Admittedly, there are some pretty fanatical people on both ends of the spectrum here (liberal and conservative, Right and Left), but we all have the right to dissent. I definitely don't agree that all Republicans should die, but everyone has a right to voice their opinioin, passionately or not. And from what I can see, is that you don't want people to be doing that? I think they should be doing it MORE. This president has done some pretty radical things IMO, and people are outraged by that. Let 'em scream... It is their right and certainly not yours to tell them not to.
And I "might" have respected your opinion, had it not been for your last comment.
I was simply voicing my opinion. And perhaps my opinion was wrong. You seem to know a lot more about this than I, so I probably would have conceded to your points. But you felt the need to flame and that makes me think you are insecure about your own opinions when you feel the need to follow a logical statement with an insult.
I believe much of what you say makes sense, we are in control of our lives, but sometimes that just isn't enough. I live in the D.C. Area, an area that calls itself the "internet capitol" [http://www.dmv.state.va.us/exec/vehicle/splates/i nfo.asp?idnm=ICI]. I consider myself skilled enough to be valuable to employers, and yet, I was laid off and it took me quite some time to find a new job. The market is saturated with skilled people who all are applyying for the same jobs. When a company finally does decide to hire, it is usually based on word of mouth, or nepitism. I eventually did find a job but because the unemployment was running out and I have a mortgage, I had to settle for a lesser paying position. Should I have held out for a better position? I could have, at the risk of ruining my credit or even losing my house. I think I chose correctly. I don't know, but because of my personal experience, I think the job/economy numbers are a bit skewed. And not in the good way. My point is that sometimes you aren't "captain" but are instead, ruled by necessity.
Oh and in regard to that last paragraph... Bush sure is doing a bang-up job of fighting terrorist. I would say he is doing a good job of creating MORE terrorists. Perhaps he just doesn't know where to look, because we are in Iraq where there were (note the past tense) no terrorists and no WMDs (the reason we went there) and no Osama Bin Laden. You remember him, the guy we think was responsible for killing a whole lot of Americans. Why is it acceptable for W to take us to war, where too many people have died, based on assumptions? Why is it acceptable for W to spin lies about why we went to Iraq? Why is it acceptable for the current administration to lie with a straight face to the American public and get away with it? Last I remember Presidents get impeached for lieing. Instead, this one gets a flock of sheep that sing his praises even when he whines about it being "Hard Work" and gets nothing accomplished unless you count getting our citizens beheaded, soldiers killed and losing site of the main objective, to protect the country from the terrorist. Instead he is creating a whole new generation of people that want to kill the innocent, because we invaded their land and killed theirs. Anyone can do a better job than this guy. False bravado and tough talk do not make us safer. Invading a weak nation and then losing (we certainly haven't won and aren't winning, despite the mission accomplished banner) does not make us stronger. It is time for a change. Go on... flame away.
What I said was my opinion. Please note the "might" in the statement. No need to back it up, as I was not trying to state facts.
It is my opinion that if rich folks are taxed at the same rate or even higher, it could help out with eliminating the deficit, and hence help the economy. Oversimplified, yes, but it "might" help.
Thank you for trying to tell me what I don't understand, but your explanations aren't exactly illuminating.
Edax:The President has some influence on who gets taxed and how much, and that has a serious effect on the economy. [snip]IMO
Matrix:While you are correct in a round-about way, it takes an act of Congress to pass any type of tax legislature.
I said the Prez has "some" influence, so there is nothing "round about" about it, unlees you think you can dispute that some way.
Matrix:As to either of the candidate's positions, do people really think that business owners (AKA Employers) should be taxed more?
If they make more than $200K a year, then YES. I do think they should be taxed more. I few % ponts won't effect them too much and it just might help the economy.
Matrix:Aren't those the people that we depend on to create jobs?
Their businesses shouldn't be affected. Why are these 2 things confused so often. Taxing individual and taxing businesses are not the same thing.
Matrix:Where in Constitution does it say that it's the government's job to create jobs and make sure people have them?
It doesn't and no one implied that it should. The only thing that was said is that the Prez has SOME influence on the economy. And he does. Congress does too and so do events. What is your point?
(I don't see why people think the President has that much control of the economy. I think a good sum of people have been spoiled by 'irrational exuberence'.) The President has some influence on who gets taxed and how much, and that has a serious effect on the economy. IMOCertainly there are other factors, but I wouldn't say he has no influence at all.
No they didn't... From the D.C. Post "Many economists thought that the onslaught of successive hurricanes over the past month might seriously skew the results for September, but the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics, which issues the jobs reports, found otherwise.
"At the national level," the BLS said, "the severe weather appears to have held down employment growth, but not enough to change materially the Bureau's assessment of the employment situation in September." "
On a more serious note... If anyone gets even a papercut in our military, and they happen to be in combat facing an enemy that is trying to kill them, they deserve a Purple Heart. It isn't about the size of the wound and only someone who has never been in that situation would belittle it.
Good idea... >Still, it would be nice to have a version of F911 containing only the facts, minus Moore's leading sarcasm. Bush would only come off worse if you actually sit there watching him for 7 minutes without a stream of jokes in the background. Maybe a special "no director commentary" feature on the DVD.
What is even scarier if they showed all the footage of what W did that day. Sure he sat there for a long time, but even after that he dicked around and "chatted" with folks. All while Americans were dieing. * How 50% of this country still thinks this bozo is a decisive leader is beyond me. Especially now that we know the truth, that Iraq was innocent of the 2 reasons we went to war with them (him/Hussein) in the first place. And STILL... even though the violence has gotten worse this administration continues to lie to ALL of us about how things are going. AND then they (Rummy)have the nerve to say that 3/4 or 4/5 of an election is good enough. Are we all blind and deaf? Or just plain stupid.
excerpt:
At which point O'Reilly executes his signature move -- the bellowing, bullying, peremptory interruption. "They've lost billions of dollars in France, according to the Paris Business Review!" he thunders.
In short, amazing TV -- the modern media equivalent of witnessing a Christian torn apart by lions, with a touch of opera buffo thrown in. (Boycott Canada?) It mattered not that most of what O'Reilly said bears no relation to the truth. The Paris Business Review doesn't exist, and the "billions" of dollars France supposedly lost reflect figures dating to the 2001 recession, predating by two years O'Reilly's call for a ban on buying French goods (since then, French exports to America have actually gone up).
He just makes stuff up... so he must be a brilliant journalist.
Watch OutFoxed... they give plenty of proof.
Also, read Rolling Stone a few issues back.
Here is the online article:
The guy is just a jerk who lies and screams and intimidates if he doesn't get his way.
If you have seen "OutFoxed" you see him totally reem a guy whos parents died in 9-11 just because he said something that Bill didn't agree with. Had the guy escorted off the studio only after insulting his dead parents. Great guy that O'Reilly. On the other hand... Jon Stewart is a comic genius. I get more real news from the first 15 minutes of the daily show than watching CNN, MSNBC, CNBC and FOX all day. Plus I get to LOL on many occasions. Jon definitely deserves a shot at the tonight show after Jay is gone, or even Letterman's spot.
Until OO can compete with the power of M$ Excel, I won't be able to switch over. But that one thing is all it would take. I am a huge fan of XL, but the rest, I can live without. So, if anyone knows of any good [free/cheap] compettitors... please reply.
gosh... you really must be shaken up. Is there anything I can do to help you through this tragic event?
Maybe if you keep trying, someone will give you the attention you need.
In the mean time, why don't you go out to the garage, turn on the car and listen to some Counry or easy listening muzak, or even better... you should sing to yourself "where the eagles soar" by John Ashcorft. I am sure that in a short time all your problems will be solved.
YEAH!!! KISS MY ASS TOO!! You phony cowboy, money grubbing, power hoarding, Cheney hugging, environment killing, election stealing, war waging, draft dodging excuse for a human!! W needs to kiss all the parent's asses of all the kids who have been hurt or killed in Iraq as well.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, George W. Bush is all those things that you claim are "Bias"? (much like M$ Windoze is guilty of being a crappy OS) Becuase folks tend to be hard on the president here doesn't mean that/. is biased. It means that folks on/. are hard on the president. And rightly so, imo. If we, those that log on and debate our opinions about what we think is right and wrong, don't voice those opinions then we are just sheep. If you don't like the way a certain thread is going... LEAVE.
The fact the Bush didn't feel the need to answer most of the questions (or be interviewed for that matter) tells me that he just doesn't give a sh1t. At least Kerry took the time to give a response to questions that some people might care about. And he did it without throwing jabs or 'waffling'. You may not agree with his answers, but at least he took the time _TO_ answer. Obviously W doesn't feel the need to.
>First of all, a surplus is not a good thing. It means that the government took too much of your money.
This may be true, but it was there and now it is gone, and what do we have to show for it? Imporved education? Improved health care? Improved Environment? Nope... I believe all are worse since W put on his presidential cowboy hat.
>Deficits aren't that great either, but Bush's deficits are inline with historical averages
Record deficits are "inline"? You righties will delude yourself until the poverty line is all but that 2% that got the big cuts. Did you notice that the Poverty level has risen each year sine W has been in office or are you going to ignore that too since (I'm guessing here) probably aren't poor, never have been and never will be.
>Uh, Bush didn't start taxing the middle class.
How astute...can't get anything past you.
>Who exactly are you referring to? Enron? Nope, they got busted.
Really? We shall see what happens to Kenny Boy. I predict a slap on the hands and a few months at club fed. Big bloody deal... those execs should have their nuts stomped for the sh1t they pulled.
>Halliburton? They haven't done anything illegal.
They are under investigation. The Misplaced Billions and cannot account for where it went. That isn't illegal? More deluding yourself, I imagine. Why weren't any other companies offered a chance to bid on the same contract. Because W & Dick are in their Pocket, or is it the other way around?
>Well, it is going great by any measure. We have accomplished some pretty darn amazing things over there in the past year and a half.
The delusion has crossed into insanity... When Saddam was in power, I don't remember reading about or watching people getting beheaded on the internet? What are these "NO-GO" zones I keep hearing so much about? How about the car and suicide bombings that happen every day, specifically targetting police forces, security and gov't officials? How about 1000+ American soldiers dead? How about 7000+ American soldiers wounded? How many innocent Iraqis have died, I am sure that number is astronomic, but the public will never know, because the WAR is going swimmingly. Even just released intelligence docs say it isn't likely to get any better, if not, it will get worse. Yeah...it is going great.
>It isn't the best, but it is doing well.
Really? How long were you unemployed this or last year? Then what did you do when you couldn't find an equal paying job? I'm sure it looks great to all those skilled folks who have to settle for crappy jobs when they used to be programmers and engineers or miners or factory workers. W has lost more jobs than ANY President EVER.
>Bush has gone out of his way to thank Kerry for his military service.
And yet... he won't renounce the Swift liars. Hmmm, is it because they are doing his bidding?
>You don't think that the National Guard is honorable? Do you realize that there are hundreds of thousands of people you just insulted by saying that?
Typical conservative spin. Frankly, the Nat'l Guard should be insulted when one of their own claims to have served when we know he was sheltered from Vietnam by his daddy's friends.
Dissention is part of being American. By saying W didn't serve honorably, I think I am speaking the truth. If you want to assume the guard's insult, go ahead. It has nothing to do with anyone who knows they did their duty for their country.
>Many Iraqi's do love our troops.
I disagree, I think a few May...but certainly not many.
>Well, some people from Saudi Arabia were involved, but unless you have some top secret evidence proving otherwise, the Saudi Arabian government had nothing to do with it.
I suppose we will never know, since W is also in their Pocket.
And that is just it... because of the facist tendencys of this regime,
"I will squander a record surplus and tax the middle class while giving all my rich buddies a free ride on their illegal doings and also give them a tax cut and claim that the war is going great and the economy is great, but my opponent isn't really a war hero and I served my country honorably and the Iraqis love our troops and Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with 9/11... what was I talking about?"
Obviously, an actual plan could not be summed up in a few paragraphs but I am willing to bet that Kerry/Edwards have a more honest (i.e. one that doesn't rape America's middle class and any other country we feel like invading) plan for moving forward.
Of course, digging out of the whole that W has gotten us into won't be easy. And if Kerry does get elected the Conservatives will keep him bogged down with some inane scandal that has little to do with running our country (i.e. Clinton/Lewinski) and then say he did a terrible job.
>On a side note: does anyone know if they survey all of the likely voters in a household, or just the person who answers? (I've never been polled)
I have been called twice and both polls were done buy the RNC (which I thought a bit odd, but that is neither here nor there) I was asked if I would be voting for Bush, if I intend to vote and if I was registered... but the one question I found to be very strange was "Do you support our troops in IRAQ?"
I had to say yes, even though I am strongly opposed to this war. I do support the souls that have been ordered to go there, but I don't support WHY they are going there. I imagine that this is another way to spin and show support for the War. I think the real question should have been "Do you support the war in Iraq?" That way it has nothing to do with emotions involving supporting those who (I believe) are unjustly dieing there. This war is a crime and Bush and his cronies are ciminals commiting the most heinous crimes ever commited. If you think Saddam was a threat, try looking at the Saudis. With one phone call they could pull a sh1t-load of $$$ out of our economy and basically crush this country into the depression to end all depressions. Scary!
Instead of coming up with negative commercials and Bush slamming, why not just lay out the facts. It bewilders me that this president, has not been under any kind of investigation for his actions on 9/11 (well, excluding the 9/11 commission where he had to have his hand held by Cheney). The Facts are: We had a record surplus, now we have a record deficit.
We invaded a country, after lieing to EVERYONE about why we were invading. Now that country is in hell because every other country that sponsors terrorism sends terrorists there to make sure that democracy will only succeed at great cost in lives, American and Iraqi.
He says he is a uniter, and yet the country has NEVER been more divided.
Whenever Kerry takes a lead in the (useless)polls there is an all too convenient TERROR update, even if the information is 3 years old. (yes, I have taken part in phone polls sponsored by the Republicans and the questions were a bit skewed. "Do you support our troops in Iraq?" Of course I support our troops, what I don't support is the "war" or the reason they are there. How can I say no to this and not be an American?) Anyway...
W and his cronies have an amizing knack of being able to take the flaw that they are guilty of, turn it around and say their opponent is guilty of it, then have Fox News confirm it, then the Right fanatics all embrace it like it was the gospel.
Are Americans really that stupid? (Canada, you stay out of this;-> )
Slashdot Mirror
Communism sure is better the facism, which is where we are heading if W wins.
Admittedly, there are some pretty fanatical people on both ends of the spectrum here (liberal and conservative, Right and Left), but we all have the right to dissent. I definitely don't agree that all Republicans should die, but everyone has a right to voice their opinioin, passionately or not. And from what I can see, is that you don't want people to be doing that?
I think they should be doing it MORE.
This president has done some pretty radical
things IMO, and people are outraged by that.
Let 'em scream... It is their right and certainly not yours to tell them not to.
It seems that namy professors from Harvard Business School are of the same opinion that I am.
/ nf 2004108_4276_db016.htm
l ?sid=04/10/ 08/1829206&tid=224&tid=98
That cutting taxes for the uber-rich can be bad.
http://businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2004
And apparently many right here on slashdot.
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.p
I know you won't agree, and will have a good deal of banter to back up your opinion, but it seems to me that you are in the minority on this one.
And I "might" have respected your opinion, had it not been for your last comment.
I was simply voicing my opinion. And perhaps my opinion was wrong. You seem to know a lot more about this than I, so I probably would have conceded to your points.
But you felt the need to flame and that makes me think you are insecure about your own opinions when you feel the need to follow a logical statement with an insult.
It just wasn't necessary.
I believe much of what you say makes sense, we are in control of our lives, but sometimes that just isn't enough.i nfo.asp?idnm=ICI].
I live in the D.C. Area, an area that calls itself the "internet capitol" [http://www.dmv.state.va.us/exec/vehicle/splates/
I consider myself skilled enough to be valuable to employers, and yet, I was laid off and it took me quite some time to find a new job.
The market is saturated with skilled people who all are applyying for the same jobs.
When a company finally does decide to hire, it is usually based on word of mouth, or nepitism.
I eventually did find a job but because the unemployment was running out and I have a mortgage, I had to settle for a lesser paying position. Should I have held out for a better position? I could have, at the risk of ruining my credit or even losing my house. I think I chose correctly.
I don't know, but because of my personal experience, I think the job/economy numbers are a bit skewed. And not in the good way.
My point is that sometimes you aren't "captain" but are instead, ruled by necessity.
Oh and in regard to that last paragraph...
Bush sure is doing a bang-up job of fighting terrorist. I would say he is doing a good job of creating MORE terrorists. Perhaps he just doesn't know where to look, because we are in Iraq where there were (note the past tense) no terrorists and no WMDs (the reason we went there) and no Osama Bin Laden. You remember him, the guy we think was responsible for killing a whole lot of Americans.
Why is it acceptable for W to take us to war, where too many people have died, based on assumptions? Why is it acceptable for W to spin lies about why we went to Iraq? Why is it acceptable for the current administration to lie with a straight face to the American public and get away with it? Last I remember Presidents get impeached for lieing. Instead, this one gets a flock of sheep that sing his praises even when he whines about it being "Hard Work" and gets nothing accomplished unless you count getting our citizens beheaded, soldiers killed and losing site of the main objective, to protect the country from the terrorist. Instead he is creating a whole new generation of people that want to kill the innocent, because we invaded their land and killed theirs.
Anyone can do a better job than this guy. False bravado and tough talk do not make us safer. Invading a weak nation and then losing (we certainly haven't won and aren't winning, despite the mission accomplished banner) does not make us stronger.
It is time for a change.
Go on... flame away.
What I said was my opinion. Please note the "might" in the statement.
No need to back it up, as I was not trying to state facts.
It is my opinion that if rich folks are taxed at the same rate or even higher, it could help out with eliminating the deficit, and hence help the economy.
Oversimplified, yes, but it "might" help.
Thank you for trying to tell me what I don't understand, but your explanations aren't exactly illuminating.
Edax:The President has some influence on who gets taxed and how much, and that has a serious effect on the economy. [snip]IMO
Matrix:While you are correct in a round-about way, it takes an act of Congress to pass any type of tax legislature.
I said the Prez has "some" influence, so there is nothing "round about" about it, unlees you think you can dispute that some way.
Matrix:As to either of the candidate's positions, do people really think that business owners (AKA Employers) should be taxed more?
If they make more than $200K a year, then YES. I do think they should be taxed more. I few % ponts won't effect them too much and it just might help the economy.
Matrix:Aren't those the people that we depend on to create jobs?
Their businesses shouldn't be affected. Why are these 2 things confused so often. Taxing individual and taxing businesses are not the same thing.
Matrix:Where in Constitution does it say that it's the government's job to create jobs and make sure people have them?
It doesn't and no one implied that it should. The only thing that was said is that the Prez has SOME influence on the economy. And he does. Congress does too and so do events.
What is your point?
Fair enough...
But I never said anything was truth.
I only posted a quote from the source that was directly disputing what I thought you were saying.
(I don't see why people think the President has that much control of the economy. I think a good sum of people have been spoiled by 'irrational exuberence'.)
The President has some influence on who gets taxed and how much, and that has a serious effect on the economy. IMOCertainly there are other factors, but I wouldn't say he has no influence at all.
No they didn't...
From the D.C. Post
"Many economists thought that the onslaught of successive hurricanes over the past month might seriously skew the results for September, but the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics, which issues the jobs reports, found otherwise.
"At the national level," the BLS said, "the severe weather appears to have held down employment growth, but not enough to change materially the Bureau's assessment of the employment situation in September." "
Come on... we all know that size doesn't matter.
On a more serious note... If anyone gets even a papercut in our military, and they happen to be in combat facing an enemy that is trying to kill them, they deserve a Purple Heart.
It isn't about the size of the wound and only someone who has never been in that situation would belittle it.
Good idea...
e ssayaninterestingday.html
>Still, it would be nice to have a version of F911 containing only the facts, minus Moore's leading sarcasm. Bush would only come off worse if you actually sit there watching him for 7 minutes without a stream of jokes in the background. Maybe a special "no director commentary" feature on the DVD.
What is even scarier if they showed all the footage of what W did that day. Sure he sat there for a long time, but even after that he dicked around and "chatted" with folks. All while Americans were dieing. *
How 50% of this country still thinks this bozo is a decisive leader is beyond me.
Especially now that we know the truth, that Iraq was innocent of the 2 reasons we went to war with them (him/Hussein) in the first place. And STILL... even though the violence has gotten worse this administration continues to lie to ALL of us about how things are going. AND then they (Rummy)have the nerve to say that 3/4 or 4/5 of an election is good enough. Are we all blind and deaf? Or just plain stupid.
* http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/
Did you read the Rolling Stone article?
Here!
excerpt:
At which point O'Reilly executes his signature move -- the bellowing, bullying, peremptory interruption. "They've lost billions of dollars in France, according to the Paris Business Review!" he thunders.
In short, amazing TV -- the modern media equivalent of witnessing a Christian torn apart by lions, with a touch of opera buffo thrown in. (Boycott Canada?) It mattered not that most of what O'Reilly said bears no relation to the truth. The Paris Business Review doesn't exist, and the "billions" of dollars France supposedly lost reflect figures dating to the 2001 recession, predating by two years O'Reilly's call for a ban on buying French goods (since then, French exports to America have actually gone up).
He just makes stuff up... so he must be a brilliant journalist.
Well, not sure if your ears help online... But, did you read the Rolling Stone article?
He just makes up stuff to prove his point.
Watch OutFoxed... they give plenty of proof. Also, read Rolling Stone a few issues back. Here is the online article: The guy is just a jerk who lies and screams and intimidates if he doesn't get his way.
If you have seen "OutFoxed" you see him totally reem a guy whos parents died in 9-11 just because he said something that Bill didn't agree with. Had the guy escorted off the studio only after insulting his dead parents. Great guy that O'Reilly.
On the other hand... Jon Stewart is a comic genius. I get more real news from the first 15 minutes of the daily show than watching CNN, MSNBC, CNBC and FOX all day. Plus I get to LOL on many occasions. Jon definitely deserves a shot at the tonight show after Jay is gone, or even Letterman's spot.
Until OO can compete with the power of M$ Excel, I won't be able to switch over. But that one thing is all it would take.
I am a huge fan of XL, but the rest, I can live without.
So, if anyone knows of any good [free/cheap] compettitors... please reply.
No... It is just wrong to like him.
gosh... you really must be shaken up. Is there anything I can do to help you through this tragic event?
Maybe if you keep trying, someone will give you the attention you need.
In the mean time, why don't you go out to the garage, turn on the car and listen to some Counry or easy listening muzak, or even better... you should sing to yourself "where the eagles soar" by John Ashcorft. I am sure that in a short time all your problems will be solved.
And at the same time one of mine will be as well.
YEAH!!! KISS MY ASS TOO!! You phony cowboy, money grubbing, power hoarding, Cheney hugging, environment killing, election stealing, war waging, draft dodging excuse for a human!!
W needs to kiss all the parent's asses of all the kids who have been hurt or killed in Iraq as well.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, George W. Bush is all those things that you claim are "Bias"? (much like M$ Windoze is guilty of being a crappy OS) /. is biased. It means that folks on /. are hard on the president.
Becuase folks tend to be hard on the president here doesn't mean that
And rightly so, imo. If we, those that log on and debate our opinions about what we think is right and wrong, don't voice those opinions then we are just sheep. If you don't like the way a certain thread is going... LEAVE.
The fact the Bush didn't feel the need to answer most of the questions (or be interviewed for that matter) tells me that he just doesn't give a sh1t.
At least Kerry took the time to give a response to questions that some people might care about. And he did it without throwing jabs or 'waffling'. You may not agree with his answers, but at least he took the time _TO_ answer.
Obviously W doesn't feel the need to.
>This will be fun.
Glad you are enjoying it.
>First of all, a surplus is not a good thing. It means that the government took too much of your money.
This may be true, but it was there and now it is gone, and what do we have to show for it? Imporved education? Improved health care? Improved Environment? Nope... I believe all are worse since W put on his presidential cowboy hat.
>Deficits aren't that great either, but Bush's deficits are inline with historical averages
Record deficits are "inline"? You righties will delude yourself until the poverty line is all but that 2% that got the big cuts. Did you notice that the Poverty level has risen each year sine W has been in office or are you going to ignore that too since (I'm guessing here) probably aren't poor, never have been and never will be.
>Uh, Bush didn't start taxing the middle class.
How astute...can't get anything past you.
>Who exactly are you referring to? Enron? Nope, they got busted.
Really? We shall see what happens to Kenny Boy. I predict a slap on the hands and a few months at club fed. Big bloody deal... those execs should have their nuts stomped for the sh1t they pulled.
>Halliburton? They haven't done anything illegal.
They are under investigation. The Misplaced Billions and cannot account for where it went. That isn't illegal? More deluding yourself, I imagine. Why weren't any other companies offered a chance to bid on the same contract. Because W & Dick are in their Pocket, or is it the other way around?
>Well, it is going great by any measure. We have accomplished some pretty darn amazing things over there in the past year and a half.
The delusion has crossed into insanity... When Saddam was in power, I don't remember reading about or watching people getting beheaded on the internet? What are these "NO-GO" zones I keep hearing so much about? How about the car and suicide bombings that happen every day, specifically targetting police forces, security and gov't officials? How about 1000+ American soldiers dead? How about 7000+ American soldiers wounded? How many innocent Iraqis have died, I am sure that number is astronomic, but the public will never know, because the WAR is going swimmingly. Even just released intelligence docs say it isn't likely to get any better, if not, it will get worse.
Yeah...it is going great.
>It isn't the best, but it is doing well.
Really? How long were you unemployed this or last year? Then what did you do when you couldn't find an equal paying job? I'm sure it looks great to all those skilled folks who have to settle for crappy jobs when they used to be programmers and engineers or miners or factory workers. W has lost more jobs than ANY President EVER.
>Bush has gone out of his way to thank Kerry for his military service.
And yet... he won't renounce the Swift liars. Hmmm, is it because they are doing his bidding?
>You don't think that the National Guard is honorable? Do you realize that there are hundreds of thousands of people you just insulted by saying that?
Typical conservative spin. Frankly, the Nat'l Guard should be insulted when one of their own claims to have served when we know he was sheltered from Vietnam by his daddy's friends.
Dissention is part of being American. By saying W didn't serve honorably, I think I am speaking the truth. If you want to assume the guard's insult, go ahead. It has nothing to do with anyone who knows they did their duty for their country.
>Many Iraqi's do love our troops.
I disagree, I think a few May...but certainly not many.
>Well, some people from Saudi Arabia were involved, but unless you have some top secret evidence proving otherwise, the Saudi Arabian government had nothing to do with it.
I suppose we will never know, since W is also in their Pocket.
And that is just it... because of the facist tendencys of this regime,
Uh, how?
Well, we all know W's answer:
"I will squander a record surplus and tax the middle class while giving all my rich buddies a free ride on their illegal doings and also give them a tax cut and claim that the war is going great and the economy is great, but my opponent isn't really a war hero and I served my country honorably and the Iraqis love our troops and Saudi Arabia had nothing to do with 9/11... what was I talking about?"
Obviously, an actual plan could not be summed up in a few paragraphs but I am willing to bet that Kerry/Edwards have a more honest (i.e. one that doesn't rape America's middle class and any other country we feel like invading) plan for moving forward.
Of course, digging out of the whole that W has gotten us into won't be easy. And if Kerry does get elected the Conservatives will keep him bogged down with some inane scandal that has little to do with running our country (i.e. Clinton/Lewinski) and then say he did a terrible job.
>On a side note: does anyone know if they survey all of the likely voters in a household, or just the person who answers? (I've never been polled)
I have been called twice and both polls were done buy the RNC (which I thought a bit odd, but that is neither here nor there)
I was asked if I would be voting for Bush, if I intend to vote and if I was registered... but the one question I found to be very strange was "Do you support our troops in IRAQ?"
I had to say yes, even though I am strongly opposed to this war. I do support the souls that have been ordered to go there, but I don't support WHY they are going there.
I imagine that this is another way to spin and show support for the War.
I think the real question should have been "Do you support the war in Iraq?" That way it has nothing to do with emotions involving supporting those who (I believe) are unjustly dieing there.
This war is a crime and Bush and his cronies are ciminals commiting the most heinous crimes ever commited. If you think Saddam was a threat, try looking at the Saudis. With one phone call they could pull a sh1t-load of $$$ out of our economy and basically crush this country into the depression to end all depressions. Scary!
Instead of coming up with negative commercials and Bush slamming, why not just lay out the facts. It bewilders me that this president, has not been under any kind of investigation for his actions on 9/11 (well, excluding the 9/11 commission where he had to have his hand held by Cheney).
;-> )
The Facts are:
We had a record surplus, now we have a record deficit.
We invaded a country, after lieing to EVERYONE about why we were invading. Now that country is in hell because every other country that sponsors terrorism sends terrorists there to make sure that democracy will only succeed at great cost in lives, American and Iraqi.
He says he is a uniter, and yet the country has NEVER been more divided.
Whenever Kerry takes a lead in the (useless)polls there is an all too convenient TERROR update, even if the information is 3 years old. (yes, I have taken part in phone polls sponsored by the Republicans and the questions were a bit skewed.
"Do you support our troops in Iraq?" Of course I support our troops, what I don't support is the "war" or the reason they are there. How can I say no to this and not be an American?)
Anyway...
W and his cronies have an amizing knack of being able to take the flaw that they are guilty of, turn it around and say their opponent is guilty of it, then have Fox News confirm it, then the Right fanatics all embrace it like it was the gospel.
Are Americans really that stupid? (Canada, you stay out of this