|
View Poll Results: Which of these three has your vote? | |||
George W. Bush/Dick Cheney (GOP) | 14 | 60.87% | |
John Kerry/John Edwards (Dem) | 6 | 26.09% | |
Ralph Nader/Peter Camejo (Green) | 1 | 4.35% | |
no one/I'm not voting | 2 | 8.70% | |
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
10-03-2004, 11:30 AM | #31 |
USER INFO »
Status: Found The Real
Posts: 10,546
Joined: Aug 2003
Currently: Offline
|
i'll talk about kerry later, b/c i'm on my way to church in a few here....
__________________
|
10-03-2004, 10:13 PM | #32 |
USER INFO »
Status: Faceless Fan
Posts: 500
Joined: Sep 2004
Currently: Offline
|
1. He didn't address the deficit, he just ignored it and gave tax cuts to the riches of people. 2. He could cut spending in order todeal with the deficit 3. He didn't inherit a "lousy" econ it was slowing down but it wasn't lousy. 4. He didn't address this "lousy" econ even before 9/11, so i doesn't matter. 5. Bush has nothing to do with the recent incresing econ (even though it is slowing, but that doesn't matter) Alan greenspan has everything to do with the increasing econ, his low interest rates helped out the econ. |
10-03-2004, 10:30 PM | #33 |
USER INFO »
Status: Faceless Fan
Posts: 500
Joined: Sep 2004
Currently: Offline
|
My responses are bolded |
10-03-2004, 10:45 PM | #34 |
USER INFO »
Status: Found The Real
Posts: 10,546
Joined: Aug 2003
Currently: Offline
|
ahhhhhhh, there's the good ol' Democrat rhetoric... if I'm not mistaken, everyone received a tax cut. after all, it is a lot easier to make reductions from a 39+% rate than from a 10-15% rate.
but why is it that important that we have a perfectly balanced budget? clinton did it, big freakin' deal. remember FDR? massive deficit spending (along w/ the war) helped us out in the Depression. i've never really heard a halfway decent explanation as to why deficit spending is so damn bad, let alone a good explanation. so if anyone thinks they can dazzle me, i'm waiting. regardless, you should read my previous post. it gives a little bit of insight into presidents and their effect on the economy. and i do remember Bush, and not Al Gore, proclaiming, during the '00 campaign, we need to be prepared for an economic recession. seems as though bush's economic advisors might know a thing or two more than those on "the other side" i'd assume that by "address", you mean "pass legislation". if you mean "mention", read my previous remark. second, how is 9/11 a mark for the economy? wait, check that. read this following headline (the headline proves you're wrong) http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/06/07/bush.taxes/ see the date? i'm not trying to be an asshole, but when you go spouting off info without doing any research, well that just pisses me off. i guess the economy is slowing. after all, we're not experiencing the same through-the-roof inflation of 8 years ago or so. that's just bad, when there's that much inflation. this here is what I like to call, alternatingly, "reality" and "the economy correcting itself". even greenspan doesn't have that much to do w/ it. if you look at the stock market dating back to its inception, you'll find it, more or less, runs in cycles. the economy runs in cycles. http://www.thestreet.com/basics/gett...ed/999841.html
__________________
|
10-03-2004, 10:54 PM | #35 |
USER INFO »
Status: Found The Real
Posts: 10,546
Joined: Aug 2003
Currently: Offline
|
Dek: Bush is against bilateral talks, yes, but in case you didn't watch the debate and, quite frankly, he beat this point into the ground: multilateral talks. other influential major countries and us have talks w/ kim jong-il.
http://www.socialsecurity.org/cgi-bi...ncial_ crisis http://www.socialsecurity.org/cgi-bi... urity_reform http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/a...ggs020603.html http://www.socialsecurity.org/pubs/a...ggs020530.html i see where you're coming from & why you don't want to privatize social security. me, i'm a hardcore conservative, and i don't want big government programs like this, particularly wasteful failures. sure there's risk to the employee involved, but i simply would prefer to have greater control.
__________________
Last edited by RMadd : 10-03-2004 at 10:56 PM. Reason: hyperlink errors |
10-03-2004, 11:18 PM | #36 |
USER INFO »
Status: Faceless Fan
Posts: 500
Joined: Sep 2004
Currently: Offline
|
Ill respond tommorw because i an essay to write.
In the mean time you still haven't answered my arguments about ABM, nuclear testing and such. |
10-03-2004, 11:35 PM | #37 |
USER INFO »
Status: Faceless Fan
Posts: 500
Joined: Sep 2004
Currently: Offline
|
That such a biased source......CATO is so freakin libertarian that it makes bush look like a moderate.......get a new source and then maybe i will read it. |
10-04-2004, 08:49 AM | #38 |
USER INFO »
Status: Strong Inside
Posts: 1,540
Joined: Feb 2004
Currently: Offline
|
I am Bush supporter all the way.
__________________
|
10-05-2004, 07:15 AM | #39 |
USER INFO »
Status: Silence Speaks
Posts: 61
Joined: Oct 2004
Currently: Offline
|
My husband came across a union worker from the local GM plant who had a button on that said "anyone but Bush" now does that tell you anything. I can't believe that people are that lame to think that way. But that's JMHO ________ Magic flight launch box review ________ The Cigar Boss Last edited by BobbyMcGee : 05-02-2011 at 01:09 PM. |
10-05-2004, 10:51 AM | #40 |
USER INFO »
Status: Found The Real
Posts: 10,546
Joined: Aug 2003
Currently: Offline
|
agreed.... b/c when you go w/ that mentality, then you'll just end up voting in another idiot into office... i'm really hoping that in 2008, we have some über-qualified people running for president. don't get me wrong: i like bush and all, but i feel there are others out there (not running in the election) who would be better for the job. hey, maybe Jack Ryan (the guy who was running for IL Sen. against Barack Obama) will run some day.
__________________
|
10-05-2004, 12:27 PM | #41 |
Forum Diplomat
USER INFO »
Status: Rising Sun
Posts: 4,161
Joined: Sep 2002
Currently: Offline
|
The reason we dont have to and the reason North Korea wont do anything is, accroding to the UN, if North Korea does any Nuclear testing - it is China's, South Korea, Japan, and Russia's obligation to strike him back. Even if his nuclear tests were dont on his own land, it is thier obligation to strike him back with the same nuclear weapons. That has got to be one of the stupidest argument i've heard of yet. To make things worse, no one can provide evidence to back that up. There is nothing new with the Patriot Act, that Washington hasnt seen before. For the uninitiated... everything in the contents of the Patriot Act has been introduced into both houses of Congress by the FBI in the past. The FBI has requested these specific rights and at one point or another they were either shot down or edited. In reality YES the FBI does need the Patriot Act. The problem with that is that when the FBI requested those rights, it was during a time in which it needed them and it only requested a select few at a time. So those that question what is the deal about the Patriot Act, the big deal is that it has now recieved everything is has requested in the past -- just this time all at once.
__________________
Intellectial Giant (Social Outcast) |
10-07-2004, 09:38 PM | #42 |
USER INFO »
Status: Faceless Fan
Posts: 500
Joined: Sep 2004
Currently: Offline
|
1.If the econ runs in cycles how can bush effect it? That controdicts your post. 2. Inflation is still rising during the bush term.....and oil prices are the highest they have ever been in the 90's. Sorry i haven't gotten to this before, i have been very busy. I don't like Kerry or bush. But i would rather have kerry than bush. Last edited by DekWannaBFlea : 10-07-2004 at 09:47 PM. |
10-07-2004, 09:47 PM | #43 |
USER INFO »
Status: Faceless Fan
Posts: 500
Joined: Sep 2004
Currently: Offline
|
....So he introduced it to congress and wanted it passed, and why the patriot act is bad.... 1)gives to much power to exec branch 2) parts may ruled unconsitutional next year |
10-08-2004, 10:29 AM | #44 |
Forum Diplomat
USER INFO »
Status: Rising Sun
Posts: 4,161
Joined: Sep 2002
Currently: Offline
|
Yes, key word being defend. It is our obligation to defend our allies. But unlike Iraq, first strike has been passed down to those other countries. No sir, I will not deny that spending has gone up, but my comment has nothing to do with government spending. You originally said he gave tax cuts to the rich, the same rhetoric that has been regurgitated over and over, and that is what I am refering to as absurd.
__________________
Intellectial Giant (Social Outcast) |
10-08-2004, 01:05 PM | #45 |
USER INFO »
Status: Silence Speaks
Posts: 61
Joined: Oct 2004
Currently: Offline
|
Yeah why not? It's your right to vote. Be thankful that we live in a country that we CAN vote and are able to express our opinions without fear of being gunned down. In my opinion if you don't vote don't whine about the way the country is being run. ________ Essential vaaapp vaporizer ________ UNIVERSAL HEALTH WAREHOUSE Last edited by BobbyMcGee : 05-02-2011 at 01:10 PM. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|