Four more years - then we'll know

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Kerry could win a debate a day for the next month and he would still loose. The Democratic party problems are not in the party per se, the problem is the base of the base.

Did you resurrect this thread because you concede Kerry won the debate?

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Well, Ozoned, should I take your comments as an acknowledgement that the Iraqi invasion was a mistake? Otherwise, they're merely a rhetorical tangent.

The whole article is more of the same, basically arguing that since we're now stuck to the tarbaby that we shouldn't bother to try to get loose.

It's an issue of performance and reward. GWB and his appointees are approaching the end of their four year contract, and we, the people, their employer, have an option to renew. Have they performed the assigned duties well enough for that? Have they delivered on their promises, or not? Have they exhibited the kind of character that will allow them to claim their own mistakes, not attempt to shift the blame to others? Will they serve our agenda, or their own?

The answer is obvious.

You really do need to stick you head into these posts more often Jhhnn. As usual, you have said it all. It is a shame your words are wasted on the bush fanboi's who will use any angle to try and justify their fearless leaders bad decisions.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I don't believe rewarding someone who has shown that he is not up to the job with an extension of his contract. The Dub and his nefarious network of Neocons and goons misled the American Public about Iraq. If there is one thing I won't abide in is being played for a fool by an employee and the Dub is nothing but an employee who has shown to me that he can't be trusted.

Red Dawn, with respect and only asking from the perspective of the author,

How big of price are you willing to pay to satisfy your ego?

You seriously want to start talking about ego?

LOL

 

[rickn]

in four more years we could all be dead, what's your point?

 

[her209]

Did anyone else see that sign that was shown on MSNBC?

It read: VOTE FOR KERRY IF YOU WANT THE UNIVERSE TO END!

 

[jackschmittusa]

I too have considered that there may be no good outcome in Iraq, and that Kerry would be inheriting a mess that noone could fix. He will of course, become the fall guy for it, no matter how hard he tries.

As important as Iraq is (and myriad related issues), the U.S. is about much more than the war. We cannot afford 4 more years of the same at home. Bush's actions of basing policy, law, and scientific endeavour on religious mumbo-jumbo is a greater threat to this country than any terrorist threat. Bush has attempted to alter the very fabric of the nation to suit specific religious goals. He has promised to continue to do so if re-elected. He has openly placed the profits of large corporations ahead of the safety and well being of my kids and grandkids with his enviornmental policies. He has created a debt large enough that the government will be asking my grandkids to pay it off.

Four more years to let him finish turning America into Bushica? No thanks. I would let Kerry be the sacrificial lamb to save the country.

 

[chess9]

JackS:

Amen to ALL of that.

-Robert

 

[NesuD]

Originally posted by: Harvey
To answer your title question, I am damned sure I want Kerry to win. Four more years of Bushwhacko will be an even greater disaster than the last four. All we got was:

• Lies on top of lies and total ineptitude in leading us into an elective war without the support of the majority of the world and without any preparation to deal with the aftermath of that war. Lies about the reasons for going to war. Lies about the projected cost of the war. Lies about the projected manpower and equipement required to do the job.
  
• A record deficit due to both the war and ridiculous tax cuts for his rich buddies.
  
• Dismantlement and of environmental protection.
  
• Absolute stupidity in restricting funding of stem cell research.
  
• Total ripoff sellouts to Haliburton with no bid contracts.
  
• More total ripoff sellouts to those shipping jobs offshore.
  
• More total ripoff sellouts to the pharmaceutical industry, keeping the U.S. the most expensive place in the world to buy life saving medications and blocking access to the same medicines from Canada.
  
• All Children Left Behind because his vaunted "No Child Left Behind" act is unfunded hot air.
  
• A catalcysmic loss of jobs due to failed economic policies.
  
• A man who puts his "faith" ahead of scientific evidence of how wrong he is on so many issues and is willing to work to thrash the U.S. Constitution to empower that one faith to the detriment of all other citizens.

I do NOT want four more years of this prick. I'm voting for Kerry because he is the one who can take it away from Bushwhacko, but I would vote for a piece of roadkill before I voted for George W. Bush for anything.

couple of problems with some of your points Harvey.

Point one.. The deficit was a direct result of the recession that began in 2000 and was magnified as a result of 9-11. Granted the tax cuts inflated it somewhat in the short term but i believe that it would have inflated even more with a longer recession which I believe the tax cuts were instrumental in ending. Also I was a direct beneficiary of those tax cuts and I am hardly one of Bush's rich buddies. In fact virtually any middle class married couple with 2 children should have seen a significant reduction in their taxes from the year before to the tune of about 13% that is what i saw in mine.

Point two...please explain what environmental policy has been dismantled. I can't seem to recall a single bill relaxing environmental being passed. Only thing i can recall is the Alaska drilling question getting shot down.

Point three...I tend to agree with you on this point.

Point four...I think this was more a case of some very specialized services were needed and Halliburton was far and away the most able to provide them rather than any kind of contract fixing.

Point five...I really have no idea exactly what this one refers to.

Point six...Once again i will agree with that. I find it amazing that we are subsidizing the Rx part of other countries healthcare systems which is in fact what we are doing when drug prices are artificially set so high here and so low in places like Canada.

Point seven...Wasn't the no child left behind legislation in fact authored by Senator Ted Kennedy(D) Mass with the support of President Bush? If it is so badly lacking in funds why did it's author not include adequate funding in the bill?

Point eight...The cataclysmic loss of jobs was a direct result of the recession of 2000 so if you are going to point at failed economic policies as the cause you certainly can't lay that on Bush's policies. Pretty tough to undo a recession that began before you took office.

Point nine...I haven't seen any overwhelming evidence of this. That is more akin to a subjective personal opinion than any kind of substantive fact.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
How many more times does Kerry have to say he won't pull out of Iraq Ozone? Nobody is leaving Iraq, and I do believe things will get better at some point in time. One thing is for sure though, we need to get a more international coalition in there, I'm sick and tired of seeing my US troops coming home in coffins or with limbs blown off.

How prey tell do we do this????

Kerry has still YET to say exactly how he is going to bring other nations into this mess and personally I don't think he can...what is he going to offer them? what kind of deals will he make? there is no reason why any nation not allready involved would want to jump right in just because we get a new president, especially one who thinks the situation sucks.

Really Sudheer, I hear this all the time but no concrete plan or no nations have come out and said outwright that they would jump in if Kerry is the man in charge. Until I see something definate saying that more nations will help then I am passing it off as a promise that won't be kept because I see no reason for other nations to jump in and commit troops unless they are getting something serious for it and I am scared to think of what kind of deals we can (or Kerry would be willing) to make.

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

Originally posted by: NesuD

Originally posted by: Harvey
To answer your title question, I am damned sure I want Kerry to win. Four more years of Bushwhacko will be an even greater disaster than the last four. All we got was:

• Lies on top of lies and total ineptitude in leading us into an elective war without the support of the majority of the world and without any preparation to deal with the aftermath of that war. Lies about the reasons for going to war. Lies about the projected cost of the war. Lies about the projected manpower and equipement required to do the job.
  
• A record deficit due to both the war and ridiculous tax cuts for his rich buddies.
  
• Dismantlement and of environmental protection.
  
• Absolute stupidity in restricting funding of stem cell research.
  
• Total ripoff sellouts to Haliburton with no bid contracts.
  
• More total ripoff sellouts to those shipping jobs offshore.
  
• More total ripoff sellouts to the pharmaceutical industry, keeping the U.S. the most expensive place in the world to buy life saving medications and blocking access to the same medicines from Canada.
  
• All Children Left Behind because his vaunted "No Child Left Behind" act is unfunded hot air.
  
• A catalcysmic loss of jobs due to failed economic policies.
  
• A man who puts his "faith" ahead of scientific evidence of how wrong he is on so many issues and is willing to work to thrash the U.S. Constitution to empower that one faith to the detriment of all other citizens.

I do NOT want four more years of this prick. I'm voting for Kerry because he is the one who can take it away from Bushwhacko, but I would vote for a piece of roadkill before I voted for George W. Bush for anything.

couple of problems with some of your points Harvey.

Point one.. The deficit was a direct result of the recession that began in 2000 and was magnified as a result of 9-11. Granted the tax cuts inflated it somewhat in the short term but i believe that it would have inflated even more with a longer recession which I believe the tax cuts were instrumental in ending. Also I was a direct beneficiary of those tax cuts and I am hardly one of Bush's rich buddies. In fact virtually any middle class married couple with 2 children should have seen a significant reduction in their taxes from the year before to the tune of about 13% that is what i saw in mine.

Point two...please explain what environmental policy has been dismantled. I can't seem to recall a single bill relaxing environmental being passed. Only thing i can recall is the Alaska drilling question getting shot down.

Point three...I tend to agree with you on this point.

Point four...I think this was more a case of some very specialized services were needed and Halliburton was far and away the most able to provide them rather than any kind of contract fixing.

Point five...I really have no idea exactly what this one refers to.

Point six...Once again i will agree with that. I find it amazing that we are subsidizing the Rx part of other countries healthcare systems which is in fact what we are doing when drug prices are artificially set so high here and so low in places like Canada.

Point seven...Wasn't the no child left behind legislation in fact authored by Senator Ted Kennedy(D) Mass with the support of President Bush? If it is so badly lacking in funds why did it's author not include adequate funding in the bill?

Point eight...The cataclysmic loss of jobs was a direct result of the recession of 2000 so if you are going to point at failed economic policies as the cause you certainly can't lay that on Bush's policies. Pretty tough to undo a recession that began before you took office.

Point nine...I haven't seen any overwhelming evidence of this. That is more akin to a subjective personal opinion than any kind of substantive fact.

The President Has Repeatedly Broken His Promise to Provide Federal Support for Education. In the two years since the President signed the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, none of his budgets have come close to meeting the level of funding authorized in the Act. The FY 2004 budget submitted by President Bush fell $9 billion short of the amount authorized for 2004 and his FY 2003 budget fell $7.2 billion short of approved funding. [Office of Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, 6/9/03; Associated Press, 2/24/03]

Kennedy was part of the writing and wrote the budgets for No Child Left Behind along with the President and others. Ultimately it is the responsibility of the President to make sure he has room in his budget to fund what he signed. He has to take responsibility.

 

[Gravity]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I don't believe rewarding someone who has shown that he is not up to the job with an extension of his contract. The Dub and his nefarious network of Neocons and goons misled the American Public about Iraq. If there is one thing I won't abide in is being played for a fool by an employee and the Dub is nothing but an employee who has shown to me that he can't be trusted.

RD, Kerry also misled the american public since both he and the POTUS had the same information and drew the same conclusions. Kerry also said he'd do it again.

Of course then he said that he wouldn't....go figure.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Gravity

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I don't believe rewarding someone who has shown that he is not up to the job with an extension of his contract. The Dub and his nefarious network of Neocons and goons misled the American Public about Iraq. If there is one thing I won't abide in is being played for a fool by an employee and the Dub is nothing but an employee who has shown to me that he can't be trusted.

RD, Kerry also misled the american public since both he and the POTUS had the same information and drew the same conclusions. Kerry also said he'd do it again.

Of course then he said that he wouldn't....go figure.

Big difference is saying "Ok, Mr. President, if all diplomatic efforts fail and the weapon inspectors cannot do their job, then go ahead and use military force, provided you have a broad coalition." and....

"OMG, Mr. President, you better invade right now. We're all gonna die!!!"

LOL

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Don't worry, all neocons become bleeding hearts wanting to help Iraqis when the floor falls out on their reasons for the war.

LOL, and they really show how desperate they've become by trying to convince people that it would be better for their "party" to lose. LOL, the people supporting Kerry want to end the bloodshed ASAP. It's not a "strategy" to whip Bush, it's a heartfelt conviction that this war is a waste of our countries precious resources.

 

[Krk3561]

Originally posted by: CQuinn

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

I'd also like to know who the last US president who didn't 'waste hunderds of billions' was.

WJ. Clinton. At least counting the surplus that was passed on to GW in 2000.

Lets see...

Bush came into office in 2001 first of all....

Second of all, many people dont realize the recession started in late 1999, the year of the surplus.

Any educated individual would know that a surplus hurts the economy

 

[Ozoned]

"The Democrats would have to fight or quit a war that they never wanted in the first place, no matter how they voted. They don't have the heart for Iraq; there's no way they could."