"Why I voted for Bush"

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Spiffor
This comparison is funny, given that Bush perpetrates the only appeasement policy made by the US I'm aware of (with North Korea)

*COUGH* Clinton *COUGH*

You have your parties muggled up my friend. Clinton tried to buy off the Korean commies to get them to stop making nukes. The North Koreans took the money and kept building nukes any way. Bush has repeatedly refused to give the North Koreans any aid money because of their past lies about their nuclear program.

I'm not sure how this helps us to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons but at least he isn't an appeaser.

[Arrian]

There are no really good options with the NK situation. I would prefer a different policy from both Clinton & Bush (a 3rd way, if you will), of letting SK talk to NK without us, promising NK nothing while demanding nothing. Essentially ignore them.

-Arrian

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
The trouble with people that say something is unbiased... they're inclined to say that about sources that concur with them. I don't know anything about that source I'm just talking generally.

This isn't just me saying this but both of the major parties are claiming that factcheck.org is the most neutral site to get honest evaluations.

[Arrian]

It's only a matter of time before one of the parties tries to discredit factcheck because it made them look bad (Repubs most likely in near-future).

-Arrian

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Arrian
It's only a matter of time before one of the parties tries to discredit factcheck because it made them look bad (Repubs most likely in near-future).

-Arrian

It would of happened much sooner if Factcheck kept a running tally of dishonesty or anything like that.

-Drachasor

[Adam Smith]

Bush Must Go

Like Robert Jordan's grandfather, I've "never knowingly sat at the same table as a Democrat." But THIS article from The American Conservative states the case defeating George W. Bush about as concisely as I have seen it. I think it's worth the read.

Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations. The launching of an invasion against a country that posed no threat to the U.S., the doling out of war profits and concessions to politically favored corporations, the financing of the war by ballooning the deficit to be passed on to the nation’s children, the ceaseless drive to cut taxes for those outside the middle class and working poor: it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing cliché about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy.

George W. Bush is not anywhere near the sharpest knife in the drawer. His limited capacity and family history has resulted in administration policy which can best be summed up as "Don't make the same two mistakes Daddy made."

First, don't leave Saddam Hussein in power. But the use of American military, economic, and political power to conduct a personal vendetta is absolutely inexcusable.

Second, do everything you can to make sure the economy is ripping along by the time election day rolls around. But in doing so George W Bush has started to piss away the greatest absolute advantage the American economy has over any other country in the world: financial stability. We and our children will pay the bill.

I know that many of you who support George W. Bush are very leery of John Kerry. And in many ways Kerry is like the Democrat Kamasutra: a thousand different positions and you still get screwed. But I also know that many of you supervise other people in the workplace. And if one of your employees persistently screwed up as badly as George W. Bush, wouldn't you fire them and take what's behind Door #2 as a replacement?

[Arrian]

*applause*

Well said, sir!

-Arrian

[Agathon]

it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing cliché about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy.

What do you mean, false? Bush is simply unapologetic and blatant about what the US has almost always been doing since WWII.

[Arrian]

Commies.

-Arrian

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Oerdin
*COUGH* Clinton *COUGH*

You have your parties muggled up my friend. Clinton tried to buy off the Korean commies to get them to stop making nukes. The North Koreans took the money and kept building nukes any way. Bush has repeatedly refused to give the North Koreans any aid money because of their past lies about their nuclear program.

I'm not sure how this helps us to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons but at least he isn't an appeaser.

Well, Clinton is a scumbag anyway, and appeasement is a policy that makes sense when you are dealing with a frigging cult equipped with nuclear weapons.

[dojoboy]

Originally posted by Arrian
Indeed.

And Dojoboy:

To say "your candidate lies!" as a counter to complaints about your candidate, who lies too (and even more), is assinine.

-Arrian

Did I say that? Such arguements make me weary. I never said Bush didn't lie, but don't make the claim if your own candidate lies. I didn't begin the accusation.

[Arrian]

Edit: I see what you're saying. My response is that I disagree with that line of thought, because one candidate can be an outrageous liar and the other can get a few facts wrong (I'm not saying that is the current situation) and *presto* one must not talk about the outrageous liar's lying. Bull****.

-Arrian

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by MrFun





Another deluded person who believes the war in Iraq really has something to with the war on terror!

Another deluded person who can't stand to acknowledge that Iraq has a lot to do with Jihadists and terror now!

[Odin]

Originally posted by notyoueither




Another deluded person who can't stand to acknowledge that Iraq has a lot to do with Jihadists and terror now!

AQ wouldn't be in Iraq if we wouldn't of invaded.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Arrian
Edit: I see what you're saying. My response is that I disagree with that line of thought, because one candidate can be an outrageous liar and the other can get a few facts wrong (I'm not saying that is the current situation) and *presto* one must not talk about the outrageous liar's lying. Bull****.

-Arrian

Neither deserves my vote.