Kerry the comedian

[boldandlame]

You can feel safer now.

 

Nuclear Lab Breach Could Be 'Devastating'

 

Bushco is keeping us safe.

 

SWEEEEEEET!

 

Thanks BushCo!

[fmccap]

SWEEEEEEET!

 

Thanks BushCo!

 

While we're at it let's have these guys join too!

 

Six Arab states join rush to go nuclear

 

We'lle be allright because UAE are our buddies who control our ports, and Saudi Arabia makes us money, oops I mean Bush money.

[fmccap]

Kerry fucked up a joke.

 

Bush fucked up a nation, and a world. :titanic:

 

The crime of exposing the truth about Iraq

Two weeks ago, Dick Cheney said (while visiting with Rush Limbaugh) that things in Iraq were going "remarkably well" -- the same thing we have been hearing for several years now from the administration and their most rabid and dishonest followers. Yesterday, The New York Times published a chart prepared by the United States Central Command which demonstrates precisely the opposite -- namely, that the situation in Iraq is steadily deteriorating, not improving, and is close to full-blown chaos (this report received little attention because the media was focused on the much more important matter of John Kerry's joke).

[uRfk9AcDfo9Wui]

The crime of exposing the truth about Iraq

 

 

Let me go a head and give you the standard right wing republican followers excuse. It was " it's Clinton's fault."

[{CARD-SHARK}]

I am surprised that the union don't support the Republican party as much as they suck managements dick :kissass:

 

Isn't that the truth! OUCH!!!

[AAISkinsFan]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...11/154020.shtml

And yet despite this information, Clinton was too busy getting his winky wacked by Monica.

 

http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prio...t_bin_laden.htm

Go on Democrat spin masters! Do your little dance! Maybe Howard Dean and the Kennedies will come by and try to save you!

 

1-Wash. Times article cited by you is written by Rowan Scarborough who wrote a book praising Donald Rumsfeld. Rummys mouthpiece (read it here)

 

2-Newsmax article was written by Jon E. Dougherty, a staff reporter at WorldNetDaily.com. Thanks for the credible unbiased link...

 

3-Your last reference is to an article written by Mansoor Ijaz who is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Go google Conservative think tank and Council on Foreign Relations and see what you come up with...

 

Next.

[cal50]

1-Wash. Times article cited by you is written by Rowan Scarborough who wrote a book praising Donald Rumsfeld. Rummys mouthpiece (read it here)

 

2-Newsmax article was written by Jon E. Dougherty, a staff reporter at WorldNetDaily.com. Thanks for the credible unbiased link...

 

3-Your last reference is to an article written by Mansoor Ijaz who is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Go google Conservative think tank and Council on Foreign Relations and see what you come up with...

 

Next.

 

 

 

 

 

Your quoting Scarborough as an authority then you must also believe his other writing that was in the Washington times also-

 

Tapes reveal WMD plans by Saddam (Rowan Scarborough)

The Washington Times ^ | 3-13-06 | Rowan Scarborough

 

Posted on 03/12/2006 10:29:27 PM PST

 

Tapes reveal WMD plans by Saddam

 

By Rowan Scarborough

 

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

 

Published March 13, 2006

 

Audiotapes of Saddam Hussein and his aides underscore the Bush administration's argument that Baghdad was determined to rebuild its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction once the international community had tired of inspections and left the Iraqi dictator alone.

 

In addition to the captured tapes, U.S. officials are analyzing thousands of pages of newly translated Iraqi documents that tell of Saddam seeking uranium from Africa in the mid-1990s.

 

The documents also speak of burying prohibited missiles, according to a government official familiar with the declassification process.

 

But it is not clear whether Baghdad did what the documents indicate, said the U.S. official, who asked not to be named.

 

"The factories are present," an Iraqi aide tells Saddam on one of the tapes, made by the dictator in the mid-1990s while U.N. weapons inspectors were searching for Baghdad's remaining stocks of weapons of mass destruction.

 

"The factories remain, in the mind they remain. Our spirit is with us, based solely on the time period," the aide says, according to the documents. "And [inspectors] take note of the time period, they can't account for our will."

 

The quote is from roughly 12 hours of taped conversations that unexpectedly landed in the lap of Bill Tierney, a former Army warrant officer and Arabic speaker who was translating for the FBI tapes unearthed in Iraq after the invasion.

 

Mr. Tierney made a copy, which he provided to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The committee in turn gave a copy to intelligence analysts who authenticated the voice as that of Saddam.

 

Mr. Tierney said that the quote from the Saddam aide, and scores of others, show Saddam was rebuilding his once-ample weapons stocks.

 

"The tapes show...

 

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...

[Pumpmaster]

Your quoting Scarborough as an authority then you must also believe his other writing that was in the Washington times also-

 

Tapes reveal WMD plans by Saddam (Rowan Scarborough)

The Washington Times ^ | 3-13-06 | Rowan Scarborough

 

Posted on 03/12/2006 10:29:27 PM PST

 

Tapes reveal WMD plans by Saddam

 

By Rowan Scarborough

 

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

 

Published March 13, 2006

 

Audiotapes of Saddam Hussein and his aides underscore the Bush administration's argument that Baghdad was determined to rebuild its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction once the international community had tired of inspections and left the Iraqi dictator alone.

 

In addition to the captured tapes, U.S. officials are analyzing thousands of pages of newly translated Iraqi documents that tell of Saddam seeking uranium from Africa in the mid-1990s.

 

The documents also speak of burying prohibited missiles, according to a government official familiar with the declassification process.

 

But it is not clear whether Baghdad did what the documents indicate, said the U.S. official, who asked not to be named.

 

"The factories are present," an Iraqi aide tells Saddam on one of the tapes, made by the dictator in the mid-1990s while U.N. weapons inspectors were searching for Baghdad's remaining stocks of weapons of mass destruction.

 

"The factories remain, in the mind they remain. Our spirit is with us, based solely on the time period," the aide says, according to the documents. "And [inspectors] take note of the time period, they can't account for our will."

 

The quote is from roughly 12 hours of taped conversations that unexpectedly landed in the lap of Bill Tierney, a former Army warrant officer and Arabic speaker who was translating for the FBI tapes unearthed in Iraq after the invasion.

 

Mr. Tierney made a copy, which he provided to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The committee in turn gave a copy to intelligence analysts who authenticated the voice as that of Saddam.

 

Mr. Tierney said that the quote from the Saddam aide, and scores of others, show Saddam was rebuilding his once-ample weapons stocks.

 

"The tapes show...

 

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...

 

11-4-06:

Number of U.S dead in Iraq: 2,829

Number of U.S. non-mortal caualties: 44,779 (as of 9-30-06)

(source: http://www.icasualties.org)

Number of Iraqi's killed since March 2003: at least 655,000 (source: The Lancet)

Status of Iraq according to U.S. CENTCOM: "sliding towards chaos" (civil war already occurring).

U.S. dollar amount, per month, cost of Iraq occupation: $9 billion. Yes, that's BILLION.

 

State of cal50, George "bring 'em on" Bush, Dick "last throes" Cheney, Don "back off" Rumsfeld: denial. :titanic:

[fmccap]

11-4-06:

Number of U.S dead in Iraq: 2,829

Number of U.S. non-mortal caualties: 44,779 (as of 9-30-06)

(source: http://www.icasualties.org)

Number of Iraqi's killed since March 2003: at least 655,000 (source: The Lancet)

Status of Iraq according to U.S. CENTCOM: "sliding towards chaos" (civil war already occurring).

U.S. dollar amount, per month, cost of Iraq occupation: $9 billion. Yes, that's BILLION.

 

State of cal50, George "bring 'em on" Bush, Dick "last throes" Cheney, Don "back off" Rumsfeld: denial. :titanic:

 

And most of this happened after:Mission Accomplished

 

Hey Cal50, What mission was it?

Edited November 4, 2006 by fmccap

[cal50]

Since you like to cite death numbers as some type of indicator as good or bad maybe you can digest the stats below.

 

Maybe we should "pull out" of some of these states? Or we can let them be run by people like yourself since you oppose force. Is it a coincidence these major cities are liberal or democratic strong holds?

You guys should move there.I am sure you can "talk" to the troublemakers and they will all play nice.

:P

 

 

 

 

 

On September 8, 2004, the Los Angeles Times reported (The Conflict In Iraq, U.S. Toll in Iraq Reaches 1,000) that through September 7, 2004, 1,000 US soldiers lost their lives in Iraq due to both hostile and non-hostile actions. This is certainly a tragic loss correctly reported in the media and mourned by the US populace. However focusing exclusively on these statistics does not provide the much needed perspective.

 

According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report of May 24, 2004, the number of murders reported during calendar years 2002 and 2003 show a comparable death toll exists in several US cities. Los Angeles, Chicago and New York City reported 1,168, 1,246 and 1,184 murders during the subject 24-month period.

 

[...snip...]

 

The average monthly death toll for US soldiers in Iraq is 55.6 deaths per month while the average reported murders per month in Los Angeles, Chicago and New York City are 48.7, 51.9 and 49.3 deaths per month. The murder statistics in the US cities are for hostile deaths only — whereas the death toll in Iraq includes both hostile and accidental deaths. This makes our own murder rates in LA, Chicago and NYC even more appalling. Yet there is not an equivalent amount of reporting or hand wringing.

 

[...snip...]

 

Reasonable people can disagree about the wisdom of going to war in Iraq. But objectivity requires that these deaths be put in perspective. Do we continue to condemn death in Iraq while simultaneously ignoring the concurrent deaths in our own cities — or should we consider all violent deaths a terrible waste of life?

[fmccap]

Do we continue to condemn death in Iraq while simultaneously ignoring the concurrent deaths in our own cities — or should we consider all violent deaths a terrible waste of life?

 

All violent deaths are a waste of life. We can control the Iraq side by coming home. As far as the part in our own country I don't think it will ever go totally away, but it can be drastically brought down. There needs to be strict enforcement of laws, none of these fine lines, "he knew it was wrong but thought it would be ok", we'll lighten the sentence. Bring back family values. The young ones in this country are not how I remember it being. There has been a drastic change in mindset over the last 20 - 30 years.

 

Here is a good article I think would change things if we straightened things up at home.

 

Family debasement

 

 

Heightened isolation of older people produces other socially destructive consequences. Throughout most of human history, households included more than two generations, meaning they consisted of children, parents and grandparents. In cases where grandparents weren't actually in the household, they were in close proximity.

 

Their absence removes the accumulated wisdom of the elderly from the home. It deprives young mothers of assistance and instruction in child-rearing. Instead, they are left dependent on day-care centers, manuals and nannies. These substitutes have nowhere near the value of loving grandparents living in the home or nearby.

 

Also, for most of human history, elderly people died in the homes and in the presence of their children. Grandchildren had a ringside seat and could observe old age and death close up and, at the same time, be taught their responsibilities toward the aged. When the elderly are kept at arms length, we're cut off from the lessons of this universal reality.

Edited November 4, 2006 by fmccap

[methos]

Reasonable people can disagree about the wisdom of going to war in Iraq. But objectivity requires that these deaths be put in perspective. Do we continue to condemn death in Iraq while simultaneously ignoring the concurrent deaths in our own cities — or should we consider all violent deaths a terrible waste of life?

 

 

When I see a post of this nature, it never ceases to amaze me. What is wrong with folks like you, really? Trying to put the war in the context of urban violence is wrong, even worse, it's sick. The war has caused almost three thousand dead, and due to IED's, the nature and number of casualties is remarkable. Try to put that into context for those that are survived by the fallen.

 

Justifying the war by saying that it's not bad in comparison to urban violence is incredibly stupid. Sure, the violence is bad in some of our cities, so that is supposed to lessen the impact of deaths of soldiers abroad? So, we lost a few thousand people in Iraq, hey don't get upset, we lose a few thousand each year here due to violence in inner cities or auto accidents, uh...ok.

 

Is that what the war has come down too? No hope, little justification, and no direction; therefore, the deaths need to be put into the proper context.

 

Maybe I am just confused, but would it not be better since we do have problems, to actually start solving those problems. Moreover, instead of spending a half-trillion dollars in some sinkhole in the desert, we might spend some money here, where it counts.

 

Instead of trying to fight a war, where our soldiers are not even sure who or where the enemy is, we should have remembered the hard won lessons in Vietnam. In addition, they should require all those that support the war should fight in the war. Oh, I know, it is an all-volunteer army, but they can use all the help they can get.

[AAISkinsFan]

Your quoting Scarborough as an authority then you must also believe his other writing that was in the Washington times also-

 

Check yourself cal...I didn't quote Scarborough - stevenj did. I was pointing out that Scarborough has his head so far up Rummys ass that he can't see straight.

 

Yes, the same incompetent Rummy that Bush chooses to blindly stay loyal to and who is now under attack from the very media that caters to the Military community. Sad.

 

Papers sold to military: ‘Rumsfeld must go’

Editorial comes days after Bush affirms defense secretary’s job security

 

Just days after President Bush publicly affirmed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's job security through the end of his term, a family of publications catering to the military will publish an editorial calling for the defense secretary's removal.

 

Source

[cal50]

When I see a post of this nature, it never ceases to amaze me. What is wrong with folks like you, really? Trying to put the war in the context of urban violence is wrong, even worse, it's sick. The war has caused almost three thousand dead, and due to IED's, the nature and number of casualties is remarkable. Try to put that into context for those that are survived by the fallen.

 

Justifying the war by saying that it's not bad in comparison to urban violence is incredibly stupid. Sure, the violence is bad in some of our cities, so that is supposed to lessen the impact of deaths of soldiers abroad? So, we lost a few thousand people in Iraq, hey don't get upset, we lose a few thousand each year here due to violence in inner cities or auto accidents, uh...ok.

 

Is that what the war has come down too? No hope, little justification, and no direction; therefore, the deaths need to be put into the proper context.

 

Maybe I am just confused, but would it not be better since we do have problems, to actually start solving those problems. Moreover, instead of spending a half-trillion dollars in some sinkhole in the desert, we might spend some money here, where it counts.

 

Instead of trying to fight a war, where our soldiers are not even sure who or where the enemy is, we should have remembered the hard won lessons in Vietnam. In addition, they should require all those that support the war should fight in the war. Oh, I know, it is an all-volunteer army, but they can use all the help they can get.

 

 

 

 

The stats are just that,statistics. No justification. There are places here in the U.S. that are more dangerous than places in foreign countries. It would be nice if we could solve the violence against each other and abroad but I highly doubt that happening in any of our lifetimes. Point being is how do you deal with a person or people that want to do your harm and are intent on doing it? Sometimes you can "talk" things out but for the remainder of problems the use of force defensively of offensively is needed. Who decides? Personally your on your own. As a nation there is no solution. Very few wars go exactly as planned. Everyone that is involved in the war thus far is a volunteer. Recruitment is steady and there is no shortage of men and women to carry out what they deem is a correct effort,to eliminate possible threats to U.S. interests. You may differ on this view and if the majority of people really felt like you there would be a shortage of support. I can not "justify" what someone else started. In hind site Iraq was less of a threat than everyone though. Saddam bluffed and a lot of people believed it. He got his wish and soon I hope he gets his fate,with a rope. I wish the U.S. would spend all or our money here on our own people but money alone will not solve problems in Iraq or our own problems here either.

[fmccap]

Recruitment is steady and there is no shortage of men and women to carry out what they deem is a correct effort,to eliminate possible threats to U.S. interests. You may differ on this view and if the majority of people really felt like you there would be a shortage of support.

 

Would there be enough if everyone knew the truth?

Army Recruiters Accused of Misleading Students to Get Them to Enlist

 

Saddam bluffed and a lot of people believed it.

 

Saddam bluffed what? I believe that there were weapons inspectors months before we invaded that did not find anything.

Iraq war wasn't justified, U.N. weapons experts say

Blix described the evidence Secretary of State Colin Powell presented to the U.N. Security Council in February 2003 as "shaky," and said he related his opinion to U.S. officials, including national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.

 

"I think they chose to ignore us," Blix said.

[AAISkinsFan]

C'mon howie...you wasted a perfectly long winded rant because you misplaced your quote tag when you responded to Norfolkbuilt. Now, go back and fix it so I can chop this shit up! Aw hell, I'll do it anyway.

Not typical at all, it's just the truth plain and simple with no spin. No spin...oh my.

 

Events that led to our present situation in Iraq were brought about by both Dems and Reps. Wrong, our Government facilitated these events when they armed Saddam to the hilt in the 80's. What led to our present situation was his need to brutally opress the Shiite majority with force, bluff his neighbor Iran and voice his hatred for Israel and its staunch supporter (the US) to maintain popularity with radical Islamic fundamentalists. The CIA knew he was a thug long ago...it comes as no surprise that he would lash out when backed into a corner. Thing is, we knew he was no threat to us...period

 

IMHO, Bush could have done a lot of things wrong but I have seen little evidence of him doing so despite Dem insisting he has. I guess it is the basic differences in mindsets of Dems and Reps. Dems believe that they are victims and guvmint should baby them from cradle to grave. Reps believe they have an individual responibility to better their lives with little to no guvmint involvement. Little evidence...are you kidding me? He has gone out of his way to increase the scope of the Executive Branch of our Government and you mean to tell me that espouses what Republicans stand for - No Guvmint involvement! Dems aren't the victims in this scenario...we all are!

 

Bush led us into a false war? Nope, he led us into the justified action that needed to be done, based on events leading to it. Dems actually held a larger drumstick in beating the war drum. Yes, he did. Iraq posed no threat to us, period. Read our Constitution for the reasons we need to engage in war. The Dems didn't hold a larger stick. The war drumsticks began with Bush administration officials within the Project for the New American Century.. Those were the drums beating in Bushes head...

 

Our jobs are being shipped overseas at a spinning rate? Who pushed for and signed NAFTA? Why isn't the International UAW organizing those jobs overseas? Naw, it's easier to take the blame off of us and put it on a president that had little to do with it. Big Business pushed for NAFTA and ensured it would pass. Ross Perot was the only candidate speak the truth...remember the sucking sound? We all hear it, especially in this industry. BTW, Bushes daddy played a huge role in NAFTA...do a little research.

 

Healthcare is spiraling out of control? Why isn't that damn Bush regulating those twelve dollar aspirins they have in the hospital? Minimum wage is not keeping pace with the current market? That dam Bush should regulate wages so that everyone makes a minimum sixteen bucks an hour and are able to afford the good life. Gas prices going thru the roof? That dam Bush should nationalize the oil companies and give us free gas to run our v-8 SUV's down to the store 6 blocks away to get a pack of smokes and more beer. Why didn't Bush take care of Katrina? That dam Bush shoulda known the mayor and governer weren't up to the job and sent Laura down there to fill up some sandbags. That Dam Bush won't even come and fix my broken washer! As for Clinton and your fascination on his sex life. I coulda cared less about his meanderings. I voted for him when he first ran. The flaw I saw in him was his sending the military to Waco to burn American women and children. His pathetic leadership abilities dropped to zero when he laid it all on Reno to take responsibility. A mini Rush/Hannity rant. Bush should not be held accountable for anything. A typical theme of his presidency that echoes with the rhetoric he spews. You bought it, hook, line and sinker.

 

Its just amazes me that after all the rhetoric we have heard,you will still not hear a straight answer on why Iraq needed to be invaded. Keep listening...it changes frequently. Amazing isn't it?

 

Perhaps instead of just hearing the rhetoric, you should attempt to LISTEN. Dems amaze me in their inability to actually utilize a brain process when the ear is functioning. I suppose it is a biological defect. Straight answers were given and I would love to reiterate them if you wish but I fear the same abnormality affects your eyes also. Please reiterate...I am anxiously awaiting and I'm not even a Dem.

 

No wait,Im sorry ,its because the Iraqis deserve freedom and democracy . Like that any of our fucking business . What about the innocent women and children being slaughtered by the masses in Africa ?

Your first sentence of reason...good job.

 

Iraq freedom and democracy is the icing on the cake. A byproduct of the immediate concern at that time to remove a Saddam whom was a clear threat to the future stability of the Middle East and ultimately our future security. Why would you be so concerned about the masses in Africa when you clearly show you have no regard for the Iraqi masses? I don't see any threat of our future security coming from Africa. If a threat from Africa were to come, I betcha we would be there to stop it. Damn, you just fumbled the snap. Rest assured Africa will be a concern soon enough. It is also a continent rich in in oil...Iraq will not be free and democratic due to our involvement. We can see that. At least some of us can.

 

Your right though, Iraqis had it much worse,sure . And dont give me that WMD ,pre-emptive bullshit either .

 

No bullshit involved. Would you rather act or react? Prior 911, we were damn good at reacting. Post 911, we are doing damn good at acting. I love pre-empting much better.

 

Again...the word preemptive and our constitution...can you cite that relationship for me?

 

Because when you have other members of the "axis of evil" COMING RIGHT OUT AND STATING PUBLICLY ,that they have /or are developing WMD's, why didnt we go after them ?

 

Axis of Evil howie...think of that rhetorically. Now think of how it was used by this administration to rouse the religous right by using the word evil...I'll let you ponder that.

 

Oh come on, do you really need the answer to that? North Korea is doing the WMD as they clearly stated years ago. Our response was to back down, gave them billions in aid to strengthen their armies even after they denied a decent monitoring program. Our current president won't go that previous trail in appeasing the N. Koreans. Wisely, we insist on diplomatic multi-national negotiations. Will they work? If it doesn't, we'll then have the nod from Japan, S. Korea, China and Russia to go in and do what needs to be done. Remember this, N. Korea has already broken the Armistice we hold with them. We don't need any further reason to stop us from making a nice parking lot out of N. Korea. Wisely, we beat the war drum softly. As for Iran, again we are utilizing multi-national diplomacy with a regime that is ultimately isolating itself from world opinion. Their bad-boy bad-ass nucleur rhetoric will eventually be their undoing. I feel that we'll be there in force also. Thank god, we have an established base in the middle of it all. Better for some good 'ol pre-empting.

 

We can't just preempt all over the globe howie. Our forces are already stretched too thin. Diplomacy and the winning is the only option. We can't go the "You are either with us, or against us" way. We need help from the international community on these issues.

 

Hold up, dude you are really slipping into moronic mode on this one.

 

Dont you find it strange that in the previous wars you mentioned in Japan and Germany ,those were called a WORLD WAR ?

 

Didn't mention the wars, I mentioned the EXIT strategies. Since you brought it up tho, you don't feel we are in a world war now?

 

Meaning that we were not the only ones that were fighting those wars. Those were different times,and much graver circumstances. Japan attacked us,so we hit them back .Learn your history before you start comparing those wars to this bullshit .

 

We are the only ones fighting terrorism now? I feel the circumstances are MUCH graver now especially with the continued proliferation of nucleur threats. Terrorism hit us and we are attacking back. You would do well to heed your own advice since YOU are the one comparing wars. I bet if you did a serious study of it, you would see the similarities.

 

Since you wanna bring up the history of wars and remind everyone about how the "Dems also used WMD blah blah" crap ,lemme ask you this . Remember a Democrat by the name of Harry S. Truman ? Yeah,he was involved in those wars you so casually mentioned.

 

Your point? Oh, that Harry was a Dem? Big deal! Lincoln was a Rep and he was the first Civil Rights crusader. So, we establish that Dems and Reps switch idealologies thru history? Harry was a leader of his time that did what needed to be done. I woulda voted him in for that reason. Same goes for Lincoln and same goes for Bush. Sorry, the present day Dems are really lacking in the qualities I see for leadership.

 

I love a dare and would be glad to point out the obvious but again, why would I continue to throw pearls before swine? It's about as meaningful as chickenshit on the pump handle.

 

Get off the bandwagon tit ,and speak up for yourself .Quit allowing yourself to be just another sheep and "yes man" .

 

Bandwagons have tits? Methinks I speak well for myself. I refuse to be the standard UAW lemming that nods approval to a mindset of little more than a "HATE BUSH" mentality.

 

Well, Dayammmm! This is the first thing in your post that is somewhat lucid! I could almost agree with you. It certainly is different from the usual crap I hear from a Dem.

 

Hit me with some facts howie...I'd love to further this discussion with anything but a rhetorical theme. Thanks.

Edited November 4, 2006 by AAISkinsFan

[megirldeth]

Kerry fucked up a joke.

 

Bush fucked up a nation, and a world. :titanic:

 

 

I like that comeback lmao

[StevenJ]

Cal50, you can't convice dumbacrats. They don't believe in truth or facts, only emotion and illogic.

[fmccap]

Cal50, you can't convice dumbacrats. They don't believe in truth or facts, only emotion and illogic.

 

Oh wise one, please enlighten us with the truth and facts!!!!!!!!!!

And for that matter what he has done that makes him worth anything.

Edited November 5, 2006 by fmccap

[dark270]

Cal50, you can't convice dumbacrats. They don't believe in truth or facts, only emotion and illogic.

 

 

YOU CANT convince repubicans either

 

 

 

Oh wise one, please enlighten us with the truth and facts!!!!!!!!!!

And for that matter what he has done that makes him worth anything.

 

 

same question ...no answer.....

 

what has bushco. done for us that was good ?

Edited November 5, 2006 by dark270

[StevenJ]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20050803-1.html

 

Economic Growth:

 

* The American Economy Is Growing And Creating Jobs. The economy is growing faster than any other major industrialized economy. Unemployment has declined to five percent, the lowest it has been since September 11th and lower than the average of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. Consumer confidence is high. Inflation remains low. The economy has already created over 2 million jobs in the last 12 months, and more Americans are working today than ever before.

 

* The Deficit Is Decreasing. Thanks to spending restraint and tax relief, the Federal deficit is projected to be $94 billion less than previously expected, and the government is ahead of pace to reach President Bush's goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009.

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20050803-1.html

 

FIRST TERM ACCOMPLISHMENTS

 

THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM

 

# In 2001, with less than a month's notice, American and British forces in Afghanistan joined with local anti-Taliban troops in an assault on the al Qaeda network and the Taliban regime that gave it safe harbor in Afghanistan.

# Passage of the USA Patriot Act met one of the president's goals. This law brought down the artificial wall separating law enforcement and intelligence officers and allowed them to talk to each other as they work to prevent future attacks.

# In 2002, President Bush proposed and Congress approved a single, unified Department of Homeland Security to improve protection against today's threats and be flexible enough to help meet the unknown threats of the future. By unifying over 22 agencies and offices, the president has improved the government's ability to guard U.S. borders and infrastructure and patrol the skies.

 

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PaulWey..._under-reported

 

One issue which did receive a small amount of coverage was the Administration's strong stance in favor of the Adam Walsh Child Exploitation Bill. After the bill passed, President Bush held a Rose Garden ceremony for signing of the bill. While this bill had widespread bipartisan support, nevertheless, it should be a topic for talk radio and television because parents need to know what is in the law. It is named after six-year old Adam Walsh, whose father found him dead in the gutter, murdered by a sex offender. The elder Walsh had worked for years to get this bill passed.....

 

Finally, President Bush issued new welfare-reform regulations stressing work and family. This is a major step forward but the country has no idea what was done or why. If you are one of those voters who are angry because you think nothing is happening you might want to look again. And while you are at it, call your local radio talk show host and urge him to discuss some of these worthwhile things the President has done, which I have outlined.

 

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/fs/4201.htm

 

Attacking global poverty has been the focus of the G-7/8 Summit and is a priority of U.S. foreign policy. President Bush has committed the United States to a true partnership with developing countries to remove obstacles to development: poor governance, trade barriers, unsustainable debt, illiteracy, hunger, and disease.

 

To achieve these ends, President Bush and other G-8 leaders agreed to action in the following areas:

 

-- World Economy: President Bush believes a dynamic, growing global economy is the ultimate poverty reduction strategy. Each of the G-7 countries committed to putting in place pro-growth policies. The U.S. is leading the way with dynamic and flexible markets and decisive action, including tax cuts that will inject $40 billion into the economy in the third quarter alone.

 

-- New Trade Round: President Bush believes that one of the most important things we can do to ignite a new era of global growth is to expand world trade. Thus, he and the other G-7 Leaders pledged to "engage personally and jointly" to ensure a successful launch of an ambitious new round of global trade negotiations in November.

 

-- A New Partnership with Africa: President Bush and the G-8 Leaders committed themselves to forging a new partnership with Africa to alleviate poverty. They welcomed the "New Africa Initiative," which embraces the same principles the President has emphasized -- responsibility and ownership. The President has made Africa a priority: he has met with 7 of the major African leaders in his first half year in office; he has instructed his Secretary of State to develop an education initiative for Africa focused on teacher training; and he will inaugurate in October the first U.S. - Sub-Saharan African Trade and Economic Cooperation Forum involving 35 African countries.

 

Edited November 5, 2006 by StevenJ

[dark270]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20050803-1.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20050803-1.html

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PaulWey..._under-reported

 

[qoute] One issue which did receive a small amount of coverage was the Administration's strong stance in favor of the Adam Walsh Child Exploitation Bill. After the bill passed, President Bush held a Rose Garden ceremony for signing of the bill. While this bill had widespread bipartisan support, nevertheless, it should be a topic for talk radio and television because parents need to know what is in the law. It is named after six-year old Adam Walsh, whose father found him dead in the gutter, murdered by a sex offender. The elder Walsh had worked for years to get this bill passed.....

 

Finally, President Bush issued new welfare-reform regulations stressing work and family. This is a major step forward but the country has no idea what was done or why. If you are one of those voters who are angry because you think nothing is happening you might want to look again. And while you are at it, call your local radio talk show host and urge him to discuss some of these worthwhile things the President has done, which I have outlined.

 

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/fs/4201.htm

 

 

 

wow the federal deficit is going down ? last i saw in 2000 it was a SURPLUS....now we have a deficit....amazing...it went down ?

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Edited November 5, 2006 by dark270

[StevenJ]

You don't supose 9/11 and our war on getting the terrorist wouldn't happen to have something to do with it? And to that extent, our military has captured and killed various key Al Qaeda operatives. Maybe if Clinton wasn't soo busy getting his game on with his mistresses we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.

Edited November 5, 2006 by StevenJ

[Heywood]

YOU CANT convince repubicans either

same question ...no answer.....

 

what has bushco. done for us that was good ?

 

By "us" do you mean autoworkers only, or everybody? I'll assume you mean everybody, including autoworkers:

 

1. Tax cuts got the economy going after 9/11, the dot-com bust, and the Enron mess. Unemployment was just reported to be 4.4%, which is the lowest in history I believe. Home ownership is at record levels. The deficit as a percentage of GDP is lower than it was when Bush took office. Fuel prices are coming down (and SUV sales are picking up!) I don't get how people continue to think this is a bad economy. By any measure, it isn't.

 

2. He appointed John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Those new justices will interpret the laws as written, and not legislate from the bench or consult "foreign law" like Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg (a former ACLU lawyer and Clinton appointee) does.

 

3. Bush finally went on the offense in dealing with terrorism, hunting them down and eliminating them. No attacks on the US since 9/11.

[cal50]

By "us" do you mean autoworkers only, or everybody? I'll assume you mean everybody, including autoworkers:

 

1. Tax cuts got the economy going after 9/11, the dot-com bust, and the Enron mess. Unemployment was just reported to be 4.4%, which is the lowest in history I believe. Home ownership is at record levels. The deficit as a percentage of GDP is lower than it was when Bush took office. Fuel prices are coming down (and SUV sales are picking up!) I don't get how people continue to think this is a bad economy. By any measure, it isn't.

 

2. He appointed John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Those new justices will interpret the laws as written, and not legislate from the bench or consult "foreign law" like Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg (a former ACLU lawyer and Clinton appointee) does.

 

3. Bush finally went on the offense in dealing with terrorism, hunting them down and eliminating them. No attacks on the US since 9/11.

 

 

 

 

All of the above with a few things added in along the way. Small things like 911,a war,a few hurricanes,a little flooding,etc. I really think some people (star wars type?) are too stupid to make an observation based on facts.