Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 7:43 pm
You last visited January 21, 2017, 6:32 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Go Kerry!!


Last Edited: October 4, 2004, 1:08 pm

I loved seeing Bush squirm...


Have you ever poured salt on a slug??
Entry #19


DoctorEw220Comment by DoctorEw220 - October 4, 2004, 2:02 pm
dude. let me tell you everything i've gotten out of john kerry's campaign (these are not direct quotes),
"Vote for me! I served in 'nam!"
"Vote for me! I windsurf!"
"Vote for me! I take it to the extreme when I snowboard dude!"
"Vote for me! I like to play football!"
"Vote for me! I got a 'tan'!"
Do you see what all of that has in common. I have gotten nothing concerning the issues out of John Kerry's campaign.
Comment by Sedertree - October 4, 2004, 2:16 pm

Stay tuned for the next round of debates. In the meantime, read the transcripts.

ONEDAYComment by ONEDAY - October 4, 2004, 3:12 pm
I like Bush..According to electoral-vote.com he is going to win.
ToddComment by Todd - October 4, 2004, 3:22 pm

Your stock just went up with me big-time. It takes a degree of maturity for a student to be able to rise above the group-think that exists on campus and in the classrooms. Nice.

In addition to those Vote for me's, you can also add "Vote for me, I hate George Bush!"

I don't think hate will win. If you read the transcripts, the only things Kerry get specific about is how he hates George Bush. Everything else is vapor.

Why do you think he refuses to talk about his 19-year Senate record?

The one time in the debate he talked about getting rid of bunker-busting bombs being developed immediately made me think of how Kerry opposed every single weapons system in use today, and all the weapons systems that won the cold war. Some things never change. He was wrong then, and he's wrong now.

Comment by dragon - October 4, 2004, 6:50 pm
I am not sure there is something wrong with voting against most weapons systems.

I would have voted against most weapons systems too.
Comment by reddog - October 4, 2004, 7:27 pm
I do not like going to liberal websites. They are one sided and good at brainwashing people. If Bush is a slug, then Kerry is the Devil. If you look through his $1000 haircut you can see the horns.
hypersoniqComment by hypersoniq - October 4, 2004, 7:35 pm
There is nothing wrong with weapons systems like the stealth program planes or the F22 and new joint strike fighter... We should sleep better at night knowing we have them on our side...
with technology, Bush, Sr. should have finished the war then...
Scary story I saw on the history channel, when the U.S. became the only nation to use nukes in a war, we beat the japanese by 2 days (DAYS) and their plan to use spent fuel from the failed nazi atomic bomb program in big "dirty" bombs launched from submarines off the coast of San Fransisco... days... millions would have become sick and and millions would have died. scary... the almost 200,000 lost in the 2 U.S. bombs had the ripple effect of saving millions.

War is ugly, but if you are gonna be in, be in to win. War should be a last resort, but when diplomacy fails... get in, get out, go home... What is this rebuilding nonsense? I don't recall the japanese rebuilding pearl harbor and I will bet on the taliban NOT to rebuild downtown NYC... Leave peacekeeping (a.k.a. leaving our troops in a hostile environment for target practice) to the U.N.
get in, get out, go home... If we can't do that, we shouldn't be there in the first place...
we have the best toys, we have the best troops, let them do what they were trained for, or bring them home safe. They have families, jobs (hopefully, wouldn't that be the ultimate slap in the face if the fighting men and women of the armed forces come home to find their jobs were outsourced to one of the the 31 countries their own commander-in-chief is fast-tracking into NAFTA?) and lives back here at home.

not that kerry would do any better, but at least he has been there. Which really confuses me, how could he have served and then try to deny troops the life-saving advantage of total air superiority?

some choice... maybe I will check out what the Nader camp is offering...
ToddComment by Todd - October 4, 2004, 7:59 pm
hypersoniq, maybe you're not old enough, or not familiar enough with history, but we spent YEARS rebuilding Japan after WWII. That's what we do because we are a compassionate country that spreads peace. The U.N. is nothing but a puppet for tyrannical and socialist countries, and they fail at everything they get involved with. Getting them involved is a recipe for disaster.

You did great, right up to the "rebuilding nonsense" part. At that point, I categorically disagree with everything you wrote. Your Bush-hating that you write everywhere else is also wrong, and lacks deep thought.
ToddComment by Todd - October 4, 2004, 8:00 pm
Dragon, luckily you are not in a position to dictate policy, because if you were, the USSR would still exist, and we would still be bitter enemies.
Comment by dragon - October 4, 2004, 8:54 pm
Todd,I guess I wasn't clear with the gist of my message. I have worked for many years in aerospace, and to some degree still do. I see stuff going on that I would not be proud of, and I don't believe many of our weapons systems are worth the money we're spending on them. They serve the companies that build them, not our country. So, yes, if I were dictating policy, things would be different. But there would be less national debt. Perhaps John Kerry knew some of this when he voted against some of our weapons systems?

And what's this "Bush-hating" that you quote? Because a person is critical of the actions of the current president, because he will vote for somebody else, it does not mean that he hates Bush. It simply means, as it does mostly in our American system, that he votes for what he sees to be the lesser evil.

I am a non-partisan, and I vote for the character. Too bad for Mr. Bush, but sending American children into war for no discernible purpose is just not something I can stand for.
Comment by Babel - October 4, 2004, 9:09 pm
If you listen to Kerry's whole statement about the nucler bunker bunsting bombs what he said was how can we on the one hand shake our finger around the world saying you can't have nuclear weapons while with our other hand we are building our own new nuclear weapons. Us, the USA, the only country in the history of the world to use nuclear weapons (rightly or wrongly) in a war.

See, the thing about voteing records is that they are far from black and white and it is very easy to point at one vote, or a series of votes, and say see! Look! Senator/Congressman X cast vote Y! They believe Z! But it's just not that simple. Especially with the ammendment system we have now senate/congress votes are highly highly subjective. There can be any number of reasons for someone to cast a particular vote. You just don't know.

Now I don't want to debate Kerry's record but I will offer this one example. The now famous statement "I actually voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it". WTF?!, you say. How can you vote for something then vote against it. And the answer is this. John Kerry wants to support our troops. I think it's unfair to say any politician doesn't. Wants instead to leave them hanging in the wind. I mean really, you might not like him but please, let's not atribute maliciousness to him. The reason Kerry voted against the bill was that he didn't think 87 billion dollars should be charged to the national credit card while we slash taxes and create the largest budget deficit in the history of the nation. He wanted it financed a different way. He never said he didn't want to support the troops, he was one, he's been there and done that. He fealt it needed to be paid for a different way. And honestly, if our troops needed all this new equipment so badly shouldn't we have procured it before we sent them?

Now I will filly admit that I don't like President Bush. I don't like his position on things, don't like his policies, don't like the way he represents the country. I'm a liberal leaning registered independant voter but to me the whole debacle about the 87 billion seems like one more attempt by the president to slip things through the back door. I think he knew all along that we would need another 87 billion to properly equip the troops. At least I hope he did. Because if it truely came as a shock to him he needs to fire some people at the pentagon. So to me this is another example of his administration trying to hide the true cost of things in order to get what they want. If they had gone to congress from the getgo and said we need all this money chances are slimmer that they would have gotten what they wanted. So instead they only asked for what they needed to get troops in the field so after they could ask for the rest and chalk it up to supporting our troops. And we all want to support our troops. Kind of like his tax cuts. They were passed on the basis of them being limited in duration. If they had been permanent from the getgo they wouldn't have been passed. But they got passed and now he wants to make them permanent. And if you don't vote to make them permanent you are piloried in the media for raising taxes. Getting things through the back door. Be honest about what you want to do. That's the least I ask for those in charge of our country.
ToddComment by Todd - October 4, 2004, 10:22 pm
I don't buy either of your arguments. Or should I say your Democrat talking-points?
Comment by Babel - October 4, 2004, 10:37 pm
I have no democratic talking points. I just have my own ideas. I listen to both sides. I read commentaries in the paper, I read the paper and watch CNN and other news outlets, I listen to Hannity and others on talk radio, I watched both conventions, I watched the debates. So please don't attribute my arguments as coming from a particular party. I don't like organized parties. I think everyone should register independant and make up their own minds.

If you disagree with my arguments great. We live in a 'free' country and that's your right. But rather then saying I'm pimping for the democrats tell me why you disagree. I'm willing to talk it out if you are. I'm one of those people that thinks that not talking about politics has gotten us where we are today. To properly develop your own ideas you need to expose yourself to the opinions of all sides. I don't expect to change your mind and doubt you will change mine but a well thought out argument might just persuade someone who reads it.
ToddComment by Todd - October 4, 2004, 10:59 pm
Babel, I've written pages and pages here why you're wrong. You should read them. Then you can figure out why you're wrong. By the way, watching CNN is not a good way to see both sides of the argument.
Comment by Babel - October 4, 2004, 11:08 pm
I would agree with you if I said I watch CNN and thus I have all sides of of the argument. I didn't say that however. What I did say was that I listen to many different media outlets, mass media is generally said to be liberal leaning while talk radio is said to be conservative leaning. The commentary section of the local paper has one article from each side of the political spectrum daily.
Comment by Sedertree - October 5, 2004, 5:07 am
"how Kerry opposed every single weapons system in use today, and all the weapons systems that won the cold war."

Let's take a trip back in time.....

Comment by Sedertree - October 5, 2004, 5:30 am
And to further set Senator Kerry's voting record straight:


Comment by dragon - October 5, 2004, 8:41 am
Todd, why is everybody that does not fit exactly into your personal values "wrong." You tell people they are "wrong." Does that not strike you as presumptuous? Why do we all "hate Bush?" We simply do not agree with that president's main actions, that's all.

I am not saying you are wrong. You have strong values and regimented and fairly narrow views. There is nothing wrong with that. But when you accuse others here of pounding the liberal drum, has it occurred to you that all you yourself do is babble the conservative sound bites?
ToddComment by Todd - October 5, 2004, 9:54 am
History will prove me right, and you wrong. Plain and simple. Just like the peacenicks who wanted a nuclear freeze during the 80s. They were wrong, and the conservatives, headed by Ronald Reagan, were right. Plain and simple.
DoctorEw220Comment by DoctorEw220 - October 5, 2004, 4:52 pm
one thing that makes me mad is when Dumocrats argue that Republicans are closed-minded. If anything, the Dumocrats are as much, if not more closed-minded then Republicans.
Comment by Babel - October 5, 2004, 6:27 pm
Great links Sedertree, thank you. For anyone that might be in the anyone but Bush camp I'd heartily suggest reading them and you might be enlightened. I'd also recommend this one: http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0438/turse.php

Don't believe Republican spin. Look into it for yourself. You won't get this from the evening news.
ToddComment by Todd - October 5, 2004, 7:59 pm
Sure, maybe you also want to read the fine journalism at moveon.org. (Ha!) The liberals on this board are getting more desperate and pitiful as time goes on. Hopefully you will cease fire once George Bush gets reelected.
Comment by Babel - October 5, 2004, 9:22 pm
Again Todd you attack the people and the ideas and provide no facts of your own. It's really tiring and it makes you look foolish.
ToddComment by Todd - October 5, 2004, 9:47 pm
I attack wrong statements, and you keep making them. I think you're labeling the wrong person as foolish.
Comment by Babel - October 5, 2004, 10:49 pm
Saying it's wrong doesn't make it so. Show why. Provide facts.
ToddComment by Todd - October 5, 2004, 11:12 pm
I'll tell you what. If you want to keep replying, then be my guest, but this is the last time for me. If I'm right, you won't be able to keep from posting another reply, even though I am not continuing the argument. Let's see if you prove me right....

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.