Bush supporters give me a break!
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 08-04-2004 - 2:17pm |
I truly feel like whenever I hear a Bush supporter speak, it is like listening to someone with Stolkholm syndrome, THEY ARE COMPLETELY BRAINWASHED!!! I mean, honestly, unless you are living in a cave (without internet, mind you) there is no way that the Bush supporters do not intake the same news that I do.
HE LIED!!! HE LIED!!! Let this serve as a newsflash to anyone who did not know. THERE ARE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. IF THERE ARE, HIS DAD SUPPLIED THEM. This is something that they were aware of befor the sent us into Iraq. That is unethical manipulation of your position of power.
For those of you who were just about to argue that we went in for "humanitarian" reasons to collapse the tyranical reign of Saddam, let me just halt you in your tracks. Why are we not in any country in Africa, in which there are civil wars, AIDs epidemics, and feminist repression running rampant due to governmental proceedings? Why are we not in China? Why are we not in Palestine (oh wait, I forgot, we are, sponsering their killing by the Israelis)? Becaus they do not benefit us? So what's the deal, we fight for humanity contigent on how much money we gain from it? Give me a break!
I read another posting about how Republicans are frustrated with the Democrats focus on how George Bush cannot speak. A couple interesting points: It worries us that he cannot speak because you'd think that after a couple years at Yale, the University rated number one on the recently released Princenton Review, that he would be able to process a few words. I guess the fact that he graduated with like a D average just does not count. Additionally, I would just like to call to attention the fact that over and over again science has come to the conclusion that the major difference between humans and the animal kingdom is our ability to speak, and our advanced methods of communication which in turn lead to organization and technology, thus the advancement of the human race. If he cannot speak, then he is getting closer and closer to the animal, right?
Finally, on the GOP thread several posters commented on how although Dems were calling them nervous, they were actually unwaveringly confident. Yeah, I would be too if my party had just rigged the last election!!
People, women, get to the polls!!
Let's make it like father, like son, one term!
Lani

Pages
Kerry is a beneficiary of the Heinz fortune; it counts. Kerry is the richest w/ over $1 billion. Bush is the least wealthy with $12-15 million. Cheney & Edwards is more of a toss up with their fortunes being wildly estimated at a low & high range. Cheney has between $17 & $85 million. Edwards has between $12 to $60 million; he had over $26 million in income the last 4 years he practiced law.
http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=19618
Renee ~~~
Renee ~~~
<<In the educated opinion of a great number of America's top lawyers, and law educators...>>
And in the educated opinion of a great number of America's top lawyers, and law educators, it's not.
<<There are only two legal justifications for attacking another country: self-defense, or if the Security Council authorises you to do so. It is perfectly plain that none of the Security Council resolutions relating>>
Pre-emption is a recognized form of self-defense. Beyond that, Iraq was not at peace. The cease fire from the '91 Gulf War was still in effect. That's why the majority of Iraq was a no fly zone for Saddam, and he couldn't touch the Kurds. Not only did Saddam violate the terms of the ceasefire concerning military buildup & WMDs, he was also daily firing on US planes which is an act of war.
According to your definition, we violated international law when we took action in Kosovo, when Clinton attacked that infamous asprin factory in Sudan, when he bombed Baghdad, and when Reagan pre-emptively invaded Granada, and when he attacked Lybia. Where is all the legal scholarship denouncing those incidents are illegal under international law?
<>
Au contraire. As Collin Powell has explained, serious consequences is defined in the UN charter to include military action.
<<We were mislead about hte waepons of mass distruction, and that is a lie, same as Clinton saying he did not have relations with Lewisnsky, but somehow, since nobody died, well I can forgive that one. >>
Please educate yourself about the conclusion of the 911 Commission.
<>
I do feel for you. It's so difficult to cope with friends and family in harms way, but I believe their role in the WOT is vital to our ultimate success, and that the millions of lives they have saved from Saddam's system and the freedom & hope they have brought to Iraq are a worthy cause.
Renee ~~~
Renee ~~~
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,505037996,00.html
<>
Renee ~~~
<<It's her money, not his. No doubt she spends some on him, but he does not have full ownership or free access.
>>
So? Even in this day & age there are plenty of women
Renee ~~~
Ah, the smell of jealousy permeates the air. Who really gives a rat's behind what their private financial arrangement is. If the man is brave enough to try to clean up the mess Bush has made, be grateful. Rabid envy can be very destructive.
as far as your vast knowledge on Chomsky, you really are not going to tell me much about him that I do not know already. I do not believe everything he says, like some people who blindly follow oh, I don't know, Bush for instance, hey it does not mean that they are not smart people, they just think differently and hold dear different values than I do.
I challenge your remark about Chomsky because I have a great deal of respect for him for many reasons. One being that he is one of the great thinkers of our time, if not the greatest. Two, the progress he has made in they knowledge of education and theory will reshape our educationql system. Three, and this one is really going to set you off, I am sure He is WHAT AMERICA is STANDS FOR!!!! He is a self described anarchist, (dont worry I'll wash my keybord later for typing that naughty word) and America, without Anarchy is what???? oh yes that is right it never would have existed. America was based on just that. SO whatever you want to say about him is fine. I never accuse you of worshiping Bush, and I resent that you would say that I worship at the altar of anyone, you don't know me. How presumtious.
Also I meant a dem or rep running for office would be dumb to have a public debate with Chomsky. So, yes, I could have phrased that better.
Of course HE makes crap up, are you about to say that he is the only one that does not? You seem to feel that just having the gall to tell someone what you feel they need to learn automatically sharpens your point or makes you right.
I will not accept your analogy and I think you are admittting in part of your post that you do not in fact know much about the man in question. You need not give me the links you researched on order to respond to my post. I have read much of Chomskys works, Non political, and some political and many interviews and works that study his theories and books. I like to find out for myself read both sides, and come to a decision of my own.
But than you for the insult I would expext nothing less from you.
The EC is designed (in a nutshell) so that major metropolitain areas such as NYC, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc dont decide the election for the entire country.
Kerry $600 million
Edwards $ 55 millioin
Cheney $ 35 million
Bush $ 15 million
By far and away, this is the richest group of people ever running for President in the history of this country. The only other time it was close was when Forbes and Perot were running for the third party nomination.
Pages