HA HA

[GeorgeBush]

Well how did George Bush cheat now? He didn't, ha ha. What are you sorry liberals going to do with your lives now. It looks to me that people are switching over to Republican, and if you don't believe me just look at the election results. People are getting wiser and realizing that the Liberal Democrat way of thinking and living is what is bringing this country down. Well I have a Victory Party to go to so I will leave with these few words. YOU LOSE HA HA HA HA HA.

[Dick Cheney]

Just like I tought ya. Good boy George, let's practice some other talking points...

[democratssuck]

We need to understand them, not drop bombs on them? We need to fight a more "sensitive" war??

Oh yes! Remember that when they are preparing to cut off your head. Say to them; "Awwwwwwww. now you don't REALLY want to do this, do you? Let's talk about it."
Yea, rrrrrrrrrrrrriiight!!!!!!

Face it! Your precious lying war criminal (Kerry) LOST! He should have been tried for treason 30 years ago!

[KerryMan]

Wuff Wuf wuf wuf. Hey dummies are you all too stupid to see that NY voted for John Kerry in a landslide! In fact if you take note all the important states (money, power, influence) the Northeast, and west coast voted Kerry.

The people in the Southern Belt, Plains states voted for your guy. The farmers, cowboys and orange grove workers.

Why do all you Reps say such nasty things with anyone who doesn't support you? and for your information the Democratic Party has experienced an unexpected increase in voter registration, not the Reps.

Time to have your anger management class!

[What is interesting]

If you look at the results Suffolk county was almost split. More people voted for Bush then was expected. And if you look at the votes we should be very proud. People for the most part jumped back and fourth between the parties.Long Islanders and in particular Suffolk residents did not vote straight party lines. They voted in their own self interest which is what they should do, consider who would be best to represent them. The only problem is they went straight incumbent. Newsday is doing the sophisticated voter on the Island a disservice.Take out the bias and present the candidates ideas so people can make an informed choice. We need the best people available to move us forward, stop with the personal attacks, stop letting politicians take credit for things they didn't do, loose the idea that candidates are only as good as the party they represent and listen to them. You will find the best candidates are the ones not to the right or the left, but the ones in the middle. Stop getting wrapped up in parties and vote for people who can articulate creative ways to make life here on Long Island better, who have ideas to best address our concerns, and who cares more about representing the people they are elected to represent then the prospect of merely being elected or re-elected.

[Oracles]

KerryMan proves why the Democratic party is in long-term trouble nationally when he writes of "important states", thus implying that others (e.g. "red" states) are insignificant. Perhaps he should remember that there are millions of Americans living in those "insignificant" states. See the following op-ed piece written by Democrat Zell Miller for a better explanation:

I tried to tell you . . .
Democrats repel voters, who put faith in freedom
Published on: 11/04/04

America's faith in freedom has been reaffirmed. With the re-election of President Bush, America recommitted itself once again to expanding freedom and promoting liberty. Only the 1864 re-election of Abraham Lincoln, the 1944 re-election of Franklin Roosevelt and the 1980 election of Ronald Reagan rival this victory as milestones in the preservation of our security by the advancement of freedom.
This election validated not just freedom, but also the faith our Founding Fathers placed in average folks to navigate the course of this great nation. By weighing the greatest issues at the gravest times and choosing our path, ordinary people have again accomplished extraordinary things. With courage and caution, rather than fear and timidity, the voters chose a path to ensure others would enjoy the same freedom to set their own path.

This election outcome should have been implausible, if not impossible. With a litany of complaints — bad economy, bad deficit, bad foreign war, bad gas prices — amplified by a national media that discarded any pretense of neutrality, a national opposition party should have won this election.

But the Democratic Party is no longer a national party. As difficult as the challenges are — both real and fabricated — Democrats offered no solution that was either believable or acceptable to vast regions of America. Tax increases to grow the economy are not a solution that is believable or acceptable. Democratic promises of fiscal responsibility are unbelievable in the face of massive new spending promises. A foreign policy based on the strength of "allies" such as France is unacceptable. A strong national defense policy is just not believable coming from a candidate who built a career as an anti-war veteran, an anti-military candidate and an anti-action senator.

Democratic Party policies haven't sold in large sections of America in decades, and the only success of Democrats in presidential elections for 40 years was when they pitched themselves as pro-growth, low-tax, strong-defense, fiscally responsible, values-oriented candidates. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton hummed the tune but never really sang the song, and that's why Democrat prospects have gone south in the South. In 1980, the South had 20 Democrats and just six Republicans in the Senate. As recently as 1994, the Senate had 17 Democrats and nine Republicans from the South.

A decade later, the number had reversed to 17 Republicans and nine Democrats. With this election, it is 22 Republicans and just four Democrats from the South. When will national Democrats sober up and admit that that dog won't hunt? Secular socialism, heavy taxes, big spending, weak defense, limitless lawsuits and heavy regulation — that pack of beagles hasn't caught a rabbit in the South or Midwest in years. The most recent failed nominee for president stands as proof that the national Democratic Party will continue to dwindle. The South has gone from just one-fourth of the Electoral College in 1960 to almost a third today. To put this in perspective, that gain is equal to all the electoral votes in Ohio. Yet there was not a single Southern state where John Kerry had any real chance. Would anyone like to place bets on the electoral strength of the South by 2012? Maybe they should tax stupidity. When you write off centrist and conservative policies that reflect the will of people in the South and Midwest, you write off the South and Midwest. Democrats have never learned from the second or third or fifth kick of a mule. They continue to change only the makeup on, rather than makeup of, the Democrat Party.

And so we have a realignment election. For the first time, in an "us vs. them" election and in the toughest of situations, Republicans have been re-elected to the White House, the Senate and the House of Representatives. Confronting an opposition that can win a divided electorate in the worst of times and that has a growing electoral base, the national Democratic Party has a choice: continue down this path toward irrelevance or reverse course. As the last Truman Democrat, I hope my party makes the right choice but know I will not be allowed to be part of it. Such is the price you pay when you love your nation more than your party.

And so while I retire with little hope for the near-term viability of the party I've spent my life building, I retire with a quiet satisfaction that after witnessing the struggle of democracy over communism and fascism, the fear I once held that America might not rise to meet this new challenge of terrorism has vanished like a fog under the radiance of a new dawn. While the threat is still real, the shadow looming across a promising future is gone.

And the credit for that goes to one man. Like the last lion of England, Winston Churchill, George W. Bush has stood alone and risked all to give the world a new, clearer path to the advancement of freedom.
Abraham Lincoln, in his second annual message to Congress, stated: "In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom for the free — honorable alike in what we give and what we preserve. We shall nobly save or meanly lose the last, best hope of earth."

George Bush has injected into a region of enslavement an incurable dose of freedom, and thus nobly saved that "last, best hope of earth" — free men.

— Zell Miller is Georgia's Democratic U.S. senator.

[whiningdonkeys]

Clap Clap Clap

Bravo, Oracles!!

[marah]

Dems and Indys upset with this administration and worried for the USA please wear a ribbon - red, whit and blue with black around it to show your continued concern and monitoring of this administration. Now is the time for us to work harder. Ignore the ignorance and anger of the right wing. Ask for reform with voting machines - no paper trail means it's even easier to hack in and change the machines. Think about it two weeks of voting in places - two hour waits and they all went to Bush?! Not likely. Don't let the passion die

[walking along]

Yawn . . .Bush won, Kerry lost. Elections over. I'm going back to bed.

[chiming in]

Treason? What is your vision of this country when it comes to free speech? What changes to you suggest to the Bill of Rights? Something like, "Say whatever you want but don't criticize my country during times of war". Let me ask you, do any of us know whether the protestors during the Vietnam war lengthened it or shortened it? Our country was not fighting that war intelligently. We weren't winning. I could have dragged on for another ten years for all we know. It was only because of the pressure and protesting in this country that got us out of a place we never should have been in to begin with. What's your I.Q. that you can't see what has become so obvious to MOST people during the decades that have elapsed since the war? The man fought, he came home and spoke his mind. And he was right about what he said. Why in the world do you think that the war wasn't exactly our country's shining moment in time? It certainly had nothing to do with the protestors. It had everything to do with being in the wrong place, with losing thousands of lives for no good reason. The citizens of this country have a RESPONSIBILITY to speak out when this country moves down the wrong path. Sorry your I.Q. is too low to see that.
________
Bmw R32 History (http://www.bmw-tech.org/wiki/BMW_R32)

[Dear chiming in]

I agree that we have a responsibility to watch our gov't be they republican or democrat. that is how our system works.
However Kerry is not the whole of the democrat party, He was a bad candidate and the party had better to offer.
Try to keep an open mind and go to stolen honor on the internet and watch the video. One person does not make a party, ideology is the determining factor or should be when choosing to give your support. You also must question yourself when you heart is so full of rage if you truly know the differences that separate the parties. Look at what each party stands for not, the BS put out by the opposing parties and see which ones represent what you truly believe.
I will not preach for one party or the other, I just ask you to look at your elected officials from both parties and see who is just talking and who is actually getting the job done. promises make you feel good in the short run but they do not improve your quality of life. By the way if your public official can not get the job done, does it matter if he is a Rep or a Dem, what good is he/she? Your allegence should be to your community not to any given party.

[chiming in]

I am an Independent. In the local elections over the past three or four years I've pretty much split my votes between the two major parties. I vote for the best candidate, not blindly by party. We can agree with that. This country should be all about tolerance and accepting one another despite our differences. And, this is what scares me about Bush and any citizen who voted for him solely on the basis of his intolerance for people who live their lives differently, even if the way they live does not affect others in the least. Thats intolerance and it has everything to do with people forcing their beliefs on others (such as what we intend to do across the ocean (i.e., americanizing that part of the world).
________
Buy extreme vaporizer (http://www.vaporshop.com/extreme-q-vaporizer.html)

[People can agree to diffe]

We are the party of ideas. The Dems brought nothing to the table. The American people are also wising up to the good old standbys of scaring the elderly and minority voters. They want people dependant not independant. Bush's tax cuts were across the board. Lower income earners are actually paying nothing in the way of income tax, some due to the child credits are getting checks from the gov't. Put money into people's pockets and let them decide how to spend it, save it , and/or invest it. This spurs on economic growth.

Likewise partially privitizing SS will allow people of ALL income levels have a stake in their retirement if they CHOOSE to do so. otherwise these younger workers can opt for the old SS system. What is wrong with that? Kerry's plan was to leave things as they are putting off the inevitable stress and collapse of the system. Taxes would have to be raised, retirement age increased, benefits cut. i don't think thats's a good plan.

[chiming in]

Talk a little about the tax cuts and how they affect the deficit. Talk a little about who will inherit the largest deficit in history. Talk a little about how we are going to pay for the war on terrorism and at the same time come up with the largest tax cuts in history. Talk a little about welfare reform and which administration accomplished that feat (Clinton). If you have any children, explain to them how our generation is going to hand over to them a deficit that even their generation will not be able to erase. Talk a little about how successful the no child left behind program is. Explain to me how it is to our advantage to have no federal dollars funding that federal program. Talk a little about values and truthfullness and the morality of this administration when it had to change its explaination ten times as to why we went into Iraq. Talk to me a little about the morality and correctness of demanding that citizens of our country who have served it proudly, and have since received an honorable discharge, are being called up to serve again, and only a lawsuit can temporarily stop such dispicable tactics. Talk to me a little about how vicious and cunning and despicable this adminstration is, to bring to the forefront "value" and "morality" issues such as the place of gay people in this world, knowing it would bring out of the woodwork all of the conservative and ultra conservative voters which does nothing but further polarize this country. Talk to me a little about your feelings on having this country "americanize" the middle east region. Talk to me a little as to whether you see any correlation between this country's current foreign policies (knowing who Bush has to help guide him in his administration) and past conqerors such as Neopolian, Cesear, the England of old, et al. Talk to me a little about just how much the Bush administration wants to help the elderly affort their medication, as opposed to helping the pharmeceutical companies line their pockets a little more (e.g., can't purchase drugs in Canada because our dear president wants to make sure they are "safe". Does ANYONE buy that story?). Meanwhile, people have to choose between food or medicine. Now, that's really caring for the needy over the needs of the big companies.
________
Head Shop (http://headshop.net/)

[chiming in]

Oh, yes, I forgot....let's talk a little about what Bush's own party said about how incompentent his administration is overseas. Let's talk a little about people's fears on changing administrations smack in the middle of the war on terrorism. Let's talk a little about how the vast majority of the American people think we are moving in the wrong direction but are, again, too scared to vote in a new commander in chief because this one makes them feel "safe". Let's talk a little about people who call Kerry a coward and put down his Vietnam experience when his own country gave him the Silver Star, for Christ's sake. For people who think Kerry should have been shot for protesting the war in the early 1970s, who among you has seen the movie Born on the Fourth of July? Let's talk a little about how Bush was dead-set against the 9/1 commission. Why? Let's talk about stem cell research. He allegedly doesn't want to place anyone on the supreme court who would make decisions based on their personal beliefs, yet he is preventing medicine from advancing in the area of stem cell research precisely because of his personal beliefs.

We supposidly "like" this guy because he's down to earth and "one of us", as opposed to the pompous Kerry. Surely, most of America could have come up with more intelligent things to say, especially if our entire lives were in the field of politics, than:

he can run but he can't hide

being president is hard work

nuculur
________
7M-Ge (http://www.toyota-wiki.com/wiki/Toyota_7M-GE)

[ok]

Very good you hit all of Terry McCollughs talking points. Not one original thought was present here.
No one has had the courage to fix social security, though everyone knows it is on the verge of collapse. I heard your sobs but what are your ideas to keep it solvent? For that matter what were Kerry's? As far as welfare reform I hate to correct you, but I will, that was the republican congress. Bill went along with them and took a lot of crap from the democrats.
As far as the reservists, they knew they could be called up if the country was involved in a conflict. By the way this is how it always worked, example korea. Many times calling these veterans up saved younger less experienced soldiers lives.
As far as the lie nonsense give it a break, the intelligence indicated that there were weapons, not only our intelligence but other nations intelligence as well, and what about that stock pile that was talked about just before the election or the soviet trucks loading up before the invasion. Again democratic talking points that contradict each other. You need to get an original thought.
Another thing you fail to recognize is that the federal government does not create jobs the private sector does. If you tax the crap out of small businesses or large businesses for that matter the result is lost employment, which criples your economy. Bush is talking about tax cuts coupled with reducing government spending. An increase in jobs, consumer spending, and investments for expanding small businesses equals more money for the government. Higher taxes doesn't work. Need proof look at the Dinkins Administration (democrat) he came close to bankrupting the city. He drove many businesses to New Jersey because he taxed the crap out of them.
As far as the gay marriage thing get a grip you are out of step with the rest of the country who have strongly said enough is enogh. whats next should we let Janet Jackson perform at the next super bowl completely topless for her entire performance, after all in your way of thinking she is not hurting anyone and is merely expressing herself.
The fact is the country as a whole is saying enough is enough it is time to restore some morality. The left has finally gone to far. The conservatives have been kicked, ridiculed, scorned, and made to think they were out of step with todays society. Well guess what they showed in this presidential election that they are in the majority and will not surrender their morality to the vocal minority any longer. The Hollywood elite and the far left has had their day in the sun, however that sun has set, a new dawn has risen and the silent majority have shown they will no longer be silent. The leftist wing of the democrat party has had their historical fifteen minutes of fame but it is over, even your party has recognized a need for them to move to the center as Clinton said and did.
You may not like it but your liberal, bleeding heart philosophy has been rejected by a majority of the states.

In closing, stop the talking points you know it is all a bunch of bull! Get your own opinion and stop this mindless dribbling and crying. Oh and by the way have a nice four years, with a grewing economy, increases in job growth, reduction in the deficit, and a supreme court that will not legislate from the bench. And to further get your panties twisted in a knot I offer you this last politically incorrect sentiment. Happy holidays, whatever your faith may be.

[stark reality]

Nice dream world, ok. But how has Bush cut gov't spending? He has been the most profligate spender in US history. That hurts the economy, big time, especially when you cut revenue. If the Asians get tired of buying our debt, we're in big trouble.

________
GE HONDA HF120 SPECIFICATIONS (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/GE_Honda_HF120)

[scpd patrol]

I did not agree with my candidate allowing budgets loaded up with pork to go through without a veto. I also blame greedy congress for pushing this through (both sides). Discretionary spending should be held down. I think that ALL memebers of Congress should state that they will not vote for a budget if it includes all of this pork spending. Tax cuts are very important in keeping the economy moving.

History shows that tax cuts will generate more revenue, because when people have more money in thier pockets, they will spend, save, or invest it which not only spurs on the economy, but creates more taxes paid to government. Congress must have fiscal discipline not to OVERSPEND as it has in the past.

Tax increases will slow down growth and hurt job creation. They will also slow down revenue to the gov't coffers. The people who have money to create a business and hire (job creation) will not do so at a higher rate when they are taxed up.
________
Kitchen Measures (http://kitchenmeasures.com/)

[chiming in]

I need to get an original thought? Just because the points I made have been heard before ad nauseum, it doesn't mean they are not valid. Dinkens was a jerk and he was bad for the city. As I've said, I'm an Independent, not a democrat or republican. People should vote for the best candidate, not by party, because there are jerks in both parties. I find when brosing these threads that most of the people who consider themselves lifelong republicans have a big problem with anybody who doesn't fit their mold. It seems that anyone who tilts even one inch to the left is a liberal. There is simply no tolerance or patience with anyone expressing a dissimilar view to their own. You failed to address several of the things I mentioned in my last post. You appeared to pick and chose those issues you felt most comfortable with, avoiding things like drug purchases in Canada and our dear president's sole desire to keep our elderly safe, as opposed to protecting the pharmeceutical companys. You failed to offer your opinion on the Bush administrations strong resistance to the 9/11 commission until it had to back off from its own party and swallow the conclusions. Why? Using Bush as an example of someone who pushes smaller government is like using Clinton as the ultimate example of morality in marriage. Apparently, you have no clue of his record in Texas, which by the way became the most polluted state in the union under his "leadership".

With Clinton, who was a centralist president, you budge not even an inch in acknowledging that is was a democrat who got welfare reform through. You are right...it had republican support but there were plenty of people on both sides of the aisle that supported what he did. there were also a huge number of republicans who hated Clinton because they thought he was stealing their agenda. so here's an example of a president who had a vision of both parties working together, who had many centralist ideas, but who was hated like no other president by the republicans precisely because he actually pushed policies that the republicans could support, taking away any good reason whatsoever to hate the guy, other than the fact that he was so successful and from the good ol' south.

You talk about our intelligence leading up to the Iraqi war. Come on, for God's sake. Like by now you don't know that Bush heard only what he wanted to hear and dismissed anything that conflicted with his assessment that Iraq was the imminent threat and that there was an Al Quida link that by its mere inferance tied iraq to 9/11 which we all know by now was not the case. His own damn CIA and other sources tried to convey, to no avail, the the links were tenuous, at best. We struck iraq because there were easy targets to bomb and there was nothing to strike in the mountains of Afganistan where Bin laden was located, as one of Bush's own cabinet members said early on. Bush knew he went to war on the flimsiest of evidence (fabrications?) and hoped that the American people would blindly follow him wherever he wanted to go using 9/11 as the motivation. We are sticking with him, despite his own party saying he's incompetent, because we prefer to have someone at the helm with an ichy trigger finger because that somehow makes us feel safer.

By the way, whatever happened to the the monarchies of old? All those great nations who had conquest on their minds? France, Britain, Italy, Russia...they all had one common thread and that was: their way or the highway. Gee, sounds familier. But, we'll be long gone before my hypothesis is realized.
________
DAIMLER SP250 (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Daimler_SP250)

[ok]

Here you go again more brainless Democrat talking points.
Deal with today. You people blame Bush for everything. Get over it, Kerry lost it is time to heal and get behind our President. I was not happy when Carter or Clinton won but once it was over I accepted it. By the way I want to point out that when they had senate hearings on Clinton to remove him from office some republicans crossed over to leave him in office. However, not one democrat crossed. Are you telling me there was not one democrat felt he should have been booted?
When you talk about intolerance you should look in the mirror.
Read the papers especially newsday, the Bush bashing is incredable lately. Attacks on religion, saying that if you are a person who believes in their faith or relies on your faith to carry you through the hard times you are an idiot. Talk about intolerent.
If you believe that abortion, especially partial birth abortions are wrong (as do 50% of America) you are a cave man. Just because of differing views. Thats intolerance.
If you believe that lower taxes is good for the economy your a moron, again intoerence.
If you believe that people should get a hand up not a hand out, you hate the poor. That's intolerent.
If you are against gay marriages you are a homophobe and a biggot, That's intolerence.
If you believe that something needs to be done with social security you are attacked for being against the seniors. this labeling is intolerence.
If you believe that only safe drugs should come into the country, your labled an idiot that's intorence.
If you are against racial quotas, you are labeled a racist, that's intolerence.
If you believe that liberal federal judges who were never elected should not dictate their personal views to the rest of the country, your labeled as against personal freedom, that is intolerence.
The bottom line here is that the democrats like to tell people that they are the inclusive party. What a bunch of bull! If you do not agree with all of their agender you are labeled. If you look at the republican party we allow differences in opinion and respect the views of others (example Guiliani, Swartzneger, Zell Miller (democrat) We do not label you we agree to differ, That is tolerance. The democrats should think long and hard. If you are a person that respects other peoples faith you might want to be a Republican. If you are tired of paying high taxes you may be a Republican. If you believe that partial birth abortion is wrong, however early on a woman should have the right to choose you might be a Republican. If you believe that liberal judges should not write but interpret the Law you might be a Republican. If you want only safe drugs ditributed in this country you might be a republican. If you think social security should be fixed you might be a republican. If you believe that gay marriage is going to far but, civil unions are acceptable you might be a Republican.If you believe that you help people in trouble to obtain the ability to support themselves and not become wards of the state you might be a republican.
Finally if you only believe in half of these things you might be a Republican and I say welcome to the party of tolerance, with respect for the differing views of others.

[chiming in]

Like I've said in a previous post, I've voted essentially half republican and half democrat in the most recent local elections. Bush, on the other hand, is not your typical "moderate" republican. he is far right, too far to the right for my tastes.
________
DODGE 600 HISTORY (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Dodge_600)

[BushCountry]

Get used to it, its BUSH COUNTRY now! And don't dare complain when your stocks go up, gas goes down, and housing becomes affordable. Dont dare complain when you enjoy another terror free 4 years. People wised up in this election and realize it was time to grow up, and people realized how much damage the democrats have already caused with blood on their hands from 9/11. The next 4 years are going to be great!!!!!

[chiming in]

Do you really think that an individual terrorist walking into a crowded public location and blowing him/herself up along with God knows how many others, depends on who is at the helm? It can happen on anyone's watch and if you think that just because Bush is President, those acts of terrorism can't happen, you must be pretty stupid. Even your not-so-bright President inferred that the war can't really be totally won because it is impossible to stop every act. And what's your point about the democrats having blood on their hands? If a bomb makes it into this country and is set off because less than five percent of ship cargos are checked, are you ready to say its Bush's fault? No, not a "this is Bush country" guy. Put his and your I.Q.s together and you may total 100.
________
Medical Marijuana Card (http://medicalmarijuanacard.info)

[deuce]

When did ANY terrorist walk in and blow himself, or anyone else up, since 9/11, in the United States? Keep thinking....you know the answer.......never. President Bush has made it safer in the US. NO attacks on our soil since. I guess you actually believed what John Kerry had to say, whatever it was, since he had so many varied opinions about the same topic. I believe you are the one with the low IQ, and if you're scared of attacks, you can move North to Canada, or maybe France. You could probably feel safe in France, since they've never really fought in a war anyway. Enjoy the next 4 years !!
________
Uggs (http://uggstoreshop.com/)

[stark reality]

The privatization of SS is infeasible:

PRIVATIZING SOCIAL SECURITY DOESN'T MAKE A LICK OF SENSE

By JOHN CRUDELE
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp
November 9, 2004 -- PRIVATIZING Social Security is impossible.

I'll say it again: allowing people to take some of their Social Security contributions and invest that money privately is not possible. End of story.

Wall Street staged a wonderful rally last week partly on this Social Security fantasy and it doesn't want to hear logic.

Politicians don't want to deal with it either because they believe people can be conned into thinking that such a simple plan will actually reform and strengthen Social Security.

It won't. But it could make the entire financial system of this country a lot weaker.

To be honest, I don't even like hearing myself say this. According to my latest statement from Social Security, I have contributed more than $80,000 during my lifetime into the government retirement program, and my employers have kicked in another $60,000 on my behalf.

I'd love to get any part of that money back and be able to invest it myself. I'd even settle for the government's proposal ? if you can call the whispers we've been hearing a "proposal" ? that would allow us to privately invest some of the future money that we would have been paying into Social Security.

But despite how much I'd like this to happen, it can't be done without causing extreme disruptions to this country's already weakened financial system.

Here's why: It will probably come as a shock to no one that there isn't a big pile of Social Security money sitting somewhere. It isn't in the U.S. Treasury in Washington, nor at the Denver mint, nor hidden among alien spaceships in Roswell, N.M.

Each year when you and I pay up to $5,449 of our hard-earned wages into the Social Security "trust fund" ? which even a moron now knows is an oxymoron ? that money gets spent by the government.

First, the money goes to pay people who are currently collecting Social Security. These days there's money left over since the demographics of the country haven't shifted yet (but will) to people receiving more annually than is contributed.

The leftover money right now is borrowed by Washington. In place of the cash, the government leaves IOUs in the trust fund.

Taking this Social Security money allows the government to borrow less in the financial markets, where foreigners already contribute heavily to funding our annual budget deficit ? which, in case you haven't noticed ? has been growing.

Let's not even get into one very important fact: If this plan had been put into place the last time it surfaced four years ago under the Democrats, people would have lost a lot more money when the stock-market bubble busted and would now also be entitled to a lot less from Social Security when they retire.

Privatization didn't make sense then, and it doesn't now.

If people are allowed to put that 20 percent chunk into private accounts, that means the government would have nearly $2,200 less that it can borrow from Social Security for each person who chooses this option. (This assumes we can also use the employer's contribution.)

And, depending on the details, the numbers get worse.

"Putting 10 percent of the payroll tax in private accounts without reducing benefits involves $1 trillion to $2 trillion of transition costs ? transition costs being a euphemism for $1 trillion to $2 trillion of added deficits and debts," says Pete Peterson, former U.S. Commerce Secretary, author of "Running on Empty," a book about the Social Security calamity, and co-head of Blackstone Group.

That extra money that'll have to be borrowed by Washington to replace the Social Security loans will cause an inevitable rise in interest rates beyond where they would ordinarily be.


________
Drug Tests (http://drugtestingkit.org)

[chiming in]

Maybe your memory is failing you but during the Clinton administration, back in 1993 I believe, that was the date of the first attack on the World Trade Center. Both Al Quida and even our own strategists all agree that Al Quida has all the time in the world. They're extremely patient. Eight years separated the first attack on the trade center from the second attack. Bush has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that there have been no attacks since 9/11. It's just a matter of time, most likely during his second term. Like I said, it doesn't have anything to do with who is President...they can't protect you or I from some rogue terrorist nut who decides to strap some explosive to him/self. I'm guessing that the only reason we haven't seen anything else is because they typically prefer to raise the order of magnitude of each subsequent terrorist act (in other words, something even worse than what happened on 9/11), so I would guess that our experts on terrorism are brainstorming for that possibility. Poisoning the air, water, etc. are always up there in the way of concerns.

Look at Israel. They know how to protect themselves and in many ways run rings around us in the way of coming up with methods of protection. Has terrorism stopped in their country? Of course not, because you can't plan for everything. Al Quida has bigger plans for us than a couple of bombs strapped to someone, I hate to say. You think we're safer with Bush? I say that precisely because he's back in office, we should expect the worst. I really hope to God that I'm wrong, but his John Wayne style, and your John Wayne attitude, are what got us into this mess, instead of focusing solely on the entity that took down the trade center. Three years later, that clown is alive and well and calling on his followers to continue with this religious war. THREE YEARS!! I've got no doubt that if the inability to catch this guy over a three year period had happened under a democrat's watch, you and some others on this thread would be screaming about how incompetent the democrats were.

Oh, yes, and one other reminder. You don't quite conform to the current opinion of your own republican party concerning just how good a job your president is doing. As we all know, even the republican leadership has BEEN QUOTED as saying this current administration has been INCOMPETENT when it comes to fighting the war on terrorism. We're "behind" your John Wayne wannabe only because he's smack in the middle of fighting a war and no one wants to change leadership in the middle of this mess.
________
HONDA RC148 (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Honda_RC148)

[awm]

Lets see, common sense applied here. Everyone should get tax cuts first of all, but taxing the rich because you are jealous or don't want to work as hard as they do to get that rich does not make sense. This is a capitalist society, sorry liberals- we don't believe in punishing people because they have more than someone else. Very simple, A person making over $200,000 per year gets a tax cut it goes back into the stock market, thus building the economy and the companies you work for which provide your $30,000 a year salaries. SEE "Trickle Down Effect" Reaganomics 101- It really does work! Kerry wanted to tax higher anyone making over $200,000 and give the tax savings back to the middle- that will be nice for a year or two, but in the long run the economy would have collapsed. Why do you think 9 out of 10 stockbrokers voted for Bush? Duh! While im sure the middle class would like to get an extra $2,000 a year to pay for a couple extra cartons of cigarettes, and an abortion for your 16 year old it sure isn't helping the economy. The upper class is what makes the economy strong, the upper class is what invests in our stock market and provides the middle class with jobs. If the middle class invested their refunds in the stock market instead of a new SUV that costs more than their yearly salary, then maybe they would be in the upper class. An economy that is supported solely on consumer spending and less on the market is destined to fail.

Terrorism?? I dont' know, you tell me- that sounds like a no brainer. 4 years, no attacks- the only one on 9/11 was caused by the democrats apathetic attitudes about defense anyway. Slash the military and intelligence (CLinton) and spend the money on teaching kids ebonics and "Heather has two mommies" and what did you think was going to happen? But then again, if it was up to the liberals we would be fighting a "More sensitive war" Ha-Ha!!!!. What would you do? Dedicate 9/11 as "National hug a terrorist day"? Thank god you idiots aren't running the country again. We already suffered enough hard times and embarrasment during the Clinton disgrace. Before you try and claim credit for the good economy in the 90's too, stop right there- thank the late great President Ronald Reagan for your wonderful economy which Clinton rode the wave of.

ANd last but not least, Osama Bin Laden who killed 3,000 innocents on 9/11/01 told you not to vote for Bush, anyone who voted for Kerry is nothing more than a terrorist supporter. You lost the country, the election, and all your cheating and rock the vote campaigns, washed up celebrity "Has been" appearances, Michael Moore, etc. was ALL IN VAIN.

THIS IS "BUSH COUNTRY" Be red or dead!!!!!!!!

Can't wait to see you cowards lose again in 2008!!!!

Hillary Vs. Guiliani- Now that's a no brainer!!!
________
Silver Surfer Vaporizor (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/)

[chiming in]

You are a pompous, class-conscience, egocentric, bigoted idiot who is an embarrassment to his party. Your image of the middle class being concerned only with cigarettes and abortions makes you a prime candidate for some serious psychotherapy. Maybe your upbringing had something to do with it but I'm not the therapist so who knows. You just did me a major favor and presented in your post everything that people stereotype the republicans for, and that is: your uncanny ability to look down upon, and ridicule, those who may not be as fortunate as you. I am sure you are a white male, quite successful and also probably somewhat unethical in the way you conduct your business, probably arrogant and pompous to your subordinates (assuming you have subordinates); probably drive a poor mileage luxury car or large SUV, probably have a real problem with minorities, probably have a good health plan and no worries with covering yourself or your family, I am absolutely sure you are a type A driver on our roads, you don't believe in the every other car merge rule, at least not when it comes to allowing someone in, well.....you get the picture. Just look in the mirror.
________
Marijuana strain green crack (http://trichomes.org/marijuana-strains/green-crack)

[stark reality]

Just finished laughing at your post. Good one. But you never opened an economics text, did you? What do rich people do with tax cuts? Most of it goes into their savings, doesn't get generated into the economy. The middle class spends whatever tax cuts they get because they have to (need a new washing machine, lawnmower, clothes for kids, whatever). That stimulates the economy - 2/3 of which is consumer driven.

And politically, all I know is I live in a state with 2 liberal senators and a Dem dominated state assembly, I live on an island with 2 Democrat CE's, the Dems picked up several judgeships, I have a Democratic Congressman, so I would say at least around here the Dems/libs have the upper hand. LI used to be a Repub/conservative stronghold. Those days are over.
________
Buy extreme vaporizer (http://www.vaporshop.com/extreme-q-vaporizer.html)

[ok]

The question is how are you doing? Are things any better for you?
What has Chuck Schumer done. Don't tell me what he talks about but what has he actually done? How has Hilary made your life better what bills has she put forward. What significant changes has Levy made? Don't give me the sound bites, tell me what has actually gone through. Bottom Line is the democrats talk and the republicans get the job done. It is great that the two party system is well here, however we are falling behind the rest of the country. Watch Souzi, his fix Albany will hurt his county. But that is ok with Souzi because this is all about him and a run for Governor. Levy has his eye on the governors seat to, He will do a better job when he stops trying to grab headlines by ramming proposals down other peoples throats and actually tries to work with others. Look at some of the proposals that Schumer puts through, some are so dumb that have no hopes of getting done, it's pathetic.
Getting your face on tv does not make you a great representative. WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO MAKE OUR LIVES BETTER? The answer is zip, zero, natta, nothing. Wake up Long Island and demand results not empty promises. When a politician doesn't deliver get rid of them.
The dems are in power.
Are the taxes still high? Yes
Are we getting less for more money? Yes
Have we lost important programs that make a difference? Yes
Is the affordable housing problem fixed? No
Do you see a new prison? No
Has Levy's Administration been hit with scandles? Yes
Is the County executives office and the Legislature working together? No
Is the state budget still late? Yes
Has school funding been cut? Yes
Have community based programs been slashed? Yes
Are our seniors doing better? No
Are the roads better? I don't think so.
Is the gang problem getting better? No worse.
The list goes on and on. Levey has had his vetos overturned at least 15 times.
Yep the Dems have grabbed a lot of seats but what have they done with them? Not a dam thing.
Wake up Long Island when the republicans were in charge things got done. Now all we get is lip service. . The bottom line though is that the democrats have not delivered. Is it more important to say hey a democrat seat or wow life is better. if you want to keep going backward vote democrat. If you have the intelligence to look back and see that we got things done with the republicans. Vote Republican and we welcome you back.

[Peon Serf]

<but taxing the rich because you are jealous or don't want to work as hard as they do to get that rich does not make sense.>

No one taxes because they are "jealous" and I know many people who work much harder than the "rich" to make ends meet. It is unfortunate that those who have made plenty of money off the backs of others are unwilling to support the society that allowed them to do so.

Carnegie, Vanderbilt, Rockefeller and all the other old money capitalists knew this and subscribed to the theory of "noblesse oblige". They paid their taxes (75%+ of their income) and also became great philanthropists AND STILL HAD MORE MONEY THAN THEY COULD SPEND!

God bless them for making all they could and giving back to protect and nurture the society and people that made their wealth possible.

It's too bad that selfishness has become a virtue today.

[chiming in]

Yeah, your right. I've finally crossed over to your way of thinking. Why don't we get a petition together to get Gulotta re-elected next time County Exec position is up for grabs? He kept taxes fixed for ten years (or more) and he kept the infrastructure such as mass transit, highway maintenance, etc. functioning by borrowing. He kept that money in the consumers pockets no matter what. The democrat who is now in power is just using smokescreens in trying to convince us he is fiscally responsible. Look at what has happened to our taxes, now that he won't borrow any more money (actually, the county couldn't borrow any more money). The taxes are through the roof. This is an outrage. Typical "democratic" way of conducting business. Sure, the county's credit rating is now "supposidly" excellent but I don't believe that for one second. Suozzi is playing us for fools and only when Gulotta gets back into power will Nassau County no longer be an embarrassment. Bring back the old Republican administration, the one that we kept voting into office because our taxes stayed low. The citizens of the County most certainly knew what was good for them. The democratic party had its chance and they blew it. They will be uncovered for perpetrating a fraud on the citizens of the county by presenting a picture of fiscal restraint and responsibility when the exact opposite will turn out to be true. Not only that, but Gulotta was great at presenting proclamations at community events. he presented himself very well and I for one put that right at the top of the list of things I would expect my County Exec to perform well.

Over in Suffolk County, the guy at the top, unlike most politicians with the exception of the guy at the top in Nassau County, has higher aspirations. he too is using smokescreens to create the illusion of a well-run county, when anyone with an I.Q. above 60 knows that this guy is running the county just as poorly as the guy in Nassau is running his. Watch out for both of these guys because they are true-blue democrats. Watch for scandals, unlike the Republican party which almost without exception runs a clean ship. I for one am aware of one township in particular, Brookhaven, which is REpublican run, and scandals of any form would never be tolerated there. its just the way its been for as long as i can remember. The democrats can learn a good hard lesson in morality, professional ethics, and basicly just how to run Counties for the betterment of the people, by taking some pages from the legacy the REpublicans have left behind.

I just don't know why it has taken me so damn long to see the light. But I'm with you now! Is there room in the REpublican party for one more person, with a little egg on his face?? What can I do to help??
________
VAPORIZER REVIEW (http://vaporizers.net/)

[scpd patrol]

If the "rich" people, as you say put their tax cut money into savings, they are STILL helping to move the economy. Whether the money goes into the stock or bond market, or even into the local savings bank or credit union, that money is put back into the economy. Banks and credit unions use that money to issue loans for mortages or businesses looking to start up or expand. Same goes for money put inot stocks and bonds. Unless they put the money under the mattress or in a hole in the backyard, the money continues to go back into the economy.
________
THE YAZIDI BRANCH OF YAZDANISM ADVICE (http://www.religionboard.org/yazidi-branch-yazdanism/)

[stark reality]

But it's not nearly as productive a use of capital as when it's spent on hard goods. That keeps jobs going. That's why it's a consumer driven economy. Widgets made, widgets bought, widgets sold; widgets made, widgets bought, . . .
________
Weed news (http://potwire.com)

[stark reality]

You say "Wake up Long Island when the republicans were in charge things got done." Were is the operative word. If republicans got things done, then how did they lose power? Truth is LI became overtaxed under the republicans, and if republicans aren't holding down taxes, they aren't useful for many other things. Face it, you had control and you lost it. Worship Mondello all you want, but he's the best thing to ever happen to LI Dems.
________
Buy Mflb (http://www.vaporshop.com/mflb-vaporizer.html)

[chiming in]

Good point on Mondello. Most politicians are windbags, both sides of the aisle. But this guy takes the cake. His face shows up in the dictionary under the words "arrogant", "boisterious", "in-your-face", "obnoxious", "over-bearing", "self-absorbed", "simple-minded", "vindictive", well, readers will get the picture. The republican party deserves this guy.
________
Justin bieber (http://justinbieberfan.info/)

[scpd patrol]

As people buy houses, they WILL be purchasing hard goods. Goods such as construction materials, cabinets, paint, appliances, furniture, etc. as businesses expand, they too will be purchasingnew builodings, or adding on. New office materials, desks, computers, etc will be purchased. Construction workers will be employed, new workers hired due to expansion, economic growth will occur. The workers who are hired will purchase items for themselves and families and so on and so on. Any investments or savings they make will go back into our economy and it goes on from there.
________
Voyeur toilet (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/1166/toilet/videos/1)

[stark reality]

You've got the tail wagging the dog. Investment follows job growth, it does not create job growth. If it worked your way, we'd never have a recession.
________
Teen vid (http://teenvid.org)

[scpd patrol]

Jobs are created when money is invested into the creation or expansion of businesses. Without the initial layout of capital (money) the new business doesn't start up, thus no jobs are created.

My brother and I have talked about opening up a business. We need money to do this. We will have to borrow money from a bank or credit union to do this. Once we get the business up and running, thanks to the money loaned to us from the bank (remember this money comes from others savings and investments), we will then look to hire people to help us with the business. Now new jobs are created. These people will earn a salary and then spend, save and invest that. This will also spur on the economy in other facets. Without us getting the initial capital, none of this will happen.
________
Pornstars fucking (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/862/fucking/videos/1)

[Hydra]

Quote:When did ANY terrorist walk in and blow himself, or anyone else up, since 9/11, in the United States? Keep thinking....you know the answer.......never. President Bush has made it safer in the US. NO attacks on our soil since.

I was walking home one day and I stopped by a market stall belonging to a man - this man was named Mr. Shrub.
Being an inquisitive fellow, I asked him what he was selling and he told me that there was a wondrous magical stone in stock. Needless to say, I was curious as to what this stone could do and whether, as he had claimed, it was indeed magical.
Mr. Shrub, carefully explained that if I had this stone in my possession I would never be struck down with malaria.
Now, I had never seen someone suffering from malaria myself, but I had seen people suffering from it on TV and I realized that it was quite deadly - I even heard one quote say half of all people ever born have been killed by it.
Now with that in mind, I hurriedly bought this magic stone. Suspecting I had a whopping 50% chance of being killed by Malaria, I was sure I'd just dodged a bullet.

That was a number of years ago now.
I still have the magic stone and I have never been diagnosed with Malaria - so evidently the stone is indeed magical.
I would like to take this time to say ' thank you '.
Thank you Mr. Shrub, without your wonderful magic stone I would not be here today.

Quote:My brother and I have talked about opening up a business. We need money to do this. We will have to borrow money from a bank or credit union to do this. Once we get the business up and running, thanks to the money loaned to us from the bank (remember this money comes from others savings and investments)
Trying to follow your logic here - you're saying that if banks have more money in them, then they'll lend out to more business'?

Quote:You've got the tail wagging the dog. Investment follows job growth, it does not create job growth. If it worked your way, we'd never have a recession.
Also trying to follow your logic - if investment only follows job growth, then where does the money come from that funds the jobs that lead to that job growth? Edited by: Hydra at: 11/15/04 12:23 pm

________
List Of Amc Transmission Applications Specifications (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/List_of_AMC_Transmission_Applications)

[scpd patrol]

In response to your second posted quote, the answer is no. I was trying to explain to "stark reality" that investment spurs job creation. I think your third qoute is for "stark reality"
________
Rg500 (http://www.suzuki-tech.com/wiki/Suzuki_RG500)

[stark reality]

Your initial capital will be unavailable unless you can convince someone your plan will work. If your product doesn't sell, you won't create jobs, nobody will invest in you. Investment dollars will go where people believe it will grow. If you can create jobs, then the investment money will come. Not the other way around.
________
B-CLASS (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_B-Class)

[Hydra]

Quote:I was trying to explain to "stark reality" that investment spurs job creation.
Indeed it does, though only if you can prove that this investment will create jobs and be economically sustainable.

Quote:Your initial capital will be unavailable unless you can convince someone your plan will work. If your product doesn't sell, you won't create jobs, nobody will invest in you. Investment dollars will go where people believe it will grow. If you can create jobs, then the investment money will come. Not the other way around.
Exactly, investment comes from other business', and only under the condition that there is a clear plan that indicates there will be return on the initial investment.
People invest and buy stocks when they percieve the economy to be doing well, which benefits the creation of job growth. Investor confidence takes a knock when there are scandals such as Enron, which slows the economy down because even companies that appear to be doing well (through corruption) can in reality be crumbling.
Investment is not a way to keep the economy ticking over - it is a business in itself, a business as relient on the consumer driven economy model as any other.

I was a little confused however because you appeared to be implying
Quote: Investment follows job growth, it does not create job growth. If it worked your way, we'd never have a recession.
That investment followed the actual job growth. When you were saying that it follows the proof that you can create this job growth.

________
Mflb (http://vaporizer.org/)

[scpd patrol]

There is no "given" when starting up a new business. I could open up , let's say a Dunkin donuts but several factors apply, demand for such product, location, etc. I could have an idea for a business, but without having some demand or want for and of the product the plan could fail. I give people who go out there and start businesses lots of credit. Nothing is given. Lots of hard work go into starting a business. Once successful, they can expand...hire more people, open new stores, advertise more.
________
Unique vaporizers (http://vaporizerinfo.com/)

[stark reality]

What I was trying to say with my last quote that you cite is, for example, when jobs reports are released and the news is positive, the stock market goes up, and vice versa. Growth comes first, then the investment money follows. If it worked the other way around, whenever there was bad economic news, or even a recession looming, investors would just put more money in the stock market and the problem would be over. Doesn't work that way, though. A country can't just invest its way out of problems because it is not an investment driven economy but a consumer driven economy, as you point out.
________
COUNTRY SQUIRE (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Country_Squire)

[fox comrade]

"Well how did George Bush cheat now? He didn't, ha ha. What are you sorry liberals going to do with your lives now. It looks to me that people are switching over to Republican, and if you don't believe me just look at the election results. People are getting wiser and realizing that the Liberal Democrat way of thinking and living is what is bringing this country down. Well I have a Victory Party to go to so I will leave with these few words. YOU LOSE HA HA HA HA HA"

yeah. lets see them dems argue out of that one. the better man won. you know who that was dems? BUSH!!!
HA HA HA HA HA!!
4 MORE YEARS!!!

[CheckUrself]

I think you got the "comrade" part right.

And please check the map, Bush lost big time here (NY) and all the NE states, and west coast.

Whats that tell ya? Well maybe all the educated people in the US voted for Bush, all the Bible thumpers and farmers, cowboiys and trailer folks went for Bush..

Who's laughing now !!!

[check YOURSELF]

I see. So all the real Americans voted for Bush, and all of the commie, pinko socialist, fellow traveler, bobos voted for the traitor Kerry.... Gotcha, buddy.

[chiming in]

I'm an Independent but I didn't "read" the election results the same way you did. The democratic candidate also set a record for most votes, just as your Republican pick did. The reason the Republicans won was because they did a better job of getting their registered constituents to get off their butts and vote. I think it had very little to do with democrats "switching" to the republican fold. The Republicans used scare tactics and the morality issue to get the conservative base to vote, and its to their credit that they were able to accomplish that.

There is no exodus of democrats over to the other side of the aisle. People who stuck wth the democrats recognized that for someone with Bush's background and recent track record to talk about morality, well, that's kind of funny. here's a guy who was helped by his father in business (several times) but failed in it nonetheless, was a drunk, was apparently an immature jerk who didn't take his obligations seriously during his "military career", is in the pockets of the big corps, has gone before his country a dozen times offering twelve different reasons for invading Iraq, but only after each preceding reason proved to be false, has used hate and intolerance as the motivational tool in getting the conservative "right" to vote. Yeah, this guy has got MY "morality" vote.

The only knocks on Kerry? His pompous speech style. The only time he ever was heard to just talk instead of sounding like he was giving a U.N. speech, was when the microphones caught him talking about the Republican administration in an off-the-cuff manner. The other knock, which was huge, was his inability to convince the public (me included) that he wasn't flip flopping half the time. Might I add that the Republicans did a much better job driving that message home to the voters, than the democrats did in trying to convey to the public the flip-flopping Bush kept doing with his reasons for invading Iraq.

Almost 120 million people voted; Bush won by about 3 million. The hate and intolerance card won this round.
________
GM HIGH VALUE ENGINE (http://www.chevy-wiki.com/wiki/GM_High_Value_engine)

[CheckUrself]

you got it backwards tiny tim, and as i said before, new yorkers and long islanders voted for kerry (overwhelmingly) so maybe you should move to idaho!

[I think I will stay in N.]

You are a CottonHeaded Ninny Muggin!

[CheckUrSelf, Do you smoke]

McCarthyism is not popoular and you sound like a red faced windbag!!

[chiming in]

You are PRECISELY the kind of person that reinforces why I have always prided myself on having an open mind. Apparently, anyone who doesn't think exactly like you, fits the blue state commie pinko saddamite tag. Its really a paradox that people like you truly believe you are the sole protectors of this country's ideals, when in fact you represent the opposite. This country's founding fathers were all about tolerance and individualism. Those words don't exactly apply to you, wouldn't you agree? Your hate and intolerance towards anyone who represents an idea that is different from yours....well, let's see, what can I use to make my point?....Germany from WWI and WWII, the KKK, and pretty much any other group of individuals whose primary message is one of hate and intolerance rather than a message of free speech which is what this country is supposed to be all about. Are you serious about the commie statements? Are you serious about the saddamite statement? Are you telling the readers of this post that almost half of this country are saddamite supporters simply because they didn't buy into the twelve different reasons for justifying the war with Iraq?
________
Cannabis Collective (http://dispensaries.org/)

[Nut Patrol]

Bravo!!!!!!!!

[chiming in]

you dummy, you support the very people who may impede your liberties, and let me tell you another thing you right wing extremist nut! I voted for Kerry and I'm no pinko, i'm 100% red white and blue American who would defend my country if necessary, in fact I have! So pound of wimp!
________
BUY HERBALAIRE (http://vaporizers.net/herbalaire-vaporizer)

[chiming in]

I never saw the Michael Moore movie. If I had, I would have listened to what he said, but with much caution, knowing his political affiliation. That doesn't mean that most of what he said was not true. It might have been, or might not have been. That's why we have a brain; to do some research on what people try to shove down our throats as the "truth". Take our President, for example. You talk about how some of those who voted for Kerry were simply "mislead". Why don't you enlighten the readers of this post about how you DON'T think we were "mislead" by the Bush administration in Iraq? From the first day of the first term of this administration, they were seeking ways to justify invading Iraq. They took information they KNEW was questionable, manipulated it and used it to....lets see, what's an appropriate word to use here...I've got it: MISLEAD the public in twelve different ways for justifying the invasion.

What else can we talk about? Oh, yeah, your reference to "simpletons". What kind of individual does it take, what level of intelligence does it take, to never question the true motives of an administration, to simply take at face value EVERYTHING, EVERY REASON, EVERY JUSTIFICATION, for every blunder we've made over there, not to mention going there in the first place?

We've had some great Presidents from both parties and we've had some real stinkers from both parties. Using your philosophy, anyone who questioned the actions of the stinkers when their administrations were in office, were nothing more than unpatriotic simpletons, or worse.

You have an obligation, a patriotic duty, to question your leaders when you feel they are "misleading" the country. Do you really think, knowing the neo-conservative composition of this administration, that we went to iraq, and shed our sons and daughters blood, to "free a people from a madman". That SOUNDS like moral high ground, but anyone who believes that rubbish is truly a simpleton. The word of the day is OIL and keeping is flowing to this country. Our administration's goal is to democratize the region in order to best serve our interests. Sounds a little like the global conquerors of old, don't you think? And, the only individuals who are 100% behind this administration are either the people who have bought into the twelve different lies, or who really know the reasons why we are there but still support the administration because they somehow feel they have a God-given right to put into place in other countries, regimes that will ensure a flow of oil to you and me.
________
DUCATI APOLLO (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Ducati_Apollo)

[Listening]

Excellent, Bravo, and I hope you consider running for office!!!

[Hydra]

Quote:MISLEAD the public in twelve different ways for justifying the invasion.
by Chiming in

I can already imagine a TV skit involving George Bush walking up Mount Sinai, to personally receive a stone tablet from God that has 'The twelve different ways to justify the invasion' engraved on it.

Quote:Our administration's goal is to democratize the region in order to best serve our interests. Sounds a little like the global conquerors of old, don't you think?
by Chiming in

Just to add a little historical context to this rather appropriate (if rhetorical) question.

Quote:The British were quick to ensure their control over their new vassal by insisting on a comprehensive treaty and alliance with Britain and a constitution for the country along a British style constitutional monarchy and parliament. The treaty insisted upon commercial freedom, religious tolerance, and that all foreign, military, judicial and financial matters were to be taken by British advisers.
from www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/iraq.htm

That's a description of the British plan(with all their colonial know-how) to form the nation of Iraq and turn it into a democracy.
Though it sounds very similar to the current situation.

Back then, Britain was invading Mesopotamia (Iraq) to free the population from the rule of the barbaric Turks, who had previously been an ally to the British and a barrier against the Russians.
There had recently been a discovery of a vast amount of oil in the area - of course that had nothing to do with the invasion.
The population of Mesopotamia, after the invasion started causing trouble and attacking British soldiers, so the British retaliated by launching air-strikes against civilian populated cities - the first time in history that tactic had been used....

....How did the original formation of Iraq turn out you ask?
Well the country was politically unstable because the indigenous population saw the British as invaders, the British eventually cut their losses and made a quick exit.
Iraq did find some sort of political stability a few years later - if only because if you didn't remain what the ruler considered ' stable ' you were executed.
I am of course talking about the rule of Saddam Hussein.

There you have it, the last time this venture occurred it lead to the creation of one of the worlds worst tyrants.
Doesn't give one much hope for the future, does it?
by Hydra, ' Bush is a moron ' - Republican forum


I'm eagerly awaiting ' Need to Check You Commie 's post detailing how we were not mislead over the Iraq war.
So far, I have yet to find anyone who can argue the administrations case, but seeing as ' Need to Check You Commie ' isn't one of the (in his own words) " weak minded fools " perhaps he will be the one to provide me with some enlightenment on the issue. If he finds himself in a position where he can not do so, perhaps he should consider checking his political beliefs.
________
Suzuki gv1400 (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Suzuki_GV1400)

[Check You Commie]

You sound like the type liberal wimp who never got into a school yard fight with multiple opponents, and whipped them. The Iraq War was a necessary and important component in the war against terror. Terror networks are much like organized crime families, or communist organizations for that matter, which appear to be more your speed. Terror networks, like criminal conspiracies, rely upon complex, furtive organizational structures which defy legalistic definition. In our country's efforts to combat organize crime, legislation had to be developed to fight corrupt enterprises, such as the Mafia. There is no such corporation or partnership called "the five families," but does that mean there is no such thing as organized crime?

Saddam Hussein's Iraq operated essentially in the same way as a organize crime family which has corrupted a labor union. Hussein used the government to fund his private and public ambitions and will to power. He ignored numerous United Nations resolutions with respect to weapons inspections, and worked feverishly to bribe officials in France, the United Nations, Germany, and Russia to rebuild his WMD capacity. Concurrently, while Hussein was engaged in very dangerous enterprises which implicated the corruption on governments and NGOs, our nation was attacked on September 11, 2001, by an enemy engaged in a similar form of terroristic-enterprise corruption. And yes, while there is no "formal" or evidentiary link between Hussein and Bin Laden, there had been evidence of interactions between Al Quaida and Iraqi intelligence. Again, since most successful and intelligent conspirators do not leave obvious evidence of "joint ventures," any evidence of contact alone must raise an askance gaze, and requires action.

Frankly, if anything, I am hoping that Bush will get tougher in his second term. I am very pleased that Ms. Rice will become Secretary of State. She is a no nonsense person who might kick some tail with the career foreign service officers. There is a very serious need of reform at Foggy Bottom, as they represent one of the weak links in our efforts to prevent terror.

The next fight in the war against terror may very well be in the State Department VISA offices. Perhaps the easiest way for a terrorist to gain access to the United States mainland is through the good old F-1 Student Visa. Just hook up with one of these licenses to hang out on college campuses and meet with your compatriots and do some damage. Overstay your welcome on the VISA, then enroll in one of those "language schools." Work off the books in businesses run by another sympathizer, and plot the next move.

I would like to see a returned emphasis to simply reuniting families, bringing in top quality scientists, professionals, and artisans, providing safe haven to those who truly have a genuine "well founded fear of persecution," and other individuals who genuinely want to live the American Dream, and embrace the ideals of our society, language, and culture. I would like to see less emphasis on so called "diversity immigration," particularly if such immigration policy permits individuals who may be hostile to the United States to blight our shores.

The war against terror is complex. Understanding the war against terror requires one to think outside of the box. To understand the threat posed by criminal states, such as Saddam's Iraq. Indeed, the Bush White House understood this threat, and took appropriate action. Bush's goal of fostering democracy in Iraq is laudable, and this is a play for all the marbles in the Middle East, if successful. Democraticization is the key to reform in the Middle East, since there is no instance in modern history of Democracies engaged in warfare against each other.

If Bush wins, he becomes a historical figure of titanic proportions. It's too bad that "know it all" nitwits like yourself have no imagination, and simply waste our time. If you do not understand why Hussein had to be stopped, and why diplomacy failed (with the UN on the former Iraqi dictator's payroll), I really can't help you, and you are just simply a helpless moron who deserves the same fate as Mr. Van Gogh.

[stark reality]

You made a better and more eloquent case for the US invading Iraq than Bush ever did. You (and others) have made the case for war with Iraq in terms easier to swallow than the administration. I would have had an easier time supporting the invasion if Bush and co. had laid out the argument like this from the beginning. Glad you did not mention WMD's. I never bought that from the beginning and I think it hurt Bush more than helped him.
________
Iolite Portable Vaporizer (http://iolitevaporizer.net/)

[Check You Commie]

Thanks. That is the dilemma with Bush. Right policies, but not the most eloquent spokesperson for his policies. Then again, wars are often fought for "shifting rationales. Did Pearl Harbor justify fighting the Nazis? How did an attack by asian Japan justify fighting the racist Hitler? I think fighting Hitler was right. And my posts were more tongue in cheek and rhetorical, then truly based upon policy preference.

[chiming in]

It almost looks like its your writing at the very beginning and at the very end, where you continue to take personal swipes. All the stuff in-between appears to be cut and paste. HOWEVER, I agree with stark reality; it was a powerful argument. The main problem I have with the Bush administration is that I don't believe that their goal, from day one of his first term, was to attack Iraq in order to fight terrorism. I think it's pretty well documented that terrorism was not exactly "number one" on his "things to do" list. Even his own former administrators (and I think some current ones) didn't argue with the fact that terrorism was NOT at the forefront of his agenda. After all, 9/11 hadn't happened yet. I don't think it would have been in the forefront of a Democratic president's agenda, either. But I take great exception to any administration that has a particular motive (as I said prevoiusly, installing a democracy and ensuring the flow of oil) for invading a country and shedding our children's blood, but instead presents to the American people a totally different reason for taking action, and then keeps changing the reason while continuing to avoid the truth. Most of us are intelligent adults and most of us can figure out the real motives behind the actions we've taken. And this is the other thing that galls me about Bush supporters: that he represents the moral high ground, when the entire middle east agenda is based on motivations that remain close-to-the-vest, while they hope that the "fighting terrorism" position will be enough to keep the public behind their actions.

And no... I never got into a school yard fight against several adversaries and still managed to beat the crap out of them. You sound like such a manly man. You also sound a lot like the school yard bullies that we all have come across at one time or another. Most of those bullies grew up to become staunch supporters of aggresive adminstration policies that had invasion motives contrary to what the public was being told. In other words, a personality that looks forward to kicking ass for the sake of kicking ass.
________
Xv250 (http://www.yamaha-tech.com/wiki/Yamaha_XV250)

[Check You Commie]

Point well taken. I would also add that I hope Ms. Rice checks R-1 or religious worker VISAs. They can be abused too.

[Urban Cowboy]

all talk, no action. if this guy was a school yard bully, steve erkel coulda knocked him out! all you rootin tootin loud mouth " kick butt" dudes are really just makin up for another area (probably physical) were they are short!

[Check You Commie]

That Urkel Kid is a dangerous southpaw with one hell of a left hook. Would rather lose in the 10th to Urkel then have your experience of being b*** raped by the men's cheerleading squad.

[Urban Cowboy]

Boy you're just full of trash talk, ain't ya fella? I seriously doubt you'd care to say some of these things to me or some of the other posters personally?