John McCain!! :)

Sir GH<br><font size=1>ah yeah</font> wrote:

I fail to see the major difference between then and now. They are still being terrorized, just by a different country.

They're being terrorized by the terrorists in their country! If you really feel that we haven't helped them any, then do you feel the same way about slavery in the South? That we didn't change anything there? Things weren't better for the former slaves for a LONG time.

The war could end tomorrow, but Bush insists the US continues, fully knowing they are still killing innocent people daily. And don't say "that's the way war is". Such a pitiful attempt at rationalization is only defering from the problem at hand.

How can we pull out when the terrorists would overrun the country, since the Iraqi government is not stable enough yet?

In the Civil War, we made the mistake of pulling Union troops out of the South too quickly. Things basically went back to the way they were. That's what would happen in Iraq.

Kerry is promoting such non-violent ways of solving this problem.

With his "non-violent" approach, Saddam would still be in power, slaughtering his own people.

lifelong conservatives whose levels of cognitive development are still at stage one.

Lovely, so you resort to insulting us.

To war-obsessed Americans who have bought into Bush's scare tactics, which is a good percentage of them, war is the only answer. To truly compassion-literate Americans, war is not the answer. Read my signature below.

Do you plan to explain how Kerry's non-violent tactics would have taken Saddam out of power?

Or do you feel we should have sweet-talked him as his sons raped 10 year olds?

Speaking of saying things "for election reasons". By banning gay marriage, and quoting the bible on such matters, Bush has showed exactly what he thinks of gay people.

... That he doesn't think they should be married... that doesn't mean he doesn't think they deserve respect and tolerance. He just thinks we shouldn't change the marriage laws.

More than once I've seen Bush on TV saying a marriage should be between a man and a woman. Any Bush-voting conservative who calls Kerry a flip-flop is a hypocrite for the above reason.

I don't see how Bush is a "flip-flop" for saying that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but that gay people should be treated with dignity and respect... Especially since Kerry is saying the same exact thing minus the Marriage Amendment, unless of course Kerry is talking to a gay crowd, in which case he plays up Bush's "intolerance".

"I passed tenth grade, unlike you."

Wow, you're just getting on my nerves now, and I'm not going to skirt around the issue anymore: you're a stupid bitch.

You don't know anything. You're a parrot. "Saddam this, Saddam that!" That's right, just repeat whatever the fuck the Bush camp tells you to.

Well you know what, fuckup? Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, and "thaving Iraq" didn't help all the people who were and are STILL unemployed, who cannot feed their families, and who are moving into poverty. I have a sneaky feeling that the same amount of civilians are being killed NOW as they were under Saddam -- not to mention the fact that IT'S NONE OF OUR FUCKING BUSINESS TO GO INTO OTHER PEOPLE'S COUNTRIES!

Going into Iraq didn't help MY city get out of it's debt -- despite Bush's nationalistic BS -- NYC has barely seen ANY federal aid, despite our being a figurehead for that goddamned asshole's campaign.

Isn't it surprising how, after another Bin Laden tape appears, the Bush camp doesn't give a fuck? Don't you find that odd?

No, I think you're too much of a MORON.

You support a bigoted, racist, born-again lying son of a bitch. Someone whose party has been threatening black colleges, sending out flyers saying that Democrats are supposed to vote on Wednesday, and telling people that they can vote over the phone.

I hate people like you. You are an ignorant, ignorant slob. Your parents must be horrible people to have raised you to be such a mindless dumbass.

At this point, if I met you, I would consider beating the crap out of you.

STOP HARASSING THE OTHER PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD WITH YOUR UNFOUNDED, CHILDISH INSULTS AND GODDAMNED RIGHT WING BULLSHIT.

[/rant]

ah yeah
McCain french fries
anus?
born-again vagina?

FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote:

They're being terrorized by the terrorists in their country!

How can we pull out when the terrorists would overrun the country, since the Iraqi government is not stable enough yet?

USA to the rescue, killing 100,000 people. Hurrah!

With his "non-violent" approach, Saddam would still be in power, slaughtering his own people.

That is the past. We're talking about now.

Lovely, so you resort to insulting us.

Truth hurts, don't it?

Do you plan to explain how Kerry's non-violent tactics would have taken Saddam out of power?

Or do you feel we should have sweet-talked him as his sons raped 10 year olds?

I'm not talking about Saddam. That was in the past. The problem is what is happening NOW. Stop changing the subject.

... That he doesn't think they should be married... that doesn't mean he doesn't think they deserve respect and tolerance. He just thinks we shouldn't change the marriage laws.

So Bush is showing tolerance by giving them less rights than heterosexual couples?

While it's true that both Bush and Kerry don't agree with making gay marriage legal nationwide, at least Kerry is willing to give every state the right to choose whether they want legalize gay marriage or not. Bush on the other side has definitely crossed the line by trying to put a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

I guess Bush thinks that giving a homosexual couple the right to marriage is far more threatening than allowing people to use guns.

Sir GH, most of this is in fact about what is happening now and what each candidate would do in the future given a particular situation, but you have to look at how each candidate reacted in past situations to gauge how he will react in future situations.

Perhaps you (to the reader, not Sir GH) are dissatisfied with Bush's performance; then give a reason why Kerry's performance would have been better. Do not try to take Kerry's side based on the randomly possible chance that he may have done a better job. A lot of the arguments here are all "Bush is bad because..." rather than "Kerry is good because...". "Bush is bad because..., and Kerry would probably be better because he would have reacted differently..." doesn't cut it. You need "Bush is bad because..., and Kerry is good because..." using the same issue. Remember...don't attack on cross what was not brought up in direct in the same argument.

Sir GH<br><font size=1>ah yeah</font> wrote:

FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote:

They're being terrorized by the terrorists in their country!

How can we pull out when the terrorists would overrun the country, since the Iraqi government is not stable enough yet?

USA to the rescue, killing 100,000 people. Hurrah!

With his "non-violent" approach, Saddam would still be in power, slaughtering his own people.

That is the past. We're talking about now.

Lovely, so you resort to insulting us.

Truth hurts, don't it?

Do you plan to explain how Kerry's non-violent tactics would have taken Saddam out of power?

Or do you feel we should have sweet-talked him as his sons raped 10 year olds?

I'm not talking about Saddam. That was in the past. The problem is what is happening NOW. Stop changing the subject.

... That he doesn't think they should be married... that doesn't mean he doesn't think they deserve respect and tolerance. He just thinks we shouldn't change the marriage laws.

So Bush is showing tolerance by giving them less rights than heterosexual couples?

Killing "100,000 people" may be necessary for progress. Do not throw out her argument because "100,000 people" died. You need more to your rebuttal.

Cheap insults are not truth.

In a moderated debate, sure you can attack someone for bringing in tangents, but in an argument such as this you might say: "This is off topic, but <rebuttal>." Leaving it at "Stay on topic" looks really bad not only for her, but for you as well.

The problem may be what is happening now...but what is happening now and how do you plan to resolve it?

I am not sure if Bush wants to restrict the rights of homosexual couples or if he wants to just disallow marriage between them. I wouldn't mind if the government allowed civil unions with the same basic rights as a married couple. If anyone knows Bush's plan, I would like to know, please.

Under Pressure wrote:

"I passed tenth grade, unlike you."

Wow, you're just getting on my nerves now, and I'm not going to skirt around the issue anymore: you're a stupid bitch.

You don't know anything. You're a parrot. "Saddam this, Saddam that!" That's right, just repeat whatever the fuck the Bush camp tells you to.

Well you know what, fuckup? Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, and "thaving Iraq" didn't help all the people who were and are STILL unemployed, who cannot feed their families, and who are moving into poverty. I have a sneaky feeling that the same amount of civilians are being killed NOW as they were under Saddam -- not to mention the fact that IT'S NONE OF OUR FUCKING BUSINESS TO GO INTO OTHER PEOPLE'S COUNTRIES!

Going into Iraq didn't help MY city get out of it's debt -- despite Bush's nationalistic BS -- NYC has barely seen ANY federal aid, despite our being a figurehead for that goddamned asshole's campaign.

Isn't it surprising how, after another Bin Laden tape appears, the Bush camp doesn't give a fuck? Don't you find that odd?

No, I think you're too much of a MORON.

You support a bigoted, racist, born-again lying son of a bitch. Someone whose party has been threatening black colleges, sending out flyers saying that Democrats are supposed to vote on Wednesday, and telling people that they can vote over the phone.

I hate people like you. You are an ignorant, ignorant slob. Your parents must be horrible people to have raised you to be such a mindless dumbass.

At this point, if I met you, I would consider beating the crap out of you.

STOP HARASSING THE OTHER PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD WITH YOUR UNFOUNDED, CHILDISH INSULTS AND GODDAMNED RIGHT WING BULLSHIT.

[/rant]

"Saving Iraq" is not something that, if it were to happen, would happen over night. I can't see how you are already making assumptions on the future of Iraq.

Is it none of our business to go into other people's countries? Is it our responsibility to ensure peace and stability around the world, as the single most powerful nation in the world? I don't know. It is your belief that the answers are 'no', but, personally, I would lean toward 'yes'.

Did the Bush camp totally disregard the video? How do you know they aren't doing everything they can to ensure the safety of the USA. I don't see where you are backing this up.

"You support a bigoted, racist, born-again lying son of a bitch. Someone whose party has been threatening black colleges, sending out flyers saying that Democrats are supposed to vote on Wednesday, and telling people that they can vote over the phone."

First of all, I have seen NOTHING which would even give an inkling of an idea that she is bigoted, racist, born-again, lying, nor a son of anyone, let alone that of a bitch.

But I agree, we obviously should hate her because of her party. Hell, let's hate all white people. That's a good idea. White people are responsible for many grave acts. They enslaved African Americans, they kill each other, they rape people, they are bigots and, oh dear God! The list goes on and on! Those whites!

I think it's laughable to see that you are attributing those things to the Republican Party. Fine, then I attribute every conceivable crime to have ever been committed at any one point in time by a caucasian person, and thus I condemn the entire race.

I can clearly see that not only one side of this debate is closed-minded.

<

iGSM wrote:

&lt;&lt;Shouldn't a candidate say what is in their heart and not what will get them elected?&gt;&gt;

They SHOULD. But often don't.

Meh, take that non-compulsory voting.

What?

Oh. It's all written out in the quote. :-)

Anyway, don't vote for what is in the candidate's heart, vote for what they will do. They will most likely do what will keep them in favor of the public eye, thus what they really feel is irrelevant.

I'm Hispanic, not white BTW :)

All I have to say is:

na na na na na na, Bush won.

The end.

Oi, I was so nervous yesterday I was sick all day, and couldn't sleep...so I've been online since about eight yesterday evening, watching the outcome. And while I'm still really nervous about Ohio, I can't help but saying I'm so happy about the outcome!

It was funny...at one point, I read an article on how Florida was poised to be the 'next Florida'. I hope there ends up being no 'next Florida', though I guess it could be Ohio. Do you guys think we'll have to wait another 36 days this time around?

Ja ne!

I don't think we'll have to wait another 36 days. I predict that it will all be over by, say, 3:00 PM today.