Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 179
  1.    #41  
    edit above post: syria is supporting terrorists, rather, not hostages.
  2.    #42  
    amazing. our argument is once again the fact that kerry voted AGAINST the furthering of many.... many important military investments, not just one or two.
    that's the point! its not that kerry voted against a few, its that he voted against SO MANY OF THEM!
    cheney has made his votes.. but are you trying to say he voted against the equipment that we would need to use in our handling of iraq? that is an absurd assumption.
    you feel good voting for a guy like kerry with HIS voting record?
  3.    #43  
    you say miller made a fool of himself with his anger. well something must indeed be remiss within his party to fuel such a scathing temper, wouldn't you agree? if all was welll within the democratic party and he felt good about the dem leaders, why would he bother trying to get attention?
    I didn't see any repubs at the dnc doing this jumping parties in protest of bush with the argument is that bush is so terribly off base.
    I don't see it as an embarrassment, I see it as reinforcing the solidity of the repub argument.
  4. #44  
    Gah, Treobk214, could you please quote the different messages you're replying to? It would make it easier to follow...
  5.    #45  
    hi sherv, yes I will try to post a link here for you when I get home later today. im away from my computer right now and on my treo, but I will certainly try to do this for you when I get home.
  6. #46  
    Ah, sorry, I forget people access this forum on mobile devices...don't sweat it, it's just a pet peeve I have, heh.
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by Sherv
    What I know is that seeing thousands of protesters showing up for the RNC sends a pretty powerful message. Same deal with the incredible number of worldwide protests of the invasion of Iraq.
    I also see the powerful message from the protests - the weirdos and anarchists are anti-Bush and pro-Kerry.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  8.    #48  
    voting records don't matter? don't mean anything? so then what is it exactly that kerry stands for? I can't make heads or tails of it looking at his voting history. usually those are the vitals you need to put together an idea of what a candidate is all about. you discount that? so what are you going on to justify supporting him, then? im curious.
  9.    #49  
    I understand the point that you can support a bill but disagree with certain clauses or conditions attached with its passing, so you vote against it. I have no problem with that.
    but kennedy and kerry have voted down SO MANY defense bills, what exactly are we going to use as defense when the time comes? harsh language? not a reassuring stance from a commander in chief.
  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    the weirdos
    That's pretty sensitive and open minded of you.
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by heberman
    I also see the powerful message from the protests - the weirdos and anarchists are anti-Bush and pro-Kerry.
    Hahah, yeah, they're definitely anarchists.

    If anywhere, the anarchists were among the sparse protesters that showed up for the DNC, actually.
  12. mrjoec's Avatar
    Posts
    369 Posts
    Global Posts
    384 Global Posts
    #52  
    I'll repeat: Every single item that Miller mentioned last night was either something that Cheney himself defunded, or that Kerry voted FOR once the extra fat was excised from the bill.

    He didn't VOTE DOWN these defense bills. He simply demanded that the bill only fund the project at hand, rather than line the pockets of businesses out to take an extra scoop of our tax dollars. Once the bill cut out these extra expenses, he was more than glad to give them the okay.

    Sounds like what I would expect from a responsible public servant. The same thing I would expect from McCain, or any republican.

    If you don't like Kerry, that's fine. But if you're going to make an argument against him, you have to come up with something that actually holds some validity.

    And for the RNC to use Miller as the KEYNOTE speaker, the person meant to set the tone for the entire convention, I think sends a really negative message that I don't think they intended to send. And I do think it's a detriment to an otherwise masterfully run campaign thus far.
    mrjoec
    www.joecieplinski.com
  13. #53  
    More on Kerry's voting record: http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127/
    Units - Unit conversion for webOS!
    Treo 180->270->600->650->Blackberry Pearl->Palm Pre
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by Sherv
    What I know is that seeing thousands of protesters showing up for the RNC sends a pretty powerful message. Same deal with the incredible number of worldwide protests of the invasion of Iraq.
    Yeah you're right. It does send a powerful message.... that there are a lot of misguided retards out there. Lets not forget that we went into Iraq with a coalition of well over 60 nations. As much as the democratic talking heads would have you believe it was a unilateral effort, please dont forget that one very small detail...
  15. #55  
    [QUOTE=mrjoec]Do you honestly believe that we are any safer and more secure than we were four years ago? [QUOTE]

    You're joking right? Aside from the fact that we now have the Patriot Act, a national security director, captured Saddam Hussein, killed Uday and Qusay, toppled the Taliban, seriously disabled al Qaeda, created a Department of Homeland Defense, and are in the process of building a bridge between the FBI and CIA for increased and more accurate intelligence, ummmmmmm I would say we might just be a tad bit better off than we were 4 years ago. Just a guess....
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by 03Range
    I have one serious honest question for the Dems on this thread and I hope to get serious honest answers. Here goes:

    Given Sen. Kerry's 19-year senate voting record, complete with all the votes against some of our military's most effective weapon systems, would you honestly feel safer and more secure with him as commander-in-chief over G.W. Bush?

    I look forward to your answers.
    First, I am not a democrat but i hope my response is still permitted.

    I would feel safest if we kept our incredible military systems to ourselves. I would feel safe if we stopped our ignorance regarding Israel. I would feel safe if we stopped being the planetary bully and started taking care of our own. Let us quietly eliminate our national debt, provide military support (but not leadership) when called upon by the UN, and when the next Hitler comes along we will be plenty strong enough to deal a swift kick in the pants.

    Perhaps at it's simplest I certainly would rather someone with combat experience (McCain or Kerry - POW or disputable purple heart) over someone "born on third base" with questionable domestic "military service".
  17. mrjoec's Avatar
    Posts
    369 Posts
    Global Posts
    384 Global Posts
    #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by 03Range
    Yeah you're right. It does send a powerful message.... that there are a lot of misguided retards out there. Lets not forget that we went into Iraq with a coalition of well over 60 nations. As much as the democratic talking heads would have you believe it was a unilateral effort, please dont forget that one very small detail...
    "Misguided retards." I see we're making a great effort here to have an intelligent discussion.

    It's like talking to a three-year old. When in doubt, just call the other person a poopy head, and you win the argument.
    mrjoec
    www.joecieplinski.com
  18. #58  
    Kerrys voting record is one glimpse into his view on defense. Take into account his statements saying he would only deploy US Forces under UN command, he would only respond to terrorist attacks, his call for a nuclear freeze, his many anti military stances,his refusal to fund any program to help the US in the event of a nuclear war, his recent statement saying he would allow Iran (with the EU's help of course) to keep their nuclear reactors (same stance Clinton took with N. Korea, now they're in the nuke club), his self admitted war crimes. He is a man of few principles and many positions. He has no clue where he stands on terrorism which is frightening and dangerous. When speaking to palestineans he told them the Israeli wall was wrong, few weeks later when speaking to a Jewish group he said it was the right thing to do. This man is hollow. His accomplishments are few and he has, his whole life, lived off of others. He is no leader, he is not even respectable.

    But like Benedict Arnold and Lyndie England at least Kerry served.
  19. #59  
    Zieak,

    In your opinion, how is the US a bully and why are we not fit to provide leadership to the UN.
  20. mrjoec's Avatar
    Posts
    369 Posts
    Global Posts
    384 Global Posts
    #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by 03Range
    You're joking right? Aside from the fact that we now have the Patriot Act, a national security director, captured Saddam Hussein, killed Uday and Qusay, toppled the Taliban, seriously disabled al Qaeda, created a Department of Homeland Defense, and are in the process of building a bridge between the FBI and CIA for increased and more accurate intelligence, ummmmmmm I would say we might just be a tad bit better off than we were 4 years ago. Just a guess....
    And the actual perpetrators of 9/11 are where? Where's Osama again? I forget. Oh, that's right. He got away. The ones who actually attacked us are still at large. That doesn't make me feel safe.

    Saddam Hussein was a ba$tard, and I'm glad he's no longer in control of Iraq. But exactly when did he ever pose a serious threat to us? When was that attack on our soil that he masterminded? Where are those supposed WMDs that he didn't actually have?

    And how does all of this stop anyone from getting on a plane, train, taxi cab, or whatever, strapped with C4? Do you seriously think it's any more difficult to engage in terrorist activity than it used to be? They still aren't even scanning all of our bags at the airports yet.

    The national security director was a result of the 9/11 commission, the formation of which Bush vehemently opposed for years. He also altered the position in ways that weaken its effectiveness.

    The bridge between the FBI and CIA was put on hold so that congress could take a summer vacation. Not necessarily Bush's fault, granted. But funny to mention.

    The Homeland Security department was also shot down by Bush, despite strong congressional support from both parties for the idea, until just after 9/11, when he took full credit as he appointed Tom Ridge, as if it were his idea in the first place.

    The Patriot Act is a whole other ball of wax. Does it make us safer? Maybe. But at what cost is a real question. I'll grant you this one as a maybe.

    Seriously disabled Al Qaeda? I doubt it. Distracted the world long enough with Iraq to give them adequate chance to reload is more like it.

    Oh, but I forgot. We've got duck tape and a color-coded alert system now. What was I thinking? You're right.

    If you think for a minute that terrorism is going to decline just because we invade a country who didn't have any connections to the terrorists who attacked us, I'm not sure I can say anything to convince you otherwise.

    Some people I respect have offered valid reasons why the Iraq war was a good idea. Some people I admire, like John McCain, believe in their hearts that this radical shift in our foreign policy (to a proactive, pre-emptive strike approach) is a good thing. I don't agree, but I at least respect their viewpoint. None of them make spurious connections between Iraq and Bin Laden, however, as many other war supporters do.

    Even Bush himself said a few days ago that we can't win the war on terror, we can only hope to make them think twice about attacking us. But then he backtracked really quick, probably because he was afraid people would call him a flip-flopper. Personally, I think he was right. It was the first time in a long time I agreed with him 100%.
    mrjoec
    www.joecieplinski.com
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions