Here's why one should vote for Kerry...

[TiderinVA]

Foster, you're very mistaken if you think no one was

sacked or given a desk job after Pearl Harbor. There were several high ranking officers that were either given a desk job and never heard from again or quietly were forced to retire/resign.

 

[TiderinMiss]

As far as arguments as to "what has Bush done or hasn't done" as far as I am concerned the liberals have run out of strategies to attack him. The war on terrorism goes well, the economy is picking up, etc. As far as poor education standards for our children and poor health care for our citizens, do you expect Bush to fix it overnight? If so why couldn't Clinton fix it in 8 years?

OUCH!!!! That's gotta hurt!

 

[PeteTheYankee]

At the end of the day, what Iraq comes down to is that they've had WMDs before (kurds, anyone?), they had been in material violation of UN resolutions for more than a decade, and the bottom line is that they would have, at some point, become a serious threat to American security (remember Saddam's painting of 9/11?). The number of lives lost in Iraq is a trifling compared to what it would've been if we had allowed Saddam to continue to hide his weapons.

The whole "Illegal War in Iraq" has been done to death and nobody's really come up with anything good yet. Not that I expect anyone to let it go and move on to real issues... but geez...

 

[TexasTide]

FK,

1) When you accept fault for something, you imply that something wrong was done. I don't think Bush believes invading Iraq was wrong, nor do I.

2) We all know it was ultimately Bush's decision to go into Iraq. We all know he is ultmately responsible, even though he had the support of Congress. Bush knows he is responsible. To come out and make a statement as such would be redundant. Bush gets blamed every day by millions of people, does anyone really believe he is not responsible? Would it be some great revelation to you if Bush came out and said he was responsible for the decision to invade Iraq? Whose decision did you think it was? Putin? Chirac? UN?

3) The blood of American soldiers and civilians and innocent Iraqi's is on the hands of Saddam and the Islamic terrorists. Although Bush is responsible for sending troops to Iraq, he was left with little choice. See PeteTheYankee's post for reasons, not that you will understand them.

 

[IH8Orange]

foster:

Are you a marine biologist specializing in sharks? A carpenter? A bludgeoning serial killer?

I'm just curious to your inclination toward the term "hammerhead".

 

[Stephen323]

Would someone plese tell me what Bush has done ovr the lst 3+ years to justify electing him to another term???

Remember, I'm asking for things BUSH has done, not anything about Kerry...

Can you do it???

Can you tell me where the "Clean Water Administration" is? This is only the third time I have asked.

 

[Pachydermatous]

Pachydermatous

foster:

Are you a marine biologist specializing in sharks? A carpenter? A bludgeoning serial killer?

I'm just curious to your inclination toward the term "hammerhead".

No, foster is none of those things. In fact he is the Democrat Party's punching bag, or whipping boy. Once again he has jumped into the middle of a post with his usual litany of dumb charges and managed to change the theme from an utterly useless Kerry to George Bush. I thought by now some of you had caught on to his scam, but most are so eager to belabor foster that you can't wait to poke him in the snoot.

Foster is quite willing to be poked. And while you are swinging away, Kerry, like a harassed rat, escapes into his hole.

 

[Pachydermatous]

Pachydermatous

Now to get the thread back on theme. It is only through the stupidity of much of the electorate --- and the connivance of media, academia and Hollywood --- that a total zero like Kerry could be seriously considered a presidential candidate. His record is what? If you hired a plumber you would at least ask for references. He has sat in Congress for years and done nothing on his own, voting on other people's bills, and always with a leftward slant in deference to the wishes of his betters in the party. Talk about a puppet!

I could think of thousands who would make a better president, maybe hundreds of thousands. He has no managerial experience, not even at managing his wife's $1 billion legacy. She is wise to keep that experience to herself. I know he can ski and ride a bike, at least as well as the average amateur. Rumor has it his singing is enough to make dogs howl.

He claims to be a war hero. But since I have been to war myself I know what to think about those who trade on their "heroism," especially for political gain.

The plain fact is it is difficult to criticize Kerry because there is nothing there. He has done nothing and is nothing.

Nothing at all.

 

[Nate Harris]

The truth is both candidates suck.

 

[REALtide]

This is why I'm voting for Bush....

We haven't finished tracking down the ones responsible and Kerry would call the dogs off.

3d Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division soldiers found this painting. The caption to the mural of Mr. Hussein and the WTC say; "The Right Honorable, Mr. President, Leader, Holy Warrior Saddam Hussein (may God protect him)." The badge between Mr. Hussein and the WTC at the middle and top of the mural says;
"Allah protect Iraq and Saddam."

.... enough to remove him over if you ask me.


p.s. had the counter not messed up with the recent upgrade , I would now have made 1000 posts !!!!!

 

[TommyMac]

Would someone plese tell me what Bush has done ovr the lst 3+ years to justify electing him to another term???

Remember, I'm asking for things BUSH has done, not anything about Kerry...

Can you do it???

Typical lib/dem ploy. They can't defend the actions of their candidate, so they have to try to attack his opposition.

 

[IH8Orange]

No, foster is none of those things. In fact he is the Democrat Party's punching bag, or whipping boy. Once again he has jumped into the middle of a post with his usual litany of dumb charges and managed to change the theme from an utterly useless Kerry to George Bush. I thought by now some of you had caught on to his scam, but most are so eager to belabor foster that you can't wait to poke him in the snoot.

Foster is quite willing to be poked. And while you are swinging away, Kerry, like a harassed rat, escapes into his hole.

So he's actually a sado-masochist with a martyr complex. Interesting.

 

[jthomas666]

This is why I'm voting for Bush....

We haven't finished tracking down the ones responsible and Kerry would call the dogs off.

One reason we haven't gotten the people responsible is because Bush invaded Iraq instead of stepping up efforts to get bin Laden.

 

[wisten]

Removing a regime is easier

Removing a regime is easier than finding a lone individual. We did cripple the Taliban and Al Queada, and I believe Osama Yomama will be found. Based on what was going on, with Afganistan neutralized and Iraq rumbling, I still feel the proper action was to topple Saddam. As a fringe benefit, Libya dropped all pretense of being a rogue nation, the other mid-east states are walking very lightly around us, and even North Korea and China are paying attention.

Osama? Various news reports have him and his cronies have had numerous plots foiled. Don't believe me? Google it on the news tab .. "Osama Bin Laden plots" ... interesting reading.

 

[jthomas666]

Removing a regime is easier than finding a lone individual.

Just what we need--determining our foreign policy based on the path of least resistance.

Osama? Various news reports have him and his cronies have had numerous plots foiled. Don't believe me? Google it on the news tab .. "Osama Bin Laden plots" ... interesting reading.

Of course I've read them. They indicate that he is still out there, still plotting against us. So we have two potential targets. One has already demonstrated the ability to strike against American soil. The other *might* be able to strike against American soil.

Which would you consider a more immediate threat?

 

[Bamalaw92]

. So we have two potential targets. One has already demonstrated the ability to strike against American soil. The other *might* be able to strike against American soil.

Which would you consider a more immediate threat?

Both...as both demonstrated both ability and desire albeit only one, thankfully, was able to carry out the task. Would you prefer to wait until AFTER the one who "might" actually does??

 

[jthomas666]

Both...as both demonstrated both ability and desire albeit only one, thankfully, was able to carry out the task. Would you prefer to wait until AFTER the one who "might" actually does??

1. Exactly when did Hussein demonstrate the ability to attack the US homeland? In two wars against the US, he never demonstrated the ability to defend his own homeland. (Do you suppose he's part French?)

2. Someone who has attacked us is a greater threat than someone who might attack us. I do not understand why that is such a difficult concept.

What did Osama do when we attempted to run him down? He went into hiding, from where he continues to plot against us.

What did Hussein do when we attempted to run him down? He went into hiding. Period. I don't recall him masterminding anything from his spider hole.

 

[IH8Orange]

Just what we need--determining our foreign policy based on the path of least resistance.

Every policy in this country is determined by choosing the path of least resistance.

Have you ever wondered why our Senate passes laws "to recognize the great achievements of (insert name here) in the field of (insert field here)" 100-0 while they can't pass a decent budget or confirm any judges?

The answer is that it is a safe vote. It shows up on the vote statistics(Some senator will say "I was present for 96% of the votes"... nevermind that 95% of them were useless) and no constituent is going to berate their senator for voting yes on giving an award to some kid that saved another from drowning.

I've noticed that no legislation on crime ever appears on the register until after some kid blows away 10 of his classmates and then there is a knee-jerk bill submitted for some worthless law that doesn't come within a parsec of addressing the real problems. It just LOOKS GOOD to a receptive public, who just want to believe that SOMETHING IS BEING DONE, regardless of whether it is remotely effective.

Until we start voting out some of the dead wood in the Senate and House, we'll never see any gutsy efforts to address problems head-on. There will continue to be PR and red-herrings and nothing of substance.

 

[jthomas666]

lack of leadership

Every policy in this country is determined by choosing the path of least resistance.

...

Until we start voting out some of the dead wood in the Senate and House, we'll never see any gutsy efforts to address problems head-on. There will continue to be PR and red-herrings and nothing of substance.

True enough. That's why I generally vote against the incumbent. When it started to look like bin Laden wasn't going to be captured anytime soon, then suddenly Hussein turned into Public Enemy #1.

"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too." JFK


"I got so wrapping up in trying to keep my job that I forgot to do my job." The American President

Just a thought.

 

[REALtide]

Last I heard , we still have troops digging through Afganistan looking for Bin Laden, so what's your point ?