Both Bush and Kerry are bad candidates

worse choice in a long time, i think Leslie Nielsen would be a better choice.

is it just me or dose it worry you that we agree on something?
 
I don't like it. It give all the electoral votes to the majority in the state; even if it's just by a handful of votes. It doesn't make the candiates more moderate, which I think a pure voting system would do.






Exactly, so a popular voting system would favor the center, and we might actually get somewhere; rather than this tug-of-war. I don't nescessarily believe it would happen right away, but people would be less inclined to vote for the less of two evils, and would actually think there's a chance for their candiate.





I don't believe it is. I don't know a single republican or democrat that thinks these candiates match their values completely. Most people are center, and these guys aren't.





haa, you said the same thing...

Hopefully we change the voting system. Yet I don't see that happening, because it's the power that be.
 
If you were Osama Bin Laden, crawling from hole to hole, one step ahead of US forces, you'd love to see Bush get 4 more years?? How about if you were Momar Quadaffi, he's been a pretty good boy lately, but of his own choice? He'd like to see Bush get re-elected, wouldn't he?? Saddam Hussien, he's pulling for Bush isn't he?? Quadaffi, and many other terrorist leaders are taking note of Hussien's new living quarters, knowing full well that if a Democrat were our president, he'd still be ruling Iraq, and working with them in their terrorist activities. Terrorists really do have reasons to hate Bush.
 
All of them?? The British, Itialian, Polish, Ukrainian, Dutch, Austrailian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Japanese, Thai, Danish, and about 20 more that have assisted us in someway in the Iraq war? Okay, you'll tell me that just their LEADERS like Bush, the people of those countries don't. Maybe those people should worry then about replacing their own leaders before complaining about ours.
 
Are you serious about EdwarRAB? He is a junior Senator who was favored by most strategists to loss his reelection bid in NC. He doesn't have the experience and his background as a trial lawyer makes me doubt that, if elected, his administration will enact any tort reform.
 
A large number of Italian companies have gotten decent size contracts for work in Iraq and Kuwait by the US government. The Poles have gotten work a well, the Ukrainians I believe were threated with the withdraw of aid, the Dutch probably got signifjcent chunks of cash, the Aussies, not sure about them, Romiania for sure got threatened or bribed, bulgaria the same, the japanese, not sure, the Thai got threatened or birbed, not sure about the Danish. Most of the coaltion was bribed or threatend with revokes of military/economic aid.

Momar Quadaffi offered to give up his WMD during the 1996-1998 term of Clintion to the British. Also, he was losing billions and with the rising cost of oil, basic economics takes over.

OBL is becomming simply a poster. This new Al Queada is far more dangerous, with no central leadership, thousanRAB of cells, and recurits comming from every part of the globe, terror has been greatly helped by Bush.

Saddam wasn't much a terrorist, and he was anti-fundemnetalism, something that ****** of thousanRAB of terrorists. OBL was out to get Saddam for that reason. Besides, we now have free reign to attack the US and other foreginers in Iraq while earning the support of arabs and muslims acorss the world. terror has been greatly helped by Bush.

Bush has also screwed up Afghanistan. litteraly Nato only controls Kabul and a few other cities. The south, with help from Pakistan, is firmly in the control of the terrorists.

Terrorism is streaking across the globe in unprecedenent ways due to bush's acts. In a democract was in office, he probably wouldn't be harming them, but he wouldn't be helping them like Bush is.

A major new playground, a anti-fundemnetalist ruler gone, thousanRAB of new recruits, new more deadly restructing, unified hate of the US, what else could a terrorist ask for?
 
The only thing Kerry has going for him is he's not Bush, and vice versa.

Fortunately they both have enough skeletons in the closet and brain freezes that neither has to actually address the issues, they can just attack each other personally.

The press, and most voters, much prefer that anyway.

Waxy
 
65 years ago it was Nazis. Today it's terrorists. When we got Hitler, what happened to the Nazis? They fell apart. Like terrorism will, if we get the right people.
 
I gave you litterally 3 days and this was the best you could come up with?

The Nazis were considerablly different then modern terrorism. One, they had the state supporting them, two, most of their operations were overt, three, they abided to many of the rules of war, four, they wore recognized uniforms, five, they operated through international communcation lines, six, they did not resort to the activites we are seeing today, such as beheadings.

If you think terrorism is anything like a state government, you've got another thing comming. Terrorism is more like the mob spread across the globe with a thousand Dons.
 
I think most Americans are wondering what they're going to do.

Live with this FUBAR for 4 more years

Or Settle for that FUBAR for 4 years

Just close your eyes and pin the tail on the donkey.... :rolleyes:
 
scary thought of the evning, do you know the reason that Hitler gave for invading Poland? he had to stop the terrorists, they were an iminent threaght to his country, as proven by (staged) attacks on German land.
 
Well, sorry I don't spend much of my time trying to convince YOU of something. :) My desire to post here takes a distant back seat to my fastination with reading the postings of the Bush haters.
 
i pretty much agree. if bin laden was adequately hunted 3 years ago when he should have been, the al qaeda network would have eventually fell apart. now that al qaeda has more decentralized and set to auto-pilot, bin ladens death will not have such an impact now. bush wasted time by not dealing with bin laden immediately, but quickly shifting our attention to iraq. in fact, i seriously doubt bush ever wanted to eliminated bin laden then, far less now. it is obvious that bush really doesnt care about reducing terror. in fact, the mere threat of terror increasing is good for his agenda. bush just wants prime stake in the iraqi oil, and thinks nothing of putting our troops lives on the line to get it.

have you heard of any terrorists being attacked lately? in fact, have we attacked ANY terrorists since the half-ass taliban strike in afghanistan?
 
Back
Top