undertaker3x7
Member
highwaytothelost said:
What do you mean someone like me?? :?
The 2004 Election
- Thread starter jmills
- Start date
What do you mean someone like me?? :?
raidenfighter
New member
Mac said:
No, you're saying they're wrong. And you have a point.
Anywho, even though I'm relatively sure that it is illegal to ask about who one will vote for, Bush'll get my vote this year. Why? Because they're both fucking morons, but Kerry is full of more hot air than Gore, and I didn't even think that was possible. I'd also like to see a Giuliani vs. Hillary election in '08.
El Chupacabra
New member
Kerry is way to "FAKE" to get my vote. I voted for Bush over Gore as it was an easy choice. I think the choice this year is even easier.
I'm not some huge Bush supporter. Actually, i'm not someone who cares all to much who sits in as the President of the United States. In all honesty, it effects my day-to-day life very little. Sure. I may be paying or gaining a few extra dollars every year depending on who is president, but either it's small potatoes. You can also throw in a few other minor things but nothing that makes me re-work my life any.
As for the two guys running. Bush is a realist. He tends to believe he sees things clearer than other people do (the non-realists) and he is actually right. Realist people do see things from a clearer perspective as they typically allow themselves to see more than 1 side of an agrument. He sees a problem in the middle east, which there is, and he is taking care of it.
Kerry is a politician. Plain and simple. He's a fraud, a fake, and a phoney. From smile to hair to speech - it's all fake. He says what the people want/need to hear to get elected and then rarely does any of what he said. Sort of like the kids running for president/vise-president in your high school election.
"I can get vending machine costs down"
"I can get $.25 knocked off lunches"
Yeah. That's all great. But can you reall do it? No. Will you do it? No. I'm not saying Kerry is a terrible guy but from what I see ... he is just saying what he needs to win and worst of all, makes it very very obvious.
As for the War: Iraq and the middle east will be a problem for the next number of years. As will Korea. As will any of the other countries involved with illegal weapons and/or terrorists. No matter who the president is this will not change. It is a problem and it must be addressed. If George W. Bush KNOWS one thing, it is the Middle East. You HAVE to give him credit for that. The man knows far more than you, her, she, me, we and I combined. He does because he is the president of the United States. He has intelligence agencies who gather information, armies posted in the Middle East, and extensive knowledge of foreign relations and people in this area. There is no other person, presidential wise, that I would trust more to get the job done and done correctly than George Bush. Kerry only knows what every other senator knows - what the media tells him and what little political info he has from his own party. But, as any citizen of the US, he isn't entitled to the information George Bush is ... and as a PERSON, he knows far less about the middle east than Bush.
From my standpoint, and since the War is the major issue this election, my vote goes to Bush as he knows what he is doing and is the man most capable for the job over there. No one else knows more about this situation than him - election wise - and John Kerry is the LAST person I would want as the President in a war-situation as he just doesn't have what it takes.
I'm not going to go into details about the overall Election as I don't follow politics and don't care to. Politics are a world of their own and you, no matter how much you think you do, don't know anything unless you are actually invovled. This isn't my arguement. I am just posting on how I see the two canidates and their knowledge on the Middle East and other War-like issues.
I vote Bush. I will vote for Rudy when he runs ... as will the rest of the US because the media has made that man into a Hero, something that doesn't exist in todays times, and there will be no stopping a "Hero" who runs for president. Plus I like him. And I like how he damaged the Mafia in NYC back in his prosecution days.
I'm not some huge Bush supporter. Actually, i'm not someone who cares all to much who sits in as the President of the United States. In all honesty, it effects my day-to-day life very little. Sure. I may be paying or gaining a few extra dollars every year depending on who is president, but either it's small potatoes. You can also throw in a few other minor things but nothing that makes me re-work my life any.
As for the two guys running. Bush is a realist. He tends to believe he sees things clearer than other people do (the non-realists) and he is actually right. Realist people do see things from a clearer perspective as they typically allow themselves to see more than 1 side of an agrument. He sees a problem in the middle east, which there is, and he is taking care of it.
Kerry is a politician. Plain and simple. He's a fraud, a fake, and a phoney. From smile to hair to speech - it's all fake. He says what the people want/need to hear to get elected and then rarely does any of what he said. Sort of like the kids running for president/vise-president in your high school election.
"I can get vending machine costs down"
"I can get $.25 knocked off lunches"
Yeah. That's all great. But can you reall do it? No. Will you do it? No. I'm not saying Kerry is a terrible guy but from what I see ... he is just saying what he needs to win and worst of all, makes it very very obvious.
As for the War: Iraq and the middle east will be a problem for the next number of years. As will Korea. As will any of the other countries involved with illegal weapons and/or terrorists. No matter who the president is this will not change. It is a problem and it must be addressed. If George W. Bush KNOWS one thing, it is the Middle East. You HAVE to give him credit for that. The man knows far more than you, her, she, me, we and I combined. He does because he is the president of the United States. He has intelligence agencies who gather information, armies posted in the Middle East, and extensive knowledge of foreign relations and people in this area. There is no other person, presidential wise, that I would trust more to get the job done and done correctly than George Bush. Kerry only knows what every other senator knows - what the media tells him and what little political info he has from his own party. But, as any citizen of the US, he isn't entitled to the information George Bush is ... and as a PERSON, he knows far less about the middle east than Bush.
From my standpoint, and since the War is the major issue this election, my vote goes to Bush as he knows what he is doing and is the man most capable for the job over there. No one else knows more about this situation than him - election wise - and John Kerry is the LAST person I would want as the President in a war-situation as he just doesn't have what it takes.
I'm not going to go into details about the overall Election as I don't follow politics and don't care to. Politics are a world of their own and you, no matter how much you think you do, don't know anything unless you are actually invovled. This isn't my arguement. I am just posting on how I see the two canidates and their knowledge on the Middle East and other War-like issues.
I vote Bush. I will vote for Rudy when he runs ... as will the rest of the US because the media has made that man into a Hero, something that doesn't exist in todays times, and there will be no stopping a "Hero" who runs for president. Plus I like him. And I like how he damaged the Mafia in NYC back in his prosecution days.
God of thunder
New member
Well, I haven't read all the posts, don't plan on it. Politics have become quite a cluster fuck in this country anyways. Greedy, lying bastards wanting a position of political influence so they can help their friends.
For what it's worth, I'm voting for Bush on Election day. I believe, and the man has proven to me, that he is a worthy leader in times of trouble. He has had to make several hard decisions and he's stuck by them. Aside to contrary belief, he's a very intelligent man. And I only have doubts or disagreements with four of his policies. 1: Healthcare. 2: Social Security. 3: Economy. 4: Enviromental issues.
All except for one above do a I disagree with his policies. In fact issues, 1, 2, and 3 he has little or no control over. This country is on the verge of a crucial turning point, and anyone who's studied any one of those topics understands the problems we face as a country. I'm not speaking here as a Republic or Democrat, Liberal or whatever. We as a people, not as politicians, need to put our noses to the grindstone, stop bitching about what t his politician is about, says, or does. We need to find and put people in office who will do what we want them to do. This is why I can not bring myself to vote for Kerry. I do not know where the man stands, and I have read over his voting record in the senate. He is for things I am very much against, personally. Each individual has their own few on Abortion, equal rights, medicare, healthcare, enviromental protection, gay rights, etc... And everyone in this country has been born with that right. Be it by coincidence or divine providence, everyone has the right to believe and choose in that which they wish. There is no point in emotional or irrational bickering because you believe one candidate is better than the other. Vote for the person who you believe will do the best job for the country. And do not berate your friend, neighbor our countrymen for their difference in opinion or belief.
For what it's worth, I'm voting for Bush on Election day. I believe, and the man has proven to me, that he is a worthy leader in times of trouble. He has had to make several hard decisions and he's stuck by them. Aside to contrary belief, he's a very intelligent man. And I only have doubts or disagreements with four of his policies. 1: Healthcare. 2: Social Security. 3: Economy. 4: Enviromental issues.
All except for one above do a I disagree with his policies. In fact issues, 1, 2, and 3 he has little or no control over. This country is on the verge of a crucial turning point, and anyone who's studied any one of those topics understands the problems we face as a country. I'm not speaking here as a Republic or Democrat, Liberal or whatever. We as a people, not as politicians, need to put our noses to the grindstone, stop bitching about what t his politician is about, says, or does. We need to find and put people in office who will do what we want them to do. This is why I can not bring myself to vote for Kerry. I do not know where the man stands, and I have read over his voting record in the senate. He is for things I am very much against, personally. Each individual has their own few on Abortion, equal rights, medicare, healthcare, enviromental protection, gay rights, etc... And everyone in this country has been born with that right. Be it by coincidence or divine providence, everyone has the right to believe and choose in that which they wish. There is no point in emotional or irrational bickering because you believe one candidate is better than the other. Vote for the person who you believe will do the best job for the country. And do not berate your friend, neighbor our countrymen for their difference in opinion or belief.
Insane Cucumber
New member
El Chupacabra
New member
God of thunder said:
I agree totally. Bush has proven to be a good and sturdy leader. That is my main issue with Kerry - the guy just looks like he can't handle it. The way he carries himself, the way he speaks, his views on the war, and his political background do not make him a suitable president for the times at hand. I am not saying that he would be a terrible president. What I am saying is that for the next 4 years Bush will do a much better job than Kerry - ESPECIALLY in the war situation.
Bush is more of a leader to me. More of a man who acts and acts strongly on what he believes in. Kerry seems more of a puppet and pleaser. The democrats basically got him into this position and they know if he wins they will basically control his decisions - Kerry knows this as well. Kerry also only wants to please the people. That isn't the smart thing to do as the "masses" are usually wrong.
I want a man in the office who knows what he is doing and isn't afraid to go against the popular vote. Plus I want the man who is the most knowledgeable about the War/Middle East issue - which is George W. Bush.
Bush brought us into this "war" situation, which wasnt necessary and how can you say hes been doing a good job ? Are you serious do you not watch the news or do you watch the Fox news channel ? It's a dissaster he had no plan after he invaded , why do you think our troops are getting picked off one by one because they dont have a legitimate plan to follow by. This current administration has not thought before acting. How can you say that hes done a good job ?
Everyday on his campaign trail Bush continues to babble on how we are so much safer... You sure ? In fact things are even more dangerous in Iraq right now before we invaded it. It wasnt even a housing for terrorist activity. The terrorists that attacked us were stationed in Afganistan and Saudi Arabia not Iraq. How can you say Bush is knowledgable he doesnt know shit. Which is one reason why the Iraqi's hate us simply because were barging into their country and telling them this is how you have to do things your country will now be a democracy. They're afraid that their country will become what our's is, a materialistic country. They want to keep with their religious tradition. Which is why to them having a decmocracy is wrong.
Have you not paid attention to minor leaks about Bush and his administration ? The 9-11 commision ? Bush forcing his advisors to get something on Iraq even though they told him that Bin laden is in Afganhistan. What about Farenheit 9-11, regardless of what people think about it being simply propaganda their is definetly pure fact in that movie with Moore's opinion mixed in. I dont see how anyone can support someone as corrupt as President Bush and his whole administration.
Everyday on his campaign trail Bush continues to babble on how we are so much safer... You sure ? In fact things are even more dangerous in Iraq right now before we invaded it. It wasnt even a housing for terrorist activity. The terrorists that attacked us were stationed in Afganistan and Saudi Arabia not Iraq. How can you say Bush is knowledgable he doesnt know shit. Which is one reason why the Iraqi's hate us simply because were barging into their country and telling them this is how you have to do things your country will now be a democracy. They're afraid that their country will become what our's is, a materialistic country. They want to keep with their religious tradition. Which is why to them having a decmocracy is wrong.
Have you not paid attention to minor leaks about Bush and his administration ? The 9-11 commision ? Bush forcing his advisors to get something on Iraq even though they told him that Bin laden is in Afganhistan. What about Farenheit 9-11, regardless of what people think about it being simply propaganda their is definetly pure fact in that movie with Moore's opinion mixed in. I dont see how anyone can support someone as corrupt as President Bush and his whole administration.
God of thunder
New member
You really should stop listening to Television news. The Iraqi's do not "hate" us as much as you think. They are worried that their current situation will just relapse into another sadaam regime. I have traveled to europe a few times, and have met with people and dicussed this "hatred" of the U.S. This is something the media and politicians stricly push. Most inividuals I spoke to on the subject viewed America as being arrogant. On the war in Iraq, it is something that should have been taken care of over 12 years ago. You complain now about our "boys", I have family and friends over there I worry and pray for them everyday, are being picked off. 1,000 American lives lost and more. But what of the hundred of t housands of Iraqi's who've been murdered, raped, beaten, and butchered at the hands of Sadaam? Do I agree witht he war on Iraq? Yes, it is something that has to be done. And we can not pull out now or all those who have suffered, all those who have died, it would have been in vain. You live a life of extreme comfort compared to those who live in Iraq, Americans do not realize how fortunate we are to have what we have.
As for Osama Ben Laden, the man is hiding in a hole somewhere. Perhaps he has already been killed. And the world isn't a safe place, it never will be. But now people are actually working together in attempt to make America safer, wether or not it is working, only time will tell.
As for Osama Ben Laden, the man is hiding in a hole somewhere. Perhaps he has already been killed. And the world isn't a safe place, it never will be. But now people are actually working together in attempt to make America safer, wether or not it is working, only time will tell.
God of thunder said:
I actually agree with this post. If we were so wrong to invade Iraq, then should we just say we're sorry to Saddam and let him go? I don' t think so. Everyone is glad Saddam is out and the rest of the world is glad that they aren't the ones who had to do it. They sit around and criticize us for it because of the process, and also because half the countries in Europe that were opposing the war were selling arms and other goods to Iraq, and they didn't want the curtain pulled back on them. These countries were making money of Saddam. Also, Bush himself isn't supposed to be a military strategist. He has Generals and other advisors that are supposed to work out the details. The President only considers the big picture. It sucks that troops are getting killed, but you can't blame Bush or any one person for that. If you are going to blame one person, it should be Saddam.
God of thunder
New member
That's partially right. A main factor in why the other countries are upset with us about Iraq is oil. French and germanies problem is they were making money off medical supplies.
And it's not entirely Saddam's fault. This reminds me of WWII. The other countries in Europe knew what was happening, yet they remained idle until they came under attack. More Gypsies were killed than jews, but there are no "Documents" to prove it. All because people refused to stand up and do the right thing.
And it's not entirely Saddam's fault. This reminds me of WWII. The other countries in Europe knew what was happening, yet they remained idle until they came under attack. More Gypsies were killed than jews, but there are no "Documents" to prove it. All because people refused to stand up and do the right thing.
God of thunder said:
This seems like the position that many Democrats have now. They would rather sit back and wait until something catastrophic happens before taking action. In my opinion, it's better to be proactive than reactive. Many more lives would be lost by sitting back and waiting until you absolutely had to do something, than if you were to actually take some measures to try to prevent something like that from happening.
There is a fine line there though. When is it alright to try to prevent something from happening? It's very easy to to react to something, because no one will object, but when you are doing something to prevent future problems how do you really know that you're doing the right thing? I have my ideas about individual situations, but it's hard to say how others view those same situations. For example, the war on terror. How do we know when to invade somewhere that is a "supposed" terrorist camp, if they haven't done anything, but we think they will?
God of thunder
New member
It's shocking to find myself agreeing with you in more than one post. Wow.
The Democratic party is in shambles right now, there is no leader, there is no focus within the party. And they seem to use scare tactics and lies to entice minorities and the old to join them. I know I would be one of the first to draw a weapon and fight against half the things they say will happen if the Bush is re-elected. This is America, thousands of people each day, millions of people each year, flock to our borders to escape their own country. The most patriotic american's are the ones who run from persecution in their own country to come to ours. It's time we stopped squabbling amongst ourselves and started fixing the problems, not just debating.
The Democratic party is in shambles right now, there is no leader, there is no focus within the party. And they seem to use scare tactics and lies to entice minorities and the old to join them. I know I would be one of the first to draw a weapon and fight against half the things they say will happen if the Bush is re-elected. This is America, thousands of people each day, millions of people each year, flock to our borders to escape their own country. The most patriotic american's are the ones who run from persecution in their own country to come to ours. It's time we stopped squabbling amongst ourselves and started fixing the problems, not just debating.
God of thunder said:
One thing I'd like to say about that, is that some of the hardest working entrepreneurs are foreign immigrants. They love that they can come to a country and make as much money as they an figure out how to. Many Americans take this liberty for granted.
A lot of people don't like that though. They think that foreigners shouldn't be allowed to come to America and "take our jobs." I say, if you can do it better then do it; if not, maybe they do deserve that job.
My point is immigration is the biggest form of flattery for America. If it wasn't a great country, then why would so many people want to come here? Granted, we have our problems, but at least we have capitalism! That is something that the Democrats would also like to minimize; bigger government and more spread-out wealth if they had it their way.
El Chupacabra
New member
Like God of Thunder and JWo have said: The war in Iraq has not been a failure. We have lost soldiers. Yes. But what do you expect? Another Gulf War? This isn't Desert Storm - it's bigger, longer, and has taken more resources. That being said it has also been more successful than Desert Storm. The long term effects of this current war are what you need to look at.
The Middle East and surrounding countries have been a problem for years. If we don't do something about it the problem will only grow. What Bush has done is attacked these countries - now - before it gets out of hand. He is trying to establish a working goverment and system in these countries, in hopes of stabalizing them and thus creating "NEW" allies for the future. I think people tend to forget this. By removing Saddam, this can be accomplished. We will also have support and help from the Middle East in locating Terrorists and people creating illegal weapons. It's similar to what we did in Germany after WW2. Help build a country who later becomes an ally all the while removing an enemy. To do this it takes time, resources, and due to war - casualties.
If this isn't done now then I guarantee that in 15 years the problem will be 10 fold. Sactions and inspections only do so much - Kerry needs to understand this. Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty to accomplish a goal. Thats what's happening. The last thing we need is a president to take over in the middle of a War, and remove the majority of our presence in the Middle East (thus weaking the current foothold we have just gained) and destroying what is currently being built. If we do that we allow other leaders, ones that won't help us - ones such as Saddam, which helps matters none.
If we never invaded Iraq and company now than Saddam would still be in power and 10+ years down the line it would cause MAJOR problems. Ones that might take more than a few hundred lives of American soldiers.
Face the facts. America does try and police the world - but it does so to protect itself and other countries from future madmen, terrorists, and idiots who rule countries as Tyrants and attack the people they don't like. I am glad Bush has gone in there. I'm glad he is doing what he is doing. I want it to stay that way. Th elast thing I want is a politician taking over the US in the middle of a war and screwing things up. Things that won't be evident for the next 4 years or so, but things that will turn up when im older and I have children.
As for the media. The media does what? It emphasizes bad news. It covers everything and anything, no matter if it's true or not, for a story. It also uses these stories to create other stories - and gain ratings. The media is out to inform us, yes. But don't forget that their MAIN goal is to get ratings - they are companies in competition - and to get ratings they have to exploit any piece of news they can get their hands on. The media isn't always right. They aren't always wrong either, but not always right. Keep that in mind. Besides - I have talked to plenty of people/soldiers over the past 2 years who say it's not near as bad as people make it out to be, that the people don't hate us near as much as the media makes us believe, and so forth. I think every soldier or person involved in the military i've talked to has enjoyed being over there. The soldiers majority vote will be for Bush ... why is that?
The Middle East and surrounding countries have been a problem for years. If we don't do something about it the problem will only grow. What Bush has done is attacked these countries - now - before it gets out of hand. He is trying to establish a working goverment and system in these countries, in hopes of stabalizing them and thus creating "NEW" allies for the future. I think people tend to forget this. By removing Saddam, this can be accomplished. We will also have support and help from the Middle East in locating Terrorists and people creating illegal weapons. It's similar to what we did in Germany after WW2. Help build a country who later becomes an ally all the while removing an enemy. To do this it takes time, resources, and due to war - casualties.
If this isn't done now then I guarantee that in 15 years the problem will be 10 fold. Sactions and inspections only do so much - Kerry needs to understand this. Sometimes you have to get your hands dirty to accomplish a goal. Thats what's happening. The last thing we need is a president to take over in the middle of a War, and remove the majority of our presence in the Middle East (thus weaking the current foothold we have just gained) and destroying what is currently being built. If we do that we allow other leaders, ones that won't help us - ones such as Saddam, which helps matters none.
If we never invaded Iraq and company now than Saddam would still be in power and 10+ years down the line it would cause MAJOR problems. Ones that might take more than a few hundred lives of American soldiers.
Face the facts. America does try and police the world - but it does so to protect itself and other countries from future madmen, terrorists, and idiots who rule countries as Tyrants and attack the people they don't like. I am glad Bush has gone in there. I'm glad he is doing what he is doing. I want it to stay that way. Th elast thing I want is a politician taking over the US in the middle of a war and screwing things up. Things that won't be evident for the next 4 years or so, but things that will turn up when im older and I have children.
As for the media. The media does what? It emphasizes bad news. It covers everything and anything, no matter if it's true or not, for a story. It also uses these stories to create other stories - and gain ratings. The media is out to inform us, yes. But don't forget that their MAIN goal is to get ratings - they are companies in competition - and to get ratings they have to exploit any piece of news they can get their hands on. The media isn't always right. They aren't always wrong either, but not always right. Keep that in mind. Besides - I have talked to plenty of people/soldiers over the past 2 years who say it's not near as bad as people make it out to be, that the people don't hate us near as much as the media makes us believe, and so forth. I think every soldier or person involved in the military i've talked to has enjoyed being over there. The soldiers majority vote will be for Bush ... why is that?
Well said, Chup. It really bothers me that some people would rather sit around and wait until the next 9/11 happens to try to change some things. People say, "It's not our job to police the world." Well, then, who's job is it? The UN's? That's a joke.
Some people will also say that Bush made a mistake by invading Iraq because he didn't actually have WMD's, and he wasn't helping terrorists. BS, he has had and used WMD's before and there is no doubt in my mind that he would do it again. At the time when we decided to go to war, and yes "WE" decided to go, not just Bush, we were supplied with intelligence which stated that Saddam did have WMD's. The CIA and the Russian's told us this. Based upon that evidence, Bush and Congress decided that removing Saddam was the best course of action.
Kerry actually supported this movement at the time. Just because we learn that may not have been entirely factual does not mean that you can just back out of this situation now. It's real easy for Kerry to change his mind and criticize the President because he doesn't have the kind of obligations that the President does. We owe it to the people of Iraq now to finish what we started over there and not turn our backs on them. They would really hate us if we did that.
The best person to finsih the job in Iraq is Bush! He already has the experience, he knows the current situation, and he is one that has already led our troops this far. I just don't see how Kerry could be of any help given our current situation. Hell, I still don't know exactly where Kerry stands on the war. He says that Bush was wrong, but what exactly is Kerry's plan of action?
Some people will also say that Bush made a mistake by invading Iraq because he didn't actually have WMD's, and he wasn't helping terrorists. BS, he has had and used WMD's before and there is no doubt in my mind that he would do it again. At the time when we decided to go to war, and yes "WE" decided to go, not just Bush, we were supplied with intelligence which stated that Saddam did have WMD's. The CIA and the Russian's told us this. Based upon that evidence, Bush and Congress decided that removing Saddam was the best course of action.
Kerry actually supported this movement at the time. Just because we learn that may not have been entirely factual does not mean that you can just back out of this situation now. It's real easy for Kerry to change his mind and criticize the President because he doesn't have the kind of obligations that the President does. We owe it to the people of Iraq now to finish what we started over there and not turn our backs on them. They would really hate us if we did that.
The best person to finsih the job in Iraq is Bush! He already has the experience, he knows the current situation, and he is one that has already led our troops this far. I just don't see how Kerry could be of any help given our current situation. Hell, I still don't know exactly where Kerry stands on the war. He says that Bush was wrong, but what exactly is Kerry's plan of action?
whatashame
New member
Kerry can save the country! All he has to do is drop out of the race.
I respect all of your opinions and I am aware that the media is only doing things to benefit themselves, but Bush and his whole administration connected with huge corporations doesnt sit well with me. I have my views regarding the invasion in Iraq as to why we would go into Iraq since North Korea and Iran are far more dangerous. Iraq has never done anything to us in fact remeber when Sadam was our friend. America has stabbed so many people in the back to benefit themselves, which is why most of the world hates us. I do admit I am a Democrat I feel that the party is more benenifical to the young and middle class. I also sense that you guys are Republican or lean on the conservative side.
aside from that I dont like what Bush is doing in terms of religion in wearing his religion on his sleeve. Doesnt anyone recall the serperation of church and state ? I mean I belive in God and Jesus Christ, but I dont advertise my religion to the masses as I feel Bush is doing simply to win votes and appeal to the narrow minded, die-hard christians. I just dont like what he's been doing to this country and I feel he will lead down the wrong path as I feel Bush is doing that now.
aside from that I dont like what Bush is doing in terms of religion in wearing his religion on his sleeve. Doesnt anyone recall the serperation of church and state ? I mean I belive in God and Jesus Christ, but I dont advertise my religion to the masses as I feel Bush is doing simply to win votes and appeal to the narrow minded, die-hard christians. I just dont like what he's been doing to this country and I feel he will lead down the wrong path as I feel Bush is doing that now.
whatashame
New member
Don't get me wrong, I think they both suck. In fact, I equate Bush with being one of the worst presidents I've ever seen, but I think Kerry wouldn't be any better. I'm still fighting with whether or not I will vote at all this time around. I didn't vote for Bush last time, so why would I now? And as far as Kerry is concerned, I don't want to feel responsible for helping in the decision to elect him either. Can I just vote for myself? I promise to deliver booze and painted ladies to every man's doorstep. Unless of course, they are gay. If they are gay, I will send them over to Toasty's place for some hot rear action. 
jmills said:
Actually, I am a libertarian. I believe in the financial freedoms of the republican view and the social/personal freedoms of the democratic view. I just think that if you can survive as a business, then great. If you can't, then you shouldn't get government handouts, corporate welfare and such. Private business will work things out on its own. I've heard the argument of the rich getting richer and whatnot, but if you can't figure out how to get rich on your own, then you don't deserve to be. Bigger governments suck. Capitalism rocks.
I also believe in personal freedoms. Government shouldn't be allowed to tell anyone that what they do is wrong. If someone wants to use drugs for personal use, they should be able to. The war on drugs is BS. Our government could be making so much money off this, and instead they are spending so much money on a war that they will never win, and the people of America won't let them win. Make marijauna legal, tax the hell out of it like cigarettes, and all of a sudden you've got a huge turnaround of funds.
Same with prostitution. Not that we spend a ton of money trying to stop that, but if it were legal, it would be a lot safer and more controlled. Women should be able to use their bodies however they wish. Professional wrestlers do. They make money by using their bodies as a means of income. This is just something that we shouldn't have to worry about.
Gay marraige....same thing. Who are we to tell a gay man that he can't enjoy the same benefits as any other married couple just because it says so in the bible? Talk about separation of church and state, this is clearly the opposite of that. I see people that drive around with those bumber stickers of "marraige = man + woman," and it almost makes me sick to think that some people are so self-righteous and judgemental to advertise that to other people on the road. It's not our place to decide those types of things. Worry about yourself instead of standing around at church gossiping and judging others.