|
|
Post by chrisfan on Sept 8, 2004 10:59:06 GMT -5
I am so glad that all of the national guard stuff with Bush is coming up again. He is such a good looking man in the picture from his guard days that they always show when these things come up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Proud on Sept 8, 2004 11:00:18 GMT -5
he looks like an inbred chimp.
|
|
|
|
Post by stratman19 on Sept 8, 2004 11:23:06 GMT -5
I am so glad that all of the national guard stuff with Bush is coming up again. He is such a good looking man in the picture from his guard days that they always show when these things come up. As long as the Democrats insist on making the campaign about a 35 year old war, I think it's all the better for the GOP. |
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Sept 8, 2004 11:33:18 GMT -5
As long as the Democrats insist on making the campaign about a 35 year old war, I think it's all the better for the GOP. I'm starting to get so confused by all of this. As I said last week, after telling us to move off of Vietnam, John Kerry himself went back there on Thursday night (or Friday morning, depending on what clock you're looking at). NOW, we're being told to question George W Bush for service he's never boasted about, because a former LT Governor says that he was pressured to pull strings to get him there. BUT, the same guy has testified under oath on more than one occasion that he was not pressured. AND, he's one of the top fundraisers for the Kerry campaign. But just a couple of weeks ago, we were told that the swift boat guys couldn't be trusted, because they were suddenly changing their stories, AND because in some contorted Kevin Bacon game sort of way, they had connections to the Bush campaign. But now we're being told that story-changing-fund-raising-guys ARE to be trusted?  ? Damn, I hope Kerry doesn't get elected. Could you imagine the charts that would be needed to keep track of his positions? Imgaine the ilustrations journalists would have to resort to in order to wade through a state of the union address! |
|
|
|
Post by stratman19 on Sept 8, 2004 11:42:51 GMT -5
I'm starting to get so confused by all of this. As I said last week, after telling us to move off of Vietnam, John Kerry himself went back there on Thursday night (or Friday morning, depending on what clock you're looking at). NOW, we're being told to question George W Bush for service he's never boasted about, because a former LT Governor says that he was pressured to pull strings to get him there. BUT, the same guy has testified under oath on more than one occasion that he was not pressured. AND, he's one of the top fundraisers for the Kerry campaign. But just a couple of weeks ago, we were told that the swift boat guys couldn't be trusted, because they were suddenly changing their stories, AND because in some contorted Kevin Bacon game sort of way, they had connections to the Bush campaign. But now we're being told that story-changing-fund-raising-guys ARE to be trusted? ? Damn, I hope Kerry doesn't get elected. Could you imagine the charts that would be needed to keep track of his positions? Imgaine the ilustrations journalists would have to resort to in order to wade through a state of the union address! LMAO!! Ain't that the truth Chris! Hell, my head spun around several times, just reading your synopsis of events! |
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Sept 8, 2004 11:52:01 GMT -5
Proud, you're not one of those people that think Nader's on the GOP payroll are you? Why don't people understand that he CAN'T sit this one out, if he does the green party will lose all it's validity...which admitedly isn't much, but it's more then any other third party has had for a long time. Nader knows he'll never be president, he also knows he can't back down no matter how much he likes or dislikes Bush.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Sept 8, 2004 11:54:50 GMT -5
Proud, you're not one of those people that think Nader's on the GOP payroll are you? Why don't people understand that he CAN'T sit this one out, if he does the green party will lose all it's validity...which admitedly isn't much, but it's more then any other third party has had for a long time. Nader knows he'll never be president, he also knows he can't back down no matter how much he likes or dislikes Bush. I'm not sure I follow. Since Nader isn't running as the Green party candidate this time, how does his candidacy do anything for the Green party? Woudln't the Green nominee do more for the Green party? |
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Sept 8, 2004 11:58:41 GMT -5
You're right...he's been so invisible this year...I guess it's just me wanting to believe one day we might have a viable third party. Sigh.... *slowly pins Kerry/Edwards pin back on lapel*
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Sept 8, 2004 12:01:07 GMT -5
You're right...he's been so invisible this year...I guess it's just me wanting to believe one day we might have a viable third party. Sigh.... *slowly pins Kerry/Edwards pin back on lapel* While you're pinning that, can you help us? What IS John Kerry's position on Iraq? |
|
|
|
Post by stratman19 on Sept 8, 2004 12:03:28 GMT -5
Inquiring minds want to know!
Just for the record DED, David Cobb is the Green Party candidate. Nader is running as an independent.
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Sept 8, 2004 12:06:08 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure he doesn't like it...
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Sept 8, 2004 12:09:54 GMT -5
Is Nader running as an independent? I thought i heard somewhere that he was running on the ticket of Perot's old party. Or does it depend on the state? OR, does it depend on which Iraq position Kerry has taken day to day?
|
|
|
|
Post by Galactus on Sept 8, 2004 12:13:06 GMT -5
He's Reform party I think...I don't know much about the reform party though.
I guess Kerry can change his stand on Iraq at least as many times as Bush changed the reasons for being there...
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Sept 8, 2004 12:17:12 GMT -5
You're right...he's been so invisible this year...I guess it's just me wanting to believe one day we might have a viable third party. Sigh.... *slowly pins Kerry/Edwards pin back on lapel* My thoughts on the Nader ticket: It's easy to fall back on the "Nader's votes will guarantee Bush into office for another term" angle. It's the foremost scare tactic that would make me want to vote for KERRY at all costs -- except when I think about the "viable third party" option. Seems to me THAT is the main reason Nader is sticking to his guns in the face of such heated controversy and adversity: He merely wishes to steadily keep "sowing the seeds" so to speak of this third party precisely in order to KEEP it viable. I.E, if the Green Party consistently and insistently continues to lobby for its platform every single election year, then there is a chance that it could grow a teensy - weensy bit at a time. Sure they didn't win it long ago, nor the election before last, nor the last election, nor shall they this one, nor shall they the following one. BUT!, it is conceivable, no matter HOW DARK the Age we are currently in may be, that SOME DAY IN THE UNFORESEEN FUTURE, the clouds of conservative adversity may part, the Sun may begin peeking it's natural face through these grim clouds, and the Green Party may at long last finally reach fruition: Perhaps in the year, say, 2052, there will FINALLY HAVE BEEN ENOUGH DISSENTERS of this current regime's short-sightedness to have gradually shifted the balance over to the good-natured, wholesome, environmentally-conscious ideals of the Green Party. THAT, my fellow nervous Americans, may very well be the single most profound reason for Ralph Nader to NEVER BOW OUT of the races: because The People of this great nation WILL TAKE THE POWER BACK for themselves one clear shining day in the future, REGARDLESS of how long it may actually take. |
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Sept 8, 2004 12:17:15 GMT -5
He's Reform party I think...I don't know much about the reform party though. I guess Kerry can change his stand on Iraq at least as many times as Bush changed the reasons for being there... Then why are you voting for him? He's already gone over 1. |
|
? Damn, I hope Kerry doesn't get elected. Could you imagine the charts that would be needed to keep track of his positions? Imgaine the ilustrations journalists would have to resort to in order to wade through a state of the union address! 
