Anything Kerry/Edwards won't say to get elected.

[Mike AI]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...t14.html?sub=AR (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34167-2004Oct14.html?sub=AR)

An Edwards Outrage

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, October 15, 2004; Page A23

After the second presidential debate, in which John Kerry used the word "plan" 24 times, I said on television that Kerry has a plan for everything except curing psoriasis. I should have known there is no parodying Kerry's pandering. It turned out days later that the Kerry campaign has a plan -- nay, a promise -- to cure paralysis. What is the plan? Vote for Kerry.

This is John Edwards on Monday at a rally in Newton, Iowa: "If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve are going to walk, get up out of that wheelchair and walk again."


In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately, for personal gain, raising false hope in the catastrophically afflicted is despicable.

Where does one begin to deconstruct this outrage?

First, the inability of the human spinal cord to regenerate is one of the great mysteries of biology. The answer is not remotely around the corner. It could take a generation to unravel. To imply, as Edwards did, that it is imminent if only you elect the right politicians is scandalous.

Second, if the cure for spinal cord injury comes, we have no idea where it will come from. There are many lines of inquiry. Stem cell research is just one of many possibilities, and a very speculative one at that. For 30 years I have heard promises of miracle cures for paralysis (including my own, suffered as a medical student). The last fad, fetal tissue transplants, was thought to be a sure thing. Nothing came of it.

As a doctor by training, I've known better than to believe the hype -- and have tried in my own counseling of people with new spinal cord injuries to place the possibility of cure in abeyance. I advise instead to concentrate on making a life (and a very good life it can be) with the hand one is dealt. The greatest enemies of this advice have been the snake-oil salesmen promising a miracle around the corner. I never expected a candidate for vice president to be one of them.

Third, the implication that Christopher Reeve was prevented from getting out of his wheelchair by the Bush stem cell policies is a travesty.

George Bush is the first president to approve federal funding for stem cell research. There are 22 lines of stem cells now available, up from one just two years ago. As Leon Kass, head of the President's Council on Bioethics, has written, there are 3,500 shipments of stem cells waiting for anybody who wants them.

Edwards and Kerry constantly talk of a Bush "ban" on stem cell research. This is false. There is no ban. You want to study stem cells? You get them from the companies that have the cells and apply to the National Institutes of Health for the federal funding.

In his Aug. 7 radio address to the nation, Kerry referred not once but four times to the "ban" on stem cell research instituted by Bush. At the time, Reeve was alive, so not available for posthumous exploitation. But Ronald Reagan was available, having recently died of Alzheimer's.

So what does Kerry do? He begins his radio address with the disgraceful claim that the stem cell "ban" is standing in the way of an Alzheimer's cure.

This is an outright lie. The President's Council on Bioethics, on which I sit, had one of the world's foremost experts on Alzheimer's, Dennis Selkoe from Harvard, give us a lecture on the newest and most promising approaches to solving the Alzheimer's mystery. Selkoe reported remarkable progress in using biochemicals to clear the "plaque" deposits in the brain that lead to Alzheimer's. He ended his presentation without the phrase "stem cells" having passed his lips.

So much for the miracle cure. Ronald D.G. McKay, a stem cell researcher at NIH, has admitted publicly that stem cells as an Alzheimer's cure are a fiction, but that "people need a fairy tale." Kerry and Edwards certainly do. They are shamelessly exploiting this fairy tale, having no doubt been told by their pollsters that stem cells play well politically for them.

Politicians have long promised a chicken in every pot. It is part of the game. It is one thing to promise ethanol subsidies here, dairy price controls there. But to exploit the desperate hopes of desperate people with the promise of Christ-like cures is beyond the pale.

There is no apologizing for Edwards's remark. It is too revealing. There is absolutely nothing the man will not say to get elected.

[Buff]

exactly

[PornoDoggy]

There is only one person who has the objectivity to respond to a Mike AI post about the election.

Where is Meni, anyway?

[Almighty Colin]

Summary :: Kerry is creepy in a different way than Bush is.

[SykkBoy]

and yet, I'm still voting for Kerry...

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Oct 15 2004, 01:43 PM
There is only one person who has the objectivity to respond to a Mike AI post about the election.

Where is Meni, anyway?


PD I would have to say you and Meni have much more in common....

Birds of a feather....

[OldJeff]

I have to ask, by him saying anything to get elected makes him different than Bush, Clinton, Bush, Regan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kenedy, etc. because ?

They are all stamped from the same shitty mold

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by OldJeff@Oct 15 2004, 03:02 PM
I have to ask, by him saying anything to get elected makes him different than Bush, Clinton, Bush, Regan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kenedy, etc. because ?

They are all stamped from the same shitty mold
yup

people don't elect the president, voters do... (well, ok, the electoral college does ;-))
and who should a politician listen to? the ones who got him elected or the ones who sat around saying "I'm not voting, it doesn't matter"?

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by OldJeff@Oct 15 2004, 03:02 PM
I have to ask, by him saying anything to get elected makes him different than Bush, Clinton, Bush, Regan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kenedy, etc. because ?

They are all stamped from the same shitty mold


Now doubt, professional politicians should all be hung.

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Oct 15 2004, 02:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Oct 15 2004, 02:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-PornoDoggy@Oct 15 2004, 01:43 PM
There is only one person who has the objectivity to respond to a Mike AI post about the election.

Where is Meni, anyway?


PD I would have to say you and Meni have much more in common....

Birds of a feather.... [/b][/quote]
Meni and I come down on the same sides of a lot of issues - that's true.

But, IMHO at least, that's as far as it goes.

Do you really think that the article you so skillfully cut 'n pasted shows somehow that the Kerry/Edwards team is less ethical than Bush/Cheney? Are you really that (niave? intellectually lazy? stupid?)?

As far as I can tell, the two campaigns do about an equal job distorting the record of the other - and only a blind partisan, shallow minded, or intellectually lazy individual would contend otherwise.

I am hard pressed to find much difference between the quality of the arguments you make for Bush and the arguements Meni makes for Kerry.

It's a good thing the election is in three weeks. If it were two months away, you'd begin posting in free verse before it happened.

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by PornoDoggy+Oct 15 2004, 03:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (PornoDoggy @ Oct 15 2004, 03:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by Mike AI@Oct 15 2004, 02:58 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-PornoDoggy@Oct 15 2004, 01:43 PM
There is only one person who has the objectivity to respond to a Mike AI post about the election.

Where is Meni, anyway?


PD I would have to say you and Meni have much more in common....

Birds of a feather....
Meni and I come down on the same sides of a lot of issues - that's true.

But, IMHO at least, that's as far as it goes.

Do you really think that the article you so skillfully cut 'n pasted shows somehow that the Kerry/Edwards team is less ethical than Bush/Cheney? Are you really that (niave? intellectually lazy? stupid?)?

As far as I can tell, the two campaigns do about an equal job distorting the record of the other - and only a blind partisan, shallow minded, or intellectually lazy individual would contend otherwise.

I am hard pressed to find much difference between the quality of the arguments you make for Bush and the arguements Meni makes for Kerry.

It's a good thing the election is in three weeks. If it were two months away, you'd begin posting in free verse before it happened. [/b][/quote]


PD sorry I cannot make sophisticated arguements to convicne you about Bush. Lets face it, you would vote for Lenin before you voted for Bush.

As far as cutting and pasting, I included the entire peice - I did this because the writer has a unique perspective on the issue, since he is in a wheel chair from a car accident. The writer is also a medical doctor. Thus to me he has credibility on these issues....

I was not quoting Howard Stern. :huh:

[Mike AI]

PD maybe you would be more comfortable with quotes from another Democrat...

KRS one, a rapper. It is funny how he points out he was taken out of content, then he lays this out

“I was just as saddened as everyone else on 9/11,” he continued. “However, for many of us that were racially profiled and harassed by the World’s Trade Center’s security and the police patrolling that area as well as the thousands of American protesters that spoke out against the World Trade Organization months before in Seattle, Washington there was a sense of justice, a sense of change, a wake up call watching the twin towers fall.”

The rest of it is here http://www.allhiphop.com/hiphopnews/?ID=3618

Someone taking joy, pride in 9-11 is pretty sick.

BUT the funny thing is this guy equating World Trade Center, and the World Trade Orginization! :D :lol: :yowsa:

There are probably 100 buildings in the US names World Trade Center - there is one in new orleans and tampa!!

[PornoDoggy]

In addition to being a wheelchair-bound doctor, he is also a writer for conservative journals and commonly regarded as a neo-con (a fall from grace, imho, since he used to work for Carter & Mondale) - so his "credibility" is questionable.

As far as your second post, I don't know what the fuck to make of it. I don't even LIKE hip-hop.

And besides, you should know that Lenin can't run against Bush. Lennin is foreign born. Now I realize that you probably believe that Kerry IS Lennin, but that's another delusion.

[grimm]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Oct 15 2004, 12:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Oct 15 2004, 12:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-OldJeff@Oct 15 2004, 03:02 PM
I have to ask, by him saying anything to get elected makes him different than Bush, Clinton, Bush, Regan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kenedy, etc. because ?

They are all stamped from the same shitty mold


Now doubt, professional politicians should all be hung. [/b][/quote]
they say what needs to be said to get the position. What they do with said power is what determines the correctness of your vote. if you voted for bush in 2000, well your vote might not have been the best choice. But for every road there is a road not taken, who knows, things could be worse?

This is what it has come down to. you have to sell out to lead. glad handing and kissing babies has never worked. Every president ever elected has compromised something in his integrity or position. The scorecard on who will lead best comes at the end of the term, not at the beginning. But, in this day and age of information, all of the backdealing and compromising, lies and allegations come to us faster than ever. The boogymen can't hide in the closet, and the man behind the curtain is exposed.


IF you are of the type that believes whatever story breaks, then you best listen to both sides, or you compromize the ingrity of your vote, you cant weight your vote with one sided outlets. Part of being educated is listening and giving proper weight to all outlets of information. But that in itself is a double edged sword. losing your self ina groundswell of subjectivity may suck the life out of your vote, how can you decide if you remove opinion from the equation?


Politics has become the sum of the sound and the fury, by an endless stream of MacBeths.

Voting signifying nothing.

[Vick]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Oct 15 2004, 03:11 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Oct 15 2004, 03:11 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-OldJeff@Oct 15 2004, 03:02 PM
I have to ask, by him saying anything to get elected makes him different than Bush, Clinton, Bush, Regan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kenedy, etc. because ?

They are all stamped from the same shitty mold


Now doubt, professional politicians should all be hung. [/b][/quote]
Is that an intended double entendre?

As in all life time politican should be hung as in long penis so they can fuck themselves?

[RawAlex]

Summary: Kerry is creepy in a way that benefits mankind, Bush is creepy in a way that creates more terrorists.

Hard choice!

Alex :P

[Vick]

I'm your top prime cut of meat, I'm your choice,
I wanna be elected,
I'm your yankee doodle dandy in a gold Rolls Royce,
I wanna be elected,

Kids want a savior, don't need a fake,
I wanna be elected,
We're all gonna rock to the rules that I make,
I wanna be elected, elected, elected.



I never lied to you, I've always been cool,
I wanna be elected,
I gotta get the vote, and I told you 'bout school,
I wanna be elected, elected, elected,
Hallelujah, I wanna be selected,
Everyone in the United States of America.

[RawAlex]

Oh, and, I might add... what Bush won't say to be able invade a country or start a war.

Anyone got some WMDs?

The american public is going to call bullshit on him in the biggest way possible.

Alex

[Opti]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Oct 17 2004, 06:43 AM
The american public is going to call bullshit on him in the biggest way possible.

Alex

A man with faith! :rolleyes:

I dont think the American public sees presidential integrity/honesty as a high priority at "times of war", probably rightly to some extent.

Hate to say it... but I think Bush can get away with saying anything he likes for now.. and I think my $1 election bet is going to go on Bush to still be here next year. :\

[JR]

http://i.timeinc.net/time/verbatim/20030908/photo/verbatim_spears.jpg

[JR]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Oct 16 2004, 12:43 PM
Oh, and, I might add... what Bush won't say to be able invade a country or start a war.

Anyone got some WMDs?

The american public is going to call bullshit on him in the biggest way possible.

Alex
“When people are uncertain, they would rather have somebody who is wrong and strong than somebody who is weak and right.”

- William Jefferson Clinton

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Oct 16 2004, 03:43 PM
Oh, and, I might add... what Bush won't say to be able invade a country or start a war.

Anyone got some WMDs?

The american public is going to call bullshit on him in the biggest way possible.

Alex


Alex, before war started did YOU doubt the presence of WMDs in Iraq??

The intelligence services of England, Pakistan, Russia, France, Germany, and Israel all thought there were WMDs in Iraq.

Maybe if you knew, you should have posted something on Oprano or something....

[JR]

Originally posted by Mike AI+Oct 16 2004, 01:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike AI @ Oct 16 2004, 01:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-RawAlex@Oct 16 2004, 03:43 PM
Oh, and, I might add... what Bush won't say to be able invade a country or start a war.

Anyone got some WMDs?

The american public is going to call bullshit on him in the biggest way possible.

Alex


Alex, before war started did YOU doubt the presence of WMDs in Iraq??

The intelligence services of England, Pakistan, Russia, France, Germany, and Israel all thought there were WMDs in Iraq.

Maybe if you knew, you should have posted something on Oprano or something.... [/b][/quote]

before Bush got elected he hated Bush.
when Bush got elected he hated Bush
before the war he hated Bush
during the war he hated Bush
after the war he hates Bush

maybe there is a bigger pattern that explains his views?

[Opti]

LOL JR... you hate flip floppers yesterday and dont like patterns today? :yowsa:

I don't recall, but did you support Bush before 9/11? I mean, did you ever post jokes about what a dumbass he was or anything before "the war"?

[RawAlex]

Mike, if you go back and view posts from that time, you will see that YES, I doubted there were WMD in Iraq. The inspectors that were there should have found SOMETHING, or at least good solid hints of something. Instead, they saw nothing, smoke and mirrors, and so on.

Nobody could say for sure, there were some ideas and suggestions, but no real hard evidence. Just "bob said that peter said that paul heard from a guy on a street corner in a city in Iraq that someone might have said that they heard about a weapon being built maybe possibly perhaps".

Bush wanted a war, he got a war. A large number of American soliders will lose their lives, get injured, or just get emotionally affected by this war, all in the name of WMD (no wait, terror, no wait, oil... nope, hang on, he didn't use that one yet!).

Your President used less than factual information to make a choice that will effect so many people. This lie makes the Clinton sex thing look like a kid's party.

Alex

PS: JR, well, DUH! I hate Bush. I hate his KIND of person. I hate the power bestowed on someone because of his family and relationships, and not because he is the best man for the job. That blows.

[Buff]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Oct 16 2004, 03:58 PM
Mike, if you go back and view posts from that time, you will see that YES, I doubted there were WMD in Iraq. The inspectors that were there should have found SOMETHING, or at least good solid hints of something. Instead, they saw nothing, smoke and mirrors, and so on.

Nobody could say for sure, there were some ideas and suggestions, but no real hard evidence. Just "bob said that peter said that paul heard from a guy on a street corner in a city in Iraq that someone might have said that they heard about a weapon being built maybe possibly perhaps".

Bush wanted a war, he got a war. A large number of American soliders will lose their lives, get injured, or just get emotionally affected by this war, all in the name of WMD (no wait, terror, no wait, oil... nope, hang on, he didn't use that one yet!).

Your President used less than factual information to make a choice that will effect so many people. This lie makes the Clinton sex thing look like a kid's party.

Alex

PS: JR, well, DUH! I hate Bush. I hate his KIND of person. I hate the power bestowed on someone because of his family and relationships, and not because he is the best man for the job. That blows.
Alex, you tell him!

Tell him, "Peace in our time! Peace with honor!"

[RawAlex]

Buff, in your (totally amazing) mind, you still seem to have Saddam and 9/11 lined up as "the same guys did it"... The war in Iraq has nothing to do with terrorists (except that it has created both a new training ground and thousands of new recruits). It has lead the US down a road where "if your not with me, your against me" has become the norm. It has all the makings of a world war. Do you really want that?

Bush is a spoiled brat with a really big gang to back him up. There are few things that are worse.

Alex

[Buff]

Originally posted by RawAlex@Oct 16 2004, 04:36 PM
Buff, in your (totally amazing) mind, you still seem to have Saddam and 9/11 lined up as "the same guys did it"... The war in Iraq has nothing to do with terrorists (except that it has created both a new training ground and thousands of new recruits). It has lead the US down a road where "if your not with me, your against me" has become the norm. It has all the makings of a world war. Do you really want that?

Bush is a spoiled brat with a really big gang to back him up. There are few things that are worse.

Alex
You're right, Alex, of course.

Iraq is the only country in the world that was not trying to produce WMD. In fact, even though his arch rivals in Iran were trying to develop them, Hussein forbid any of his scientists to work on WMD. He threatened any man, woman, or child who even mentioned WMD with death. If you were in one of Iraq's pristine public libraries and even so much as looked at a picture of WMD, he had you shot. If you lied to any weapons inspectors, he had your family murdered.

In fact, Hussein was so opposed to having WMD in his country that he invaded Kuwait just so he could sneak all his WMD -- WMD that he never wanted but that we forced him to take against his will -- into Kuwait, and he set the oil fires as a cover for the fact that he was burning them all up... it was the only way to make sure they were permanently disposed of. It was a fine line he had to walk, because he knew we would be pissed that he got rid of his WMD, so his strategy was brilliant -- he knew that by disposing of the WMD in Kuwaiti oil fires, Bushitler 41 could send his oil buddies in Halliburton over to put the fires out and make a boatload of cash, thus somewhat appeasing us.

As for terrorists, we know that the documents which show that Hussein was paying out $25,000 to families of suicide bombers were forged by the same people who forged the documents that tricked CBS anchor Dan Rather, namely Karl Rove/Cheney/Halliburton.

If it weren't for the foreign policy of George Bush, the Middle East would be the most peaceful region on Earth, because Islam is THE religion of peace. In fact, Islam is so peaceful that they're not mad at us for invading Iraq -- they're only mad at us and fighting us because we framed Muslims for the 9/11 attack Bushitler planned and carried out with US Special Forces.

Does that sum it up about right, wingnut?

[Mike AI]

If Kerry had his way, Saddam would not only till be in Iraq, but also Kuwait as well.

Evern with having largest coaltion, UN support, FRENCH support, Kerry still voted against force in first Iraq war.

Think about it.

[Buff]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Oct 16 2004, 05:18 PM
If Kerry had his way, Saddam would not only till be in Iraq, but also Kuwait as well.

Evern with having largest coaltion, UN support, FRENCH support, Kerry still voted against force in first Iraq war.

Think about it.
Nah, he only went to Kuwait to brun up the WMD we gave him and to help us out by providing Cheney-Halliburton with some work.

[RawAlex]

Whatever! You guys so deserve Bush. Call me when you need to set up Canadian companies to be able to stay in the porn business. :-)

Alex

[JR]

Originally posted by Opti@Oct 16 2004, 01:42 PM
LOL JR... you hate flip floppers yesterday and dont like patterns today? :yowsa:

I don't recall, but did you support Bush before 9/11? I mean, did you ever post jokes about what a dumbass he was or anything before "the war"?

Bush had not fully revealed himself as the idiot he was at the time as soon as he got into office. Presumably because he was always chopping wood at the ranch. I did repeatedly point out that he had the oratory ability of a half retarded 4th grader. Bush is an idiot.

i was just trying to make the point that 1000's of threads like these and millions of posts could haves simple been said like this...

One Side: "I am conservative"

Other Side: "I am liberal"

One Side: "ok, I guess we fully undertand each others views. Lets go do something more productive now"

Its pretty silly for someone who would have never supported a Convservative candidate to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince the world and themselves of why that particular person is terrible an incompetent, when they would have shared equal disdain for any conservative candidate and visa versa.

[Opti]

Originally posted by JR@Oct 17 2004, 04:36 PM
i was just trying to make the point that 1000's of threads like these and millions of posts could haves simple been said like this...

One Side: "I am conservative"

Other Side: "I am liberal"

One Side: "ok, I guess we fully undertand each others views. Lets go do something more productive now"
ROFL.. sounds like communism, good in theory.



Its pretty silly for someone who would have never supported a Convservative candidate to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince the world and themselves of why that particular person is terrible an incompetent, when they would have shared equal disdain for any conservative candidate and visa versa.

Hard to argue with that... but why would Oprano exist then!??! :)


I wasnt suggesting you were anti bush ever btw.. I was really just wondering. I feel like i remember almost everyone was anti-bush immediately prior to 9/11... him being unintelligent was a constant topic of threads.. and it stopped dead that day and didnt start again for almost 2 years.

[JR]

Originally posted by Opti@Oct 16 2004, 11:06 PM


I wasnt suggesting you were anti bush ever btw.. I was really just wondering. I feel like i remember almost everyone was anti-bush immediately prior to 9/11... him being unintelligent was a constant topic of threads.. and it stopped dead that day and didnt start again for almost 2 years.
I did prefer Bush to Gore. Just was my personal preferrence. Right now, voting for Bush or Kerry is me like being asked to choose between sucking a cock or getting fucked in the ass. Either way, I will be ashamed, walking with a limp or be left with a funny taste in my mouth.

I think that people need to be careful in seperating the issues and what constitutes "supporting Bush". I did support going into Iraq before the fact, based on the evidence, the history, the patterns of behavior and the changing paradigms in national security.

People outside the US who are largely polarized against Bush cannot understand that "anyone but Bush" does not mean "better than Bush"... and they are not the ones in the crosshairs. They think Americans voted for Bush because they are idiots and in their limited understanding of the issues that are important to voters, there is no other answer.

I was deeply dissapointed when Powell went to the UN. That sort of turned my stomach a little. I thought they would lay out a solid case for invading Iraq and was left feeling that they had very little evidence to justify it and Powell was (in my opinion) really reaching in a lot of the conclusions in his presentation. At that point, I would have supported the invasion had they simply said "hey man, these fuckers keep saying "fuck you" and won't cooperate. 10 years is enough. This is now also a security issue and we are going to depose him".

Now Bush, though his behavior and with the help of people who oppose both him domestically and abroad have made the notion of supporting the invasion synonymous with supporting lies and falsehoods and a flaky idiot with nuclear weapons who speaks to God. But I do believe that it was indeed time to start picking up the slack where the UN fails and start putting pressure on rogue regimes to either back off the extremism or pay the price. If the UN was effective at curbing the behavior of insane regimes, Saddam would still be happily subverting the oil for food program today.

[Dravyk]

Anything Kerry/Edwards won't say to get elected.

Same as Bush/Cheyney. Same as every politician anywhere and you know it, Mike.

Pick either Idiot 1 or Idiot 2. That's all elections come down to any more. :(

Idiot 1 has had four years to demonstrate he is a mighty idiot who has made things a lot worse. So, I'm voting for Idiot 2 so he can have his chance to show he might do less harm over the next four years.

That's about it.

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by Dravyk@Oct 17 2004, 07:45 AM
Anything Kerry/Edwards won't say to get elected.

Same as Bush/Cheyney. Same as every politician anywhere and you know it, Mike.

Pick either Idiot 1 or Idiot 2. That's all elections come down to any more. :(

Idiot 1 has had four years to demonstrate he is a mighty idiot who has made things a lot worse. So, I'm voting for Idiot 2 so he can have his chance to show he might do less harm over the next four years.

That's about it.


Drav, I agree with you.... it comes down the the idiot we know, and the idiot we don't.

I will take the idiot we know.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by JR+Oct 17 2004, 06:58 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JR @ Oct 17 2004, 06:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Opti@Oct 16 2004, 11:06 PM


I wasnt suggesting you were anti bush ever btw.. I was really just wondering. I feel like i remember almost everyone was anti-bush immediately prior to 9/11... him being unintelligent was a constant topic of threads.. and it stopped dead that day and didnt start again for almost 2 years.
I did prefer Bush to Gore. Just was my personal preferrence. Right now, voting for Bush or Kerry is me like being asked to choose between sucking a cock or getting fucked in the ass. Either way, I will be ashamed, walking with a limp or be left with a funny taste in my mouth.

I think that people need to be careful in seperating the issues and what constitutes "supporting Bush". I did support going into Iraq before the fact, based on the evidence, the history, the patterns of behavior and the changing paradigms in national security.

People outside the US who are largely polarized against Bush cannot understand that "anyone but Bush" does not mean "better than Bush"... and they are not the ones in the crosshairs. They think Americans voted for Bush because they are idiots and in their limited understanding of the issues that are important to voters, there is no other answer.

I was deeply dissapointed when Powell went to the UN. That sort of turned my stomach a little. I thought they would lay out a solid case for invading Iraq and was left feeling that they had very little evidence to justify it and Powell was (in my opinion) really reaching in a lot of the conclusions in his presentation. At that point, I would have supported the invasion had they simply said "hey man, these fuckers keep saying "fuck you" and won't cooperate. 10 years is enough. This is now also a security issue and we are going to depose him".

Now Bush, though his behavior and with the help of people who oppose both him domestically and abroad have made the notion of supporting the invasion synonymous with supporting lies and falsehoods and a flaky idiot with nuclear weapons who speaks to God. But I do believe that it was indeed time to start picking up the slack where the UN fails and start putting pressure on rogue regimes to either back off the extremism or pay the price. If the UN was effective at curbing the behavior of insane regimes, Saddam would still be happily subverting the oil for food program today. [/b][/quote]
I'd like to sign my name onto your statement. I also liked Bush more than Gore and still do. I like Bush and Kerry about the same.

Also, some people think "undecided" means "waiting for more information". This is not always true. I don't find one candidate to be any better than the other. I have decided. Each candidate has positives and negatives relative to my desire for what kind of state/world I want to live in. I don't like either of these candidates more than other.

In general, I am liberal on issues of individual social issues (liberty) and conservative on social programs (anti-socialism).

In 2000, I was concerned with Gore being negative on both sides of the fence so I liked Bush more and still do. With Kerry I am not really sure what he really believes but I know what Bush believes regarding porn, abortion, and so on and I disagree with him.

[Winetalk.com]

Mike,
if you really beleive I MUST read this on my vacation,
you gotta check with the local shrink and >Ill pay for it
:-)))))

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Oct 18 2004, 09:27 AM
Mike,
if you really beleive I MUST read this on my vacation,
you gotta check with the local shrink and >Ill pay for it
:-)))))


It can wait till you get back Serge.

If you plan on voting for Kerry, you should stay in Europe for 3 more weeks!

:P