PDA

View Full Version : Make no mistake about it.



LastActionHero
October 7th, 2001, 08:59
seems like the most spoken phrase right now is make no mistake about it.

post sentences starting or ending with make no mistake about it :D


Make no mistake about it , I'm a male.

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 09:02
Attacking Bush I see? Someone with a 90% approval rating is not supposed to be attacked. :D

(Considering the fact he uses Make no mistake about it quite often - makes his speeches much more demanding)

Toefur
October 7th, 2001, 09:04
If he wasn't attacked, he and the people would grow too complacent, and screw up too often.

People attacking Bush makes him a stronger person, and perhaps over time a slightly (SLIGHTLY :p ) better leader.

LeX
October 7th, 2001, 09:09
Make no mistake about it, this is pretty stupid. :p:p

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 09:10
There you again.

He is a great leader as you can see clearly in the past two weeks. If you disagree, I have to respectively say there is something wrong with you.

LastActionHero
October 7th, 2001, 09:11
Originally posted by Giancarlo
Attacking Bush I see? Someone with a 90% approval rating is not supposed to be attacked. :D



What if I'm from the rest 10%? ;) BTW I hate all politicians.

LeX
October 7th, 2001, 09:12
I get tired of him staring at me from fws. ;)

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 09:27
Originally posted by LastActionHero


What if I'm from the rest 10%? ;) BTW I hate all politicians.

Then you are one of the very few who doesn't want to revitalize the economy and go after the terrorists.

LastActionHero
October 7th, 2001, 09:36
Originally posted by Giancarlo


Then you are one of the very few who doesn't want to revitalize the economy and go after the terrorists.

Terrorists are scum. They take innocent lifes. They are the worst form of animal life exisiting on this planet. I have been saying this long before the wtc attacks infact since the day I first read about a terrorist attack in the newspapers. FYI Terrorist attacks are way of life in India, everyday dozens of innocent lives are lost.

What I don't like is the moral policing by the President of the United States. What I don't like is all politicians become corrupt when they have power in their hands. If you are gonna say that anybody who has power is not corrupt then you are wrong, it is a big temptation to become corrupt once you have power in your hands.

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 09:43
Originally posted by LastActionHero


Terrorists are scum. They take innocent lifes. They are the worst form of animal life exisiting on this planet. I have been saying this long before the wtc attacks infact since the day I first read about a terrorist attack in the newspapers. FYI Terrorist attacks are way of life in India, everyday dozens of innocent lives are lost.

What I don't like is the moral policing by the President of the United States. What I don't like is all politicians become corrupt when they have power in their hands. If you are gonna say that anybody who has power is not corrupt then you are wrong, it is a big temptation to become corrupt once you have power in your hands.

Well a few who have power use it responsibly, like the way Bush is doing now. Quite frankly, I don't give a rat's arse if you hate what Bush is going to do in the region north of you because it has to be done or it will not be done at all.

LastActionHero
October 7th, 2001, 09:47
I don't hate what is going to be done in the region to the north of me if innocent people don't lose their lives. I have clearly said I hate terrorists.

But what was the rest of the world doing when terrorists were making merry killing innocent people in Kashmir, Palestine,Chechnya, Indonesia? Where was the moral police then? huh? What was your President doing then? Or do only lives of American citizens matter?

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 09:50
Originally posted by LastActionHero
I don't hate what is going to be done in the region to the north of me if innocent people don't lose their lives. I have clearly said I hate terrorists.

But what was the rest of the world doing when terrorists were making merry killing innocent people in Kashmir, Palestine,Chechnya, Indonesia? Where was the moral police then? huh? What was your President doing then? Or do only lives of American citizens matter?

The President was trying to help the Israelis and Palestinians come to peace, and now they have no choice but to come to peace. Our President was doing the best he could, and wanted Bin Laden far before September 11th occured. If you hate him, then fine.

LastActionHero
October 7th, 2001, 09:53
I don't any particular politician , I hate them all.

Epgs
October 7th, 2001, 10:19
Originally posted by Giancarlo


The President was trying to help the Israelis and Palestinians come to peace, and now they have no choice but to come to peace. Our President was doing the best he could, and wanted Bin Laden far before September 11th occured. If you hate him, then fine.

I have to say the things good about bush is he is surrounding himself with smart people (so he doesn't blow us all up). Another thing that sucks is now he gave this huge tax cut. Now we have an even bigger national debt and also we need 109 billion dollars to cleanup nyc. (great planning) now he wants another tax cut. why the hell doesn't he want to pay off the national debt. He reminds me of a person addicted to credit cards. He has the ability to pay off the national debt (clinton gave him that ability) and he just won't pay it off. He wants to spend, spend, spend. It is gonna get bad when he puts us in a position where it will take 10+ years to pay off the debt. Some people with sense will have to cleanup up what he is doing.

LeX
October 7th, 2001, 10:20
Yup. They talk a lot but few actually do.


Just some personal, baised comments.

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 11:47
Originally posted by Epgs


I have to say the things good about bush is he is surrounding himself with smart people (so he doesn't blow us all up). Another thing that sucks is now he gave this huge tax cut. Now we have an even bigger national debt and also we need 109 billion dollars to cleanup nyc. (great planning) now he wants another tax cut. why the hell doesn't he want to pay off the national debt. He reminds me of a person addicted to credit cards. He has the ability to pay off the national debt (clinton gave him that ability) and he just won't pay it off. He wants to spend, spend, spend. It is gonna get bad when he puts us in a position where it will take 10+ years to pay off the debt. Some people with sense will have to cleanup up what he is doing.

So we should break out backs with taxes? If we don't cut Captial Gains Tax like Bush wants to do we will be in deep recession. The Tax cut does not suck because it actually helps the people. All he wants is the tax cut to occur much faster, and another $60 billion tax relief will help boost confidence. We may be stuck with deficit, but under Reagan the economy did create 14 million jobs even with the deficit didn't it? Clinton gave this country a recession, not anything else. Clinton is just another Carter who did nothing and just let the economy dry up. Sense? Bush is the only one with sense, you democrats had to get Gore... a senseless fool. Gosh, I hate people who think a recession with zero deficit is better than prosperity with deficit, because in the future it would be the other way around if we go with the second. Prosperity with deficit means we can pay off that, and recession with zero deficit means the GDP is shrinking. Typical democrat idealism, always wants the zero deficit even with a recession, bigger government and less money for the average person. Stupidity never comes any more apparent in the Democratic Platform.

Dusty
October 7th, 2001, 11:53
the fact he uses Make no mistake about it quite often - makes his speeches much more demandingNo, it makes them more redundant. I'm not getting involved in a political debate, I'll just say "I don't like Bush, either one of 'em, especially not Curious George" and leave it at that. Over and out, see ya next Tuesday.

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 11:58
Originally posted by Dusty
No, it makes them more redundant. I'm not getting involved in a political debate, I'll just say "I don't like Bush, either one of 'em, especially not Curious George" and leave it at that. Over and out, see ya next Tuesday.

OH GOODIE! IT DOES NOT MAKE ANYTHING REDUNDANT. Another person who is critizing Bush even after that pinnacle speech (made a while back) he made to congress. Always somebody critizing Bush and second-guessing our government. Those people don't help the country.

But... They are allowed to speak because we are a democracy afterall, and that I will stand by because we live in a democracy.

Coolin
October 7th, 2001, 14:30
Originally posted by Giancarlo
Clinton gave this country a recession, not anything else. Clinton is just another Carter who did nothing and just let the economy dry up.Yeah, the USA was just sooo poor economically in the 90's :rolleyes:

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 14:33
Originally posted by Coolin
Yeah, the USA was just sooo poor economically in the 90's :rolleyes:

I am sorry, but you have no understanding about economics. No understanding what-so-ever. The current policies placed in effect, do not hurt the economy when they were started but affects the economy in the long term. Clintons mismanagement did this.

Now it is a liberal-excuse to say, oh the economy wasn't in trouble in the 90s. You want to know why? Ronald Reagan. Clinton undid the things Reagan did, therefore the economy ----ed up two months before Bush took power.

Dusty
October 7th, 2001, 14:49
I know I said I would stay out of this, just one last comment.

The economy does not react instantly, I will agree to this. Saying Clinton was solely responsible for the economic upturn in the '90s isn't true. He contributed it to it, most certainly, but he wasn't solely responsible for it.

However, if you agree that, then how can you turn around and say Georgey Porgy is doing anything right now? Wouldn't any upturn in this recession be due to Clinton?

I say the business cycle is just that, a cycle. Luck of the draw who gets the upside and who the downside. In my opinion, economics is three fourths bull---- and... well, the others fourth's bull---- too. The economy can be influence but it can't be controlled, anyone that claims they can control it is a liar, that's what makes it a perfect field for politicians. :D

LastActionHero
October 7th, 2001, 14:51
Well said Dusty :)

Giancarlo
October 7th, 2001, 14:55
Originally posted by Dusty
I know I said I would stay out of this, just one last comment.

The economy does not react instantly, I will agree to this. Saying Clinton was solely responsible for the economic upturn in the '90s isn't true. He contributed it to it, most certainly, but he wasn't solely responsible for it.

However, if you agree that, then how can you turn around and say Georgey Porgy is doing anything right now? Wouldn't any upturn in this recession be due to Clinton?

I say the business cycle is just that, a cycle. Luck of the draw who gets the upside and who the downside. In my opinion, economics is three fourths bull---- and... well, the others fourth's bull---- too. The economy can be influence but it can't be controlled, anyone that claims they can control it is a liar, that's what makes it a perfect field for politicians. :D

Quite frankly this recession is because of Clinton and he was NOT responsible for the Reaganomic's Technological Boom of the 90s. Bush's programs are much more faster acting, because they are tax cuts. The upturn is based on the government providing tax-cuts to the people, and that itself will take nine months to show its true value, fast acting revitalization.

Another thing is, I hate Clinton. He did nothing. He passed nothing. He destroyed our Nuclear Energy programme. He placed so many restrictions on the economy for his so called "environment strategy". He caused this recession and you know it.

Bush's policies will take nine months (or even an year and a half) as any other tax cut policy. For Reagan in 81, it didn't come till 83 for revitalization by tax cuts. The Captial gains Tax if cut, will revitalize the economy, and has every single time. Clinton never cut that captial gains tax. In 1983 there was a revitalization (as mentioned) and Carter was not responsible with that because Reagan cut the captials gain tax. I WIN!

Well said, Giancarlo. :rolleyes:

robin
October 7th, 2001, 15:22
Make no mistake about it, I just love when every single thread on General Discussions turns into empty political banter.

Make no mistake about it, I think it would be even funnier if the same thing started happening over in Free Webspace.

H4X0RD00D: m4k3 n0 m1st4k3 ab0ut 1t! 3y3 n33d 100GB, CGI, PHP, mysql, static IP, and a car!

FWS Junkie: Make no mistake about it, you'll never find that because George W. Bush is against that sort of thing! And besides, what with the economy...

FWS Junkie #2: Yeah, but if Bush didn't <blah blah blah blah blah blah> the economy <blah blah blah blah blah blah> East Timor <blah blah blah blah> communism <blah blah> Noam Chomsky <blah blah>!!

H4X0RD00D: Dude, never mind.