Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Bush has recently said that the Democrats cannot be trusted to run the government. I ask you, can we trust the Republicans to run the government? The War in Iraq has made terrorism worse, spending has gone out of control, they are allowing child sex predators to prey on young boys in the capital, and it goes on from there.

We can no longer allow the Republicans to make America the laughing stock of the world. We need to make a change before it is too late. To save America, vote Democratic this November!

A valod thread topic, yes, but keep in mind that this user also started this thread:

If this wouldn't be the 10th millionth thread like this it might have been worth reading... But okay, and I hardly think this is the place to ask for votes... Especially not when you consider that everybody here either already thinks logically or is so stubborn that they will vote republican no matter what....

Actually, I agree that the republicans can't be trusted with the govt. Unfortunately I think that the democrats can be trusted even less. Which means that, barring a meaningful independent running, I will be voting republican this year.

Originally posted by Madacapa
The War in Iraq has made terrorism worse

Yet there hasnt been a terrorist attack in the US since the war in Iraq..good logic there.

Vote independent pitt_woot

Originally posted by ThePittman
Vote independent pitt_woot

I agree with you.

Platform voting is retarded

Originally posted by KidRock
Yet there hasnt been a terrorist attack in the US since the war in Iraq..good logic there.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f11/t424341.html
are you going to address this thread?

Originally posted by Madacapa
Bush has recently said that the Democrats cannot be trusted to run the government. I ask you, can we trust the Republicans to run the government? The War in Iraq has made terrorism worse, spending has gone out of control, they are allowing child sex predators to prey on young boys in the capital, and it goes on from there.

We can no longer allow the Republicans to make America the laughing stock of the world. We need to make a change before it is too late. To save America, vote Democratic this November!


L L!!!




People who don't believe in gay marriage, abortion, being soft on crime, raising taxes, big government, or being considerate to a terrorist will of course vote republican.

People who support such ideas will likely vote democrat.

If you really feel that the republicans have got it wrong, go vote.

And try to get others who are tree-huggin hippies to go vote with you.

(based on 2000 and 2004, you'll just lose because there are more of us, but go on and try if it makes you feel better)

But I can tell you this much:

There are over 100 million evangelical Christians in this country, and over 50% of Americans identify themselves as conservative in values....

and despite whatever recent problems that certain republicans may have had, we will never vote for a Democrat.


Liberals had their time, in the 70's and in the 90's.

People are sick of what they did to our country's values and standards.

What you are seeing now in the modern conservative push in America is the backlash of those mistakes.



Oh, and speaking personally as a Bush republican:


Go f*ck yourself.

http://gallery.brawl-hall.com/data/media66542/10/bush_finger.jpg

How about a Conservative Democrat then or a Liberal Republican!

Liberal doesn't always equal Democrat (mostly it does but not allways) its just that in the US we associate those values with our whopping two party system.

I really never got conservatives, what good is staying still in time... Republicans destroy all advancement in civilization for what? Outdated ideals and morales and values that the rest of the world has long ago abandoned because they felt it wasn't right...

If conservatives would always have had the power we would still be living in the Dark Ages where woman were worthless we had slaves and every male in their country would pray 7 times a day beat their wives and stone gays....

Conservatives rule

Originally posted by sithsaber408
L L!!!




People who don't believe in gay marriage, abortion, being soft on crime, raising taxes, big government, or being considerate to a terrorist will of course vote republican.

People who support such ideas will likely vote democrat.

If you really feel that the republicans have got it wrong, go vote.

And try to get others who are tree-huggin hippies to go vote with you.

(based on 2000 and 2004, you'll just lose because there are more of us, but go on and try if it makes you feel better)

But I can tell you this much:

There are over 100 million evangelical Christians in this country, and over 50% of Americans identify themselves as conservative in values....

and despite whatever recent problems that certain republicans may have had, we will never vote for a Democrat.


Liberals had their time, in the 70's and in the 90's.

People are sick of what they did to our country's values and standards.

What you are seeing now in the modern conservative push in America is the backlash of those mistakes.



Oh, and speaking personally as a Bush republican:


Go f*ck yourself.

http://gallery.brawl-hall.com/data/media66542/10/bush_finger.jpg

another pussy who wont address the new topic. all hat and no cowboy

Come on Clinton did something alot worst then that Republican guy did.Lets give the Republican a break for once.I mean I am not saying what the guy did was good I am just saying that everyone thinks Bill Clinton is so great and he is a sick!jm

*votes Republican*

Bite me..

Either Hilary or a Bush-wannabe in 2008....we are so screwed....

Originally posted by Draco69
Either Hilary or a Bush-wannabe in 2008....we are so screwed....

agreed

we need someone who's more towards the middle. the farther left/liberal we get, the more like communism we become. the farther right/conservative we get, the more like a dictatorship or a monarchy we become. i think we need a leader who is dead-center between both democratic and republican ideas. until then, we're never going to have a perfect leader, not that anyone is perfect to begin with...

We can so do without liberals!I hope a Republican wins for president next year but Mrs Clinton no thank you!jm

No one can be trusted to run the government.

Originally posted by Madacapa
Bush has recently said that the Democrats cannot be trusted to run the government. I ask you, can we trust the Republicans to run the government? The War in Iraq has made terrorism worse, spending has gone out of control, they are allowing child sex predators to prey on young boys in the capital, and it goes on from there.

We can no longer allow the Republicans to make America the laughing stock of the world. We need to make a change before it is too late. To save America, vote Democratic this November!

did u said it made terrorism worse? we havent been attacked since 9/11. nothing like that has happened and wont happen again cuz we have their asses hiding in the damn desert so they dont get blown up or shot. i say kill them before they kill more of us

Alittle harsh but I argee.jm

a little harsh, but i mean sometimes u got to get the point across. as long as we are killing them and not killing us..im fine with whoever is in there. and as long as prices dont get too crazy

THey are already are.But I am still Republican and if I was old enough to vote I would vote for Republican!Bush all the way!See you later.jm

This is one of the most ridiculous, pathetic things I've ever read.

So even if a Democratic candidate's stand on issues happened to fall more in line with yours than the Republican's, you'd still refuse to vote for the Democrat?

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Originally posted by Lana
This is one of the most ridiculous, pathetic things I've ever read.

no it isnt

Originally posted by Lana


So even if a Democratic candidate's stand on issues happened to fall more in line with yours than the Republican's, you'd still refuse to vote for the Democrat?



Hey Lana.

That's a fair question.


I can say that in that case, I would definately take a look at what it is the Democrat was advocating and offering as a candidate.


I find it highly unlikely however, that a person in the democratic party would be in-line with conservative values.

You may have one or two that support the war in Iraq (like Hillary Clinton or Lieberman) but won't support pro-life, traditional marriages, etc...

so they aren't really the kind of democrat that I would vote for.

And while I don't speak for all conservative feeling people or even all evangelical Christians, I can say with certainty that nobody who leans that way (that I know) would vote for democrats who don't support their positions, just because 1 or 2 republicans have screwed up.

Originally posted by Madacapa
Bush has recently said that the Democrats cannot be trusted to run the government. I ask you, can we trust the Republicans to run the government? The War in Iraq has made terrorism worse, spending has gone out of control, they are allowing child sex predators to prey on young boys in the capital, and it goes on from there.

We can no longer allow the Republicans to make America the laughing stock of the world. We need to make a change before it is too late. To save America, vote Democratic this November! Finally, an American who knows when a political party is lying. You do know that EVERY single Republican (since WW2) has been pretty much the same? Eisenhower, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, Ford AND Nixon. Evil moronic militants. And you people STILL vote for them???

I've looked at some of the history in the US and it seems that ever since a Republican has been in power, everything has gone down. (And GWB has the record.)

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
We can so do without liberals!I hope a Republican wins for president next year but Mrs Clinton no thank you!jm Dear me.

It is better then voting someone like Clinton.I ask you do you want a sick old man to be president or a a guy who made one mistake?jm

Originally posted by lord xyz
Finally, an American who knows when a political party is lying.

Finally?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Finally? Well, okay, there are quite a few of you who are sensible minded and intelligent, but on a whole, you guys don't seem very intelligent. (No offense like).

Originally posted by lord xyz
Well, okay, there are quite a few of you who are sensible minded and intelligent, but on a whole, you guys don't seem very intelligent. (No offense like).

.................leave, please.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
.................leave, please. console

Originally posted by Draco69
Either Hilary or a Bush-wannabe in 2008....we are so screwed....
With a liberal in the whitehouse, by screwed do you mean the US will start giving money to terrorists and opening our boarders to whoever feels like coming in?

I agree.

Originally posted by KidRock
With a liberal in the whitehouse, by screwed do you mean the US will start giving money to terrorists and opening our boarders to whoever feels like coming in?

I agree. yeah because that's happened, how many times in the US?

Originally posted by lord xyz
yeah because that's happened, how many times in the US?

Not once since Bush has been in office.

I still love the quote by the thread starter, "the war in iraq has made terrorism worse"..brilliant.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
I can say that in that case, I would definately take a look at what it is the Democrat was advocating and offering as a candidate.

You should be doing that in every case. But from the sound of you, you don't you just eat up soundbites.


Originally posted by sithsaber408
I find it highly unlikely however, that a person in the democratic party would be in-line with conservative values.

What exactly are your conservative values?

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
You should be doing that in every case. But from the sound of you, you don't you just eat up soundbites.




What exactly are your conservative values?

Some dems are conservative but not alot of them.If you are prolife you are one through.jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Come on Clinton did something alot worst then that Republican guy did.Lets give the Republican a break for once.I mean I am not saying what the guy did was good I am just saying that everyone thinks Bill Clinton is so great and he is a sick!jm



What the hell did Bill Clinton do that was worse than anything Bush and Cheney did ?

1) Bush sent troops to Iraq; he declared war

2) He FAILED to catch Osama Bin Ladin

3) He is responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq, AND from United States

4) He sent hundreds of people to Death Row when he was Governor of Texas

5) Dick Cheney shot someone in the fkn FACE !




What did Clinton do that was any worse ?

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Some dems are conservative but not alot of them.If you are prolife you are one through.jm

Thank you for yet another irrelevant point.

And no one is talking about abortion. There's a thread for that. But I can assure you, I can think of no better reason to support it than you.

It is a honest and real point and you are very welcome.jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
It is a honest and real point and you are very welcome.jm

JM what did Clinton do that was worse than what Bush and Cheney have done ?

Originally posted by KidRock
Not once since Bush has been in office.

I still love the quote by the thread starter, "the war in iraq has made terrorism worse"..brilliant.

Another idiot. The U.S. isn't the only place in the world.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
JM what did Clinton do that was worse than what Bush and Cheney have done ?

he got a blowjob.

My name is Jackie he had sexs with Monaca and then said he did not.Which makes him not only a lier but a very sick man.jm

Originally posted by Lord Urizen

What the hell did Bill Clinton do that was worse than anything Bush and Cheney did ?

1) Bush sent troops to Iraq; he declared war

Correction, congress declared/authorized war, However when Clinton lobbed his missiles into Iraq and Afghanistan Congress was informed, no resolution was made previous to the action.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
2) He FAILED to catch Osama Bin Ladin

So did Clinton

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
3) He is responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq, AND from United States

Actually I'm pretty sure it was the Islamic extremists who were responsible for the deaths of innocents.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
4) He sent hundreds of people to Death Row when he was Governor of Texas

That's a bad thing?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
5) Dick Cheney shot someone in the fkn FACE !

Which was an accident, unlike Mr Clinton's affair with Ms Lewinsky

Thank you!You had proven my point.jm

Originally posted by docb77
Which was an accident, unlike Mr Clinton's affair with Ms Lewinsky

If you can explain how Clinton getting a blowjob had anything to do with his ability to run the government, I'll conceed that point.

It not only that but it was something else that I am not about to say online.He lied saying he did not while Miss Lewinsky said he did.Why believe her?
The proof is staring at everyone right in the face and the fact that his lie did not throw him out of the white house is still a mystery!jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
It not only that but it was something else that I am not about to say online.He lied saying he did not while Miss Lewinsky said he did.Why believe her?
The proof is staring at everyone right in the face and the fact that his lie did not throw him out of the white house is still a mystery!jm

But Bush can lie about weapons of mass destruction and go to war for no reason and it's not considered a lie?

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
But Bush can lie about weapons of mass destruction and go to war for no reason and it's not considered a lie?

Of course not...It's for the good of the Country!

Just like when Republicans e-mail little boys and tell them to take their clothes off it's ok...You didn't know that?

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
But Bush can lie about weapons of mass destruction and go to war for no reason and it's not considered a lie?

What sounds better to you?Lieing about weaspons(That is not all true)or having a president who actly assulted a woman?jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
What sounds better to you? Lying about weapons (That is not all true)

or

Having a president who actually assaulted a woman? JM

It's true and worse.

He never assaulted her. It was, what's the word, CONSENSUAL.

Well you know what I mean.jm

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Well you know what I mean. JM

No, I truly do not.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
What sounds better to you?Lieing about weaspons(That is not all true)or having a president who actly assulted a woman?jm

Assaulted! That's it, you are way beyond stupid. I'll pull a page from your book and just go ahead and add you to my ignore list. Not one thing you say makes sense, has a point or is legible without being read three times.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Assaulted! That's it, you are way beyond stupid. I'll pull a page from your book and just go ahead and add you to my ignore list. Not one thing you say makes sense, has a point or is legible without being read three times.

If you don't think he did that then you are the one who is wrong not me.Too much of a suporter of Clinton I guess to care what he did.JM That a Dem for you!

Don't block her. Her posts are quite funny after a little while.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen


5) Dick Cheney shot someone in the fkn FACE !

How is that relevent to his job?

No worrys he is aready blocked from me.Shoting someone in the face has nothering to do with him being a VP.JM

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
what does that have to do with him being VP?

He's an idiot for shooting someone is the face.

An accient.jm

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
How is that relevent to his job?

What does the VICE F******* PRESIDENT shooting a guy in the face have anything to do with him being vp? You truly think there's nothing wrong with that?

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
An accident. JM

That doesn't change the fact he's still an idiot.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
You truly think there's nothing wrong with that?

Only if he did it on purpose.

I'm just shaking my head as I read those last few posts.

1- Clinton's affair had nothing to do with his ability to govern, but then again, neither did Cheney's hunting accident.

2- I'd still like someone to explain to me how Bush lied. He told us what he believed to be true. Since when is that a lie? He may have been wrong, but I've always thought that lies were deliberate.

3- As far as whether or not Clinton assaulted a woman... Who knows? What is in evidence is that the Lewinsky thing wasn't the only misconduct he was accused of. Shall we list a few, Flowers, That chick with the nose, then outside of the realm of sexual misconduct we have whitewater, and other such stuff.

yeah, I'm still thinking I trust Bush more than Clinton. That said, I wish he'd stop using the stupid "trust me" line, explain his actions once in a while.

In your view maybe you think he is stupid but he is not.^Argee with this post above me through.Got to get ready for bed.Night.jmsleep1

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
What does the VICE F******* PRESIDENT shooting a guy in the face have anything to do with him being vp? You truly think there's nothing wrong with that?

Yeah, its a horrible accident but it has nothing to do with his job, does it?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Yeah, its a horrible accident but it has nothing to do with his job, does it?

It has everything to do with the job...If I did that to someone I sure as hell wouldn't be let off scott free, now would I?...


Edit: I took what you said from a different point of view; I thought you were saying something different.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
It has everything to do with the job...If I did that to someone I sure as hell wouldn't be let off scott free, now would I?...

You sure would if it was an accident.

Originally posted by docb77

2- I'd still like someone to explain to me how Bush lied. He told us what he believed to be true. Since when is that a lie? He may have been wrong, but I've always thought that lies were deliberate.


How do you know what he believed to be true?

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
It has everything to do with the job...If I did that to someone I sure as hell wouldn't be let off scott free, now would I?...

Legally, maybe. But you shouldn't be fired because of something that happened outside of work that had nothing to do with work.

Originally posted by Lana
How do you know what he believed to be true?
I love you Lana.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Legally, maybe. But you shouldn't be fired because of something that happened outside of work that had nothing to do with work.

We never said "fired".

Originally posted by Lana
How do you know what he believed to be true?

because bush pisses rainbows and craps sunshine. he could never tell a lie. these people are so brainwashed that they could catch bush selling their mothers' heisted organs over the internet and find some way to justify it.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
We never said "fired".

Or even punished at work at all.

Originally posted by PVS
because bush pisses rainbows and craps sunshine. he could never tell a lie. these people are so brainwashed that they could catch bush selling their mothers' heisted organs over the internet and find some way to justify it.

But the thing about it is, he would not do it, he has Morals, and that Lady's and Gentlemen(and Liberals) closes your point

And to Iraq, the same reasons you have for not going in apply to Nazi Germany, they did not declare war on us, they did not attack us, yet do you think the World is worse off for us invading them?

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
But the thing about it is, he would not do it, he has Morals, and that Lady's and Gentlemen(and Liberals) closes your point

And to Iraq, the same reasons you have for not going in apply to Nazi Germany, they did not declare war on us, they did not attack us, yet do you think the World is worse off for us invading them?

Morals? Are you serious?

They declared war on us idiot.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
Morals? Are you serious?

They declared war on us idiot.

Yes Morals



Actually they didn't, but ok, WE declared War on them after Pearl Harbor, which was done by Japan, who did not really have a Formal Alliance with Germany

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
Yes Morals



Actually they didn't, but ok, WE declared War on them after Pearl Harbor, which was done by Japan, who did not really have a Formal Alliance with Germany

Ya, they did. Germany declared war on us. Get over it.

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
They declared war on us idiot.


That was great!


Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
Yes Morals



Actually they didn't, but ok, WE declared War on them after Pearl Harbor, which was done by Japan, who did not really have a Formal Alliance with Germany

Actually, Hitler declared war on us on December 11th. 3 days after we declared war on the Nips.

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
But the thing about it is, he would not do it, he has Morals, and that Lady's and Gentlemen(and Liberals) closes your point

And to Iraq, the same reasons you have for not going in apply to Nazi Germany, they did not declare war on us, they did not attack us, yet do you think the World is worse off for us invading them?

i stand corrected. love the ww2 history lesson btw, ive learned so much

































* just realised he's completely unreachable as well as lacking any substantial mental capacity, so may as well send him off with a lie and a cookie.

Darth Krieger, you need to read up on your history.

....or at least watch the history chanel.........or even one of those children's history lessons on pbs...........................oh never mind

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
That was great!




Actually, Hitler declared war on us on December 11th. 3 days after we declared war on the Nips.

Thank you.
Originally posted by PVS
i stand corrected. love the ww2 history lesson btw, ive learned so much

































* just realised he's completely unreachable as well as lacking any substantial mental capacity, so may as well send him off with a lie and a cookie.

lol.
Originally posted by Lana
Darth Krieger, you need to read up on your history.

Originally posted by PVS
Watch the History Channel

Already do, and PVS, your lack of intelligence is shown in your previous post, we are the ones that Officially declared war

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
Already do, and PVS, your lack of intelligence is shown in your previous post, we are the ones that Officially declared war

*smacks forehead*

The US declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor. Because Japan and Germany were allied, Germany declared war on us.

Originally posted by Lana
*smacks forehead*

The US declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor. Because Japan and Germany were allied, Germany declared war on us.

No, Germany and Japan had a Non-Aggression Contract, they wern't Allied Officially, just had a few Trade Deals and such, we declared war on Germany

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
No, Germany and Japan had a Non-Aggression Contract, they wern't Allied Officially, just had a few Trade Deals and such, we declared war on Germany

Tell that to the Tripartite pact.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Tell that to the Tripartite pact.

Germany did not have to go to War within that

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
Germany did not have to go to War within that

Yes they did...If one of Germany's allies were attacked, Germany HAD to declare war...But yet, Japan made the first move against America, and Germay STILL declared war.

Germany didn't HAVE to declare war. Hitler did it first and did so because he wanted Japan on his side in the enevitable war with Russia.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Yes they did...If one of Germany's allies were attacked, Germany HAD to declare war...But yet, Japan made the first move against America, and Germay STILL declared war.

Correct, but Germany didn't officially declare War, we did, mostly out of Allegiance to the UK, and because Hitler was supporting Japan

no wait....thats right....it was clinton who didnt want to go to war with germany

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Germany didn't HAVE to declare war. Hitler did it first and did so because he wanted Japan on his side in the enevitable war with Russia.

Germany didn't have to declare war against the U.S.A because Japan attacked first...If it were the other way around, then yes, Germany would have had to declare war.

Originally posted by PVS
no wait....thats right....it was clinton who didnt want to go to war with germany

WTF?

Originally posted by PVS
no wait....thats right....it was clinton who didnt want to go to war with germany

He was busy getting blown.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Germany didn't have to declare war against the U.S.A because Japan attacked first...If it were the other way around, then yes, Germany would have had to declare war.

Japan declared war the same day as pearl harbor. Not before, but after the attack. Officially. And we aren't debating the "could have been"s we were discussing the actual happenings.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Japan declared war the same day as pearl harbor. Not before, but after the attack. Officially. And we aren't debating the "could have been"s we were discussing the actual happenings.

I don't quite understand what you're trying to say...It's not a "What if?", it's fact...

"ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict.

If I took what you said the wrong way, then I'm all ears for you clarifying it to me...I was just answering what I thought you said.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
I don't quite understand what you're trying to say...It's not a "What if?", it's fact...

"ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict.

If I took what you said the wrong way, then I'm all ears for you clarifying it to me...I was just answering what I thought you said.

Japan attacked, the Treaty is outside that, Germany vocally supported Japan, so we decided to attack

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
I don't quite understand what you're trying to say...It's not a "What if?", it's fact....

It may be a clause in the pact, but it didn't happen. And that's not what we were talking about. That's all I was saying.

Originally posted by Lana
How do you know what he believed to be true?

I give him the benefit of the doubt. He's not the only one who was saying such things. Clinton did, Kerry did. Were they lying too?

Acouse they were lying.jm

Shouldn't you be getting ready for school, Jackie?

I shouldn't be surprised that this thread grew so fast, but I am. I haven't read all of the replies, but I want to know what all of you think.

I believe that the Republicans can no longer be trusted to run the USA's government.

I believe that they are more concerned for the rights of the corporations that donate millions to them over the rights of the poor and middle class citizens.

I believe they would keep US troops in Iraq for years rather than admit that it was a mistake to invade it. Almost 3,000 US soldiers have died so far, and it has made terrorism worse, not better. It reminds me of the Vietnam War.

I am very angry about the mistakes that the Bush Administration has done, and the President's refusal to admit those mistakes.

Originally posted by Madacapa
I believe that they are more concerned for the rights of the corporations that donate millions to them over the rights of the poor and middle class citizens

lets be fair. thats become the whole of our government

only problem is bush/cheney/neocons' biggest special interest is in oil companies...and well....here we are....screwed

Originally posted by PVS
lets be fair. thats become the whole of our government

only problem is bush/cheney/neocons' biggest special interest is in oil companies...and well....here we are....screwed

Republicans get far more corporate donations than Democrats.

If you had to pick one party that cared more for Americans, its the Democrats, because they can't rely on donations from evil corporations like oil companies. Lets be practical here.

Originally posted by Madacapa
Republicans get far more corporate donations than Democrats.

If you had to pick one party that cared more for Americans, its the Democrats, because they can't rely on donations from evil corporations like oil companies. Lets be practical here.

No, they just get their donations from other corporations. Add Unions and such to that... They don't care about you or me any more than the Republicans. All either party cares about is getting re-elected.

Originally posted by Madacapa
Republicans get far more corporate donations than Democrats.

If you had to pick one party that cared more for Americans, its the Democrats, because they can't rely on donations from evil corporations like oil companies. Lets be practical here.

we are governed by special interests. its all corrupt. only oil is worse, since its dangerous and leads to tens of thousands dead per year and potentially global warming. its all corrupt though. all of it. to paint one side as a saint is incredibly naive.

Originally posted by docb77
I give him the benefit of the doubt. He's not the only one who was saying such things. Clinton did, Kerry did. Were they lying too?

Right you are.

Indeed, add Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clintion, Sen. Kennedy, and Howard Dean to John Kerry and President Clinton.


All voted for the war in Iraq, all thought (just as Bush did) that based on intel provided, Saddam had WMD.


Democrats (and their supporters) crack me up.

Just because you don't like Bush, he is the liar, while the others were just mistaken?

what cracks me up is the mentallity of a cult follower. they assume that everyone has the same unconditional trust and adoration for the people who claim to represent their side. this is the basis of their arguments, and why they think they 'win' by pointing out any flaw in the other party.

Originally posted by PVS
what cracks me up is the mentallity of a cult follower. they assume that everyone has the same unconditional trust and adoration for the people who claim to represent their side. this is the basis of their arguments, and why they think they 'win' by pointing out any flaw in the other party.

Is a desire for consistency wrong? Either Clinton and Kerry were lying about WMD's too, or you have to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. That doesn't mean you can't say he bungled it, just that if You're not calling other people on the same "lies" you have to give Bush the same pass.

Originally posted by docb77
Is a desire for consistency wrong? Either Clinton and Kerry were lying about WMD's too

and what does this prove? that they are all more concerned with their careers than the good of america? welcome to reality!!! oh wait, your implication is that they all thought it was the truth? ok, gnite *kiss*

Originally posted by docb77
or you have to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. That doesn't mean you can't say he bungled it, just that if You're not calling other people on the same "lies" you have to give Bush the same pass.

bush is the president. bush makes the decisions. the rest were just "mee tooo" cheerleaders. both clintons included. whats the point? how does this nullify bush's crimes?

Originally posted by PVS


bush is the president. bush makes the decisions. the rest were just "mee tooo" cheerleaders. both clintons included. whats the point? how does this nullify bush's crimes?

How does it rectify the dem's crimes?

They share just as much blame, since it was the congress that voted to go to war. The president isn't an emperor, or a king, and quite a few of your beloved democratic leaders were behind him 100%.

They were either mistaken, or they are war criminals. You can decide for yourself.

But to say that Bush lied and is some evil-dictator type is pure rubbish.

He said that he believed Saddam had WMD, and that the intel backed it up.

Clinton said he believed it. (weren't there some targeted missile strikes, Clinton's favorite tool, against Baghdad in the mid-late 90's designed to target warehouses and factories believed to be making chemical and biological weapons?)

Many people looked at the faulty intel and believed it.



It seems as though your logic is flawed here PVS.

You: The president lied about the WMD.

Truth: He went off of faulty intel, and the advice of his cabinet.

You: Its all his fault.

Truth: Many democrats supported the war and the WMD theory and the removal of Saddam Hussein. Their votes for it prove this to be true.

You: !!!WRONG!!! Teh prezident is TEH EMPoreR1111 all teh decisions were hiz11 He is teh evil haXxorZ111!!!






You don't have to like Bush or his policies, but you have to acknowledge that the War against Al-quieda, the war in Iraq, and now with the passing of this bill, the measures that we use to interrogate suspected terrorists....

were ALL supported by republicans and democrats alike.

And they are representative of many more millions of Americans who agree with them.

You can fight this all you wish, and try to distort the issue from the threats that we face and how we should deal with them, but that's your own affair.

I used to consider you a smart, well-informed debater who was a liberal and a democrat, that took several issues to heart and argued for them.

But now with the direct denial of your sides support/accountability for many of the things you are against, with your total blame for "George W. the King", and comments about GOP supporters being " the dumbass tough-talkers who have wet dreams of being teabag recipiants of the neocon agenda"......

I can't take you seriously.

You aren't an accurate representation of most liberals/democrats, you are part of a small minority that is hurt and angry that things beyond your control haven't gone your way, though most agree that the responses were correct.


And its people like you, with your deliberate denial of the way things are in this world, coupled with a support of abortions, gay marriage, porn, christian-bashing, and fairness to suspected terrorists that keeps people voting Republican.


Thanks bud. thumbsup

Originally posted by sithsaber408
How does it rectify the dem's crimes?

They share just as much blame, since it was the congress that voted to go to war. The president isn't an emperor, or a king, and quite a few of your beloved democratic leaders were behind him 100%.

They were either mistaken, or they are war criminals. You can decide for yourself.

But to say that Bush lied and is some evil-dictator type is pure rubbish.

He said that he believed Saddam had WMD, and that the intel backed it up.

Clinton said he believed it. (weren't there some targeted missile strikes, Clinton's favorite tool, against Baghdad in the mid-late 90's designed to target warehouses and factories believed to be making chemical and biological weapons?)

Many people looked at the faulty intel and believed it.



It seems as though your logic is flawed here PVS.

You: The president lied about the WMD.

Truth: He went off of faulty intel, and the advice of his cabinet.

You: Its all his fault.

Truth: Many democrats supported the war and the WMD theory and the removal of Saddam Hussein. Their votes for it prove this to be true.

You: !!!WRONG!!! Teh prezident is TEH EMPoreR1111 all teh decisions were hiz11 He is teh evil haXxorZ111!!!






You don't have to like Bush or his policies, but you have to acknowledge that the War against Al-quieda, the war in Iraq, and now with the passing of this bill, the measures that we use to interrogate suspected terrorists....

are ALL supported by republicans and democrats alike.

And they are representative of many more millions of Americans who agree with them.

You can fight this all you wish, and try to distort the issue from the threats that we face and how we should deal with them, but that's your own affair.

I used to consider you a smart, well-informed debater who was a liberal and a democrat, that took several issues to heart and argued for them.

But now with the direct denial of your sides support/accountability for many of the things you are against, with your total blame for "George W. the King", and comments about GOP supporters being " the dumbass tough-talkers who have wet dreams of being teabag recipiants of the neocon agenda"......

I can't take you seriously.

You aren't an accurate representation of most liberals/democrats, you are part of a small minority that is hurt and angry that things beyond your control haven't gone your way, though most agree that the responses were correct.


And its people like you, with your deliberate denial of the way things are in this world, coupled with a support of abortions, gay marriage, porn, christian-bashing, and fairness to suspected terrorists that keeps people voting Republican.


Thanks bud. thumbsup

http://www.iamcolin.com/images/bushorly.jpg

Originally posted by sithsaber408
You: The president lied about the WMD.

Truth: He went off of faulty intel, and the advice of his cabinet.

You: Its all his fault.

Truth: Many democrats supported the war and the WMD theory and the removal of Saddam Hussein. Their votes for it prove this to be true.

You: !!!WRONG!!! Teh prezident is TEH EMPoreR1111 all teh decisions were hiz11 He is teh evil haXxorZ111!!!

yes, imaginary arguments are funny

get your pompoms

sithsaber's right; your hatred of Bush makes you blame him for every little thing.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
sithsaber's right; your hatred of Bush makes you blame him for every little thing.

bush/cheney/rove intentionally leaked the i.d. of an undercover c.i.a. operative in order to keep the wmd myth alive, and the bill passed by congress (another "just trust me" blank check_ was under the condition that all diplomatic means would have to be exhausted before a military strike.

you can kick and cheer for sithsaber all you wish but it simply makes you both wrong. cheering for an imaginary argument with imaginary quotes topped with imaginary truths (congress voting for war/regime change: a lie) does not make you right. it just makes 2 foolish voices instead of 1.

Originally posted by PVS
bush/cheney/rove intentionally leaked the i.d. of an undercover c.i.a. operative in order to keep the wmd myth alive, and the bill passed by congress (another "just trust me" blank check_ was under the condition that all diplomatic means would have to be exhausted before a military strike.

you can kick and cheer for sithsaber all you wish but it simply makes you both wrong. cheering for an imaginary argument with imaginary quotes topped with imaginary truths (congress voting for war/regime change: a lie) does not make you right. it just makes 2 foolish voices instead of 1.

Congress has the power to declare war, not the president.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Congress has the power to declare war, not the president.

they never declaired war. the left it up to bush. that was the bill passed.
research it...my god man this is recent history.

Originally posted by PVS
you can kick and cheer for sithsaber all you wish but it simply makes you both wrong. cheering for an imaginary argument with imaginary quotes topped with imaginary truths (congress voting for war/regime change: a lie) does not make you right. it just makes 2 foolish voices instead of 1.

I don't care what their arguments are. I don't cheer for any KMC user with the words "Darth," "Sith," or "Lord" in their username. The overall lack of creativeness in selecting a name allows all their posts to blend together and makes them very easy to ignore.

BlackC@ (formerly BlackC@t) once changed her name to Darth Puke or something of that nature, and I went ballistic. Fortunately, she changed it to BlackC@. whew.

70's? Nixon, Ford and Carter? Haha... No.

Originally posted by Eis
70's? Nixon, Ford and Carter? Haha... No.

congress?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020919-1.html

Originally posted by PVS
we are governed by special interests. its all corrupt. only oil is worse, since its dangerous and leads to tens of thousands dead per year and potentially global warming. its all corrupt though. all of it. to paint one side as a saint is incredibly naive.

I did not paint the Democrats as saints. They are simply less corrupt than the Republicans. Their policies are less destructive to America and the environment. I will take lying under oath about consensual sex v. destroying the planet anyday.

The Democrats do care more for the average American than the Republicans because they have too. They don't have oil company money to rely on.

Originally posted by docb77
congress?
Well democrats had the house for a lot longer than the seventies and there were a lot more democrats in the senate in the sixties than in the seventies. So I fail to see how the liberals 'had their time' in the 70's and we are talking about democrats, not even real liberals.

Originally posted by Madacapa
I did not paint the Democrats as saints. They are simply less corrupt than the Republicans. Their policies are less destructive to America and the environment. I will take lying under oath about consensual sex v. destroying the planet anyday.

The Democrats do care more for the average American than the Republicans because they have too. They don't have oil company money to rely on.

No, they do have the drug companies though, and labor unions, and george soros, let's not forget money from outside the US. Yeah they're really forced to rely on the people.

By the way, the drug companies are making more money than the oil companies. Look it up on Forbes.

regardless, as i said (and agree in part as you can see by reading back) the problem with oil as a special interest is that it not only leads to deliberate fixing of intelligence pertaining to oil-rich countries who do not play ball, along with the casual turning away from connections between saudi arabia and funding for 9/11, its also preventing us from advancing in alternative fuel and technologies related to. sure bush will give the electric car rhetoric with every campaign speech and state of the union address, but the fact stands that he has nothing to face but profit loss and alienated sponsors if he follows through, so its all just lip service

reminds me of vito corleone hypocritically yet truthfully saying "drugs are a dangerous business". some forms of corruption and crime against the people, however evil, are less destructive than others.

Originally posted by PVS
regardless, as i said (and agree in part as you can see by reading back) the problem with oil as a special interest is that it not only leads to deliberate fixing of intelligence pertaining to oil-rich countries who do not play ball, along with the casual turning away from connections between saudi arabia and funding for 9/11, its also preventing us from advancing in alternative fuel and technologies related to. sure bush will give the electric car rhetoric with every campaign speech and state of the union address, but the fact stands that he has nothing to face but profit loss and alienated sponsors if he follows through, so its all just lip service

reminds me of vito corleone hypocritically yet truthfully saying "drugs are a dangerous business". some forms of corruption and crime against the people, however evil, are less destructive than others.


Well, he might not have anything to gain monetarily, but there is the almighty "legacy".

Originally posted by Madacapa
I did not paint the Democrats as saints. They are simply less corrupt than the Republicans. Their policies are less destructive to America and the environment. I will take lying under oath about consensual sex v. destroying the planet anyday.

The Democrats do care more for the average American than the Republicans because they have too. They don't have oil company money to rely on.


LOL you make me laugh, LOL.

if Pro is good and Con is bad does that mean Congress is the opposite of Progress?

Originally posted by sithsaber408
!!!WRONG!!! thumbsup


Wrong is right. You keep saying the democrats voted to go to war, all they did was vote to give the President the authority to load the gun, not to fire it. That's a power the president has always had on his own. There is a difference.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Wrong is right. You keep saying the democrats voted to go to war, all they did was vote to give the President the authority to load the gun, not to fire it. That's a power the president has always had on his own. There is a difference.

Funny, I could have sworn it was an authorization to use force, not just to prepare it.

Originally posted by docb77
Funny, I could have sworn it was an authorization to use force, not just to prepare it.

It authorized him to use force in he couldn't find a reason not to after consulting the United Nations Security Council. He simply ignored their input and constant protests. That's what began the debate in this country about the relevance of the UN in modern world politics. It wasn't a free ticket to do whatever he wanted, he just acted like it was and sold it to the American people.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
It wasn't a free ticket to do whatever he wanted,

actually, it kinda was. it was congress' way of shrugging off all responsibility and allowing bush to declare war. it was a blank check, proving their complete lack of function.

Originally posted by PVS
actually, it kinda was. it was congress' way of shrugging off all responsibility and allowing bush to declare war. it was a blank check, proving their complete lack of function.

It was certainly treated that way. But it wasn't worded that way.

fools. all of you. ignorant fools
HAAHAHHAHAHAAH. YOUR TIME WILL COME

dont let him hijack yet another thread. just ignore him

edit.

You're right.

Justice without force is powerless, force without justice is tyranny.

Originally posted by PVS
dont let him hijack yet another thread. just ignore him

thats ****ing rich, coming from you boy. dont let me dig up the amount of threads you have hi jacked. sleep it off