Living in Jersey we've got one of the most corrupt senators around (I know that is redundant.) This guy took rolexes, suits, tvs, and cash from a Chinese crook and slithered out of an ethics commitee. Now he's been taking $140G from Iranian terrorists.
Originally posted by MoeGatesNot to mention the President. Oh wait, I guess I'm helping the terrorists by saying that.
Oh good grief. Decorum, people. No one mentioned the president or the terrorists. You're rapidly turning into a parody of yourself. Anytime anyone criticizes someone unpopular they're labeled an enemy of free speech by folks like you.
Using a key to gouge expletives on another's vehicle is a sign of trust and friendship.
I supported McCain in the primary. Thank GOD that didn't work it. The last thing the GOP needs is that schmuck running the country. If you think Bush is beating the war drum, McCain probably would've had us invading six countries on the 12th. Not to mention is campaign finance laws that restrict our basic freedom of speech. But never fear, McCain is taking on the most important issue in the country right now: Boxing Reform.
What, Grimis, because a guy was in the military he's automatically a pig-headed warmonger?! Sure, lets ignore the fact the guy was kept in a VietCong prisoner of war camp and has endured more trauma, pain, and forging of his SPIRIT than you'll ever go through. Lets ignore the fact we've had military men as Presidents (Jackson, Grant, Harrison, Eisenhower, I probably missed) and with the exception of Grant, they were all GOOD Presidents during times of international PEACE. Lets ignore the fact that it's morons like you that scorn the military, giving it a bad rep and forcing it to have legions of PR men, damage controllers and the like for things that are normal military business. Lets look at what you said here..
"Not to mention is campaign finance laws that restrict our basic freedom of speech."
So you're telling me you WANT negative ad campaigns, instead of actual debates over the stinking issues? You WANT people like Bush, being bought out by Tobacco and Corporations, and Gore, being bought out by labor unions and environmentalists? You want to have repeats of Election '01?! You, sir, are insane.
Originally posted by BoromirMarkWhat, Grimis, because a guy was in the military he's automatically a pig-headed warmonger?! Sure, lets ignore the fact the guy was kept in a VietCong prisoner of war camp and has endured more trauma, pain, and forging of his SPIRIT than you'll ever go through.
Whoa! Back this truck up here a second. Me saying that McCain would've gotten us into the war has little to do with being in the military. Besides I have a tremendous amound of admiration of McCain for the fact that he survived brutal conditions and came out relatively ok.
Originally posted by BoromirMarkLets ignore the fact we've had military men as Presidents (Jackson, Grant, Harrison, Eisenhower, I probably missed) and with the exception of Grant, they were all GOOD Presidents during times of international PEACE. Lets ignore the fact that it's morons like you that scorn the military, giving it a bad rep and forcing it to have legions of PR men, damage controllers and the like for things that are normal military business.
This is probably the first time a very conserviatve Republican has ever been accused of giving the military a bad name.
Originally posted by BoromirMarkSo you're telling me you WANT negative ad campaigns, instead of actual debates over the stinking issues? You WANT people like Bush, being bought out by Tobacco and Corporations, and Gore, being bought out by labor unions and environmentalists? You want to have repeats of Election '01?! You, sir, are insane
It's this great thing we have called Freedom of Speech. Besides, negative campaigns existed long before the days of PACs, unions, and mass media.
Next time, try refraining from the name calling. I would usually expect that from the Liberals.
It is so funny that people keep downing Bush, saying he is "bought" by this company or that... blah blah, when it is totally not the case. I hated Clinton, but at least I bashed him about stuff he actually did. There is no denying that Bush has done a great job since he took office... stalling an economic downturn that began before he took office and could have bottomed after September 11th, responding quickly and correctly to the terrorist attack (not like Clinton's missile lobs) and standing up to the pathetic UN. If you want to talk about someone who is bought, look at (Joe) Gray Davis, California Prostitue Governor. If you want to see something funny, go to www.egray.org . It is an "ebay" style site that basically lists every bribe that Gray Davis has accepted. It is ridiculous that you hate the fact that a Republican is in office so much that you have to reach so-far and accuse him of being "bought" when someone like THIS is so prominant in politics. Gore was not the man for the job, this time. The Executive branch needed a serious shake-up after the Clinton ordeal (I am sorry, his administration was one huge stain), and Gore would not have been able to do that. If you can say anything about Bush, he definitly has restored some of the dignity that the office is supposed to hold, and that was what this country needed. If you do not like Bush, instead of supporting whatever yahoo happens to be at the top of the Democratic food chain, find a real canditate, and you will get more respect from me. Bush was a good choice to run (Colin Powell would have been better, but I can understand his hesitancy), and has been doing a decent job since he took office. Why is that so bad to admit?
Craig Reade "Pool Boy" Chris Jericho stole my beard. That is right, I had it first.
Hmm.. peace? Involvement in Bosnia to cover up his blowjob? Threats to attack Iraq to draw attention away from impeachment scandals? Remember Somolia? The only reason we did not have MORE war is because Clinton was spineless, and everytime someone DID attack us (the Cole bombing, embassy bombing) he chickened out, and showed no leadership. Clinton lashed out militarily at anything that was weak and moved when he needed the distraction, but when it came down to NECESSARY military action, he was nowhere to be found. As far as prosperity goes- riding off of the economic boom from the end of the first Bush's term (yes, it was Bush 41's economic policies that lead to that, nothing that Clinton did), and the downturn of his second admin (Remember a thing called dot-com?) does not strike me as economic prosperity. Your 0-2 on those arguments. Yup, Clinton got a hummer. He also filed false affidavite, sold the White House for campaign donations, and let the country down by refusing to stad up for us in the international community. Sure- I will admit, that I would probably like to party with Clinton. He sounds like a fun guy. But he was a terrible president- usung the Office for SOCIAL gain and having fun for 8 years does not make you a good leader- though it will make you popular with the masses...
Craig Reade "Pool Boy" Chris Jericho stole my beard. That is right, I had it first.
Originally posted by JaguarHow are Clinton's missle lobs different from Bush's missle lobs? I'm so confused.
Perhaps the fact that we followed it up with further attacks, perhaps the fact that they weren't merely part of a "wag the dog" scenario to take attention away from his breaking of the law. as hell there is certianly no difference.(God that's dripping with sarcasm even for me)
You know, at the time I was thinking the *wag the dog* thing too. I guess in retrospect, that kind of wore off after bin Laden turned out to be an actual threat. Anyway, Bush didn't really accomplish that much. Sure we stuck to our guns and when Afghanistan wouldn't turn over bin Laden, we blew up their country. But we still don't have bin Laden.
Damn. I misspelled 'missile' twice. Sheesh.
"You gotta hate somebody before this is over. Them, me, it doesn't matter."
"Hate, who do I hate? You tell me."
"Who do you love?"
-Wintermute to Case in William Gibson's Neuromancer
You could just as easily call the current Iraq stuff a "wag the dog" scenario to help the GOP in the upcoming elections and/or distract attention from the failure to capture bin Laden. Trying to speculate about Hidden Motivations gets you nowhere (or at least, is certainly not going to convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you.)
Personally, I think that if you knew bin Laden was this kind of threat years ago, then yeah, we should have elected YOU President I guess, 'cause no one else seemed to know that. I think hindsight is a liiitttle bit too convenient on this one.
Three Faces of Dean: Teenage Riot, T.R., and now this guy
You see this? You see how my body's glowing like that? Yeah... a lot of people can't do that. Come get some of this glowing. Oh, okay, you. You want some. You want some of the glowing. Look, man... your soul... I'm going to totally floss with it and chew on your spirit. I read that somewhere. But I'll do it.
My doubt is on the location of this attack. Yes, Jordan (in relations to the rest of the region) is moderate, but what would they accomplish killing 20,000 Arabs. All that could possibly do is cause a potential backlash against Al Qaeda.