25 replies to this topic

[plith]

He got to the last syllable of "missages" before hastily correcting himself. I was so confused, I couldn't tell what direction he planned on taking our nation's spelling and grammar!

[Radien]

On the lighter side, that's pretty funny. I'm so used to it by now that I guess I just filtered it out. Talk about mixed messages... I'd like to know how our translators handle him during international talks.

[Xpertgmer]

Also, if George W. gets re-elected, every male that is at least 14, or in some cases 13 not too old ( I don't the exact age) will be in danger of being drafted during his next term. P Bush would be more likely to start the draft because he never experienced war; he managed to sneak his way into the national guard that had a huge waiting list so he didn't have to go to the war! (Will be more added later, will edit, running out of time to post.)

[shadow]

Also, if George W. gets re-elected, every male that is at least 14, or in some cases 13 not too old ( I don't the exact age) will be in danger of being drafted during his next term. P Bush would be more likely to start the draft because he never experienced war; he managed to sneak his way into the national guard that had a huge waiting list so he didn't have to go to the war! (Will be more added later, will edit, running out of time to post.)

Knock yourself out Xpert! Actually I think you have dug yourself in pretty deep here with this draft nonsense. Here is a News Article so you can catch up on current events and what is / is not baloney.

While you are reading, take note of who voted for the draft: Two Demo Rats!

"Voting for the measure were Reps. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), who long has argued the United States needs more troops in Iraq, and Fortney "Pete" Stark (D-Calif.), a 32-year House veteran."

Have fun!

[Radien]

You've linked to a pay site. It would be nice if you could find something that we can view without subscribing.

I'm very hesitant to believe Kerry or Edwards ever voted for anything resembling draft, because if they had, then the Bush campaign would have barraged them with accusations about it, which they have not.

[shadow]

You've linked to a pay site. It would be nice if you could find something that we can view without subscribing.

I'm very hesitant to believe Kerry or Edwards ever voted for anything resembling draft, because if they had, then the Bush campaign would have barraged them with accusations about it, which they have not.

C'mon Radien! You have made some pretty darned good arguments for the wrong side. This is about as weak as an argument can get.

a) Yes WashingtonPost.com offers subscriptions and they print a very liberal paper. The link takes you to the story "House GOP Brings Up Draft in Order to Knock It Down" and I see no demand to login, only a place to "sign in" if you like. Readers can find this and other stories by googling for "draft bill" or some such. Here is Yahoo! story if it makes you feel better.

b) Nobody said the Johns voted for it. Article says two house Demo rats did, and even gave the names. You just did what you accused the GOP of doing.

Play again?

Edited by shadow, 11 October 2004 - 10:54 AM.

[davidballardjr]

To be honest, I think Kerry is a fraud. He has no plans on how to deal with the ecomony, the war on terror, and, on tax cuts. He says he wants to tax only the wealthy. Kerry and his wife won't be paying higher taxes because they know all of the tax loopholes. Do we really want this man in office? I say no. This country is a hell of a lot safer with Bush as President instead of Kerry.

Edited by davidballardjr, 11 October 2004 - 09:41 AM.

[Radien]

Shadow, the first thing I look at in a politician isn't usually their party affiliation. There are Republican politicians I like and respect, such as John McCain. Finding a mere two examples of people whom I disagree with is something I wouldn't even bother responding to.

For me, the site says "Register Now: It's Free and Required" and it doesn't show the article. I never doubted that the Washington Post is a good newspaper; I just don't have any money I'm free to spend right now. And whether or not it's "liberal" doesn't matter to me, either, since I don't try to see things in black and white.

It looks like I missed the quote you took from the article; I clicked on the link before I finished your post and forgot to read the last line. The reason I assumed that you were talking about Kerry/Edwards is because what you are talking about is much less relevant. It's not like I voted for either of those two you mentioned.

Also, what exactly do you say I'm doing that I accuse the GOP of? If you're trying to say I'm talking about a subject without researching it, then no, I'd accuse a lot of people of doing that. But lately, what I usually run into are people who simply repeat Bush attack ads, usually word for word.

DavidBallardjr:

So he doesn't have a plan... again, have you looked at his website and read about it? Kerry has written entire books on some of the things he wants to do. He does have a plan. But you can't disagree with it until you read it.

Edited by Radien, 11 October 2004 - 04:57 PM.

[Sparkrulean]

Nothing is more sKerry than Kerry. Mr. "I want the UN to govern USA, I hate guns, and *I was accepted in to a communist hall of honor" Pffftt.. Can you say Communist? lol! Both of the cannidates really suck because they are stealing and decaying America away from the ways it was and has been for years. We are losing our homeland because of actins that bush is agreeing with, and that kerry will most likely bite into.. I still think that we should stick with bush though.

*Check this out:http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38738

[Radien]

Nothing is more sKerry than Kerry. Mr. "I want the UN to govern USA,

Which is more scary: cooperating with the U.N., or telling them "screw you"? I think the latter. Especially since the most powerful countries in the U.N. are our allies... assuming they stay that way after this mess, that is.

Anyway, the idea of the U.N. ever controlling the U.S. is, at this point in time, extremely silly. The U.S. has always been powerful enough to back out at any time (usually quite rudely), and the U.N. is usually quite frustrated because they can't do anything about it. To be afraid that they could do something about it shows more weakness than strength.

I hate guns,

Kerry is a gun hobbyist.

It's amazing how people cling to blanket statements sometimes...

*I was accepted in to a communist hall of honor"

*snicker* Gotta fit communist paranoia in there somewhere. After all, you can't truly insult somebody in America without calling them a "damn Commie!"

[DCEnygma]

I was watching bits of the debate (the 2nd one) and was watching some of the mudslinging last night, and was completely disgusted with them both. I don't normally care about politics, but Bush and Kerry both should be held under a wet blanket for about twenty minutes.

The big issue everyone is talking about is the threat of terror. Kerry says that if he were in office, terrorism would not be the main focus of the US, it would be a nuisence. A nuisence? That just screams nuclear strike. Then Bush comes back with that should be the main focus for the US right now. Main focus? Oh, what about that other thing, y'know... the one that will cause the slow, eventual collapse of the United States. Y'know, that thing called... the ECONOMY! I want to hear one of the them shut up about the terrorism and stop with the mudslinging, and give a straight answer on what they're going to do about three things. The econmoy, gasoline prices, and finally, foreign relations. Not terrorism, foreign relations. How do they plan to handle other nations' problems. I don't want someone who's going to go Vietnam on us and get thousands of soldiers killed in someone else's war (and that's where Bush is heading in my opinon).

I'm kind of glad I never registered to vote this year, as I don't think I could justify voting for eather of these men.