Kerry tells President Bush he will concede White House race

[HNICPantitude]

One line responses. Sarcastic remarks. Useless insults. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN TO LEAD A COUNTRY OF OVER 300,000,000 PEOPLE? Is it to Rock to Vote with 18 year olds who dont know shit about shit, and historically "fight the establishment" or is to hand over our military to a useless fucking organization that should be exposed for the corrupt laden lie that it is? Or do you just want to write checks to every other country? What? What is your plan?

[HNICPantitude]

I guess that question just silences all of you? Maybe you can just ignore it until Burbank gets here and fights your battle for you. I honestly dont believe there is a democrat on this board who can give me ten serious reasons they voted for John Kerry (if they even voted - I know it was raining in some places and all).

[Anonymous]

Sure.

- The man isn't an idiot.

- Taking steps to make other countries not hate the nation I live in quite as much seems like a good thing to me.

- Even though Kerry clearly said he didn't support this line of thought, I am not of the opinion that the US is somehow more important than all other countries of the world put together. I think under Kerry, we would have had some checks and balances with the rest of the world.

- Our educational system is sad at best and under-funded, which is evidenced in no greater way than the fact that we just re-elected a man who at least thinks and talks like an idiot, and most of America can really relate to that.

- Rich people don't need an 89 billion tax cut as much as our country needed the money to help fund our inane war in iraq and thousands of programs at home.

- Our administration started an endless 'war,' which has already overextended our armies and completely missed its projected goal. It's making a mockery of the intelligence of every American to trust anything they're doing, but it isn't like that was really hard to do in the first place.

- The supreme court was already conservative without adding three more lapdogs to the mix. Bush will now not only get anything he wants, but with no re-election possible in the future, he has nothing to lose, and will irrepairably damage the country and the documents on which it was founded in the name of his crazed beliefs.

- Bush is trying to impose christian values onto everyone in the nation, with a ban on abortion and same-sex marriage outlawed in the constitution. Being a not-christian, this does not make me happy.

- Under Bush, we've had several civil liberties stripped through the passing of the Patriot act, and Patriot II is still in the making. The country is slowing beginning to turn into an Orwellian nightmare, wherein people gladly give up their freedom to feel safe. A former director of the CIA once said "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither."

- And we'll get neither, since it's obvious security isn't the primary concern of this administration. Upon invading iraq, the only defended building was the oil ministry, and no-one even tried to check in at a well-known munitions dump to see if there was anything there. Aside from showing Bush's intentions in invading Iraq all-too-clearly to all-but-Americans, it also showed that he's apparently uninterested in the security of this nation.

Those are 10, but I feel like I'm playing tennis with a brick wall.

[Spectre X]

What we would like, Pant, would be a president that doesn't put his country and the rest of the world in grave mortal danger.

[Anonymous]

I guess those reasons just silences all of you? Maybe you can just ignore it, because there's no possible way coherently answering to something could take somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 minutes if you want to make a reasoned argument!

This is America! WE DON'T STAND FOR REASON HERE.

[mburbank]

Pantydude, you're the villian of the moment for precisely the reason you say is inconsequential in Bush. You can articulate your thoughts. I say that such a quality is neccesary for good leadership. I won't argue whether W is actually stupid or not. I don't know him.

I will argue that intellectual curiosity and communication skills are esential leadership qualitiesm and I will argue that W. Lacks both in spades.

Exit polls showed something missed by our sterling media up until now. The most important issue in the minds of voters was not Iraq, not the economy, it was morality.

Will you argue any of these points.

A.) The President can imbue a nation with morality by some sort of moral osmosis.

B.) This president is more moral then Kerry, or particularly moral at all.

C.) The most importnat reason to pick a candidate is their percieved morality.

D.) Morality is important is of primary importance as a leadership quality.

E.) A person's morality is reflected by accepting Jesus as your personal.
savior.

F.) Making noise about a constitutional ammendment banning Gay Marriage is a sincerely moral issue, and reflects moral character.



You are now part of our country's entrenched ruling elite. There is no longer any chance of the party of opposition doing much of anything for at very least two years. I'd expect that as opposed to spouting any no longer neccesary party line (like you've accused others here of doing) you'd answer these questions honestly as they pertain to you and your beliefs.

I think there's a qualitative difference between you and Naldo. I don't know f either of you is really stupid. You, though, can communicate. You waited for the opponent to concede before glaoting, which shows you don't suffer from the premature ejaculation which so weakens Naldo. You're the man. Step up and defend. Kerry lost. You have no one to run against. It's time for you to run for.

Suppport this thug, explain his culture of liofe which includes the unborn yet approves the death penalty and shows no interest at all in the 'collateral damage' to a country that wasn't Afghanistan. Lets look together for freedom on the march and the halving of our defficit. I look forward to it.

[Bobo Adobo]

"You must eliminate envy of America in your culture and try to find your own identity and culture. By propmoting the positives of living in America's shadow, you may be able to capture some of its' financial drain off, and rebuild that military!

Stop coming here for jobs, and stop coming for vacation. All you do at that point is feed the pig. I don't know what to do with ALL of this money we have. "

I think we found a new idiot.

[HNICPantitude]

Originally Posted by Chojin

Sure.

- The man isn't an idiot.

- Taking steps to make other countries not hate the nation I live in quite as much seems like a good thing to me.

- Even though Kerry clearly said he didn't support this line of thought, I am not of the opinion that the US is somehow more important than all other countries of the world put together. I think under Kerry, we would have had some checks and balances with the rest of the world.

- Our educational system is sad at best and under-funded, which is evidenced in no greater way than the fact that we just re-elected a man who at least thinks and talks like an idiot, and most of America can really relate to that.

- Rich people don't need an 89 billion tax cut as much as our country needed the money to help fund our inane war in iraq and thousands of programs at home.

- Our administration started an endless 'war,' which has already overextended our armies and completely missed its projected goal. It's making a mockery of the intelligence of every American to trust anything they're doing, but it isn't like that was really hard to do in the first place.

- The supreme court was already conservative without adding three more lapdogs to the mix. Bush will now not only get anything he wants, but with no re-election possible in the future, he has nothing to lose, and will irrepairably damage the country and the documents on which it was founded in the name of his crazed beliefs.

- Bush is trying to impose christian values onto everyone in the nation, with a ban on abortion and same-sex marriage outlawed in the constitution. Being a not-christian, this does not make me happy.

- Under Bush, we've had several civil liberties stripped through the passing of the Patriot act, and Patriot II is still in the making. The country is slowing beginning to turn into an Orwellian nightmare, wherein people gladly give up their freedom to feel safe. A former director of the CIA once said "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither."

- And we'll get neither, since it's obvious security isn't the primary concern of this administration. Upon invading iraq, the only defended building was the oil ministry, and no-one even tried to check in at a well-known munitions dump to see if there was anything there. Aside from showing Bush's intentions in invading Iraq all-too-clearly to all-but-Americans, it also showed that he's apparently uninterested in the security of this nation.

Those are 10, but I feel like I'm playing tennis with a brick wall.

Stephen Hawking isn't an idiot either, but I certainly wouldn't put him in the White House tomorrow either.

Bush continues to build alliances with other nations. Bush had a very large alliance going into Iraq. Do you speak of governments, or should the U.S. President walk the streets of Belgium and see if he cant swing over a few stoners to the cause? As for Kerry, outside of sacrificing Israel, and allowing the UN to push the demands of the Palestinians, I really don't see yur point. What measures exactly di Kerry propose? Was he going to stay up late one night and make some phone calls or something? Take Chirac to a titty bar? What. He never once outlined a plan HOW he was going to rebuild alliances.

I am not of the opinion that we are more important either. I am, however, of the opinion that the safety of the citizens of this country is more important than anything else..... when it comes to the responsibilities of the President of the United States of America. Remember the original purpose of the Federal Government Chojin? Read the Constitution.

What the hell does our education system have to do with the federal government Chojin? Again, I refer you to the Constituion. I would also perhaps suggest that you read up on your state's issues and become active within your state to improve the education system IN your state.

Rich people didn't get an 89 billion dollar tax cut. Do you actually read anything, or do you just drool along with Dan Rather. Number one, the category, so appropriately being called "the rich people" included every entrepeneur and small business owner out there who was making more than $200,000, for their business. They would not have been able to stay in business should they have been bent over by liberal tax cuts brought down by the Kerry administration. As for actual people who make more than $200k personally, they would merely have changed the way they file for minimum taxes and paid less than they do under Bush. Look it up in our current FLAWED tax laws.

Overextended our army? Bill Clinton deployed more soldiers than George Bush. Endless War? Where do you see that. Iraq is moving along. Slower than expected, but progress is being made.

The Supreme Court is conservative. Clinton had eight years. Why is it wrong that Bush has eight years? Only fair.

Never once has Bush pushed for a ban on abortion. There is a tremendous difference between abortions performed during early-mid pregnancies, and sucking the brain out of an 8 month old fetus which would otherwise survive outside the womb. I don't agree with amending the Constitution on gay marriage either. It's a states issue and should stay that way. John Kerry was against gay marriage on the state's level also.

I'm so sick of hearing we're sacrificing freedoms. Where have you been opressed in this country Chojin? Flying is a priveledge not a right. So don't us airport security. What else? What has changed in your daily life? What has the federal government taken away from you? If your so terrified of a government controlled state, perhaps you are only a hop, skip and a jump away from being a right-wing gun toting militia leader. Again, I refer you to your constitutional right to bear arms, and why that right was granted.

The oil ministry was defended for the simple purpose of avoiding Sadam lighting them againm again. It was credible intelligence, and we acted on it. Every intention was made to move forward on Baghdad as rapidly as possible. The initial objective of the soldiers was not to act in an investigative manner, but to secure the country as rapidly as possible to avoid unnecessary loss of life. As for you "all-but-Americans" theory, Bush had an alliance of over 30 countries, but much like your failed candidate, I guess those dont count to you.

As for your answer, not one issue (save "Taking steps to make other countries not hate the nation I live in quite as much seems like a good thing to me," which was incomplete and didn't state a stance or a plan) you pointed out had anything to do with Kerry, which is exactly why Democrats lost this election. You have to find someone to vote for, not against. Your entire argument was based on hatred and anger. I can easily identify ten issues I am FOR. I voted FOR how I wanted the country to proceed. I could give a shit about what I didn't like about John Kerry.

[Anonymous]

I'll respond in reverse order to blow your mind.

You have to find someone to vote for, not against.

If Kerry was elected, with Republicans holding all the cards in the other branches, he wouldn't have been able to do anything. But, he would have been able to veto things and to stop the bleeding of America. So, it only makes sense that most of my arguments are about what Bush did wrong, considering those are the only things Kerry could have affected. I'm not saying Kerry ran a brilliant campaign, either - he didn't.

As for you "all-but-Americans" theory, Bush had an alliance of over 30 countries, but much like your failed candidate, I guess those dont count to you.

For as much as you like to accuse me of rhetoric, really, wake the fuck up. The only major country supporting us was England, otherwise our only support was sad. Here's some rhetoric for you - 90% of all military deaths in Iraq are American. So either our grand coalition is either REALLY GOOD at not dying, or it isn't REALLY GOOD at all.

The oil ministry was defended for the simple purpose of avoiding Sadam lighting them againm again.

Uh, ok. I still think it might have been a 'good idea' to 'weigh in' on '300 tons of fucking explosives.'

I'm so sick of hearing we're sacrificing freedoms. Where have you been opressed in this country Chojin?

Even your fellow sheeple acknowledge a steady reduction of freedoms, and rationalize it with national security. So far, I have not been oppressed, largely on account of me being a white male registered as 'unaffiliated.' Under Patriot, police can hold suspected terrorists without reason for an indefinite period of time. Warrants are no longer needed for suspected terrorists. In the event I decide to stick it out in this country and peacefully protest, I will most likely be jailed for large periods of time. But at least freedom will be on the march.

Never once has Bush pushed for a ban on abortion. There is a tremendous difference between abortions performed during early-mid pregnancies, and sucking the brain out of an 8 month old fetus which would otherwise survive outside the womb. I don't agree with amending the Constitution on gay marriage either. It's a states issue and should stay that way. John Kerry was against gay marriage on the state's level also.

And he won't push for a ban on abortion, either, on account of his strong sense of morality and recognition that people should be able to do what they want in a free country! Am I right, guys! I assume with the brain sucking tripe, you're referring to partial birth abortions, which are administered with a blow to the back of the neck, not a comical hospital brain-sucking apparatus. John Kerry was not against gay marriage on the state level, he was for leaving it up to the states. Which you'd know if you weren't too busy booing and throwing cheetos at the tv during his segments in the debates.

Clinton had eight years. Why is it wrong that Bush has eight years? Only fair.

Clinton wasn't pushing to ruin the country.

Endless War? Where do you see that.

Bush himself said that the war on terror couldn't be won. It's more of a philosophy and a policy than an actual 'war.' If you think Iraq will be the end of the war on terror, you're officially adorable.

Rich people didn't get an 89 billion dollar tax cut...They would not have been able to stay in business should they have been bent over by liberal tax cuts brought down by the Kerry administration. As for actual people who make more than $200k personally, they would merely have changed the way they file for minimum taxes and paid less than they do under Bush. Look it up in our current FLAWED tax laws.

Kerry only proposed rolling the tax cut back for those people, not taxing them further. Are you suggesting that small businesses didn't exist before Bush? As for the second part, nonsense.

What the hell does our education system have to do with the federal government Chojin?

What, now you didn't listen to Bush during the debates, either? No Child Left Behind being thrown out there every 10 minutes and all? Our country's education system is pathetic. So, I can either blame all 50 states for this, or blame the federal government, which is actually in a position to try and fix it.

[Kerry] never once outlined a plan HOW he was going to rebuild alliances.

Whereas Bush wouldn't even try. You're right, it's way better to have a plan.

Remember the original purpose of the Federal Government Chojin? Read the Constitution.

I might want to get on that, before it goes out of print.

[HNICPantitude]

Pantydude, you're the villian of the moment for precisely the reason you say is inconsequential in Bush. You can articulate your thoughts. I say that such a quality is neccesary for good leadership. I won't argue whether W is actually stupid or not. I don't know him.

I would say the same thing regarding Kerry. I would take a nervous public speaker who can articulate his plan any day of the week over a candidate who could not articulate one single point or any semblance of a plan.

I will argue that intellectual curiosity and communication skills are esential leadership qualitiesm and I will argue that W. Lacks both in spades.

Exit polls showed something missed by our sterling media up until now. The most important issue in the minds of voters was not Iraq, not the economy, it was morality.

Exit Polls have repeatedly been proven to be a farce. Yesterdays election polls were an embarassment for the media.

Will you argue any of these points.

A.) The President can imbue a nation with morality by some sort of moral osmosis.

I do not believe a president can imbue a nation with morality any more than I believe a movie can imbue a nation with morality. A president is merely a vessel to represent the country in its current stance on moral issues. Would you argue that moral issues had nothing to do with yesterday's victory? George Bush did not give me my values, nor does he influence them.

B.) This president is more moral then Kerry, or particularly moral at all.

I am of the firm belief that this president is much more moral than Kerry in his beliefs, but again, I didn't vote for George Bush for his moral stance on any issue. If you are heading down the road of religion, I will comment on that also. I am not a "born again" Christian. To be quite honest, I am not very religious at all. I have a religion, which I practice about once every other year, when my parents whine about it at Christmas, and manipulate me into participating. Outside of that, I believe religion represents a set of morals to live by, and nothing more.

C.) The most importnat reason to pick a candidate is their percieved morality.

I absolutely believe a candidates perceived moral value has a place, but, no, not the most important reason to pick a candidate whatsoever.

D.) Morality is important is of primary importance as a leadership quality.

Morality, I would hope, in a very general definition, should be important in any venture in life.

E.) A person's morality is reflected by accepting Jesus as your personal.
savior.

That's an assinine question, and I believe only posed to instigate an argumentative response.

F.) Making noise about a constitutional ammendment banning Gay Marriage is a sincerely moral issue, and reflects moral character.

I don't believe in gay marriage, and I have also repeatedly stated that I disagree with george Bush's stance on this position. I have never once changed my stance on that argument. I believe in a very limited Federal Constitution, and a very Liberitarian like interpretation of such. In my personal opinion, we should be very careful in setting precedent amending the Constitution every time we dont like something. To me, it is no different than my argument against removing the word ****** from the dictionary. Why would I argue that? I am not a proponent of using the word, but a precedent would have been set to remove words each time a group deemed that word offensive or unnacceptable in some way, highly akin to revisionist history.

You are now part of our country's entrenched ruling elite. There is no longer any chance of the party of opposition doing much of anything for at very least two years. I'd expect that as opposed to spouting any no longer neccesary party line (like you've accused others here of doing) you'd answer these questions honestly as they pertain to you and your beliefs.


I think there's a qualitative difference between you and Naldo. I don't know f either of you is really stupid. You, though, can communicate. You waited for the opponent to concede before glaoting, which shows you don't suffer from the premature ejaculation which so weakens Naldo. You're the man. Step up and defend. Kerry lost. You have no one to run against. It's time for you to run for.

Suppport this thug, explain his culture of liofe which includes the unborn yet approves the death penalty and shows no interest at all in the 'collateral damage' to a country that wasn't Afghanistan. Lets look together for freedom on the march and the halving of our defficit. I look forward to it.

[Ant10708]

What civil liberties have we had stripped away from us from the Patriot Act? I know that it has the potential to be used agaisnt us but I don't think Bush has done this so far. Only one Muslim American is being held under the Patriot Act. The rest are all foriegners. I just don't see the abuse and the stripping away of civil liberities everyone talks about.

[FS]

I hate to play dramaqueen, but if you're not going to see that your rights have been eroded until the moment they're rounding up people in the streets, it's going to be too late.

The very potential of the Patriot Act you speak of should be enough to concern you.

[kahljorn]

"in a wierd, twisted way I'm glad Bush won re-election. I know the general mood around here is gonna be "the country's going to hell", but look at it this way: the majority of the country is obviously blinded by a religious text that's been editted, revised and translated for thousands of years. It's going to take something really big and really terrible to wake people up from their little world. With Bush in office, it's only a matter of time."

That's a good point, that's kinda what i thought. Either that or there would be a revolution, and either seems quite nice!

[HNICPantitude]

Originally Posted by Chojin

I'll respond in reverse order to blow your mind.

I'll respond in a logical fashion to confuse you further.

If Kerry was elected, with Republicans holding all the cards in the other branches, he wouldn't have been able to do anything. But, he would have been able to veto things and to stop the bleeding of America. So, it only makes sense that most of my arguments are about what Bush did wrong, considering those are the only things Kerry could have affected. I'm not saying Kerry ran a brilliant campaign, either - he didn't.

So you voted for Kerry so he could veto?

For as much as you like to accuse me of rhetoric, really, wake the fuck up. The only major country supporting us was England, otherwise our only support was sad. Here's some rhetoric for you - 90% of all military deaths in Iraq are American. So either our grand coalition is either REALLY GOOD at not dying, or it isn't REALLY GOOD at all.

Here's a trivia fact for you to take with you. Military assistance isn't the only support you can offer. The United States has more than enough military force to handle a country like Iraq on our own. As for support, it comes in many forms. Merely saying you are in favor immediately helps. Money further helps. Post war rebuilding helps. There are many aspects involved. Far too many to get into here, but you know that, so it's a fruitless argument. You can go on criticizing countries like Spain, Poland, Bulgaria, Japan, Australia, etc. and then tell me in your next post how we are not more important than other countries.... only to begin your next post by labeling England as the "only other important country." Do you have a link to your official country ranking system?

Uh, ok. I still think it might have been a 'good idea' to 'weigh in' on '300 tons of fucking explosives.'

Again.... not their objective in the start of the war. Beyond that, you may want to wait for the facts to be found, before you start throwing them around.

Even your fellow sheeple acknowledge a steady reduction of freedoms, and rationalize it with national security. So far, I have not been oppressed, largely on account of me being a white male registered as 'unaffiliated.' Under Patriot, police can hold suspected terrorists without reason for an indefinite period of time. Warrants are no longer needed for suspected terrorists. In the event I decide to stick it out in this country and peacefully protest, I will most likely be jailed for large periods of time. But at least freedom will be on the march.

Ok, Riversong. The communes are out west.

And he won't push for a ban on abortion, either, on account of his strong sense of morality and recognition that people should be able to do what they want in a free country! Am I right, guys! I assume with the brain sucking tripe, you're referring to partial birth abortions, which are administered with a blow to the back of the neck, not a comical hospital brain-sucking apparatus. John Kerry was not against gay marriage on the state level, he was for leaving it up to the states. Which you'd know if you weren't too busy booing and throwing cheetos at the tv during his segments in the debates.

John Kerry said he was against gay marriage, for civil unions. Check your facts. And again, you're preaching to the choir. I've stated my stance on this umpteen times.

Clinton wasn't pushing to ruin the country.

Really. North Korea, China, nuclear targeting systems, turning down Bin Laden three times, and on and on and on. Conjecture has no place in a factual argument unless pefaced with an "In my opinion"

Bush himself said that the war on terror couldn't be won. It's more of a philosophy and a policy than an actual 'war.' If you think Iraq will be the end of the war on terror, you're officially adorable.

Who said Iraq would be the end, or should be the end. I'll need to go back over my comments. The end will come when the world takes a united stance against terrorist acts. And they will rise again. So, in that sense, I will concede an endless war, but a very necessary war.

Kerry only proposed rolling the tax cut back for those people, not taxing them further. Are you suggesting that small businesses didn't exist before Bush? As for the second part, nonsense.

Nonsense? I think not. Of course he proposed rolling it back... at first. Do the math Chojin. Total his benefits plans. He needed to raise taxes.

What, now you didn't listen to Bush during the debates, either? No Child Left Behind being thrown out there every 10 minutes and all? Our country's education system is pathetic. So, I can either blame all 50 states for this, or blame the federal government, which is actually in a position to try and fix it.

Bush's plan involves raising federal funding to states should they comply with accountability standards. States hold ultimate authority.

Whereas Bush wouldn't even try. You're right, it's way better to have a plan.

How and where has Bush not tried. Name the country.

I might want to get on that, before it goes out of print.

Good idea. You have at least 51 more months.

[AChimp]

Originally Posted by Ant10708

What civil liberties have we had stripped away from us from the Patriot Act? I know that it has the potential to be used agaisnt us but I don't think Bush has done this so far. Only one Muslim American is being held under the Patriot Act. The rest are all foriegners. I just don't see the abuse and the stripping away of civil liberities everyone talks about.

Riiight... so because they're not Americans, they're not entitled to the same rights as Americans.

Why didn't I think of that.

[HNICPantitude]

I have no idea what happened with the quote tags there - so good luck reading it

[LNSICPantitude]

John Kerry was not against gay marriage on the state level, he was for leaving it up to the states. Which you'd know if you weren't too busy booing and throwing cheetos at the tv during his segments in the debates.

Chojin - know your candidate. John Kerry was AGAINST gay marriage, at BOTH the federal and state level. He ONLY supported civil union and ONLY on a state by state basis.

[Emu]

Are you guys related or something?

[HNICPantitude]

Married - I'm the husband - she's the wife

[Anonymous]

[quote="HNICPantitude"]

Originally Posted by Chojin

I'll respond in reverse order to blow your mind.

I'll respond in a logical fashion to confuse you further.

Good one!

So you voted for Kerry so he could veto?

Yes.

Here's a trivia fact for you to take with you. Military assistance isn't the only support you can offer. The United States has more than enough military force to handle a country like Iraq on our own. As for support, it comes in many forms. Merely saying you are in favor immediately helps. Money further helps. Post war rebuilding helps. There are many aspects involved. Far too many to get into here, but you know that, so it's a fruitless argument.

And they've really helped. Really. A lot. Help. It's on the way.

You can go on criticizing countries like Spain, Poland, Bulgaria, Japan, Australia, etc. and then tell me in your next post how we are not more important than other countries.... only to begin your next post by labeling England as the "only other important country." Do you have a link to your official country ranking system?

I meant their importance to the war effort. Most of these countries are barely helping at all, or are barely able to. No large world military powers are in this except for us and England.

[quote]

Uh, ok. I still think it might have been a 'good idea' to 'weigh in' on '300 tons of fucking explosives.'

Again.... not their objective in the start of the war. Beyond that, you may want to wait for the facts to be found, before you start throwing them around.

WHAT? We went into Iraq to look for WMDs, and you don't think securing weapons was our objective in the start of the war? Is your frontal lobe caked in Dial soap?

John Kerry said he was against gay marriage, for civil unions. Check your facts. And again, you're preaching to the choir. I've stated my stance on this umpteen times.

Chojin - know your candidate. John Kerry was AGAINST gay marriage, at BOTH the federal and state level. He ONLY supported civil union and ONLY on a state by state basis.

John Kerry said he was against gay marriage, but opposed a constitutional amedment for it because he recognizes that not everyone shares his faith. He went on to state he'd leave it up to the states. 'Check your facts.'

Really. North Korea, China, nuclear targeting systems, turning down Bin Laden three times, and on and on and on. Conjecture has no place in a factual argument unless pefaced with an "In my opinion"

You'll notice no buidings had planes run into them while Clinton was in office, either, and that no Patriot acts were passed. "In my opinion" you are in denial.

Who said Iraq would be the end, or should be the end. I'll need to go back over my comments. The end will come when the world takes a united stance against terrorist acts. And they will rise again. So, in that sense, I will concede an endless war, but a very necessary war.

And I'll point you back to my original statement, because this war will have about as much resounding success as the war on drugs.

Nonsense? I think not. Of course he proposed rolling it back... at first. Do the math Chojin. Total his benefits plans. He needed to raise taxes.

How about you do the math for me, since we're both apparently way smarter than anyone in office and know for sure what will happen. Then let's secede from the union and create a new nation called 'Pantijin' wherein we, the smartest people in the world, govern a body of 4 cats.

Bush's plan involves raising federal funding to states should they comply with accountability standards. States hold ultimate authority.

And Bush's plan sucks. He's in a position to help education, and refuses to.

How and where has Bush not tried. Name the country.

Every one in the UN?

I'm going to go buy food and plan to flee the country like a rat from a sinking ship. So forgive me if I'm not here to rebutt you within 10 minutes.

[Ant10708]

Originally Posted by AChimp

Riiight... so because they're not Americans, they're not entitled to the same rights as Americans.

Why didn't I think of that.

I'm pretty sure foriegners especially the ones here illegally do not have the same civil liberities guarunteed to them by my government as a citizen of that government. Anyways Chojin is a citizen so I'm merely poiting out 'we' as in citizens so far havn't had our civil liberties stripped away or atleast from what I can tell.

Different people are entitled different rights. In America if your under the age of 18 you are not guarunteed the right to vote. Foriegners are also not guarunteed this right. Isn't voting a civil liberty?

[HNICPantitude]

[quote="HNICPantitude"]

Originally Posted by Chojin

I'll respond in reverse order to blow your mind.

I'll respond in a logical fashion to confuse you further.

Good one!

Sarcasm in response to sarcasm. See how that only further divides?

So you voted for Kerry so he could veto?

Yes.

Vote or Die! Young People Unite

Here's a trivia fact for you to take with you. Military assistance isn't the only support you can offer. The United States has more than enough military force to handle a country like Iraq on our own. As for support, it comes in many forms. Merely saying you are in favor immediately helps. Money further helps. Post war rebuilding helps. There are many aspects involved. Far too many to get into here, but you know that, so it's a fruitless argument.

And they've really helped. Really. A lot. Help. It's on the way.

They've helped all they could

You can go on criticizing countries like Spain, Poland, Bulgaria, Japan, Australia, etc. and then tell me in your next post how we are not more important than other countries.... only to begin your next post by labeling England as the "only other important country." Do you have a link to your official country ranking system?

I meant their importance to the war effort. Most of these countries are barely helping at all, or are barely able to. No large world military powers are in this except for us and England.

Again, support comes in many forms.

[quote]

Uh, ok. I still think it might have been a 'good idea' to 'weigh in' on '300 tons of fucking explosives.'

Again.... not their objective in the start of the war. Beyond that, you may want to wait for the facts to be found, before you start throwing them around.

WHAT? We went into Iraq to look for WMDs, and you don't think securing weapons was our objective in the start of the war? Is your frontal lobe caked in Dial soap?

Don't half quote me and leave out the substance. That's a tactic that will make sure you lose the next election too. The initial objective was to take control prior to the use of WMD in an effort to avoid life loss.

John Kerry said he was against gay marriage, for civil unions. Check your facts. And again, you're preaching to the choir. I've stated my stance on this umpteen times.

Chojin - know your candidate. John Kerry was AGAINST gay marriage, at BOTH the federal and state level. He ONLY supported civil union and ONLY on a state by state basis.

John Kerry said he was against gay marriage, but opposed a constitutional amedment for it because he recognizes that not everyone shares his faith. He went on to state he'd leave it up to the states. 'Check your facts.'

WHO ARE YOU ARGUING HERE??? WE KNOW WHAT HE SAID AND I HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID I AGREE

Really. North Korea, China, nuclear targeting systems, turning down Bin Laden three times, and on and on and on. Conjecture has no place in a factual argument unless pefaced with an "In my opinion"

You'll notice no buidings had planes run into them while Clinton was in office, either, and that no Patriot acts were passed. "In my opinion" you are in denial.

No, but the same terrorist organization drove an explosive filled van into the parking lot below. I guess you rank terrorist acts on completion percentage.

Who said Iraq would be the end, or should be the end. I'll need to go back over my comments. The end will come when the world takes a united stance against terrorist acts. And they will rise again. So, in that sense, I will concede an endless war, but a very necessary war.

And I'll point you back to my original statement, because this war will have about as much resounding success as the war on drugs.

Might as well just not fight it then, and go hide in a corner.

Nonsense? I think not. Of course he proposed rolling it back... at first. Do the math Chojin. Total his benefits plans. He needed to raise taxes.

How about you do the math for me, since we're both apparently way smarter than anyone in office and know for sure what will happen. Then let's secede from the union and create a new nation called 'Pantijin' wherein we, the smartest people in the world, govern a body of 4 cats.

So you believe this money could be procured without taxation?

Bush's plan involves raising federal funding to states should they comply with accountability standards. States hold ultimate authority.

And Bush's plan sucks. He's in a position to help education, and refuses to.

His plan is to help education. Where does it suck, and how is he refusing? Oh, by the way, what was John Kerry's plan again? I seemed to have missed that while I was throwing Cheeto's at the screen.

How and where has Bush not tried. Name the country.

Every one in the UN?

Germany, France and Russia are the only members nowadays, huh?

I'm going to go buy food and plan to flee the country like a rat from a sinking ship. So forgive me if I'm not here to rebutt you within 10 minutes.

Bye

[Emu]

That was a rather lacklustre reply...

[Bobo Adobo]

"Might as well just not fight it then, and go hide in a corner. "


Dosen't sound like a bad idea. Terroism has been around for thousands of years. You can't just "win" a war on terrorism. Its a tactic.

[HNICPantitude]

Im out -headed home for the evening to attend a Rich Whit Republican Tax Cut Party. After tha, we'll be praying to Jesus, kicking some kids and dogs, and blowing some generic shit up around the neighborhood before the midnight lynching. See you tomorrow.