Report, edit, etc...Posted by €Hawk€ on 2004-09-29 at 20:19:52
We can be happy for one thing. Bush was not NEARLY as bad as Nixon was. We know that for sure.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2004-09-29 at 20:42:13
Bush is better than Nixon??? Nexion did stupid stuff and was forced to resign for it, Bush did stupud stuff and look --- he's still in office. I still think Bush is one of worst Presidents.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by €Hawk€ on 2004-09-29 at 23:10:47
Bush didn't do as stupid things as Nixon did. I agree, Bush comes close to Nixon in the worst presidents.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by phlemhacker99 on 2004-10-05 at 21:34:45
Bush all the way.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2004-10-05 at 21:37:13
can you explain why Bush? I don't like people just stating their opinions, I need reasons. This is, after all, in serious discussion.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2004-10-05 at 21:57:48
All the Bush supporters are so stupid. Bush is so bad the best reason to liek him is "I'm a Republican; he's a Republican". That's my cousins argument anyway. 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2004-10-05 at 22:34:05
he's not a republican..he's sort of a mix between idiocy and stupidity
besides, I know a lot of republics who hate bush
besides, I know a lot of republics who hate bush
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2004-10-05 at 23:01:43
Dang, i just watched the vice prez debate thing and 
Cheney just "noobed" Edwards. Of all the presidents/vice presidents that are running in this campaign, i like Cheney the most. I dont really like bush or kerry or even edwards; they're all pretty gay.
Cheney just "noobed" Edwards. Of all the presidents/vice presidents that are running in this campaign, i like Cheney the most. I dont really like bush or kerry or even edwards; they're all pretty gay.Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2004-10-05 at 23:07:58
lol details! how did cheney noob edwards... sounds interesting
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2004-10-05 at 23:11:11
QUOTE(devilesk @ Oct 5 2004, 10:07 PM)
lol details! how did cheney noob edwards... sounds interesting
[right][snapback]82700[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]82700[/snapback][/right]
Well that's what the commentators on Fox news said.... Well they didn't really use the word "noobed" but something close to that.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Nozomu on 2004-10-06 at 00:23:34
Yeah, Cheney proved that he knows how to be more articulate and convincing than Edwards. He also proved that lying is a totally reasonable debate tactic, at least for Republicans. Sure, Cheney may be smarter, but what an ! Did anyone catch his rudeness and bitter hatred? Do we really want that kind of malicious hate-monger running the country alongside a dimwit? "Compassionate Conservative" my ass.
! Did anyone catch his rudeness and bitter hatred? Do we really want that kind of malicious hate-monger running the country alongside a dimwit? "Compassionate Conservative" my ass.Report, edit, etc...Posted by phlemhacker99 on 2004-10-06 at 12:12:16
QUOTE(CheeZe(U) @ Oct 5 2004, 08:37 PM)
can you explain why Bush? I don't like people just stating their opinions, I need reasons. This is, after all, in serious discussion.
[right][snapback]82635[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]82635[/snapback][/right]
Yes I can. He got rid of most of al quidea and liberated Iraq from saddam.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Nozomu on 2004-10-06 at 17:03:47
Okay, he meant valid reasons. Do you think that if Kerry had been president instead of Bush he would have just let Al-Qaida go? As a direct result of President Bush's actions, Osama bin Laden is still on the loose. He "outsourced" the responsibility of capturing Osama to the very same warlords who were originally sheltering him, all so he could divert troops toward Iraq before the war was approved by Congress. Well, he let bin Laden slip away and has been trying to convince people through misleading and confusing statements that Saddam was somehow behind 9/11, which he wasn't. Don't even try to push the "he went after the terrorists" point on us. If Bush had really given a about stopping any potential terrorist attacks he would have listened to his insistent intelligence advisors and stopped them before they happened.
Now, about Iraq. You say that he got rid of Saddam, but does that automatically make the world a safer place? Well, if you look at the facts that parts of Iraq are still insecure and that swarms of new terrorists are being recruited, it makes the world a whole lot less safe. Or, you could pull a "Bush Administration" and pretend that these facts aren't true. The war was never about "liberating" the Iraqis, Bush didn't give a about them until it became politically advantageous to do so. He went in because he told us there were WMDs, which there weren't. Seriously, you have to stop using the word "liberated", because the Iraqis are under martial law and locked down - they aren't being tortured anymore, but they certainly aren't free to do what they please.
about stopping any potential terrorist attacks he would have listened to his insistent intelligence advisors and stopped them before they happened.Now, about Iraq. You say that he got rid of Saddam, but does that automatically make the world a safer place? Well, if you look at the facts that parts of Iraq are still insecure and that swarms of new terrorists are being recruited, it makes the world a whole lot less safe. Or, you could pull a "Bush Administration" and pretend that these facts aren't true. The war was never about "liberating" the Iraqis, Bush didn't give a
about them until it became politically advantageous to do so. He went in because he told us there were WMDs, which there weren't. Seriously, you have to stop using the word "liberated", because the Iraqis are under martial law and locked down - they aren't being tortured anymore, but they certainly aren't free to do what they please.Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2004-10-06 at 23:53:02
QUOTE
Well that's what the commentators on Fox news said.... Well they didn't really use the word "noobed" but something close to that.
Fox News... That biased stupid peice of
. That explains everything...Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2004-10-07 at 22:35:26
ooo who heard about the weapons inspectors report that iraq didnt have weapons of mass destruction
Report, edit, etc...Posted by phlemhacker99 on 2004-10-08 at 12:05:11
QUOTE(Nozomu @ Oct 6 2004, 04:03 PM)
Okay, he meant valid reasons. Do you think that if Kerry had been president instead of Bush he would have just let Al-Qaida go? As a direct result of President Bush's actions, Osama bin Laden is still on the loose. He "outsourced" the responsibility of capturing Osama to the very same warlords who were originally sheltering him, all so he could divert troops toward Iraq before the war was approved by Congress. Well, he let bin Laden slip away and has been trying to convince people through misleading and confusing statements that Saddam was somehow behind 9/11, which he wasn't. Don't even try to push the "he went after the terrorists" point on us. If Bush had really given a about stopping any potential terrorist attacks he would have listened to his insistent intelligence advisors and stopped them before they happened.
Now, about Iraq. You say that he got rid of Saddam, but does that automatically make the world a safer place? Well, if you look at the facts that parts of Iraq are still insecure and that swarms of new terrorists are being recruited, it makes the world a whole lot less safe. Or, you could pull a "Bush Administration" and pretend that these facts aren't true. The war was never about "liberating" the Iraqis, Bush didn't give a about them until it became politically advantageous to do so. He went in because he told us there were WMDs, which there weren't. Seriously, you have to stop using the word "liberated", because the Iraqis are under martial law and locked down - they aren't being tortured anymore, but they certainly aren't free to do what they please.
[right][snapback]82941[/snapback][/right]
about stopping any potential terrorist attacks he would have listened to his insistent intelligence advisors and stopped them before they happened.Now, about Iraq. You say that he got rid of Saddam, but does that automatically make the world a safer place? Well, if you look at the facts that parts of Iraq are still insecure and that swarms of new terrorists are being recruited, it makes the world a whole lot less safe. Or, you could pull a "Bush Administration" and pretend that these facts aren't true. The war was never about "liberating" the Iraqis, Bush didn't give a
about them until it became politically advantageous to do so. He went in because he told us there were WMDs, which there weren't. Seriously, you have to stop using the word "liberated", because the Iraqis are under martial law and locked down - they aren't being tortured anymore, but they certainly aren't free to do what they please.[right][snapback]82941[/snapback][/right]
A) He is still looking for Osama
B)It is safer.There are only so many terroists.Kerry can't make up his mind up his mind about Iraq or what to do there. He is an indesiseve bone head and everyone knows it.Who knows, They might find wepons.They could have been shipped into hiding when we went over there.The inteligence about the wepons isn't his fault.The CIA gave him crappy info.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Nozomu on 2004-10-08 at 12:44:43
Yeah, he's an indecisive bonehead who incidentally crushed Bush in a publicized debate, which you obviously didn't watch. If you had watched it on C-SPAN, and seen the two candidates as they actually are, and not as Fox News portrays them, you would be qualified to make judgements about them. Unfortunately, as ignorant of the facts as you are, you are in no position to make those kinds of calls.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2004-10-08 at 17:54:16
QUOTE
B)It is safer.There are only so many terroists.Kerry can't make up his mind up his mind about Iraq or what to do there. He is an indesiseve bone head and everyone knows it.Who knows, They might find wepons.They could have been shipped into hiding when we went over there.The inteligence about the wepons isn't his fault.The CIA gave him crappy info.
PROOF! Give me proof Kerry is a flip-flopper. As he said in the debate, he has had one constant stance on the war in Iraq.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2004-10-08 at 18:31:12
He's one of those people who think Bush is good because he's believing in the media instead of the facts. 
Plenty of those people at my school, very sad. Everytime we argue, I win and they are still for Bush.
Why I don't like Bush:
1. He is Ignorant
2. He made fun of the rest of the world
3. He destroyed our allies
4. He killed many innocent people in Iraq with the loss of thousands of soldiers
5. He claims the war is over and when infact, hundreds of lives have been lost after his official speech
6. He is retarded with the following "proofs":
-He got a 1200~ on the SAT (about 200 points below the average of the school he went to: Yale)
-He averaged C's
-His vocabulary is worse than mine (that is saying a lot)
-His logic never makes sense, but since the majority of Americans don't know why the heck he's talking about (he doesn't either), they just go with it and support him because he's Republican.
Plenty of those people at my school, very sad. Everytime we argue, I win and they are still for Bush.
Why I don't like Bush:
1. He is Ignorant
2. He made fun of the rest of the world
3. He destroyed our allies
4. He killed many innocent people in Iraq with the loss of thousands of soldiers
5. He claims the war is over and when infact, hundreds of lives have been lost after his official speech
6. He is retarded with the following "proofs":
-He got a 1200~ on the SAT (about 200 points below the average of the school he went to: Yale)
-He averaged C's
-His vocabulary is worse than mine (that is saying a lot)
-His logic never makes sense, but since the majority of Americans don't know why the heck he's talking about (he doesn't either), they just go with it and support him because he's Republican.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Nozomu on 2004-10-09 at 13:36:19
Don't forget that he encouraged attacks on our own soldiers. "Bring 'em on!" is possibly the dumbest thing he's said.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MapUnprotector on 2004-10-09 at 14:38:31
so what u think of the recent townhall debate
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2004-10-09 at 17:35:04
Bush sucks at Debating. He repeats himself so many times and you see Kerry laughing at him. I don't understand how he can not feel humiliated
Report, edit, etc...Posted by VoidArchon(MC) on 2004-10-09 at 18:14:20
Since i dont live in USA i'd vote for Bush because he's like a stand up comedian
Report, edit, etc...Posted by gftgy on 2004-10-23 at 12:34:55
Your all stupid idiots voting for kerry, you just beleive what the press tells you. you think its the whole story, you think they arent lying, you think that bush has driven this country to the ground. CLINTON IS WHO HAS DONE THAT! he made plenty of problems while he was in office, but the BIG problems the press only brought up after he was gone and blamed bush!
As for the war in Iraq, which would you prefere?
Us going there and losing a couple thousand people?
Or the terrorists planting bombs everywhere and killing millions of people?
Take your pick, it's not a hard one.
As for the war in Iraq, which would you prefere?
Us going there and losing a couple thousand people?
Or the terrorists planting bombs everywhere and killing millions of people?
Take your pick, it's not a hard one.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2004-10-23 at 13:07:00
QUOTE
Us going there and losing a couple thousand people?
Or the terrorists planting bombs everywhere and killing millions of people?
Or the terrorists planting bombs everywhere and killing millions of people?
If we didn't take out Iraq there would be less terrorists in Europe and other places. Also, Clinton did nothing bad with this country. Don't believe me? Name on thing.