Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / [LOCKED] US Citizens-Who are you going to vote for? Busch or Kerry

Author
Message
Ron Erickson
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Dec 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 04:25
Link
Quote: ""bush has proved many times that he is a liar (about big isues, like WMD).""


um... Kerry also saw the same evidence. He was also for going to war with Iraq because of that SAME evidence.

I thought Kerry was made to look very foolish. He did a bit better toward the end, but I think Bush won too many early rounds in the fight. A lot of Kerry's arguments just did not make sense. He complained that our troops are not armed well enough, but he also complained about the cost of the war. In the same breath he mentioned how much more money he wanted to spend over here (US) on things such as medicare, homeland security, etc.... The only thing that he mentioned about additional funding was taking back tax cuts for the rich. While that should be done, it won't make a dent in what he is promising.

I think this bout goes to Bush. I don't care for the guy, but I think he got the better of Kerry last night.

EZrotate!
Tokamak Physics Wrapper!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
David T
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 04:59
Link
Quote: "Of course, even after that resolution was made and Saddam failed to disarm by the deadline, the UN did nothing.

They're worse than useless."


I know I said I'd stop posting inh ere, but I had to point this out. Saddam didn't have any WMDs to disarm ^_^

Get 15 new commands, all the date / time commands left out of DBPro for free!
DOWNLOAD PLUGINS HERE: http://www.davidtattersall.me.uk/ and select "DarkBasic"
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 05:01
Link
yeah, but he sure acted like he did...

"We make the worst games in the universe."

Back to top
Profile PM Email
David T
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 05:05
Link
If we invaded because it looked like he had WMDs... then I hate to see future wars

Get 15 new commands, all the date / time commands left out of DBPro for free!
DOWNLOAD PLUGINS HERE: http://www.davidtattersall.me.uk/ and select "DarkBasic"
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ron Erickson
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Dec 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 05:09
Link
Quote: "I know I said I'd stop posting inh ere, but I had to point this out. Saddam didn't have any WMDs to disarm ^_^"


Um... But this is about Kerry vs. Bush. They BOTH believed Saddam had WMD. They both agreed that force/war was needed to disarm him.

EZrotate!
Tokamak Physics Wrapper!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 05:10 Edited at: 2nd Oct 2004 05:10
Link
that's not what i was saying...

it's more like this...(what i was saying)

CIA:"saddam, we have reason to believe you have WMD...is this true?"
saddam:"..."
CIA:"WELL?!?!?"
saddam:"......."

Note: i know this actual conversation did not take place


BTW posted same time as wolf

"We make the worst games in the universe."

Back to top
Profile PM Email
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 05:17 Edited at: 2nd Oct 2004 05:24
Link
>> If I was an 18-25 year old man or the parents of one
>> and I was concerned about the draft, I'd be running
>> as fast as I could to the Bush camp."
>
> The reason nobody jumped all over it is because expanding
> the size of the army and special forces doesn't automatically
> mean he'll use a draft. I don't know why you think one must
> lead to the other.

True, but it does increase the probability of it happening. If you're undecided, it can make a big difference. When one person says there will be no draft and the other guy says I need two divisions of volunteers AND he says that he wants to bring troops back (meaning you will not have a numerical superiority overseas AND the guy has a voting record of not supporting the military), how do you think it will affect your vote?

Kerry may or may not have said he was against the draft before the debate. I can only base things on what I heard at the debate. Of all the things that he repeated, no draft was not one of them.

If anything, he sounded more war-hawkish than Bush. He repeatedly said he wanted to kill terrorists rather than bring them to justice. He mentioned his military service at least three times. The way he talked about those two extra divisions, he want to expand the United State's military presense to other parts of the world (such as North/South Korea.) I'll stand by my perception that any undecided draft age voter will probably be more than a little disturbed.
--
TAZ

Side note: My son and one of my step sons also watched the debate and they latched on to the same thing. So, I'm not trying to push an agenda as much as report what we saw and felt.

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 05:41
Link
Well, this is the guy who shot himself twice for war medals ...

I haven't seen the debate myself. I read a report that said most viewers thought Kerry 'won', but it was on a very liberal news site, and the general opinion here seems to be that (for better or for worse) Kerry didn't present himself very well.

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 05:49
Link
Kerry contradicted himself

Bush repeated himself

That was the debate.


Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 06:12
Link
@Mouse

I can see nothing there about them agreeing to reach a settlement by September.

"Of course, even after that resolution was made and Saddam failed to disarm by the deadline, the UN did nothing."

If the UN did nothing then what exactly do you call the UN inspections then? The UN inspectors were there to verify that he had disarmed.

UN Resolution 1441, Passed 8 November 2002
Quote: "
Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
"


Bush didn't allow them to complete their job. If you think that Iraq didn't disarm by the deadline then, please, cite a deadline. I'm having trouble finding any.

Oh, and Hans Blix seems to disagree with you about them disarming:

Quote: "
Blix stresses that he never trusted Hussein and that inspectors were often misled and stonewalled, but he also points out that they never found any evidence of weapons of mass destruction either.
"


Quote: " "Containment had worked," he writes. "It has also become clear that national intelligence organizations and government hawks, but not the inspectors, had been wrong in their assessments.""


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375423028/002-1015872-6714449

"They're worse than useless."

Tell that to the people in Kosovo.

@Everyone

It appears that at least Powell has some sense of responsibilty:

Quote: "
Powell Regrets Iraq Weapons Claim for War
"


Quote: "
He added, "As we've gone back and looked through the intelligence, there are indications that we had bad sourcing that we should have caught. For that I am disappointed and regret that that information was not correct."
"


Also of interest:
Quote: "
A Senate Intelligence Committee's report on prewar intelligence about Iraq found that much of the information provided or cleared by the CIA (news - web sites) for inclusion in Powell's speech to the United Nations "was overstated, misleading or incorrect."
"


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=3&u=/ap/20041001/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/powell_iraq

I'll be hunting down that Senate Intelligence Committe's report and posting my relevant findings here. This should be interesting.

I also found this little tidbit from Osama. Apparently on February 11, 2003, Bin Laden called for Muslims in Iraq to resist the U.S. and Saddam.

Quote: "
February 12, 2003

* An audio tape attributed to Osama bin Laden is released by al-Jazeera television. It recounts the battle of Tora Bora and urges Muslims to fight the United States and to overthrow the Iraq regime of Saddam Hussein.
* February 13, 2003
"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_disarmament_crisis_timeline_2001-2003

From the transcript of the audio tape:
Quote: "
This means fighting should be for the sake of the one God.

It should not be for championing ethnic groups, or for championing the non-Islamic regimes in all Arab countries, including Iraq.
"


Quote: "
We also point out that whoever supported the United States, including the hypocrites of Iraq or the rulers of Arab countries,...
"


Quote: "
Regardless of the removal or the survival of the socialist party or Saddam, Muslims in general and the Iraqis in particular must brace themselves for jihad against this unjust campaign and acquire ammunition and weapons.
"


Quote: "
Fighting in support of the non-Islamic banners is forbidden.
"


Allaince of convience?
Quote: "
Under these circumstances, there will be no harm if the interests of Muslims converge with the interests of the socialists in the fight against the crusaders, despite our belief in the infidelity of socialists.

The jurisdiction of the socialists and those rulers has fallen a long time ago.

Socialists are infidels wherever they are, whether they are in Baghdad or Aden.
"


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2751019.stm

It's becoming quite clear that Osama really didn't like Saddam. In this tape he calls him an infidel and his survival irrelevant. Though he does say that a temporary allaince of convience between forces isn't exactly forbidden either.

It gets rather difficult to believe given evidence like this that Iraq and Al Qaeda were connected in any meanful way.

@Mouse

"Well, this is the guy who shot himself twice for war medals"

Evidence?

"I haven't seen the debate myself. I read a report that said most viewers thought Kerry 'won', but it was on a very liberal news site, and the general opinion here seems to be that (for better or for worse) Kerry didn't present himself very well."

Quote: "
Kerry Seen As Debate Winner Around World
"


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&ncid=535&e=7&u=/ap/20041001/ap_on_el_pr/debate_world_view

@zircher

"True, but it does increase the probability of it happening."

How? The pentagon has repeatedly stated they are against the draft. There is just no real need for it.

Quote: "
Pentagon dismisses rumors of a new draft
"


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6134043

"If anything, he sounded more war-hawkish than Bush."

On this I agree with you. I think the perception among the Democrats is that if he doesn't seem hawkish Bush would paint him as weak on the war on terror. He needs to project a strong aggressive image or they'll smear him as some liberal pansy.

"So, I'm not trying to push an agenda as much as report what we saw and felt."

I understand. I have not intented to accuse you of such. I'm just being my normal argumentive self.
Back to top
Profile PM
DrakeX
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location:
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 06:57
Link
mouse - jimmy pretty much summed up the debate right there. i personally don't think either candidate "won", because neither showed me that much.

for those who were listening pretty closely, you'll see that kerry would like to "turb" some things, and that bush doesn't want to send "mexed missages".

yeah, i know, pointless. but what am i supposed to do with the debate? i can't vote, and being 17 and having no political voice, i have some other things to worry about, like my personal life, before i'm dropped into the big wide world, where politics are everything. better live out my youth while i have it.

and just another point - i totally agree with the point that it was not bush's fault that he went to war with iraq. i think most presidents would have done the same thing if they were presented with evidence like that. why do i agree with this standpoint? because there are six billion people in the world, and people interacting with others and doing things every day, and it doesn't make ANY kind of sense to blame a few people for the world's problems. catching osama will not end terrorism; catching saddam will not end militaristic regimes in all countries; and voting in a different figurehead president will not automatically make the world a better place. there are just too many variables.

i still love you, judas
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 07:37
Link
@DrakeX

"i totally agree with the point that it was not bush's fault that he went to war with iraq."

I take it you didn't read my posts then about how they falsified information for the Iraq war? I documented it pretty throughly.

"i think most presidents would have done the same thing if they were presented with evidence like that."

Fortunately, not every president is surrounded by Neo-con war hawks who have wanted to invade Iraq since 1998. But I think I see what you are saying. Bush is a hapless idiot with no critical thinking skills who trusted a bunch of advisors who were all members of the same pro-war policital idealogy(neo-con) to be objective. Looking at it from that light, yes, I can certainly see how most presidents would have gone to war.

"why do i agree with this standpoint? because there are six billion people in the world, and people interacting with others and doing things every day, and it doesn't make ANY kind of sense to blame a few people for the world's problems."

Unless of course, those problem's are directly attributable to the actions that those few people take. You make it sound like since there are a bunch of people doing various things no one can be held accountable to anything. That makes no sense whatsoever.

No one MADE Bush go to war. He choose to himself. The responsiblity for the Iraq War lies squarely on his shoulders and the shoulders of his neo-con advisors.

"catching osama will not end terrorism; catching saddam will not end militaristic regimes in all countries; and voting in a different figurehead president will not automatically make the world a better place. there are just too many variables."

Nobody is suggesting that catching Osama will end all terrorism. Only that it will elimate one of the cheif master-minds behind it.

Same goes for Saddam.

I'll disagree on the last point though. Bush and his advisors set the policy. They are the reason we are in the Iraq war. Not millions of other people who have no other control over the nation as you seem to suggest. There are not "too many variables". There are in fact just a handful and they live in the WhiteHouse.

I don't know if voting in Kerry will make the world a better place. But I do know that we can not afford another four years of Bush and his neo-con cronies. They are balantly incompetent and have shown a reckless disregard for the truth. To me, it's a choice between a known screw-up and an unknown. Personally, I'll cast my lot in with the unknown. The worst that could happen is that he is as bad as the screw-up. In that case, I really haven't lost anything. In the best case, he is infinitly better than the screw-up.

Kerry would have to really try to f`up as bad as Bush has.
Back to top
Profile PM
Peter H
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Feb 2004
Location: Witness Protection Program
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 08:29 Edited at: 2nd Oct 2004 08:32
Link
Quote: "Fortunately, not every president is surrounded by Neo-con war hawks who have wanted to invade Iraq since 1998. But I think I see what you are saying. Bush is a hapless idiot with no critical thinking skills who trusted a bunch of advisors who were all members of the same pro-war policital idealogy(neo-con) to be objective. Looking at it from that light, yes, I can certainly see how most presidents would have gone to war.
"

uummmm...YAAAA What kind of president wouldn't trust his "advisors" ??!?!?!?!?!?!?

there needs to be a strong trust between a president and his "advisors" or it will take years to decide anything(because he has to go and make sure that what they just said is true)

and sence those people violated the "trust"(And made a mess) they are now fired...

and anyway...remember something??? KERRY AGREED WITH DECLARING WAR ON IRAQ

Quote: "Kerry would have to really try to f`up as bad as Bush has. "

that would be your opinion. not a fact.

"We make the worst games in the universe."

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 09:11
Link
@Peter_H

"uummmm...YAAAA What kind of president wouldn't trust his "advisors" ??!?!?!?!?!?!?"

Abe Lincoln to name one.

"there needs to be a strong trust between a president and his "advisors" or it will take years to decide anything(because he has to go and make sure that what they just said is true)"

This is false. Go read up on Abe Lincoln one of the greatest presidents in our history. Besides, what I'm advocating is not that he disbelieve everything they say, but to turn a skeptical eye to claims that line up so perfectly with their agenda(notice how I mentioned they are all of the same narrow political idealogy?). Bush has placed way too much trust in these people and it has cost America dearly.

"and sence those people violated the "trust"(And made a mess) they are now fired..."

No they aren't. Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfield, and Paul Wolfowitz still have jobs. This is all wishful thinking on your part. You think they've been fired? Back that up with evidence. I dare ya.

"and anyway...remember something??? KERRY AGREED WITH DECLARING WAR ON IRAQ"

Yes, I know that. I never claimed anything to the contrary. In fact, I've expressed my doubts about Kerry before. But Kerry has recently changed that view. Whether he honestly believes that or not I don't know. But I do know that he isn't in league with the neo-cons and that is enough for me to take a chance on him.

"that would be your opinion. not a fact."

No kidding.
Back to top
Profile PM
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 09:15
Link
Peter_H does bring up an good point, it took a vote of congress to go to war. If you're going to rag on the President about the war, you have a long long list of congress men and women to add to that list, including John Kerry.

In the end, they all made a decision and we can't change that. The question may be, who's version of damage control do you prefer?
--
TAZ

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 09:44
Link
@zircher

Congress authorized the use of force against Iraq. Their vote did not require Bush to go to war. It merely allowed him to exercise the option if he saw fit. I'm sure many thought it would be a usefull tool for applying pressure to Saddam to let the inspectors in and that it was part of an elaborate political bluff. They misjudged just how hawkish Bush's advisors are. Their mistake.

But you are right that I would have a long long list of congressmen and women to add to that list though. I am far from pleased with either party's performance in that regard. But I place Bush and his neo-cons at the top of it. They, above all else, are responsible for this country's rush to war with Iraq.

"In the end, they all made a decision and we can't change that."

True.

"The question may be, who's version of damage control do you prefer?"

I don't know how well Kerry's plan will work, but I do know how well Bush's plan has worked. With only 5% of the budget for reconstruction actually spent and only 30% of it actually going to the Iraqis I think I'll take my chances with Kerry. He could hardly do worse.

But to be more frank, I really don't believe it is possible to turn this war around. We've lost. It's like you said. "damage control". That's all we have left.

@Any Republicans out there

For any Republicans out there that want a reason to vote for John Kerry I give you this:

Quote: "
As son of a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, it is automatically expected by many that I am a Republican. For 50 years, through the election of 2000, I was. With the current administration’s decision to invade Iraq unilaterally, however, I changed my voter registration to independent, and barring some utterly unforeseen development, I intend to vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry.
"


http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=44657

@Anyone who still thinks Bush won the debate

Quote: "
I thought Kerry did very, very well; and I thought Bush did poorly — much worse than he is capable of doing. Listen: If I were just a normal guy — not Joe Political Junkie — I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate, I would. If I were just a normal, fairly conservative, war-supporting guy: I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate.

And I promise you that no one wants this president reelected more than I. I think that he may want it less.
"


http://www.nationalreview.com/nordlinger/nordlinger200410010114.asp
Back to top
Profile PM
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 10:09
Link
Quote: "@Any Republicans out there

For any Republicans out there that want a reason to vote for John Kerry I give you this:

Quote: "
As son of a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, it is automatically expected by many that I am a Republican. For 50 years, through the election of 2000, I was. With the current administration’s decision to invade Iraq unilaterally, however, I changed my voter registration to independent, and barring some utterly unforeseen development, I intend to vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry.
"

"


No where does it state WHY we should vote for Kerry, one old guy with a complex is going to change my vote.

GO BUSH!


Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 10:13
Link
@Jimmy

Did you even bother to read the article? The quote was meant as an introduction.
Back to top
Profile PM
Rob K
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 10:13
Link
Quote: "one old guy with a complex is going to change my vote"


Except you don't have a vote


BlueGUI:Windows UI Plugin - All the power of the windows interface in your DBPro games.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 10:16
Link
Rob, you took my vote?? WTJ?!!!?

Actually you're right, because I have not registered. I live in Utah. Everyone votes the same and it satisfieth me plenty.

Neo: No, I don't click on links posted by babbling maniacs. That's internet rule #34 in my home.


Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 10:23
Link
@Jimmy

"Neo: No, I don't click on links posted by babbling maniacs. That's internet rule #34 in my home."

John Eisenhower is not a "babbling maniac". You're just pissed because both liberals and conservatives can see that Kerry is the only sane alternative to Bush. But if you want to be closed minded that's your problem.
Back to top
Profile PM
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 11:29
Link
Neo, don't take everything so personally; Jimmy kids around a lot, and you should really know that by now...

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 11:58
Link
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/benedetto/2004-10-01-benedetto_x.htm

Good article on the debate there. Good statistics too.

Bush's likability factor is probably what's going to win the election for him. Kerry's uglier and doesn't sound as good, which arguably makes as much difference as the words do.

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 12:00 Edited at: 2nd Oct 2004 12:09
Link
I didn't take it personally. And I don't think Jimmy was kidding. When he kids, he really goes over the top. Like this:

Quote: "
I think you're all complete morons and the earth is going to be taken over by rabid hamster donkeys. They'll look cute, friendly and cuddly at first, but don't turn your back or they'll steal your car keys and make fun of infants
"


His "babbling idiot" comment was meant to be taken literally. He hasn't been very receptive to the idea of people not liking Bush so he gets real defensive.

[edit]
"Bush's likability factor is probably what's going to win the election for him. Kerry's uglier and doesn't sound as good, which arguably makes as much difference as the words do."

Yes, if Bush does win it will be because of his looks and his ability to project a "one-of-the-guys" persona.

I think it is a sad commentrary on the state of politics that people base their decisions on who to lead them on something as irrelevant as looks and not on facts.

I agree with Alan Moore. Politics today is bunk. A man could have all of the right ideas and have a firm grasp of the issues, but be rejected because he had a wart on his nose or something stupid like that.

Things like this make me think that there is little hope for us as a species. We'll kill each other off because of our own brazen stupidity and inability to move past even the most trivial of non-issues.
Back to top
Profile PM
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 12:03
Link
Well I guess he really means it when he regularly calls me a sucker and a whore then ... Jimmy, you heartless traitor

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Sparda
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Jan 2004
Location: Pacifica
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 12:10
Link
This thread is too much. Sorry, but unless Kerry himself flies a plane into some cave in Afghanistan, then I'll still support bush.

Gl and hf everyone!


Back to top
Profile PM Email
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 12:18
Link
@Konrad

"Sorry, but unless Kerry himself flies a plane into some cave in Afghanistan, then I'll still support bush."

Why? What is it about Bush that you like?

I'm continuely puzzled as to why people support this man. I haven't seen any real solid defense of his positions. Yet, I've posted copious amounts of information that is...well for lack of a better term, damning.
Back to top
Profile PM
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 13:08 Edited at: 2nd Oct 2004 13:11
Link
I'll take a stab at that. I don't hate Bush.

If you need more, I don't trust Kerry. I feel that Kerry will say anything to try and get into power. I think a Kerry campaign promise is dust in the wind. I don't like his senate voting record, his attendence record, his dubious behavior in and right after his military service. (At least Jane Fonda aplogized for her actions.)
--
TAZ

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 13:19
Link
@zircher

Excellent. I've been eager for some intelligent debate regarding Bush and Kerry. Though I'd be more interested in hearing Pro-Bush views, I suppose I could settle for some anti-Kerry ones that have some thought put into them.

"I feel that Kerry will say anything to try and get into power."

You're probably correct. But that accusation covers pretty much any politican, even Bush.

" I think a Kerry campaign promise is dust in the wind."

I think the same could be said about Bush. Did you read that link I gave to the Iconoclast, Bush's hometown paper? Their main beef with him is that he broke from his earlier campaign promises. A lot of them.

Here is the link in case you missed it:

http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm

"I don't like his senate voting record, his attendence record, his dubious behavior in and right after his military service."

A little clarification would be appreciated. I'm paticularly interested in what you have against his military service. Concerns with his voting record also interest me. Are there any paticular issues with his senate record you disagree with?

On the whole I have to say that I'm glad to hear someone has stepped up to the plate. Me posting facts and other people ignoring them has been getting kind of tiring.

I await your reply.
Back to top
Profile PM
Sparda
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Jan 2004
Location: Pacifica
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 13:51
Link
@Neophyte - Because 99% of the people who support Kerry and liberal actions in general are the kind of person I would hate to become. Btw, you are not included in that.

But hey! Who cares!? I'm not old enough to vote anyways


Back to top
Profile PM Email
zircher
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 13:57 Edited at: 2nd Oct 2004 14:06
Link
Military service: The fuzzy recollections, the purple hearts earned versus deserved, his apparent confusion between ribbons and medals (he's either a two faced liar or a moron), those don't bother me too much. But, what kind of weasel carries a camera into combat or stages re-enactments for his future glory? His actions after his return, the accusations that he made before Congress, I do not like the character of this man. I'm a vet, but not old enough for Vietnam. Still, I wouldn't mind spitting on Kerry.

[Not that I would do that, spitting is considered assault in many states and sitting in a prison for a few years would really hurt my game development hobby, which I consider more important than Kerry.]

Talk radio has done Kerry's voting and attendence record to death. In a nutshell, he voted hardcore liberal except where politically expedient. Not a crime, just a solid base of mud. His service to the Senate Intelligence Committee and his pathetic attendence record does his reputation no good. What's his battle cry? "I'll gladly devote 24% of my attention to the job at hand." Yeah, that's the man I want in the Oval Office. Not!

[FactCheck also points out that Kerry's web site claimed that Kerry is a leader and a vice chairman on the Senate Intelligence Committee. For the record, Kerry has never held that position.]

The Iconoclast editorial is little bitter to say the least, but an interesting read. At least they didn't compare Bush to Hitler.

FactCheck.org is a little more biased and their top story picks apart errors made by both sides during the debate.

http://www.factcheck.org/default.aspx
--
TAZ

[edit for typos and clarity]

"Do you think it is wise to provoke him?" "It's what I do." -- Stargate SG-1
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
ionstream
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2004
Location: Overweb
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 14:04
Link
Indeed.

This whole post is about what people think is right morally. Neophyte, your not going prove anything by ignoring previous Pro-Bush posts. Some people think that war is bad and are automatically against Bush. The fact of the matter is this:

If Bush wins, the war continues and Iraq is democratic. Gay people don't get married, and abortion is outlawed. The patriot act and the No Child Left Behind act remain.

If Kerry wins, Iraq is abandoned, and most of the above is negated or modified. It all comes down to what you think is right.

Live for the moment, die for the aftermath.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 14:43
Link
@Konrad

"Because 99% of the people who support Kerry and liberal actions in general are the kind of person I would hate to become."

What kind of person would that be?

"Btw, you are not included in that."

Thank you.

"But hey! Who cares!? I'm not old enough to vote anyways"

But you will eventually. It's better to get an early start defending and reasoning through your views then to have to play catch up later.

@zircher

" the purple hearts earned versus deserved,"

He earned all of his purple hearts. If you think he didn't cite which one and I'll disprove it.

" his apparent confusion between ribbons and medals (he's either a two faced liar or a moron)"

Or he misspoke.

"But, what kind of weasel carries a camera into combat or stages re-enactments for his future glory?"

Que? Do you have some evidence for this?

"His actions after his return, the accusations that he made before Congress, I do not like the character of this man. "

He spoke out against attrocities that were being committed. What is wrong with that?

I believe if the government orders you to do something immoral than you have a duty to speak out against it. Solider or not.

" I'm a vet, but not old enough for Vietnam. Still, I wouldn't mind spitting on Kerry."

That's pretty harsh. Kerry risked his life to save his comrade's life. The man does have heroic qualities in him. You and I might disagree over the other things, but I think we can at least agree that he is not a total villian. Hell, even I'll admit Bush does have some positive qualities and I detest his administration.

"Talk radio has done Kerry's voting and attendence record to death."

That set off warning flags right there. Talk radio is about a fact-free zone as you can get. I would seriously suggest you check out any so-called "facts" for yourself. You'll often find that you have been misled.

"In a nutshell, he voted hardcore liberal except where politically expedient. "

That's a myth. I've looked into his voting record myself. He's liberal, but he's not the ultra-liberal that his opponents have tried to paint him as. There are people in Congress right now that are much more liberal than him.

" His service to the Senate Intelligence Committee and his pathetic attendence record does his reputation no good."

That's yet another myth. The Senate Intelligence Committe doesn't keep an attendence record and most of it's work happens behind closed doors(obviously, were dealing with classified stuff here). The Bush administration came up with that figuare by counting how many public hearings Kerry gave a speech at. Not how many public hearings he attended, just the one's he gave a speech at.

"FactCheck.org is a little more biased and their top story picks apart errors made by both sides during the debate."

What makes you think that FactCheck.org is biased out of curiousity?

@ion stream

"This whole post is about what people think is right morally."

(By post I assume you mean thread?)

No, it's about a lot of misconceptions and what the facts really are.

" Neophyte, your not going prove anything by ignoring previous Pro-Bush posts."

And what posts am I ignoring?

I would also comment ion stream that you are not going to prove anything by just repeating your beliefs without any facts to support them.

"If Bush wins, the war continues and Iraq is democratic."

The war will continue whether Bush or Kerry wins. As to Iraq becoming democratic that looks increasingly unlikely. The latest government report described the best senario of Iraq's future as "tenuous stability" and at worst "civil war". If you think everything is all rosey in Iraq you've been living in a dreamworld.

"Gay people don't get married, and abortion is outlawed."

Though I doubt abortion will be outlawed. And whether gay people can get married is a state's rights issue. The federal government can't constitutionly impose laws regarding marriage licences. If you don't believe me read the constitution of the U.S.

"The patriot act and the No Child Left Behind act remain."

Provisions of the patriot act were just ruled unconstitutional recently. Of course, the No Child Left Behing act will probably remain. That's all the more reason to me for Bush to get booted out.

"If Kerry wins, Iraq is abandoned,"

Iraq will be abandoned eventually. The cost of this war is getting too politically high so sooner or later someone will declare "success" and cut and run. Whether Kerry or Bush does it is really irrelevant.

" It all comes down to what you think is right."

"Thinking" something is right doesn't make it right or real.
Back to top
Profile PM
The Wendigo
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Sep 2002
Location: A hole near the base of a tree in the US
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 16:53
Link
Quote: ""Thinking" something is right doesn't make it right or real"


I've based a lot of my life on this and you know what it all comes down to: a flip of the coin or some very indepth thinking. Even if the proof is right in front of you, there can always be counter-proof hidden somewhere else. You NEVER know the right decision and you never will. So basically, "thinking" something is right or not is all you got.

Current Projects: Verious things right now. Lots of utils for game making. Hopefully something solid soon.

http://www.geocities.com/djpeterson83
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 2nd Oct 2004 17:03
Link
Actually, Neo, I was calling you a babbling maniac.


Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 02:13
Link
Sorry to do a bit of a 180 here, but I agree with Neo on the Patriot Act and No Child Left Behind. The latter, I would mention, is directly against traditional conservative values, and is furthermore a completely useless waste of tax money. If children have no incentive to learn, they're not going to no matter how much money you waste on ad campaigns. The Patriot Act has its own thread at this point.

Neophyte-

I have to say I think it's a bit hypocritical that you condemn talk radio as a 'free fact zone' when some of the sites you've used as supporting evidence have been so slanted it's almost hilarious (the one particular liberal one devoted to proving Bush was essentialy the devil was pretty amusing).

And...

Quote: ""Thinking" something is right doesn't make it right or real."


A good deal of politics eventually boils down to matters of moral opinion which it is quite difficult to realistically debate. Pro-life; pro-choise is one of those things. In a proper debate it always comes down to whether a fetus has human rights or not, and there's no way to prove or disprove that.

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 02:22
Link
@Jimmy

" Actually, Neo, I was calling you a babbling maniac."

You're just jealous because the facts are on my side and not your's.

@Mouse

"I have to say I think it's a bit hypocritical that you condemn talk radio as a 'free fact zone' when some of the sites you've used as supporting evidence have been so slanted it's almost hilarious (the one particular liberal one devoted to proving Bush was essentialy the devil was pretty amusing)."

What site was that?

"A good deal of politics eventually boils down to matters of moral opinion which it is quite difficult to realistically debate."

I'm aware of that. But the topics he choose weren't matters of moral opinion. The Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind, and future democracy in Iraq don't hinge upon our morality. It seemed like all he thought he had to do was "feel" something was real and it would turn out true.
Back to top
Profile PM
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 03:07
Link
@Mouse: Stop making up words.

'hypocritical'

Peace sells
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 03:09
Link
Urgh, I'm sorry, I'm not searching through six long pages of debate to find one link. Really, since you supplied the URLs and read the sites completely, I'd think you'd know. No offense, you debate quite well, but sometimes it seems you don't make an effort to comprehend what the other side is presenting if there's any flaw in it at all

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 03:10
Link
Quote: " @Mouse: Stop making up words.

'hypocritical' "


hypocritical

hy·po·crit·i·cal [hìpp? kríttik’l] adjective
falsely claiming high principles: showing, originating from or of the nature of hypocrisy • It would be hypocritical of me to congratulate you on defeating me.

—hyp·o·crit·i·cal·ly, adverb



What do they teach kids in school these days

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 03:28
Link
Where did you get that load of bullcrap from?

Peace sells
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Neophyte
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 04:09
Link
@Mouse

" Really, since you supplied the URLs and read the sites completely, I'd think you'd know. "

I do know, and I don't ever remember posting anything that tried to equate Bush to the devil or anything even close to that. If anything I've tried to steer as far away from liberal sources that I can by relying on government sites or conservatives. The only two links that I remember that dealt with Bush specifically that I posted are the following:

This one is for the Iconoclast, Bush's hometown paper. Since they supported Bush in 2000 I don't think you can exactly call these guys liberal.
http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm

The only other one I remember is the link to an op-ed by John Eisenhower who was a republican for 50 years:
http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=44657

If these two aren't it then I'm afraid you'll have to be more specific.

"No offense, you debate quite well, but sometimes it seems you don't make an effort to comprehend what the other side is presenting if there's any flaw in it at all"

I comprehended what you said perfectly. You said I was a tad hypocritical for posting a link to site that was steeped in liberal bias while simutaneously criticizing someone for referring to something I considered a "fact-free zone" correct?

Since I don't ever remember posting anything here of the sort I asked for clarification. How is that me not comprehending?
Back to top
Profile PM
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 04:45
Link
You're doing it again--

Quote: "I do know, and I don't ever remember posting anything that tried to equate Bush to the devil or anything even close to that. "


Taking me litteraly when I said that when it was blatantly obviously not so...


I finally found the darn site:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5829.htm

I mean, just look at the front page of that place and read a lot of the articles and you'll see what I mean. Those are the kind of extremists that make Lowtax want to vote Republican across the board just to annoy them. That's what I was talking about.

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 05:08
Link
Neo you don't post facts, you post opinions from liberals and mixed up old men.

I, for one, don't regard every excerpt found on the internet as fact or truth. Come out of your freaking hole and see what's really going on outside of cyberspace.


Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 05:11
Link
That doesn't have much bearing on the evidence he's presenting, actually, Jimmy... a good deal of his links are to White House & conservative sites, as he said. Please try to avoid personal attacks like that...

[center]
"Humans are useless they can only give you questions."
Back to top
Profile PM
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 05:20
Link
Oh, that's real cute coming from you, Mouse.


Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
David T
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 05:26
Link
Quote: "Where did you get that load of bullcrap from? "


It's a word. Adjective of hypocrite. Try dictionary.com

Get 15 new commands, all the date / time commands left out of DBPro for free!
DOWNLOAD PLUGINS HERE: http://www.davidtattersall.me.uk/ and select "DarkBasic"
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jimmy
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Aug 2003
Location: Back in the USA
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 05:29
Link
You are aware that you just quoted Pet Rat right? I mean... seriously


Remember, Jimmy still loves you.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
David T
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 05:31
Link
Yes.

Get 15 new commands, all the date / time commands left out of DBPro for free!
DOWNLOAD PLUGINS HERE: http://www.davidtattersall.me.uk/ and select "DarkBasic"
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
gothboy 101
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st May 2004
Location: Watonga, ok, usa
Posted: 3rd Oct 2004 05:31
Link
if i was old enough i'd vote for a 3rd party canidate

www.dragonseige.tk
http://dragonseige.tk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-26 06:47:06
Your offset time is: 2024-11-26 06:47:06