Why should I vote for Bush?...
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: No, everybody should care. But give me a break, we've got 15+ months till the presidential election in the US. The Democratic primaries haven't even started yet. I was hoping not to read election rants in the Soapbox until at least January, ideally not until next summer. What you should be caring about MORE is that USA citizens are dieing everyday overseas! No thanks to this administration. If my son or friend or fellow CPian died over there, I would feel it would have been a political death which would not stand still in my mind.:| I don't like seeing the USA having a military presence in every corner of the earth it gets me more when these people obeying orders end up dead, and their families are the ones that suffer the most. So your dam-straight I am thinking about how I am voting for now, and it looks like the State of California is also waking up. Our military should protect our borders nothing more nothing less, imo. Joe Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky.JoeSox wrote: I don't like seeing the USA having a military presence in every corner of the earth it gets me more when these people obeying orders end up dead, and their families are the ones that suffer the most. So your dam-straight I am thinking about how I am voting for now, and it looks like the State of California is also waking up. Our military should protect our borders nothing more nothing less, imo. Notice the use of the noun "I". While the Constitution that "you" did not die for quarantees you the right to your opinion it does not mean that the rest of us must agree or even give your opinion much serious thought. And that will become more and more apparent as GW gets another 4 and the Dems point fingers at each other and continue to self destruct as a viable party. California is, as California always is, the Land of fruits and nuts - LA-LA land. It is a test bed for the Democratic party to try their silly ideas out before trying to inflict them on the rest of us. It is not known as the "Left Coast" for nothing. The very last thing I ever want to see is our highly trained infantry troops reduced to the status of a prison guard. And by the way - you speak knowingly about our soldiers dieing a "political death". What about Korea ( Harry Truman ) - how many dies there ? Or Vietnam ( Kennedy - Johnson ) How many there ? Give that tired old rheotoric a break will you. Richard In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love; they had five hundred years of democracy and peace and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. Orson Welles
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Mainly because I can't vote in the US.. Sure you can. Come to Chicago where EVERYBODY can vote. Citizens, non-Citizens, living, dead... ;P Beauty is only a lightswitch away.
Mike Mullikin wrote: non-Citizens, living, dead... Only if they vote a straight Democratic ticket :) Richard In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love; they had five hundred years of democracy and peace and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. Orson Welles
-
To answer your question, because he isn't one of the morons you're quoting and is interested in the safety and well being of our citizens. That happens to be the reason why, never having done so before, I contribute both to the Bush campaign war chest (and, yes - I meant to say war chest) and to the RNC. JoeSox wrote: Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) has repeatedly warned that deficits undercut the ability of the economy to grow in a way that reduces unemployment and increases the wages of American workers." With the welfare state initiated by FDR, and fanned into flames by LBJ - the correction to deficit problems is reduced spending on social programs. I for one and sick and damned tired of 1/2 the country not paying income taxes and standing with their hands out bitching for more. I'd far rather fund defense, including the premptive sort, than spend another penny on some dead-ass who thinks I owe him something. JoeSox wrote: the economy to grow in a way that reduces unemployment and increases the wages of American workers." The way to grow the economy is to kill worker visas, kill NAFTA, and prevent companies from moving white collar and technical jobs offshore. As long as those three continue, nothing matters a damn. JoeSox wrote: The economy has lost 3.2 million private-sector jobs since Bush came to office in 2001, and unemployment has risen from 4.1 percent to 6.2 percent If you're stupid enough to believe a president has anything to do with gain or loss of jobs then I hope you have someone to meter your meds. JoeSox wrote: I tried looking for something good this administration has done but I failed to come up with anything Here's some help. Reason 1: As did Regan, following that foolish little man called Jimmy, Bush gives real Americans a reason to hold their heads high. Reason 2: He pisses off deeply insightful psuedo-intellects. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: To answer your question, because he isn't one of the morons you're quoting and is interested in the safety and well being of our citizens. That happens to be the reason why, never having done so before, I contribute both to the Bush campaign war chest (and, yes - I meant to say war chest) and to the RNC. See, this is were the fine line, gets thinner. I want to believe you, I almost need to believe you, but there is one huge problem with this your statement. There is so much evidence that goes against the administration "protecting us". http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-consp.htm[^] I have done research myself on daddy Bush and traced a money trail that the CIA funded Iraq. I have done a timeline on the first Iraq war and how it just happened to take part right during Neil Bush's court case, and remember what the media did with the OJ Simpson case right before hand? The founding fathers new governments evolve into corruption and stressed the intellectuals to "watch" it and take care of it, the problem is it might be too late, the Commission of Presidential Debates is proof that the system is being manipulated. There is new proof poppng up everyday. Either way, if I am wrong or not, the country is ignoring the ideology that has made this country great to live in. Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
JoeSox wrote: I don't like seeing the USA having a military presence in every corner of the earth it gets me more when these people obeying orders end up dead, and their families are the ones that suffer the most. So your dam-straight I am thinking about how I am voting for now, and it looks like the State of California is also waking up. Our military should protect our borders nothing more nothing less, imo. Notice the use of the noun "I". While the Constitution that "you" did not die for quarantees you the right to your opinion it does not mean that the rest of us must agree or even give your opinion much serious thought. And that will become more and more apparent as GW gets another 4 and the Dems point fingers at each other and continue to self destruct as a viable party. California is, as California always is, the Land of fruits and nuts - LA-LA land. It is a test bed for the Democratic party to try their silly ideas out before trying to inflict them on the rest of us. It is not known as the "Left Coast" for nothing. The very last thing I ever want to see is our highly trained infantry troops reduced to the status of a prison guard. And by the way - you speak knowingly about our soldiers dieing a "political death". What about Korea ( Harry Truman ) - how many dies there ? Or Vietnam ( Kennedy - Johnson ) How many there ? Give that tired old rheotoric a break will you. Richard In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love; they had five hundred years of democracy and peace and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. Orson Welles
Richard Stringer wrote: The very last thing I ever want to see is our highly trained infantry troops reduced to the status of a prison guard. And by the way - you speak knowingly about our soldiers dieing a "political death". What about Korea ( Harry Truman ) - how many dies there ? Or Vietnam ( Kennedy - Johnson ) How many there ? Give that tired old rheotoric a break will you. What battle have you fought in? and we'll see if your opinion changes. this country's federal government has been being manipulated and doing manipulation on a grand scale since the begining of WWI. Just because I value the ideology of this country and see how it has changed doesn't mean I shall sit still and take it up the ass, like a school boy and his older brother. Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
I sure as hell won't vote for Bush! Mainly because I can't vote in the US.. -- Berlin rules.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: I sure as hell won't vote for Bush! Mainly because I can't vote in the US.. Oh ho ho, but what if Bush was running for government office in Sweden (if he could)?;P Brad Jennings I like pancakes!
-
"...The grand strategy authorises the US to carry out preventive war: preventive, not pre-emptive. Whatever the justifications for pre-emptive war might be, they do not hold for preventive war, particularly as that concept is interpreted by its current enthusiasts: the use of military force to eliminate an invented or imagined threat, so that even the term "preventive" is too charitable. Preventive war is, very simply, the supreme crime that was condemned at Nuremberg. That was understood by those with some concern for their country. As the US invaded Iraq, the historian Arthur Schlesinger wrote that Bush's grand strategy was "alarmingly similar to the policy that imperial Japan employed at the time of Pearl Harbor, on a date which, as an earlier American president [Franklin D Roosevelt] said it would, lives in infamy". It was no surprise, added Schlesinger, that "the global wave of sympathy that engulfed the US after 9/11 has given way to a global wave of hatred of American arrogance and militarism" and the belief that Bush was "a greater threat to peace than Saddam Hussein" (4)..." http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=4030[^] "...The administration recently projected deficits of more than $450 billion this year and $475 billion next year — numbers that don't even factor in money borrowed from Social Security (news - web sites) and other trust funds, Stenholm said. "Budget deficits place a drag on the economy and our living standards now and in the future," Stenholm said. "Federal Reserve (news - web sites) Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) has repeatedly warned that deficits undercut the ability of the economy to grow in a way that reduces unemployment and increases the wages of American workers." The economy has lost 3.2 million private-sector jobs since Bush came to office in 2001, and unemployment has risen from 4.1 percent to 6.2 percent, he said...." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&ncid=1278&e=2&u=/ap/20030809/ap_on_go_co/democrats_economy[^] I tried looking for somet
I'm not voting for Bush. My plan for election year is to watch what kindof candidates are running against him and decide if it's worth voting or not. If I see a candidate that I really like I'm voting for him/her but if it seems like I'm voting for the lesser of two evils again, I'll leave the decision up to somebody else. Brad Jennings I like pancakes!
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: I sure as hell won't vote for Bush! Mainly because I can't vote in the US.. Oh ho ho, but what if Bush was running for government office in Sweden (if he could)?;P Brad Jennings I like pancakes!
I probably wouldn't vote for him or any other party (in Sweden you vote for parties, not individuals. we don't have a president, just an inbred king which has no real power). I've voted "null votes" everytime since I loathe and dispise all lying sons and daughters of bitches. They are all crooks, and they're all out to get my money. 95% serious -- Berlin rules.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: To answer your question, because he isn't one of the morons you're quoting and is interested in the safety and well being of our citizens. That happens to be the reason why, never having done so before, I contribute both to the Bush campaign war chest (and, yes - I meant to say war chest) and to the RNC. See, this is were the fine line, gets thinner. I want to believe you, I almost need to believe you, but there is one huge problem with this your statement. There is so much evidence that goes against the administration "protecting us". http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-consp.htm[^] I have done research myself on daddy Bush and traced a money trail that the CIA funded Iraq. I have done a timeline on the first Iraq war and how it just happened to take part right during Neil Bush's court case, and remember what the media did with the OJ Simpson case right before hand? The founding fathers new governments evolve into corruption and stressed the intellectuals to "watch" it and take care of it, the problem is it might be too late, the Commission of Presidential Debates is proof that the system is being manipulated. There is new proof poppng up everyday. Either way, if I am wrong or not, the country is ignoring the ideology that has made this country great to live in. Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky.JoeSox wrote: Either way, if I am wrong or not, the country is ignoring the ideology that has made this country great to live in. If you feel that way than I presume you also exclude any Democrat from your list of possible alternatives to Bush? Not only do they ignore the principles the country was founded on, they are going out of their way to eradicate those principles.
-
"...The grand strategy authorises the US to carry out preventive war: preventive, not pre-emptive. Whatever the justifications for pre-emptive war might be, they do not hold for preventive war, particularly as that concept is interpreted by its current enthusiasts: the use of military force to eliminate an invented or imagined threat, so that even the term "preventive" is too charitable. Preventive war is, very simply, the supreme crime that was condemned at Nuremberg. That was understood by those with some concern for their country. As the US invaded Iraq, the historian Arthur Schlesinger wrote that Bush's grand strategy was "alarmingly similar to the policy that imperial Japan employed at the time of Pearl Harbor, on a date which, as an earlier American president [Franklin D Roosevelt] said it would, lives in infamy". It was no surprise, added Schlesinger, that "the global wave of sympathy that engulfed the US after 9/11 has given way to a global wave of hatred of American arrogance and militarism" and the belief that Bush was "a greater threat to peace than Saddam Hussein" (4)..." http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=4030[^] "...The administration recently projected deficits of more than $450 billion this year and $475 billion next year — numbers that don't even factor in money borrowed from Social Security (news - web sites) and other trust funds, Stenholm said. "Budget deficits place a drag on the economy and our living standards now and in the future," Stenholm said. "Federal Reserve (news - web sites) Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) has repeatedly warned that deficits undercut the ability of the economy to grow in a way that reduces unemployment and increases the wages of American workers." The economy has lost 3.2 million private-sector jobs since Bush came to office in 2001, and unemployment has risen from 4.1 percent to 6.2 percent, he said...." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&ncid=1278&e=2&u=/ap/20030809/ap_on_go_co/democrats_economy[^] I tried looking for somet
He is not a Democrat.
-
I'm not voting for Bush. My plan for election year is to watch what kindof candidates are running against him and decide if it's worth voting or not. If I see a candidate that I really like I'm voting for him/her but if it seems like I'm voting for the lesser of two evils again, I'll leave the decision up to somebody else. Brad Jennings I like pancakes!
Brad Jennings wrote: but if it seems like I'm voting for the lesser of two evils again, I'll leave the decision up to somebody else. There are plenty of other candidates there to vote for that fits your ideals. here is something I just wrote: "45.3 percent of registered voters, 91.8 million people , did not vote for the Presidency in 2000. Add that to the 56.8 million USA citizens not registered and we end up with 148.6 million people who did not see a need to vote for one reason or another. So let’s just say they all said, “My vote doesn’t count”. The problem with this is when 148.6 people say “My vote doesn’t count”, it does. The 2000 Presidential popular vote was only won by 543,895 votes . That’s plenty of votes left over for the voters who say “I don’t like the two candidates, so why should I vote?” That 148.6 million people possibly could have voted for a third party candidate and that candidate would have won! So no matter what the Commission of Presidential Debates states every Presidential election year , it is possible for a third party candidate to win the Presidency of the United States of America and should be included in the nationally televised debates. " Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
He is not a Democrat.
Stan Shannon wrote: He is not a Democrat. :laugh: but a Democrat is not a Libertarian;) Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
JoeSox wrote: Either way, if I am wrong or not, the country is ignoring the ideology that has made this country great to live in. If you feel that way than I presume you also exclude any Democrat from your list of possible alternatives to Bush? Not only do they ignore the principles the country was founded on, they are going out of their way to eradicate those principles.
Stan Shannon wrote: If you feel that way than I presume you also exclude any Democrat from your list of possible alternatives to Bush? This point and time of this country, it doesn't need a Democrat or Republican. Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
Mike Gaskey wrote: the correction to deficit problems is reduced spending on social programs. and so, the question, again: why vote for Bush? he's set all-time spending records. he's up 18% (i think) over Clinton right now, with no sign of slowing down . in fact, he'll probably start spending more, as he spendsswings towards the middle for the election. -c CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: Bush? he's set all-time spending records. he's up 18% (i think) over Clinton right now, Chris, you and I both know that the President does not spend. Recommend, yes. Promise, yes. Spend, no. That is the responsibility of the Congress, which can and from time to time does ignore recommendations and promises made by the President. Mike
-
"...The grand strategy authorises the US to carry out preventive war: preventive, not pre-emptive. Whatever the justifications for pre-emptive war might be, they do not hold for preventive war, particularly as that concept is interpreted by its current enthusiasts: the use of military force to eliminate an invented or imagined threat, so that even the term "preventive" is too charitable. Preventive war is, very simply, the supreme crime that was condemned at Nuremberg. That was understood by those with some concern for their country. As the US invaded Iraq, the historian Arthur Schlesinger wrote that Bush's grand strategy was "alarmingly similar to the policy that imperial Japan employed at the time of Pearl Harbor, on a date which, as an earlier American president [Franklin D Roosevelt] said it would, lives in infamy". It was no surprise, added Schlesinger, that "the global wave of sympathy that engulfed the US after 9/11 has given way to a global wave of hatred of American arrogance and militarism" and the belief that Bush was "a greater threat to peace than Saddam Hussein" (4)..." http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=4030[^] "...The administration recently projected deficits of more than $450 billion this year and $475 billion next year — numbers that don't even factor in money borrowed from Social Security (news - web sites) and other trust funds, Stenholm said. "Budget deficits place a drag on the economy and our living standards now and in the future," Stenholm said. "Federal Reserve (news - web sites) Chairman Alan Greenspan (news - web sites) has repeatedly warned that deficits undercut the ability of the economy to grow in a way that reduces unemployment and increases the wages of American workers." The economy has lost 3.2 million private-sector jobs since Bush came to office in 2001, and unemployment has risen from 4.1 percent to 6.2 percent, he said...." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=512&ncid=1278&e=2&u=/ap/20030809/ap_on_go_co/democrats_economy[^] I tried looking for somet
Why did you waste all that effort. You had no intentions of voting for him anyway, no matter what he has or hasn't done. Be honest. Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
-
Chris Losinger wrote: Bush? he's set all-time spending records. he's up 18% (i think) over Clinton right now, Chris, you and I both know that the President does not spend. Recommend, yes. Promise, yes. Spend, no. That is the responsibility of the Congress, which can and from time to time does ignore recommendations and promises made by the President. Mike
Mike Gaskey wrote: Chris, you and I both know that the President does not spend. but first, he wrote: With the welfare state initiated by FDR, and fanned into flames by LBJ so, we can blame LBJ and FDR, but not GWB ? right. that's what i thought. -c CheeseWeasle
-
Stan Shannon wrote: He is not a Democrat. :laugh: but a Democrat is not a Libertarian;) Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky.That's true, but I would argue that the Libertarian philosophy is as diametrically opposed to our founding principles as anything the Democrats or Rebublicans are pushing for. So they (as a party) are not a viable option either to those of us who still believe in those founding principles.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: Chris, you and I both know that the President does not spend. but first, he wrote: With the welfare state initiated by FDR, and fanned into flames by LBJ so, we can blame LBJ and FDR, but not GWB ? right. that's what i thought. -c CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: so, we can blame LBJ and FDR, but not GWB ? Exactly. LBJ and FDR both enjoyed hugh democratic majorities in Congress. They took advantage of that majority and pushed through an overtly socialistic agenda - which has virtually crippled us as a society. They didn't spend the money, but they are repsonsible for the programs that the bulk of our national debt goes to pay for.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote: Chris, you and I both know that the President does not spend. but first, he wrote: With the welfare state initiated by FDR, and fanned into flames by LBJ so, we can blame LBJ and FDR, but not GWB ? right. that's what i thought. -c CheeseWeasle
Chris Losinger wrote: so, we can blame LBJ and FDR, but not GWB ? Yes, LBJ especially was a master at pushing agendas through Congress. Kennedy, a pretty decent President for the amount of time in office, had a social agenda that he had difficulty making happen. LBJ was able to push it through to take "our" eyes off of what was happening in 'Nam. Mike
-
Why did you waste all that effort. You had no intentions of voting for him anyway, no matter what he has or hasn't done. Be honest. Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
Gary Kirkham wrote: Why did you waste all that effort. You had no intentions of voting for him anyway, no matter what he has or hasn't done. Be honest. Honestly, I wanted Bush supports to give me a reason to vote for him. So far I see no logical reason to. no BS Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky. -
That's true, but I would argue that the Libertarian philosophy is as diametrically opposed to our founding principles as anything the Democrats or Rebublicans are pushing for. So they (as a party) are not a viable option either to those of us who still believe in those founding principles.
Stan Shannon wrote: That's true, but I would argue that the Libertarian philosophy is as diametrically opposed to our founding principles as anything the Democrats or Rebublicans are pushing for. So they (as a party) are not a viable option either to those of us who still believe in those founding principles. Yes, but the Libertarian Party is the largest of any other third party. They have the best chance of getting this country back to those ideals. Later,
JoeSox
www.humanaiproject.org "The worst fad has been these stupid little robots, Graduate students are wasting 3 years of their lives soldering and repairing robots, instead of making them smart. It's really shocking." -Marvin Minsky.