file Democrats were stung by Gore's decision.

"It isn't fair that he turned his back on Lieberman," said Mohammed Islam, a New York taxi driver and longtime Democrat voter. "If he was good enough for him in 2000, why not now?"

In an unusual response, Democrat candidate Wesley Clark issued a statement touting the number of former Gore staffers working on his campaign.

In 1998, Dean considered challenging Gore for the Democrat nomination in 2000 but backed away amid pressure from the vice president's office, and opposition in Vermont. He quietly lobbied to be mentioned as a vice presidential candidate, but did not make Gore's short list.

The pair have differed on many key issues, such as gun control. While Gore fought the National Rifle Association, Dean was embraced by the lobby.

Gore is pre-eminent among the party's establishment, second only to former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. Officials close to both Clintons said Monday that they would not endorse in the primary race.

Gore announced Dec. 15, 2002, that he would not make another run for the White House, saying a rematch with Bush would force him to revisit the recount ordeal of 2000

[yeat182]

Originally posted by dank
I dont know if you're supporting Bush or just trying to be the smarted dude in the world. Are you taking his side or just blessing us all with your naive enlightenment?

if you're going to critisize someone, then you should at least get the facts straight. making fun of bush because fat mike tells you to is lame...

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by yeat182
if you're going to critisize someone, then you should at least get the facts straight. making fun of bush because fat mike tells you to is lame...

You should have pointed out the "smarted" dude comment....i bet fatty taught him that one....

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Justin_stacy
You should have pointed out the "smarted" dude comment....i bet fatty taught him that one....

the suffix "-est" is a known tool of right wing propaganists, so i'm not surprised he avoided it.

[Justin_stacy]

Originally posted by yeat182
the suffix "-est" is a known tool of right wing propaganists, so i'm not surprised he avoided it.

*hangs his head in laughter*

[jgirv17]

I found this kind of interesting....and somewhat hard to believe....but still a good read.


http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3fs8i/air/Elections.htm

[dank]

you guys are pretty funny with my typing error. i actually laughed, you got me there. but honestly, the fat mike stuff does not pertain to me. i know he doesn't back the bush program but thats all. i don't listen to musicians' propoganda because most of them dont know much other than..."i'm a punk so i have to hate authority". the dude from Boy Sets Fire is intelligent, but other than him I dont really know what my favorite artists are saying about the man i hate.


i thought it was cute that you and your boyfriend could pick on me.

[dank]

But seriously, why do you think that Dean is such a lock up for the Democratic nomination? He would be an incredible candidate but i dont think he could swing any moderately conservative votes. With Clark's military experience he would be the best person to handle the mess in Iraq and most likely to pick up some extra votes.



i guess

[xnotedgex]

Originally posted by yeat182
if you're going to critisize someone, then you should at least get the facts straight. making fun of bush because fat mike tells you to is lame...

god, you say this every time..."you believe what fat mike tells you"...that's like me saying you believe what bill o'reilly tells you or any other person who expresses right wing opinions...but i guess to prove your superiority to yourself, you have to think those who diasagree with you don't have the ability to have their own beliefs

ass

[yeat182]

Originally posted by xnotedgex
god, you say this every time..."you believe what fat mike tells you"...that's like me saying you believe what bill o'reilly tells you or any other person who expresses right wing opinions...but i guess to prove your superiority to yourself, you have to think those who diasagree with you don't have the ability to have their own beliefs

ass

attacking bush personally and with no legitimate reason is stupid, and is something fat mike practices regularly, if you have legitimate reasons, as you often do, then i have no problem, its just the simple brainwashed "punk rock" attitude to hate bush because its trendy, that i have a problem with.

[xnotedgex]

Originally posted by yeat182
attacking bush personally and with no legitimate reason is stupid, and is something fat mike practices regularly, if you have legitimate reasons, as you often do, then i have no problem, its just the simple brainwashed "punk rock" attitude to hate bush because its trendy, that i have a problem with.

ok, i see your point

[atownplaya]

attacking bush personally and with no legitimate reason is stupid, and is something fat mike practices regularly, if you have legitimate reasons, as you often do, then i have no problem, its just the simple brainwashed "punk rock" attitude to hate bush because its trendy, that i have a problem with.

i don't hate bush because "it's trendy"- i hate him because he's a fucking idiot who's done absolutely nothing good for anybody. oh yea, i forgot he's a saint because "he visited troops in Iraq on Thanksgiving" which automatically overwrites every bad thing he's ever done... forgive my stupidity. Go read ann coulter.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by atownplaya
i don't hate bush because "it's trendy"- i hate him because he's a fucking idiot who's done absolutely nothing good for anybody.

that is an asinine statement...

[dank]

so what is so good about bush if these supposed evils are false? yeat182, i beg your reply

[slicepaprwrists]

Originally posted by mwhpunk
GWB IN 2004!!!!!!!!... he'd get my vote
on a side note, i HATE the f*ckin media... they are sooo democratic it makes me want to throw up on myself... GO BUSH!



What??? The media is controlled mostly by conservatives. Turn on CNN or Fox "News" (notice the quotes around news), and you'll find stories about how we are liberating Iraq, and how great it is that we captured Saddam. When do you ever hear about how approximately 9,000 Iraqi citizens have been killed in the war with Iraq compared to the 2,700 killed on Sept. 11? Or when do you hear about the US Patriot Act and how it is slowly stealing away our freedoms. Do you ever hear about Bush's connections with the Bin Laden family, or how he is good buddies with the Saudi royal family, the leaders of a country who rivals the taliban in suppression of human rights??? No...I didn't think so.

Get your facts straight before you rant

[yeat182]

Originally posted by slicepaprwrists
What??? The media is controlled mostly by conservatives. Turn on CNN or Fox "News" (notice the quotes around news), and you'll find stories about how we are liberating Iraq, and how great it is that we captured Saddam.

We did liberate Iraq, and it is great that we captured Saddam

When do you ever hear about how approximately 9,000 Iraqi citizens have been killed in the war with Iraq compared to the 2,700 killed on Sept. 11?

first the exact numbers are extremely debateable, and secondly, they mention every day those that are killed in attacks, nearly all of the killed BY TERRORISTS, not american soldiers.


Or when do you hear about the US Patriot Act and how it is slowly stealing away our freedoms.

what freedoms have YOU lost? what can't you do now that you could do prior to 9/11?


Do you ever hear about Bush's connections with the Bin Laden family,

the bin Laden family are not Terrorists, Osama is. He was virtually disowned by his family well before he became the monster he is today, and in fact, much of the bin Laden family lived here in the US. they are one of the most respected familys in Saudi Arabia.

or how he is good buddies with the Saudi royal family, the leaders of a country who rivals the taliban in suppression of human rights??? No...I didn't think so.

he's "good buddies"...? like he's good buddies with Cretien? or Tony Blair? it is a political relationship...

Get your facts straight before you rant

[Justin_stacy]

wonderfully done yeats....

[xnotedgex]

changing topics ever so slightly, did anyone see diane sawyer's interview with bush last night, how he refused to answer the question about wmd's...what a schmuck

[slicepaprwrists]

Originally posted by yeat182
what freedoms have YOU lost? what can't you do now that you could do prior to 9/11?

Me? Personally? None, but what about those of middle eastern descent that were thrown into jail without a trial, shortly after 9/11 only because of the fact that they were Arab/Iraqi/ect? Under the US Patriot Act this did not only happen, but it was legal.

Originally posted by yeat182
the bin Laden family are not Terrorists, Osama is. He was virtually disowned by his family well before he became the monster he is today, and in fact, much of the bin Laden family lived here in the US. they are one of the most respected familys in Saudi Arabia.

Hmm, that must explain the video footage that was dated 6 months before 9/11, that showed some of the "good" bin ladens that bush sr. did business with, including Osama's mother, a sister, and 2 brothers, with Osama, at his son's wedding. Oh, and the New Yorker report about how Osama's family has not cut ties with him and continues to fund him must not be true also.

Originally posted by yeat182
"he's "good buddies"...? like he's good buddies with Cretien? or Tony Blair? it is a political relationship...

Political relationship, no. Business? Yes.
Oh, and what about Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia donating $1 million to the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum, and a $1 million to Barbra Bush's Literacy Program. What about in the fall of 2000 when Prince Bandar took Bush Sr. on a phesant hunting trip to England. Oh, and two nights after 9/11, Bush and Bandar drank and smoked cigars on the Truman Balcony of the White House to try to unwind from the days before.

[open mind]

bush has infriged on my rights by classifying millions of documents that have no buisness being classified like the purity of water, safety ratings on auto equipment and airliners, where a pipeline is going to be put, the list goes on and on.
it's now legal to take documents that would make a company look bad,say they involve national security and have them classifed so they are not allowed in a court of law.
by doing this he's taken away the ability of the public to make an informed decision on everyday things i would like to know.
it's catering to buisness interests and taking away power from the people in the name of "national security".
bush and his administration have almost no good points when it comes to diplomacy, unless you count quoting al capone (a fucking thug)a good way to talk to the rest of the world,personaly i don't think that's exactly the image that needs to be portrayed to the rest of the world.
shady buisness dealings and government contracts to close friends at the very least give the appearence of profiting from death and destruction and with bush and co. mostly saying no comment (except for halliburton) about these things things aren't being helped.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by dank
Bush supporters should be ashamed of themselves. do you see whats going on in the world? as soon as bush was elected the united states was booted out of offices in the UN.

first, we give the most money to the UN, so we aren't booted out of it. secondly, the UN is a joke and it can't really do anything right, so not being a part of it isn't really a big deal.


the guy is a nazi. his family has more ties with the bin ladins than most people are aware of.

actually, bush isn't a nazi. (name calling...very mature) and bush has some ties with the bin Laden family, but the bin Laden family, aren't Terrorists...

bush could single handedly destroy the world,

no one can single handedly destroy the world, and even if it were possible, bush isnt/wouldn't.

foreign relations? he's destroyed almost every foreign relation policy this country has had since WWII.

that isn't even remotley true. just because the French and Germans make a huge fuss doesn't mean every nation in the world hates us.


our nation will fall with bush in charge, any republican for that matter.

you need to relax. this is unfounded pessimism with no basis in reality.

look up some statistics kids. since the reagan era citizens of this country have been getting poorer while the top 5% get richer. think about that while you and your parents work endless hours in a dead end job. the middle class carries this country and gets nothing in return.

it isn't the governments responsibility to give anyone a job, nor is it their responsibility to make sure you don't have a dead end job. how many people are free to run their own small business? to work for themselves?

eventually we'll lose those jobs to cheap labor overseas. our pop culture has us blinded to the truth.

that isn't bush's fault. that is the fault of foreign governments that don't pass legislation protecting their workers, and they don't enact child labor laws.

we might be the richest country in the world and bask in glorious freedom, but we're killing ourselves and everyone else as a result.

no, life isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

[open mind]

bushes foreign policy has alienated people around the world not just france and germany look at the differences in opinions of america throughout the globe and you will see a big drop in approval by citizens it's dropped everywhere,just because we have the governments of these foreign countries backing us doesn't change the fact that everywhere people are liking america less and less
auctually it is the governments job to get people jobs in fact most canidates run with getting jobs for the people as a part of their platform.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by open mind
[B]bushes foreign policy has alienated people around the world not just france and germany look at the differences in opinions of america throughout the globe and you will see a big drop in approval by citizens it's dropped everywhere,just because we have the governments of these foreign countries backing us doesn't change the fact that everywhere people are liking america less and less


the population of other countires, yes have been alienated, but as for the governments of other countries, most of them are still friendly towards us.

actually it is the governments job to get people jobs in fact most canidates run with getting jobs for the people as a part of their platform.

it isn't the responsiblility of the government, no where in the contitution does it say the government will provide every citizen with a job. canidates run on that platform because they know it will win them votes.

[slicepaprwrists]

Originally posted by cal1082
When did this happen and where, i would figure someone would point out that people were being put into jail for no reason.

Immediately after September 11, Muslim and Arab Americans were rounded up and held without charges, trials or representation by lawyers. Somewhere between 1000 and 2000 people were arrested and many were deported due to minor visa violations.

taken from: http://www.ncrr-la.org/news/10_1_03/2.html

[slicepaprwrists]

Oh yea, on another note I read a post about Halliburton (big ol' oil company that dick Cheney used to be a top executive for) and it made me think of something. I heard that they were setting up shop over in Iraq to supposeably help them in the rebuilding process. I'm not sure if it's true or not, has any one heard about it, and if it is true, doesn’t it seem kind of...fishy? I mean jeeze; I would never think that a US corporation would try to exploit another country for its oil or anything...

[yeat182]

Originally posted by slicepaprwrists
Immediately after September 11, Muslim and Arab Americans were rounded up and held without charges, trials or representation by lawyers. Somewhere between 1000 and 2000 people were arrested and many were deported due to minor visa violations.

taken from: http://www.ncrr-la.org/news/10_1_03/2.html

1. a violation is a violation and they should be deported

2. of those 1000-2000 people 90% understood why they were rounded up, cooperated fully, and were released with out incident.

3. again, how has the Patriot Act effect YOUR rights?

[yeat182]

Originally posted by slicepaprwrists
Oh yea, on another note I read a post about Halliburton (big ol' oil company that dick Cheney used to be a top executive for) and it made me think of something. I heard that they were setting up shop over in Iraq to supposeably help them in the rebuilding process. I'm not sure if it's true or not, has any one heard about it, and if it is true, doesn’t it seem kind of...fishy? I mean jeeze; I would never think that a US corporation would try to exploit another country for its oil or anything...

they are helping in the rebuilding of Iraq, for the simply reason that they are the only company that can do the job, they are the biggest company of that type in the world and the only one that could handle the work. And they have nothing to do with the export of the oil, the sale of which goes to the Iraqi's, only with the rebuilding of the equiptement saddam destroyed.

They did however, over charge the US Army $61 million dollars in gasoline sales, which the Bush administration said they will be forced to re-imburse. (if the conspiracy theories were really true, would they first knowingly overcharge the government and then have their so called 'buddies' in the administration force them to pay it all back?)

[slicepaprwrists]

Originally posted by yeat182
they are helping in the rebuilding of Iraq, for the simply reason that they are the only company that can do the job, they are the biggest company of that type in the world and the only one that could handle the work. And they have nothing to do with the export of the oil, the sale of which goes to the Iraqi's, only with the rebuilding of the equiptement saddam destroyed.

They did however, over charge the US Army $61 million dollars in gasoline sales, which the Bush administration said they will be forced to re-imburse. (if the conspiracy theories were really true, would they first knowingly overcharge the government and then have their so called 'buddies' in the administration force them to pay it all back?)




Ahhh, i gotcha. I hadn't heard to much about it, just one some website or somethin. I didnt hear about that part about over-charging the army...interesting.

[open mind]

Originally posted by yeat182
the population of other countires, yes have been alienated, but as for the governments of other countries, most of them are still friendly towards us.

yeah go along to get along.

it isn't the responsiblility of the government, no where in the contitution does it say the government will provide every citizen with a job. canidates run on that platform because they know it will win them votes.

okay not the governments job but the job of the people who are in charge of running government.

[open mind]

Originally posted by open mind
bush has infriged on my rights by classifying millions of documents that have no buisness being classified like the purity of water, safety ratings on auto equipment and airliners, where a pipeline is going to be put, the list goes on and on.
it's now legal to take documents that would make a company look bad,say they involve national security and have them classifed so they are not allowed in a court of law.
by doing this he's taken away the ability of the public to make an informed decision on everyday things i would like to know.
it's catering to buisness interests and taking away power from the people in the name of "national security".
bush and his administration have almost no good points when it comes to diplomacy, unless you count quoting al capone (a fucking thug)a good way to talk to the rest of the world,personaly i don't think that's exactly the image that needs to be portrayed to the rest of the world.
shady buisness dealings and government contracts to close friends at the very least give the appearence of profiting from death and destruction and with bush and co. mostly saying no comment (except for halliburton) about these things things aren't being helped.

[theseidel]

back to the upcoming election, it's not a sure win for bush. bush sr. had the highest approval rating of any president after the first gulf war. he then lost to clinton in '92.

[jgirv17]

back to the upcoming election, it's not a sure win for bush. bush sr. had the highest approval rating of any president after the first gulf war. he then lost to clinton in '92.


The Democrats weren't as split over Clinton as they are with Dean, Clark, Kerry, Kucinich, Sharpton, Braun, Edwards, Lieberman, and Gephardt.

[Justin_stacy]

The Democrats weren't as split over Clinton as they are with Dean, Clark, Kerry, Kucinich, Sharpton, Braun, Edwards, Lieberman, and Gephardt.

you might also add the Republicans were split at that time......and much like the liberals bitch about nader losing them the race in 00', Republican can also bitch that Perot lost them the race in 92', because with out him, clinton would have never won....

[jgirv17]

you might also add the Republicans were split at that time......and much like the liberals bitch about nader losing them the race in 00', Republican can also bitch that Perot lost them the race in 92', because with out him, clinton would have never won....

Very good point.

The only way Bush will lose is if a Moderate Democrat who has some support of the war is nominated. This way he will challenge Bush in popularity on stances that a Liberal may not Problem is, if such a candidate is nominated (such as Lieberman) why wouldn't the average voter just vote for Bush, since they are essentially the same candidate (as far as an average voter would see)?

That wasn't written out as well as I'd hoped, but I think you will understand what I mean. Pretty much, it seems like Bush has a high chance of winning reelection. Although, a lot can happen in nearly a year's worth of time.