GTSticky Posted August 2, 2004 Posted August 2, 2004 /agree Ayokona Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Yuck Posted August 2, 2004 Posted August 2, 2004 Another reason that I support my candidate is that during wartime, it's a good thing to keep the current president, because you know what you have. (I know some dont like what they have now, but I do) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackRussell Posted August 2, 2004 Posted August 2, 2004 Another reason that I support my candidate is that during wartime, it's a good thing to keep the current president, because you know what you have. (I know some dont like what they have now, but I do) You just demonstrated one of my points: 3. Kerry will be smarter and more savy than other candidates in the "War" against Terrorism. And I don't see Kerry calling himself literally a "war time President". That would be a stretch of the phrase and not unlike commiting a kind of fraud on the American people and the World. The current President is not literally a "war time President". Even implying that is scare mongering. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigred Posted August 2, 2004 Posted August 2, 2004 sometimes you just can't help everyone. and other times you just have to let people learn the hard way Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Atreides Posted August 3, 2004 Posted August 3, 2004 But Big, we learned the hard way not too long ago... His name be Carter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackRussell Posted August 3, 2004 Posted August 3, 2004 And passing thru penn station, for the last few years, there's now armed military personel, which maybe would scare some people, i dunno, but i kinda like them there. I overlooked that nuance in your post before. I never implied, for instance, that the visible armed military personel themselves are there to scare you <_< (and by extension that any other President would remove them; of course not). They've been there for years now because NYC is generally percieved to be a probable target due to it being America's financial center and is where a major attack occured before. That was twisting what I said. My previous replies say nothing like what is italicised above. Nice cheap shot though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggy Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 he believes...he plans...he believes... yeah, whoopdeedoo, i believe in a lot of stuff also. he plans on increasing national security....HOW?! he believes in turning this nation back into a place of strength instead of a place of fear....HOW?! (besides which, i BELIEVE our nation is the epitomy of strength) he has plans to liberate our hold on Middle east oil by using other means of getting energy....HOW?! he believes in helping and maintaining a strong middle class America....HOW?! He also believes in creating alliances....HOW?! yeah, he can say whatever he wants, but he's yet to back up anything he says. Yeah, i believe in giving everyone a $1mil tax refund, you all wanna vote for me? Says WHO?! The MEDIA?! His comrades sure as hell don't. Wait until the book "Unfit for Command" is released (scheduled for 9/25/04). Then we'll see who the "war hero" is. all i can do is laugh at you because of your childness. all of these how questions cannot be answered without breaking the rules of this thread, but all i can say about this is that actions speak louder then words on behalf of the candidate that i choose and when he gets elected, only then can he show how he plans to do all of this. also, since you chose to go down the road of bashing i feel that i must retort back on something. first of all, your beloved bush hasnt experienced war. he hasn't seen comrades die in combat. he hasn't seen countless civilians dead. Kerry who has experienced war whether he be a war hero or not, has still served this country. Kerry knows the harshness and reality of war and because of that, he makes more rational decisions on what we do with our national security. kerry doesn't just go to war because he wants to and because he's on a power trip, unlike Bush. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AYoKoNA Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 but all i can say about this is that actions speak louder then words on behalf of the candidate that i choose and when he gets elected, only then can he show how he plans to do all of this. "If" he gets elected. Usually a presidential hopefull will atleast move "slightly" in the polls after a convention. Doesn't seem so with Kerry. first of all, your beloved bush hasnt experienced war. he hasn't seen comrades die in combat. he hasn't seen countless civilians dead. Kerry who has experienced war whether he be a war hero or not, has still served this country.First off why must ppl BASH the National Guard? They protect our borders and demoralizing them doesn't make you any better.As far as Kerry being a War Hero, seeing countless civilians dead, and comrades dying in combat, I beg to Differ. http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews.../9324635.htm?1c http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/ http://www.vnsfvetakerry.com/ http://www.vetsagainstkerry.org/ http://www.kerrylied.com/ Oh and whats this link right here? Ah yes its "JOHN KERRY BEING HONORED, BY COMMUNISTS, FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THEIR VICTORY OVER UNITED STATES." http://www.vetsagainstkerry.org/Misc/Kerry...Communists2.htm Kerry knows the harshness and reality of war and because of that, he makes more rational decisions on what we do with our national security. kerry doesn't just go to war because he wants to and because he's on a power trip, unlike Bush.Bush didn't go to war because he is on a "Power Trip", he went to war for our National Security. Now since we are on "National Security" lets compare the Senator's voting record to Bush's stance on our Security.http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/ind...rs&code=04-F_02 http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040223-115221-2572r.htm The Center for Security Policy has analyzed more than 75 votes over the past decade cast by Mr. Kerry and other senators. The Washington-based conservative think tank gave Mr. Kerry one of the lowest ratings of any senator. In 1995, for instance, the group gave Mr. Kerry a rank of five out of a possible 100. In 1997, Mr. Kerry earned a zero from the Center for Security Policy, which identifies its goal as "promoting international peace through American strength." Among the votes the group evaluated were nine Mr. Kerry cast against developing a missile-defense system envisioned to protect the United States from nuclear attack. Also noted are the six times in the past 10 years he voted to freeze or reduce defense spending. Mr. Kerry also cast two votes to loosen trade controls over "dual-use" technology such as U.S.-made high-speed computers that can also be used by enemies to build high-tech weaponry. Who is weak on National Security and Defense? IDK about you, but I look at the facts and voting record, not what someone "says" and doesn't DO! Furthermore if "Kerry" is such a "Military Guy" then why do majority of veterans and military personal favor Bush over Kerry?!?!? Veterans prefer Bush as Commander-in-Chief by a 60% to 33% margin. Fifty-four percent (54%) of veterans give the President good or excellent ratings for handling the situation in Iraq. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Veterans%20Vote.htm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
exeter_acres Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 pwned all of these how questions cannot be answered without breaking the rules of this thread Just for clarification, You cannot say who you will vote for (even to yourself) without bashing the other guy? Hmmm Ummm, OK, but sadly typical Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackRussell Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 Just for clarification, You cannot say who you will vote for (even to yourself) without bashing the other guy? Hmmm Ummm, OK, but sadly typical You're assuming this means that the ONLY reason for a vote is what's wrong with the other guy. That is NOT the case here. As I wrote before: The reason you don't see any Kerry supporters is because the so called "rules" are skewed in favor of anyone supporting the incumbent. The incumbent is mostly about what he has done and is doing. The usurper is ALL about what he says he will do (what he has done in other roles isn't very useful because it hasn't involved being THE executive). To support the usurper, all one can say is "he says he'll do this and that". You can't properly support the usurper without comparing his plans to how you think the incumbent has gone wrong. This all smacks of censorship. AYoKoNA wrote:"If" he gets elected. Usually a presidential hopefull will atleast move "slightly" in the polls after a convention. Doesn't seem so with Kerry. The Kerry campaign has recently lost media focus at key moments due to some pretty serious news flow about threats (Ridge Press Conferences). The first time was the day after Kerry announced Edwards as his running mate. The second time 2 or 3 days after the Democratic convention when Kerry was on tour attempting to help garner that bounce (as all candidates do). Mind you I'm not saying this or that about the Ridge press conferences. Fine, he's warning the country; good. What I am saying is that what you said is rather below-the-belt. Whenever a crisis of national security comes up, the President's ratings usually go up (as if I even need to lecture on that well known tendency)... and that of course could well have an effect on his opponents "bounce". And twice that's happened now at key moments... hence I thought your comment a bit cheap. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
exeter_acres Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 You're assuming this means that the ONLY reason for a vote is what's wrong with the other guy. That is NOT the case here. As I wrote before: Sorry I was responding to Shaggys post.... You have articulated your points well, Jack... of course they are all wrong (relax....just playing!) I think we would agree to disagree and that is cool.... again my whole idea for this thread is for people to think about who they vote for and not get caught up in media hype..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackRussell Posted August 5, 2004 Posted August 5, 2004 Sorry I was responding to Shaggys post.... Oops... didn't mean to barge in like that You have articulated your points well, Jack... of course they are all wrong (relax....just playing!) I think we would agree to disagree and that is cool.... again my whole idea for this thread is for people to think about who they vote for and not get caught up in media hype..... I'm on the same page Not like I'm shaking my fist fuming. Most of the time, this is hilarious Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts