my two cents (the beginning)

[dbebesi]

if people took the time to really reseach the the two choices in this election, rather than listen to what they want to hear, or doing the cool thing and hating bush, people would realize what, many already do.

for one, people bash bush, for ruining our economy. and all i have to say about that is 9/11. do you think any president would have a thriving economy if they were in office when the two main finacial centers of the world were destroyed. and the economy is becoming increasingly stronger, amazingly. in fairness, i don't know what kerry would have done economically different, b/c i've never heard him comment on it.

as far as the war is considered, bush took a position, and he's sticking solid to it. we've barely cracked the surface in iraq. kerry want's us out, asap. what kerry knows, but it's never talked about, is that france and germany, publically say "they will not go into iraq if kerry or bush is elected" so how is this part of his plan. and first it's 6 months and were out, then a year, then four years, then oh, i'd never of gone in the first place. that's funny cause kerry said 1 year ago "anyone who thinks we should not be in iraq is not fit for president" OOPS. and another point is that while bush is being critized for not have a strong enought collalition. lets look at the facts... the US has 31 allies in the war in iraq. how many allies where in WW2? 7 yes SEVEN. i think bush has done a hell of a job there. plus after WW2, we still had troops stationed in germany and japan... ooh wait we STILL HAVE TROOPS THERE. but no one complains about that. theres still troops in korea, vietnam, cuba. you name it, we're still there. we will be in iraq for a long time to come. the left uses this as a scare tactic, a very effective one. as far as "we should be in afganistan, not iraq". first of all, we are in afganistan, in strong numbers. but more importantly, afganistan was not run by a evil dictator. some people think we sould have left saddam alone. "he had nothing to do with 9/11" "he has nothing to do with terrism".... well well, MASS GENICIDE, and funding thousands upon thousands of suicide bombers IS terrism, and a form or wmd (imo). i could go on and on.

ok, health care. kerry wants a national health care program. here's the problem with that. and for example purposes, i'm using canada's failing health care system. in canada, there is a salary cap on doctors. somthing there has to be to keep the health care in budget. here's the problem. doctors all over canada are hitting there salary cap in sept. oct. nov., and packing up and going on vacation. you get sick in late december in canada, the average canadian is driving over 100 miles to get to a family practictioner. that is a HUGE problem. also with a salary cap, why would a doctor have any incentive to buy new equipment, or go into special fields. hospitals, are not buying up to date equipment, and are failing in large amounts in customer satisfaction. if you don't believe me... reseach it, it's true. plus, what happens to your medical research companies. they can no longer accept privately funded finainces, and wall street is aready talking about the devestation it would have on the hundred of medical related stocks. plus all the increased wait for surgury, and treatments. bush wants to have a tax free medical savings fund for americans... the only problem i have with that, is that most americans can't properly manage there money in the first place. but more importantly bush wants to stop these damn trial lawyers from running up our insurance prices from pointless malpractive suits. most in which the patient is fully aware of the danger involved in whatever the treatment they may be recieving. it disgusts me. (note: i am note saying ALL med mal treatment cases are wrong, just the thriviless ones). ALSO... people are not turned away from treatment if they can't afford it. do people not realize that.

i'm personally sick of poor people who do not apply themselves in life, living off the government, and getting all the handouts they can get. it's funny, cause i live in ohio, one of the highest job loss/unemployment states. and all people do is bitch about it, and how it's bush's fault. but i see hiring signs ALL OVER, in good places, and the paper i loaded with job listings. but it's bush's fault they can't get and lost employment. NO, first of all, it's there own damn fault they don't get off there ass and get a job (at least something, there are many good jobs out there, but some special area's are hurting around here such as social services, teaching jobs. far from bush's fault, as many ohioians see it. they forget we have this worthless governer bob taft (a republican) ) But all the manufacturing jobs in ohio are all do to buisnesses in ohio, that are smart enough to gain a buck buy getting out of here. i don't agree with it, but that's how greedy corps work (rep. and dem.) Kerry comes to my state and spews crap about how he's going to create SOOOO many jobs here in ohio. BUT last time i checked, the president has ABSOLUTELY NO CONTROL over the job situiation here in ohio. the governor has control over the tax rates, and tax breaks to big buisness.

ok, i'm going to stop now, b/c i can really keep going, but no one would read it all.


p.s. cool this was my 500th post. yah for me

[2strokebloke]

bush took a position, and he's sticking solid to it.

Sometimes when you're wrong it's better to admit to it, rather than pretend you actually know what you're doing. Sometimes however, you're just too stupid to realize that you're wrong though.

it's funny, cause i live in ohio

That is funny. I pitty you.

You're right in that the president has little impact on the economy, I don't blame GWB for "ruining" the economy, it's not his fault - and just as surely, I don't give him any credit for "reviving" the economy either.
We might as well have democrats blaiming bush for rainy days, and republicans praising him for making the sun rise every morning.

[dbebesi]

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

and just as surely, I don't give him any credit for "reviving" the economy.

so explain to me how the tax refunds and extremely low interest rates didn't help the economy, please.

[2strokebloke]

so explain to me how the tax refunds and extremely low interest rates didn't help the economy, please.

Your the one defending it, you explain it. I'll say this though, the unemployment rates have only risen minimally (even despite the new form of measuring unemployment, which counts more people as "employed" than the old system of a couple years ago did) since a couple of years ago, and we're still not where we were five years ago.
I'm still not giving him credit for something he can only effect so very minimally (if really, all).
Also, some more issues:

we still had troops stationed in germany and japan... ooh wait we STILL HAVE TROOPS THERE. but no one complains about that.

Actually alot of people complain, but you've never heard them because you don't live in Japan, etc.

some people think we sould have left saddam alone. "he had nothing to do with 9/11" "he has nothing to do with terrism".... well well, MASS GENICIDE, and funding thousands upon thousands of suicide bombers IS terrism, and a form or wmd (imo).

You do know that our good communist buddy China kills more people every year than Saddam did (per year) for most (but not all) of his years in power. If you're going to talk about "evil dictators" as a valid reason to destroy a country's infrastucture, there are several "leaders" who we'd be better off without than Saddam. so why was Saddam so important? Probably just the good ol' Bush Vs. Hussein family feud (like father like son) - that's a good reason to waste several billion dollars of tax payers money - right? I mean since that's much better than handing it to jobless people in AMERICA.

[dbebesi]

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

Your the one defending it, you explain it. I'll say this though, the unemployment rates have only risen minimally (even despite the new form of measuring unemployment, which counts more people as "employed" than the old system of a couple years ago did) since a couple of years ago, and we're still not where we were five years ago.
I'm still not giving him credit for something he can only effect so very minimally (if really, all).

ok, so i gain that you cannot answer that. lets try again shall we. EXPLAIN TO ME how the tax refunds and low interest rates were not responsible for the economic bounce. instead of telling me about unemployment rates.

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

Actually alot of people complain, but you've never heard them because you don't live in Japan, etc.

i think you knew i was reffering to americans.

Originally Posted by 2strokebloke

You do know that our good communist buddy China kills more people every year than Saddam did for most of his years in power. If you're going to talk about "evil dictators" as a valid reason to destroy a country's infrastucture, there are several "leaders" who we'd be better off without than Saddam. so why was Saddam so important? Probably just the good ol' Bush Vs. Hussein family feud (like father like son) - that's a good reason to waste several billion dollars of tax payers money - right? I mean since that's much better than handing it to jobless people in AMERICA.

oh but on the contrary, i view china as a very large threat, and i firmly believe they will be delt with in due time. you are so quick to assume what i think, i find that interesting.

[2strokebloke]

you are so quick to assume what i think, i find that interesting.

No, what I find interesting is that you don't capitalize the letter "I" when refering to yourself... Secondly, I did not try to put words in your mouth or tell you what you're thinking, you were telling us that you think Saddam was worthwhile, I don't and I pointed out that there are worse dictators around these days than Saddam.

i think you knew i was reffering to americans.

God forbid that the people who actually inhabit those countries hold any opinions.... And no I didn't know that you were referring to "only americans" because you never stated that, and because we're dealing with world politics here, and the United States of America isn't the only country on the face of the planet.

[carrrnuttt]

dbebesi: I find it ironic that you are serious enough about these issues, that you wrote 5, full paragraphs regarding it - yet can't spell the subjects...

• terrism - terrorism
• genicide - genocide

Now, I'm not trying to be Mr. English professor in here, but if you have actually read-up on these subjects at some point, and posted this thread with a well-founded base of knowledge, I would assume that you would have read at least the proper spelling of the two words above.

So I would just have to assume that you, in fact, DON'T - have a base of proper knowledge to go off of. Especially since you're in here talking about how Saddam funded suicide bombers.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

people think we sould have left saddam alone. "he had nothing to do with 9/11" "he has nothing to do with terrism".... well well, MASS GENICIDE, and funding thousands upon thousands of suicide bombers IS terrism, and a form or wmd (imo). i could go on and on.

Hell, even the administration has never claimed that.

Read up, and come back with something a bit more...informed.

[dbebesi]

ok, both of you insult my spelling. how childish. it was a quickly typed post, i could give a shit.

and yes there is FACT, that saddam funded suicide bombers. PROVE ME WRONG. i am challenging you to do someting more constuctive than not focusing on anything i said. twisting what both of you knew i meant ( i was talking about the US election for crying out loud, not world politics), and insulting my intelligence.

and 2strokebloke, you go and say that you're not putting words in my mouth, but then two sentences later you twist every thing that was blattenly obvious in my statement COMPLETELY about the US election. if you couldn't gather that. well (i refrain from comment)

[2strokebloke]

Actually, mine was a criticism of grammar, not spelling.

but then two sentences later you twist every thing that was blattenly obvious in my statement COMPLETELY about the US election. if you couldn't gather that.

i think bush has done a hell of a job there. plus after WW2, we still had troops stationed in germany and japan... ooh wait we STILL HAVE TROOPS THERE. but no one complains about that.

I see nothing in there about the election, even if there was, how could me missunderstanding you be considered as me putting words in your mouth?

[driftu]

Originally Posted by dbebesi

ok, so i gain that you cannot answer that. lets try again shall we. EXPLAIN TO ME how the tax refunds and low interest rates were not responsible for the economic bounce. instead of telling me about unemployment rates.

so when it is bad it isn't his fault. but when it is good he should get all the praise? hmmm how did you start this thread again? oh yeah like this.

if people took the time to really reseach the the two choices in this election, rather than listen to what they want to hear

Originally Posted by dbebesi

i think you knew i was reffering to americans.

I think you need to stop thinking in small terms. it's a global problem when a war breaks out. and when the agressor has an election it becomes global business.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

oh but on the contrary, i view china as a very large threat, and i firmly believe they will be delt with in due time. you are so quick to assume what i think, i find that interesting.

just like osama? the guy who attacked america and sent 3000 to their deaths. you remember him right?

[lazysmurff]

just a few nit picky details you might want to iron out before you start making such outrageuous claims.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

if people took the time to really reseach the the two choices in this election, rather than listen to what they want to hear, or doing the cool thing and hating bush, people would realize what, many already do.

this goes for you as well. youll see what i mean.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

for one, people bash bush, for ruining our economy. and all i have to say about that is 9/11. do you think any president would have a thriving economy if they were in office when the two main finacial centers of the world were destroyed. and the economy is becoming increasingly stronger, amazingly.

when the economoy improves like it is (showing higher figures but not exactly a higher employment rate) it only means the rich are getting richer. hardly an apt measure of the economic growth of a country.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

as far as the war is considered, bush took a position, and he's sticking solid to it.

that doesnt make it right. a smart president would know when to admit his mistake and get on with it.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

kerry want's us out, asap.

wrong, do yourself a favor and actually research things before you say things like this.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

and another point is that while bush is being critized for not have a strong enought collalition. lets look at the facts... the US has 31 allies in the war in iraq. how many allies where in WW2? 7 yes SEVEN.

i'll get thirty seven kids, all of them 5', maybe a hundred pounds, if im lucky, and i'll put them all on crutches. you get 7 professional rugby players...whose gonna win? more importantly, did you catch the point i was trying to make?

Originally Posted by dbebesi

as far as "we should be in afganistan, not iraq". first of all, we are in afganistan, in strong numbers. but more importantly, afganistan was not run by a evil dictator.

dear god son. yes, we have a few troops in afganistan. but they arent doing a shit bit of good. and no afganistan wasnt run by an evil dictator, just the taliban. you know, the government front of alqueda, the guys that blew up the WTC. nothing at all like a dictator that hadnt attacked another country in 12 years.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

ok, health care

while i cant comment on kerry or bush's health care plans, as i havent exactly researched them enough, ill remind you that drug companies represent one of the most powerful lobbying groups in america. regardless of who wins, you have nothing to worry about as far as health care going the way of canada.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

NO, first of all, it's there own damn fault they don't get off there ass and get a job (at least something, there are many good jobs out there

for the thousandth time, there are more people in america than there are jobs. the idea that everyone who wants a job can get one is a myth. its time you and everyone else in america realized that. how we deal with the poor and jobless, however, is an entirely different matter.

Originally Posted by dbebesi

p.s. cool this was my 500th post. yah for me

conflatulations.

please, if your going to demand that people do research, do your own first.

[dbebesi]

oh my lord you people are imposible. i don't know why i even bother. forget it. i don't see the flabbering crap you all see. and REBUTTLE the facts, don't tell me to look into them. my facts are true. prove me wrong. noneof you have yet. you just defend yourselfves with retarded liberal talking points. forget it, it's a waste of my time. the next post you'll see from me in this section of the forum, is me bragging when W wins. and you libs will be having a bitch fest for four more years.

[driftu]

Originally Posted by dbebesi

oh my lord you people are imposible. i don't know why i even bother. forget it. i don't see the flabbering crap you all see. and REBUTTLE the facts, don't tell me to look into them. my facts are true. prove me wrong. noneof you have yet. you just defend yourselfves with retarded liberal talking points. forget it, it's a waste of my time. the next post you'll see from me in this section of the forum, is me bragging when W wins. and you libs will be having a bitch fest for four more years.

so if bush doesn't get re-elected you won't comeback at all?

BTW you haven't proved anything either. you just spit out dribble and expect us to believe it with no facts to back it.

[Oldengineer]

dbebesi:

What do you expect? With their "one trick" donkey sinking in the polls in most of the battleground states, they're getting frantic. Even here in West Virginia, with a vast Democratic majority, most folks can't stomach this guy. The local veterans have even mobilized for Bush.

Anybody notice that, after the Prime Minister of Iraq spoke to both houses of Congress, all Kerry could do was urinate on the whole affair. Apparently he thinks any form of praise and mention of success for American efforts is bad. My hope is, that Kerry's latest round of "flip-flopping" has alienated some more of his base.

Regards:
Oldengineer

[carrrnuttt]

Originally Posted by dbebesi

and yes there is FACT, that saddam funded suicide bombers. PROVE ME WRONG. i am challenging you to do someting more constuctive than not focusing on anything i said.

My rebuttal to that above is this: you cannot prove a negative. Since my stance on the issue you speak of is in the negative (Saddam did not fund suicide bombers), it's kinda hard to do that no? You're either too dumb to know this, or so smart, that you are trying to use this fact to your advantage. Guess where I think you stand on that.

No...the burden is on YOU, to prove the positive of the issue.

BTW, Desert Storm vet here, and you must have had better intelligence than the Air Force had, considering with my old MOS, I worked primarily in the command tents, and/or dealt with higher brass, and I never heard of any such plans/actions by Saddam.