alison watkins alison watkins

I may not be John Kerry, but I Approve this Message

▼

I may not be John Kerry, but I Approve this Message

Go Johnny Go!

from JoeUser Forums
People bitch that Kerry "flip flops". In an ever-changing world, one has to change their thoughts on subject matter or there would be no progression. If people did not change their opinions about weighty issues, then this world would be a drastically different place. Think about women's issues and African American's rights....

Republicans make me think of Elmer Fudd walking around with his musket.....

Bush lied to the American people. Thousands have died.

Are we really better off then we were 4 years ago?

What don't you like about John Kerry, peace or prosperity?
politics
14,040 views 47 replies
Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top
I would vote for Kerry since he is much more confident and far more realistic on important issuses than Bush.
ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #28 from PolMach Forums Top
But a bird in the hand beats two in the bush. In military terms, its much better to destroy one enemy, and then the other instead of trying to fight both.


Which last time I checked all Major conflict was done in Afghanistan before the Iraq situation.

Though your principle goes against World War 2 if you applied your principle to that war.

- Grim X
Reply #29 from PolMach Forums Top
I would vote for Kerry since he is much more confident and far more realistic on important issuses than Bush.


I AM voting Badnarik, because if you vote for the 'lesser of two weasals' you still are voting for weasal.

- Grim X
'Say it loud!!'
'I am Libertarian and Proud!!'
Reply #30 from JoeUser Forums Top
T-Bone...admittedly I have only seen this issue on the surface and I am not fully aware of all the details. This issue of the future cost of our healthcare system remains unaddressed by both candidates, which is sad.
Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top
Bush did not bring more security to Americans. Instead the wolrld now is more insecure and terrorists are gaining ground because of Bushes right wing policy.
In fact Bush is responsible of the killing of more than 1000 American brave soldiers so far. All of whome died just to make Bush and his group wealthier and more powerfull. Liberation of Irak??? what about the distruction instead of liberation of Irak. Well whay not since Bush's associates are going to rebuild Irak( more distruction = more business).
Reply #32 from PolMach Forums Top
Last time I checked all the terrorist are gathering in one place...Iraq, which makes it easier to round them up or take them out so that could be a flipside to your opinion.

- Grim X
Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
Which last time I checked all Major conflict was done in Afghanistan before the Iraq situation.


Well, supposedly its the same situation in Iraq, and it isn't exactly pacified yet either.

Though your principle goes against World War 2 if you applied your principle to that war.


Well, yeah it sort of does actually.... Germany didn't do too well in fighting on two fronts pretty much alone, did they.

Reply #34 from PolMach Forums Top
Though last time I checked Australia and Britain (though should not forget Poland) have all committed troops to Iraq, while there is a STRONG German Bundeswehr Force in Afghanistan.

- Grim X
Reply #35 from PolMach Forums Top
In fact Bush is responsible of the killing of more than 1000 American brave soldiers so far. All of whome died just to make Bush and his group wealthier and more powerfull.


DEATH TO BUSH!!! He is evil as the devil, if not the devil himself. He sent people into Iraq because somehow, hes going to GAIN money!!! Alex, please tell me your ingenius theory on how Bush and his "friends" stand to profit from this war??(im saying profit money wise, we all already know that we will profit from the liberty it ensures and from the terorrism that has been stopped) Really im very interested, because though i've heard many claims, i have yet to see ANY proof of this, in fact i havnt even seen them back it up with opinion, just the claims.

And PS- I usually dont comment on spelling errors, but if you can't spell Iraq by now people are going to question if you really know what you are talking about.
Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top
DEATH TO BUSH!!!


OK. Despite my first JU blog -- "DEATH TO CONSERVATIVES" -- I must protest. I've thought about it a lot. The Republic is bigger than George Bush.
Reply #37 from PolMach Forums Top
Myrrh it was sarcasm, Mitch21 is conservative.

- GX
Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top
Okay at least I know to avoid this blog. Talk about looney.
Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top
There are 2 documentary films that give you a precise idea of what is behind the dstruction of Irak: 9/11 and le monde selon Bush.

Please note that the spelling of Irak is correct :

dictionary.com
"
irak

n : a republic in the Middle East in western Asia; the ancient civilization of Mesopotamia was in the area now known as Iraq; modern government is involved in state-sponsored terrorism [syn: Iraq, Republic of Iraq, Al-Iraq, Irak]"


Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
There are lots of govenments and dictators who sponsor terrorism. none of them is worth the lives of 1000 brave american soldiers.
Terrorism was never the purpose of destroying Iraq. it money and ...
Reply #43 from PolMach Forums Top
If you are basing everything you believe about these two candidates on two documentaries you watched, you need to take some time to find other sources. Just because it is on film or in a "documentary" doesn't mean it is accurate.
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reply #42 By: Alex (Anonymous) - 10/14/2004 3:39:56 AM
There are lots of govenments and dictators who sponsor terrorism. none of them is worth the lives of 1000 brave american soldiers.
Terrorism was never the purpose of destroying Iraq. it money and ...


Your talking out your ear, cause your mouth be knowing better.
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top
Oh shit. Alison, there's been a major screw up. Someone forgot to give you the cheat sheet for discussions here:

Free Republic: Reasonable. Democratic Underground: Whacked Out, Man!
Reply #46 from PolMach Forums Top
ya see, there was something we call 9/11... it killed thousands and the economy crashed


The recession began March 2001, 6 months before 9/11.

Reply #4 By: Citizen drmiler - 10/13/2004 7:04:18 PM
Reply #2 By: alison watkins - 10/13/2004 7:02:03 PM
Bush knew that they were planing the terrorist attacks ....

Show some PROOF! Of couse none exsists But don't let stop you from trying.


There was that Aug PDB report "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.".....so if he read the PDB I think he would know that they were planning an attack.

You may be forgetting we have captured over 75% of Al-Quieda


That figure has been disputed....from CNNs fact check

Claim: Bush said that 75 percent of known al Qaeda members have been brought to justice.
CNN Fact Check: Bush incorrectly suggests that under his watch 75 percent of al Qaeda's membership has been brought to justice. CIA officials have estimated that 75 percent of the two-dozen or so known al Qaeda leaders, as of September 11, 2001, have been killed or captured.
The non-partisan International Institute for Strategic Studies estimates that al Qaeda has 18,000 potential operatives, but there is no official data on the size of al Qaeda's total membership, in part because it is difficult to track the number of new recruits since the Iraq war began.
Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top
But shouldn't we focus on one thing at a time. Wouldn't catching the bastards who blew up the twin towers be number one on the list of threats??


If the onlyt thing you concentrate on are the claws of the tiger, the teeth will rip you to shreds while you are 'concentrating' on your one thing.

I think you better check your front lawn for a black helicopter. Only this one is going to have men in white jackets and bearing nice coats for you.