why neither John Kerry or G.W. Bush should be pres [Archive]

ILovePapaSmurf

09-28-2004, 12:49 PM

Why 'ForDaddy' should never post a political thread…

1. Because he is an ignorant hack.
2. Because he is a four year old who when daddy is not around, decides it would be cool to chat on a board before he gets spanked for messing with daddy's 'toy.'
3. Because he was dropped on his head as a child.
4. Because no one really cares what he is posting.
5. Because he thinks violence is the thing that solves everyone's problems.

Wolverine

09-28-2004, 12:50 PM

Not a bad point. Not a bad point at all bub. They concern how the other is so horrible for the job. But would you rather have Nader in the white house? He's an idiot. But so are the other 2. So vote or don't vote. Bush has had 4 years to prove himself, and Kerry hasn't had a chance yet. I say we give Kerry 4 years to see what he can do, then ew can impeach him if he sucks. Bush can then run again. And we can vote for him for another 4 years. Or Jimmy Carter can run for president again...

Droogan_Leader

09-28-2004, 01:04 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
they are both a couple of jackasses who like to run around insulting each other for this race.
Why not.....
Murder

[/ QUOTE ]
Get a life, slapnuts.

Droogan_Leader

09-28-2004, 01:05 PM

Wolverine, I take back what I said. You are a gimp, and you should be put down. You're worse than a friggin' computer virus. Stop replicating yourself, dumb fruit.

Threadkiller

09-28-2004, 01:14 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
dumb fruit.

[/ QUOTE ] First prize for best insult of the week right here. /forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

Droogan_Leader

09-28-2004, 01:33 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
First prize for best insult of the week right here.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.tftj.com/miss/MAO/03_04Pageant/Winner/Surprise.jpg

I, I...don't know what to say!!

Rico

09-28-2004, 02:15 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
...say we give Kerry 4 years to see what he can do, then ew can impeach him if he sucks...

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you even know what impeachment is? You can't just impeach a president because you don't think he's doing a good job.

Look into it and then make an informed post, it's always better.

FanGirl

09-28-2004, 02:25 PM

You would need at least a sex scandal to even think about doing that.

Razorback

09-28-2004, 03:42 PM

Or you can manufacture one.

Did you get rid of the dress yet?

Matt1

09-28-2004, 06:42 PM

If what you mean by your post is that this race has mostly been about mud-flinging and pointless non-issues instead of a discussion and debate about the most pressing problems of our lifetime, then I would agree. But since you are an imbecile I doubt that is what you meant.

jjcourtright

09-28-2004, 06:45 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
you are an imbecile

[/ QUOTE ] I would have went with, "you are a pre-pubescent, ignoramus...now toodle-oo". Although imbecile works, too.

EternalStrife

09-28-2004, 07:46 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
Do you even know what impeachment is?

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm.......is it some kind of fruit?

ZyronDrazil

09-28-2004, 07:56 PM

It's a form of political assassination, which involves no killing, just the destruction of a presidents, or government officials reputation.

FanGirl

09-28-2004, 09:09 PM

It's so peachment it's impeachment.

*breaks into song*
My little buttercup has the sweetst smile....

ZyronDrazil

09-28-2004, 10:01 PM

That was pretty good.

09-28-2004, 10:57 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
and Kerry hasn't had a chance yet. I say we give Kerry 4 years to see what he can do,

[/ QUOTE ]

How many years has Kerry been a senator? What's his record there? What has he accomplished? Oh, right- we're not supposed to ask those kinds of questions, just blindly put our faith in the man...

marksiwel

09-28-2004, 11:09 PM

Also he hasnt had any real leadership roles, he just played poltics in DC and waited for a chance, ANY chance to run for President. Frankly this is his best shot.
it seems like no one is Pro-Kerry, just Anti-Bush. And real Men love Bush /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

Matt1

09-29-2004, 12:27 AM

How many years has Bush been a President? What's his record there? What has he accomplished? Oh, right- we're not supposed to ask those kinds of questions, just blindly put our faith in the man... /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

marksiwel

09-29-2004, 12:33 AM

lets see Bush
Elected Governer of one of the biggest and most important states in the USA.
Became President
Thanks to Bush Osma Bin Laden is on the run and his terror cell is in shambles.
A crazy world leader is sitting in jail.
We now have a buffer in the Middle East between Isreal and Iran.
Iran is now surronded by US military power.
Put the Economy back on the right track.
Also you arent putting your faith JUST IN HIM but the people he puts in power who will outlast him. Also never ask questions, when it comes to the goverment or poltics YOU DONT want to know the answers

Affleckie

09-29-2004, 12:41 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
Why not.....
Murder

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that said Mulder. For about a half a second, I didn't think you were a dumbass.

Rico

09-29-2004, 02:57 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
It's a form of political assassination, which involves no killing, just the destruction of a presidents, or government officials reputation.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be right, if only it weren't wrong.

Once again, do some reasearch. If not to make informed posts, at least do it for yourself. The sad part is that often times people who don't know this sort of thing actually have CONTROL over who becomes president.

I'm scared for my future /forums/images/icons/shocked.gif

PS:

No, this isn't some sort of dig at you, I'm speaking generally and I'm just trying to get you to learn what the term really means and what it does in the political system.

09-29-2004, 03:45 AM

You're real cute, you know that? Why don't you answer my questions with something more than that flippant, facetious bullsh*t? What has Kerry done besides vote against every defense program we have? WHat has Kerry done except miss 76% of the Security Council meetings he should be attending? What has he done besides emasculate the CIA? There's more, but why go on? Hopefully the left's blind hatred and utter rage won't be enough to put a man who's been on the wrong side of history his entire political career in the White House.

Here's another question- Why am I wasting my lunch break on this pointless endeavor?

Matt1

09-29-2004, 05:59 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
You're real cute, you know that?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ruggedly handsome is the term I would prefer, but thank you nonetheless.
<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
Why don't you answer my questions with something more than that flippant, facetious bullsh*t? What has Kerry done besides vote against every defense program we have? WHat has Kerry done except miss 76% of the Security Council meetings he should be attending? What has he done besides emasculate the CIA?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why do you ask questions to which you already think you have the answers? Well, lucky for you I'm here to clarify things. Here are some nifty little non-partisan articles from factcheck.org concerning some of the distortions you've apparently fallen for:

Did Kerry Oppose Tanks & Planes? Not Lately (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=147)

More Bush Distortions of Kerry Defense Record (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=177)

Anti-Kerry Ad Misses Context, Distorts Facts (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=209)

And one article for the one thing you got right:

Bush Nails Kerry's Poor Attendance at Intelligence Committee Hearings (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=241)

Hey, we're making progress. Discussing the candidates' political records as opposed to who did what during Vietnam and who can properly pronounce "Lambeau Field." Maybe the guys running for office will take a cue from us and do the same.

Also, from the tone of your response I'm beginning to suspect your initial compliment towards me may have been insincere.

Razorback

09-29-2004, 09:56 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
Oh, right- we're not supposed to ask those kinds of questions, just blindly put our faith in the man...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, you will just blindly oppose him.

jjcourtright

09-29-2004, 06:18 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
How many years has Kerry been a senator? What's his record there?

[/ QUOTE ] 20. Liberal. Pretty simple. He has voted pretty consistently throughout his senate career. If you don't like his politics, that is one thing, but to claim he hasn't done anything, I think is pretty silly. He has done exactly what the voters in Massachusetts elected him to do. Vote like them. Like a liberal.

Matt1

09-29-2004, 07:15 PM

Yes, I am a zombie brainwashed by the DNC. It is the only possible answer, since we all know that it is impossible for well intentioned and intelligent people to disagree.

Razorback

09-29-2004, 07:25 PM

I only consider it intelligent disagreement if in the end you agree with me. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

09-29-2004, 10:59 PM

So Zel Miller was lying when he named every single defense system that Kerry voted against? Were those voting records forged? So Kerry didn't oppose Reagan at every turn while he was fighting the Cold War? So while Kerry was Lt. Gov, he didn't sign a law stating Mass. would never take part in any Civil Defense preparedness measures in the event of a nuclear attack?

My major beef with the man really has nothing to do with his politics- the man is a goddamn hero to the Communist Party. The way he sh*t all over his shipmates and fellow servicemen is deplorable and treasonous. He's a weasel and a flip-flop artist. He has the integrity of seive. God, I sound like a rabid liberal... need to cut back on the caffeine.

Matt1

09-29-2004, 11:52 PM

Zell Miller's Attack on Kerry: A Little Out Of Date (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=252)

Swift Boat Veterans Anti-Kerry Ad: "He Betrayed Us" With 1971 Anti-War Testimony (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=244)

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
My major beef with the man really has nothing to do with his politics- the man is a goddamn hero to the Communist Party.

[/ QUOTE ]
On what grounds do you base that accusation? And even if that was true, I fail to see how it would be a legitimate criticism. I've had a few conversations with bigots who support George Bush. An idiot in my Math class said he's voting for Bush because, "He'll keep faggots from getting married." Should I base my vote against Bush because that jackass is one of his supporters? Well, I'm not. I'm basing my decision on policy, and not on policy that's over eight years old for that matter.

marksiwel

09-30-2004, 02:43 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
because, "He'll keep faggots from getting married."

[/ QUOTE ]

First off slap that SOB. Second off you should have corrected him and said neither party is going to let them get married.
Thats my problem with the Left and the Right, morons. On the left whiney vegan *cartman voice* hippies. On the right bible thumping redneck bigots. These of course are extermes and do not refer to either side as a whole.

Also why were you talking about voting in math class? Talk about Math.

09-30-2004, 03:48 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
On what grounds do you base that accusation?

[/ QUOTE ]

His smiling mug in picture taken with NVA leaders in Paris, following his "testimony" to Congress, hanging in the Vietnam War Museum in Hanoi. It is a legitimate criticism because communism is fundamentally un-American. It's legitimate because liberalism is socialism by another name and socialism is only a stone's throw from communism. And the website you so avidly cite- it seems that many of the fact checkers are of the opinion that Kerry's past record is of no consequence, only what he has done recently (like voting against money for our troops?) And on the other hand, every tiny detail of Bush's life is of dire consequence and should be studied under a microscope. Why is that so? That is the intent of my original question for the Kerry supporters. It's disgusting how Kerry gets a free pass on the minutia, but Bush gets crucified.

karmattack

09-30-2004, 10:25 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
It's disgusting how Kerry gets a free pass on the minutia, but Bush gets crucified.

[/ QUOTE ] You DO realize the opposite could be said, right? That purely depends on what side you're supporting and what you're willing to ignore.

Your logic seems off base to me. Let's say I open a door for a woman and several people see it. They converse and decide I'm a respectable guy, then tell everyone about it. The group of people happen to be Lutheran. So, by your logic, because a group of Lutherans respected an act that I did, that somehow makes me Lutheran.

Oh, but yeah. John Kerry is a champion of the Communists. Kerry is a Communist himself.

Since a woman was once a baby, when I have sex with her....it's just a few steps away from having sex with a baby. So, I'm basically a baby rapist just like I'm a liberal and essentially a Communist.

What the fuck?

Razorback

09-30-2004, 11:39 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
You DO realize the opposite could be said, right? That purely depends on what side you're supporting and what you're willing to ignore.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly!

By the way, everything you said after that applies to the above. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

DangerSeeker

09-30-2004, 01:41 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
It's disgusting how Kerry gets a free pass on the minutia,

[/ QUOTE ] Like the way his tan was put under such scrutiny. Riiiight.

Mighty_Wingman

09-30-2004, 02:22 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
His smiling mug in picture taken with NVA leaders in Paris, following his "testimony" to Congress, hanging in the Vietnam War Museum in Hanoi.

[/ QUOTE ]

How 'bout Bushs' smiling mug in a picture taken with Saudi Royalty mere days after 15 Saudi Fuck heads rammed our planes into our buildings. But you're okay with that right ? Nah, of course that's not treasonous.

And everyone making a big deal out of what Kerry (or Bush) did thirty years ago is just a distraction tactic to keep America from focusing on the massive failures of the last four.

Droogan_Leader

09-30-2004, 03:37 PM

This isn't really directed at you in particular, Wingman, but why the crap do you all keep arguing? You know who you [individually] are going to vote for, and everyone is spinning stuff, there are plenty of sides to all of these stories.

If anybody is still undecided, I take it back, but I don't see the point in arguing just for argument's sake, unless, of course, that's how you all get your jollies.

jjcourtright

09-30-2004, 04:14 PM

I like these arguments, because it is something that we are all obviously passionate about. Arguing about a movie is one thing, but we are arguing about our way of life. I see it as a way to get to know everybody on a much deeper level than I get from knowing their favorite movie.

Plus, I'm right and they are wrong...obviously.

Matt1

09-30-2004, 05:02 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
It's legitimate because liberalism is socialism by another name...

[/ QUOTE ]
No.
<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
...and socialism is only a stone's throw from communism.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. I'm no socialist, but that idea is mistaken. That's akin to saying capitalism is only a stone's throw away from fascism. You need to take a high school civics class over again.
<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
And the website you so avidly cite- it seems that many of the fact checkers are of the opinion that Kerry's past record is of no consequence, only what he has done recently (like voting against money for our troops?) And on the other hand, every tiny detail of Bush's life is of dire consequence and should be studied under a microscope.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ahh yes, the old, "It doesn't conform to my ideology and preconceived notion 100 percent, therefore it must be biased in some way" line of thought. Don't feel bad, both sides are guilty of it. Actually, you should feel bad and they should too.

I purposely used a non-partisan, objective website to guard myself from these kind of attacks. Tell me, to what articles are you alluding? The one where they dress down Michael Moore for calling Bush a deserter? (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=131) Then again, I could see how the article cutting through Kerry's rhetoric on outsourcing (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=225) could be interpreted as having a liberal bias.

But let's go back to something you said above...
<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
(like voting against money for our troops?)

[/ QUOTE ]
I can't defend that. Since he voted for the initial resolution to give the President authority to go to war (another mistake in my opinion) he should have voted for the money, even if it was a protest vote of no real consequence. But another question you should be asking yourself is, why did the troops need that money? Who initially sent them into a combat zone without the resources they needed?

Rico

09-30-2004, 05:09 PM

Just thought I'd add that there is really no such thing as an unbiased piece of information.

Every written work has a bias in one way or the other, it's your duty as a reader to detect or know of such bias and take that information in accordingly.

/runs off from topic

jjcourtright

09-30-2004, 05:19 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
Who initially sent them into a combat zone without the resources they needed?

[/ QUOTE ] Ooooh....ooooh, pick me, I know.

Razorback

09-30-2004, 06:22 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
How 'bout Bushs' smiling mug in a picture taken with Saudi Royalty mere days after 15 Saudi Fuck heads rammed our planes into our buildings. But you're okay with that right ? Nah, of course that's not treasonous.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are kidding, right? I hope you are. I can't imagine that you are this brainwashed. So if 15 Americans kill some Saudi's does that mean that the Saudi government should not go to the White House? Or do you actually think that the Saudi government ordered the attacks?

marksiwel

09-30-2004, 11:04 PM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
Or do you actually think that the Saudi government ordered the attacks?

[/ QUOTE ]

um...I dont want to say anything, but alittle bit.

Razorback

09-30-2004, 11:07 PM

Then I feel for you.

marksiwel

09-30-2004, 11:13 PM

*sighs*
I dont really want to get into it but.... The Saudi Goverment is a very large very deverse Group o' Guys.

But certain members of Royal Family and Groups really dont like America and have large amounts of money. Are you saying NONE of that money went to Anti-American groups or terror cell.

Thats like saying the CIA never killed people illegally. Or funded some shady groups.

But Did the WHOLE goverment declare war on America? NO. Did some part of the Goverment/Roayls help with the attack, YEAH no doubt.

So thats why I said alittle bit.

Razorback

09-30-2004, 11:21 PM

Funny how some people have no problem shooting down the claims by the current administration of ties between Saddam and bin Laden and yet will eat up zero evidence of Saudi royals having ties to terrorism.

Dr3vil

10-01-2004, 12:06 AM

Then remind me, why isn't the answer believing neither?

marksiwel

10-01-2004, 12:10 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
Saddam and bin Laden

[/ QUOTE ]
Woah, Now I DO think there are links between Iraq and Bin Laden, but to deny that the Saudias havent funded terror cells or groups...thats just childish.
How can you believe one and not the other. I'm not saying you have to, but COME ON!

Mighty_Wingman

10-01-2004, 12:44 AM

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />
This isn't really directed at you in particular, Wingman, but why the crap do you all keep arguing? You know who you [individually] are going to vote for, and everyone is spinning stuff, there are plenty of sides to all of these stories.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you . 100%. I've said before, I wish we didn't have politics here.

Unfortunately, some feel the need to spew bullshit they learned from Michael Less, or a slow boat veterans for lies ad. They say angry and inciteful things. And I feel compelled to respond - in defense to the truth and in the defense of what I believe is best for this country - even though I don't really want to respond to "these types of threads".

Droog, I respect you , and I wouldn't accuse you of saying anything you didn't think was in our countries best interest. Or our boards' for that matter.

We have to share both, even if we disagree. And with respect, I say if people are going to make inciteful claims, especially false ones. I'm probably going to address it.