Bush approval: 48%

[snuffbox 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?

that vyce, is deplorable...

 

kerry fought bravely in Nam because he was a soldier and he had to. he served his country as ordered, served for and with the people beside him, and didnt awol/dodge out like clinton and bush.

 

then he publicly challenged the reasons for that war very bravely/rightly. it was not a just war but he had a responsibilty to his fellow soldier and he did it.

 

most nam vets i know realize that the war was very wrong, wrong reasons. but they were all still brave for doing it, for risking themselves, for saving each other.

[Guest MikeSC]

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?

that vyce, is deplorable...

 

kerry fought bravely in Nam because he was a soldier and he had to. he served his country as ordered, served for and with the people beside him, and didnt awol/dodge out like clinton and bush.

 

then he publicly challenged the reasons for that war very bravely/rightly. it was not a just war but he had a responsibilty to his fellow soldier and he did it.

 

most nam vets i know realize that the war was very wrong, wrong reasons. but they were all still brave for doing it, for risking themselves, for saving each other.

Bush WAS in the Guard. He WAS honorably discharged (that wouldn't happen if he DID go AWOL, just to end THAT line). The Guard is a major part of the military and to discount them is insulting. The Guard is a big presence in Iraq presently.

 

And, again, if you find something to be morally wrong, you don't keep hyping up you having taken part in it.

-=Mike

..."My Lai? Yeah it was bad --- but I'm DAMNED PROUD I was there"

[snuffbox 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?

that vyce, is deplorable...

 

kerry fought bravely in Nam because he was a soldier and he had to. he served his country as ordered, served for and with the people beside him, and didnt awol/dodge out like clinton and bush.

 

then he publicly challenged the reasons for that war very bravely/rightly. it was not a just war but he had a responsibilty to his fellow soldier and he did it.

 

most nam vets i know realize that the war was very wrong, wrong reasons. but they were all still brave for doing it, for risking themselves, for saving each other.

Bush WAS in the Guard. He WAS honorably discharged (that wouldn't happen if he DID go AWOL, just to end THAT line). The Guard is a major part of the military and to discount them is insulting. The Guard is a big presence in Iraq presently.

 

And, again, if you find something to be morally wrong, you don't keep hyping up you having taken part in it.

-=Mike

..."My Lai? Yeah it was bad --- but I'm DAMNED PROUD I was there"

wow...when did i discount the guard. i have nothing but respect for every man and woman in the military. where did i discount anyone that SERVED?

 

Bush saw no combat and was dishonorably discharged...why is that? he didnt go awol, but left dishonorably...hmm...daddy didnt pull strings or anything? a commander in chief that sends his country to way, but himself couldnt make it through his national guard days...wow.

 

Mike, who claimed pride for my lai? the leaders did and were punished. the soldiers suffer horrible posttraumatic stress from being in stuff like that...what would you like them to do in vietnam, desert their fellow soldier and let them die, or help each other after being thrown in by lbj, nixon, mcnamara, etc?

[Guest MikeSC]

wow...when did i discount the guard. i have nothing but respect for every man and woman in the military. where did i discount anyone that SERVED?

The phrase "dodge out" sound familiar?

Bush saw no combat and was dishonorably discharged...why is that? he didnt go awol, but left dishonorably...hmm...daddy didnt pull strings or anything? a commander in chief that sends his country to way, but himself couldnt make it through his national guard days...wow

He was honorably disacharged. If asked to serve in Vietnam, he would have. He did his service and was discharged honorably for his service.

Mike, who claimed pride for my lai?

Nobody, and that was the point. If you did something you find to be wrong, you don't often brag about your doing it. If the Vietnam War was wrong, you wouldn't spend a lot of time both boasting of your service and talking about how wrong it was.

the leaders did and were punished. the soldiers suffer horrible posttraumatic stress from being in stuff like that...what would you like them to do in vietnam, desert their fellow soldier and let them die, or help each other after being thrown in by lbj, nixon, mcnamara, etc?

If you feel that the war was extremely wrong, then you don't brag about your service.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

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

I think the point is that most people view Vietnam as a bad war, although that does not mean they view all war as bad and never accomplishing anything.

 

The point of Kerry talking about his service is that a guy who's seen a bad war can better tell the difference between a war going well and a war going badly.

 

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.

 

It's talking out of both sides of his mouth. He wants to impress the undecideds while still letting the Christian Coalition and it's allies know he's still on their side. And unlike Clinton, it's incredibly transparent.

 

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

 

Doesn't change that what Bush presented to Congress and what Bush put in his budget was wildly different.

 

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.

 

I don't know how it makes him look less like a right-wing extremists than he previously appeared to be, because at the very least he never said anything as stupid as, say, Pat Buchannan when it comes to the subject of immigration.

 

If he had stayed the course, he at least wouldn't look like he was pandering. He didn't. Now he does.

 

Care to provide instances of this?

 

Here's one I can remember right off the top of my head. The FBI used the Patriot Act to look into the finances of a Las Vegas strip club owner? who was under investigation for political bribery. Not terrorism.

 

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

[snuffbox 0]

i never hear Kerry bragging up the war...i hear it mentioned, i hear others bring it up, but i never hear any bragging from. maybe im just not spinning enough?

 

and yes...bill clinton WAS a draft dodger. no doubt. and he never should have sent 500+ young people to war in iraq...er wait...nevermind

[Justice 0]

i never hear Kerry bragging up the war...i hear it mentioned, i hear others bring it up, but i never hear any bragging from. maybe im just not spinning enough?

 

and yes...bill clinton WAS a draft dodger. no doubt. and he never should have sent 500+ young people to war in iraq...er wait...nevermind

You, my friend, are a fucktard.

 

Seriously.

 

People constantly tout how many men have died in Iraq as though we are supposed to say "Jesus, people are dying! We have to get out of there!" Understand, moron, that more people would have died had Saddam been left in power compared to when we went in. 500 Deaths? I mourn them for their sacrifice, but I understand why that sacrifice was made: for the direct welfare of 25,000,000 people and countless other millions indirectly who could have been hurt by Saddam had he tried another invasion (His army was still the best in the Middle East outside of Israel). You idiots use them as a simple statistic to try and further your already weak argument of non-intervention. More died in a single hour on Omaha Beach, dying for the freedom of others who couldn't defend themselves. Would you throw away their achievement and say that they died in vain for a war we never needed to get involved in (Japan and Germany never intended to invade the US). How 'bout telling the 1,000,000 families abroad (Outside of Iraq) that lost their loved ones that the lives of 500 servicemen was simply a price too high to take out someone who took the lives of their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, and uncles. I loathe people like you.

[snuffbox 0]

i never hear Kerry bragging up the war...i hear it mentioned, i hear others bring it up, but i never hear any bragging from. maybe im just not spinning enough?

 

and yes...bill clinton WAS a draft dodger. no doubt. and he never should have sent 500+ young people to war in iraq...er wait...nevermind

You, my friend, are a fucktard.

 

Seriously.

 

People constantly tout how many men have died in Iraq as though we are supposed to say "Jesus, people are dying! We have to get out of there!" Understand, moron, that more people would have died had Saddam been left in power compared to when we went in. 500 Deaths? I mourn them for their sacrifice, but I understand why that sacrifice was made: for the direct welfare of 25,000,000 people and countless other millions indirectly who could have been hurt by Saddam had he tried another invasion (His army was still the best in the Middle East outside of Israel). You idiots use them as a simple statistic to try and further your already weak argument of non-intervention. More died in a single hour on Omaha Beach, dying for the freedom of others who couldn't defend themselves. Would you throw away their achievement and say that they died in vain for a war we never needed to get involved in (Japan and Germany never intended to invade the US). How 'bout telling the 1,000,000 families abroad (Outside of Iraq) that lost their loved ones that the lives of 500 servicemen was simply a price too high to take out someone who took the lives of their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, and uncles. I loathe people like you.

can we go into the other countries where millions die now then?...you know, the ones without oil fields?

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

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

 

You have a source for that? (and for the Mondale claim too)

[Jobber of the Week 0]

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

Damn. I forgot to answer some things in this post of yours.

 

Clinton wasn't really backed by liberal activists until it was obvious he was going to be the nominee. He played much of the same "work both sides" game that Bush is.

 

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

 

All current funding is going to the Mars mission. He has dedicated all of NASA's time and energy into this Mars thing. That means that non-Mars related astronomy, such as the Hubble, will simply have to be forgotten about as they misfunction or fade out.

 

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

      -=Mike

No Child Left Behind called for $5.6 billion to be spent on title 1 schools. Congress approved. Bush's budget allocated only $1 billion.

[Kahran Ramsus 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.

Ok. I am increasingly unable to read what you are trying to say. You are in violation of board rules by doing this. You have to learn how to write properly, including proper capitalization, or else you won't be around for much longer.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

If asked to serve in Vietnam, he would have.

Not like Good Ol' Pops had anything to do with him getting that post in the first place, oh hell no.

[MrRant 0]

What does the Moon have to do with anything? That is going to cause him to lose?

[Vyce 0]

i never hear Kerry bragging up the war...i hear it mentioned, i hear others bring it up, but i never hear any bragging from. maybe im just not spinning enough?

 

and yes...bill clinton WAS a draft dodger. no doubt. and he never should have sent 500+ young people to war in iraq...er wait...nevermind

You, my friend, are a fucktard.

 

Seriously.

 

People constantly tout how many men have died in Iraq as though we are supposed to say "Jesus, people are dying! We have to get out of there!" Understand, moron, that more people would have died had Saddam been left in power compared to when we went in. 500 Deaths? I mourn them for their sacrifice, but I understand why that sacrifice was made: for the direct welfare of 25,000,000 people and countless other millions indirectly who could have been hurt by Saddam had he tried another invasion (His army was still the best in the Middle East outside of Israel). You idiots use them as a simple statistic to try and further your already weak argument of non-intervention. More died in a single hour on Omaha Beach, dying for the freedom of others who couldn't defend themselves. Would you throw away their achievement and say that they died in vain for a war we never needed to get involved in (Japan and Germany never intended to invade the US). How 'bout telling the 1,000,000 families abroad (Outside of Iraq) that lost their loved ones that the lives of 500 servicemen was simply a price too high to take out someone who took the lives of their fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, and uncles. I loathe people like you.

Marney's JS Mill quote really applies here. It truly does.

 

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

 

Nobody, and that was the point. If you did something you find to be wrong, you don't often brag about your doing it. If the Vietnam War was wrong, you wouldn't spend a lot of time both boasting of your service and talking about how wrong it was.

 

Right. This is my problem with Kerry. I find his actions terribly disingenuous.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

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?

Because he still risked his life for this country, his regret about it doesn't change that.

 

Just because you didn't want to be there, doesn't mean the bullets are going to go around you.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

What does the Moon have to do with anything? That is going to cause him to lose?

If you mean the NASA thing, I don't think it's going to cause him to lose. In fact, I think the idea was to try and provide a Kennedy-esque moment of leadership conveniently quick after people on both sides got angry at him for Medicare and immigration.

 

The thing that a lot of people didn't see is the side effects of directing NASA to focus entirely on this "to the Moon, then to Mars" thing. Things like the Hubble Telescope aren't related to the anything as close as the Moon or Mars. They're meant to look way out there.

 

It was recently stated that when the power supply on the telescope runs dry, they will not be running a maintenance mission to keep it going. All the money and manpower is going to Bush's moon/mars plan.

 

 

So, basically, a politician is telling a group of astronomers, astronauts, and scientists who are far more informed and experienced in this field than he is, what to do.

 

I'm always uncomfortable when that happens, doesn't matter who it is or what party they're from. If privatizing the space program would get rid of this kind of thing, then damn, I'm sold.

[Firestarter 0]

So, basically, a politician is telling a group of astronomers, astronauts, and scientists who are far more informed and experienced in this field than he is, what to do

Honestly, that group of "astronomers, astronauts, and scientists" is at least as politically manipulative and greedy as any given politician in any party. You think a constant stream of manned shuttles circling round and round places we've been any number of times already is about science? Every independent expert agrees that it's completely worthless and ridiculously unsafe. The International Space Station? Same thing. NASA always has and still does make supposedly "scientific" decisions based on their photo-op value. Humans in space = risk = ratings = bigger budget. It's kind of like the lunar equivalent of a campaign rally. At least the President wants us to go somewhere new.

[Justice 0]

can we go into the other countries where millions die now then?...you know, the ones without oil fields?

So, because there's oil in the country, they don't matter? If they had fucking CORN in their country you'd say "Can we go to a country where there's no corn!?" I don't remember Afganistan being all too big on oil either, dude.

 

Okay, you can give me a dictator out there who could cause more damage to his own people and countries around him than Saddam (Kim Il Jong II is out since he's already being dealt with anyways), please, speak up.

 

Christ, I thought I qualified as the war-like one here, but invade Iraq and suddenly all the libs are "Well now look what you did! You'd better invade EVERYONE now!" Apparently they lack the knowledge that military campaigns take time.

[sfaJack 0]

can we go into the other countries where millions die now then?...you know, the ones without oil fields?

Yeah, because Iraq having oil has really been beneficial to us. Have you bought a tank of gas lately?

[snuffbox 0]

can we go into the other countries where millions die now then?...you know, the ones without oil fields?

Yeah, because Iraq having oil has really been beneficial to us. Have you bought a tank of gas lately?

Ill bet I can think of a few high-ranking gentleman that made more a few coins off it though

[Vern Gagne 0]

Gas prices are managable in Minnesota. Up to about 1.69 and down to about 1.42 a gallon at times.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Honestly, that group of "astronomers, astronauts, and scientists" is at least as politically manipulative and greedy as any given politician in any party.

Yeah, that's why they get all that money and everything. Most NASA projects (such as these rovers) cost a lot less than they used to, but it's not so much what you're saying as who's saying it. I know how much you love the military and it's current level of funding, so it's pretty amusing to sit and read you talk about the space program as though it's got a bunch some group of sharp-tongued lobbyists trying to get a huge slice of the budget.

 

NASA always has and still does make supposedly "scientific" decisions based on their photo-op value. Humans in space = risk = ratings = bigger budget.

 

I'm going to disagree with you here, but if in the future I concede to being wrong, at least it reinforced my talk about privatizing.

 

At least the President wants us to go somewhere new.

I'd like to go to Zebulon-8 and look for the Zebulonians and their fabulous Space Cheese, but I'd defer the situation to a better educated person who can figure out how possible it is and whether it's worth sacrificing things currently going on to do it.

 

Oh yeah, and the additional money he DID promise? No announced cut or anything about where that money is coming from. I guess he'll put it on charge.

 

[Justice 0]

can we go into the other countries where millions die now then?...you know, the ones without oil fields?

Yeah, because Iraq having oil has really been beneficial to us. Have you bought a tank of gas lately?

Ill bet I can think of a few high-ranking gentleman that made more a few coins off it though

Of course, you'd have no proof besides heresay and conjecture, but what the hell, those count, don't they?

[Guest hunger4unger]

I mourn them for their sacrifice, but I understand why that sacrifice was made: for the direct welfare of 25,000,000 people and countless other millions indirectly who could have been hurt by Saddam had he tried another invasion (His army was still the best in the Middle East outside of Israel). You idiots use them as a simple statistic to try and further your already weak argument of non-intervention.

I don't think the Iraqi army was "the best" in the middle east outside of Israel and capable of anything - look at the little resistance they posed when they were invaded. They had outdated tanks in small numbers and showed no other weapons of strength - especially not those elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction.

[Justice 0]

I mourn them for their sacrifice, but I understand why that sacrifice was made: for the direct welfare of 25,000,000 people and countless other millions indirectly who could have been hurt by Saddam had he tried another invasion (His army was still the best in the Middle East outside of Israel). You idiots use them as a simple statistic to try and further your already weak argument of non-intervention.

I don't think the Iraqi army was "the best" in the middle east outside of Israel and capable of anything - look at the little resistance they posed when they were invaded. They had outdated tanks in small numbers and showed no other weapons of strength - especially not those elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Uh, that doesn't mean that they couldn't utterly fuck up people like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Just because they wilt against us doesn't mean they can't hurt or beat anyone else. Their equipment is probably some of the better stuff in the Middle East (Their tanks are THAT out of date. T-72s are still pretty formidable). They still had one of the larger armies in the world and that alone is pretty dangerous.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I think there's a data-entry error with your card.

 

It only says good through 1/05.

 

Shouldn't that be 1/08?

 

And another thing, instead of the hologram picture of the world map, shouldn't it just be an image of the U.S. -- since we're a unilateral super power and all?...

[Guest MikeSC]

I mourn them for their sacrifice, but I understand why that sacrifice was made: for the direct welfare of 25,000,000 people and countless other millions indirectly who could have been hurt by Saddam had he tried another invasion (His army was still the best in the Middle East outside of Israel). You idiots use them as a simple statistic to try and further your already weak argument of non-intervention.

I don't think the Iraqi army was "the best" in the middle east outside of Israel and capable of anything - look at the little resistance they posed when they were invaded. They had outdated tanks in small numbers and showed no other weapons of strength - especially not those elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Don't go with the whole "Because the U.S easily went through them, they must be bad" line of thinking.

 

Using that mentality, there is no competent military in the world outside of the U.S and Israel.

-=Mike

[Jobber of the Week 0]

It only says good through 1/05.

 

Shouldn't that be 1/08?

I don't know why.

 

 

I'm so confident that we're going to win that you couldn't believe it.

[Firestarter 0]

I'm so confident that we're going to win that you couldn't believe it.

I believe it; Democrats are delusional. And I'm going to remind you of this on November 3rd.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I believe it; Democrats are delusional. And I'm going to remind you of this on November 3rd.

I'm always winning to believe that things could change drastically between now and November, and if such a thing happens, my mood is willing to change. But if the course is maintained, good luck to ya.

 

Though, to be honest, I also think the man is a blemish on our nation who needs to be removed with anyone, even the bum down the street, for the good of the country. So even if I feel Bush will win, I'll still hope he loses. =b