2004 Election

[D3V]

Personally, I would vote for John Kerry. Personally I can't stand bush, his brother is the 'leader' of our state, and he has done such a shitty job with the funds he has been given. Bush sucks. John Kerry seems to be aganist this pointless war, thats why I would vote for him?

[Kuja`s #1]

If you want a serious topic about them and their stands on certain issues, DON'T POST IT IN THE CHAT FORUM!!!!

[Acer]

Ill be 18 in august so I can vote... but I wont. If I did, I would pick Kerry, I dont like him nor bush, but I have to pick one.

[MightyJoe]

Yeah I turned 18 in april and I will be voting for Bush because I can't stand Kerry. He goes back and forth on all the issues.

[KagomJack]

Yeah...if I could vote, it would be for Bush. Kerry is 2 faced and won't stick with the issue long enough. He'll go "Yeah...I'm against this." and a month later he'll go "I'm for it!"

He also got medals and is waving them around now. However, when he first received them, he threw them out and started an anti-war campaign. He really is an ass. Also, I had talked to a senior (who has now graduated :() and he said that Kerry's economic plan would be very bad. He even said Ben Stein (actor and wealthy man) said that it would be bad. He had taken a course on economics and studied politics.

[Titusfied]

I'm hittin' up Bush. Kerry is trying to please everyone...

[uncapped]

We need that guy from 24 to run for Pres. That would be great.

Anyways, I pick Kerry, simply because I'm from Mass and it really isn't too fucked up, so he must doing something right.

[Penny_Bags]

Yeah, I'd go Bush, a mass policy change in war time is bad.

[Demosthenes]

If I could vote, I'd vote Kerry. Then again, I'd vote for Pumba from the Lion King over Bush.

[Sovereign]

I don't trust Kerry, I hate Bush.

Ralph Nader is the perfect american.

Stoned, doesn't give a shit.

My kind of guy. ^_^

[D3V]

I would vote for that other John,... fuckin I forgot his last name, but he was like 30 somethin years old.

[badboy]

Personally I think you people need to get off your crack. John Kerry is an opportunist, pure and simple. John Kerry has opposed almost ever major defense authorization and program during his years in the White House. He oppossed : B-1 bomber, B-2 stealth bomber, AH-64 Apache, F-15, F-14A, F-14D fighter jets, AV-8B Harrier jet, Aegis air-defense cruiser, Trident missle system. Furthermore he : voted to cut back the M1 Abrams tank, Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the Tomahawk cruise missile and the F-16. Voted to cut more than $3 billion from defense in 1991 and shift the money to social programs. Voted to cut $6 billion from defense in 1992, Republicans and Democrats alike were against Kerry. Opposed a military pay raise in 1993. Introduced a plan in 1993 to cut the number of Navy submarines and their crews, reduce tactical fighter wings in the Air Force, terminate the Navy's coastal mine-hunting ship progam, force the retirement of 60,000 members of the armed forces in one year, and reduce the number of light infantry units in the Army to one. The plan was DOA. Voted to freeze defense spending in 1995 for seven years, cutting more than $34 billion from defense. Introduced a bill in 1996 to cut Defense Department funding by $6.5 billion. Kerry had NO Sponsors from ANYONE. Voted yes on a fiscal 1996 budget resolution that would have frozen defense spending for the next 7 years and transferred the $34.8 billion in savings to social programs. It was rejected. Kerry says he favors missle defense now but : he voted no on the Defend America Act of 1996. He voted no on the American Missle Protection Act of 1998, but voted yes on the Cochran-Inouye National Missle Defense Act of 1999. He opposed funding Patriot Missile System. In 1994 he proposed to cut $1 billion from intelligence. In 1995, the senator voted to cut $80 million from the FBI's budget and introduced a bill that would have reduced the intelligence budget by $1.5 billion by 2000.

Kerry has opposed all attempts to ban gruesome partial-birth abortions. He voted to allow federal taxpayer funding of abortions and to provide abortion clinics. Though he claims to be a Catholic, if elected president he would would appoint only pro-abortion judges.

1989-90 voted against tax cut in capital gains. 1993-94 voted against an amendment to reduce spending by $94 billion. Voted for the largest tax increase in history. 1995-96 voted against bipartisan plan to balance the budget in seven years. 1997-98 voted against approving a GOP budget to cut spending and taxes. Voted against a balanced-budget constitutional amendment. 1999-2000 voted against reducing federal taxes by $792 billion over 10 years. 2001 voted against Bush's tax relief, a $1.35 trillion package to reduce income-tax rates, alleviate the marriage penalty and gradually repeal the estate tax. Voted to reduce Bush's proposal by $448 billion over 10 years. In April 2002, Kerry flip-flopped by calling for a tax cut even larger than the one passed in 2001.

[Demosthenes]

Like I said, Pumba over Bush. If Kerry is Bush's opponent, then I'm all for him.

[zagggon]

Bush most definatly, Kerry is just gona raise the taxes.

[Chruser]

Kerry, obviously. While he may not have his goals as straight as Walker himself, he isn't the same war-crazed lunatic. Yes, Bush is better for the US economy in the long run, as it is heavily based on war to make its wheels turn, but give me a break, collateral damage for profit? If Bush remains president, I, for some reason, foresee invasions of Iran and North Korea; the latter if capitalism can't take its toll soon enough on the nation.

Who said the cold war was over because Soviet "lost"?

[zagggon]

Chruser whats wrong with invading a country that starves there people and has slave work camps like NK?

[Thanatos]

Bush all the way.

[Chruser]

Chruser whats wrong with invading a country that starves there people and has slave work camps like NK?

Collateral damage. Militia renegades and revolts. Making the people revolt is more efficient. Treat it like DDR, not like Iraq. Kennedy was a genius unlike Bush.

[zagggon]

Chruser NK has an army of 1 million all of which are loyal to Kim, what do you think would happen to a weak little peasant rebelion supported by the US?

[Demosthenes]

Someone please explain to me on what basis would we use to justify our foray into North Korea?

[badboy]

North Korea is a communist country, they hate the U.S.A, they have nuclear weapons.

[badboy]

The General of Vietnam in 1975 said "if it wasn't for these guys (Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War) we would have lost."

[D3V]

I Vote Kerry because he's a democrat. Look at how badly we are off when a Republican is in office. The fucking statistics don't lie, they give us a little money from tax breaks, then they fucking do some stupid shit and ruin our economy. Look at Clinton, he had the economy going great, keeping out of wars, Smokin the peace pipe with many nations. Then gay ass Bush comes in here, we (get attacked) Then we go to war with Afghanistan. (88 billion dollar war). Then we go to Iraq, (800 billion dollar war). Now our economy is shot, gas prices going up, our reputation as a nation is shitty, and everything is out of line. Bush's time is up, get him the fuck outta office.

[Demosthenes]

North Korea is a communist country, they hate the U.S.A, they have nuclear weapons.

That would be the perfect justification if you were a playground bully, but that in no means justifies a millitary advancement into North Korea. China is a communist country with nuclear weapons, but we aren't attacking them. Plus, a large part of the world hates the USA. So again, how is it that attacking North Korea would be justified?

We aren't the sole country with the rights to nuclear arms. We can not make political blunders simply because we feel threatend. Going to war with them for that reason would make no sense whatsoever. That's like a country coming into the USA and telling us we aren't allowed to have nuclear weapons. As you have already guessed, that would most likely spark a war, most likely a nuclear war, and we all know the reprecussions to that. Attacking North Korea for that reason would simply make the United States a power-hungry warmonger.

Albeit a small one, there is a communist party in the USA. Why don't we dissolve them? Because we are a democracy, and they have the right to express whatever political views they want to. Going to war with North Korea would just be forcing our political views upon them. Now, if I recall correctly from my social studies class, America was founded by the pilgrims because they were being opressed from expressing their views. Going over to North Korea and forcibly making them a capitalistic democracy, simply because we can, would be a quintessential demonstration of hypocrisy, and an indirect attack on what this country stands for.

Even if everything you said correctly justified going to war, why wouldn't we do the same thing to China? They are also an evil :rolleyes: communist country, but we have made no encroachment upon their territory. So why North Korea, and not China? Asserting something on a much weaker country, and then not doing the same thing on another country that would require much more of a struggle is "being a pussy," as some have so eloquently called me for saying anything against this frivolous, over-done depredation in Iraq. Going into North Korea would be even worse.

[Chruser]

Very well said, mjordan2nd. If you support a republican because YOU'RE a republican, or a democrat for president as you're a democrat yourself, then you deserve to starve to death, chained to a tree root far below surface level.

Really, I think the best idea to run a nation would be via full democracy. Give everyone a chance to vote in ALL matters, and establish a large council to count the votes in public. Yes, let the people do the decisions of the "president". There wouldn't *be* anyone in power, or tops, some powerless person involved in political matters who can only talk about the nation's greatness without an ability to change anything. Look into how the monarchy system works in the Scandinavian nation for more information about this. If anyone would be corrupt in the vote-counting council, it would very likely be reported. Human fallacy. It's *much* safer than giving a closed presidential administration practically full power to run a multi-million population nation.

Since computers are common and available to just about anyone, all that would be needed would be to distribute an iris scanner to all users in order to allow unique identification of everyone, to let them vote. This system would be very hard to cheat if established well, but unfortunately, conservatists (such as, a majority of the US population whether you like it or not) would never support this idea.

[Chruser]

Actually, I have a prime example of what could go wrong when a "big happy box of politics" is chosen. Remember what happened during the early 20th century in Germany? The National Socialists offered a remedy that would take care of the poverty caused by the Versailles treaty. Of course, this great help from the party required the "weak in society" to be blamed, but hey, if it patches the horrendous, suicide-inducing economy and they will make our nation strong once again, it's not so bad, is it? That's what people thought. Kind of like the supporters of a president in the US. You see so many great qualities in a president, that the bad sides can be ignored. He's still THE guy to support, right? I mean, the other candidate is REALLY an utter moron.

Well, we all know what happened in nazi Germany. I'm not saying that the US will turn out to be a modern version of that atrocity, but I'm very well saying it can and WILL have some consequences that won't conform with the will of the US population, no matter who gets elected. But who knows, maybe millions will die if, say, Bush decides to invade North Korea. The destruction of another Communist nation may look great. But will it be worth the price of an atrocious genocide?

[D3V]

I hate when ignorant people try and talk Kerry down. They talk about how he wants to make cuts from this stupid ass war. And he wants to cut some of the defensive budget. But do you know why? HE WANTS TO IMPROVE OUR COUNTRY. Not waste all of that money into a defensive system which is not needed. Look how many times we've been attacked after 9/11 ..... NONE. If you count Anthrax , well that was an american who did that, so blah.

John Kerry has a good plan for the states, and We've already seen how shitty of a job Bush has done, Put us in Debt, get the whole world to hate americans, Our fucking popularity has gone down like 32% since Bush came in off. See, Bush doesn' tlike to listen to the U.N. ... If we would have let them go in , check for the ''''weapons of mass destruction''''' then We wouldn't have had any of the problems. But his war hungriness led to this.

[zagggon]

Someone please explain to me on what basis would we use to justify our foray into North Korea?
Ok MJ lets stear away from the "Lets please the rest of the world instead of ourselves" reason and go onto something more urgent, the fact that North Korea's Leader Kim is starving his people and has active torture chambers. Or the fact that he threatens South Korea's Capital Seol once a month with a nuclear attack. Or if thats not enough the fact that Kim's army is digging under ground tunnels thrue South Korea in preperation for a future invasion. But I can understand, your way to imbeded with the rest of the "lets all be against Bush cuzz he actually did something!" crowd to give a damn about the kids in North Korea that work 12 hours a day and resemble a walking stick while their "harmless leader" and his devote zealots live a luxuroius life style while their people starve to death. John Kerry is a hypocrite, he claims that there are "Benedict Arnold companies" in the US, yet, he benefits from his wifes Hienz Ketchup company who is a major out sourcer.

[!King_Amazon!]

Ok then MJ, let's just sit around and wait for them to nuke us. Did you not read it very well? THEY HATE US AND THEY HAVE NUKES. 2+2=NUKED.

Woops, forgot the whole point of this thread. Neither Bush or Kerry are pleasing me too much right now, but I'd take Bush over Kerry any day. He knows how to get things done the right way and he does them. Democrats are teh sux.

[Chruser]

Kim is digging underground tunnels and threatens South Korea with a nuclear strike every month? I'd like to see your source for that information, zagggon.

!King_Amazon!, as far as I know, the range of the North Korean nukes is unknown. And once again, wouldn't it be BETTER if everything worked out like DDR in '89? The two instances are very similar; only the scale of the conflict in the Koreas is far greater. And honestly, assume for a moment that North Korea DID have ICBM's. I'd hardly want to invade such a nation with controversial forces. "Hey, let's invade RUSSIA with 400,000 men from the infantry. I'm sure they will want to play this game fair and square, even though they know they can't deal with us in field battle."

You'd get nuked.

You die.

You lose.

So does the whole fucking world, from the nuclear winter. Think twice before you want to start a war with a nuclear nation. In fact, think twice before you want to start a war at ALL!

[zagggon]

So your fine with letting Kim have his way and the North Koreans starving eh?

[Chruser]

If the price for stopping their starvation will come at the price of sacrificing 85% of the Earth's human population, including the "starving North Koreans", from massive radioactive fallout, then yes, I'm fine with it. Really.

[badboy]

Apparently they are. They hate Bush, I can tell from D3V's view of him causing the oil prices to go up. How the fuck does that have anything to do with Bush? It's called those gay ass Arabian oil monopolies that hate America and don't care if they lose money by not selling us oil cause they are already fucking rich as hell. And there are no statistics to prove that Clintion did anything for the economy, he was just around when it was good. 9/11 caused people to panic and pull out of the market, fucking learn your information.

[badboy]

If the price for stopping their starvation will come at the price of sacrificing 85% of the Earth's human population, including the "starving North Koreans", from massive radioactive fallout, then yes, I'm fine with it. Really.

It's people like you that were the reason Hitler killed millions of Jews, and Stalin killed millions of his own people.

[zagggon]

It's people like you that were the reason Hitler killed millions of Jews, and Stalin killed millions of his own people. True, Chruser you cannot just ignore suffering to save your own skin... Besides, 85% of the worlds population?! Come on Chruser, not anywhere near that many people would die...

[Demosthenes]

True, Chruser you cannot just ignore suffering to save your own skin... Besides, 85% of the worlds population?! Come on Chruser, not anywhere near that many people would die...

Most likely more, if an all out nuclear war were to happen.

[Demosthenes]

Ok then MJ, let's just sit around and wait for them to nuke us. Did you not read it very well? THEY HATE US AND THEY HAVE NUKES. 2+2=NUKED.


Other countries could say the same fucking thing about us. And what about China, why not them, then. You can not go and attack someone because they have technology, and you feel threatend. If they were to use it, which is very unlikely, then go ahead.

Many countries hate us. Hey, I have a great idea. Lets start World War III because our pride heavily outweighs our reason.

[badboy]

Um, have we attacked them, no, so drop it.

[Demosthenes]

Um, have we attacked them, no, so drop it.

Yes, but the fact of the matter is that you are actually trying to justify the hypothetical situation of us attacking them.

[zagggon]

Most likely more, if an all out nuclear war were to happen.
We are not talking about an all-out nuclear war you dunce.

[Chruser]

It's people like you that were the reason Hitler killed millions of Jews, and Stalin killed millions of his own people.

Oh, because I'm not a rampant, genocidal lunatic like you suddenly makes ME similar to Hitler? That's a very interesting perspective. Too bad it's wrong.


We are not talking about an all-out nuclear war you dunce.

Okay, listen. Here's a theoretical scenario that could very well take place.

1) The US decides to invade North Korea to "liberate" the nation, and try to make it democratic. Save the starving people!
2) Kim does not like the idea of being invaded, and before his regime falls, he launches his nuclear arsenal on South Korea, as it is a very successful capitalistic nation, and one of his arch-enemies. The entire South Korean population of 48 million people is eradicated, but the nuclear winds spread north-west, through North Korea and into China.
3) China, a well-known supporter of North Korea during the cold war, also the reason why the US/UN did not manage to reunite the Koreas, do not like getting their soil irradiated. More than likely, they would sign trade embargoes against the US and likely other Western nations.

From here, an endless amount of outcomes could occur. Nothing may happen. Or maybe China launches a massive IBCM strike, targeting US soil with the knowledge of the US being impossible to conquer by conventional means. Trying a coup d'êtat on the US government would be close to impossible due to the strength of the army, and the amount of weapons carried by civilians in the US. You'd get the entire population against you. Better just obliterate everything. And of course, this leads to counterstrikes from the US to "save what's left" of the population, etcetera, etcetera.

[Demosthenes]

We are not talking about an all-out nuclear war you dunce.

If North Korea decides to use nukes, then why the fuck are we not talking about an all out nuclear war?

[badboy]

I don't know why you people think I said we should go to war with them now, someone just asked for a reason to go. Nobody said he WE HAVE TO GO TO WAR WITH THEM, it would just be better for the world and everyone's lives to do away with communism altogether. I really don't see how you people can see anything from the communist's as being a reason not to irradicate their form of Tyranny.

[zagggon]

Ok MJ, I have decided that you are hopeless when it comes to this subject since you are a liberal. :rolleyes:

[Demosthenes]

Ok MJ, I have decided that you are hopeless when it comes to this subject since you are a liberal. :rolleyes:

I have decided you are hopeless when it comes to anything. And I would like to see the sources from where you pulled all that stuff about North Korea. You think you know everything, slick, but you don't. Don't you fucking dare to preach to me about my opinions.

And, Badboy, tell me, where exactly is the tyranny in communism?

[badboy]

It's called 1 child per family, it's called Stalin murdering thousands of his own people. It's called the North Vietnamese killing the South. It's called the North Koreans killing the South. It's called ANY country with STAN in it's name. It's called THE BERLIN WALL. It's called Cuba, a once very wealthy country, and now it's flooded with poverty. If you don't call that tyranny, than what is it.

[Sovereign]

Very good points you brought up there, badboy

[Demosthenes]

It's called 1 child per family, it's called Stalin murdering thousands of his own people. It's called the North Vietnamese killing the South. It's called the North Koreans killing the South. It's called ANY country with STAN in it's name. It's called THE BERLIN WALL. It's called Cuba, a once very wealthy country, and now it's flooded with poverty. If you don't call that tyranny, than what is it.

You could name perfectly good examples of democracy that parallel those examples. And I had no idea Germany was a communist state during WW2...

[badboy]

The Russians took over Germany after World War II. Split it in two with half communist, half not. East Germany was communist.

[Demosthenes]

Oh yea. I forgot it was put up after the war.

[D3V]

I still haven't found out why we are in Iraq, and Who the hell everyon wants to vote for....

[badboy]

Oh, because I'm not a rampant, genocidal lunatic like you suddenly makes ME similar to Hitler? That's a very interesting perspective. Too bad it's wrong.

No, it's your "If it doesn't affect me I don't care" perspective that allowed people like Hitler and Stalin to commit their attrocities.

[Grav]

Opposed to the "let's collect 20 good christians, get shotguns, and fly to Germany" plan.

[D3V]

I've got a thought. What gives us the damn right to make decisions for any other country.

Lets say that some other government doesn't like the way we're run. They decide to come here to liberate us. WE SURE AS HELL WOULDN'T FUCKING LET IT STAND.
But that christian/germany plan is a keeper.

[Neko]

Hay guyz bad things happened. I BLAME BUSH!!!!!!!!11111!1one

Seriously, the way you guys talk it seems like it's the reincarnation of Hitler. For God's sake, at least find another scapegoat. I'm tired of hearing about Bush being the anti-Christ.

[D3V]

Bush Isn't an anti christ at all, he's just an imbred redneck from texas that is war hungry.

[Chruser]

No, it's your "If it doesn't affect me I don't care" perspective that allowed people like Hitler and Stalin to commit their attrocities.

In fact, it's called rational thinking; a quality which you do not seem to have. If Russia would attack the US with the intent of reestablishing the Soviet union and all of its old traditions, and you see pictures all over mass media with Russians who celebrate the attacks, wouldn't Bush perchance be likely to retaliate using military efforts or even nuclear weapons? What if Russia NUKED the US into oblivion, wouldn't a retaliatory strike take place? Or would the US gladly accept their loss? "Oh, wow, you nuked us and KILLED 99% of our population, capitalism must suck. We surrender." I don't think so.

So, let's bring this to the North Korean perspective ONCE AGAIN. The US strikes North Korea, and the collateral damage is great. Kim, who has a nuclear arsenal, would hardly just accept his loss; he'd unleash his nuclear wrath upon Capitalism; the EVIL of the world.

Oh, and maybe you overlooked North Korea's chances of turning into a democracy without fucking running at a risk of turning the Earth uninhabitable from permanent nuclear winter? Efforts are being made, especially by the UN, to get North Korea to give up their entire nuclear arsenal. They WILL get free, although the talks are going to take a number of years. A DDR-alike revolt could take place, too. And I hardly see a population of 22 million North Koreans to be a "measily peasant revolt", as someone ever-so-eloquently put it. And where exactly did you find out that their army is loyal to Kim? I'd REALLY like to see your sources for your information, zagggon, due to the controversy you've created.

I'm not liberal. I'm not even a member of the United States. All I do is to think rationally, unlike some others who think war is the ONLY solution to everything. Fucking atrocious bullies.

And no, communism is bad. It's very bad, especially as it isn't established as ANYTHING but a despotism anywhere in the world. Communism shouldn't have a leader who rules the people. How is that equal to anything? Forcing communism upon a people doesn't work without great casualties. The world should and WILL get rid of it, but war is NOT the key. War is just a dumb excuse for letting the US improve its heavily-war-dependent weapon industry economy.

[!King_Amazon!]

I'm sick and tired of people calling him "an imbred redneck from texas." Prejudice anyone?

Oh yeah, Christians are the scum of the earth, we should have a Christian Genocide.

[Penny_Bags]

I say we give every son of a bitch in the states a lead jacket and drop some nukes on every piece of shit country in the world (a.k.a. everyone but Canada, England and Jamaica). Yay for fallout.

[Syn]

So your fine with letting Kim have his way and the North Koreans starving eh?

And you're fine with endangering the lives of 280+ million US citizens, and for that matter 6 billion people in the world? You're an ignorant sheep following the sheepherder (Bush) on whatever he decides to do. Think about it for five minutes and you'll realize just how stupid your stance on this is.

You're saying that we should directly endanger the WHOLE WORLD with mutually-assured destruction that WOULD happen if we were to try and invade North Korea since they do have nuclear weapons. You're saying that a few million "starving people" is worth putting the rest of the world on the line?

This and WWII are two completely different scenarios. If you want to try and use the reasoning that people who hold my opinion are the reason Hitler and Stalin did all their shit, think about what the circumstances were then. Hitler didn't have nukes. Russia fucking knew that if they were going to use their nuclear arsenal that the world would end, so they didn't do anything on that scale. But North Korea and its leader probably aren't going to think as rationally as Stalin did, because they don't really have much of a reason for being around anyway. You're basically saying that pissing off a guy with no nukes or a guy with nukes who knows what will happen if he uses them is the same as pissing off a guy with nukes who couldn't give a shit if his country was around after a war, so long as he gets to use his weapons to destroy capitalistic populations first.

[Demosthenes]

Anyway, I'm going to try to get back on topic, and get away from the North Korea topic. I'm going to repost something I wrote about Bush a few months ago, stating a few reasons why I don't like him.


I don't dislike bush for the way he handled 9/11. I don't see much other way he could have responded to a vicious and unprecedented attack like that. By attacking terrorists, he handled that well. I now realize that America had to respond, regardless of the innocent people that died. Taking out Al-qaeda was important. I dislike bush because, as RS stated, he actually might be dumber than a brick. If you hold a high American office, such as governor, you should know who the PM of Canada is. Don't try to cover it up. He had no idea what he was talking about, and if he didn't know people were talking about then he should've asked. That wasn't a smart response. It was a stupid response.

One slip-up I can see, and someone being watched as close as the president, I can see many slip-ups, but look at the long list of "Bushisms." Look back in the chat forum, around a month or two ago. I had posted many "Bushisms," and the sad thing is that was a mere fraction of his slip-ups. The worst thing is, that I don't even think the man realized he had slipped up on some of them, until he was told later.

I was in India for the summer, and the media there had a much different story of what was happening in Iraq than what you hear here. Most of the Iraqi people would rather have Saddam than an American government. You would think we're helping the Iraqi people, hell I can see why one would look at it that way, but unless someone asks you for help you shouldn't try to force help down there throats. And where are the supposed weapons of mass destruction that this whole war was over? I'll tell you where they are. Right here: http://www.coxar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ Now, considering this war was over nothing, imagine how it would feel if you lost a brother, sister, mother, father, or close friend as a casualty of war, simply because Dubya needed to finish what daddy started.

Some of you claim that he exemplifies the values that the founding fathers of America created this country on, but on the contrary, he is diminishing the very values that this country was created on. The founding fathers of this country separated church and state for a reason, yet you are saying that him having strong Christian values somehow strengthens the basis of our nation. That doesn't make much sense to me.

Not only has he lead us into a frivolous war in Iraq, but perhaps you have not heard of the Patriot Act, where he is taking away your right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Perhaps you have not heard of how he has let Ashcroft eat away at our right to fair trial. The worst thing is that he is Ashcroft's puppet. Ashcroft is a scary man. And what about withdrawing from the anti-ballistic missile treaty. Now, I wonder, what would he want to do that for.

"There ought to be limits to freedom." That is a quote straight from your beloved president. Now, at first look, I guess the quote doesn't look all that bad, but you have no idea what he is referring to with that quote. Perhaps you think there ought to be limits to what arms we can bear or something. Well, it's not about that. Bush said this about a website that was attacking him; about what he has done in the past with drugs and stuff. Again, I must ask, why would he want to do this? Simply so there isn't bad things said about him. This doesn't sound like democracy to me. This is altering the Bill of Rights. I'm sure that our founding fathers just wanted to change the first amendment and abolish our freedom of speech. Great way to run a democracy! If we keep this up we might end up in a (*pause*) dictatorship.

And as for him being dumb, well, lets see, he has managed to screw the English language in just about every way possible. When any other president did that he was brutally criticized about it, but with Bush, it is a "bushism."

Some of this might not make sense, because it was in reply to someone elses post.

[badboy]

Ok, you people must think to attack a nuclear country you have to use nukes ? Why kind of retards are you people. It's called assassins. Plus get people on the inside to take them out from there. They kill all the evil people and the country is saved. Get rid of the nukes and there's nothing to worry about. Try to think past saving your ass just cause nukes are a possiblity.

[Demosthenes]

We were talking about going to war with North Korea. That involves much more than assassins. And you're calling us retards?

[KagomJack]

first of all: assassins = dirty and underhanded...dishonorable

second of all: we go to war with them = possible WW III?

finally: can we just make negotiations with N. Korea?

[zagggon]

No we cannot negotiate with NK, their leader is a terrible person and cannot be allowed to hold power. It makes me sick that there are so many wusses in the world.

[Demosthenes]

No we cannot negotiate with NK, their leader is a terrible person and cannot be allowed to hold power. It makes me sick that there are so many wusses in the world.

And who the fuck are you to pass that judgement. He might be a bad person, but it isn't our call. Exactly what crimes is he being charged with? I would like sources.

[slaynish]

Very well said, mjordan2nd. If you support a republican because YOU'RE a republican, or a democrat for president as you're a democrat yourself, then you deserve to starve to death, chained to a tree root far below surface level.

Really, I think the best idea to run a nation would be via full democracy. Give everyone a chance to vote in ALL matters, and establish a large council to count the votes in public. Yes, let the people do the decisions of the "president". There wouldn't *be* anyone in power, or tops, some powerless person involved in political matters who can only talk about the nation's greatness without an ability to change anything. Look into how the monarchy system works in the Scandinavian nation for more information about this. If anyone would be corrupt in the vote-counting council, it would very likely be reported. Human fallacy. It's *much* safer than giving a closed presidential administration practically full power to run a multi-million population nation.

Since computers are common and available to just about anyone, all that would be needed would be to distribute an iris scanner to all users in order to allow unique identification of everyone, to let them vote. This system would be very hard to cheat if established well, but unfortunately, conservatists (such as, a majority of the US population whether you like it or not) would never support this idea.

Well fucking put. Props.

[zagggon]

And who the fuck are you to pass that judgement. He might be a bad person, but it isn't our call. Exactly what crimes is he being charged with? I would like sources.
If you live in the current world and are not aware of the infinite crimes Leader Kim and his regime have comited then you are an oblivious moron.

[Demosthenes]

If you live in the current world and are not aware of the infinite crimes Leader Kim and his regime have comited then you are an oblivious moron.
So has every other fucking political leader slick.

[zagggon]

So has every other fucking political leader slick.
Wrong, very wrong. Anyways I can see your no smarter on this topic than my 6 year old brother so ill stop.

[badboy]

Very well said, mjordan2nd. If you support a republican because YOU'RE a republican, or a democrat for president as you're a democrat yourself, then you deserve to starve to death, chained to a tree root far below surface level.

Really, I think the best idea to run a nation would be via full democracy. Give everyone a chance to vote in ALL matters, and establish a large council to count the votes in public. Yes, let the people do the decisions of the "president". There wouldn't *be* anyone in power, or tops, some powerless person involved in political matters who can only talk about the nation's greatness without an ability to change anything. Look into how the monarchy system works in the Scandinavian nation for more information about this. If anyone would be corrupt in the vote-counting council, it would very likely be reported. Human fallacy. It's *much* safer than giving a closed presidential administration practically full power to run a multi-million population nation.

Since computers are common and available to just about anyone, all that would be needed would be to distribute an iris scanner to all users in order to allow unique identification of everyone, to let them vote. This system would be very hard to cheat if established well, but unfortunately, conservatists (such as, a majority of the US population whether you like it or not) would never support this idea.

That's called violation of privacy and it wouldn't be long before that idea spread to everything and certain rights of everyone are lost. Powerful and to active government doesn't work for the better.

[Demosthenes]

Ok, Zagggon, I've quite about had it with you flapping your fatuous jaw around, acting like you know something. I'm tired of your ignorant claims of me being wrong, and that being the only thing you say. HOW THE FUCK AM I WRONG? I have asked you numerous times for some sort of proof, any substantial evidence to back your statements, yet you have not provided a single one, and you still have the audacity to continue dribbling this inane bullshit directly from your ass. You have the nerve to tell me that my opinions are wrong? Who the fuck do you think you are? I must hand it to you, you have become a tiny bit smarter than the putz who posted "I can eat you if I want to," but that isn't saying much. You are still a halfwitted imbecile. Do you think because you don't post utter asinine crap anymore that you have all of a sudden become some sort of omniscient being? Ofcourse not. You always have been, and still are, nothing more than a tick on Zelaron's shoulder, contaminating this forum with your putrid ooze pulled strait out of your ass, temporarily lowering my IQ points every time I am unlucky enough to come across something written by you.

While our opinions might not concur, I can respect yours, but don't you dare sit there and try to belittle mine. Until you are god, don't you fucking try that bullshit. You have your eyes glued the fuck shut. I can understand you having your own opinions and whatnot, but keep your mind open, because everyone is inevitably bound to be wrong at some point or the other, and with your mental capacity, I forsee that it will happen quite a bit more with you than others. I am not at all opposed to having a sensible debate, but what you're doing is absolutely puerile. Thus far, all I've seen from you is you bitching "I'm right; you're wrong" in an even less articulate manner. Until you are capable of having a semi-mature debate, shut the fuck up!

And are you honestly dense enough to think that politicians are benign people? Please explain to me how the hell they got into power in the first place, ignoramus.

Please tell me what gives America the power to make judgement calls on other countries, and if you say our powerful military, I swear to god I will dig your eyes out with a random blunt object. Our military leads to power, but not so we can abuse it. And since America is all-righteous, and can do no wrong, please explain to me why the very people we are liberating hate our guts. Why is it that our presence there is allying two Islamic sects, both who have abhorred eachother for centuries, against a common cause; us? If you are going to say that only a small faction of the Iraqi people dislike us, you've obviously heard that in our own media. I dare you to go to another country and find the same information. The Iraqi people's unhappyness is growing, and we are the reason for their discontent. If the whole world loves us to death, why is it that some olympic-headed athletes are withdrawing from the olympics because they fear for their own safety?

Zagggon, take a minute to think before you speak. It really does help to have some thought put behind a statement. I know that's asking a lot from you, but for the sake of the members of this forum, please try. And I would still like to see those sources.

[KagomJack]

No we cannot negotiate with NK, their leader is a terrible person and cannot be allowed to hold power. It makes me sick that there are so many wusses in the world.
Let me tell you something, it is better to try to negotiate before going to war to "liberate" people.

I don't mind going in and fighting first and then negotiate, but that is just brute strength without trying at least other alternatives. Good thing you showed us you'd prefer us to be warmongers.

[Slim]

Wrong, very wrong. Anyways I can see your no smarter on this topic than my 6 year old brother so ill stop.

Ok, so you think that MJordan is wrong in saying that all other political leaders have commited some atrocious crime?
Would you care to prove yourself and name one completely law abiding political leader?

[zagggon]

Ok, so you think that MJordan is wrong in saying that all other political leaders have commited some atrocious crime?
Would you care to prove yourself and name one completely law abiding political leader?
Go fuck yourself, as for you Kagom, stfu queer Your way out of line. Mj, I am at the moment watching the temple of doom but once it is over I will provide you with Kim's crimes.

[!King_Amazon!]

There's a difference in an "atrocious crime" and a speeding ticket.

[Slim]

I never said there wasn't a difference.

[zagggon]

There's a difference in an "atrocious crime" and a speeding ticket.
Since the mods as usual are nowhere to be found doing their job to prevent flaming of MJ's type, Fuck You ka.

[!King_Amazon!]

What the hell are you talking about? I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to the moron that posted above you that went from saying that all political leaders have commited atrocious crimes to asking for you to find a single leader who is completely law abiding.

[badboy]

Why don't you take it to the Flame Forum MJ.

[Demosthenes]

Since the mods as usual are nowhere to be found doing their job to prevent flaming of MJ's type, Fuck You ka.

Hey slick, I think KA was trying to help you.

[Demosthenes]

Why don't you take it to the Flame Forum MJ.

I could...

If a mod asks me to, I will move it. Until then, it stays here.

[KagomJack]

as for you Kagom, stfu queer Your way out of line.
I'm way out of line? Listen here, I prefer peaceful tactics over loud and war filled tactics. So listen here, zag-fag, STFU and pull your head from out of your ass.

[zagggon]

Exposed- Kim Jong-Il’s Slave Camps
John Larkin
Far Eastern Economic Review
December 5, 2002

Pyongyang's infamous slave-labour camps have long been talked about, but the general public has never seen photographs of them. Until now. Satellite images ordered by the REVIEW show one such camp. A former prison guard there corroborates the images.

AHN MYONG CHOL traces his finger along the dirt road he took to escape from one of North Korea's most notorious slave camps. He has no trouble picking it out on the photograph, even though it was taken by a satellite far above the camp where he served as a guard for four years. "This is definitely it," says Ahn. "I finished my shift at 2 a.m. Then I drove my truck along this road to the railway station you see there, and followed the road to the Chinese border."



The solidly-built 33-year-old has spent much of the eight years since his defection to South Korea exposing the horrors of North Korea's forced labour camps for political prisoners. But his testimonies, including one with former inmates at a United States congressional committee hearing in 1998, have suffered from a key failing: No foreigners have ever seen the North Korean camps. They're hidden away in rugged mountains, camouflaged from prying eyes on the ground and in the air.

Satellite imagery of the camps that intelligence services in South Korea and the United States are believed to possess has not been released. With no physical evidence to refute North Korea's denials that these camps exist, the testimony of defectors has largely failed to lift the veil of mystery enveloping them. "These places don't officially exist," says another former guard, Choi Dong Chul, who worked at several labour camps before defecting to South Korea in 1995. "They're North Korea's biggest secret."

Until now. The REVIEW has obtained satellite photos of one of the biggest slave camps, nestled in the mountains of North Korea's rugged far northeastern frontier with China. The photos were purchased from DigitalGlobe, a U.S.-based commercial provider of satellite imagery, after the REVIEW handed over geographic coordinates for some of the camp's key facilities. The images were then corroborated on four separate occasions by Ahn, the only person known to have escaped from No. 22 Camp, where he worked from 1990-94. South Korea's Unification Ministry said in its annual White Paper on Human Rights in North Korea this year that the camp is still operating. Neither the ministry nor South Korea's National Intelligence Service would comment on the photos.

Taken in April and May this year, the satellite shots are the first images of a North Korean labour camp to be made public. They show a vast complex headquartered at the town of Haengyong with administrative buildings, farms, factories and prisoner quarters connected by dirt roads.

Encircling it all, according to Ahn, is a three-metre-high barbed-wire fence accompanied by minefields and mantraps. Inmates are crammed into clusters of huts. Each houses around 30 people, who provide slave labour for the farms and factories.

Some inmates are sent to the Chungbong coal mine, several kilometres away. Miners squeeze into narrow shafts to fill their daily coal quota. Many die of exhaustion, their energy sapped by pitifully small rations, or by vicious beatings from guards. The hospital south of the pithead rarely has qualified staff or medicines. Patients are often left to die, says Ahn.

Almost 210,000 prisoners were interned in 10 such camps in 1999, according to South Korea's intelligence agency, but five have since been closed after news of some of their locations leaked out. Ahn believes some 50,000 are held at No. 22 Camp, which is also sometimes referred to as Hoeryong camp after the county in which it lies.

The camp's horrors are well documented, thanks almost entirely to Ahn's 1998 testimony to a subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He has also relayed this information to South Korean government agencies and the international and local press. In 1995, he published a book about his experiences as a guard at four slave camps. "The most reliable testimony [about the camps] comes from Ahn Myong Chol," says Christine Lee, an activist at the Seoul-based Citizens' Alliance for North Korean Human Rights.

For most camp inmates, their only crime seems to lie in being related to someone who got on the wrong side of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il or his late father, the country's founder, Kim Il Sung. The elder Kim decreed that three generations of a class enemy's family be wiped out to cleanse his socialist paradise. That directive still holds.

An offence can be as trifling as tearing up a newspaper photo of Kim Jong Il. But it's nonetheless a life sentence in the truest sense. Inmates transferred to or born in these camps will never leave. Even after death, they are buried within the camp's electrified perimeter.

As one of the biggest camps, Haengyong is a target of human-rights campaigners. "There's a fair amount of literature available now on camps like this written by defectors," says former U.S. Congressman Stephen Solarz, a member of the independent U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea. "The existence of these camps and their conditions constitute a terrible indictment of the regime in North Korea."

The opacity of Kim Jong Il's North Korea has shielded him from much of the damage from international condemnation of his gulag system. But even if that condemnation came, Kim would be loath to dismantle the camps. They embody the reasons why it is so difficult for Kim to open up his country in a meaningful way.

A pillar of Kim's regime, the camps are also its Achilles heel. Forced labour accounts for a large amount of what remains of the national economy. The camps allow Kim to dispose of potential leadership threats and cow his people into fawning obedience. Releasing prisoners would pave the way for open dissent. Moreover, it would pollute his realm with enemies who would spread tales of barbarity at the camps.

"The labour camps are crucial to Kim's hold on power," says Kim Dok Hong, a top North Korean defector who has called for the toppling of the Kim regime since he fled to South Korea in 1997. "If he opens them up everyone will see that he has killed so many of his own people. He knows he can't do that."

The satellite photos transport Ahn back in time to a place he describes as his second home town. His job was to drive supplies around the camp's seven main zones. "It feels like I'm right back inside the camp," says Ahn. "I went back and forth every day with supplies, so I knew every inch of the camp. It hasn't changed at all."
His job took him to virtually every building except the prisoners' huts. For six months he guarded an explosives depot at Chungbong. "It's that building there," he says, pointing to a small walled facility. "One day our platoon officer got bored, so he called over some prisoners for us to beat up."

Ahn picks out the theatre at Haengyong where he watched James Bond movies. Across a courtyard is the building the inmates feared most, a detention centre for those discovered breaking camp rules. Here, inmates are tortured and sometimes executed, though Ahn admits he never set foot inside.

"There's a little hill near the detention centre and I was standing there once when I saw 50 prisoners. Once I saw a Japanese woman," he says, adding that she was being beaten at the time. He heard the woman, aged about 50, cry out in accented Korean and was told that she was Japanese. The incident occurred in 1993.

Ahn says he watched prisoners work on a tunnel a few hundred metres away, next to camouflaged anti-aircraft guns. He says heavy artillery was moved into the tunnel after the 1991 Gulf War, when the North Koreans were horrified by what America's precision bombing did to Iraq's defences. Not far from the cinema is the obligatory memorial hall to Kim Il Sung, fronted by a spacious garden. Across the river that divides Haengyong, Ahn identifies buses used to ferry guards to their posts.

From above, Haengyong looks like nothing more than a quiet small town. There's a reason for that, says Ahn. Even when he worked there, camp authorities were wary of satellites and took pains to camouflage the facility. "Anyone who doesn't know better would think this is just another village," says the defector.

Clearly this is no ordinary village. Ahn defected in 1994 after his father was jailed for criticizing Kim Jong Il. Less than a week later he was in South Korea after eluding a massive manhunt in northeast China. He has never tired of telling what he knows, partly to salve his own guilt. The photos bring some of those feelings back, but they'll help him to continue exposing North Korea's greatest shame. "From now on," Ahn promises, "there'll be no secrets."

Here is an example MJ... Ka im sry.

[Slim]

You know I find it quite odd that you can call me a moron, though you support Bush who dodged the draft and pretty much stole the election from Gore (Not that I liked Gore either, just pointing this out.) Pretty odd how he somehow won with the state his brother is governor of isn't it? Have you not noticed Bushes ability to completely and utterly destroy the English language in EVERY speech he makes? I fail to see how someone who can't pronounce the word "nuclear" graduated from Yale, let alone run the most militarily driven country in the world after dodging the draft to get high. Hm, baked pussy anyone?

[zagggon]

You know I find it quite odd that you can call me a moron, though you support Bush who dodged the draft and pretty much stole the election from Gore (Not that I liked Gore either, just pointing this out.) Pretty odd how he somehow won with the state his brother is governor of isn't it? Have you not noticed Bushes ability to completely and utterly destroy the English language in EVERY speech he makes? I fail to see how someone who can't pronounce the word "nuclear" graduated from Yale, let alone run the most militarily driven country in the world after dodging the draft to get high. Hm, baked pussy anyone?
Bush did not dodge the draft you fucking lie intaking piece of crap.

[KagomJack]

if I can remember, Bush did serve in the army and this was said because people want to make Bush look evil?

[Slim]

if I can remember, Bush did serve in the army and this was said because people want to make Bush look evil?

Read.

http://www.schlatter.org/Dad/Bush%20lies/draftdodge-long.htm
http://www.refusingtokill.net/USGulfWar2/whatdubyadidduringvietnam.htm

[!King_Amazon!]

Clinton was also a draft dodger and people don't throw that in his face every chance they get.

[Slim]

Clinton was also a draft dodger and people don't throw that in his face every chance they get.

Yes, they throw it in his face that he got head while in office.
While on that subject...how the hell is that grounds for impeachment? I mean it's not like he was getting sucked off by some Russian for military secrets.

[zagggon]

Clinton disgraced the presidency...

[Slim]

Clinton disgraced the presidency...

Yes, and making our country look like a bunch of illiterate war craving morons doesn't?

[zagggon]

Bush has done nothing but given the American people exellence in his service as president so far. He showed the rest of the world that if you mess with the united states or pose a deadly threat to it then your gona get fucked. Im glad that he did not sit back and listen to the French.

[Slim]

Bush has done nothing but given the American people exellence in his service as president so far. He showed the rest of the world that if you mess with the united states or pose a deadly threat to it then your gona get fucked. Im glad that he did not sit back and listen to the French.

Yeah, great service. For example:
The economy is in the shitter.
We're at war with two countries (most likely 3 if he gets re-elected)
We were attacked by Al Qaeda because he disregarded intel given to him.

Wow, with a record like that how could he lose this election!

[slaynish]

Its my own opinion, but it all has to stop.. To me it sounds like a great depression could occur... Look at the facts:

1. Gas is higher than FUCK
2. We're at war. ( Pretty much still )
3. We've got this Nick Berg shit going on
4. Half the world hates us
5. Half of that side has nukes.

To me, both the runners are wrong. We need somebody strong, we need somebody that knows what to do, and doesn't just THINK they know what to do. Bush could go on, I think that he has driven us into a ditch, and hes the one thats going to pull our asses back out. He can do it, becuase he has actually been president before.

Its just stupid... I wish it would all stop.

[KagomJack]

Bush has done nothing but given the American people exellence in his service as president so far. He showed the rest of the world that if you mess with the united states or pose a deadly threat to it then your gona get fucked. Im glad that he did not sit back and listen to the French.
Yes, he's doing pretty good.

[D3V]

As I recall, bush joined the National Guard to aviod war...

[D3V]

Its my own opinion, but it all has to stop.. To me it sounds like a great depression could occur... Look at the facts:

1. Gas is higher than FUCK
2. We're at war. ( Pretty much still )
3. We've got this Nick Berg shit going on
4. Half the world hates us
5. Half of that side has nukes.

To me, both the runners are wrong. We need somebody strong, we need somebody that knows what to do, and doesn't just THINK they know what to do. Bush could go on, I think that he has driven us into a ditch, and hes the one thats going to pull our asses back out. He can do it, becuase he has actually been president before.

Its just stupid... I wish it would all stop.


The gas being high has not anything to do with the war (according to our government) Nick berg was supposively fake, actually the WHOLE world hates us, besides england and austrailia. 1/25 of the people that hate us have nukes.

Yeah, we need somebody like another JFK. (greatest president ever)

[KagomJack]

Yes...if only JFK hadn't been assassinated :( We need another JFK in office. Our world ties would be bettered, etc.

[slaynish]

So my facts were wrong. We cant get them right all the time.. Another JFK would be great. Except he would get assasinated because he's ' communist .'

[frickaline]

I'd vote for John Kerry. Bush looks like a drunken monkey.
-frick

[!King_Amazon!]

So far all you liberals can say against bush is "hes ugly, he's stupid, he looks like a monkey" and a bunch of stuff that isn't even true.

[Demosthenes]

So far all you liberals can say against bush is "hes ugly, he's stupid, he looks like a monkey" and a bunch of stuff that isn't even true.

http://www.zelaron.com/forum/showthread.php?p=411919#post411919. I briefly explained why I dislike Bush.

[Chruser]

So far all you liberals can say against bush is "hes ugly, he's stupid, he looks like a monkey" and a bunch of stuff that isn't even true.

Good thing I'm not a liberal, then. I'm just anti-Bush with fact and reason.

[D3V]

So far all you liberals can say against bush is "hes ugly, he's stupid, he looks like a monkey" and a bunch of stuff that isn't even true.

I'm not a liberalist but Bush has proven to us over and over that he isn't a good Leader, he does not make Wise Decisions, and overall He isn't really fit for president. He can hardly read, and overall he has made the US look like shit, we gave him one chance, now its his time to get out, and step the hell aside.

[frickaline]

I'm not a liberalist but Bush has proven to us over and over that he isn't a good Leader, he does not make Wise Decisions, and overall He isn't really fit for president. He can hardly read, and overall he has made the US look like shit, we gave him one chance, now its his time to get out, and step the hell aside.

all that,
...and he looks like a monkey.

http://joe02151.250free.com/22-bush.jpg

[Slim]

Not quite, the monkey has a slightly more intelligent look on its face.

[frickaline]

Not quite, the monkey has a slightly more intelligent look on its face.

lol...true.
That curious george one is my favorite. :D

[D3V]

I think we should have a double public execution. Where we tie the arms and legs of saddam hussien and ****censored*** and hook them between 2 cars and whoever gets ripped into peices first loses.

[Demosthenes]

all that,
...and he looks like a monkey.

http://joe02151.250free.com/22-bush.jpg

HEY! Don't make fun of monkeys.

[!King_Amazon!]

Chruser makes bad decisions, he made sov a super mod. Nobody bashes him.

[Slim]

Chruser makes bad decisions, he made sov a super mod. Nobody bashes him.

Sounds like someone is a tad bitter to me.

[!King_Amazon!]

Sounds like you've got 18 posts and don't know what you are talking about.

[Slim]

I know enough about what I'm talking about to realize that you were demodded, and Sovereign was made a supreme mod and ever since you've been bitching about it at every opportunity.

[Titusfied]

No making up words!

Bergoflickle!

[D3V]

No he quit cuz he couldn't stand working with sov.

[Titusfied]

I'm not a liberalist but Bush has proven to us over and over that he isn't a good Leader, he does not make Wise Decisions, and overall He isn't really fit for president. He can hardly read, and overall he has made the US look like shit, we gave him one chance, now its his time to get out, and step the hell aside.

I just don't completely agree with this.

One, it's not his sole discretion on the decision making, that's why he has the executive board there, to help him weigh the options, propose a course of action, then implement it.

He can obviously read, and fine. Sure, he isn't the most articulate speaker the U.S. has had as President, but honestly, we were spoiled off our asses having Clinton in office prior to Bush. Clinton was a pure genius at public speaking.

I don't think he made the U.S. look like shit. We defended ourselves in a time of the greatest adversity we've had since Viet-fucking-nam. No other President in recent years has had nearly as much shit to deal with. Between appeasing the public over 9/11, keeping his convictions strong throughout this entire Iraq "war", which I wouldn't even consider it to be, and trying to run a re-election campaign, he is doing a damn good job in my mind. North Korea is just icing on the cake, and don't be fucking stupid people, there will be no nuclear hallocaust in the near future, no one wants that, no one.

What more could someone have done in these situations? Sadaam was captured, we are granting sovereignty to Iraq within the month, and there are other pressing issues at hand right here in the U.S. being shadowed by the foreign politics all over the media.

Granted, I don't always think of Bush as a great leader, but in times of hardship, he has impressed me a lot. There is only so much he can disclose to the public, so how can you blame him from tip-toeing around certain questions? His speeches are quite articulate, and just because he's been tatooed with phrases like "evil-doers" doesn't make him unintelligent.

There is just so much that goes on under the public eyes. There is so much shit that's classified, that how can we possibly know all the facts? How can we possibly put ourselves in his shoes? He's made 10 tougher decisions in a matter minutes than 99% of the world will ever have to make for 1 in their lifetimes.

I'm just thankful that we didn't have fucking Gore in office when all this turmoil went down... Do you guys really think that someone who is trying to raise pressing issues in public about "The Day After Tomorrow" lately would have been a better candidate during Bush's term in office? Thank God he lost, and through all speculation, thank God whatever conspiracy went down to get Bush in office, went down.

[badboy]

Actually, he did win. Fair and square. You people are just thinking what your parents have told you, or what your friends think, not what the facts say or what the truth is.

[Titusfied]

Who are you referring to? I'm guessing Bush, but fact of the matter is, Gore received more American population votes than Bush, it's the electoral votes percentage that Bush won, which weighs heavier than America's vote percentage.

American Votes:
Bush: 50,456,169
Gore: 50,996,116

Electoral Votes:
Bush: 271
Gore: 266

However, Bush won 30 states, compared to Gore's 21. I mean seriously, Gore won the population vote, so don't confuse your facts badboy. I'm actually pro-Bush, but numbers are numbers.

[!King_Amazon!]

The Electorial College is outdated and should be eliminated.

[D3V]

I hate when ignorant people try and talk Kerry down. They talk about how he wants to make cuts from this stupid ass war. And he wants to cut some of the defensive budget. But do you know why? HE WANTS TO IMPROVE OUR COUNTRY. Not waste all of that money into a defensive system which is not needed. Look how many times we've been attacked after 9/11 ..... NONE. If you count Anthrax , well that was an american who did that, so blah.

John Kerry has a good plan for the states, and We've already seen how shitty of a job Bush has done, Put us in Debt, get the whole world to hate americans, Our fucking popularity has gone down like 32% since Bush came in off. See, Bush doesn' tlike to listen to the U.N. ... If we would have let them go in , check for the ''''weapons of mass destruction''''' then We wouldn't have had any of the problems. But his war hungriness led to this.



*Bump, I love these old ass threads :)

[D3V]

The gas being high has not anything to do with the war (according to our government) Nick berg was supposively fake, actually the WHOLE world hates us, besides england and austrailia. 1/25 of the people that hate us have nukes.

Yeah, we need somebody like another JFK. (greatest president ever)



Obama maybe?

[D3V]

http://zelaron.com/forum/showpost.php?p=411563

Bush all the way.

............ :rolleyes:

[Grav]

It makes me laugh to consider that D3v made more sense than K_A at the time...

[Thanatos]

Hey... I was 17 at the time and in a drug-induced haze.

Fuck you.

[D3V]

I'm sorry, but i'm totally disappointed with Obama's performance the first year. I understand what he has inherited makes his job terribly difficult, and I understand that the Republican machine is something you can't take on yourself, but him bowing out to them is just troubling.

[Mutant Couch]

Ah, that election was the second one I actually cared about. Of course my support involved ending up at a John Kerry rally dressed as a whoopie cushion and refusing free tickets to see Springsteen, because I had standards. Good days.

As for Obama, I agree, but I wasn't one of those people that assumed he was the Messiah before he was elected.

[D3V]

Good point. I think I expected too much of campaign Obama as opposed to what actual President Obama would be. I don't think he's completely lost, but is trying to appease to many people around him at this time. Anyone live in Canada? I need an exit plan.

[!King_Amazon!]

I have faith that he'll pull things together. At least I'd like to hope so.

[D3V]

Yeah, he is a pretty talented politician. I'm not sure what he has planned, or what he's planning on doing. I just hope he can keep his head on straight throught the next three years. Let's say that he doesn't, we may be looking at the rise of the Independent party in 2012.

[!King_Amazon!]

As long as Palin runs in 2012, that's all that matters. I think our country needs the laughs.

[Mutant Couch]

Absolutely. Which is why I don't understand how Dennis Kucinich wasn't more over. He even looks amusing.

I'd love to see the Independent party have a chance, but it's way too much change and scary unknowns for far too many Americans.

[!King_Amazon!]

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/1619/applez.jpg

[Mutant Couch]

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z123/jms35164/48061732190.jpg?

[Skurai]

Anyone live in Canada? I need an exit plan.

I know a girl there who's getting my an escape ready, so I'm sure I can get an extra ride ready for you. The more the merrier. ;)

[D3V]

Absolutely. Which is why I don't understand how Dennis Kucinich wasn't more over. He even looks amusing.

I'd love to see the Independent party have a chance, but it's way too much change and scary unknowns for far too many Americans.

If Dennis Kucinich didn't tell everybody he saw a UFO he would've probably gotten more votes. I think Alan Grayson may have a chance in the future, along with Anthony Weiner, (haha weiner). Not only that, but he looks like quagmire.

[Skurai]

... Dennis Kucinich ... saw a UFO .
Tell me more, this sounds interesting. :eek:

...(haha weiner)...
Haha, weiner.

[D3V]

MVcmAqyEW7Y