Bush approval: 48%

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Kerry Strengthens Lead to 48 Percent, 35 Points Ahead of Nearest Rival Dean;

                  Wins in Match-Up With Bush (50% To 45%)

 

          Fifty-Eight Percent Say Gay Marriage Should Not Be Legal;

    Majority Says Issue of Gay Marriage Very Important (22%) or Somewhat

          Important (32%) in Determining Their Vote for President

 

    NEW YORK, Feb. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- President George W. Bush's approval

rating has slipped to 48 percent, the lowest level since February 2001,

according to the Newsweek poll. Fifty percent of registered voters say they

would not like to see Bush re-elected to a second term (45% say they would).

And if the election were held today, Democratic frontrunner Sen. John Kerry

would win over Bush by 50 percent to 45 percent among registered voters.

However Bush would have clear wins over Democratic contenders Sen. John

Edwards (49% to 44%), former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (50% to 44%) and retired

General Wesley Clark (51% to 43%).

    Sen. Kerry has also strengthened his lead among Democrats and Democratic-

leaning voters in the race for the Democratic nomination.  Kerry places first

in the field with 48 percent, while Dean, his closest rival, follows with

13 percent (last week Kerry led with 45% to Dean's 14%). Edwards is in third

place with 10 percent, followed by Clark with nine percent (an improvement of

four points for Clark who last week received 5%).  Almost two-thirds (65%) of

Democrats and Democratic-leaners say Kerry is their first or second choice,

followed by Dean (32%) and Edwards (31%).

    Meanwhile, following the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's ruling

last week that its landmark decision in support of gay marriage meant full

marriage rights and not civil unions, almost half (45%) of Americans say

efforts to protect the rights of gays and lesbians have gone too far; 25

percent say more effort is needed, 22 percent say the right amount of effort

has been made. Fifty-eight percent of Americans says there should not be

legally-sanctioned gay marriages (33% disagree), while 51 percent say there

should not be legally-sanctioned gay and lesbian unions or partnerships

(40% disagree).

    Americans, however, are more deeply and more evenly divided on whether

they support an amendment to the Constitution.  Forty-seven percent say they

would favor a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in all states,

with 45 percent opposing it. (Of those numbers 43% would strongly favor it,

while 35% would strongly oppose it).

    Despite their views on gay marriage, Americans are almost evenly split on

whether gays and lesbians should have the right to legally adopt children;

47 percent say they should not, while 45 percent disagree.  When it comes to

economic issues, a large majority (60%) says gay spouses should have health

insurance and other employee benefits (33% disagree). Sixty percent also say

gay spouses should have inheritance rights (30% disagree) and 55 percent say

they should have social security benefits (36% disagree). An overwhelming

majority of Americans (87%) says that there should be equal rights for gays

and lesbians in terms of job opportunities (10% disagree) and 60 percent say

gays and lesbians should be able to openly serve in the military (29%

disagree).

    Fifty-four percent of registered voters say the issue of gay marriage will

be either very important (22%) or somewhat important (32%) in determining

their vote for president this year.  Twenty percent say it won't be too

important and 21 percent say it's not at all important. Thirty-eight percent

say Bush comes closer to reflecting their own views on gay marriage, while

29 percent say Kerry does.

    Asked about Bush and Kerry's stance on gay marriage, a majority (54%) of

registered voters respond "don't know" when asked Kerry's views, compared with

29 percent who say the same of Bush.  Forty-nine percent say, based on what

they've seen in the news, Bush would support a Constitutional amendment, if

necessary, to ban gay marriage in all states (7% say Kerry would do the same).

Twelve percent say Bush believes the issue should be left up to individual

states (14% say this of Kerry); nine  percent say Bush supports gay civil

unions but not gay marriage (17% say this of Kerry); and one percent says Bush

favors full marriage rights for gays and lesbians (8% say this of  Kerry).

    Turning to the role of candidates' wives in the presidential race, almost

a third (31%) of Americans say former First Lady Hillary Clinton comes closest

to their image of what a first lady should be; in a three-way tie for second

place are First Lady Laura Bush and former First Ladies Barbara Bush and Nancy

Reagan, with 20 percent each. Almost two thirds (62%) say a first lady should

be involved in politics, while 32 percent disagree; 75 percent of Democrats

feel this way (21% disagree); and 50 percent of Republicans feel this way

(44% disagree).

    When deciding which presidential candidate to support, 67 percent say it

is either very important (25%) or somewhat important (42%) for them to learn

about the candidate's spouse. Seventy-two percent say the relationship between

a candidate and his spouse tells voters either a lot (40%) or something (32%)

about how good a president he would be; 13 percent say it tells you not much

and 12 percent say it tells you nothing.

    For this Newsweek poll, Princeton Survey Research Associates interviewed

1,004 adults aged 18 and older on February 5-6, 2004.  The margin of error is

plus or minus three percentage points.  This poll is part of the February

16 issue of Newsweek (on Newsstands Monday, February 9).

 

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....02105043&EDATE=

[MrRant 0]

::Dies::

[Guest JMA]

::Dies::

Burial or cremation?

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

I guess Saddam's capture only goes so far with people who can't pay the bills.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

It doesn't matter, blah blah blah.

 

Wait until he starts beating Kerry again, THEN it'll matter.

 

(note: sarcasm)

[snuffbox 0]

I guess Saddam's capture only goes so far with people who can't pay the bills.

maybe he woulda been better off finding binladen, the guy that actually attacked america

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I guess Saddam's capture only goes so far with people who can't pay the bills.

maybe he woulda been better off finding binladen, the guy that actually attacked america

Don't worry, they'll roll him out right before the election.

[Guest Cerebus]

I guess Saddam's capture only goes so far with people who can't pay the bills.

maybe he woulda been better off finding binladen, the guy that actually attacked america

Don't worry, they'll roll him out right before the election.

OMG CONSPIRACYTHEORY~!!!LOL2004!!!1

[snuffbox 0]

I guess Saddam's capture only goes so far with people who can't pay the bills.

maybe he woulda been better off finding binladen, the guy that actually attacked america

Don't worry, they'll roll him out right before the election.

OMG CONSPIRACYTHEORY~!!!LOL2004!!!1

i love the new bush fanboy excuse...

 

whatever he does wrong is actually just a 'conspiracy theory'

 

fucking sick...this so much like a monarchy it turns my stomach. a king that can do no wrong, and dont question him or johnboy aschcroft will bradshaw your ass.

[Vyce 0]

Someone apparently isn't bright enough to understand sarcasm.

[snuffbox 0]

Someone apparently isn't bright enough to understand sarcasm.

hers some sarcasm for you...fuck you buddy.

 

nope...that wasnt sarcasm.

 

ive seen the conspiracy theory thing so many times now...and its a serious arguement for the bush disciples...on the net and television and from actual people...i dont see at as sarcasm anymore.

[Lando Griffin 0]

Listen, you idiot: Saying that Bush has OBL in custody and will roll him out right before the election IS a conspiracy theory. So go shit and slip in it.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

After hearing this folder gloat over the Democratic Party's chances for so long, a Kerry victory in the general election would be so incredibly fitting.

[snuffbox 0]

Listen, you idiot: Saying that Bush has OBL in custody and will roll him out right before the election IS a conspiracy theory. So go shit and slip in it.

uh...hes not in custody...thats a problem. but hey, he found saddam so thats terrific. why find a guy who attacks america when you can attack a county that didnt.

 

 

wait wait wait...i know i know...saddam was killing/torturing people, now he cant, thats good. but what about all the other countries where thats happening to just as many if not more people? if only those countries had oil fields...

[snuffbox 0]

After hearing this folder gloat over the Democratic Party's chances for so long, a Kerry victory in the general election would be so incredibly fitting.

im sure it would be a role reversal of 2000...

 

gore got more people to vote for him, but he didnt win...'deal with it!'

 

bush was the second coming of christ...'howd he lose?! conspiracy!!!'

[Guest MikeSC]

After hearing this folder gloat over the Democratic Party's chances for so long, a Kerry victory in the general election would be so incredibly fitting.

Because a 3 point lead in a poll several months before an election before one guy has even begun his campaign at all ---- yup, THAT means something.

 

It's not like Dukakis, Mondale, and Dole all led at this point.

-=Mike

...What? They DID?

[snuffbox 0]

After hearing this folder gloat over the Democratic Party's chances for so long, a Kerry victory in the general election would be so incredibly fitting.

Because a 3 point lead in a poll several months before an election before one guy has even begun his campaign at all ---- yup, THAT means something.

 

It's not like Dukakis, Mondale, and Dole all led at this point.

-=Mike

...What? They DID?

they did Mike, really? I dont recall Dole ever leading over Clinton...

[Jobber of the Week 0]

before one guy has even begun his campaign at all

Well, we'll see then. The Meet The Press interview was pretty much the official first shot of his re-election campaign. I suspect he'll continue to be on the defensive for a while as the Iraqi intelligence stuff keeps on being a mystery.

 

Also, the party and it's supporters has already begun the advertising machine ("Take that liberal freakshow back to Vermont!") so it's not like he's getting no exposure. Incumbents always do.

[Guest MikeSC]

After hearing this folder gloat over the Democratic Party's chances for so long, a Kerry victory in the general election would be so incredibly fitting.

Because a 3 point lead in a poll several months before an election before one guy has even begun his campaign at all ---- yup, THAT means something.

 

It's not like Dukakis, Mondale, and Dole all led at this point.

-=Mike

...What? They DID?

they did Mike, really? I dont recall Dole ever leading over Clinton...

Before the campaign really started, Dole had a big lead over Clinton.

 

But he lost --- and badly.

 

Why?

 

Because when your ENTIRE campaign is based on hatred of your opponent, you won't win too often. Kerry will learn that lesson is short order.

 

Kerry has been riding a wave of Bush hatred amongst Democratic extremists for months now. He's going to have a MUCH harder time when, you know, MAINSTREAM voters examine his record.

Well, we'll see then. The Meet The Press interview was pretty much the official first shot of his re-election campaign. I suspect he'll continue to be on the defensive for a while as the Iraqi intelligence stuff keeps on being a mystery.

 

Also, the party and it's supporters has already begun the advertising machine ("Take that liberal freakshow back to Vermont!") so it's not like he's getting no exposure. Incumbents always do.

Bush hasn't responded to the attacks of the Dems to any degree up to now. When he starts --- and when Kerry's record (you know, playing up your service AND hatred of the war will get old quickly) becomes part of the debate --- well, good luck to him.

 

He'll need it.

 

Kerry is extreme. Bush most definitely is not.

-=Mike

[snuffbox 0]

bush is possibly the most extreme president ever...especially considering he lost the popular vote. war in iraq, patriot act, leave all poor children behind, mars/moon, evildoers, ran as 'compassionate' conservative, biggest deficit/budget ever...pretty extreme for a guy that didnt get as many votes as his opponent...

 

and beyond the king...his people are very extreme, with ashcoft being the worst(the man so untrustworthy in his homestate he couldnt beat a dead guy in an election). cheney is terribly corrupt, haliburton goes beyond whitewater and the tepot dome by miles and miles and miles. rice and powell dont balance it out either.

[Guest Cerebus]

I guess Saddam's capture only goes so far with people who can't pay the bills.

maybe he woulda been better off finding binladen, the guy that actually attacked america

Don't worry, they'll roll him out right before the election.

OMG CONSPIRACYTHEORY~!!!LOL2004!!!1

i love the new bush fanboy excuse...

 

whatever he does wrong is actually just a 'conspiracy theory'

 

fucking sick...this so much like a monarchy it turns my stomach. a king that can do no wrong, and dont question him or johnboy aschcroft will bradshaw your ass.

You think I'm a "bushfanboy" just b/c I don't buy into some bullshit theory that Bush is waiting for October to find OBL? Mike maybe blatantly partisan, but he's not stupid... from what I've seen its hard to make the same call about you.

[Guest MikeSC]

bush is possibly the most extreme president ever...

Hmm, passed a major education bill supported by Ted Kennedy.

Passed a medicare prescription benefit.

Proposed an immigration amnesty bill.

Man, he IS a raving conservative.

especially considering he lost the popular vote.

Man, live in the now. Seriously. It's been over 3 years.

war in iraq, patriot act, leave all poor children behind, mars/moon, evildoers, ran as 'compassionate' conservative, biggest deficit/budget ever...pretty extreme for a guy that didnt get as many votes as his opponent...

Let's go in order:

War in Iraq? Yup. No problem there.

Patriot Act? Allowed terrorists to be treated like mob bosses. You're just griping because, darn it, you're a good leftist and you ALL gripe about it.

Biggest deficit/budget ever? Yup. Funny, I hear the Dems gripe that he is spending TOO LITTLE. Any idea what that equates to?

Leave all poor children behind? How much has education spending gone up under Bush? Well, according to the Heritage Foundation, it jumped from $35B in 2001 to $58B in 2003. That would be a 65% jump. Dang him for gutting education.

Mars/moon? Has ANYTHING been done for this, yet?

Evildoers? Sorry, I suppose Saddam and Osama were good guys. My bad.

Ran as "compassionate conservative"? Well, he did pass the education bill, treats terrorists as mob bosses, and passed a prescription drug benefit.

Didn't get as many votes as his opponent? Apparently, relevant points aren't a strong suit.

and beyond the king...his people are very extreme, with ashcoft being the worst(the man so untrustworthy in his homestate he couldnt beat a dead guy in an election).

You know, it actually IS rather difficult to win against a guy who died tragically right before an election?

 

He COULD have easily contested the election and won the seat, but unlike a certain former VP, chose not to.

cheney is terribly corrupt, haliburton goes beyond whitewater and the tepot dome by miles and miles and miles.

Care to explain how? Can you provide evidence of massive corruption?

 

I thought not.

rice and powell dont balance it out either.

Nothing needs balancing out.

 

Why not go post on the AOL boards? It seems more your speed.

-=Mike

[snuffbox 0]

i could have sworn that ive stated my political party affiliation on here a few times for you Mike...LIBERTARIAN.

 

i know ann coulter couldnt grasp this one...apparently neither can you...its NOT the same as liberal.

 

liberal = big government, liberal on social issues

conservative - small govt(theyre usually in favor of the biggest, at least the past 25 years), conservative on social issues

libertarian = against big govt, waste, taxation without representation, etc. very liberal on social issues, freedom for americans.

 

will i have to continue to explain this...or will i be spun as a liberal because i dislike bush? you cant grasp the differences between parties...in theory, libertarians are farther right than republicans,...and yet im slow. come on man, spinning does not equate to accuracy.

[Guest MikeSC]

i could have sworn that ive stated my political party affiliation on here a few times for you Mike...LIBERTARIAN.

 

i know ann coulter couldnt grasp this one...apparently neither can you...its NOT the same as liberal.

 

liberal = big government, liberal on social issues

conservative - small govt(theyre usually in favor of the biggest, at least the past 25 years), conservative on social issues

libertarian = against big govt, waste, taxation without representation, etc. very liberal on social issues, freedom for americans.

 

will i have to continue to explain this...or will i be spun as a liberal because i dislike bush? you cant grasp the differences between parties...in theory, libertarians are farther right than republicans,...and yet im slow. come on man, spinning does not equate to accuracy.

Saying stuff like "Leave all poor children behind" kind of belies your whole assumption of actually being libertarian.

 

To give you a hint: Libertarians would oppose the education bill because the gov't shouldn't be involved in education, not because the poor aren't getting their fair share.

 

But, go ahead and convince yourself of your actual beliefs.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Kerry has been riding a wave of Bush hatred amongst Democratic extremists for months now. He's going to have a MUCH harder time when, you know, MAINSTREAM voters examine his record.

Many of the primaries (since you dismissed caucuses) have reported higher than usual turnout. This would imply more usual joes instead of just the "extremists" who appear at every election.

 

when Kerry's record (you know, playing up your service AND hatred of the war will get old quickly)

 

How's that bad? It makes a lot of sense compared to a bunch of chickenhawks talking about how we need to give war a chance.

 

Kerry is extreme. Bush most definitely is not.

          -=Mike

 

Bush is not extreme. Bush is simply whatever shade of Republican he can be to get re-elected. If that means signing a gay marriage ban with one hand while granting gifts to illegal immigrants with the other, well then so be it.

[snuffbox 0]

heres how to handle the situation WITHOUT big speding Mikey...the LIBERTARIAN way...

 

schools right now are failing children...not failing as in not passing them, but failing as in not giving them a good education..they get a lot of money, but still, by and large, they struggle...

 

here is the main problem imo...teachers (not all but many) are too often not interested in giving kids what they need to grow and become successful adults. they seem more concerend with the power that they have over kids and teens, never being wrong, being looked up at, authority. if teachers would focus on teaching and not ruling...thered be better education and less violence, imo. this wouldnt cost any extra money.

 

also, teachers tend to teach kids how to survive not how to succeed. theres little emphasis on ALL students to follow artistic desires, higher aspirations...only how to get a diploma/get a job. if all teachers would focus on giving their students more hope instead of keeping them in line...education would improve. imo.

 

and, we are all traxed quite enough right now. we dont need more, and we can by on less. say we didnt invade countries, plan mars/moon trips, build un headquarters, pork barrel spend, and have a billion dollar war on plants that kill zero people per year, etc...wed have billions still available and trimmed taxes. plenty for education and healthcare, and more for families immediate needs and future plans/goals.

 

that is a libertarian philosophy...not liberal, not conservative, not green, not stupid.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Hmm, passed a major education bill supported by Ted Kennedy.

And then dropped funding for it.

 

Passed a medicare prescription benefit.

 

The TV ads for this crack me up. "It's like more Medicare!" Spun up to make it look like the Democrats (and actual conservative Republicans) were upset about it for no reason.

 

By banning the government to negotiate drug prices, everything has been tossed in the hands of HMOs, or more accurately, drug companies. While it's true that without the drug companies there wouldn't be a drug in the first place, this freedom to let the companies make a sharp jump in their prices means that sick people who aren't rolling in wealth are going to have a much harder time getting their medicine.

 

It actually makes life harder on the people the TV ad is trying to spin to.

 

Proposed an immigration amnesty bill.

 

You tryin' to make me not like the guy?

 

Man, he IS a raving conservative.

 

Well, take a look at his 2000 backing. Social conservative activists ahoy!

 

Patriot Act? Allowed terrorists to be treated like mob bosses. You're just griping because, darn it, you're a good leftist and you ALL gripe about it.

 

The Patriot Act powers are being exercised against people who are not terrorists! That right there is a violation of the trust expressed to the people by the administration that the act was a temporary change in law for use in catching terrorists.

 

Biggest deficit/budget ever? Yup. Funny, I hear the Dems gripe that he is spending TOO LITTLE.

 

Then please, hit them for me.

 

Mars/moon? Has ANYTHING been done for this, yet?

 

I don't know about you, but I like scientists driving the NASA organization, not politicians. Bush barely increased NASA's budget, but he did order that all their money now go to Mars exploration. This means that a lot of good projects, such as the Hubble Space Telescope, will now be scrapped when they naturally expire, as all funding is now going to Mars.

[Guest MikeSC]

Kerry has been riding a wave of Bush hatred amongst Democratic extremists for months now. He's going to have a MUCH harder time when, you know, MAINSTREAM voters examine his record.

Many of the primaries (since you dismissed caucuses) have reported higher than usual turnout. This would imply more usual joes instead of just the "extremists" who appear at every election.

My state's primary had "higher than normal" turnout. The number (200,000) is still 1/3 of the voters who voted in the 2000 GOP primary. They weren't exactly mainstream.

 

Roughly 50% vote in the general election.

 

Do even 10% vote in primaries?

when Kerry's record (you know, playing up your service AND hatred of the war will get old quickly)

 

How's that bad? It makes a lot of sense compared to a bunch of chickenhawks talking about how we need to give war a chance.

Most people aren't proud of doing things they view as being bad.

 

And throwing somebody else's medals did kind of put a damper on his symbolic gesture oh so many years ago.

Kerry is extreme. Bush most definitely is not.

          -=Mike

 

Bush is not extreme. Bush is simply whatever shade of Republican he can be to get re-elected. If that means signing a gay marriage ban with one hand while granting gifts to illegal immigrants with the other, well then so be it.

It's called traingulation. Morris had Clinton do it to a win in 1996. Bush is doing the same thing. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now --- but it works.

Hmm, passed a major education bill supported by Ted Kennedy. 

 

 

And then dropped funding for it.

Education spending has skyrocketed 65% in just 2 years, according to the Heritage Foundation (which bases ITS numbers on the, you know, federal budget).

Passed a medicare prescription benefit.

 

The TV ads for this crack me up. "It's like more Medicare!" Spun up to make it look like the Democrats (and actual conservative Republicans) were upset about it for no reason.

 

By banning the government to negotiate drug prices, everything has been tossed in the hands of HMOs, or more accurately, drug companies. While it's true that without the drug companies there wouldn't be a drug in the first place, this freedom to let the companies make a sharp jump in their prices means that sick people who aren't rolling in wealth are going to have a much harder time getting their medicine.

Or, in simple terms, it's like EVERY friggin' entitlement program the gov't has been involved in. Prices will skyrocket, making medical care MORE impossible to afford.

 

It is a horrible idea --- and I bitched when it happened --- but it doesn't paint him as an extremist, that's for sure.

It actually makes life harder on the people the TV ad is trying to spin to.

Every entitlement program does that. Why do you think the two areas with the quickest price inflation is medicine and education? Because the gov't is HEAVILY involved in those areas.

Proposed an immigration amnesty bill.

 

 

You tryin' to make me not like the guy?

I didn't say it was a good bill, either. It is asinine. BUT, it definitely removes a lot of the "He's a right-wing extremist" crap the left has tried to hang on him for his entire term.

Man, he IS a raving conservative.

 

Well, take a look at his 2000 backing. Social conservative activists ahoy!

Clinton was supported by liberal activists. I doubt you viewed him as extreme.

Patriot Act? Allowed terrorists to be treated like mob bosses. You're just griping because, darn it, you're a good leftist and you ALL gripe about it.

 

The Patriot Act powers are being exercised against people who are not terrorists! That right there is a violation of the trust expressed to the people by the administration that the act was a temporary change in law for use in catching terrorists.

Care to provide instances of this?

Biggest deficit/budget ever? Yup. Funny, I hear the Dems gripe that he is spending TOO LITTLE.

 

Then please, hit them for me.

Kerry has too many guards to allow me to slap him.

Mars/moon? Has ANYTHING been done for this, yet?

 

I don't know about you, but I like scientists driving the NASA organization, not politicians. Bush barely increased NASA's budget, but he did order that all their money now go to Mars exploration. This means that a lot of good projects, such as the Hubble Space Telescope, will now be scrapped when they naturally expire, as all funding is now going to Mars.

I've not heard of ANY funding going to the Mars mission.

heres how to handle the situation WITHOUT big speding Mikey...the LIBERTARIAN way...

 

schools right now are failing children...not failing as in not passing them, but failing as in not giving them a good education..they get a lot of money, but still, by and large, they struggle...

 

here is the main problem imo...teachers (not all but many) are too often not interested in giving kids what they need to grow and become successful adults. they seem more concerend with the power that they have over kids and teens, never being wrong, being looked up at, authority. if teachers would focus on teaching and not ruling...thered be better education and less violence, imo. this wouldnt cost any extra money.

If we slashed administration of school districts, costs would plummet. An ungodly large amount of money goes to overhead.

also, teachers tend to teach kids how to survive not how to succeed. theres little emphasis on ALL students to follow artistic desires, higher aspirations...only how to get a diploma/get a job. if all teachers would focus on giving their students more hope instead of keeping them in line...education would improve. imo.

Most teachers, honestly, aren't exactly rocket scientists. They don't have the intellect to do that kind of thing.

and, we are all traxed quite enough right now.

Absolutely. Bush cut taxes, too.

we dont need more, and we can by on less. say we didnt invade countries, plan mars/moon trips, build un headquarters, pork barrel spend, and have a billion dollar war on plants that kill zero people per year, etc...wed have billions still available and trimmed taxes.

We attacked Iraq and that was the right thing. North Korea might be a problem in the future, but by and large, not a lot of military actions we need to take presently. And, we should pull out of the UN entirely, so rebuilding the HQ IS stupid. I have no problem with NASA expenses as the benefits we get from space travel and the science attached to it is considerable. And the war on pot IS bad. I don't like it and think we should end it.

plenty for education and healthcare, and more for families immediate needs and future plans/goals.

Spending money on education and health care have driven prices through the roof since the 1960's.

that is a libertarian philosophy...not liberal, not conservative, not green, not stupid.

It's actually conservative, if you want to know the truth.

 

Still doesn't explain the whole "Poor children left behind" line.

-=Mike

[snuffbox 0]

damn...i take the time to explain a libertarian plan for education(yes, it does have conservatism in it due to libertarianism being very fiscally-conservative) and Mike agrees with a fair bit of it. wow...cheers brah

[Vyce 0]

Bush is not extreme. Bush is simply whatever shade of Republican he can be to get re-elected.

 

This just goes into my growing file of how Bush is, in many ways, the Republican version of Bill Clinton.

 

As for Kerry......hasn't he publically stated that he regretted every being in the Vietnam War?

 

How the fuck do you say something like and STILL go out and trot out your service record and get a pass for doing so?