Michael Moore backs up all(most) claims in Fahrenheit 9/11. [Archive]

jmiller

July 12th, 2004, 19:46

Oh well...I don't care much, but I really don't want to see Bush anymore anyways...I don't care for Bush whatsoever, and would like to see him gone as president.

However, after watching Farenheit 9/11 I am truly appauled with Michael Moore.

How can anyone call such mindless rhetoric and propaganda a "documentary"?

I felt that the views shown by Michael Moore in the movie were incredibly childish and biased.

What the hell does Bush talking about his dog have anything to do with politics?

As much as Moore tried relating all that garbage to the war in Iraq, it was still obviously meant as an attempt to tarnish Bush's image even more.

Quite frankly I would be happy to never see a Michael Moore film ever again.

jmiller

July 12th, 2004, 19:47

What's it to you? Your in Canada. Glad your not voting this November.In case you haven't noticed Bush's presidency has affected the lives of more than just Americans.

OFF TOPIC:

And someone like you who can't spell makes a better voter than Daniel? :confused4

Daniel

July 12th, 2004, 19:48

What's it to you? Your in Canada. Glad your not voting this November.

Because he's ruining the economy...which affects EVERYONE in the world. Gas prices are up at 94 cents a litre...

For the record, I never seen Fahrenheit 9/11 yet...though I guess I will eventually.

Daniel

July 12th, 2004, 19:49

And someone like you who can't spell makes a better voter than Daniel? :confused4

I wasn't aware VerticalHost can't spell... :confused4

Robert

July 12th, 2004, 19:54

What's it to you? Your in Canada. Glad your not voting this November.Being the President of the U.S. not only affects those living in the U.S., but it also affects the surrounding countries (Canada, Mexico) plus countries we friends with. The President of the U.S. is by far, probably, one of the most powerful men in the world. Our elections are watched throughout the world.

And yet, we managed to get stuck with Bush. :rolleyes2 Go Figure.

jmiller

July 12th, 2004, 19:56

I wasn't aware VerticalHost can't spell... :confused4"Your" instead of "You're".

Conscript

July 13th, 2004, 01:49

The US economy is booming - fastest growth rate in 20 years. If the Canadian economy sucks is cause your leftist government gives you a tax bill every year that is higher than whitney houston's rehab bill.

Moore lies a lot in his movie, like about Bush sending the bin Ladens out of the country - Richard Clarke ordered that. But truth isnt Moore's strong point and never has been. I will not see Farenhate 9/11 because I can't get over his lies from Bowling for Columbine which I did see.

I'm sorry but a man who splices three different speeches together to create a sentence that was never spoken does not deserve to have his movie seen.

jmiller

July 13th, 2004, 01:54

The US economy is booming - fastest growth rate in 20 years. If the Canadian economy sucks is cause your leftist government gives you a tax bill every year that is higher than whitney houston's rehab bill.You call over $7 trillion dollar in debt booming?

Congratulations, your posts make you look like an unintelligent, right-wing Michael Moore.

Grow up.

EDIT:

Oops, typo.
Okay, HUGE type, sorry.

Conscript

July 13th, 2004, 03:18

$37 trillion? Did you go to a doctor with a flashlight to get that number?

07/09/2004 $7,267,025,626,017.01
http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm

Congratulations, you just made yourself look like an unintelligent, left-wing, lying... er.. just Michael Moore.

Grow up.

And last I checked the state of the economy was measured by unemployment rates and GDP growth rate (which is fastest in 20 years) among other economic indicators, not by the amount of debt - which for your info is much lower than some previous years as far as a percentage of GDP goes.

jmiller

July 13th, 2004, 03:23

$37 trillion? Did you go to a doctor with a flashlight get that number?

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm

Congratulations, you just made yourself look like an unintelligent, left-wing, lying... er.. just Michael Moore.

Grow up.The 3 key is next to the 4, thus I accidentally hit it, and failed to prove my post, settle down.

Not that the source posted by you is even reliable.

And for your information I am "centrist", not left.

By the way, how about clearing up that first sentence, seeing as it makes next to no sense.

EDIT:

Your previous Whitney Houston remark makes you look incredibly unintelligent, and gives you no credibility.

How about providing some proper facts, instead of childish rambling such as that?

Conscript

July 13th, 2004, 03:23

lol i see you fixed your post. Good job there. I thought the $37 figure was another one of those talking points thrown out by Bush haters.

Conscript

July 13th, 2004, 03:25

Oh it makes sense... think about it.. Doctor with a flashlight.. where is he pulling out those numbers from when he needs a flashlight? Oh cmon, it couldnt be more obvious!Think about it.

My source isnt reliable? Notice its a .GOV site, and I think the gov't knows how much it owes. It's sure as hell more reliable than moveon.org.

Edit: FYI I have family in canada and I know the outrageous taxes they pay over there and I know all about their healthcare system (you'll get better service from a witch doctor than you will from the Canadian healthcare system, and at least you dont have to wait weeks if not months to see a witch doctor).

You're just some man online, you're not very credible either. And I think posting a .gov source is pretty reliable and credible.

Stop making ad hominem attacks against me. Saying I'm stupid isn't proving your point, it's just making you look like the symbol of the Democrat party (boy did they earn that symbol!) Just cause you say "you're stupid" doesnt prove my arguments are wrong. How about addressing the substance of my statements rather than just calling me stupid?

Reminds me of a quote by Ann Coulter:

"If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they would be robbed of half their arguments."

heh, so true.

jmiller

July 13th, 2004, 03:30

jmiller

July 13th, 2004, 03:34

I haven't used the word "stupid" once in this thread, Conscript.

Do not put words into my mouth.

I'm pretty sure anyone will agree with me that your Whitney Houston statement was both childish and unintelligent.

Conscript

July 13th, 2004, 03:35

*rolls eyes* Why don't you just admit you're a liberal?

The Government goes beyond Bush I hope you know. Bush doesn't control what every government outfit or website says word for word. He isn't an all-knowing all-seeing all-sensing god of the American government that runs everything himself.

.GOV sites are sure as hell a lot more trustworthy than liberal sites. There are far too many people looking over the gov't's shoulder for them to get away with some jumbo lies. Unfortunatley, not enough people scrutinize the left's "facts", if they did, Michael Moore would be laughed at not admired.

Note: unintelligent and stupid are pretty much the same thing.

jmiller

July 13th, 2004, 03:42

.GOV sites are sure as hell a lot more trustworthy than liberal sites. There are far too many people looking over the gov't's shoulder for them to get away with some jumbo lies. Unfortunatley, not enough people scrutinize the left's "facts", if they did, Michael Moore would be laughed at not admired..GOV sites are more trustworthy than any biased party whether they be right of left winged.

Way to just include liberal in that statement.

tandoc

July 13th, 2004, 04:34

BOGAHICA!

would you all just shove it... given the choices in the up coming election, if i could vote, i wouldn't vote for kerry...

*bend over, grab ankles, here it comes again!

tandoc

July 13th, 2004, 04:36

First, your flashlight comment wasn't properly worded, at all.

Second, who is to say the .GOV site contains statistics that are any less skewed than those put forth by a leftist media outfit?

Especially under Bush's power.

he has a point tho, whether or not true, it's far more credible..

Robert

July 13th, 2004, 06:41

Concript,

First you're argument about name calling, last time I checked, it was Cheney who told a Democrat to ---- off.

Secondly, if Bush did all the righ things, then he wouldn't be defending his decisions on public TV like he did yesterday. Bush allows his religious beliefs to get between his job as a President. I'm glad he's religious, but he shouldn't use that to be against same sex marriages, or stem cell research. Furthermore, Bush is an idiot. He doesn't realize he's fighting a war based on religion.

As far as our national Debt, it'll continue to rise and rise. Sure Bush gave you a tax cut, but he also had to cut federal funding for education, health and other programs in order to compensate that money. And while you may now be benefiting from his tax cuts, our national debt continues to grow and who has to pay it? We do. The Youth of America. By letting go of our SS and by cutting other funding. Bush has done nothing but divide this country even farther. He's done nothing but increase discrimination for gays. He's done nothing but have 16,000 Soliders wounded or murdered in IRaq. He's done nothing but bring the world against each other. He has caused Terrorism to rise. Bush has now limited the amount of times a Cuban-American can travel to Cuba, once a year. Cuba has not shown any hostility to the U.S. in years. And yet Bush has limited our freedom even more. Bush went to war based on false information, lied to the U.S., and now, seeing how the 9/11 Panel and other senators are disagreeing with him, he has to make up other false lies.

Bush has corrupted our country, our children, and our economy.

trenzterra

July 13th, 2004, 07:05

And the whole world is affected. Some of you may not like Clinton, but you can't deny that he didn't invoke war & brought peace to the country (maybe except the Asian economic crisis) despite flirting with Monica.

Curtis H.

July 13th, 2004, 11:21

jmiller

July 13th, 2004, 11:27

he has a point tho, whether or not true, it's far more credible..I don't doubt that.

I just don't like how he stated that only liberal websites were uncredible.

conkermaniac

July 13th, 2004, 12:18

My source isnt reliable? Notice its a .GOV site, and I think the gov't knows how much it owes. It's sure as hell more reliable than moveon.org.

Yeah, what about cia.gov, which claims that China has a GDP per capita of more than $4,000? Even the Chinese government is using Shanghai's per capita of $1,000 of China's amazing development, and Shanghai is the richest part of the country. The real figure is something closer to $800. Yes, the gov't DOES knows how much it owes, but it won't tell YOU about it.

Daniel

July 13th, 2004, 12:23

Wasn't the national debt something like $400 billion during the end of Clinton's presidency? Yeah, I think it was.

Robert

July 13th, 2004, 12:44

John Kerry, who hopes to oust Bush, has blown much hot air Bush's way for the Iraq campaign. "It's not enough just to give speeches. America will only be safer when we get results," he said yesterday.

But for all the bluster, the Democratic wannabe did not echo Rockefeller's claim that Americans are less safe because of the war. Despite the Senate's critical report, even Kerry could not bring himself to say the Iraq war was wrong.

And that's because . . . it wasn't.

IRAQ: W. MAKES THE CASE (http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/27211.htm)
That article is opinion based.

Secondly, even the administration has stated that terrorism has risen because of the war.

I'm all for War on Terror.. not war in iraq and iraq isn't where we need to focus. We were lied to and everyone knows it.

Curtis H.

July 13th, 2004, 13:00

Curtis H.

July 13th, 2004, 13:10

I'm all for War on Terror.. not war in iraq and iraq isn't where we need to focus. We were lied to and everyone knows it.
O'REILLY: OK. Did President Bush lie about weapons of mass destruction?

EDWARDS: I don't know the answer to that question. I think...

O'REILLY: Do you have suspicions?

EDWARDS: Did I say that? You said that. First of all, I think this is something that we should treat not hysterically but in a very responsible way. I think it's a good thing that Saddam -- you know I supported the war in Iraq. I think it's a good thing that Saddam Hussein is gone. I think we should be proud of what our young and men and women in the military did. I think the result of the war is a very good thing. And I think now the responsible thing for us and the Congress to do is to determine if there is in fact a discrepancy between what the intelligence community, our intelligence community told us or told the president. I don't know what they told the president.

Transcript: Edwards Un-Spun (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124951,00.html)

Robert

July 13th, 2004, 13:30

O'REILLY: OK. Did President Bush lie about weapons of mass destruction?

EDWARDS: I don't know the answer to that question. I think...

O'REILLY: Do you have suspicions?

EDWARDS: Did I say that? You said that. First of all, I think this is something that we should treat not hysterically but in a very responsible way. I think it's a good thing that Saddam -- you know I supported the war in Iraq. I think it's a good thing that Saddam Hussein is gone. I think we should be proud of what our young and men and women in the military did. I think the result of the war is a very good thing. And I think now the responsible thing for us and the Congress to do is to determine if there is in fact a discrepancy between what the intelligence community, our intelligence community told us or told the president. I don't know what they told the president.

Transcript: Edwards Un-Spun (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124951,00.html)
What does me saying we were lied to have to do with Edwards saying he thinks the war is a very good thing? Not a damn think. I think the war on TERROR is a good thing, and in a way, I think the war in Iraq is too. Saddam had his time. But the way Bush went about it, is wrong. He lied to us.

Let's talk about what I said:

The 9-11 Panel stated:

There is "no credible evidence" that Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq collaborated with the al Qaeda terrorist network on any attacks on the United States, including the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackings, according to a new staff report released this morning by the commission investigating the hijacking plot.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45853-2004Jun16.html

Wait.. no credible evidence? But Bush said we had evidence.. we had PROOF. Was I imagining it? Was it a dream? No it was our idiot President who can't speak properly.

Futhermore,

Powell clearly stated in 2001 that (and I quote)

Saddam Hussein... has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors So we either have a President who doesn't read what his people say, or, he lied to us. Or they are disorganized.

Bush wanted to finish his dad's work. He wanted to go into Iraq and he saw an opportunity to do it with 9-11 when America was mourning.

I'm also sad to see Powell acting the way he is. With the lies he makes up and the false information. I thought he was better than that. And to think I would have voted for him. At least he has military experience.

kaliboy2g

July 13th, 2004, 13:48

Michael Moore's movie is dissent, but his dishonesty within the film is dishonorable. Also, when he runs around Europe bashing America, he's giving comfort to our enemies, totally dishonorable and disgraceful in a time of war. You have to be careful where you utter anti-American statements. What's OK in Berkeley is not OK in Paris.
Dissent or Dishonor? (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,125510,00.html)

I saw that too. Basically thinking back to the movie what moore did was stupid. He had a truely good movie baised on facts but then the other little things like showing the president make a grammar mistake or look stupid just ripped him of all credibility.

Curtis H.

July 13th, 2004, 14:14

So we either have a President who doesn't read what his people say, or, he lied to us. Or they are disorganized.
Make up your mind Robert. Did President Bush lie to "us" or not? Evidently Mr. Edwards was smart enough not to say that.

Bush wanted to finish his dad's work.
Isn't that getting a bit old by now? You're smarter than that.

No it was our idiot President who can't speak properly.
Try showing some respect for the President of our country. Especially in a time of war. Calling someone an idiot reflects poorly on you.

Robert

July 13th, 2004, 14:27

Make up your mind Robert. Did President Bush lie to "us" or not? Evidently Mr. Edwards was smart enough not to say that.
He did.

Isn't that getting a bit old by now? You're smarter than that.
Ahh when we say something, it's old. But when reps keep talking about kerry's flip flop, it never gets old.

Try showing some respect for the President of our country. Especially in a time of war. Calling someone an idiot reflects poorly on you.
Respect? I have no respect for that man. We aren't at war.. or are we?

I have no respect for someone who doesn't believe in equal rights, who won't accept gays as equals in our society. I thought we were better than that. I thought we have gotten past the "eww gays, no yucky" idea.

Conscript

July 13th, 2004, 16:52

Bush wanted to finish his dad's work.

What's wrong with that? If a job has to be done it has to be done.

Kerry and Edwards both voted for the war and then voted against funding our troops who are there. So much for "being against the war but supporting the troops", they're voting record shows that it is in fact in reverse: they are in favor of the war and against the troops.

And on ---- Cheney telling that kook to "go f**$(@#$% himsef", he deserved it. This was a guy who goes out there and talks about how corrupt Cheney is and how evil the administration is how they lie to everyone, then Cheney shows up in the Senate and he wants to get in the photo op as if nothing has happened?

If someone who personally insults me and accuses me of corruption and incompetence wanted to do a photo-op with me and pretend like nothing happened I'd say the same thing!

Robert

July 13th, 2004, 16:55

What's wrong with that? If a job has to be done it has to be done.

Kerry and Edwards both voted for the war and then voted against funding our troops who are there. So much for "being against the war but supporting the troops", they're voting record shows that it is in fact in reverse: they are in favor of the war and against the troops.

And on ---- Cheney telling that kook to "go f**$(@#$% himsef", he deserved it. This was a guy who goes out there and talks about how corrupt Cheney is and how evil the administration is how they lie to everyone, then Cheney shows up in the Senate and he wants to get in the photo op as if nothing has happened?

If someone who personally insults me and accuses me of corruption and incompetence wanted to do a photo-op with me and pretend like nothing happened I'd say the same thing!
So it's ok that he told the guy off? I know a million other ways he could have told the guy off. It's sad that you accept that.

VerticalHost

July 13th, 2004, 18:41

First off I'd like to say that I can spell. Jmiller, not everyone takes their precious time to type up every word perfectly so that all the 12 year olds in this forum can use it for an essay in english class.

Im for Bush. I don't like everything that his administration has done, but nobody will EVER agree with any ONE administration. I believe that the current administration is doing what they can in order to keep us safe. I also will revote for them because of the fact that I don't want the war on terror to end, and that is exactly what will happen if Kerry gets elected. Well, that is until the next attack happens because of no protection against it.

BTW - if you watched ABC news today, you would have seen that in IRAQ there are still terrorist groups. We were not allowed to go into IRAQ, unless we declared war. So Bush had to make the American people believe that there was a reason to go into iraq. That reason was chemical weapons. Bush got our votes for going to war and so then he was able to go after the terrorists.

What most overlook in the presidential debates is the fact that politicans are scammers. They dig up so much dirt on the other person so that they start to look better. The facts are all true, but are worded in ways to defer the mind to reason correctly about the situation that was described.

All of what I have said are opinions so go ahead and chop away at it if you like. But why bring up the national deficit and gas prices. The debt will always grow and the gas prices will always steadily go up.

Mazinkaiser

July 13th, 2004, 18:57

BTW - if you watched ABC news today, you would have seen that in IRAQ there are still terrorist groups. We were not allowed to go into IRAQ, unless we declared war. So Bush had to make the American people believe that there was a reason to go into iraq. That reason was chemical weapons. Bush got our votes for going to war and so then he was able to go after the terrorists.

So Bush either lied or chose to believe the CIA's lies (or blunders) to justify a war that otherwise is unjustifiable. Ultimately he still scammed the world.

Daniel

July 13th, 2004, 19:02

BTW - if you watched ABC news today, you would have seen that in IRAQ there are still terrorist groups. We were not allowed to go into IRAQ, unless we declared war. So Bush had to make the American people believe that there was a reason to go into iraq. That reason was chemical weapons. Bush got our votes for going to war and so then he was able to go after the terrorists.

Terrorist groups? They're insurgent forces. You'll always encounter some insurgent forces whilst trying to invade a country.

And no weapons of mass destruction have been found.

Hobo

July 13th, 2004, 20:51

So Bush either lied or chose to believe the CIA's lies (or blunders) to justify a war that otherwise is unjustifiable. Ultimately he still scammed the world.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43220-2004Jul11.html?nav=rss_nation

Just thought I'd give you a source for that.

A little Side Ramble
Also, I don't really want to get into this but I have to wonder how intelligent you are Conscript, if you read Ann Coulter. Now I'm really hoping that you don't because well, the only way to put this is that she is a complete dips*** and I feel bad for you if you do.

Conscript

July 13th, 2004, 21:16

We've found some WMDs so far, and we will find more as time goes on.

Hobo

July 13th, 2004, 21:27

But, don't you think that it is odd that he would go to war without adequate information?

I didn't see the movie, but did it mention the fact that during Clinton's term he worked on a plan to help fight terrorism, which included making a Department of Homeland Security. I also believe the plan called to assassinate Osama Bin Ladin, but the plan was only completed towards the end of his term. Being a nice guy, he didn't want to start, and then have the next administration entering a war on his leave. Another little tidbit, is the fact that Clinton's plans were COMPLETETLY IGNORED by Bush. It took 9/11 for Bush to finally start to put the plans made by the previous administraton into action...

Robert

July 13th, 2004, 21:33

We've found some WMDs so far, and we will find more as time goes on.
No we haven't found Weapons of mass destruction. Maybe weapons of stand within 12 feet and you'll die weapons.

Curtis H.

July 13th, 2004, 21:38

Respect? I have no respect for that man. We aren't at war.. or are we?

I don't care for Kerry or what he stands for. (Does anyone know what that is including himself?) But if by chance he does get elected, I would show respect towards the President of the United States. That's the difference between me and you. Perhaps it's because you are a youngin'? Dunno.

You should understand that the U.S. is at war against terrorism. Of course twist words if you feel the need to.

As for equal rights and gays, I'll leave that to the courts and our government.

Robert

July 13th, 2004, 22:03

I don't care for Kerry or what he stands for. (Does anyone know what that is including himself?) But if by chance he does get elected, I would show respect towards the President of the United States. That's the difference between me and you. Perhaps it's because you are a youngin'? Dunno.

You should understand that the U.S. is at war against terrorism. Of course twist words if you feel the need to.

As for equal rights and gays, I'll leave that to the courts and our government.
Maybe I was being a little extreme.
Just because he's my President doesn't mean I have to like or respect him. As a President, I don't respect him. As a American, I do. It's not easy being President. Every choice you make, you'll please some and not others. Like the saying goes "you can please some people sometimes, and other people at other times, but you can't please everyone all the time". I don't want to see him killed or harmed, and I don't think he's "evil" like some liberals try to make him be. Unfortunantly, all the decisions he has made, I've disagreed with. Can't win them all. I don't have respect for him because of his decision to openly state he's against same sex marriage and stem cell. WHen you're the President, you must be careful what you say. As far as "equal rights and gays, I'll leave that to teh courts and our government", that's the thing. According to Bush, it's a religious thing. THere needs be a larger seperation of State and Church.

What I will say about Kerry is.. what does he plan to do when he's President? So far, everything I've heard come out of his mouth is everything that Bush has done. If the U.S. continues to have a poor selection of Candiates for President, we'll heading in the wrong direction.

Hobo

July 13th, 2004, 22:13

You should understand that the U.S. is at war against terrorism.

No the U.S. is at war with Iraq. The War Against Terrorism, is the silly name that the media gave it to give it a better spin. Just like the Axis of Evil. If this was really a War on Terrorism then why aren't we doing anything to North Korea, and Iran? Oh that's right its a definte fact that both countries have Nuclear Weapons Programs! The CIA wouldn't even have to do any research for Bush to continue his "War on Terror".

I don't know about you, but the thought of two countries that are part of the "Axis of Evil" having the ability to wipe out the East Coast in a short period of time terrifies me.

Another thing that I find odd is the fact that although we originally invaded Iraq to find these Weapons of Mass Destruction, it is now said to be to free Iraq. Doesn't it seem odd that only after it was evident that there were no giant stockpiles of deadly weapons that it became a humanitarian mission? I think its weird but then again, I might just be a nut job like Ann Coulter.

VerticalHost

July 13th, 2004, 22:59

According to Bush, it's a religious thing. THere needs be a larger seperation of State and Church.
I believe the opposite. But it will happen eventually. And when it does, there will be NO good intentions or morals in the government because it will be centered around me, myself, I, and MONEY. Take that statement and leave it. This isn't a religious battle.

Also, it took us over 3 months to get into IRAQ. So how long does it take to move things? Honestly, it only takes me 1 day to move from house to house.

Hobo, you really don't know what your talking about. So what if Korea has nukes. Should we march right in there? NO, they aren't a threat to us because we can destroy them in a heartbeat and they know that. The only countries we need to worry about are Russia and China. Just keep good relations and we're ok.

As for Iraq being free. They are talking about Sadaam being out of power. You take it out of context when you what CNN, the Communist News Network.

Hobo

July 13th, 2004, 23:39

What I'm saying is the justification for the war was weapons of mass destruction, under the pretext of stoping terrorism. Negotiations with North Korea over ending their weapons program is failing, but that doesn't mean we are going to go to war with them does it? How can he justify one war and not another? Kim Jong is no better than Saddam. Is an authoritarian ruler who is proven to have nuclear capabilities somehow less dangerous than one who, from the findings so far, had nothing? I guess so...

VerticalHost

July 14th, 2004, 01:04

"Kim Jong is no better than Saddam"
Comparing those two is like apples and oranges.
Saddam is WAAAYYYY worse than Jong.

LeX

July 14th, 2004, 01:08

"Kim Jong is no better than Saddam"
Comparing those two is like apples and oranges.
Saddam is WAAAYYYY worse than Jong.
But you just said you can't compare the two. :confused2

jmiller

July 14th, 2004, 01:11

But you just said you can't compare the two. :confused2I think i know what he was trying to say, but he still managed to make the comparison and contradict himself.

VerticalHost

July 14th, 2004, 01:15

You know exactly what I was trying to say. People just have to piss and moan about a post if it CAN be taken out of context.

Conscript

July 14th, 2004, 03:20

I don't care for Kerry or what he stands for. (Does anyone know what that is including himself?) But if by chance he does get elected, I would show respect toward the President of the United States. That's the difference between me and you. Perhaps it's because you are a youngin'? Dunno.

Yes, exactly. As the saying goes "You respect the office, not the man", or in the military I hear they say "you salute the rank, not the man". Either way, he IS the President of the United States and he deserves respect, whether you agree with his policies or not.

That doesn't mean you can't say you disagree, but comparing him to Hitler and taking personal jabs at him and insulting his intelligence (he has a Harvard MBA, what do you have?) is disrespectful to the office of the Presidency itself and IS NOT legitimate dissent.

Example of Dissent: "I disagree with the Iraq war, I believe we should pull out or troops"

Example of Disrespecting the Presidency itself: "Bush is Hitler! He's an idiot and he eats babies!"

Liberals often pull that kind of crap, like with the MoveOn.org ad comparing him to Hitler - which was on their site till a few days ago I believe (drudge had the scoop, they didn't remove it from their site when they said they did, they just renamed the file). Then you have people insulting his intelligence, comparing him to a monkey. That is all uncalled for.

Then I love it when people call liberals in on their idiocy and then liberals cry and moan about their patriotism being questioned (guess what, undermining your country's war effort IS unpatriotic AND deadly) or start yelling "McCarthyism! They're trying to silence dissenting voices!"

Or when liberals like Leahy meet administration officials in person they are surprised and outraged that the Vice-President - a favorite target of theirs for relentless attacks on every aspect of his life INCLUDING his very health (I thought liberals would be caring enough to be sympathetic to his health problems rather than using that as an attack point. I wonder if libs would attack a Republican for having cancer or AIDS? Probably.) - would tell them to go f$@# themselves instead of smiling for a photo with them.

It's one thing to not agree with Bush and talk about why, it's quite another to call him stupid, Hitler, and compare him to a monkey. The latter is not dissent, it's uncivilized mudslinging and at the end of the day it will not win over anyone to your side of the isle that wouldn't already be there anyway. In fact, such negativism turns people off of politics and sometimes even causes a backlash against you.

LeX

July 14th, 2004, 04:53

You know exactly what I was trying to say.As a matter of fact, I don't.
People just have to piss and moan about a post if it CAN be taken out of context.
My my, what quick temper, and a nasty tongue too. Tsk tsk.

I don't understand why you're taking this so personally... because this is a political thread maybe? Anyway, I'd appreciate it if you'd stop jumping to conclusions, quit make wise---- remarks, and just address my inquiry.

trenzterra

July 14th, 2004, 05:03

Im for Bush. I don't like everything that his administration has done, but nobody will EVER agree with any ONE administration. I believe that the current administration is doing what they can in order to keep us safe. I also will revote for them because of the fact that I don't want the war on terror to end, and that is exactly what will happen if Kerry gets elected. Well, that is until the next attack happens because of no protection against it.
In a way, I agree. John Kerry doesn't seem up to the mark, but being an outsider, I don't know much about US politics anyway. It's your choice anyway, you all voted for Bush in the first place. Might be better with Al Gore.

Robert

July 14th, 2004, 08:06

In a way, I agree. John Kerry doesn't seem up to the mark, but being an outsider, I don't know much about US politics anyway. It's your choice anyway, you all voted for Bush in the first place. Might be better with Al Gore.

No we didn't all vote for Bush and there are still many questions regarding the 2000 elections and if Bush really did win. Especially considering that the State that had problems (Florida), is the same state Bush's Brother is the Govenor of.

Robert

July 14th, 2004, 08:08

Yes, exactly. As the saying goes "You respect the office, not the man", or in the military I hear they say "you salute the rank, not the man". Either way, he IS the President of the United States and he deserves respect, whether you agree with his policies or not.

That doesn't mean you can't say you disagree, but comparing him to Hitler and taking personal jabs at him and insulting his intelligence (he has a Harvard MBA, what do you have?) is disrespectful to the office of the Presidency itself and IS NOT legitimate dissent.

Example of Dissent: "I disagree with the Iraq war, I believe we should pull out or troops"

Example of Disrespecting the Presidency itself: "Bush is Hitler! He's an idiot and he eats babies!"

Liberals often pull that kind of crap, like with the MoveOn.org ad comparing him to Hitler - which was on their site till a few days ago I believe (drudge had the scoop, they didn't remove it from their site when they said they did, they just renamed the file). Then you have people insulting his intelligence, comparing him to a monkey. That is all uncalled for.

Then I love it when people call liberals in on their idiocy and then liberals cry and moan about their patriotism being questioned (guess what, undermining your country's war effort IS unpatriotic AND deadly) or start yelling "McCarthyism! They're trying to silence dissenting voices!"

Or when liberals like Leahy meet administration officials in person they are surprised and outraged that the Vice-President - a favorite target of theirs for relentless attacks on every aspect of his life INCLUDING his very health (I thought liberals would be caring enough to be sympathetic to his health problems rather than using that as an attack point. I wonder if libs would attack a Republican for having cancer or AIDS? Probably.) - would tell them to go f$@# themselves instead of smiling for a photo with them.

It's one thing to not agree with Bush and talk about why, it's quite another to call him stupid, Hitler, and compare him to a monkey. The latter is not dissent, it's uncivilized mudslinging and at the end of the day it will not win over anyone to your side of the isle that wouldn't already be there anyway. In fact, such negativism turns people off of politics and sometimes even causes a backlash against you.
blah blah blah liberals this liberals that. blah blah blah.

Difference betweena liberal and a republican is when we say something we have facts, when a republican says it, it's an opinion. Just like your entire post above. blah blah blah.

Curtis H.

July 14th, 2004, 10:42

blah blah blah liberals this liberals that. blah blah blah.

Difference betweena liberal and a republican is when we say something we have facts, when a republican says it, it's an opinion.
Thanks for laugh Robert. I spit coffee on my monitor. You REALLY need to get some fresh air.

VerticalHost

July 14th, 2004, 11:44

I don't have an attitude. It's just that in EVERY post in every forum. Someone here always, always, always has to try and make someone look bad by asking a question to try and make that poster look stupid and that is exactly what you were trying to do. Some things will never change here.

Difference betweena liberal and a republican is when we say something we have facts, when a republican says it, it's an opinion. Just like your entire post above. blah blah blah.
That is because the facts that the democrats pull up are all dirt. When a republican goes to defend the liberal statement, what else are they supposed to write? We all know they didn't find weapons of mass destruction, we know gas prices are up, we know the national debt is up (and will never change). What "fact" that has been brought up here, has not been on the news over and over and over again. If you want both sides of the story, you can't watch the news. But just take their word for it because its on tv, it must be the only truth.

Here is some truth that many people will think is an opinion. Bush WON Florida. Florida has always voted republican so why would it change? Oh, maybe it can't because Jeb is in office and he wanted his brother to win. Give me a break.

VerticalHost

July 14th, 2004, 11:46

The sad thing is....
This thread is based on a liberal movie. Pathetic.

Do research yourself and actually LEARN something.

Nick

July 14th, 2004, 11:48

Wow, I almost forgot how much I hate politics.

Good thing this thread came along.

LeX

July 14th, 2004, 11:56

I don't have an attitude. It's just that in EVERY post in every forum. Someone here always, always, always has to try and make someone look bad by asking a question to try and make that poster look stupid and that is exactly what you were trying to do.
If that's how you're going to interpret it, fine, it's your freedom. You've won my hostility.

loggerheads

July 14th, 2004, 19:23

<off topic>
Just out of interest, would you all agree that America is possibly the only country in the world with such straight line, clear cut political support. This forum alone seems to have plenty of people lining up to be "republicans" or "liberals."
As such, with the exception of a few, Bush is either good or bad, I can't imagine Conscript saying something anti-Bush on any issue any more than I can imagine Robert saying something pro-Bush on any issue.

This compares with the UK where almost literally no-one is a member of a political party, and I suspect where even fewer people would claim total support for any political party. Blair is regarded with cynicism, but an acceptance that living standards are alright, we haven't been nuked and a general acceptance that the opposition doesn't look like doing much better, and as such he might well win his 3rd term.

The reason this seems odd to me is that in the USA there are two main political wings, the right and the further right, whereas in the UK its only really in the last ten years or so that we stopped having a fairly influential left wing party.

Anyway if you're bored of the yah-boo Bush stuff feel free to discuss.
</off topic>

Hobo

July 14th, 2004, 23:18

The reason this seems odd to me is that in the USA there are two main political wings, the right and the further right

Wha? Are you saying most people are conservative and then there are super conservative?

Robert

July 14th, 2004, 23:27

loggerheads

July 15th, 2004, 07:59

Trust me on this one, ask Tony Benn, any Scandinavian, or me, where the average US Liberal would sit on our left-right political scale and it'd be just right of centre, or centre at best. The US has always been that way and probably always will be. I'm just saying that if you look at the UK in the 1970's there was heated debate because there were clear, major ideological differences between Labour which (to simplify) was for high taxation, some redistribution of wealth and the continuation of nationalised industry, and the Conservatives who (again simplistically) wanted lower taxation and to privatise more or less everything.
I don't see differences of the same magnitude between Kerry and Bush say.

Fuzzylogic

July 15th, 2004, 09:17

just an observation of american potical system that there really isn't anything remotely democatic about. really all you do is vote for one party or the other, wheres the democary in that?, there isn't a choice at all. unless there are some minor parties in the us that i haven't heard about.

Mazinkaiser

July 15th, 2004, 19:20

Gov. Jesse Ventura (the wrestler) said something intelligent when he said that the two party system in the US is only one more party to choose from than Russia's communist party. Then again, at least it's choosing between door A, door B and a little door C (independents) as opposed to just one door.

Conscript

July 15th, 2004, 19:27

Robert

July 15th, 2004, 21:35

Here is a list of things I don't agree with Bush about:

- Immigration
- Healthcare
- Medicare bill
- Education Policy
- Funding of the NEA
- Campaign Finance Reform
- Government Spending
- Tax Cuts (not big enough)

There are probably more but those are the ones I could think of off of the top of my hat.

The list of things that will make me vote for Bush:

- War on Terror (that includes the War in Iraq as it is all part of the War on Terror
- Economy (I guess some tax cuts are better than none or John Kerry tax increases)What about Stem Cell Research? Same-Sex Marriage and Abortion?

Reason Why I'm not voting for Bush:

- He's against Stem Cell
- He's against Same Sex Marriage

I won't add that he lied to this country to get us to go into war and has caused over 16,000 soliders to be killed or injured.

Tax Cuts not big enough? SO where are we gonna pull this money out of? Our ---? We'll continue to have to cut federal funding on programs like Education and Health so you can get a bigger tax cut. We'll also have to give up our SS, as we've already done.

Conscript

July 15th, 2004, 23:54

Yes, we should cut education and healthcare. We have given so much money into education that the schools cannot spend it fast enough. And healthcare is no business of the state, they should ease regulations and enact tort reform to drive down costs.

States are getting a reminder from the federal government: Make plans quickly to spend more than $2 billion in education money or be ready to lose it.

...

States then have two final years to spend the money. Ultimately, school money not committed or spent returns to the federal treasury, as happened with $155 million last year.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040629_981.html

I agree with Bush on stem cells, abortion, and gay marriage. Though I am still puzzled about why Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry lied to us, thus helping make the case for war that killed or injured 16,000 Soldiers.

"If you don't believe Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." - John Kerry

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - John Kerry

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." - John Kerry

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - John Kerry

"I actually did vote for his $87 billion, before I voted against it." - John Kerry

(my favorite)

Most of them are from http://www.kerryquotes.com/

I can dig up other quotes if you like.

Meanwhile, I suggest everyone who thinks Saddam wasn't a threat to take John Kerry's advice and not vote for Kerry.

keith

July 16th, 2004, 00:25

EDIT:

Oops, typo.
Okay, HUGE type, sorry.

when VerticalHost misspells, he's stupid and can't spell. but when you do it, it's a typo...

besides, it's typo, not type. i didn't know jmiller couldn't spell.

jmiller

July 16th, 2004, 00:28

when VerticalHost misspells, he's stupid and can't spell. but when you do it, it's a typo...

besides, it's typo, not type. i didn't know jmiller couldn't spell.Yes, but I was questioning one's ability to vote now was I?

However, yes I did misspell, and I appologize to VerticalHost.

EDIT:

I'm a "liberal kook" am I?

Way to edit out your personal attack there Keith, but I need not worry, it has not actually been "deleted".

VerticalHost

July 16th, 2004, 00:49

when VerticalHost misspells, he's stupid and can't spell. but when you do it, it's a typo...

besides, it's typo, not type. i didn't know jmiller couldn't spell.
Let's not get ourselves in a rush. Your worried about the wrong thing. I misspell one word and your all over that. Should I be getting onto you for not using the SHIFT key when gramatically necessary? Since when are forums the centerpiece for learning the english language?

My point being, who honestly cares if someone makes a gramatical mistake?
Please explain that to me, I'd like to know why you care so much in a forum that is packed full of people who can't spell.

Robert

July 16th, 2004, 08:41

Yes, we should cut education and healthcare. We have given so much money into education that the schools cannot spend it fast enough. And healthcare is no business of the state, they should ease regulations and enact tort reform to drive down costs.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040629_981.html

I agree with Bush on stem cells, abortion, and gay marriage. Though I am still puzzled about why Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry lied to us, thus helping make the case for war that killed or injured 16,000 Soldiers.

Most of them are from http://www.kerryquotes.com/

I can dig up other quotes if you like.

Meanwhile, I suggest everyone who thinks Saddam wasn't a threat to take John Kerry's advice and not vote for Kerry.
The money that the schools have are from 2002. When Jeb Bush cut our educational funding in FL, Schools start to take notice. When Bush started to cut the funding, they started saving the money because they need to save it. So the money that the schools have isn't because Bush gave them ohh so much, it's because they saved it, or else, we'd be in bigger trouble.

We need to increase educational funding, get rid of the NCLB program, get Ted Bush out of FL and make sure our children are getting a proper education. The math courses the U.S. are far below the standard level of other countries.

As far as John Kerry is concerned, Bush has said some confusing things before as well. A lot of AMericas were FOR the war after 9-11, now are against it. Kerry was for the war, and 87 billion, which has turned into over 120 billion, which he's against. You're quotes are about Saddam, nobody is upset that we took Saddam out. NOBODY. We're upset because first, Bush keeps chaning the objective in Iraq. First it's to find WMD, which fails, so then it turns to Liberate Iraq, which isn't working that much, now it's to help education Iraq.

We're upset because 9-11 was an attack on the U.S. by TERRORISTS, YET, Bush hasn't done NOTHING to assist the war on Terror except INCREASE terrorism throughout the Globe. Why did Powell lie to us in 2001 when he said that Saddam was no threat?

It seems eveyrthing that happens in this war is a lie, a trick, or false:

As the Iraqi regime was collapsing on April 9, 2003, Marines converged on Firdos Square in central Baghdad, site of an enormous statue of Saddam Hussein. It was a Marine colonel — not joyous Iraqi civilians, as was widely assumed from the TV images — who decided to topple the statue, the Army report said. And it was a quick-thinking Army psychological operations team that made it appear to be a spontaneous Iraqi undertaking.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/latimests/armystagemanagedfallofhusseinstatue

Oh and if you wanna throw some quotes around:

"It's your money, you paid for it."
La Crosse, WI 10/18/00

"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."
Washington, DC 12/18/00

"Arbolist...Look up the word. I don't know, maybe I made it up. Anyway, it's an arbo-tree-ist, someone who knows about trees."
Crawford, TX 8/21/01

"I don't read what's handed to me."
New York, NY 3/15/00

"The Bob Jones policy on interracial dating, I mean I spoke out on interracial dating. I spoke out against that. I spoke out against interracial dating. I support the policy of interracial dating."
CBS News 2/25/00 (My Favorite)

"Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"
Florence, SC 1/11/00

Quotes taken offf punkvoter.com

Conscript

July 16th, 2004, 12:24

Anyone who speaks in public as often as Bush is bound to misspeak once in a while. I am sure you do that as well.

But anyway, the point of the Kerry quotes is to show you he was EXACTLY on the same page as Bush UNTIL it became politically beneficial to oppose the war. He's a poll man, he has NO PRINCIPLES. When the going gets though, he is NOT willing to stick with what he thinks is right, but instead changes his position so he could win an election.

And the other point of my Kerry quotes was to show you that HE LIED to us about Saddam and his WMDs, thus sending us to war. If you are so upset at Bush for doing it, why aren't you upset at Kerry for doing it?

And yes I know the money is from 2002, that's the point. We are giving so much money into education (and the amount is growing every year) that educrats are not spending it fast enough and are losing it. There is no shortage of money in education, MONEY is NOT the problem. We do no not need to increase the education budget any further, and I am sure we can actually make cuts in it and not feel any difference at all.

Robert

July 16th, 2004, 12:28

ok i'm tired of debating. Bush has done nothing to change his flaws.

Nick

July 16th, 2004, 19:20

when VerticalHost misspells, he's stupid and can't spell. but when you do it, it's a typo...

besides, it's typo, not type. i didn't know jmiller couldn't spell.

Wow, you used a capital letter :eek:!

Haven't seen you around here in a while...

Conscript

July 16th, 2004, 19:36

ok i'm tired of debating.

Could it be because you're guy isn't any better?

loggerheads

July 16th, 2004, 19:53

So it's agreed then. The next President of the USA won't be any good.
Sorted.

Conscript

July 16th, 2004, 20:00

But Bush will be better than Kerry.

Oh and just today there is a new story out about how Kerry said he back's Bush's pre-emption strategy and won't let any other nation interfere with our national defense. I guess he's done a full circle from Backing the war to opposing back to backing. Hmm, the polls must be indicating that people are starting to back the war.

Robert

July 16th, 2004, 20:02

Could it be because you're guy isn't any better?No it's because we are going in circles. The same thing we are debating now is what we debated a year ago.

And kerry isn't my guy. I don't like him either, but he's not the President at the present moment.

Robert

July 16th, 2004, 20:03

So it's agreed then. The next President of the USA won't be any good.
Sorted.

I'm afraid so. I'm afraid that the U.S. may never get the President that we really need.

Curtis H.

July 16th, 2004, 22:15

As far as John Kerry is concerned, Bush has said some confusing things before as well.
And how long has Kerry been under the microscope compared to President Bush? Oh do tell. A year ago, how many (especially the voting public) even knew of Kerry?

Robert

July 16th, 2004, 23:24

And how long has Kerry been under the microscope compared to President Bush? Oh do tell. A year ago, how many (especially the voting public) even knew of Kerry?
What is your point? Bush managed to make himself look like a fool within 8 months of taking office.

trenzterra

July 17th, 2004, 01:37

You guys can't argue your way out, I request this thread to be closed.

jmiller

July 17th, 2004, 01:51

You guys can't argue your way out, I request this thread to be closed.Why?

This thread doesn't have to come to one decision.

Just let it die off on it's own.

trenzterra

July 17th, 2004, 01:58

Why?

This thread doesn't have to come to one decision.

Just let it die off on it's own.
Bleh, like what some people have said last time, open a new debate forum or something.

offtopic: The last post I posted was posted at 13:37 GMT+8

jmiller

July 17th, 2004, 02:02

Bleh, like what some people have said last time, open a new debate forum or something.

offtopic: The last post I posted was posted at 13:37 GMT+8Yeah, I was thinking about suggesting a "politics" subforum under "General Discussions"...

Don't think it would pan out though. Mods have enough on their plates already.

Robert

July 17th, 2004, 09:46

You guys can't argue your way out, I request this thread to be closed.
You have a lot of learning to do. A political debate will never come to an agreement.

Curtis H.

July 17th, 2004, 12:22

After all, just last week Kerry noted that while the Bush administration had offered to give him a private briefing on the latest reports of threats from al Qaeda, "I just haven't had time." (Maybe his preparations for that raunchy Radio City Music Hall Bush-bashing hatefest went into overtime.) NO TIME FOR DETAILS . . . (http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/25125.htm)

Curtis H.

July 17th, 2004, 12:30

http://www.johnfkerrysucks.com/kerry-two-face.jpg

"John Kerry met with Ralph Nader last week. Both sides of every issue were discussed. And then, Nader spoke." -Jay Leno

Conscript

July 17th, 2004, 12:48

LOL, so true Curtis.

And people make fun of Republicans and Bush for being rich. John Kerry makes Bush look like a charity case seeing as how his family's assets are ONE BILLION DOLLARS comapred to Bush's paltry $15 million. Even Edwards has $40 million.

So when Edwards talks about 2 America's he means one for the billionaires like Kerry and one for the multi millionaires like him.

Robert

July 17th, 2004, 14:25

Curtis H.

July 17th, 2004, 15:13

Sunday, June 27, 2004
San Francisco Chronicle

Teresa Heinz Kerry, through a network of investments in blue-chip corporations, venture capital funds and municipal bonds, controls a family fortune worth an estimated $1 billion, an examination of public records shows.

The $1 billion figure is double the estimates of her wealth that are widely cited in news stories about her husband, Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president. Source (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/06/27/MNG4T7CTRN1.DTL).

==============================================

Monday, June 28, 2004

Sen. John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, with assets of about $1 billion, would be among the richest families to ever occupy the White House, eclipsing even President Kennedy and well ahead of the other moneyed chief executives over the last century.

Democratic candidate, wife are estimated to be worth about $1 billion (http://www.detnews.com/2004/politics/0406/29/a05-196590.htm)

Robert

July 17th, 2004, 15:37

Wait.. now I know where I got 525 from..
http://www.525reasons.com/

525 Reasons to Dump Bush! ohh yeaa....

And yet Kerry still managed to go to war and win 3 purple hearts. How many did bush win again? And when he go to war? oh yea he didn't.

Check this site:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

Electoral Vote Predictor 2004:

Kerry 322 Bush 205

Wojtek

July 17th, 2004, 16:44

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_lies_pez.jpg

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_robnhood.jpg

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/graphics/bush_republicard.jpg

:p

Conscript

July 17th, 2004, 18:39

On the Day After Tomorrow:

http://www.conservativecartoons.com/2004/frozen.gif

On Kerry and Oil Prices:

http://www.conservativecartoons.com/2004/anwr.gif

How Liberals cast their votes:

http://www.conservativecartoons.com/2004/ballot.gif

Curtis H.

July 17th, 2004, 18:45

And yet Kerry still managed to go to war and win 3 purple hearts. How many did bush win again?
"The idea that John Kerry would have put in for three Purple Hearts during only four months in country is just ridiculous," said Mel Howell from Evansville, Ind., a retired Navy officer who flew helicopters in Vietnam. "Most of us came away with all kinds of scratches like the ones Kerry got but never accepted Purple Hearts for them." Source (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040422-121900-7315r.htm).

And when he go to war? oh yea he didn't.

Where was Bill Clinton? :wink2: Also, if Kerry was all that, why are so many vets against him yet back President Bush? Kerry; Hero or traitor?

Conscript

July 17th, 2004, 18:57

lol great points again Curtis. Democrats didn't feel uneasy about Bill Clinton being a draft dodger, even when he went up against War Hero Bob Dole who actually lost use of a limb due to his injuries at wartime.

Robert

July 17th, 2004, 18:59

"The idea that John Kerry would have put in for three Purple Hearts during only four months in country is just ridiculous," said Mel Howell from Evansville, Ind., a retired Navy officer who flew helicopters in Vietnam. "Most of us came away with all kinds of scratches like the ones Kerry got but never accepted Purple Hearts for them." Source (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040422-121900-7315r.htm).

Where was Bill Clinton? :wink2: Also, if Kerry was all that, why are so many vets against him yet back President Bush? Kerry; Hero or traitor?The point is he has 3 purple hearts.

Clinton fled. But he ran this country great for 8 years. Bush hasn''t

http://thereitis.org/displayarticle87.html

And the vets are backing up Bush? Yea ok. After he cut their medical aide:

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/newsArticle.asp?id=1006

"We have the money to pay for a statue of the Roman god Vulcan in Birmingham, Ala. We have money to pay for a bike trail in North Dakota. We have money to fund a Nevada helicopter company that performs Elvis impersonator weddings," Conley said. "And yet we have neither the heart nor the will to ensure that all United States veterans receive the medical care they earned and we owe them."

....

"Veterans more and more are beginning to sense a loss of faith and confidence in the administration," said Richard C. Schneider, director of veteran and state affairs for the Non Commissioned Officers Association. "They're no longer willing to be the quiet, accepting veterans that they have been in the past. I think they're actually going to hold some people accountable."

Yea let's terminate any healthcare for the people who fought for this country!

Horray for our President who doesn't know what the heck he's doing!

Curtis H.

July 17th, 2004, 20:13

The point is he has 3 purple hearts.
I know many including family who have purple hearts (spent major time in the hospital) and don't even mention it. I wouldn't want to use that little tidbit when deciding who to vote for.

Clinton fled. But he ran this country great for 8 years.

If you say so Robert. LOL

And the vets are backing up Bush? Yea ok. After he cut their medical aide:

Note I did not say ALL vets. But many vets DO support President Bush. www.vets4bush.com

The winners of the nation's highest award for valor also hit hard at Kerry's record, citing the Massachusetts Democrat's as having voted, "against a $1.3 billion increase in veterans health care, skipped votes on concurrent receipt and voted against funding for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq." Source (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040717-043458-6068r.htm)

Horray for our President who doesn't know what the heck he's doing!

And you can prove this right? Better yet, tell us how you know (facts please) Kerry will be a great President and will "know what the heck he's doing." Just "moore" b.s.

Curtis H.

July 17th, 2004, 20:29

Robert

July 17th, 2004, 22:41

A little more back on topic;

JUNE 28--Prior to last week's Washington, D.C. premiere of "Fahrenheit 9/11," Michael Moore denied that the new documentary represents his de facto endorsement of John Kerry. "I am an Independent," the filmmaker told reporters. "I'm not a member of the Democratic party."

Which is not exactly correct.

Michael Moore simultaneously on voter rolls in New York, Michigan (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0628041moore1.html)
Have you ever moved from 1 state to another? Been a registered voter in 1 state and then had to register in another? Well that's what happened to Moore.

I can say that I'm registered as a Democrat, but I do not share their views 100%. There's a lot of things I disagree with on the Democrat side. Which is why you'll never see me that Kerry is the best President. And the onyl times I defend Kerry is when it has to do with stuff like his purple hearts and what not.