Things you have to believe to support George Bush

[luckydog71]

….. Why not try a reasoned debate...I don't see you countering any of the points at the top of this thread, just some name-calling. How mature.

Westwoody, I would be happy to participate in a reasoned debate. However some of the posters on this thread and a few threads along the same topic are so filled with hate, anger and prejudice it is not possible. It would be like trying to have a reasoned debate with a member of the KKK.

A few of you have decided that all 300 million Americans are the same.
You have also decided that America has no right to be the aggressor even after
- 1993 bombing of the WTC
- The bombing of the Pam Am flight over Scotland
- The bombing of the Cole
- The bombing of our embassies
- Shooting our soldiers and dragging them through the streets of Somalia
- Capturing and beheading American journalists
- The distribution of Anthrax to our government leaders
- The destruction of WTC 1
- The destruction of WTC 2
- The attack on the pentagon
- The attempted attack of the White House or the Capitol building

Do you think America is under attack?

The rational person would say yes.
The irrational person would say yes, but the US deserved what they got and now they are not allowed defend themselves.

For 8 years under Clinton we tried the irrational approach. Our response to attacks was, if we just love them more they will leave us alone. That foreign policy did not work.

Now we are under the Bush doctrine, and it looks like the American voters will support Bush on Nov 2 and reject Kerry’s approach. Kerry’s approach is we must get a permission slip from France and Germany before we defend ourselves. That foreign policy won’t fly in the US.

The U.S Britain and now Russia have declared war on terrorists. We will go were ever to find them, and kill them.

For some reason a number of posters here do not think Iraq is part of the war on terror. They are wrong.

Bush identified the Axis of Evil, Iraq, Iran and North Korea. Sadam decided to call Bush’s bluff. He thought he was still playing hide the weenie with Clinton. Sadam made a big mistake and he paid for it.
A majority of Americans are now, mad as hell, and we are not going to take it any more. Any country, any terrorist group, or any country that enables and harbors a terrorists group and pose a threat to the US will be dealt with.

You can spew all the hateful messages you want. Or you can provide all of the sympathetic messages you want. , neither will have any effect on the US foreign policy.

If you want to do something positive encourage your government to take on the growing threat in North Korea or the advancing nuclear threat in Iran. We are busy right now in Afghanistan and Iraq, so try your approach to foreign policy and see if these countries will respond to 35 UN resolutions telling them they need to stop their nuclear weapons program.

Now let’s have a looked at the REASONABLE people on this thread that just want to love everyone (except Americans).

For having so much international influence, most Americans are shockingly ignorant of the rest of the world, ….

Brainwarmer.. I believe I am more traveled and more aware of the rest of the world than you are. I have been to every continent except Africa….I have had the chance to speak one on one with many people …you can accuse me of being shockingly ignorant, but you are wrong . What I have is a different opinion than you have.

9/11 happened. Therefore George Bush is not a totally incompetent a**hole.

Another moron heard from, not worthy of a response.

BTW, does no one remember those early (spelling corrected) frightening hours when Bush and Cheney were nowhere to be found. Nobody seemed to be in charge. Nobody was on tv or radio to reassure the people that armagedon was not imminent.

How does this clown get to look like a hero, when he was clearly hiding until the real heroes regained some measure of control?

A regurgitation of the left wing attacks, but not founded in fact.
The US went into a preplanned response to an attack.
1. Bush and Cheney were place in separate and secure locations.
2. Bush was rushed to Air Force 1 and was immediately air borne along with a full squad of fighter aircraft.
3. Cheney went to the war room
Given this was the first coordinated attack on US soil since Perl harbor I think the response was not bad. There were many mistakes made, the most glaring was the scrambled jets were sent in the wrong direction and if the heroes on the plane had not re-taken control it is likely the plane would have crashed into the White House. It would not have been shot down in time.

Why would someone do this to them? Well, you're seeing some of the reasons rights now. There will now be generations of folks in Iraq and Afghanistan who will hate them, and pass it down to future generations, while waiting for their own opportunity to pounce. You can't swim with the sharks and not expect to get bitten.

Lizard King I have seen you twisted logic on other posts. To net to out what you are saying, is America brought this on themselves.

I only ask that the US now receive the benefit of your twisted logic and the US is now the shark and I bet Sadam, and OBL are sorry they swimming with the US.

Hey, September 11, 2001 was a horrific tragedy and I feel deeply sorry for the American public.

LK, you can keep your pity and you can stand up there in your safe hiding place and say how sorry you are all you want. What I would really like for you to do is stay the fuck out of the way while we go kill those bastards.

Makhno
great post its amazing how most canadians can see this..but the americans are blind

Westwoody….I think you have come to a reasoned conclusion. I do not agree with you…but I think you are at least stating a reason thought in a reasonable manner. If you look at my earlier statement, I think you can understand why Americans are enraged and angry. The terrorists will not rest. We have only one course of action open and that is to track them down. It is not going to be easy and it is not going to be quick. We will make some mistakes along the way, but in the end the US will prevail.


QUOTE]Originally posted by HankQuinlan
Reality means we have to put up with the Bush administration? Time to light a joint and keep lighting 'em for another four years, then.

It is in our best interests up here NOT to have another four years of the loony right down there. When you are the world's only superpower, everybody has an interest in your affairs.

I agree you have an INTEREST in US affairs. The US has it’s future at stake.. So Hank, I like your approach, please light up your joint and live in your hallucinogenic world. It is going to take longer than 4 years though.

 

[Restless]

It would be like trying to have a reasoned debate with a member of the KKK.

A few of you have decided that all 300 million Americans are the same.

Now we are under the Bush doctrine, and it looks like the American voters will support Bush on Nov 2 and reject Kerry’s approach. Kerry’s approach is we must get a permission slip from France and Germany before we defend ourselves. That foreign policy won’t fly in the US.

Bush identified the Axis of Evil, Iraq, Iran and North Korea. group



A regurgitation of the left wing attacks, but not founded in fact.
The US went into a preplanned response to an attack.
1. Bush and Cheney were place in separate and secure locations.
2. Bush was rushed to Air Force 1 and was immediately air borne along with a full squad of fighter aircraft.
3. Cheney went to the war room
Given this was the first coordinated attack on US soil since Perl harbor I think the response was not bad. There were many mistakes made, the most glaring was the scrambled jets were sent in the wrong direction and if the heroes on the plane had not re-taken control it is likely the plane would have crashed into the White House. It would not have been shot down in time.

Please elaborate on your comparison to the KKK. I don't follow your reasoning, but would be happy to respond.

I deal with Americans on a daily basis and count many of them as personal friends. I believe that US citizens are as diverse as Canadians. Support for the "Bush Doctrine" seems to be split around 50/50.

Wondering where Bush and Cheney were, is no regurgitation of "left wing attacks". Merely my personal recollection of what I was thinking during those early hours. I still ask "why were they not at least issuing statements to reassure the public." The fact that they were not doesn't make them evil, merely poor leaders.

Actually it was a Canadian speech writer by the name of David Frum, who wrote the "Axis of Evil" speech. I must admit, it was well read by Mr. Bush.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of GWB. My personal opinion is that he will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents the US has ever "elected".

Only the passage of time will tell us which of us is correct.

 

[Makhno]

Westwoody, I would be happy to participate in a reasoned debate. However some of the posters on this thread and a few threads along the same topic are so filled with hate, anger and prejudice it is not possible. It would be like trying to have a reasoned debate with a member of the KKK.

Of course the United States has the right to defend itself. Unfortunately it would seem that the Bush administration have taken the terrorist threat (which is, unfortunately, very real) and turned it into an opportunity to erode American's longstanding civil liberties. When any act of dissent or questioning of Bush's policies is being treated as nothing short of treason, the US has gone too far.

A man is refused passage on a flight because he's carrying a controversial environmental book. A teacher, already in trouble for the heinous crime of showing his students the film Schindler's List, is interrogated 5 hours because of his anti-war views. These are not phantoms; these examples are real. What if a school forbids traditional Halloween costumes and are permitted to wear only patriotic fashions to school on Halloween. It happened recently in Topeka.

There's a man in San Francisco who happened to mention that he opposed president Bush and his policies. The FBI interrogated him at length over this expression of opinion, as they did others.

And how does the Administration view those that dare to point out the erosion of liberty in America today? This statement from Attorney General John Ashcroft says it all:

"To those who pit Americans against immigrants and citizens against noncitizens, to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies, and pause to America's friends. They encourage people of goodwill to remain silent in the face of evil."

It can't happen here, of course.

 

[hugedman]

My personal opinion is that he will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents the US has ever "elected".

Only the passage of time will tell us which of us is correct.

Restless,

You are absolutely right, except, Bush will not be just one of the worst presidents in the US history, but he actually will be the worst one in the US history.

 

[BabyBelle]

IMHO, Bush is a wanker

 

[westwoody]

Luckydog, I think you and your government are making the mistake of assuming that your "enemy" namely the Islamic militants, think the same way that you think, and they simply do not. All the border security, amber alerts and whatever are not going to stop the Jihad against the Crusaders. You could stop ten guys at the border with trunks full of explosives but if Al-Qaeda decides to blow something up there will be another ten at the border tomorrow.
What Bush is doing is creating MORE holy warriors who are more than happy to die for their cause, he is by no means eradicating them. We both know that the coalition area of control in Afghanistan only extends a kilometer outside Kabul. Not much has changed there. Iraq? How much of a handle does the coalition have on the situation there? Every single time a smart bomb goes astray and blows up a house you turn more Iraqis against you.
You have to look at it the way Muslims look at it. They don't see the war in Iraq as war on terror, they see it as a war between the West and Islam. That's it, the West...the infidels are trying to dominate the Muslim world just as they have been trying to do for a thousand years.
My personal view is that Saddam had been neutralised by the UN inspectors and the constant surveillance overhead. Leaving Saddam in place would have been the lesser of two evils, I very much doubt that he had a workable nuclear weapon. Yes, he had a program to develop one but it had come unravelled. Again the CIA fucked everything up and ruined the credibility of the inspectors by bugging all the UN monitoring devices. The inspectors were more hampered by the CIA than the Iraqis in this regard because after that happened the Iraqis just considered them all to be a bunch of CIA flunkies, and that is when all cooperation stopped.
The point is moot anyway, the USA is in there now and I can't see how they are going to get out.The longer they stay the more enemies they will make, and the bottom line is, they are more ready to die for their cause than most Americans and there are more of them than there are of you.
America has been around for 228 years. Islam has been around for about 1400 years. You are going to have to learn to live with them, they aren't going to go away.

 

[westwoody]

This goes both ways,okay everybody? Although I disagree with some American policies, I don't expect to convert them to my point of view by calling them wankers or assholes or whatever. You can hardly blame them for wanting to lash out at those they perceive as having harmed them, so they are going to be a little touchy. Yelling "George Bush is an asshole" a million times is NOT going to impress anyone or make him change his policies...if anything it will only make Americans feel more xenophobic and hostile.
So try and think about what you are saying and imagine if you were in their situation.

 

[luckydog71]

Please elaborate on your comparison to the KKK. I don't follow your reasoning, but would be happy to respond.

Sure the KKK were a hate driven organization and their members were filled with their hatred of blacks. It would have been impossible to even get an opposing point of view into a discussion.
There are posters on this thread who are so filled with their hatred of 300 million Americans it would be just as impossible to air an opposing point of view to theirs.

I deal with Americans on a daily basis and count many of them as personal friends. I believe that US citizens are as diverse as Canadians. Support for the "Bush Doctrine" seems to be split around 50/50.

I agree we are a divided nation

Wondering where Bush and Cheney were, is no regurgitation of "left wing attacks". Merely my personal recollection of what I was thinking during those early hours. I still ask "why were they not at least issuing statements to reassure the public." The fact that they were not doesn't make them evil, merely poor leaders.

In my opinion they were doing exactly what they should have been doing. At the time there were 4 confirmed high jacked airliners and literally 1000 more aircraft still in the sky. It is reasonable to react to the worst case scenario. Bush and Cheney need to be in separate locations and making life or death decisions. In fact during the early stages of the attack, Bush gave the order to shoot down the flight that eventually crashed into Pennsylvania. What an agonizing decision to make (and only he or Cheney could make it). In my opinion making decision on which US flagged commercial aircraft need to be brought down by military strikes is far more important and urgent than making an address to the nation that everything was OK. Especially when we did not know if everything was OK or not.

Actually it was a Canadian speech writer by the name of David Frum, who wrote the "Axis of Evil" speech. I must admit, it was well read by Mr. Bush.

I do not doubt the speech was written for Bush. It is his giving the speech that makes it a US position.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion of GWB.

I am an independent, I am not a registered Republican. I do not support all of Bush’s policy.

In our political process I get to decide which one of 2 viable candidates I want to be president. The single most important issue for me is which one of these two people do I want making the life a death decisions that will be made over the next 4 years. I will vote for Bush.

I do not care about Bush or Kerry’s Vietnam records. I do not care about Kerry’s speeches to congress when he returned from Vietnam. I do not even pay much attention to the discussion on each of their domestic policy records if it goes back more than a few years.

What I do care about is how they go about making decisions. It is impossible to tell what we will face in the next 4 years so we need a strategic decision maker. In my opinion that is Bush. Kerry is a very tactical decision maker and he makes up his mind on things without thinking them through. He said he would have immediately left the school children on learning of the first airplane into WTC. And done what? He didn’t say. Likely taken command from the professionals who were in charge. What I want is a president who will leave the details to those who know best and be ready to make those critical decisions that only a president can make.

I believe Kerry when he says he turned his boat around and went to the rescue of a fellow crew member. I believe Kerry severed honorably and earned his medals. However that is a tactical decision a boat commander needs to make. That has nothing to do with making presidential decisions.

Kerry said he would immediate enact every recommendation made by the 9/11 commission. He did not stop to consider the big picture and instead made an ill-informed tactical decision. I agree with most of the recommendations I heard about 9/11 (I did not read the report), but there are things we should not do.

Cutting out the political BS that surrounds the issue, Kerry did support the bill authorizing Bush to go into Iraq and then voted against the bill that provided the funding to equip the troops once they were there. I can not trust a person who would not provide the best possible equip available to our boys and girls who are willing to put their lives on the line on orders from the commander in chief.

I do not want Kerry to be president because of the way he makes his decisions. I will accept the mistakes Bush will make in domestic policy and even the mistakes he will make in executing the war. I do believe I will be safer (although not safe) with Bush.

My personal opinion is that he will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents the US has ever "elected".

Only the passage of time will tell us which of us is correct.

He will be judged by history, but the debate will rage on for years without any real conclusion. I just heard this yesterday and I am repeating it here without knowing if this is fact: apparently Abe Lincoln was judged to be one of the worst presidents by the people of his day. He divided a country and pitted brother against brother. He badly hurt our economy and at the end of his presidency he left a divided nation and those scares are still evident today. He is judged just the opposite by today’s Americans.

 

[luckydog71]

QUOTE]Originally posted by westwoody
Luckydog, I think you and your government are making the mistake of assuming that your "enemy" namely the Islamic militants, think the same way that you think, and they simply do not. All the border security, amber alerts and whatever are not going to stop the Jihad against the Crusaders. You could stop ten guys at the border with trunks full of explosives but if Al-Qaeda decides to blow something up there will be another ten at the border tomorrow. [/QUOTE]

Unfortunately you are correct we can not close our borders. Or even worst, place in camps loyal Americans because they are Islamic. During WWII Americans of Japanese decent were place in camps because it was feared a few many sabotage the war efforts. If we give up our civil liberies we will have defeated ourselves.


QUOTE]Originally posted by westwoody
What Bush is doing is creating MORE holy warriors who are more than happy to die for their cause, he is by no means eradicating them. We both know that the coalition area of control in Afghanistan only extends a kilometer outside Kabul. Not much has changed there. Iraq? How much of a handle does the coalition have on the situation there? Every single time a smart bomb goes astray and blows up a house you turn more Iraqis against you.
….
America has been around for 228 years. Islam has been around for about 1400 years. You are going to have to learn to live with them, they aren't going to go away. [/QUOTE]

I cut out most of your quote, but in general your statements are correct. Kerry made a huge tactical error in not define to me what he would do. He has not said one word about what his solution would be. A few days ago Bush said he did not think we could win the war on terror. He quickly issued a “clarification” . But I think he was speaking the truth. We can not win the war on terror as it is currently being fought. What we can do is take the fight off shore, try to hit them where they breed. That may reduce the threat in the short term. But Israel has been fighting this for years and they are no closer to peace.

I do not know the right answer, but I tell you if someone comes forward with a plan that I think will work, I will vote for that person. I don’t care if he or she is a Republican, a Democrat, from the Green Party, or an independent.

There are a few people that I am watching for 2008. Arnold needs a chance to prove himself, but so far he is not doing badly for a rookie politician. I like Colin Powell, he walks softly, but carries a big stick. There is a TN congressman , Harold Ford, that I like and he needs more experience but he is a plain talker and no nonsense.

 

[The Lizard King]

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Luckydog for substantiating pretty much every bad opinion or thought I've ever had about the U.S., their elected officials, and a segment (not 300 million) of their population. I guess sometimes people really do get what they deserve.

Why don't you seek retribution against the guys who are actually responsible and those associated with the attacks? Oh yeah, you can't find the main guy, the Saudis are off limits, and Iran will have to wait I guess.

It's funny, the U.S. didn't touch Saddam when he gassed all those people with the shit YOU sold him. He wouldn't have even been an issue if he didn't fuck with Kuwait, and their precious oil reserves, and continue to thumb his nose at the U.S. But Luckydog, you patriot, you would actually support spending a few hundred billion in Iraq, under false pretences, over putting it to areas such as affordable health care/insurance and prescription drugs, and job creation programs in your own country. You must work for Haliburton.

Yes, your country was attacked and, yes, the attackers should be held accountable. But your leader has done nothing but lie and, well, freeze for several minutes and proceed to read a children's book while your country was under attack. I guess he pre-planned all that! It wouldn't even surprise me if he knew it was coming, it certainly got him out of that Enron mess. What's a few sacrifices, eh. God certainly didn't bless America that day. Okay He blessed the ones he chose to let live through it.

Also being attacked isn't a license to go fuck with other countries you think at some point in time MAY be a problem. Where are the WMD? I can just see this on an episode of COPS. Some redneck cop shooting some innocent black guy and facing the camera saying, "well, shit, he would have done wrong sometime".

And I wish we could stay the fuck out of the way but even if the North Koreans have good aim and there's a southerly wind, it will unfortunately still affect us.

 

[westwoody]

Luckydog, you have forgotten that Arnold was not born in the US and is not eligible to be President. I too kind of like Colin Powell but who knows how he would handle domestic issues?
I kind of fear the terrorists have already won. The last time I crossed the border I was surrounded by a Border Patrol SWAT team. As their Lt. chatted amiably with me, with his holster unsnapped and his hand on his sidearm, a couple of his buddies stood behind me with M16's pointed AT me, not at "port arms" which would have been proper procedure. What if I had gone to pull my wallet out of my pocket and some nervous guy's finger twitched? I think they are rounding up paper-pushers and giving them a gun and a kevlar vest and getting them all gung-ho about defending America. What the hell were they expecting? I'm white, small, non-offensive looking, and I was following all their instructions, were they afraid I was a suicide bomber or what?
Since then I have decided that America has lost. They have torn up their own constitution--no more habeus corpus-- they have arbitrary detention, make that arbitrary SECRET detention, anything can happen in the name of national security. How can you arrest someone, not let them see a lawyer, and not tell them why they are being held, and not let anyone know you are holding them? It's easy, just say "It's a national Security matter".
Everything that men like Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Payne stood for has gone by the wayside. It's easy to say that these are difficult times and we need strong measures, but either everyone has rights or nobody has rights. A right cannot be revoked at the whim of the government.
Osama doesn't have to destroy America, he can stand back and watch it destroy itself.

 

[luckydog71]

There has been talk of a constitutional amendment so you do not have to be born in the US to be President. This sounds like a good idea to me, even if Arnold turns out not to be the right person.

In the days after 9/11 I know they dispatched National Guard to the border. I think the treatment you described is no longer used. However another attack and it would be re-instated.

I do not believe we can defeat terrorists with the current strategy. It has bought us some time. We have paid for that time with 1200 lives of our military. But this is just a short term fix. I am sure everyone believes the US will be hit again in the next year or two.

I do not know the answer, but I know the alternative is not leave them alone and they will leave you alone.

 

[westwoody]

No you cannot hope that they will leave you alone. This is not about 9/11 or a few embassies, this is a war of ideology, and it may very well continue for the next thousand years, or until the very last adversary dies. How long have Jews, Christians and Moslems been squabbling over the Temple of the Rock in Jerusalem?
There is a new book coming out by a CIA analyst that should be required reading for all Americans, I just read a review of it but I left it at the office. He tries to explain that new thinking is needed, the current strategy will not work, even if you drafted every single American citizen, you would never be able to control the Middle East militarily. Too many American policymakers, and I include Bush, Cheney, and most of all Rumsfeldt seem to think you can just bomb them into submission. Like I said above, this will be a war of attrition, and there's a lot more of them than there are of you.

 

[HankQuinlan]

I came across this quote recently and thought it fitting to Bush's America in 2004.

"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

-- Hermann Goering, at the Nuremberg trials

Lucky Dog: I honestly believe that the above quote sums up the exact situation in the US today, and that it accounts for the support Bush is receiving --- among Americans that would not otherwise give him any credibility at all. And a great many Americans also agree completely. And yes, absolutely we have a right to use any means of communication possible -- including this board -- in the hope that it influences a voter somewhere. Convincing others by argument is the only way that the direction of your country can be changed. As you noted, yours is a very divided country right now, and any attempt to shift the balance is valid.

The difference is that your country is very definitely under attack, and a serious response to that danger is most definitely required. The similarity is that they are using that situation for their own ends, and to implement their own, poorly reasoned policies as a response. War on the scale that is being currently waged is a tragedy on a vast scale --- it should be done only as an absolute last resort and not as a first plan by a group of insular bureaucrats who honestly believe that God is on their side. It should not be inflicted just for the sake of being seen as "doing something."

By the way, "hating" George Bush and his administration does not mean hating all Americans. And it is very difficult for those (like myself) who truly believe that Mr. Bush is not very intelligent to refer to him in civil terms. I personally despise those who cloak their actions of any sort in a cloak of godliness, and have no patience at all for it. It is always the mark of a scoundrel -- from my point of view, I am simply unable to see him as anything but a scoundrel, or possibly a simple tool of the scoundrels in actual power. And again, a large percentage of your countrymen agree. I am sure that if you questioned any of the posters you are referring to, they would readily admit that they are referring to present leadership, and are also venting their frustration on those supporters who they see as being hoodwinked.

 

[The Lizard King]

So as of midnight any wingnut, or TERRORIST for that matter, will be in a position to legally or easily obtain an assault rifle now that Bush is letting the assault weapon ban expire. Great idea George, make it easier for people to fuck you up in your own backyard! Right, how could I forget, fear equals votes. Why the hell would someone need an assault rifle? Hunting? Maybe hunting people. First they teach them to fly planes and now they potentially arm them. Somehow I smell a "blame Canada" coming.

Hopefully luckydog remains lucky. You never know, his neighbour who just lost his tech job that was outsourced to India, including the health insurance package for him and his family that came with it, might just lose it and go hunting for dogs. God bless George "Wingnut " Bush.

 

[HankQuinlan]

The ban on assault weapons was almost completely ineffective anyway. It had been so watered down that it was essentially a token, listing only a number of specific brands/models and has easily been gotten around by slightly modifying the weapons, or simply changing their names.

The gun lobby is a very powerful force in Washington, especially just prior to an election. And yes, it too plays on fear to get its way.

 

[rick hunter]

The distribution of Anthrax to our government leaders

I don't remember the terrorists taking responisiblity for that? I thought that was some nutcase within the US?

Bush identified the Axis of Evil, Iraq, Iran and North Korea. Sadam decided to call Bush’s bluff. He thought he was still playing hide the weenie with Clinton. Sadam made a big mistake and he paid for it.

Is this the same Saddam that the Reagan and Bush Sr were giving arms and training too while he was helping them fight the Irians? So he was good now's he bad? And where are those supposed WMD? If we should be taking on anybody it should be North Korea since they have declared they already have nukes and why is it only ok for the U.S. to have them and not anybody else. Please don't tell me it's for self defense cause you don't need whatever the ridicucolus amount the U.S. has to defend itself.

 

[Restless]

Excellent post Luckydog.

There are a lot of good talking points in it. I'd like to take some time to respond properly to them.

 

[Restless]

Is Homeland Security a success? :

I pray that it is. Whatever political stripe I may support, I never again want to feel as sick to my stomach as I did that morning 3 years ago.

 

[BushPilot]

Mike Hawk

So, it's John Kerry who has lied about his Vietnam War record? Did I fall asleep and wake up in Bizarro world?

Who do you think owns the "left-wing media"? Sadly, it's huge corporations who almost exclusively support the Republican party. Did you watch CNN or FoxNews while they cheered rah-rah, and U-S-A, while the multibillion dollar American military was killing innocent Iraqis while they celebrated family weddings?

You fail to pass the reality test when you characterize George Bush as intelligent. Make no mistake, if he didn't have Daddy's connections, he'd be taking your order down at the local Taco Bell.