Maybe someone can answer.......

I do not think it is natural for Kerry to talk about killing people. He does because that's why his opponent's supporters like him with all of that "smoke 'em out of their caves and kill 'em" talk.

So you are saying that Kerry will say anything for votes, right?

For some real logic, look at the amount of hatred that has developed for Bush and America around the world. His actions have bred more passionate and willing terrorists than existed before Sep. 11th.

WTC 1 and Oklahoma City occured on someone elses watch too. I do not beleive 9/11 happened because Bush was president, but because of OBL's hatred of the US and his own agenda. See the logic there?

Please inform us all of Bin Laden's agenda.

And yes I was saying that Kerry will say things to get votes, Bush does too, my friend, if not more than Kerry.

Originally posted by WuvLove
If Bush is doing such a wonderful job on War on Terror, the economy and employment in this country why is the race to the White House so close? If he was doing such a terrific job wouldn't you think the polls would be more in his favor than they are? I mean he's not even leading by 10% of the votes. Any Bush supporters have an answer to this?

This is a good question cause Kerry cant make up his mind on something.

He also signed a confession of US war crimes in Nam and without torture or bribery.

PS wuvlove is the S.SGT. picture you if so, keep up the good work despited a C&C who orders people to die for untrue reasons of ghost WMDS.
God bless you and the others out there in the military. If not you I assume
a realitive presence so if not you tell your loved one the same.

Originally posted by esdad71
WTC 1 and Oklahoma City occured on someone elses watch too. I do not beleive 9/11 happened because Bush was president, but because of OBL's hatred of the US and his own agenda. See the logic there?

Yes but wasn;t WTC 1 Bush Sr. wasnt it? So wouldnt you say this happen under an administration the same as the one here now, after all you know the apple dont fall from the tree.

As for OKC Clinton was chasing skirts then wasn't he.

Originally posted by drbryankkruta

This is a good question cause Kerry cant make up his mind on something.

He also signed a confession of US war crimes in Nam and without torture or bribery.

PS wuvlove is the S.SGT. picture you if so, keep up the good work despited a C&C who orders people to die for untrue reasons of ghost WMDS.
God bless you and the others out there in the military. If not you I assume
a realitive presence so if not you tell your loved one the same.

No, it's not me, however it's my brother who is currently serving in Iraq. He was part of the "back door draft!"

cool then please relay my best wishes and not to sound totally out of touch whats back door draft exactly

I'm sorry...I get sometimes very sensitive and I go out of my mind,
U know I love everybody no matter the opinion

I'm frustated! Poor people are like crap for the 10% who controls 80% of money of your country

I want nobody to get envolved in a war that will contribute to put more money in the pockets of the riches...

Money controls everything, medias, medications etc....they want to control poors like economic slaves...people put too much faith in their country and it lost energies! Remember, politics is LIKE a big buisness with ads and pools ans is like a comedy! Don't fall for it please.....pools cannot be the real deal...have they asked YOU what you r goin to vote?

I'm sorry, poor americans please fight for your rights!

Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
LOve love love that's all you need baby

Sounds like Amelia can clearly see what's going on over here, it's just a shame that most people here don't.

I was wondering last night, why do we have a bi-partisan government? Why even put a label on it? People shouldn't be democrat or republican, they should just stand for what they believe, relay that to the people they're trying to represent and whoever can appeal to the most people gets the most votes. The leadership of this country shouldn't be determined by which party you hate the least or by voting for a guy that says he's part of a group that you usually or somewhat agree with.

I think the bi-partisan arrangement of our nation's representatives has helped alot of the American people become apathetic and disillusioned about the whole thing. Everyone is so polarized and alot of people don't even realize that they're just blindly supporting someone because they think they're supposed to.

Why is it that Bush calls Kerry a liberal and people clap like "Oh man, he got him good!"? The labels themselves have become insults and that has devolved the minds of each party's sheepish supporters. No longer do candidates, much less incumbent presidents, have to be responsible for their actions or explain their reasoning on an issue, they just have to divert questions by going "Well, my opponent on the far left is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, do you think he would have done better?"

So, as it stands, I think Kerry and Bush are 2 sides to the same coin, I just think Bush's side is incompetent and should be brought to justice for his inaction relating to the events of Sep. 11th, for his and his administrations illegal corporate ties and for his unwarranted aggression towards Iraq.

A lot of people are not going to like any leader in a time of war when they feel he has deepened that war un necessarily and on a basis of incompetent advice at best (not one or two instances but the consitency of it) or at worst, lies.

God knows I hated Saddam and supported the invasion (going after Bin Laden goes without question) but even I didnt believe in WMDs and his links with 9/11 terrorists (if they had been proven after all the better though) and as much as I would hate to admit it, we probably would have been better burying the hatchet with Saddam years ago and helping rebuild Iraq under a secure enviroment....It just seems when you see whats come out of the wood work under our undermanned, hamstrung approach, a country like Iraq needed a bastard like Saddam. Makes me sick but there you go. Maybe if the inspectors kept going and we had helped create a proper middle class in Iraq, Saddam would have been toppled by the locals?

Thats history and this is now. We fight. We win. Or we're stuffed.
Some of your allies citizens like me don't think Bush should be rewarded for the last four years. Buts thats the USAs choice, not ours.

As to why he seems to have a chance......God like PR? Maybe the subliminals are kicking in? who knows?

As the Pioneers of my old Reserve outfit used to say under thier mock emblem of the Winged Shovel - "Who Cares Who Wins - bring more beer to drown our sorrows"

Originally posted by Amelia
I'm sorry...I get sometimes very sensitive and I go out of my mind,
U know I love everybody no matter the opinion

I'm frustated! Poor people are like crap for the 10% who controls 80% of money of your country

I want nobody to get envolved in a war that will contribute to put more money in the pockets of the riches...

Money controls everything, medias, medications etc....they want to control poors like economic slaves...people put too much faith in their country and it lost energies! Remember, politics is LIKE a big buisness with ads and pools ans is like a comedy! Don't fall for it please.....pools cannot be the real deal...have they asked YOU what you r goin to vote?

I'm sorry, poor americans please fight for your rights!

Ameliaxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
LOve love love that's all you need baby

You go girl, if more people where realistic and less militaristic maybe they would see what you do here.

Actually I am very surprised that with the s#it of job he has done and kind of lies he promotes, he is still leading the political campaign.

Originally posted by WisdomMaster
Actually I am very surprised that with the s#it of job he has done and kind of lies he promotes, he is still leading the political campaign.

Are they not almost tied in the running?

It is very close, as close as an election has been in oh 4 years! Close enough that if someone really wanted to win it, they would just have to do a little vote tampering in a state or two to clench a victory.

Good thing that hasn't happened before and I'm sure it won't happen this year.

Sorry for the cynical sarcasm guys.

Originally posted by ledbedder20
It is very close, as close as an election has been in oh 4 years! Close enough that if someone really wanted to win it, they would just have to do a little vote tampering in a state or two to clench a victory.

Good thing that hasn't happened before and I'm sure it won't happen this year.

Sorry for the cynical sarcasm guys.

hey speaking of which did you hear that guy that made fereheit 9/11 is putting cameras at all Ohio and Florida Polling places to watch for cheating kinda a double slap in the faces of 2000's cheater of the year.

I don't get the notion that because we haven't been attacked in 3 years means Bush is doing a good job. There also weren't any attacks for 7 years prior. And while we haven't been attacked in the continental US, we have been abroad. Also terrorism has been on the rise all over the world in the past 3 years. These attacks take years to plan and to say Bush is the reason for there being no attacks on US soil is a guess. Bin Laden (who Bush failed to capture) made it clear that Bush's current policies will guarantee future attacks. Of course it's not the president that determines if there will be terrorist attacks, it's our foreign policies. Bush's will guarantee future attacks from Al Qeada, and we all know that they cannot be erraticated no matter how many bombs you drop. That doesn't mean the answer is to run and hide, but clearly a different approach is needed.

Also, someone mentioned the media being biased pro liberal. It goes both ways. If anything I notice a more conservative bias. Depends on ones perspective, but it definitely goes both ways (FOX).

Yeah, praising Bush for us not being attacked again has no logic to it at all. Praising Bush for September 11th has no logic since the administration (including Bush) was found to have been complicit regarding threats prior to the attack. Insinuating Iraqi involvement in 9/11 holds no logic. Linking the war in Iraq with the "war on terror" is illogical. If we attacked Iraq because they harbor terrorists, then I missed that argument prior to the invasion and I don't know why they drew the short straw out of so many countries that harbor, finance or have links to terrorists. Praising Bush for being an experienced "wartime" president is illogical, the US pre-emptively invaded a basically defenseless country, we weren't coming to the aid of another country or defending ourselves, so he can't brag about starting an unjustified war, can he? That's like me saying I'm a championship boxer because I sucker punched a 10 year old.

Guys, I am not a democrat. I am not "Bush bashing" or reciting "liberal rhetoric" because of a blind faith to a partisan party. I am saying what is obvious to anyone who doesn't mind opening their eyes a little wider than what CNN or Fox always shows us.

To those who see what's going on, do not let people try and intimidate you by calling you "liberal" or a "product of the liberal media" or anything else. Even with such a corrupt American media, we get enough info. to know that what our govt. has done over the past 3 or 4 years is ashamedly regretable and wrong. The rest of the world knows it too.

The corporate ties to this administration, the resources in Afghanistan and Iraq and the decisions made immediately after these invasions by their new "interim" American leaders should help shed some light on why we're really over there. Oh yeah, not to mention the excellent strategic advantage of having a strong military base of operations in the middle east.

Don't listen to the "spreading democracy, freedom and liberties" crap. If that's what we were doing then we would have been out of there after deposing the "evil-doers". Instead our military is hunting down everyone who wants them out. Why would we do that if we only wanted to spread freedom? Wouldn't we just have said "Hey, evil dictator gone guys. You're welcome. Oh, you want us out? Well okay, you're free to say that, so see you later, here's some money to cover the destruction we caused." We didn't do that because American military and corporate presences will remain active in Iraq and Afghanistan as long as there is money to be made there and as long as we can help our ally, Israel. That's why the military, at about 1 billion dollars a week to operate, has to rid the entire country of anyone who is willing to fight for their country against American invaders. If we were trying to get rid of someone because he was a tyrannical dictator who killed his own people (we are supposed to prosecute him for the deaths of 100,000 Iraqis) the why is it okay for us to have killed 100,000 civilians during the invasion and following "war"? Doesn't make sense to me, actually doesn't make sense at all.

If what I'm saying sounds crazy, then maybe you should realize that blindly supporting someone isn't as important as your or your family's health, which, in my opinion, as at greater risk now that we've pissed off the rest of the world and even more so if W. decides to invade a country that has nuclear weapons. Which I guarantee will happen if he is reelected and Iran doesn't hand over it's weapons willfully. We didn't attack Russia because it would have meant a certain nuclear attack against us. If we attack Iran, do you think they'll hesitate to push that button?

So being able to say you're a "proud republican" or "patriot" or anything else should come second to protecting your family and country. I'm saying this as a father and a veteran. Bush has endangered all of us for no good reason whatsoever and should be dealt with accordingly, not with admiration or devotion.

[edit on 10/31/2004 by ledbedder20]

[edit on 10/31/2004 by ledbedder20]

while im neither for or against either bush or kerry i have this opinion.if gore was elected he wouldnt have to deal with 911 for the same reason there hasnt been any attacks since.the bush administration was behind 911,a mass casualty scenario tho instigate the war in iraq.personally as long as bush is in charge it can get no better,but,things are so messed up that kerry couldnt clean it up if he wanted to.America is going downhill,into civil war of the politicians and the common american is screwed.Maybe John Titor was more right than not...........JUST MY OPINION.....thank you for your time.

[edit on 31-10-2004 by donquad2001]

Kerry may not be able to clean up Iraq any better than Bush, but I think he's less likely to commit the mistakes that Bush has since 2001.

Wanted to point out a quick fact, Bush on vacation or on his way there/back 40% of his term so far.

As of April 2004, President Bush had made 33 trips to Crawford during his presidency, bringing his total to more than 230 days at the ranch in just over three years. �Add his 78 trips to Camp David and five to his family�s compound at Kennebunkport, Maine, and Bush has spent all or part of 500 days � or about 40 percent of his presidency � at one of these his three retreats.� �Bush Retreats to a Favorite Getaway: Crawford ranch,� Houston Chronicle, April 11, 2004.

[edit on 10/31/2004 by ledbedder20]

don't tell me it's because of how they view kerry's war record. any thoughts?

I think people are concerned that Kerry will be indecisive. When you are at war you need to be able to think on your feet. Kerry has not proven he can do this, as a matter of fact, he himself has admitted that one of his biggest faults is that he overanalyzes EVERYTHING. Overanalyzing situations to the point where you are almost paralyzed and unable to act for long periods of time does not give our troops confidence that he is the man for the job at this point in time. Additionally, if you look at his Senate record he has a history of cutting back defense, intelligence and funding for the troops. No matter what his justification is for these votes, it doesn't change what his actual vote was.

I'm not surprised that the polls are so evenly split. We are at war which half the Country supports and the other half opposes and more than likely the next President will be appointing someone to the Supreme Court. It's an important election and it makes sense that the Country is so evenly divided.

Jemison

I would rather have someone stop and think about their desicions than one who insists on continuing to make mistakes and threaten the saftey of our nation all because of principle. I am not comparing Bush to Hitler, but I mean Hitler had the same mentality and it was obviously wrong. I am not saying they are the same, just that being consistent and not waivering does not equal right.

If the choice is between fixing a problem and maintaining direction, well then I am for fixing the problem. I am not a democrat, but the reason I won't vote for Bush again is because he is staying consistant. If a leader can't change their ways to suite changing problems, then they are not a true leader. Kerry looks like he can be much more adaptive to the situation which will get us out of this disaster much faster.