You're stupider than I thought. I mean seriously, what's a president got to do to get fired? You know, besides harm the economy and get us into a war we can't entirely win. Didn't we get it right the LAST time this happened? :confused: This one even managed to infringe on some of our civil rights.

Discuss.

Ban I agree. We were worse off the past 4 years then we were from 96-2000. Also, most areas voting dem. are the urban ones, large cities and state capitals. What about D.C.? The center of politics...dem. Urban areas (CITIES, CAPITALS) denote a higher intellect then rural. Nuf Said!!!

was at dinner with a colleague of mine.... he said something to the line of "...
since the Republicans don't advocate abortion, their numbers just increase in
each election and they put in more votes!"
Darn... so how we gonna breed more Dems for the future? :D

What are you talking about? Republicans don't have sex. :confused:

So anyone who disagrees with your vote is stupid? Seems like it would be a sad way to go through life.

Are you pointing your question at me???

If you are, no I don't think anyone that votes opposite me are stupid.

Just look at the facts stated above.

No I meant to address Bansuvs, sorry bout that.

I don't think urban people are any smarter than rural people. I have found population density and civilized behavior to be inversely proportional. Just look at crime stats.

Those are mostly opinions, not facts. Who says people in cities are smarter than non-cities? I say suburbs win.

Ban I agree. We were worse off the past 4 years then we were from 96-2000. Also, most areas voting dem. are the urban ones, large cities and state capitals. What about D.C.? The center of politics...dem. Urban areas (CITIES, CAPITALS) denote a higher intellect then rural. Nuf Said!!!
Now if that's the elitist Socialist "care & compassion" that Kerry would've brought to the White House, no wonder he lost.

Democrats like yourself must have been in a fog the spring/summer before the election of 2000, cause that's when the economy started to headed South.
But it's your lie, so I'll let you tell it any way you want. ;)

You're stupider than I thought. I mean seriously, what's a president got to do to get fired? You know, besides harm the economy and get us into a war we can't entirely win. Didn't we get it right the LAST time this happened? :confused: This one even managed to infringe on some of our civil rights.

Discuss.

This is part of what I posted in another thread:



it was interesting to see in the exit polls that moral values were the biggest reasons to vote for bush and not the economy, war, terrorism, etc. (this is in the mid-west/south) Bush was pushing for the Pro-gun, anti-gay, bible-pushers. While Kerry was out there pushing for fixing our relationship with the rest of the world, our economy, and fixing bush's administrations f-ups. Guess Kerry didn't realize that there are more of the 1st catagory in this country I'm not just pulling this out of my a** either, all the networks were talking about it last night too.



That's why he didn't get fired. Bush catered to the country music fan. (He even had christian rock bands play at rallys.) They don't care if their rights are taken away because they "trust" Bush because he has the same homophobic anti-foreigner values. It's called, the only kind of culture they are exposed to is the conservative middle american culture and he's from that. So what if he allowed 9/11 to happen and he let osama release that tape 5 days ago to campaign for him :D (omg we won't get into that, I had to throw a curve ball) :)

I need to not get to worked up yet, the lawsuits are just begining...

This is part of what I posted in another thread:



it was interesting to see in the exit polls that moral values were the biggest reasons to vote for bush and not the economy, war, terrorism, etc. (this is in the mid-west/south) Bush was pushing for the Pro-gun, anti-gay, bible-pushers. While Kerry was out there pushing for fixing our relationship with the rest of the world, our economy, and fixing bush's administrations f-ups. Guess Kerry didn't realize that there are more of the 1st catagory in this country I'm not just pulling this out of my a** either, all the networks were talking about it last night too.



That's why he didn't get fired. Bush catered to the country music fan. (He even had christian rock bands play at rallys.) They don't care if their rights are taken away because they "trust" Bush because he has the same homophobic anti-foreigner values. It's called, the only kind of culture they are exposed to is the conservative middle american culture and he's from that. So what if he allowed 9/11 to happen and he let osama release that tape 5 days ago to campaign for him :D (omg we won't get into that, I had to throw a curve ball) :)

I need to not get to worked up yet, the lawsuits are just begining...

Idiot... and that is all you deserve!

You're stupider than I thought. I mean seriously, what's a president got to do to get fired?

... remember President Clinton.

... remember President Clinton.

Oh, OK I get it, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, looting the treasurey, bankrupting the country, selling off our forests and wilderness while pi**ing off the rest of the world is OK


in fact deserving of re-election!



but getting a hummer in the oval office....







outtaa here!






America, F*** Yeah!

... remember President Clinton.

he could have taken care of Osama(according to CIA, Intel agencies etc...), even before Bush had the seat...but no...he might as well focus all his efforts on the economy...guess he can tell that to all the people and relatives who died at 9/11...sorry for your loss, but, i had to focus on the economy instead of capturing a world renowned terrorist.

if he just looked into it, we wouldn't be in this mess...there is no reason for this thread

You're stupider than I thought. I mean seriously, what's a president got to do to get fired? You know, besides harm the economy and get us into a war we can't entirely win. Didn't we get it right the LAST time this happened? :confused: This one even managed to infringe on some of our civil rights.

Discuss.

Maybe if he'd have got a BJ from an intern that would have pushed him over the top. What civil rights were infringed again? If you're reffering to the patriot act I agree.

Oh, OK I get it, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, looting the treasurey, bankrupting the country, selling off our forests and wilderness while pi**ing off the rest of the world is OK


in fact deserving of re-election!



but getting a hummer in the oval office....







outtaa here!






America, F*** Yeah!

If you believe a hummer is the biggest and only atrocity commited by President Clinton.

If you believe a hummer is the biggest and only atrocity commited by President Clinton.

Speaking of Clinton...

If the democrats had put up another Clinton Womanizer instead of a liberal Frankenstien double and a trial attorney, they'd have cleaned up.

Liberals should be mad at their own party for puttin up this passifist, left-wing, medal-throwing, protest loving botox freak.
I was listening to stewart smally this morning and even he ripped kerry a new hole.

If the democrats had put up another clinton instead of a liberal Frankenstien double and a trial attorney, they'd have cleaned up.

Be mad at your own party that they put up this passifist, left-wing, medal-throwing, protest loving botox freak.
I was listening to stewart smally this morning and even he ripped kerry a new hole.

I am for Bush? What do you mean "Be mad at your own party"...)? Or is this comment not for me?:)

It's kinda strange how Klintons friends from various other scandels have a habit of dying accidentally

You're stupider than I thought. I mean seriously, what's a president got to do to get fired? You know, besides harm the economy and get us into a war we can't entirely win. Didn't we get it right the LAST time this happened? :confused: This one even managed to infringe on some of our civil rights.

Discuss.


There's nothing to discuss here other than how poor a loser you are. I supported Kerry, and I agree with a lot of what you have to say. But s*** like this will only give Hella, Salty, Guru, etc... reasons to call us whinny liberal scumbags. Man up.

I am for Bush? What do you mean "Be mad at your own party"...)? Or is this comment not for me?:)

Sorry... just taking the Clinton thing and running a different direction with it. Woops! (Edited)

There's nothing to discuss here other than how poor a loser you are. I supported Kerry, and I agree with a lot of what you have to say. But s*** like this will only give Hella, Salty, Guru, etc... reasons to call us whinny liberal scumbags. Man up.

You're my favorite liberal. :D

You're my favorite liberal. :D

Hahaha...maybe I should run for president hahahahaha

he could have taken care of Osama(according to CIA, Intel agencies etc...), even before Bush had the seat...but no...he might as well focus all his efforts on the economy...guess he can tell that to all the people and relatives who died at 9/11...sorry for your loss, but, i had to focus on the economy instead of capturing a world renowned terrorist.

if he just looked into it, we wouldn't be in this mess...there is no reason for this thread

Well by your monkey logic then we can also hold bush accountable for not killing abu al-zarqawi when he had the chance before the invasion of Iraq. I mean you can tell that to all the soldiers and contractors who al-zarqawi has beheaded and kidnapped because Bush had the chance to take that turd out and he didn't...Your stupid logic doesn't apply here.

There's nothing to discuss here other than how poor a loser you are. I supported Kerry, and I agree with a lot of what you have to say. But s*** like this will only give Hella, Salty, Guru, etc... reasons to call us whinny liberal scumbags. Man up.

Agreed...He lost....I'm glad he conceded like he did instead of drawing it out.

It's kinda strange how Klintons friends from various other scandels have a habit of dying accidentally

Nothing like the Bush family aquaintences;

http://www.georgewalkerbush.net/bushdeathlist.htm

Well by your monkey logic then we can also hold bush accountable for not killing abu al-zarqawi when he had the chance before the invasion of Iraq. I mean you can tell that to all the soldiers and contractors who al-zarqawi has beheaded and kidnapped because Bush had the chance to take that turd out and he didn't...Your stupid logic doesn't apply here.

stupid?? all im saying is...if clinton took care of osama before bush was even president, we would have no war, bush would have not invaded iraq<---a mistake that bush made, since he could not find osama, its was like a scape goat, also more of a personal agenda (saddam wants Senior, his dad, assasinated). so without the 9/11 happening, which could have been prevented, i would not have to call your reply more stupid for not understanding what i posted. and are u sure it was befoe the invasion, i could have sworn all the beheadings happend during and after saddams capture, not quite sure of it though. oh well, not need to argue, im just glad and grateful to be in america, hoping for world peace

stupid?? all im saying is...if clinton took care of osama before bush was even president, we would have no war, bush would have not invaded iraq<---a mistake that bush made, since he could not find osama, its was like a scape goat, also more of a personal agenda (saddam wants Senior, his dad, assasinated). so without the 9/11 happening, which could have been prevented, i would not have to call your reply more stupid for not understanding what i posted. and are u sure it was befoe the invasion, i could have sworn all the beheadings happend during and after saddams capture, not quite sure of it though. oh well, not need to argue, im just glad and grateful to be in america, hoping for world peace

Right and all I am saying is that if Bush had killed Abu Zarqawi when he had the chance (as indicated by recent intelligence reports) then he wouldn't be masterminding all of the attacks that are going on in "post-war" iraq.

BTW- Bush's chance to kill Abu Zarqawi was way before the invasion. See here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

You holding clinton responsible for the 9/11 attacks is about as idiotic as it gets. The man had not directly attacked us until that point so there was no "concrete" reason to. Sure it would have been better if he had but at the time it wasn't the "smart" thing to do. Hindsight is always 20/20, Thats all....

And I'm not calling you stupid or idiotic but rather that line of thinking that somehow Clinton is responsible for 9/11.... ;)

Right and all I am saying is that if Bush had killed Abu Zarqawi when he had the chance (as indicated by recent intelligence reports) then he wouldn't be masterminding all of the attacks that are going on in "post-war" iraq.

BTW- Bush's chance to kill Abu Zarqawi was way before the invasion. See here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/

You holding clinton responsible for the 9/11 attacks is about as idiotic as it gets. The man had not directly attacked us until that point so there was no "concrete" reason to. Sure it would have been better if he had but at the time it wasn't the "smart" thing to do. Hindsight is always 20/20, Thats all....

And I'm not calling you stupid or idiotic but rather that line of thinking that somehow Clinton is responsible for 9/11.... ;)

why would the CIA/intelligence groups would even pose the idea of taking out Osama to Clinton, if it wasn't urgent "at the time", why would they even present it, or suggest the idea if it wasn't essential? oh well, who knows, i just wish he had look into it even further "at the time" and made a not "smart" but well evaluated decision, instead of brushing it off....this line of thinking may be idiotic/stupid to you, but it sure makes sense to me, taking him out is not going to do any harm, he's a terrorist, not a saint.

economy---the main focus of most of you...do you really think America's economy is that bad, compared to countries, say like the philippines???

what good is a high paying job, good medical benefits, a big house, fancy cars, and all the luxuries of life, if your building was just taken out by a terrorist suicide bomber?

this is just my opinion, from what has happend, i believe national security, or simply the safety of my wife and son, is more important to me than money/job/economy...whom will will i share the wealth with if they are gone?

this is my common sense

It's kind of hard to blame Clinton for 9/11 when Bush got a warning on his ranch, when he was golfing 24/7 during his first year of office, that listed Osama's plans to hijack airplanes.

im not putting all the blame on clinton, but just saying that it should not have been ignored, and the same goes for bush, he should have not ignored it even more...i just hope he can live up to his word, and do what's best for america...focus on americans, keep 'em safe, make 'em prosper, and we be all driving in our subies with big smiles.:D

im not putting all the blame on clinton, but just saying that it should not have been ignored, and the same goes for bush, he should have not ignored it even more...i just hope he can live up to his word, and do what's best for america...focus on americans, keep 'em safe, make 'em prosper, and we be all driving in our subies with big smiles.:D

My only point was exactly what you just said. That if you blame Clinton for Ignoring Bin Laden then you must also place blame on Bush for ignoring Abu Zarqawi before the war. This was my only point. You brought up the idea that Clinton should have acted differently and I compared what you said to something Bush should have done.

It's kind of hard to blame Clinton for 9/11 when Bush got a warning on his ranch, when he was golfing 24/7 during his first year of office, that listed Osama's plans to hijack airplanes.

Good point.

You're stupider than I thought. I mean seriously, what's a president got to do to get fired? You know, besides harm the economy and get us into a war we can't entirely win. Didn't we get it right the LAST time this happened? :confused: This one even managed to infringe on some of our civil rights.

Discuss.

Here's 100 things I thought a president had to do to get fired (with sources)

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=facts

if half the people that voted for bush read half of those things, I'm sure this may have turned out a little different. That is if we didn't have all of these voting and ballot issues going around now.

here's another 1546 reasons (with sources)

http://www.thousandreasons.org/listB.html

Some are just disturbing.

200million acres now unprotected, More audits for poor working people, blocked medicare from negotiating lower prices for seniors etc.

In the end, like I said before, it still comes down to the fact that he loves jesus, guns, and is against gay marriage. I like to ask myself, what god would reward a person a second term of such great power after abusing it so badly the first time around? wait... maybe it wasn't a god that did that.

Oh, OK I get it, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, looting the treasurey, bankrupting the country, selling off our forests and wilderness while pi**ing off the rest of the world is OK


in fact deserving of re-election!



but getting a hummer in the oval office....







outtaa here!






America, F*** Yeah!

Yeah pretty much. In 15 years, we'll all be reminiscing about how good Clinton was, even if he was an ******* to his wife. Slick Willy may have gotten a BJ in the Office, but Bush is ****ing us all.

There's nothing to discuss here other than how poor a loser you are. I supported Kerry, and I agree with a lot of what you have to say. But s*** like this will only give Hella, Salty, Guru, etc... reasons to call us whinny liberal scumbags. Man up.

I'm not pissed that a conservative Republican got reelected. I'm pissed that an ineffective, lying, and inept man wasn't fired from the job. I highly doubt I'd vote for Kerry in 2008 (mainly because I'm hoping McCain gets the nomination) but he deserves the job more than President Bush. W made the same mistakes his father did, so why did we fire one and not the other?

Speaking of Clinton...

If the democrats had put up another Clinton Womanizer instead of a liberal Frankenstien double and a trial attorney, they'd have cleaned up.

Liberals should be mad at their own party for puttin up this passifist, left-wing, medal-throwing, protest loving botox freak.
I was listening to stewart smally this morning and even he ripped kerry a new hole.

Kerry was a weak candidate, you are correct. Howard Dean probably would have pulled it off if he hadn't melted down during that speech.

It's kinda strange how Klintons friends from various other scandels have a habit of dying accidentally

What's that got to do with George W Bush being a poor President? He should have been removed from office, that's my point.

he could have taken care of Osama(according to CIA, Intel agencies etc...), even before Bush had the seat...but no...he might as well focus all his efforts on the economy...guess he can tell that to all the people and relatives who died at 9/11...sorry for your loss, but, i had to focus on the economy instead of capturing a world renowned terrorist.

if he just looked into it, we wouldn't be in this mess...there is no reason for this thread

Bush has done a swell job of finding and killing/imprisoning/neutralizing Bin Laden, right? How many people has our war killed (our soldiers, civilians, other nations' soldiers and civilians, Iraqis, etc.) to capture what, 1/2-1/3 of Al Qaida? whooptee damn do. Maybe if so much of the world didn't hate us with every fiber of our being, we wouldn't be such a target. You think re-electing Bush did anything whatsoever to help that?

stupid?? all im saying is...if clinton took care of osama before bush was even president, we would have no war, bush would have not invaded iraq<---a mistake that bush made, since he could not find osama, its was like a scape goat, also more of a personal agenda (saddam wants Senior, his dad, assasinated). so without the 9/11 happening, which could have been prevented, i would not have to call your reply more stupid for not understanding what i posted. and are u sure it was befoe the invasion, i could have sworn all the beheadings happend during and after saddams capture, not quite sure of it though. oh well, not need to argue, im just glad and grateful to be in america, hoping for world peace

Ummm... you wanna put something in there that SUPPORTS President Bush? :confused:

Here's 100 things I thought a president had to do to get fired (with sources)

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=facts

if half the people that voted for bush read half of those things, I'm sure this may have turned out a little different. That is if we didn't have all of these voting and ballot issues going around now.

here's another 1546 reasons (with sources)

http://www.thousandreasons.org/listB.html

Some are just disturbing.

200million acres now unprotected, More audits for poor working people, blocked medicare from negotiating lower prices for seniors etc.

In the end, like I said before, it still comes down to the fact that he loves jesus, guns, and is against gay marriage. I like to ask myself, what god would reward a person a second term of such great power after abusing it so badly the first time around? wait... maybe it wasn't a god that did that.

You're criticizing him for being conservative... I'm honestly not. I'm criticizing him for failing to achieve ANYTHING that he set out to do when he ran in 2000. Seriously, can any of you give one single accomplishment that is unequivicobaly a success for W? Terrorism is out, Domestic Security is out, the economy is worse than when he took office, etc. etc. etc.

I agree with maybe 15% of Bush's policies, but if he shares his views with more than half of Americans, then I won't complain about him or any other conservative winning. It's his failures that disappoint me.

You're criticizing him for being conservative... I'm honestly not. I'm criticizing him for failing to achieve ANYTHING that he set out to do when he ran in 2000. Seriously, can any of you give one single accomplishment that is unequivicobaly a success for W? Terrorism is out, Domestic Security is out, the economy is worse than when he took office, etc. etc. etc.

I agree with maybe 15% of Bush's policies, but if he shares his views with more than half of Americans, then I won't complain about him or any other conservative winning. It's his failures that disappoint me.

Why do you really think so many people took a trip to the polls to vote for GW, when so much MORE WASTED effort was put forth by the liberals than ever before. Liberal 527s outspent conservative ones by far. My real point is below.

The American People would have probably voted for "anyone but Bush" if they hadn't been utterly repulsed by the democratic candidate, the non-stop hate-fest for the president, and the apparent skew of news reporting. Don't you see any of this? I felt in my heart that others HAD to feel the way I did, and it turns out I was right. Bush got 11% of his votes from Democrats! That says a lot.

Half of the blame goes to the club of hatred. Michael Moore, George Sorros, Moveon.org (and the 527s), Dan Rather, Sean Penn-ladin (and others actors), and John Stewart made people rush to the polls to make them wrong.
The other half goes to picking poor candidates. Americans as a whole HATE protestors, and John Kerry even took it to the next level by mischaracterizing the service of vietnam veterans. Americans also hate passifists..global test? To make matters worse, he picked a freaking trial lawyer in a time when Kerry was campaigning on health care. It's open enrollment at my employer, and they state that 7% of premiums are from litigation and risk management (insurance). Guess where he made his money? People saw right through the lies and distortions. This started from day 1 at the democratic convention, when the polls showed an immediate negative reaction. This guy votes to ban every major weapon system and then runs on a "military guy" platform. What a freaking joke.

I hope you see the truth in what I've just stated. It really didn't come down to an election being about Bush. This election was about saying No to liberals.
People can explain it however they want, but this is how I see it.

Why do you really think so many people took a trip to the polls to vote for GW, when so much MORE WASTED effort was put forth by the liberals than ever before. Liberal 527s outspent conservative ones by far. My real point is below.

The American People would have probably voted for "anyone but Bush" if they hadn't been utterly repulsed by the democratic candidate, the non-stop hate-fest for the president, and the apparent skew of news reporting. Don't you see any of this? I felt in my heart that others HAD to feel the way I did, and it turns out I was right. Bush got 11% of his votes from Democrats! That says a lot.

Half of the blame goes to the club of hatred. Michael Moore, George Sorros, Moveon.org (and the 527s), Dan Rather, Sean Penn-ladin (and others actors), and John Stewart made people rush to the polls to make them wrong.
The other half goes to picking poor candidates. Americans as a whole HATE protestors, and John Kerry even took it to the next level by mischaracterizing the service of vietnam veterans. Americans also hate passifists..global test? To make matters worse, he picked a freaking trial lawyer in a time when Kerry was campaigning on health care. It's open enrollment at my employer, and they state that 7% of premiums are from litigation and risk management (insurance). Guess where he made his money? People saw right through the lies and distortions. This started from day 1 at the democratic convention, when the polls showed an immediate negative reaction. This guy votes to ban every major weapon system and then runs on a "military guy" platform. What a freaking joke.

I hope you see the truth in what I've just stated. It really didn't come down to an election being about Bush. This election was about saying No to liberals.
People can explain it however they want, but this is how I see it.

Who stole your computer? :p This is the kind of response this forum was created for.

Basically, while I don't like Bush's positions, what really made me upset that he won is his failure to be successful. I'd choose an efficient conservative over a useless liberal (save yourself the lame puns there) any day. But Bush is not a good leader. When was the last time he had a positive approval rating? Every time I saw it, it was well below 50%. Guess the approval polls are asking the wrong people eh?

Anyways, you still haven't risen to the challenge- what did Bush do that was so good? Where did he undeniably improve the life of the average American?

And since most of you haven't realized it, I'm not a big kerry fan. He's much more liberal than I am. (I'm not near as liberal as my anti-SUV rants would suggest. :p I'm pro gun, don't really like cutting the military back as I'm a veteran, and even when I'm more or less on the same side as his platform, it's not as far to the left.) I call myself a liberal just because I disagree with conservatives more than I disagree with liberals. I support gay rights, I don't support a flat tax, I believe that religion should be seperate from Government, although it shouldn't be ignored in schools. I also believe that you should have the right to do anything that doesn't interfere with the rights of another. Fiscally, I tend to support more government spending than less, because I believe that government should be the tool society uses to protect ourselves, to improve our standard of living, and to enable necessary changes. Blah, too many details. Maybe I'll start a new thread for each of us to try to summarize our political beliefs. Might go a long way towards quelling some of the flaming going on in here.

Bush won thanks to the bible belt or better said the Religious right that came out strong voting on such issues as...Gay rights, Abortions and other issues. Thats why he won.

Who stole your computer? :p This is the kind of response this forum was created for.
Basically, while I don't like Bush's positions, what really made me upset that he won is his failure to be successful. I'd choose an efficient conservative over a useless liberal (save yourself the lame puns there) any day. But Bush is not a good leader. When was the last time he had a positive approval rating? Every time I saw it, it was well below 50%. Guess the approval polls are asking the wrong people eh?
Anyways, you still haven't risen to the challenge- what did Bush do that was so good? Where did he undeniably improve the life of the average American?

Besides the reason I said in my previous post, I think each individual has their own personal reason. To try to put it in a nutshell, there are a couple major things that enforced my opinions.

I started working in the tech sector in 2000, (worked in construction before that) right as the tech bubble was about to pop. Thousands and thousands of jobs that should have never existed dissappeared in a matter of months. It's actually quite funny to look at a Silicon Valley map from early 2000 and compare it to what it is now. This had a major impact locally and accross the nation, and it was not GW's fault. Many people at my employer still blame Bush for it. It's illogical.

In 2001, we all know what happened on 9/11. Nobody wanted to travel or spend a dime, including myself. The impact to jobs and the economy was catastrophic, but we got through it.

Through all of this, Bush has been one constant, steadfast leader. I trust him that he would truly do ANYTHING to protect us, even if it resulted in negative consequences to himself. Though as much of this credit goes to the American people, people are traveling, spending money, and the economy has come back strong considering what has just happened.

Do I like everything Bush does? Nope. I think Iraq is a mess but I trust that he made the right decision based on the information that he had, and some we possibly don't know about. If it were simply there to take out Saddam, I think he would have done it another way. What reinforces my belief that we might be doing the right thing there is how fervent the opposition is trying to stop us from succeeding.

I do side with most of his moral stances.

Anyway, that's it in a nutshell.

No I meant to address Bansuvs, sorry bout that.

I don't think urban people are any smarter than rural people. I have found population density and civilized behavior to be inversely proportional. Just look at crime stats.



This is HILLARIOUS! I seriously lol-ed when I read that. I've never heard anyone try to make that that argument that way.

I don't think it's a matter of civilization exactly... it's more of an awareness of the outside world; some might say urban people are more informed. Rural areas are generally more isolationist and against major changes that may disrupt their way of life. In more densely populated, faster growing areas, the need for change is much more apparent, and people showed that with their votes yesterday. For example, the need to protect the environment would be most apparent where natural landscape is least abundant and/or is in the most jeopardy- in densely populated areas. If you live on ten acres, you don't mind a 10'x10' pile of crap on your property near as much as someone who lives in a studio apartment. Another example is air pollution- greater the pop. density = greater the air pollution = more respiratory problems and other obvious ecological impacts = a more apparent and urgent need for change.


After all, you don't value something until you start to lose it, right? How long will we have to wait for people to acknowledge the destruction of our own planet? Can't we learn from these densely populated areas and prevent further erosion of our environment?








...oh yaeh, can someone help me pry my arms from around this tree? :D

President Bush's policies and views are why I didn't vote for him, but they aren't why I'm upset he won. I really feel he's not suited for the job.

He can't resolve the Iraq sitation, things have stalled out in Afghanistan, he can't find the rest of al-qaida, Saudi Arabia is probably going to have a revolution or be invaded, and there's a dozen other problems in the world that Bush takes no interest in because we have no economic interests in those regions.


All your measures of success for Bush's current term are your personal financial successes. Can you honestly say that you wouldn't have done the same things regardless of who was President? What do you think will happen when government spending has to decrease to counter the rising debt Bush has continued to allow? Regardless of who does it, the economy will slow again when that happens. Bush has run a large deficit (usually something that makes conservatives scream and pull out their hair) to keep the economy from falling, when he should have kept it down and let the economy recover on its own. Hopefully he will have the fortitude to do what it takes to correct it before he leaves it to his successor.

Finally, I must say I can't blame you for voting for him. It's a whole lot easier to overlook his shortcomings when he shares your politics. however, if Al Gore had been elected in 200, and the world was exactly as it is now, I wouldn't have supported him this year either. I think our nation just didn't act like the greatest nation in the world. We could have done much better.

Ummm... you wanna put something in there that SUPPORTS President Bush? :confused:

Ummm....but i'm not supporting him...i was merely pointing out, what clinton ignored about al-qaeda, and the fact that bush misjudged or should have evaluated even more, instead of invading iraq right away, the whole scenario on the war on terror...

though i have to admit....i feel a bit safer with saddam out of his throne

this is just my opinion, from what has happend, i believe national security, or simply the safety of my wife and son, is more important to me than money/job/economy...whom will will i share the wealth with if they are gone?

this is my common sense

I agree, but I think Bush just pisses off the terrorists even more with his haughty attitude and cowboy swagger. So I don't think he is the man to secure the nation. I think he does the exact opposite.

I know this is a valid point because people all over the world, including our allies, are afraid of Bush. He scares people with his "I'm not going to listen to anybody attitude."

Personally, I think this, along with his overall "evilness", is his biggest fault as a president.

All your measures of success for Bush's current term are your personal financial successes. Can you honestly say that you wouldn't have done the same things regardless of who was President?

That's only part of it. My post about why I think people voted "against Kerry" is the other half. Not only do I think he would hurt businesses and individual pocket-books here, but I stongly disagree with the values of his party. His entire campaign was a giant contradiction.. I just didn't trust him.

As far as the deficit, that thing about our grandchildren having to pay for it is what the democrats in the 80s said about Reagan and his defence spending. It took 15 years by my estimation. The really funny thing about this is that Kerry talked about health care for all Americans, but the math on that didn't make sense with only those making over $200k getting a tax increase. I could see a lie coming.

Anyway... these are all oversimplified statements, but I think you know what I mean.

President Bush's policies and views are why I didn't vote for him, but they aren't why I'm upset he won. I really feel he's not suited for the job.

He can't resolve the Iraq sitation, things have stalled out in Afghanistan, he can't find the rest of al-qaida, Saudi Arabia is probably going to have a revolution or be invaded, and there's a dozen other problems in the world that Bush takes no interest in because we have no economic interests in those regions.


All your measures of success for Bush's current term are your personal financial successes. Can you honestly say that you wouldn't have done the same things regardless of who was President? What do you think will happen when government spending has to decrease to counter the rising debt Bush has continued to allow? Regardless of who does it, the economy will slow again when that happens. Bush has run a large deficit (usually something that makes conservatives scream and pull out their hair) to keep the economy from falling, when he should have kept it down and let the economy recover on its own. Hopefully he will have the fortitude to do what it takes to correct it before he leaves it to his successor.

Finally, I must say I can't blame you for voting for him. It's a whole lot easier to overlook his shortcomings when he shares your politics. however, if Al Gore had been elected in 200, and the world was exactly as it is now, I wouldn't have supported him this year either. I think our nation just didn't act like the greatest nation in the world. We could have done much better.

Very well said.

Saudi Arabia is probably going to have a revolution or be invaded, and there's a dozen other problems in the world that Bush takes no interest in because we have no economic interests in those regions.

Just watch out if Saudi Arabia gets invaded, there is a really good chance that Bush would be putting our military in the way to protect them.

Just watch out if Saudi Arabia gets invaded, there is a really good chance that Bush would be putting our military in the way to protect them.


Who is going to invade Saudi Arabia? Out of curiosity??

Who is going to invade Saudi Arabia? Out of curiosity??

I think the revolt is the biggest problem.

the monkey strikes again! :p

go BUSH!





aloha from the summit of *-^-Mauna kea-^-*

Who is going to invade Saudi Arabia? Out of curiosity??


I think a revotultion, or more likely a coup, will be the biggest problem there, not an invasion.

-Chris

As far as the deficit, that thing about our grandchildren having to pay for it is what the democrats in the 80s said about Reagan and his defence spending. It took 15 years by my estimation.

Eliminating the deficit happened almost solely because of the dotcom boom. Clinton deserves true credit only for being wise enough to use the huge budget windfall properly to reduce the debt. Bush has once again taken it the other way, which I find very odd for a Republican to do without a huge increase in defense spending.

Just watch out if Saudi Arabia gets invaded, there is a really good chance that Bush would be putting our military in the way to protect them.

Of course, we owe it to them for their assistance during the first gulf war, on top of our other ties economically. That's what an ally is. The problem arises out of the fact that it will strengthen the Islamic world's reasons for hating us.

Who is going to invade Saudi Arabia? Out of curiosity??

Revolution by fundamentalists, in turn supported by the hardline Islamic nations such as Iran as well as the non-geovernment organizations like Al-qaida.

the monkey strikes again! :p

go BUSH!

BARNED! :p j/k

Of course, we owe it to them for their assistance during the first gulf war, on top of our other ties economically.

And his personal ties with papa being so intrenched with the Saudi leadership