[wMceqj7F]

Everything

was just peachy when Clinton was in office, suddenly Bush gets into office, 3,000 people die, gas prices go up 200%,

and we go to war, has anyone else noticed this?!

That's nonsense! The economic bubble was ready to

collapse and the terrorist attacks were already in motion before Bush was elected. Nothing like that happens

overnight, each event took years.

I do not agree with the war in Iraq and do fault Bush there. If we had to go

to war, it should have been against the real perpetrators, not over daddy's grudge

[cialviagra]

There's

an old saying that power corrupts. That isn't true. Power attracts the corrupt and the corruptable. Anybody seeking

to feed at the public trough should be suspected of being corrupt before ever starting out. Who in their right mind

would spend millions for a job that pays so little and has such high demands unless there was some other return for

their investment. The return doesn't have to be money but I think I would trust money more than egotistical

rewards. That type really scares me.

I really have to agree with that.

[cialviagra]

Know your facts

then vote for the person without regard to parties. I'm an independent... and I have refused to vote

for people because they sling way too much mud But the fact of the matter is..... this IS a two party

system..... you can vote for whoever you want, but if its not for a Dem or Rep.... its for a loosing side!!!

Hopefully we can throw out this deadend party system one day and vote for the person... NOT the party.

[Louthcoombutt]

I honestly

can't believe that they could even consider doing this!!!



http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/07/12/world/uselec

040712

We are Americans.... and we (as a people) will find a way to get to the polling stations

regardless of any terrorist attacks!!!! Postpone the elections because of an attack.... and we might as well call it

quits, because all that says is that the terrorists have already won!!!


I personally feel that Dub'ya

is looking for a way to steal this election... just as he did in 2000, but thats just my opinion.

What does

everyone else think?

(No lizard freaks need respond..b/c your numbers up )

Say what

you want about the Lizards...Icke was predicting this months ago!

Oh so you think Dubya might be trying to

steal the election...Hmmm...& the pentagon says Bush's military records were destroyed by misktake...hmmm...The

Patriot act is really an excuse for a police state...keep connecting the dots Gossamer you're almost there

bro...

[fenter1]

CANT WE ALL JUST GET

ALONG?!?!?!?

[wMceqj7F]

Look it up, the truth is that

the economy in general has always prospered under the republicans at the expense of the poorest. Under the

democrats, the richest have always been forced to carry the load for taking care of the poorest resulting in fewer

investment dollars. Neither way is right or fair or to the benefit of this country. Party politics are the worst

thing for good government. Independent thinking people voting their concience is what will do the most good.



People who babble the party line, whether democrat or republican always make me nervous, especially when it runs

counter to established facts. Let's face it, neither major party (and most of the minors too) is interested in

anything more than promoting their own agenda to their own benefit. Do yourselves a favor, stop repeating the crap

you hear, learn and accept the facts. The alternative news is no more or less accurate than the major sources, they

just have their own slant and agenda. If you take the time to study the various stands and consider how it will

effect the country you'll be better off. And I don't mean the short term, warm, fuzzy, feel good nonsense, think

long term. How is giving business free rein going to hurt or help us? How are hand outs to the poor going to help

us? How is increasing your tax burden or adding new laws or allowing prices to soar or shipping jobs overseas going

to help this country?

[cialviagra]

However, anybody

that believes that sad old fable about Bush stealing the last election really needs to go back and re-read the

facts. Well.... I'm not gonna argue with you..... the fact is, Dub'ya became the president under very

shady circumstances and will forever have an * next to his name in the record books.



You can't

blame EVERYTHING on Bush. The hell I can't!!! Every decision he's made has been to further his

daddy's GOP agenda.... regardless of the fact that none of those decisions have been in the best intrest of this

country.

Yeah, but what was all that junk about Saddam, did everyone just forget completely about

Osama, i haven't heard his name in months..... Saddam was just a ploy.... and you haven't heard

anything about Bin Laden because they don't like to put a spotlight on their worst failures.

Something is

seriously wrong in the way this counrty is being run... and with our choices in Nov..... well..... we're in deep

shit no matter how you look at it

[soajerwaradaY]

Well, 9/11 happened during

Bush II and now they are telling us it's likely to happen again, disrupting elections??? Of course the authorities

in power would want the election postponed as who in their right mind would vote for people who let not one but two

devestating attacks to occur.

[cialviagra]

The you

accept that our political system is in serious trouble the way it is run today?

Its total garbage.... and

if we can't find a way to fix it.... we're doomed to pointless elections with worthless candidates.

[moopogyOvenny]

Everything was just

peachy when Clinton was in office, suddenly Bush gets into office, 3,000 people die, gas prices go up 200%, and we

go to war, has anyone else noticed this?! There was a terrorist attack on the Twin Towers

back in '93 while Clinton was in office. It just didn't do the damage the terrorists had planned for. Perhaps

had these subhumans been dealt with then those 3,000 lives wouldn't have been lost in the first place. You

can't blame EVERYTHING on Bush.

[soajerwaradaY]

"If the Lakers can let Phil

Jackson go, we ought to be able to let Bush go! Time for a new approach! Give someone else a shot! To say this guy

is an ineffective diplomat, for example, is absolutely unquestionable. He is damaged goods. The world hates him.

Right or wrong, he is not going to talk his way back into the world's hearts any time soon, with his self-admitted

expressive disorder. There is no way Bush could do the job for four more years, even if he wasn't the moral

equivalent of Stalin. Even traditional Republican interests would be better served by Kerry at this point than by

Bush. For example, Kerry has a much, much better military mind. There is no way Bin Laden would still be at large if

Kerry had been in there."

My own opinion is that he should have been impeached shortly after 9/11. If no one

is willing to put the blame where the blame really belongs, then the boss must go.

[QYD8eQ8F]

Look it up,

the truth is that the economy in general has always prospered under the republicans at the expense of the poorest.

Under the democrats, the richest have always been forced to carry the load for taking care of the poorest resulting

in fewer investment dollars. Neither way is right or fair or to the benefit of this country. Party politics are the

worst thing for good government. Independent thinking people voting their concience is what will do the most good.



People who babble the party line, whether democrat or republican always make me nervous, especially when it runs

counter to established facts. Let's face it, neither major party (and most of the minors too) is interested in

anything more than promoting their own agenda to their own benefit. Do yourselves a favor, stop repeating the crap

you hear, learn and accept the facts. The alternative news is no more or less accurate than the major sources, they

just have their own slant and agenda. If you take the time to study the various stands and consider how it will

effect the country you'll be better off. And I don't mean the short term, warm, fuzzy, feel good nonsense, think

long term. How is giving business free rein going to hurt or help us? How are hand outs to the poor going to help

us? How is increasing your tax burden or adding new laws or allowing prices to soar or shipping jobs overseas going

to help this country?

I wish more people would pay attention to this. Good post.

[soajerwaradaY]

you might not be alone.

[wMceqj7F]

Normally I

have agreed with these kinds of statements, for the very reasons you state.

In this case, however, I disagree

very strongly. Did you see Fahrenheit? There is a huge difference between Kerry and Bush. Kerry and Colin Powell?

Maybe not. But Bush?!?

In either case, they are going to continue to drag this country down. In that

respect there is no difference. We cannot afford either of them or their parties.

In some cases, Bush has done

the right thing. The economy is improving but might have improved if he had visited antartica for three years.

There's no way of knowing. I am certain though that democratic policies would have had us into deep recession or

double digit inflation (Remember Jimmy Carter's economy?).

At the same time, I am utterly oppossed to the

majority of Bush's policies and him in general. To name a few idiotic policies: Stem Cell Research, Gay Marraige,

Iraq, The Patriot Act and the list goes on.

[fenter1]

Don't you guys

just love debating about politics!?

[fenter1]

Yeah, but what was all that

junk about Saddam, did everyone just forget completely about Osama, i haven't heard his name in months.....

[cialviagra]

Great post AKA....

Those were the facts that I was unable to locate yesterday, thanks for posting them

[DoctoBuntonTen]

anybody that

believes that sad old fable about Bush stealing the last election really needs to go back and re-read the facts. At

least one newspaper independently varified the results and Bush would have won anyway. He may be a contempable idiot

but he is legally the president.

Wrong.

There was never an official recount. A consortium of

8 newspaper gathered up all the uncounted ballots and commissioned the U of Chicago’s National Opinion Center to

examine them. Using six different schemes for interpreting questionable ballots the consortium found that, in the

words of the AP release, “A full, statewide recount of all undervotes and overvotes could have erased Bush's

537-vote victory and put Gore ahead by a tiny margin ranging from 42 to 171 votes, depending on how valid votes are

defined.”

Gore had requested a recount of just two counties (which he no doubt thought would vote in

his favor). But he eventually conceded, and dropped his request, when the Supreme Court decided that the recount was

“too disruptive”. What the newspapers reported was that HAD THOSE TWO COUNTIES BEEN RECOUNTED Bush would have still

won. I still have the Nov. 12, 2001 copy of the NYT (I followed this issue like a hawk). The headline reads "Study

of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote" and there’s a lot of verbiage about how

Gore would have still lost if he’d gotten HIS (two county) recount. But there’s also a little paragraph that

explains how he would have won with a total state wide recount.
Gore messed up. No doubt. It was his right,

and his duty, to demand a full statewide recount. Because of his spinelessness the people’s voice was not heard.


Add to this, the fact that there was much evidence of fraud — geared towards disenfranchising Black voters — which

the Senate REFUSED to investigate, despite pleas from elected representatives of the voters in question.
But,

Most Importantly, the Supreme Court does not have the authority to stop a recount or declare a winner in any

election (that’s what Election Commissions are for). Think back to 9th grade civics and the separation of powers

that makes our government so unique. The Supreme Court interprets LAWS that are written by elected representatives

of the people. It can’t directly interpret the will of the people. It can’t interpret when a recount’s gone on for

too long. And it sure can’t select presidents.
Even if the votes had come out in Bush’s favor — which it

turns out they didn’t — his “presidency” is still illegitimate. He was selected, not elected. The Supreme Court

“decision” is unprecedented, not just in US history, but in the history of democracy as we know it.
The

implications are staggering — if you admit that the 2000 elections were stolen you have to draw a whole series of

unpleasant conclusions about the press, government, courts, and everybody else that’s supposed to be safeguarding

our democracy — and that’s why our natural response is to want to believe that somehow nothing really bad happened.

That everybody (courts, government, press) did the right thing and our democracy has not been undermined. It’s too

mind boggling to think otherwise. But that’s the way it is nonetheless

[wMceqj7F]

My own

opinion is that he should have been impeached shortly after 9/11. If no one is willing to put the blame where the

blame really belongs, then the boss must go.

What does 9/11 have to do with Bush?

[soajerwaradaY]

so true, and it's about to

happen all over again.