|
|
Post by The Angry Artist on Oct 30, 2004 21:31:25 GMT -5
For those saying Kerry never answered the questions... Do you say Bush did? Both candidates wheeled and dealed around the questions to support their own goals. It wasn't just Kerry. Do you really think they are the only candidates in the history of the United States to have dodged a question during a debate? Not to mention the fact that Bush cheated during the debates. There is no doubt in my mind that Bush wore an audio prompter in one of his ears. And I'm not saying that just because I think Bush did it -- I'm saying that because I went to www.isbushwired.com. Also, one of the reasons I like Kerry over Bush is that he is pro-choice. He wants to give women the option to have an abortion. Bush wants to force his belief that a woman shouldn't be able to have an abortion onto those who would have an abortion and those who wouldn't. So both candidates let their views influence them. But I have a problem with those who would force their views onto others. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2004 15:30:29 GMT -5
I support John Kerry, simply because I'd rather be uncertain of a President than be certain that he's bad (i.e. Bush).
Also, Bush definitely does not support my views. Everyone knows he is on the extremely far right. John Kerry is more towards the middle, which is where I am.
Bush and Cheney are liars, too. Cheney says he's against homosexuality and gay marriage, but he fully supports his daughter's beliefs. That doesn't make sense at all. Bush said there were WMDs in Iraq. There weren't.
They say John Kerry voted against all of these "great" bills, like Laci's Law. I do believe that, but think of this: bills do not contain single laws. They often have a bunch of different things tacked on to them, such as higher taxes. My belief is that Kerry voted against the bills because they weren't worth the other crap.
Bush has been on vacation for more days than any other President, EVER. When the country is in need of help (Sept. 11), of all times!
Because of the No Child Left Behind Act, my school has less money. My government teacher has been copying pages from a book--which is illegal to do--so that we all have the information. He could be fired for providing us kids with a proper education, because the NCLB Act took away some of the money we needed for books.
Oust King George on November 2nd.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tdyans on Oct 31, 2004 17:00:57 GMT -5
Bush.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiddo on Oct 31, 2004 17:10:09 GMT -5
Ditto. And I've already voted! *dances* Absentee. Sent in the ballot last week. My first presedential election EVA!! And it was a Florida ballot! Hanging chads! I was giggling. |
|
|
|
Post by Luna on Oct 31, 2004 17:12:25 GMT -5
Kerry. I can't stand Bush, he involves religion in too many things (gay marriage, abortion for a few) and I disagree with Iraq. I'm not to crazy about Kerry either, but it's a matter of who the lesser of two evils is. So I believe Bush is far worse for this country than Kerry.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsfluff on Oct 31, 2004 17:29:32 GMT -5
Kerry. I don't think he's the best choice, but he's a HECK of a lot better than Bush. Forgive me for saying this, but I find it hard to support someone who gets laughed at because he can't string a simple sentence together. Bush bases everything on his strong beliefs, but when America is a country all about freedom of beliefs, I don't see how you can do that. I am a Christian, but I think people should be allowed to choose whether or not to have an abortion, and what religion they practice, etc. I don't think people should try to force their beliefs on others.
Another thing... I seriously doubt Kerry's little flip-flops are as bad as the other party makes them seem. And even if he has changed his mind a few times, at least he is willing to admit his mistakes....
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2004 17:34:48 GMT -5
If you really care about the lives of the people, you'll have to vote for Bush. John Kerry wants to pull the troops out of Iraq.
Kerry pulls troops.
Iraq falls.
World War III breaks out.
Neuclear bombs drop on Washington DC.
That means everything within 100 miles of DC would be destryoed/killed/demolished, along with anything aound it. SO, Virginia and Maryland would both probably be demolished and wiped out.
I'm going to move to Canada if that Poo Head Kerry gets elected.
|
|
|
|
Post by Buddy on Oct 31, 2004 18:32:46 GMT -5
Kerry pulls troops. Iraq falls. World War III breaks out. Neuclear bombs drop on Washington DC. That means everything within 100 miles of DC would be destryoed/killed/demolished, along with anything aound it. SO, Virginia and Maryland would both probably be demolished and wiped out. That's so far from what would actually happen, it's ridiculous... |
|
|
|
Post by Rider on Oct 31, 2004 18:45:38 GMT -5
That's so far from what would actually happen, it's ridiculous... [glow=red,2,300]Harsh, but yeah. I'm all for Kerry. I'm a liberal, he's a liberal. And he's not a stubborn donkey like Bush is. Also, Bush's No Child Left Behind Act is a bunch of bull. Schools that need funding are denied it. Where's the sense in that? In fact, Bush puts pretty names of a lot of bullish bills. And his TV ads- have you ever seen the one with the scenes from 9/11 flashing across thre screen, and afterwards, the message says "vote for Bush' or something like that? Like if you don't vote for Bush, you're un-American? And Kerry's flexible. Bush isn't. Bush labels Kerry as flip-flopping, and that's all it is; a label. And I'm a bit scared of the fact that our president can't, like Fluffy said, string a simple sentence together. On the other hand, he accurately represnts 80% of America! ;D[/glow] |
|
|
|
Post by The Angry Artist on Oct 31, 2004 21:07:22 GMT -5
If you really care about the lives of the people, you'll have to vote for Bush. John Kerry wants to pull the troops out of Iraq. Kerry pulls troops. Iraq falls. World War III breaks out. Neuclear bombs drop on Washington DC. That means everything within 100 miles of DC would be destryoed/killed/demolished, along with anything aound it. SO, Virginia and Maryland would both probably be demolished and wiped out. I'm going to move to Canada if that Poo Head Kerry gets elected. Has John Kerry said he's going to immediately pull all the troops out of Iraq, or did Bush say that? And you're using a Slippery Slope fallacy, a falacy that means that if one thing happens it will ultimately lead to a series of undesirable consequences. And why would nuclear bombs fall on Washington? There aren't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq; Bush even admitted it! |
|
|
|
Post by Kiddo on Oct 31, 2004 21:09:04 GMT -5
And you're using a Slippery Slope fallacy, a falacy that means that if one thing happens it will ultimately lead to a series of undesirable consequences. Nuuuu, not the slippery slope fallacy!! Did you dislike If you Give a Mouse a Cookie as a kid? Personally, I prefer to express my political beliefs through my vote. *huggles voter card* |
|
|
|
Post by The Angry Artist on Oct 31, 2004 21:49:44 GMT -5
Nuuuu, not the slippery slope fallacy!! Did you dislike If you Give a Mouse a Cookie as a kid? Personally, I prefer to express my political beliefs through my vote. *huggles voter card* I never read it. |
|
|
|
Post by Linnen Malfoy on Nov 1, 2004 11:28:08 GMT -5
I voted for Kerry. I put aside the fact that Bush may not be that eloquent, but I just find it very hard to trust a man who more or less drags us into an unessicary war. I think that we need to focus more on the economy and job outsourcing instead of this war. For that matter, what happend to Osama Bin Laden? He still is a huge problem, and nothing really has been done about it. I don't like Kerry's taxes, but it's a fact of life - they must be paid. I also support Kerry's stance on abortion and things such as that. The debate did help me put some things in perspective too. It seemed pecular how much Bush stammered and stuttered whenpresented with a question. Of course, John Kerry did not have any right to bring up RichardCheney's daught as he did, so it's not like either one was 'perfect'. In the end, though I'm not adament about Kerry, I'm not very pleased with Bush either. If you really care about the lives of the people, you'll have to vote for Bush. John Kerry wants to pull the troops out of Iraq. Kerry pulls troops. Iraq falls. World War III breaks out. Neuclear bombs drop on Washington DC. That means everything within 100 miles of DC would be destryoed/killed/demolished, along with anything aound it. SO, Virginia and Maryland would both probably be demolished and wiped out. I'm going to move to Canada if that Poo Head Kerry gets elected. I'm sorry to say that is ridiculious. I don't understand how between Iraq falling you have world war three. The first two wars broke out in Europe mostly due to a land struggle. If you think about it, there are more people against Iraq than for Iraq. There wouldn't be a 'world war', because that constitues that other countries would willing go for aid. Now, I'm sure other middle east countries would, but those are rather few when you have the possiblity of more countries than that goign to war (assuming, of course, that countries like France and Germany and such came to aid).If you want a slippery slope about Bush, well then... --Bush continues in the war --Skyrocketing costs of the materials cause economy to decline --Economy crashes --Everyone is poor See, it's just not possible. ^_~ |
|
|
|
Post by Shadyy lazy on Nov 1, 2004 11:42:05 GMT -5
If you really care about the lives of the people, you'll have to vote for Bush. John Kerry wants to pull the troops out of Iraq. Kerry pulls troops. Iraq falls. World War III breaks out. Neuclear bombs drop on Washington DC. That means everything within 100 miles of DC would be destryoed/killed/demolished, along with anything aound it. SO, Virginia and Maryland would both probably be demolished and wiped out. I'm going to move to Canada if that Poo Head Kerry gets elected. As far as I'm concerned Iraq HAS already fallen. It's completely destroyed and ruled by terrorists or extremists. Who take hostages and execute journalists by preference. Iraq's a worse mess then before the whole war-thing... Iits whole culture was destroyed. Then again i don't live in the US, so I don't have to vote ^^ But polls over here say that 80% 'd rather vot for Kerry then Bush. FRom my point of view they'll both turn out to be as big terrorists as Bin Laden. You can't deny that the Inspectors didn't fird any mass distruction weapons and that Bush went to war without accords of the UN. Bah, I'll be quiet now. |
|
|
|
Post by Shadyy lazy on Nov 1, 2004 11:47:16 GMT -5
(sorry another thought) I'm sorry to say that is ridiculious. I don't understand how between Iraq falling you have world war three. The first two wars broke out in Europe mostly due to a land struggle. If you think about it, there are more people against Iraq than for Iraq. There wouldn't be a 'world war', because that constitues that other countries would willing go for aid. Now, I'm sure other middle east countries would, but those are rather few when you have the possiblity of more countries than that goign to war (assuming, of course, that countries like France and Germany and such came to aid).Myeah, other country's might be forced to fight against the US and its allies. remember the : " If you're not with us, you're against us." France, germany (and belgium) didn' t join in this war because they didn't approve of the method, but does that mean they agreed with the regime in Iraq? No, it doesn't. The world isn't black and white, but when certain people make it out to be that way you can indeed get trouble. But I don't really think Iraq has the power nor will to start WWIII. |
|
