George w. Bush World Records

[Dan the Man]

I found this on TileNut.com and thought as it was from a tile related website and I thought it was funny I though I would let you guys see it...

Geroge W. Bush's world records (http://www.tilenut.com/yo/BUSH_record.html)

[Sponsored Links]

[John Bridge]

Funny? I'm not a Bush man, but funny? What's your buddy Blair up to these days?

;)

[Dan the Man]

Ahhh, the usual stuff. Screwing up the United kingdom and its roads and its fuel and its ethnic culture and its...

...you know the usual. ;)

[muley]

Predictable, boring, typical left wing rhetoric. The man liberated 50 million people and kicked the Talibans a$$. That's aces in my book. Go Bush!!!

[Shaughnn]

Muley,
I'd say that the United States Military liberated 50 million people and kicked the Taliban's ass. Mr. Bush hasn't done anything but fly to Bagdad at the taxpayer's expence and have a photo oportunity with a PLASTIC TURKEY!! And all those service men who cheered when he entered the room; they got processed turkey meat from steam tables which we didn't get any photos of.
Is it really appropriate to hang a hero's medal on President Bush when any victory he might try to claim was won with the blood, sweat and tears of reservists whom the military didn't have to wade through hundred of pages of data to give them their marching orders?
If you believe that President George W. Bush is a hero for sending America's working class off die by the hundreds with no clear strategy and a catastrophic foreign policy to ensure that they get no outside support, then I guess I'll just have to respect your opinion and ask that you also respect mine please.
Shaughnn
"patriotism is more than a bumper sticker that you bought at the check out line of Wal-Mart"
PS: These are indeed interesting times, ain't they?:wave:

[tileguytodd]

Well, he's not the first "Man who would be King"
He's just come the closest ;)

[Dan the Man]

Sorry all,

I didn't mean to start another war. Calm down. Just thought it was worth seing that's all.

:rolleyes:

[John K]

Shaughnn.

Typical union rhetoric. Who would you guys rather have, Al Gore?

Boy he sure would have kicked butt!:mad: Hell he couldn't even win his own state, let alone a war.:eek:

[Dan the Man]

Next election <unsure about asking this, don't want war> who are the options to get in to rule US?

Do you think Bush will get in again?, it appears to us in the UK (or at least me) that GW Bush is doing pretty well but reading that thingy I posted it appears he has made a few c0ck ups too...

[davem]

I know Osama's pulling for Kerry. :)

[Shaughnn]

John K,
By "typical union rhetoric" do you mean that because I belong to a trade union I'm incapable of seeing both sides of a coin? That's a pretty narrow assessment for you to make about me with these thousands of miles between us, isn't it? For all you know, I voted for George Bush myself? For all you know, I' might be a steward with my local Republican caucus? I suppose by making my point about Prsident Bush sending America's working class off to make Haliburton wealthy on taxpayer's dollars that you took that to mean that my view of his performance is entirely proletariat. If so, I'm sorry to have given you that impression. Suffice it to say that I don't have a hign opinon of President Bush's performance in his first term and I don't expect that I'll be convinced to vote for him in November. But that's my right as an American, just as your right is to vote for whomever you believe will do the best job for ALL Americans, including your children's children.
If the tone of my reply seems at all serious, please keep in mind that I'm sitting here at my desk with a cup of coffe and a grin. I'm happy to be part of political debate and I think more people should give it a try. Thanks to Muly and John K for voicing contrasting views here. :wave:
Best of luck for us al,
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

Muley,

With due respect GW did none of the things you ascribe to him. He signed the orders that sent your fellow Americans out to do it in your name.

[Steven Hauser]

Jeremy,

Let these fellows have their fun. Let's not muddy up the water with facts.

:)

[John Bridge]

Where's CX? I gotta find out who the Libertarian candidate is this time around. I don't like Bush, and I don't like Kerry either. ;)

Hey, Linden La Roush is running again. There's a good one for ya. :D

[dallas refinisher]

john

cx could be out looking for al's in the bush's. aint he the al hunter?

[John Bridge]

Hey Dallas, Give us a first name. You've been around here long enough. :)

[Dan the Man]

Nice debate lol,

So who is in for election next time again?

[Hobbit]

Too early to tell for sure......;)

[muley]

George Bush is the commander and chief, so yes he did liberate Iraq. By some of your foolish reasoning one could say that only military people liberated Iraq. Or, not the generals they just stratagize. Or, only military people who were there. Or only those who were on the front line...etc etc.
Point two: In 19 years Kerry voted 11 times to cut military spending, 4 times to cut CIA funding, voted against the death penalty for terrerist who kill American oversea's, and voted against financing the Iraq war. That's leadership for you. On the other hand in three years Bush wiped out the Taliban and liberated Afganistan, Saddam is in American custody, 70% of the estimated Al Quida network is in custody or dead, Iraq signed their constitution yesterday, and Momar Kaddafy just eliminated his WMD program. Yes, Bush is a real leader. I'm not so damn wimpy that I can come right out and say who I support. Fence riders are people who can't make a decision. Bush will win re-election, and no it won't be close like the liberal media is predicting.

[Shaughnn]

And to fan the flames of controversy, here's another provocative link to a qualified observer's essay on her personal experiences in 'the heart of darkness". :devil:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/03/10/osp/index.html

And may I suggest to anyone who has a problem with the initial link to "George W. Bush World Records" that if you can find an instance where the reported record is held by another then I'll be happy to help you track down the author of that web-site and insist on a retraction of that single point. The one exception is the whole "shadow government" hoohaw. There's no way in hell or heaven that you can suggest that President Bush's is the FIRST shadow government. His is just the first administration too inept and/or arrogant to keep it secret.:drevil:
Love and thin set,
Shaughnn:stick:
PS: This is meant to poke sticks in good humor. If you are getting too upset by this thread, it's time to take a beer break and come back to it inna bit. Gawd knows I'm sucking back a few everytime I think about this stuff. :yummy:

[jjwq8]

Just read the article Shaughnn.

Tough going but ultimately worthwhile reading.

It tends to lend credence to the common belief here that US mid-east policy is entirely driven by open zionists and their closet sympathyzers.

It begs two questions however, what is Kwiatkowski's agenda and so what?

What is done is done.

Now a question to the Moderator. Why was Muleys response moved into the joke thread?

And Muley.

You appear to suggest that GW is the embodiment of the USA :eek: :eek: :eek:

Please say you set your sights higher than that :D

[Shaughnn]

As for her agenda, she makes a point early in the article that her appreciation for her service to the pentagon was connected in a small way to the apolitical atmosphere there. I saw her to say "dutiful soldiers without agenda" and that led to her disiluuionment and ultimately to her revulsion at what she was witnessing. The systematic restructuring, which is all verifiable and not top secret information, is "shocking" and credible.
There have been a long and notable line of dissenters from within the administration who have "blown the whistle" rather than participate any longer. Maybe she just couldn't sit by and be part of it any longer. Maybe she was emboldened by the other's who have come out of the administration to condemn the policies that they see as anti-American and anti-democratic. Or maybe she's just a bitter "lifer" who got pissy when all of these "civies" were brought in and got better office digs than she had? Whatever her reasons, there's certainly plenty of material out there for all of America to thumb through and say "hmmm?" about. The problem is that her credentials check out and she cites first-hand experiance, which makes her more credible in my book than anybody who gets assigned "spin control" on this keg o' fish. One thing's for sure though, the author won't be getting any slack on traffic tickets or her Viacom bill for the rest of her life. She's deffinately "on radar" now.:crap:
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

Then she better have a winning smile :D

I just read this line from a History of the Cathar Heresy of the early 13 century that seems most appropriate. Stephen O'Shea wrote:

".........the story of a dissidence unprepared for the vigor of its opponents."

Absolutely on the money :D

OH

John?

Just heard Osama is on the move so have oredred that reception is manned 24 hours just in case. And beware any tall clean shaven candidate who shows up for the Libertarian Party. You just never know :D

[John Bridge]

I just want to state that I don't know anything about a moved post. When I saw it in the joke thread I thought it was a mistake. I've done it a few times myself. :)

[jjwq8]

:eek:

Perish the thought!

[Shaughnn]

Can't it be woved back then?
Shaughnn

[davem]

I just moved the post back from the joke thread and deleted all the follow up comments in the joke thread.

[Dan the Man]

Sound!

So, we aint too sure who will be up for election then!!

Do you think the majority of Bush's old supporters will stick by him? Or is it a case of, depends who else there is?

Dan

[Derek & Jacqui]

SEPTEMBER 1939,
The government has declared war on Germany.
NOT ONE OF THEM SHOWED UP.



FRANKIE HOWARD.

[John Bridge]

Hi Derek,

You must have left something out, old man. Have Jacqui review it for you, will you?

:D

[Dan the Man]

LOL

[flatfloor]

Ms Kawasaki (sic) writes like she produced government procedural manuals.

[BigDog4All]

I don't have much to add other than,

You know what you were gonna get when you got a Dick and a Bush.

And boy, did we ever get it good...and damn, not even a kiss.

ABB..............for President

Anybody But Bush

[Hobbit]

I read with interest the "list" in the first post and have followed this thread since. Like most political arguments it has resolved down to "for" or "against."

The list has some items that are valid as part of a critique of President Bush. It has other items that are of a more subjective nature, and more yet that are plain distortions and fabrications. I am not a staunch supporter of Bush, but I am a supporter of the office of President.

I believe I could argue successfully against a significant number of those items listed, and would if I thought it would be of any value.

But I don't....So I guess I'll pass.;)

[Shaughnn]

Howard,
I agree with you that many of the points made in the 'list" are subjective and I had hoped that by extending my invitation as I did, someone would take the bait and open a discussion on ANY one of them. I too respect the office of the President and while I have strong feelings about the present office holder's performance and the appropriateness of his appointment I'll try to remember that the office is far more important than the officer.
That's partly why I'm so very troubled by the president's leadership. At every opportunity to accept responsibility for the mishaps and tragedies which have occured on "his watch, President Bush has pointed fingers and passed the buck in a frantic effort to remain "flawless". If he would have come out and placed blame upoin himself for the lies and fabrications which were presented to the American people under the full authority of his Office in his State of the Union address, instead of hiding behind excuses and proven falsehoods, I might have been less passionately against his continued reign. But I feel that President Bush has cheapened the office which he currently holds, far more so than oral sex and a desparate attempt to protect a marriage ever did.
But no one seems to be interested in my bait today, so I might just take my pole and go home 'till the fish are biting once again. :)
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

John,

Derek left nothing out.

Frankie Howard was a British Institution for half a century or more.

Shaun,

On a facile note, for a man who has cheapened the Office, he has one humongous war chest.

"No greater love can a man have that he sacrifice his friends for his life."

[Dan the Man]

Originally posted by Hobbit
I read with interest the "list" in the first post and have followed this thread since. Like most political arguments it has resolved down to "for" or "against."

The list has some items that are valid as part of a critique of President Bush. It has other items that are of a more subjective nature, and more yet that are plain distortions and fabrications. I am not a staunch supporter of Bush, but I am a supporter of the office of President.

I believe I could argue successfully against a significant number of those items listed, and would if I thought it would be of any value.

But I don't....So I guess I'll pass.;)

So you register on message forums becaaaaauuuusssseee?

[Dan the Man]

<------------- shuts up, missed the "if I thought it would be of any value bit out.

woops! :bow:

[flatfloor]

Shaughnn, if you got a bad bag of thinset and the tile fell off, would you blame yourself?

[Hobbit]

;)

[Shaughnn]

Jim,
Recently, I've had three occasions where my pre-mixed fat mud was missing "something". Instead of just throwing it on the wall and putting the blame on the manufacturer if it came crumbling down, I rejected the mud and sent it back to the supplier for testing. On two of those three occasions, the missing "something" was lime.
Yesterday, I pulled off a control wall that I had floated and set last year. I presumed that the "belly" that had formed in the wall was due to either back-pressure being exerted by bad framing or the sheetrock I was tied into having seperated from the studs. Once I got into it and went over the wall with a fine tooth comb, I found that my helper hadn't stapled the lower wall sufficiently and that was the cause of the float having sagged over the course of a year. I did not place the blame on my helper. I'm the professional on the job and I own my crap when it's called for. Luckliy I can save the shower without having to tear it and a tricky seat out entirely but I'm sure I'll find a little reciept in next week's pay envelope.
So, the short answer to your question is "yes, I would blame myself" ;)
Best wishes,
Shaughnn

[Scooter]

This stupid President should get none of the credit and none of the blame for most of what is on that list. 49% of America hates the moron; 49% of America loves him. 2% will determine this election.

That being said, I do question what Al Gore would have done with the Taliban. I just wonder. Hard to say.

I do fault GW for the tax giveaway and the deficit spending, he spends like a drunken sailor on a Friday night. I was against the war in Iraq when I heard Colin Powell's speech and thought, well, either Saddaaam is lying or Colin is lying, so who do I believe. Sadly, it was Sadaam that was telling the truth.

That being said, I hope and pray that everything works out alright in Iraq. It is a complete mess now, and I think time can only tell if that war will bring stability to that horrible place. I hope it does, but I fear it won't.

Now for the fun part. Pentagon officials believe they have been unable to locate Bin Laden because he has found a place to hide out with these characteristics:

1) It is easy to get in if you have money;

2) No one will recognize or remember you;

3) No one will realize you have disappeared;

4) No one keeps any records of your comings and goings; and

5) You have no obligations or responsibilities.

Pentagon analysts are still puzzled, however, as to how Bin Laden found out about the Texas Air National Guard in the first place.

[Shaughnn]

Hey Scooter,
Had you heard that Gary Larson, the "Far Side" fellah, has put up a reward of $10,000 for ANYONE who will come forward and prove that they served with George W. Bush in the NAtional Guard while he was supposed to be in Alabama? Still no takers on free money though. :D
Shaughnn

[jvcstone]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Scooter


I do fault GW for the tax giveaway and the deficit spending, he spends like a drunken sailor on a Friday night.

So what's new about that. GW ran every one of his businesses into the ground (remember Busto --oops, I mean Gusto Petroleum) by borrowing money with no plan or intention of paying it back. I'll spend it and let others clean and straighten up the mess-- The Bush business philosophy
:D :rolleyes: :D
JVC

[cx]

I think that's Doonesbury that's posted the reward, Shaughnn. No takers at last report. :)

[Shaughnn]

Thanks CX,
I could be wrong about that. You know all those comic book liberals look the same anyways. :p
Weeee! What fun,
Shaughnn

[davem]

I sure as hell wouldn't submit myself to a proctological media exam for a mere 10k. :)

[jjwq8]

Scooter.

Iraq may not be on anyones must see list at the moment but no way is it a horrible place;)

[Hobbit]

Thank you Jeremy...

There are few among us who understand what you said is true. While I may not head for Iraq this week, I assure you my future plans include a visit to "the land between the rivers."


:):)

[cx]

I assure you my future plans include a visit to "the land between the rivers."

Ah, yes, me too, Howard. Some of the most beautiful country in the world up there between the Yellowstone and the Snake as I recall. Mostly in the summer, though. :)

[muley]

This thread has digressed into nonsensicle jibberish. Additionally, I do not believe that the intellectual capacity exist within this thread to have an accurate dialog concerning the office of the presidency, thus, I chose to refrain from further discussion reguarding this matter. I have no idea what I just said, but whatever it was, thats my stance.

[jjwq8]

I have no idea what I just said, but whatever it was, thats my stance.

QED

A Bush man to the core:D:D

And here is something for your legislature to consider. Man William Jefferson would have loved this.

In twelth century Toulouse, by a law enacted by the governing capitouls, a married person could not be arrested "for reason of adultery, fornication or coitus in any store or house he or she rented, owned or maintained as a residence."

[cx]

Yeah, c'mon, Muley, if you're gonna make a serious effort to defend the actions of the current administration, you're gonna need a sense of humor. :shades:


And surely we can at least agree on my choice of "land between the rivers", eh? :)

[Shaughnn]

Did I miss something? There was gibberish and no one told me?:dunce:
Shaughnnnnnnnnnnnnnn :D

[Dan the Man]

Didn't expect this topic to go on for this long lol

[Shaughnn]

did I miss something? There was a topic and nobody told me that either? Geez! Gibberish and a topic, and I've missed them both!:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Shaughnn

[bbcamp]

CX, the land between the two rivers is in my neighborhood. The Cumberland and the Tennessee.

[flatfloor]

Everybody knows it's Manhattan between the East and Harlem Rivers.

Who the hell is William Jefferson? :confused:

[davem]

Flatfloor, you already blocking your memory of Slick Willie? :)

[Shaughnn]

That could be the William Jefferson who is a current United States Congressman from Lousianna or it could be William Jefferson Clinton, a former United States President. Might be someone else entirely, but I'm thinking "not".
Shaughnn

[flatfloor]

Oh him, right. :shake:

Man came on board just as the economy was turning around rode the crest until time to get out. Anybody notice how the "projected" surplus dissappeared the day after he left office? How the hell can you project a surplus 10 years down the road?

We are also paying now for the oil company mergers his attorney general chose to overlook.

[muley]

I have evaulated my afore mentioned stance (sobered up), and I have an intresting observation. Nobody here is singing their merits of Kerry, rather, simply attacking our great president. Democrat turnout was terrible in the primaries. I see a political rout on the horizon.

[Shaughnn]

Muley,
Was this suppose to be a comparrison between the condidates? I thought it was a review of President Bush's steller performance and his unerring ability to bankrupt everything that he has handed to him? If you want to discuss Senator John Kerry, you are more than welcome to start the "John Kerry's World Records" thread. I'll meet you over there. Don't worry though, I won't insult your opinions or try to discount your views simply because I don't agree with them. I think we're all above that sort of behavior, aren't we? :D
Love and handshakes,
Shaughnn

[flatfloor]

Muley, just to be sure, I was referring to Clinton.

[John Bridge]

Well, no way am I voting for Clinton. That's for sure.

:)

[flatfloor]

I do hope you're referring to Hillary.

Bill is working on a way to become President again. Here's the scenario. There is no constitutional ban on him becoming VP, Hillary is elected and is mysteriously assasinated. Voila! He's back in office. :D

[jjwq8]

Whats's the mystery?

There must be 100 million Republicans and countless Democrats that would head up any list of "the usual suspects" :D

[muley]

Bill Clinton can run for the presidency again. I believe the constitution says only two "consectutive" terms, not just two terms. That's a scary thought.

[flatfloor]

Amendment XXII

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

[Shaughnn]

Thanks Jim,
I'll just add a new thought the discussion by asking anyone whose interested in answering, "What is the purpose of 'term limits'?" In my opinion, "term limits" hamstring elected officials by placing permanently them "behind the learning curve". With inexperienced legislators and executives replacing their learned and insightfull predessessors every few years, the mentorship inherent in the system is removed and we are left with a "blind leading the not-quite-so-blind" scenario. And on the outside of public scrutiny, career lobbyists and other influence peddlars become the "learned authorities" and are free to persue agendas which span appointment limitations. How do "term limits' serve the democratic process then?
Thoughtful on a sunny day,
Shaughnn:stick:

[flatfloor]

After a certain amount of time in DC I think legislators loose touch with their constituency. They loose touch with reality. I think the best example of this is when I hear a legislator say... well, it's only $10,000,000.

[Shaughnn]

Thanks for the reply Jim,
Isn't the oversight that you are suggesting already accounted for by terms being limited to two, four or six years? ARen't we already given the opportunity to review our elected official's performance so that we can replace them if they have lost touch with their constituency? I'm all for keeping an eye on the shifty buggers, but I don't see how "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" will ever allow us to get a second child clean (bad analogy, I know)? I know that a lot of people have voted for "term limits', I just don't see the logic.
Shaughnn
PS: I'm kind of lucky to have Congressman George Miller as my Representative (California District 7). He shops at my local farmer's market and others on a regular basis. He personally responds to e-mail more times than I've had a staffer write in his place. I've even heard that he'll visit local city council meetings when he's in town. I think he's doing a pretty good job of "keeping in touch". Even if I don't always agree with his actions as my legislature, I know that he's listening to me and my neighbors. I suppose that's all any of us can expect. :D

[flatfloor]

Shaughnn, I do see your point of view and really hate to see seniority and the plum commitee chairs that go with it lost to another state but it should all even out.

The thing is it becomes a career for them and their whole goal is to be reelected, get that pension, get the bennies, keep the power. They spend so much time raising funds and running for office they have no time to govern. Staffers and the lobbyists you refer to are running the government.

Jesse Helms comes to mind.
:rolleyes:

[John Bridge]

I am for term limits for all offices. My thinking has always been that if this is the best that experienced office holders can do, we might as well get some novices in there. ;)

The original understanding of the founders did not include an idea of career politicians. That is why none of the early presidents went beyond two terms even though there was no constitutional prohibition from doing so. The founders considered holding office a duty, not a job. So there were always newbies in office. Didn't seem to slow them down a bit. They managed to build a nation. :)

[muley]

I'm for term limits when the democrats have majority, and agin' it when the republicans do.:D

[Albert]

Originally posted by flatfloor
Bill is working on a way to become President again. Here's the scenario. There is no constitutional ban on him becoming VP, Hillary is elected and is mysteriously assasinated. Voila! He's back in office. :D

deer fatfleur,

i guess thats the only sinario in which peeple wood be happy to see bill back as prez. anybody but hillary.

albert

[Mike2]

We could gist call em Billary.

Actually Albert, I really don't think Hillary have enough time to hit the campaign trail to become president. She way to busy as is, leading the march to socialism back there in fatfleur country.

[Albert]

hi mikey,

i does alot of thinkin when i mixes thinset. kneedless to say i does a lot of thinkin.

anyway, with martha stewart goin to jail and all, i thought it wood be nice if hillary took over marthas company. hillary wood be a good homemaker, on tv anway. she knows alot about hairstyles two.

she cood have specials bout decoratin the lincoln bedroom for bills friends and bout the importance of removin spots from clothes before you sendem to the drycleaners.

i dunno, whattya think?

albert

[Mike2]

Holly moley Albert, I'm gonna have to think about that one.

We got enough femes on TV as it is. I was lookin forward to one'a my favorite court programs, Texas Justice, sliding in on Martha's spot.

Hillary don't no diddly squat...........hey maybe you could git on her program and do an entire series on coon stew. Take it right from the top, start with the skinning, then all the way thru to spitten the gravy out on the grout gist to cover up the scum. You'd get some rating numbers for sure with a series like that.

[Albert]

i'd like to see hillary chawin on a grout sponge full of that coon stew gravy. that'd be a good picher, her chawin on that sponge and bill chawin on a good ceegar.

yeeeehawww!

albert

[Mike2]

I'd give up Texas Justice myself to see that. Barbara Wahwah sure be on top of that for an interview.

[jjwq8]

Mike, Albert sorry to ignore you but before yall ran off on a tangent there was a near serious discussion goin on to which my comment is surely you don't believe that politicians run the Government? Civil Servants run the Government. Politicians set the agenda. It has always been thus and will always be.

Now as to Hilary running Martha's Company.....seems to me there will be a faux farmer from Crawford Texas looking for a gig in 9 months time. Give him Martha's company and he could do it the justice she deserves.

[Mike2]

before yall ran off on a tangent there was a near serious discussion goin on

Huh? Where was that Q8? Musta' been back there on page 1 someplace. We've moved on from there, taking this to a whole new level. Hup, two, three, four, get in line and keep in step jeremy. :D

[bbcamp]

I'm beginning to think that Albert is not a real person. He used the word "scenario" correctly in a complete sentence, even though it was horribly misspelled.

Hmmmm...:suspect:







Naw, nobody could make that stuff up!

[jjwq8]

Albert's real name is HAL and John is Stanley Kubric :D

[Mike2]

bb, I think Albert's got himself a ghost writer. Complete sentences, highfalutin words, sometimes punctuation - too many unbelievables there. :suspect:

[flatfloor]

The only thing Hillary makes for dinner is reservations. :D

Albert is real, you all have heard of idiot savants have you knot?:p

[Mike2]

I think you might be hearing from Albert on that one flatfloor. :D I can just see him chewing his cud right now.

[selva]

you said, rather have had Gore? yes! gee, didn't all he suggest come true? like, save some of the surplus in case something happens? well????? Smart Gore? or, Dumb ax Bushhole? the punky boy George ? sorry, I did clean up my favorite name for Bushhole, some
selvalee

[Shaughnn]

S'okay to speak your mind Selva. I've got a friend who is fond of referring to our commander-and-chief as "that yammering primate with a coke problem". Not the most polite term, I'll agree but at least he's honest about what he's feeling. :laugh2:
Shaughnn

[selva]

well, the punky boy george bushhole dummie awol coke head REpubliCANT wages war because he can't make love! yes, no wonder the first lady reads so much, he can't DO IT, AND, HE CAN'T READ! Gee, his dad wrote in his book why occupying Iraq was/is a bad idea after he left office, and, his son did not even read his own father's book! geeeeeeeeeee

[Shaughnn]

I had thought that President Bush (43) was strongly "anti-homosexual". Are you saying that he's actually just closested and consumed by self-hatred? Intrigueing! :p Incidently, most of the gay men I know don't use the term "faggot' unless they are talking to very intimate friends. It's kind of a pet-name, I think. I know it needs to be said with a little blown kiss though, if you are going to do it right. Otherwise, I think that maybe the John Bridge Forum isn't the place for really crude language. People here just seem to be pretty friendly most times and "potty talk" detracts from that sort of open communication.
Best of luck,
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

I thought folks on coke didn't feel much of anything :D

[Shaughnn]

Not at all Jeremy,
Folks on coke don't *care* about much of anything. The anesthesia aspects of the drug fade pretty quiickly, or at least that's what I hear. :))
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

This calls for experimentation :yeah:

Any takers? :D

[selva]

heck, I thought by now, some Bush Supporters would be all over me, no name calling yet? come on, where is the great American Tradition our European family taught us?, ok, not only is he a closet homo!
hey, on a semi serious note, all I have ever heard is the REpubliCANTS know all about money, but, now, they say the surplus was a trick by Clinton who fooled them, wait, Clintion fooled them about money? those guys? you mean, the money boys did not know the surplus was real? how can that be explained? please, someone on the far right, how can these money stealing poluting no ethics anything to rip off the poor guys not know it was not real?

[Steven Hauser]

I felt it necessary to expunge certain words and phrases from a few of the posts.

I hate doing it but I will.

Express yourself and your thoughts but please remember that profanity is unnecessary to convey a point.

My .02

[selva]

oh well, another example of the right wing efforts to control our thoughts and means of expression, just like 1938 Germany, people are forbidden to express themselves, if they do, they are traditors, if they do, they are attacked, and just like Nazi Germany, people are thrown in jail with no trail, no charges, no lawyers, the nazi bush regime has many who support and forward their totalitarian propaganda , where are the WDMs, where is the Iraq link to 9-11? well, none on both counts, and, now, we learn, he was warned, and, did nothing. We learn he wanted a link to Iraq just so he could have a war. He should have read is father's book! At leat George the First had some sense and knowledge of the world. We now learn , these people that attacked Clinton after 9-11 saying it was his fault, that he put the government on alerts that prevented attacks, and, Bush did nothing when he was warned. Why? simple, they wanted something to happen so they could have a war! and, let innocent people die for their profits! just look how much the VP's complany is making off our boys dying. :bow: :bow: to the REpublICANTS and their killing of our boys and girls for their oil money! Think of hte innocent little boys and girls who died under American bombs to support a unjustified war so the oil rich sobs can make more mone off us! How much did you pay for the Iraq gas today?

[Shaughnn]

Say there "selva",
You seem to have a lot that you want to say, but I'm afraid that you're not being very successful at making your points clear. Maybe it would help your cause to write stuff out and edit things a bit for "flow" before presenting it all in one stream of consciousness blarg. Try introducing yourself too. It goes a long way toward inviting people to take your points into consideration.
Shaughnn

[flatfloor]

Selva, we don't censor around here as long as you present your opinions in an organized logical manner. Spend a little time going through our History Forums and the Mud Box and you will find many views expressed on both sides of the fence none of which have been censored.

There are no Jim Ryans here so please don't start that.

You have a lot of knowledge that would be welcome here.

Why, we even have an expatriat Brit member who lives in the oil fields, has some odd viewpoints and nobody has killed him. yet :D

[selva]

Having dealt with that fine gentleman, don't worry. Me, I am having fun, I saw this, and, could not resist, even if it is the truth about punky boy george!

News Release!
REPUBLICANISM SHOWN TO BE GENETIC IN ORIGIN
Los Angeles

The discovery that affiliation with the Republican Party is genetically determined, announced by scientists in the current issue of the journal NURTURE, has caused uproar among traditionalists who believe it is a chosen lifestyle. Reports of the gene coding for political conservatism, discovered after a decades-long study of quintuplets in Orange County,
CA, has sent shock waves through the medical, political, and golfing communities.

Psychologists and psychoanalysts have long believed that Republicans' unnatural disregard for the poor, and frequently unconstitutional tendencies, resulted from dysfunctional family dynamics -- a remarkably high percentage of Republicans do have authoritarian domineering fathers and emotionally distant mothers, who didn't teach them how to be kind and
gentle. Biologists have long suspected that conservatism is inherited. "After all," said one author of the NURTURE article, "It's quite common for a Republican to have a brother or sister who is a Republican."

Parents and Friends of Republicans (PFREP), who sometimes blame themselves
for the political views of otherwise lovable children, family, and unindicted coconspirators, have greeted the finding with relief.

One mother, a longtime Democrat, wept and clapped her hands in ecstasy on hearing of the findings. "I just knew it was genetic," she said, seated with her two sons, both avowed Republicans. "My boys would never freely choose that lifestyle!" When asked what the Republican lifestyle was, she said, "You can just tell watching their conventions in Houston and San Diego on TV: the flaming xenophobia, flamboyant demagogy, disdain for anyone not rich, you know."

Both sons had suspected their Republicanism from an early age, but did not confirm it until they were in college, when they became convinced it wasn't just a phase they were going through.

The NURTURE article offered no response to the suggestion that the high incidence of Republicanism among siblings could result from their sharing not only genes but also psychological and emotional attitude as products of the same parents and family dynamics.

A remaining mystery is why many Democrats admit to having voted Republican at least once -- or often dream or fantasize about doing so. Polls show that three out of five adult Democrats have had a Republican experience, although most outgrow teenage experimentation with Republicanism.

Some Republicans hail the findings as a step toward eliminating conservophobia. They argue that since Republicans didn't "choose" their lifestyle any more than someone "chooses" to have a ski-jump nose, they shouldn't be denied civil rights, which other minorities enjoy.

If conservatism is not the result of stinginess or orneriness (typical stereotypes attributed to Republicans), but is something Republicans can't help, there's no reason why society shouldn't tolerate Republicans in the military or even high elected office -- provided they don't flaunt their political beliefs.

For many Americans, the discovery opens a window on a different future. In a few years, gene therapy might eradicate Republicanism altogether.

But should they be allowed to marry?

[selva]

Originally posted by Shaughnn
Say there "selva",
You seem to have a lot that you want to say, but I'm afraid that you're not being very successful at making your points clear. Maybe it would help your cause to write stuff out and edit things a bit for "flow" before presenting it all in one stream of consciousness blarg. Try introducing yourself too. It goes a long way toward inviting people to take your points into consideration.
Shaughnn

oh no, no, it is the flow man, you know, us old Dems with our wacked out minds from all those drugs they say we take! wait, does that mean, that Russ LImb. is a closet Dem?
oh well, I have to get back to work, :bang:
thanks,
slt

[jjwq8]

Quiet down at the back!

There's enough trigger happy bozos hereabouts might here you Jim :D

For those interested.....currently reading Craig Unger's "House of Bush, House of Saud". Recommend you give it a go. Some of the issues appear to be looked at as from a speeding car but in general it is a read (so far) to make you go hmmmm.

[tileguytodd]

Selva...............
Some points worth digesting
#1-Freedom of Speech is not a license to be offensive,(It will not be tolerated)

#2-Political views are acceptible content in the mudbox-vulgarism is not acceptable.(I am a working man and if i find it offensive be assured its beyond public acceptability)

#3-Censorship while undesireable can and will be done if the above two criteria are breached.Expressing your views in an acceptable manner is up to you.we will step in only if you make it clearly necessary.If it becomes necessary on a regular basis additional steps will be taken.

#4-While the united states is a Democracy,this Forum is not bound by the personal interpretations of its constitution.We reserve the right to do as we feel is in the best interest of those who come here for knowledge.That includes the right to limit access.We do not take the responsibility lightly and give ample opportunity for members to conform to acceptable practices.(if you dont believe me,just ask Jeremy)

#5-Chastising Moderators for decisions regarding the content of your posts is pointless and unproductive.As i said we do not do these things lightly and if it is something borderline we discuss it amongst ourselves before preoceeding with any action.

If you dont agree with the points above there are other forums on the internet that will accept anything you wish to type and perhaps you will find a more comfortable place among one of these.We are happy to have knowledgable folks among us who can abide by at least a semblance of decorum.
Calling the moderators here Nazi's will not gain you respect for your views,It will however put you under the microscope.

Think about the above from the standpoint of the community rather than the standpoint of an individual.

[jjwq8]

Gee Todd, I'm honoured :D
Held up as a shining example of how not to behave in public:D

On a serious note, I fully understand what you are saying and have to admit that the scrivings of the object of your admonition are largely unintelligible to me. I put that down to my location and thereby being out of the stateside loop so-to-speak. Silence on my part should not be interpreted therefore as condoning what others find offensive or obnoxious.

As for the Nazi thing, until I took the political test elsewhere herein, I considered my politics to be about a country mile to the right of Attilla The Hun. I found out however that according to the test criterion I am in fact to the left of Colin Powell. AAARRRGGHHHH! :eek:

[tileguytodd]

Well Jeremy,a thousand posts ago you were not the upstanding kind of extremist we all knew you could become :D

You did make life interesting for awhile there ;)

[jjwq8]

OK, so now boring is better huh? :moon:

[flatfloor]

Now you did it Todd!

What part of..let sleeping dogs lie...don't you understand? :D

[jjwq8]

Quit while you're ahead guys :D

Now I'm a boring bitch? :D

[flatfloor]

Just remember you said it. :D

[jjwq8]

Arf and aaaahhhh

Bow

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ and aah ungha

Wow man yeah. Wow. I mean


Bow wow

:D

[Dan the Man]

Hi, i'm back :)

[kdzgon]

Originally posted by Shaughnn
...... But I feel that President Bush has cheapened the office which he currently holds, far more so than oral sex and a desparate attempt to protect a marriage ever did......
Shaughnn

WOW. If you can honestly say that is "all" Clinton did wrong while in the White House/to the office (and the country), I cannot fathom where I would even start a rebuttal!

I found myself wanting to respond to so many different posts along the way, but I wanted to read through the entire thread first. I agree with Jim's post re: the economy (Clinton riding the cresting wave; "suddenly" disappearing surplus) and Dave's re: $10,000 is not enough to subject myself to the media scrutiny. (Of course, I didn't read any snide comments about Clinton's actions re: serving our country in this thread...), and Howard's about my replies probably not having much value (kinda like talking to my kids as teenagers), but I cannot help but take the bait anyway - at least a little. I do not understand the name-calling, or even the wonder at why others would not respond in kind. Give me cold hard facts or even opinions based on something any time. I love a good debate, but couldn't care less about someone's alleged sexual preference. I appreciate the cleanup by the mods - heck, I find the "joke" about "what do you expect with a D.. and a B.." offensive, so I can only imagine what I missed before the cleansing.

BTW, it certainly was not Bush that restructured the military in such a way that virtually nothing moves equipment-wise without calling up the Reserves. There are a number of war/conflict-related tasks that are only executed by the reservists, thanks to something called the Abrams Doctrine http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3158215/ Of course, liberals aren't too happy with Rumsfeld's suggested restructuring of the Army - intended in large part to avoid excess reliance on Reservists. It also wasn't Bush that said "thanks, but no thanks" when Sudan offered to hand over bin Laden, but didn't see that mentioned here, either. IMO, anyone believing terrorism does not affect Americans/does not require American action is only kidding him/herself. I have my reservations about the Patriot Act, but "doing nothing" is not an option in the world today.

I haven't been here much lately, so some of you might not know I have had three daughters and three sons-in-law in the military (active duty USMC & USN) for the last 6+ years, so perhaps I tend to follow what goes on with the military a bit more closely than some. I had 1 d and 2 sils already deployed and one more d stationed at a NATO command base at the time of 9/11. 2 sils were deployed for 7 mos last Jan - July (each missed the birth of his son); one of them is already back there (a min of 8 mos; his unit is relieving the 82nd Airborne), and the other will return by the summer. My niece is engaged to a former Reservist who switched to active duty so he would deploy less often, so we see that side as well. Every one of these military members will tell you they are happy to be serving under Bush v Clinton or Gore; each will say it is about time they are allowed to do what they have been trained for - protect freedom - rather than just be used as political pawns. (Try going back and correlating military actions to Clinton's personal problems, and you might well see a pattern develop...). As a mother, I find some solace in knowing at least Bush did what he thought was right for the country. Whether you agree with his actions or not, there is no question that he (and Blair) put his political future on the line by taking the actions he did.

Oh, and FWIW, most military Thanksgiving dinners do not include processed turkey, and I understand that Bush dines with the military when he visits - I have heard that from those that serve more than once.

As to finding WMDs, read the info at this link sent to me by one of my kids http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/sandplanes.asp and keep it in mind when evaluating the lack of success to date in this regard. Amazing what little coverage things like this receive in the general media...

And one more thing: the USA is a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.

Laurie

[flatfloor]

After seeing those pictures can anybody say with certainty there are absolutely no WMOD buried there? After all Iraq is only the same size as California.

[LadyGodiva]

Check this out


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3590751.stm

We have NO right to be in Iraq. Bush is safe at home, while other people's children are dying!

.

[Shaughnn]

Hi Laurie,
Thank you for taking the time to put so much thought into your responce. Unfortuneately, I haven't the opportunity to give your points the time and thought which they deserve in reply. I'm getting married on Saturday April 3rd and I'm finding out that it REALLY is as frantic as I've always been told. Never having been married before, how did I possibly think I had everything under control??? I expect that I won't be able to reply until after April 11th, when we return from Vancouver B.C. If you haven't heard from me shortly after then, please give me a nudge and I'll be happy to try to explian my point a bit better. Right now I'm silly-blind with family angst and wierd benevolent guilt-tripping. Ahh, the pleasures of an Italian Catholic family!
"One ring to rule them all!"
Shaughnn:drool2:

[jjwq8]

Early nineties one of my projects was to complete construction and fit out a Class 2 NBC shelter for the Leader of this wee place. interesting and frightening to learn what we have developed to decimate ourselves.

Bioweapons don't do well in heat, so burying them in the desert is to basically right them-off. Chemical weapons need careful storage too and buriel doesn't qualify. Remember the UN inspectors buried the stuff to dispose of what they found in the nineties. Nukes? By Concensus everyone agrees they were a non-starter this time round.

Put the pictures into context. The planes were found by folks looking for something else. How potent is a fighting vehicle recovered from a sandy grave when the spares necessary to service it aren't available?

[John Bridge]

"After seeing those pictures can anybody say with certainty there are absolutely no WMOD buried there? After all Iraq is only the same size as California."

I find this thinking convoluted. Guilty until proven innocent? :)

We had/have business in Afghanistan. We had/have no business in Iraq.

[Shaughnn]

Ack! I told myself I didn't have enough time to be a busybody here, but I guess I fooled myself. Just wanted to point out that IF Saddam Hussain had enough resources at his disposal to hide WMD's and the entire industrial infrastructure needed to create same, do you really think that he would have left himself a crappy little dirt hole to hide HIMSELF in??? My thinking is that a man of his character would prioritize himself a swanky little bunker to hide in if hidings things was at all an option. Burying jets doesn't seem to be as much an act "hiding" as it does an act of mothballing equipment that you can't use or maintain.
Damn! Too many errands to run still!,
Shaughnn

[Steven Hauser]

Hmmm,

I don't think that the true context of the war on terrorism and the Iraq's flagrant violation of UN charters is being considered.

Further, I think that several people are forgetting Hussein's quotes after the terror attacks of 09/11/2001.

Simply a demand was issued to release all quantifiable data about weapons programs per the UN.

This was refused.

Jeremy knows exactly what I say about making threats.

Our government and the British government were caught in a quandry of global power struggles with countries that had a lot to gain from our boycott of Iraq. Namely France, Germany and China.

There are many plausible and noble reasons to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Equally there are many good and plausible reasons why it was wrong.

The bottom line in my book is making sure we remain accountable for our actions. We seem to be the only country in the world that is always fully accountable.

The heinous acts in Falluja are a good reason for the United States to remain strong and poised.

To the point about whether it is arrogant to not go along with the world, I say let the world match the United States last 100 years commitment of Human Rights. We are unmatched even today.

My .02

[John Bridge]

I suspect the burying of planes took place in conjuction with the '91 Gulf War. He also flew a bunch of his planes to Iran so that he wouldn't lose them back then. Since that time we have had a contiuous presence in that area. We patrolled the northern no-fly zone and the southern no-fly zone. We were not worried in the least about any airplanes Saddam might have launched, and how finding planes burried in the sand can be construed as a threat baffles me.

And let's remember the stated reason for going to war with Iraq. It was that Saddam and Iraq posed a "direct threat" to the United States and its people. That threat obviously did not exist, so now instead of a threat, it's enough to say that there were "good reasons" to go to war. No one wants to talk about how the threat seems to have vaporized.

In the months and days leading up to the invasion, Saddam and his cronies repeatedly denied they had unlawful weapons. They said they had been destroyed after the Gulf War. Every time a demand was made for them to produce the weapons, they stated they didn't have any. And in fact, they didn't have any. I think that's clear, and arguing that they could have had those weapons is ludicrous.

[Shaughnn]

If I was in a bar and kicked the teeth out of someone because I *though* he was a threat to me, I'd have a nice long quiet sit while I waited for a judge to slap a sentence on me. How is it, that when you wrap the same behavior in a flag it becomes "rational"? Until you have evidence, there is no guilt and there is no crime. The "Minority Report" is still fiction and the innocent are still considered such until proven otherwise by rule of law. Mob Rule is not the higher principle whcih our justice system is founded on. And to pretend that he can retain a higher moral ground while denying that same level of impartial justice to others is hypocracy laced with a good amount of ignorance.
Congress and the American people were told that Saddam's Iraq posed an immediate threat to us all and that a preemptive strike was the only way to prevent "mushroom clouds" over American cities. If someone were to misstate their case this poorly on the jobsite, I'd kick him to the curb in a heartbeat. I don't have time to waste on crackpots, liars and the deranged. So, how is it that I'm supposed to be swayed by those arguements from the sitting Predicent of the United States?
Crap! I really should be picking up kegs right now!, :D
Shaughnn

[Steven Hauser]

:D Shaughnn I think you are comparing apples and rhinos there.

[bbcamp]

Really, Steven?

[flatfloor]

John, my point and Laurie's is if we are just finding these now, who knows what else is still out there? Why did Saddam play his games for so long before agreeing to inspections?

[jjwq8]

Saddam and the Baathists are bogey men that peeked the interest of the US from time to time. A little bit of naughtiness simmering away nicely on the back burner if you will. Your perception of him and his regime is the result of his portrayal in your media and how your various presidents have chosen to present him.

Contrary to his portrayal as a mad-man he is anything but.

In the twenty six years that he has been my neighbour and consequent conversation topic he has displayed a frightening level of consistency. At no time has he made a threat he did not keep. Likewise, at no time has he claimed to possess something that he did not have, and I know that someone is going to respond, how about legitimacy? He allowed Palestinian "freedom fighters" to remain within his borders on condition that they did not prosecute their activities from there. He did not restrict their voices however.

I am NOT , being an apologist for the SOB.

But ....................

Who are we to believe?

A man who ruled his country with an iron fist for thirty years and during that time by dint of instilled fear and force of personality kept a naturally fractious nation whole. During his rule, Iraq was stable, it did not have a narcotics problem, neither was it a transit route for them. It was safe to walk the streets. In spite of sanctions, government worked, as did utlities and security and health services and those seeking it could still receive as much free education as they liked. And despite sanctions, most everyone could put food on their family's table and a roof over their heads.

In short he made sure that the necessities were there. Yes it was tough, unbelievably so, but that was the result of his disastrous foreign policy, not domestic upheaval.

Yes we compare apples and rhinos.

The problem is that the rhinos are telling lies and refusing to fess-up when caught in the lie. All except one that is:

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13046015,00.html

And now I have to admit to being impressed for the first time ever with Dubya.

I caught the beginning of his performance in West Virginia yesterday and damned if he wasn't relaxed, and stringing together entire sentences without the now famous pedontology. He has obviously been receiving some intensive schooling in the art of public speaking. The message may still be crap (I do not know and this is not thus a criticism) but at least he now has the presentation correct.


Evidently however he failed to impress everyone recently:

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13045798,00.html

[jjwq8]

Came back to add this. I finished Craig Unger's book House of Bush, House of Saud a couple of days back and have been digesting what, if anything it told me. I do not know Mr. Unger's affiliations but he clearly is no fan of Dubya.

The only revelation to really catch my eye was regarding Abu Zubaydah, the Al Qaeda operative, and the effects on three Saudi Princes of his revelations. Each died within a week of each other, first a heart attack, second in a single car wreck on a deserted road on the way to the funeral of the first and the third a few days later found in the desert having died of thirst.

I mentioned this to a member of military spookdom with whom I am acquainted and he shrugged and pointed out that there was a fire in the wing of the jail housing Al Qaeda suspects in the Kingdom and best they can estimate, 181 were accidentally barbequed when the sprinkler system that worked everywhere else in the jail failed to function in that wing. They say estimate because the fire was so intense that there weren't sufficient bits of body, teeth, dna etc, to identify, though for sure 4 of Al Qaeda's top guns disappeared that night.

You may want to check out the book. It loses it's way half way through and places far too much reliance on issues of questionable importance (from here anyway) that are repeatedly kicked up to the surface when he seems to have run out of mud on the bottom of the pond.

[Garrett]

The election between Kerry and Bush will be close. The bottom line in my book is that that this invasion of Iraq was unnecessary and bad for our war on terrorism. Bush will have a lot of explaining to do to the American People about the quality of his leadership.

The current military situation in Iraq is not good. Yes, we will regain control of the cities but not the "hearts and minds" of the ordinary Iraqi. Any puppet government we create will not stand up to the religious leaders. So.... sooner or later the Islamic clerics will seize power and Iraq will be just like Iran.

Our best bet is to turn over power now to a group of clerics, tell them that we want to be their friends and give them 10 billion a year for re-construction. And at the same time get our soldiers and marines out of there. GWB's idea to keep our troops there for many years is not feasible.

[jjwq8]

What Dubya isnt telling you is that his administration is simply securing Americas strategic interests and by felicitous happenstance, the interests of both the Carlysle Group and the House of Bush (read family and friends).

Saudi is heading tits-up. When the war on terror gets back on track it will be increasingly difficult for any American administartion to rationalize it's continuing support of the House of Saud and the country and society they have created.

Dubya may not be the sharpest tool in the shed but he does have the uncommon good sense of his Father and James Baker to fall back on. You can bet dollars to doughnuts that they have a very long term strategy pencilled out that foresees the demise of Saudi as a secure energy (and income) source and have instead lined up Iraq and the 52 State aka Q8.

[flatfloor]

Garret just when and where did you read or hear this whole thing was to be wrapped up and finished in a year?

While I was never100% behind this we are there and we have to finish it. Long before it started, actually in a thread about Afghanistan, I forecast this would happen there and now in Iraq. Didn't take much intelligence on my part to prophesize it.

I do see some merit in your solution though. Either that or turn Saadam loose.

[Scooter]

I am generally a peacenick and was dead set against this stupid war. I like to mind my own business.

Then I see Colin Powell on the TV. I like the guy and respect him, a great deal. And he says, without condition or hesitation, that Iraq is a threat and they have weapons of mass destruction, and America is at risk unless we attack Iraq now. Wow.

Sadaam says he has no weapons of mass destruction.

Who gonna believe? Colin Powel or Sadaam? Well , duh, I believe Colin Powell. And it turned out Sadaam was telling the truth, and Colin Powel was lying. Go figure. I feel like an idiot. They oversold this war.

But I have a solution, and no one's thought of this yet.

1. Declare victory, go home, and have a parade.

2. Wait until Civil War breaks out in Iraq (about a month) and then lets back one of the sides. That way they can do the dying for us. We're real good at backing civil wars (Guatamala, Chile, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia) and that way we don't get our hands dirty.

3. I bet we back the Sunni's and the ex Bathist party guys, the same guys we went to war against for WMD. Go figure.

[John Bridge]

There is no immediate solution. If Bush backs out now he will lose the election. He's not going to do that. :(

[jjwq8]

Dubya may not pull out but imagine how much less grief there might be in the world if his father had :yeah:

[LadyGodiva]

Originally posted by John Bridge
There is no immediate solution. If Bush backs out now he will lose the election. He's not going to do that. :(

And of course, that's all Bush cares about... the bloody election:mad:

[flatfloor]

Lady, I don't agree with that.

[Rd Tile]

Any country that harbors terrorists is a threat to everyone, have we forgotten 9/11 already, I haven't and never will.

[Shaughnn]

Hi RD,
Have you ever been to a bull fight? I mean the real kind where the actually stab the bull to death? It's a brutally tragic but predictable dance where the matador enrages the bull with a simple red (actually magenta) cloth and the bull charges blindly into the matadors swords time and time again until it's managed to bleed out entirely and has to rely on the "mercy" of the matador to finish it off.
Now, how different from a stupid bull in a dirt circle would we be if we threw rational and critical thought and just rushed madly around the globe trying to slash out at the shadowy threats whcih may or may not be presented to in a full and accurate context?
Is there a crack house in your city? Why haven't the local authorities closed it down? Is it perhaps because the judicious and lawful means by which such actions are taken require careful thought and consideration of MANY other factors? Just because CNN or FOXnews *reports* that some nation is harboring terrorist is not clear license to target that nation and it's millions of innocent citizens for our nationalistic blind rage. So, please do yourself a favor and tune in on a real old fashioned bull fight some time. The lumbering beast on center stage has a lot to teach the rest of us about how to survive an act of barbarism.
Shaughnn

[Rd Tile]

Who said anything about targeting innocent citizens, maybe if you saw what I saw, had friends who died and thought about the 2000 plus innocent citizens who lost their lives here, you wouldn't think the way you do, screw the damn bull, I've seen them, don't see the sport in it and against what they do.:)

Anyone who had or has any part in killing innocent citizens on purpose in any place has to go, The fact that Saddam laughed about 9/11 was a good enough reason for me, to see him go.:)

[John Bridge]

Okay, so Saddam's gone. His sons are gone. What's next?

And another thing. We all saw what happened in New York on 9/11. You don't have a copyright on it. I think we all felt the pain.

What's happening in Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. What's happening in Afghanistan does have someting to do with it. :)

[Rd Tile]

I wish I knew what's next, it's a real mess now, if Bush's father had finished the job the first time, we wouldn't be in this mess now.

As far as 9/11 is concerned, I'm sure Iraq backed any terrosist threat against us.:)

I also spent 2 1/2 months down there helping in the clean-up, starting the night after, unless you were there, you have no idea of the pain first hand, what you see on tv and pictures doesn't even begin to tell what went on.:)

[Shaughnn]

RD,
What makes you certain that I didn't lose friends or family in the attacks on September 11th? How is it that you know so much about me that you can presume that I knew no one who was in and/or near the World Trade Centers or the Pentagon (yup, remember that other thing that got blowed up on that day). As John has already pointed out, you don't own the patent on being pissed off. None of us do. Now, the question is "what is the appropriate reaction?"
I believe that the "appropriate action" following September 11th was a "no brainer" and even without prodding from the head of FOXnews, President George W. Bush would have found his way to it. I believe also that we, as a nation, have stepped strangely off that track in following a preordained plan-of-action which required the subdual of Saddam Hussain, and has nothing to do with any kind of "War on global terrorism".
As for Saddam Hussain laughing about September 11th, it makes sense that he would. If your neighbor across the street who was a huge pain in your kiester was to fall into some misfortune, might not you also take a small amount of pleasure in his pain? It's a human reaction. It's sick, but it's human. If everyone who behaved crassly or in poor taste were to get a bullet in the head, the coffers of Smith and Wesson would be flowing over their gilded edges.
Shaughnn

[Rd Tile]

As for the neighbor referance, yes, I would laugh, but if he got hit by a car, I wouldn't, anyway let's all get along and have a good night.:)

If by any chance and I hope you or anyone didn't lose a friend or family member there, I'm sorry, I did, maybe that's why I feel the way I do at times.:)

Glad to see a fellow union man also, been a teamster for 19 years now, hope this doesn't stir anything up now.:):)

[Shaughnn]

No worries RD, I got a hide as thick as a book and buckets o' goodwill to spread around. Without hope and something to keep your mind busy, there's a lot out there that can sidetrack you if you aren't paying attention. I don't get bent by talking about stuff, as long as everyone keeps things civil and moving forward.
And anyone who has a beef with organized labor holding up the wage scale for the rest of the civilized world can stew in their own drippy drawrs for all I'm concerned. It took me a long while before I decided to join the union (Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, Local 3 CA) and I haven't regretted that choice yet. I look back at the leash I was held on by non-unions outfits I had worked for before and I see now how important it is that organized labor continues to fight so that the standard of living for ALL of us is something more than "paycheck to paycheck". Without the training, protection, solidarity and resources that being a union member offers to me, I might not be as happy or as prosperous as I am today. I still hope to set out on my own one day and be my own boss. But when that day comes, I will still remain a member of the union because it represents more than a bigger paycheck. It represents a tradition and standard which I hope to help promote when I no longer need it's protection from employers without scruples.
Keep driving RD!,
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

Bush senior didn't finish the job because:

1. He was acting under entirely different circumstances, with a mandate from the UN that had authorized the removal of an invading force from Kuwait not regime change in Iraq.

2. There was no planning that went beyond kicking Saddams ass. (Sound familiar?).

What makes you think that the current scenario would not have played out back then? How much bigger mess might there have been with the participation of the Arab Governments numbering themselves in the coalition at that time?

"If only" is an exercise in futility.

Sadly so is Dubya's decision to enforce closure on unfinished family business.

[Westie]

"Anyone who had or has any part in killing innocent citizens on purpose in any place has to go,"

Given that the civilian death count in Iraq is many times what 9/11 was one has to wonder who the real terrorist is? It all depends on your point of view but the only one who has ordered the use of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in the past year or so has been Bush.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/weapons/index.html

[John Bridge]

Hey Westie,

I'm no fan of Bush, but I don't think he's ordered the use of WMDs. Let's not accuse the man of something he hasn't done. :)

[Shaughnn]

John,
Maybe Westie means the use of carpet bombing, bunker busters, and various other "really big boomy things". I would qualify any of those as "weapons of mass destruction" simply by definition of what they are designed to do. Right? Not taking any side except the side of accuracy.,
Shaughnn

[flatfloor]

We haven't done any carpet bombing in Iraq, have we?

Westie, for who and for what are the donations being solicited for? :rolleyes:

[Shaughnn]

Flatfloor,
Here's the skinny that I pulled off of their "who are we "page. Looks like a list of the "usual suspects" if you wanted to put together a list of people who don't like wars. But I think *who* they are is a whole lot less relevant that how accurate their information is. From what I can tell, they at least make an effort to note each of their sources which goes a long way toward getting me to pay any attention at all to what they have to say.
Shaughnn


HAMIT DARDAGAN (Principal researcher and site manager) is a freelance researcher currently working in London. He has made an in-depth study of the research methods of Professor Marc Herold, who pioneered a media-based methodology for estimating civilian deaths in the Afghan war of 2001-2. He has written for Counterpunch, and has undertaken research for a number of organisations, including Greenpeace. He has been chair of "Kalayaan" a human rights campaign for overseas domestic workers in the UK, which led to significant enhancement in their legal rights.

JOHN SLOBODA (Associate researcher and archivist) trained as a research psychologist and is currently Professor of Psychology at the University of Keele, UK. In 1999-2000 he worked with the Committee for Peace in the Balkans, and researched effects on the civilian population of the NATO bombing campaign. Since September 11th 2001 he has been responsible for the daily peaceuk.net mailing list disseminating critical non-violent perspectives on "the war on terror". He is a founder member of the Network of Activist Scholars of Politics and International Relations (Naspir), and a local delegate to the Stop the War Coalition. He is currently Web Resources Manager for Peace News, and is undertaking consultancy work for the Oxford Research Group.

BÜLENT GÖKAY (Associate researcher) is a Senior Lecturer in International Relations at Keele University. He is co-founder and core researcher of the Keele Southeast Europe Unit. He has authored many books and articles on global politics, the Middle East, Balkans and Central Asia, including A Clash of Empires: Turkey between Russian Bolshevism and British Imperialism (1997), The Politics of Caspian Oil (2001), Eastern Europe Since 1970 (2002), and The Most Dangerous Game in the World: Oil, War, and US Global Hegemony (2002), and is co-editor of the forthcoming book, War, Terror and Judgement: 11 September 2001 (Feb 2003).

TORBEN FRANCK (Webmaster) is a musician and peace activist. He is webmaster for www.peaceuk.net, www.humanshields.org as well as Iraq Body Count. He has recorded a track (with Joe Wilson) for the recent Stop the War CD compilation, issued in December 2002. He is a delegate to the Stop the War National Conference.

MARC HEROLD (Research consultant) is an Associate Professor of Economic Development, International Affairs and Women's Studies at the University of New Hampshire, USA, where he has taught since 1975. He holds a Master's degree in international business and finance and a Ph.D in Economics from the University of California in Berkeley, as well as an engineering degree in electronics from the Swiss Federal Polytechnic University. He has focused his writings upon social and economic changes in the Second and Third Worlds and his current research interests are on Brazil and Afghanistan, including the latter country's post-war situation. In December 2001 he released a widely cited study of the human costs of the U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan "A Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States' Aerial Bombing of Afghanistan: A Comprehensive Accounting"), updates to which may be found at: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mwherold.

GLEN RANGWALA (Legal consultant) is a lecturer in politics at Newnham and Trinity Colleges, Cambridge University. He is trained in political theory and international law. His doctorate, from Cambridge University, was in political and legal rhetoric in the Arab Middle East. He is also published on a number of other themes, including international humanitarian law, comparative human rights law, Iraq and nuclear weapons.

DAVID FLANAGAN (Technical consultant) is author of JavaScript: The Definitive Guide (among other standard works) and wrote the JavaScript code for Iraq Body Count that keeps our Web Counters updated while making them easy for webmasters to install.

PETER BAGNALL (Tech consultant & user support) is currently a postgraduate student at Lancaster University studying computer science and psychology. He spent two years working as a software design consultant in Silicon Valley, and before that four years as a network research engineer for British Telecom. His professional interest is using technology to provide real benefit to society, rather than just to develop flashy gadgets. His thoughts on ethics, politics and technology can be found on his website.

TRANSLATORS FOR PEACE is a free association of translators from all countries and of all nationalities. The Association was founded in 1999, during the Kosovo war, by a group of Italian translators who decided to dedicate a portion of their time to translate and publish information regarding the costs of modern technological wars in terms of human lives, the environment, democracy and human rights.

ERIC CLARKE (Assistant researcher) is professor of music at the University of Sheffield, where he does research and teaching in the psychology of music. He was an active member of Camden CND in the 1980s, and is a member of Amnesty International.

NIKKI DIBBEN (Assistant researcher) is a lecturer in music at Sheffield University where she carries out research into music perception, and gender representations in popular music.

JOSHUA DOUGHERTY (Assistant researcher) is a guitarist, private instructor and a graduate student in music at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, PA, USA.

MARIANNE FILLENZ (Assistant researcher) is senior research fellow in neuroscience at St Anne's College Oxford and retired University lecturer in Physiology. She was a member of the national committee of Scientists against Nuclear Arms (SANA) and is a present member of Scientists for Global Responsibility.

CHARLIE FORD (Assistant researcher) was awarded a doctorate for his holistic critique of Mozart's Cosi fan tutte in 1989 and has since published on popular music. He is an active member of Amnesty International and an occasional contributor to peaceuk mailings.

JORDANA LIPSCOMB (Assistant researcher) is a retired litigation attorney and mother of two. Supporting member and event coordinator of Musicians Opposing War (MOW). She received her Bachelors of Arts degree from New York University in Russian Language and her Juris Doctorate Degree from Southwestern University School of Law. She is currently researching the legalities and criminal implications of this war and welcomes information and sources on this subject.

SCOTT LIPSCOMB (Assistant researcher) is a co-founder of Musicians Opposing War, a collective of Northwestern University faculty, staff, & students in the United States who came together for the purpose of expressing opposition to the War on Iraq, who believe that U.S. military aggression is likely to increase - not deter - terrorism on American shores, and who advocate seeking non-violent solutions to the world's problems through a consensus of peace-minded nations. Scott is an Associate Professor in the School of Music at Northwestern, where he teaches in the Music Education and Music Cognition programs and carries out research related to the processes involved in music listening and their affect upon the listener. He is also co-author of "Rock and Roll: Its History and Stylistic Development" (2003, 4th edition, Prentice-Hall) and has been extremely concerned about the lack of response to this issue from the musical community. The recent appearance of organizations like Musicians United to Win Without War (Russell Simmons, Rosanne Cash, Michael Stipe, Dave Matthews, Peter Gabriel, Suzanne Vega, and others) is a welcome occurrence and hopefully only the first of many more that will follow.

DARELL WHITMAN (Assistant researcher) is a post-graduate student with the School of Politics, International Relations and the Environment at Keele University. He holds a Master’s degree in Government from California State University, Sacramento, a Master’s degree in Political Sociology from Southern Oregon University, and a Juris Doctorate in law from the University of Santa Clara. He is an attorney licensed to practice law in California and U.S. federal courts. He has been a long-time peace and environmental in the U.S., and served on the national organizing committee of the Emergency Committee to Stop the War (Gulf War I) from 1991-1992.

KAY WILLIAMS (Assistant researcher) is a recently retired librarian, who worked most recently as Head of Acquisitions in Keele University Library. She runs a mailing list for those in the Keele and Newcastle-under-Lyme area of Staffordshire who are interested in local and national anti-war activities.

ROWAN WILLIAMS (Assistant researcher) is a graduate in Modern Languages from the University of Cambridge. For a number of years she was Justice and Peace representative for the Anglican Community of St Francis, and a member of the steering group of the Justice and Peace Links of the interdenominational Conference of Religious. She is currently training for the priesthood in Cambridge.

[flatfloor]

A collection of theoretical academics and musicians. If they can't get it right no one can. ;)

[Shaughnn]

Who says that peacenix and "stinking hippies" can't count numbers just like the boys at Wall Street and the Petagon? Like I said, who they are isn't really the point. If their data is accurate, (and not just an exercise in statistical shellgaming) then you can't really write them off just because of their obvious motivations.
Shaughnn

[flatfloor]

Anybody watch the President's News Conference?

[Shaughnn]

Desperately searching for it in replay on TIVO menu. Can you summarise the "talking points"?
Shaughnn

[cx]

No gottee tee-vee, but, painful as it always is, I listened to it all.

Talking points never change:

The world is better off without Sadam.

9/11 justifies anything I decide to do.

No mistakes were made by my administration before or after 9/11.

I have neither read nor understand the Constitution I'm sworn to uphold.


There are variations, of course, but that pretty much covered it.

I wish I had a recording of it so I could transcribe for you what he actually said was the purpose of the President of the United States. I don't wanna paraphrase because I don't want to change a word of it. Suffice it to say it had nothing with executing the will of the Congress.

Those of you who love him will just have to forgive me, I think him frightening.

[Shaughnn]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/archive/2004/04/13/bush13.DTL

I tried to read through it but the pain between my eyes became too great and I had to pound my skull against a stuffed animal to make it go away. Can you pull out the quote you were describing, CX? I plan to give the whole thing another look tomorrow but having a short cut or two will probably make it less distasteful.
Shaughnn
PS: CX I think your assessment of President Bush's comprehension of the United States Constitution is too generous. Not only does he understand the content or spirit of that sacred document. He and his administration are actively dismantling it along with every other 'asset' we Americans have. I do wonder at times though if he's actually aware of his abuses or is his zeal so perfectly bulletproof that he could stand bareheaded in the bottom of an outhouse and call it 'rain'.

[jjwq8]

21 A4 pages!

Damn!!!

[jjwq8]

:rolleyes:

[John K]

You know I was born and raised in Southern California, but I swear some of the convoluted s*** that comes out of your mouths is nauseating. Not just California, some of the other board members from other states have some twisted views.


As for Q8. What would it be like now if George senior didn't step up to the plate and kick Your buddy Saddam out! Hell, Jeremy would probably be working for the bastard now. I'm not bashing anyone here, but facts are facts. Some of you loathe Bush and the way I see it, move. RDTile and Laurie. Kudos to you for standing behind our President and our service men and women in these tough times.


By the way. For those of you in SanFran. June is when Rainbow week starts at DisneyWorld.:D

[Rd Tile]

Thanks.

[Shaughnn]

John K,

"Make Iraq safe for democracy? "Remove Saddam Hussain because he is a terrible oppressive dictator who mistreats his people"
Is that what the American people were told was the purpose of going to war with Saddam's Iraq? Is that what the United States Congress was told to convince it to surrender it's Constitutional obligation to be the sole means of declaring "war". Was that the arguement was presented to the world's nations when we tried to make a case for war at the United Nations (which was soundly rejected).
No one has said anything here about not supporting the troops. Hell, I think most people hear respect the *office* of the President a great deal. It's the man who currently holds that office and the advisors upon which he relies which are the center of the controversy. I think the man and his advisors are wrongheaded in their zealous commitment to a frightening agenda which becomes more bizzarre as it is dragged into the light of day. How is voicing that opinion "convoluted"?
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

So John K,

despite the initials I'd be willing to guess that Mr. Kerry will not be getting your vote in November? :D

[jvcstone]

AH! How convienent to ignore history (or rewrite it) and forget the facts. Saddam became who he was because of USA support. Thats right --- back in the Regan / Bush I administration, Saddam was our friend because he was against Iran, and we provided weapons (some of the mass distruction variety) and the technology to build his own. Saddam informed the US ambassador of his desire (intent) to invaid q8, and was lead to believe he had the tacit approval of the Bush I administration. Had not the rest of the world protested the invasion so rigorously. Saddam probably would have gotten away with it. This should be no surprise to anyone. It has been USA polocy since wwII to back strong and brutal leaders while talking democracy. There is a long list of them that includes ossama while he was fighting the Commies in Afganistan. The fact is that democracy in developing nations scares the crap out of us since we have no way of controlling a goverment actually run by the people for the people. We want governments run by the US for the US interests, and people just don't matter. And we are quick to withdraw support once that strongman decides he can think for himself, or may step out on his own.

A good read that may open some eyes is Hegemony or Survival by Noam Chomsky

And finally, I've got to say, Bush again or Kerry really doesen't matter since both are puppets operated by the same string pullers. The only vioce from the outside who had a chance was silenced by media manipulations, and of course, that media is also controlled by the string pullers. I believe it was Jefferson who said God help this country if it goes two generations without a revolution. Obviously we have gone much to long! Don't get me wrong, I love this country, and would not live anywhere else. I vote in every election which is why I can say what I do about the folks who thing they are in control.

JVC

[cx]

And my job as the president is to lead this nation and to making the world a better place. And that's exactly what we're doing.

When any man starts to think his job is make the world a better place, I invite him to run for Messiah, or to go about his private way, gathering whatever private support he may muster, and to fix whatever parts he can manage.

But when a man seeks election to President of this country, I invite him to devote every ounce of his energy to fulfilling the duties of that office as set out in the Constitution. If making this country a truly shining example once again of how a free people can govern themselves, be good neighbors to all the other peoples of the world, defend themselves effectively against any who might bear malice but attack none, conduct free trade with all who are willing but make no permanent alliances with any, and generally show by example what can be accomplished by the society envisioned by the founders of this great nation is not enough to change the world, so be it.

This nation has all it can handle just trying to be what it professes to be. When we have set our house in near perfect order, perhaps then there will be time for some of our people to go off in pursuit of a more perfect world. But there will never be a time for our government to impose its will on us or any other people of the world. Never.

George W. Bush was barely elected President of this country by its own people. That alone should give him a good indication that perhaps all the peoples of the world don't necessarily share his views and ambitions, nor those of his handlers. He has gotten himself caught up in the age-old trap of believing his own rhetoric to the point of no longer being able to see the realities of his actions. That is a truly dangerous state of mind for any person in a position of great power.

As for your condemnation of the views of others, JohnK:but I swear some of the convoluted s*** that comes out of your mouths is nauseating. Not just California, some of the other board members from other states have some twisted views. I suppose I should raise my hand for recognition as "other board members", although I, of course, don't find my views convoluted at all. Indeed, I find them based solidly on the foundation of our country, its Constitution, for the most part.

Noam Chomsky is good reading on subjects such as our out-of-control federal government and how it got that way, as JVC suggests. John Silveira is another. And of course there is always David Wise, who wrote years ago in The Politics Of Lying:The consent of the governed is basic to American democracy. If the governed are misled, if they are not told the truth, of if through official secrecy and deception they lack information on which to base intelligent decisions; the system may go on - but not as a democracy. And yes, JohnK, those authors are all radicals, thinking as they do that the federal government should be the puppet of the people, not vice-versa.

My opinion; worth price charged.

[jjwq8]

Kelly,

Are there any owls to hunt in Crawford? Or would the temptation of being around the ranch with a weapon and having other targets be too great? :D

[John K]

John VanCamp, Kelly....


John V.

Some definate truthfull points. Can't argue with that.

Kelly.

Do you subscribe to the conspiracy theory that the President is not elected, but hand picked? Do you believe that the World is run by the Illuminati and our American President is told exactly what to do and when to do it? Just checking. :)

Check this out. www.theinsider.org. Just to add more confusion.:p

[bbcamp]

Is it a conspiracy, or does that link really not work...:suspect:

[jjwq8]

Try this one Bob

http://www.theinsider.org/

[John Bridge]

Don't believe in any conspiracy crap.

John K.,

Are you suggesting that anyone who doesn't like Bush and what he's doing should "move" out of the country? I surely hope that's not what you're saying, buddy. ;)

[flatfloor]

Well we can add the NWO to the "Gnomes of Switzerland" conspiracy. :rolleyes:

Please, give me a break. :shake:

[Shaughnn]

WHAT!!! You mean they are working *together*!!! Then who is keep an eye on the Atlanteans? Oh, heavens! This means trouble for the holistic hit squads and the black helicopters full of mandarin speaking aliens from Roswell.
*@*@*@* Fnord! Fnord!! Fnord!!! *@*@*@*

:nya:

[Dan the Man]

WOW my post is still going LOL

[Shaughnn]

http://www.sjgames.com/illuminati/

[John K]

John B.

Never would I suggest such a thing.:D Alec Baldwin said" if Bush was elected he would move out of the country". Damn if he still isn't here.:bang: :yeah:


Maybe I was a little caught up in the " support our troops" thing .

The thing about this topic is how can anyone really give a successful argument on what is currently going on without access to the same intelligence that our leaders have access to? The debate is total conjecture. We only know what we read and what we hear and thus we form our opinion.:)

I yield my remaining time to the gentlemen from Texas.:D

[jjwq8]

The same intelligence that said Atom bombs and Anthrax and Sarin were ready to be dropped on Washington?

[Shaughnn]

Jeremy,
Didn't you hear about that revised assessment? It was "Adam's Mom and Anthrax (the rock band) were bringing Saran (Wrap) when they dropped into Washington". It's all just a big silly misunderstanding so let's just forget anything was ever said. Shall we? :eek:
Shaughnn

[John Bridge]

I don't know any gentlemen in Texas, 'less you're talking about Davy, Jason, CX -- no, scratch CX . . . :D

John, I'm the strongest supporter of the troops you'll ever know, having been one myself lo these many years ago. ;) But I can support my fellows in the armed forces without having to agree with their civilian commander-in-chief. In fact, I can praise the folks in uniform while calling Bush a . . . . . well, I won't say it. Don't want to be mean and onery. :D

I can truthfully say the last president I liked and respected was/is Ronald Reagan. CX will take exception, I'm sure. :)

[John K]

John,

I absolutely agree with you about Ronald Regan. He was very good and had the ability to properly deliver a speech. I have to say. Tony Blair seems to deliver pretty well, for a Brit..:D

[jjwq8]

This Brit will happily deliver Tony Blair. Where would you like him and in what condition? :D

[John K]

:D :D :D

[Davestone]

Plleeaasse,this could go on forever,let,s face it, anytime you make a decision to do something half are against you.I,m a vet and believe we had to do something exactly what or how honestly i,m not sure, but giving up our autonomy for a globalist form of government has truly been disastrous as you can tell by the lack of respect we get from Mexico MiddleEast countries,France who we,ve babysat,and the rest of the countries that manipulate us for their yearly generous stipends they receive.Well i guess i feel better somehow now,didn,t solve much though, did we?Wow what if we had the JOB!

[jjwq8]

In truth Dave the pickle the US now finds itself in is one of Dubya's choosing.
Iraq was no threat and did not participate in the events precipitating the War on Terror.
Saddam was a Son of a Bitch who bruatlized 25 million of his countrymen. Just how big a threat he posed can be judged from the military facts.
Gulf War 1990-1991. Coalition went in with an Army of 1 million to evict him from Kuwait where he had perhaps 500,000 troops and maybe another 1 million within his own borders.
Gulf War 2003. Coalition (of 2) went into Iraq where Saddams entire army of 1 million plus was on home ground with a force of 150,000 and kicked major butt in no time flat.
At the time it was commented that they could have done it with far fewer.
So you tell me Dave, if the Generals were comfortable with a force outnumbered 10 to 1 militarily and 250 to 1 overall, just how much of a threat did Iraq/Saddam pose?

[John K]

Well,

We could have done with far less if we used the " Clinton, Bosnia concept" and dropped our bombs from 15,000 ft..:)

He did gas his own people and offer money to the familys of suicide bombers..

[jjwq8]

Think sound and video bights man. Simply filming holes in the landscape doesn't allow our intrepid reporters to play hero.

[John K]

Jeremy,

It worked well for Clinton. Totally moved the media from Monica to Bosnia..;)

[Dan the Man]

just to keep you updated on the subject...

http://tilenut.com/yo/no/BUSH_record.html

http://tilenut.com/yo/no/hub.html

[Bill Vincent]

Some of it's accurate, but for the most part, I don't think I've ever seen more mistruths, exaggerations, embelishements, things taken out of context, and outright lies in one place in my life, and I'm really sorry for the time I lost reading thru it.

[flatfloor]

Thank you Bill, I trust your judgement. :)

[Bill Vincent]

Now THIS just goes to show you how low the democrats will go (whoever put this together needs a good old fashioned ass whuppin):

Tennessee Democrats Compare Republicans
To Special Olympics Children
October 12, 2004 – Democrats in a race for a state House seat in District 82, are circulating a flyer that shows a child with disabilities with President Bush’s face running in a track race. The headline says: “Voting for Bush Is Like Running In The Special Olympics: Even If You Win, You’re Still Retarded.”

The flyer is being distributed by Democrat Craig Fitzhugh. His opponent, Dave Dahl has issued a call to Fitzhugh to stop distributing the flyer.

According to Dahl, “Hard-ball politics is one thing and everyone expects tough battles, but using those who are born with mental disabilities for political fodder is disgusting.”

Dahl says the flyers have been distributed for at least two weeks from Fitzhugh’s campaign office in Ripley, Tennessee. It also serves as the Kerry-Edwards headquarters. “At first, I really did not believe that Fitzhugh and the Democrats would stoop to such gutter politics, but then people started bringing the flyer to me at the end of last week. I was shocked and disgusted.”

“This kind of reckless disregard for those who suffer from mental disabilities is much larger than any state representative race. This act is so atrocious and indecent that my campaign will be sending a copy of the Fitzhugh flyer to the United States Special Olympics Committee, the Special Olympics International Group and state and national advocacy groups who work with and support special needs children and adults.”

This most recent attack on Republicans as mentally handicapped is not new. On October 28, 1994, while in Virginia, then-Vice President Al Gore attacked Oliver North's Senate bid supporters as "the extreme right wing, the extra chromosome right wing." Advocates for those with Down's Syndrome, caused by an extra chromosome, were outraged.

[flatfloor]

:shake:

[Shaughnn]

Bill, The District Attourney in Tennessee's District 82 has been called on by Tennessee Democratic Party Chairman Randy Button to investigate and prosecute the parties responsible for the flyer. It's been established that the flyer DID NOT come from the Craig Fitzhugh campaign offices. I've also searched 12 Tennessee newspapers for this story and there isn't a mention of it. Me thinks that the people on the ground recognized this as a hoax. And it also seems likely that you've fullfilled their purpose by propagating the story without confirming it's legitimacy. I'll agree that whomever created the flyer needs a serious session with a rubber hose and a sweat box, but I'm doubting that it's anyone in the Democratic campaign simply because it's such a stupid, stupid act and the stakes are so high in this election that that kind of idiot wouldn't be allowed near a pencil sharpener.
Shaughnn

[jjwq8]

Forget the rubber hose. They need introducing to a lead pipe :mad:

[Steven Hauser]

:cry:

Bill c'mon now... you know its bullshit...

Y'all realize of course that politcal parties are not pertinent to many important things in life, I would think most everyone who posts here realizes that miscreants are just that miscreants.

:bang:

[tileguytodd]

I'm not buying into this one.Nobody in the political circles would have approved this.Sounds like something highschoolers would do.

[LadyGodiva]

Predictable, boring, typical left wing rhetoric. The man liberated 50 million people and kicked the Talibans a$$. That's aces in my book. Go Bush!!!



I smell oil :D

[Bill Vincent]

Lets try this again. I'll post the email in its entirety, and you can look up the sources, because unfortunatley copying and pasting won't transfer hyperlinks:

Dear TVC Supporter:

Please take time to read the story below and forward it to your friends and associates!

TVC broke this story on October 12 (Tuesday) and the response has been so phenomenal that our web site nearly crashed from literally millions of people trying to access the site during the past few hours.

TVC was just quoted in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday afternoon. The Drudge Report and Michelle Malkin’s site are carrying the story as well!

You can help us continue to get the word out about this outrageous flyer—a flyer that demeans children with disabilities—and uses the word “retarded” to describe Republicans.

Send this to as many individuals as you know—and encourage them to support the work of TVC. You can donate online to TVC by clicking here: http://www.traditionalvalues.org/donate.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tennessee Democrats Compare Republicans
To Special Olympics Children
October 12, 2004 – Democrats in a race for a state House seat in District 82, are circulating a flyer that shows a child with disabilities with President Bush’s face running in a track race. The headline says: “Voting for Bush Is Like Running In The Special Olympics: Even If You Win, You’re Still Retarded.”

The flyer is being distributed by Democrat Craig Fitzhugh. His opponent, Dave Dahl has issued a call to Fitzhugh to stop distributing the flyer.

According to Dahl, “Hard-ball politics is one thing and everyone expects tough battles, but using those who are born with mental disabilities for political fodder is disgusting.”

Dahl says the flyers have been distributed for at least two weeks from Fitzhugh’s campaign office in Ripley, Tennessee. It also serves as the Kerry-Edwards headquarters. “At first, I really did not believe that Fitzhugh and the Democrats would stoop to such gutter politics, but then people started bringing the flyer to me at the end of last week. I was shocked and disgusted.”

“This kind of reckless disregard for those who suffer from mental disabilities is much larger than any state representative race. This act is so atrocious and indecent that my campaign will be sending a copy of the Fitzhugh flyer to the United States Special Olympics Committee, the Special Olympics International Group and state and national advocacy groups who work with and support special needs children and adults.”

This most recent attack on Republicans as mentally handicapped is not new. On October 28, 1994, while in Virginia, then-Vice President Al Gore attacked Oliver North's Senate bid supporters as "the extreme right wing, the extra chromosome right wing." Advocates for those with Down's Syndrome, caused by an extra chromosome, were outraged.

[Bill Vincent]

Here's some more food for thought:

- There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq during the month of
January - In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month
of January That's just one American city, about as deadly as the entire
war torn country of Iraq.


When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war,
offer the following facts:

FDR...
- Led us into World War II.
- Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost,
- an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman...
- finished that war and entered Korea
- North Korea never attacked us.
- From 1950-1953, 40,000 lives were lost
- an average of 13,334 per year.

John F. Kennedy...
- Ramped up Vietnam in 1962
- Vietnam never attacked us.

Johnson...
- Turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
- >From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost
- an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton...
- Went to war in Bosnia wit! without UN or French consent,
- Bosnia never attacked us.
- He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times
by Sudan and did nothing.
- Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.


In the two years since terrorists attacked us
President Bush has ...
- Liberated two countries
- Crushed the Taliban

- Crippled al-Qaida
- Put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without
firing a shot
- Captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking,
but...It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the
Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time
than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy
the Medina Republican Guard than it took Ted! Kennedy to call the police
after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!

The Military's morale is high.

The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to realize the facts.

[Shaughnn]

Bill,
I've recieved personal e-mail from Bill Gates himself offering me thousands of dollars for participating in his on-line survey. I didn't bother replying. We, as consumers of information, have to be just as critical of the reams of text that we're exposed to as me might be when chosing laundry detergent or a new car. I still think that you, and probably thousands of others, have been the victims of a hoax. I won't go so far as to say that it's a deliberate hoax designed to discredit the accused, but I'm suspicious as there are some key phrases in the letter which indicate intentional deceit and which are factually wrong.
Have you followed up on the reported Wall Street Journal story or the mention about the "Drudge Report"? What I have found by doing a little investigation is that the ONLY place this story exists is on the hard-core conservative web-sites. There are no referances to it in the mainstream media and with the exception of a news conferance held this afternoon in Nashville where representatives of the Special Olympics, Tennessee Disability Coalition, and the candidates for the Representive seat for District 82, there is little activity at all. No doubt, the flyer does exist. But origins are still a mystery to the part of the world that is still a bit rational. It may be proven that this flyer did originate from the Fitzhugh campaign? Or it may be proven that the flyer was created to discredit that campaign? But I challenge you Bill to look at the sources and ask yourself honestly, "Am I being used?" Is your trust being abused for someone else's motives? I think it's obvious that you've got a noble heart. I just also think that in this case you might have fallen for someone else's gag.
Shaughnn

[Shaughnn]

Bill,
I'll ask it again. Look at your sources and ask yourself, "Who is writting this and for what reason are they sharing it with me?" When you understand that each campaign has armies of flunkies who'se sole purpose is to flood the information market with advertisement, you will see that posts such as this newest list you've posted is as credible as the original "Bush's World Records" list. It may qualify as entertainment, but it's deffinately not worth basing your lasting impression on. Disinformation is only useful when populations rely on others to interpret their surroundings for them. I know you aren't lazy on the job site. Why are you being lazy with your insight?
Sincerely,
Shaughnn

[Bill Vincent]

But I challenge you Bill to look at the sources and ask yourself honestly, "Am I being used?" Is your trust being abused for someone else's motives? I think it's obvious that you've got a noble heart. I just also think that in this case you might have fallen for someone else's gag.
Shaughnn

Sorry Shaughnn, but that NEVER happens!! :D :D :D

(of course, the same can be said of all the garbage the left is putting out about Bush, too. but then of course, that HAS to be true, because they say it on TV.)

One other thing-- my second post-- the one that's first on this page-- all those are known facts.

[yadax3]

Here's an interesting site referred to me by my aunt, a recently retired San Fransisco Research Librarian -

http://www.readythinkvote.com/

If she trusts the sources, I trust the sources. ;)

[Unregistered]

Does anyone besides my self wonder why Shaugn questions the accuracy of Bill's post, and yet never offers even ONE example of inaccuracy? If the post is a fraud, shaugn, why dont you do us all a favor and point out the lies? This is getting sooo old.

[Shaughnn]

Hi Unregistered,
I had started to break down the Traditional Values Coalition letter, and bullet-point phrases and broken logic-strings that had inspired my doubt, but then I thought of something. I don't owe you any part of my evening except to say that I've read your complaint and to say that you are welcome to hold whatever opinion you choose. Since you haven't even offered the courtesy of a name, and I suspect that your only interest in the John Bridge Forum is to defend this letter, I have little reason to do otherwise.
Have a great night though,
Shaughnn

[BillC]

LMAO!!! That is EXACTLY the response I expected!! Actually, I would say that you fully INTEND to prove the lies, as soon as you can FIND the proof. Let us know what you find, since we all know that the folks (such as your self) calling Bush a liar, dont have any agenda of their own, nor do they ever lie.? Your answer to my post reminds me so much of Kerry when he speaks. YOU have ALL the answers, and the rest of us can either take your word for it or you will find someone else who will listen. Liberalism at its finest.

[Shaughnn]

Bill C (does the "C" stand for Clinton?),
I haven't said that the letter is full of lies. I've said that **I** don't believe that the story is accurate. I've said that **I** don't believe that the flyer in question was created or distributed by the Fitzhugh campaign. And I've also admitted that *facts* may prove me wrong and that I'm wiling to accept that when it happens. But for now, we have an anonymous flyer that appeared mysteriously in the campaign office and a copy was rushed over to the local newspaper in an attempt at "got'cha", before most of the workers in the campaign office discovered that the flyers were in their offices (according to local newspapers). By the time the local newspaper had sent a reporter to investigate, the flyers in question had been collected and thrown in the trash already. So, I see two entirely different stories here and being a rational person I am unwilling to accept either at face value.
What I was critical of was Bill Vincent's willingness to pass along propaganda as gospel. I think that the Democratic process is being choked to death by the marketing machines of the the two major political parties. The Traditional Values Coalition's letter was not "news" and it is not a credible source worthy of quotation. They, the leadership if the coalition, have made it very clear that they have an agenda and the language used in their letter demonstrates that their involvement and interest in this issue is solely based on those predetermined views and goals. So, I'll ask you also Bill C., "Who is writting this and for what reason are they sharing it with me?" It's a simple test, really. When the answer is immediately appearant, I find that the information provided is less important to me than information which is presented in a way that seems less like a lure.
Would you care to define what a "liberal" is as you understand it, Bill C.? I think that in your mind it is something entirely different than what Webster's or the Oxford English Dictionary might describe. I'm not a "liberal", Bill C, but neither am I offended by your attempted insult. I understand that some are limited in their ability to comprehend complex issues, and I forgive you for your prejudices.
Have a great day,
Shaughnn

[Dan the Man]

Are the US taking the bit of iraq with the oil from iraq then?

[Bill Vincent]

They, the leadership if the coalition, have made it very clear that they have an agenda and the language used in their letter demonstrates that their involvement and interest in this issue is solely based on those predetermined views and goals.

And you think major network news, including CNN, is any different??? Yes, I agree that all the spinning is destroying the democratic process. But for me to sit back and listen to just what the liberal media is moving out of the bowels of my tv just isn't a possibility.

[e3]

I find it surprising that any of us, listen to any of them.(politicians) We all have something they want, in votes, and they will tell you anything you want to get YOUR vote.Where it is intresting, is that people only believe what they want to hear. Both sides spin the truth to suit them.We in the past (every 4 years or so) go though this same thing that if half of the horror stories were true, the USA would have gone under long ago.Thank God, our fore fathers set up the system with checks and balances that one man alone is just that, alone. Neither man is evil ,both are tring for a job that no one should want.. Think of this as Noble and Schluter ...Coke and Pepsi..Power Aid and Gator Aid. Only YOU know what is best for YOU! Dosnt mean the other is bad !:stick: :calm:

[Davestone]

I was looking over the voting records of Kerry, and Hillary, and was surprised at how moderate Hillary was compared to Kerry,almost(gulp) likeable.Could be the mother in her.I can't imagine most of my old Army unit coming out against me and wanting to set the record straight,to tell the truth about me. There's no closer bond than two guys in a hole,other than mom.If those guys feel cheated and betrayed,there's gotta be something to it.I think they hate him as much as they hate Fonda,and she genuinely got p.o.w.'s killed when she turned over their s.s.n.'s they had sneaked into her hand,to the commander of the camp.I also like how the fact that Kerry has billions is clouded over and almost never mentioned as he talks about how (we) need health care,and (we) the middle class are losing ground,and those bad corporations are moving out of the country and and not paying their fair share of the tax burden. I'm not fooled by the Republican scare tactics,that Democrats are left wingers bent on socializing tearing down freedoms and religion. But if you forget about Bush and Kerry,and add up the others in the ring,what they've voted for and against,the directions they've taken, and the erosion of what i consider, the strengths of this country,i believe it's 60/40 in favor of the Republicans.The Nixon and Carter years are i would say equally destructive and productive,Reagan and Clinton i would rate equal,pro and con,George senior,i think didn't have a clue about the working class,in fact his state of the union address was the first time i screamed,and threw something at my t.v.,other than a sporting event,i'll never forget( i, don't think we're in a recession) as i was going bankrupt.So my friends i say what the heck,we're all going to survive this election,and if Kerry gets in Shaughnn will be busy defending instead of attacking,and if Bush gets it,well, we'll still be doing the same thing we're doing now,bumping our gums,as my old principal used to say. :)

[Bill Vincent]

Now THAT I'll agree with, on ALL counts (talking about Eric's take on things).




exceptin that Noble don't make no transition strips!! :D :D :D

[Unregistered]

Do any of you really think that having strong values and knowing right from wrong are the same as picking coke over pepsi? I cant decipher that analogy. The fact of the matter is that sometimes things HAVE TO BE SIMPLE. Sometimes its NOT wrong for things to be viewed as black and white, instead of wishes and pipe dreams.

[Shaughnn]

Dave,
I promise you that I can be equally critical of Kerry if the occasion arrives. :^D
Shaughnn

[jd77]

Do any of you really think that having strong values and knowing right from wrong are the same as picking coke over pepsi? I cant decipher that analogy. The fact of the matter is that sometimes things HAVE TO BE SIMPLE. Sometimes its NOT wrong for things to be viewed as black and white, instead of wishes and pipe dreams.

Amen to that.


I would add that somebody has to have balls enough to make decisions and can never make everyone happy. :D

JD

[Davestone]

I think this has wore me out,frankly i'll be glad when it's over,my wife just went to see W in Ocala tommorrow,now she's fanatical,i'm just gettin tired of it,i can't remember a time when the country was so divided almost equally,except maybe toward the end of Viet-Nam,it was violent till the Ohio state incident,then people seemed to settle down into a quiet resolve,polarized,but somehow unsure and wary,kind of like losing your first boxing match,you realize maybe you're not the toughest s.o.b. like your trainer told you,you still have the skill and power but you realize the other guy does too, for the first time--you're not invincible--. I agree there are sooo many more issues,one only has to watch an episode of Cops,or inner city schools,or pollution,the energy crisis,or the flu vaccine shortage for God's sake,heck that one thing alone could be far more dramatic,look at the flu epidemic in ww1.Well, i've scared myself,i have to go take a shower-i could use a good hurricane to cheer me up! :D

[Bill Vincent]

Dave,
I promise you that I can be equally critical of Kerry if the occasion arrives. :^D
Shaughnn


It arrived in 1971.

[Shaughnn]

Bill,
Do you mean by "1971", John Kerry's activities after being discharged where he made remarks critical of the United States war in Viet Nam? Why should I be critical of John Kerry because of that? He served his country and when he was released from service, he exercised his rights as an American under the First Amendment to protest the war which his personal experiences taught him was wrong. It would seem that there isn't any question now in hindsight that the war in Viet Nam was a terrible episode in American history and that thousands of lives were lost for no clearly discernable reason. And John Kerry was morally compelled to bring about the end of the war, to the best of his ability, through legitimate and legal methods.
Nope, I've got no complaints about that. Why are you bothered?
Shaughnn

[Bill Vincent]

No. to speak in front of congress would be protesting. To throw away the medals he got from the war, that would be protest. To get up in front of thousands at protest marches, that would be protest. BUT TO GO BACK TO VIET NAM AND GET CHUMMY WITH THE NVA is traitorous.

[Shaughnn]

Sorry Bill,
I don't know that story. Can you point me to a factual report of it and not a partisan retelling?
Shaughnn

[Bill Vincent]

I'll see if I can find it on line and then I'll give you the link.

Suffice to say, I personally don't need a link to prove it happened-- I remember it being reported on the news when it happened. I also know someone in Mass. who has photos that I've SEEN of the tribute to him and Hanoi Jane at the war museum in Ho Chi Men City.

[Dan the Man]

sooo, are they? US taking over the bit of iraq with the oil..!

[Unregistered]

"i can't remember a time when the country was so divided almost equally,except maybe toward the end of Viet-Nam,it was violent till the Ohio state incident,then people seemed to settle down into a quiet resolve,polarized,but somehow unsure and wary,kind of like losing your first boxing match,you realize maybe you're not the toughest s.o.b. like your trainer told you,you still have the skill and power but you realize the other guy does too, for the first time--you're not invincible"

I wasn't here to experience this as some of you were, but this is possibly the most realistic post I've seen hin a long time. Thank you, Dave.

In 25 years, I've never seen the US as divided as it is right now, and probably never will again. I can't say that I was there when Kerry threw away his medals, but here's the thing...

This is not even a "lesser of two evils" type of debate. This election not only determines our leader for the next four years, but essentially determines the future of American History. To paint GWB as a leader who is not afraid to make the "tough, though unpopular" decison is wrong and misleading. Certainly decisivness is a desirable characteristic in a leader, but only as long as that decision is an educated one.

Can anyone tell me when Iraq became an issue? As far as I can remember, and I followed closely, it was not an issue until early 2003 when it became clear that Al-Qaeda was a nearly impossible target to track and eliminate by standard military means. Al-Qaeda may have have been difficult to locate, but another established enemy, and Islamic "terrorist" was readily available in Saddam Hussein.

It is pointless to argue that he was not a bad guy, but it is easy to prove that he was not an immediate threat, at least no more than established Nuclear threats such as North Korea, and this is where I find my issue with Dubya.

I am a young man, and am truly afraid of the signal the re-electing another 4 years of our current administration will signal to the rest of the world--that we all feel the same way as our president? We have the worlds best military intelligence, and we went to war based on intelligence that Iraq may have weapons of mass destruction, and no evidence to suggest that they planned on using them on the US. To re-elect this man based on the fact that he has strong convictions is, pardon me, the wrong decision.

I would rather vote for a man that makes decisions based on the realistic, long-term, well being of our country in mind, and I believe that man is John Kerry.

[Shaughnn]

Hey Unregistered,
Where's your name?

Bill V.,
After searching through the first 100 google-hits for "Kerry in Viet Nam" I found a photo of John Kerry with a congressional delegation that included U.S. vetrans from 1973? Is this what you are referring to?
Shaughnn

[Dan the Man]

:bang:

MY TOPIC..! has gone past what I know now lol, I need to read up more on this stuff..!

grrrr...

[tileguytodd]

Before you jump to conclusions read this. and have
> a great day!

Have
> > you seen the John Kerry commercial in which George
> Bush pledges
> > to help Seniors on Medicare and "the very next day
> imposes a 17%
> > premium increase - the biggest in history"? That
> ad is a
> > stoke of genius on Kerry's part and will surely
> gain him many votes
> > among the uninformed.
> > ++++
> > I found it so amazing that I did some homework on
> the issue. As
> > it turns out the 17% increase was not imposed by
> President Bush but
> > was
> > mandated by the "balanced budget agreement"
> signed
> > by President
> > Clinton, voted into law by Senator John Kerry,
> and was
> > scheduled to come into effect during the Bush
> > administration. President Bush had no
> > authority to reverse what had been voted into law
> by Senator Kerry
> > during the Clinton administration.
> > ++++++
> > Once again Kerry is counting on the ignorance of
> > the American people. Don't be duped by his
> mendacity.
!

[Dan the Man]

How can i have a good day now after reading that? (tsk) j/k btw

[PCTDiver]

I was thinking on my way to work this morning that it will be a great relief when 11/02 has come and gone! It's hard to figure out who stands for what or what to expect after the inauguration. Besides, the President is just a figurehead anyway...it's the congresspeople that we have to worry about. :sick: My better half doesn't vote and as much as I try to argue the point, she has the attitude that appx. 50% of the American population has--her vote just won't make a difference. I've tried keeping up on all the issues but who's got the time? It's a lot easier to access information 'cause of the i-net but just like reading the paper or watching the news, a lot of it is biased. On some issues, I've written my congressperson and talked with people closer to my level who are "experts" on the subject but in the end it's my opinion vs. yours and who's to say I'm right? I just wish they'd legalize pot on the federal level and make it a happier place :rofl:

[Bri]

http://www.votergasm.com/Pledge.php :idea: :uhh: :)

[Dan the Man]

hehe, a way to settle it eh?

[vero]

Q. What's the difference between the Vietnam War and the Iraq War?
A. George W. Bush had a plan to get out of the Vietnam War.