UCBearcats1125 Wrote:Oddball would you rather the world just be communist so we dont have to worry about everyone else being different?...Answer the question with a yes or no not a maybe then explain your answer...I feel like a teacher telling a liberal what to do because he does not have enough common sense to do what is said in the first place.

Would you want the entire world to be fascist? Don't you think the world would be better if we could combine Mussolini and Hitler into one person and then just turn the keys over to them? Just a yes or no, please. :rolleyes:

MaumeeRocket Wrote:

Oddball Wrote:

MaumeeRocket Wrote:

Oddball Wrote:The Bush fortune was built on their association with the Saudis. They don't want Kerry because he won't send a plane around the country "rescuing" them should their associates perpetrate another terrorist attack against us.

I'm still baffled by the completely unfounded and unreasonable assertions of right-wingers that a war hero would be softer on defense than a deserter. That is probably the most irrational thing I have ever heard.

Its really simple look at his voting record, He could have been Napolean 30 years ago it dosent matter, its what he does now.

Look at his voting record, or at the commercials that the Chimp's boys put out about it? They are two totally different animals.

Dont worry i have it right here in front me, same animal, sorry.

Do you have the "record" put out by the RNC? The one where they count single votes multiple times to try and make their point? Or, do you have his actual voting record?

Btw, remember these?

"After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bomber. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper [MX] missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles. … The reductions I have approved will save us an additional $50 billion over the next five years. By 1997 we will have cut defense by 30 percent since I took office."
-George Bush

"Overall, since I've been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. … And now we're adding to that another $50 billion … of so-called peace dividend."
-Dick Cheney

"Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. … You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s—all great systems … but we have enough of them."
-Dick Cheney

You know why they were for those cuts? It was the post-Cold War and it made sense to scale back. Kerry also voted against the B-1 and Reagan's goofy Star Wars initiative. Many of the other claims about Kerry's voting record are greatly distorted. He, along with 16 other senators, including 5 Republicans, voted against 2, that's TWO appropriation bills that contained money for weapons systems. The RNC is extrapolating this into a claim that each system was a single vote from Kerry. Very dishonest. Then, if a bill was brought back for another vote, they did the exact same thing again, calling them individual votes. They also claim that he cut $1.5 million from the intelligence budget. Another gross misrepresentation. What he, and a majority of congress, voted for was an amendment that rescinded funding for a spy satellite that was never launched from a program that the NRO had cancelled.

Kerry voted against the B2 because it was created for the purpose of dropping nuclear weapons on Russia. The vote came after the Cold War had ended. Makes sense, no? It did to George Bush. He ended the program.

Kerry never opposed the F-117 as claimed by the RNC.

Kerry voted for limiting anti-satellite weapons provided the Russians also agreed to the same limits. The satellites that were potentially saved are the same ones that guide our missile systems today.

-In 1991, Kerry opposed an amendment to impose an arbitrary 2 percent cut in the military budget.
-In 1992, he opposed an amendment to cut Pentagon intelligence programs by $1 billion.
-In 1994, he voted against a motion to cut $30.5 billion from the defense budget over the next five years and to redistribute the money to programs for education and the disabled.
-Also in 1994, he opposed an amendment to postpone construction of a new aircraft carrier.
-In 1996, he opposed a motion to cut six F-18 jet fighters from the budget.
-In 1999, he voted against a motion to terminate the Trident II missile.

Amazingly, the F-18 and Trident II are among the weapons systems that the RNC claims Kerry opposed.

<a href='http://www.congressmerge.com/onlinedb/cgi-bin/membervotes.cgi?&lang=&member=MAJR&site=congressmerge&address=&city=&state=&zipcode=&plusfour=&fullvotes=1' target='_blank'>Voting Record</a>

And your specific problems with that record?

Oddball Wrote:And your specific problems with that record?

Ok, lets lets agree on something. You think his voting records supports the military, i dont, we wont agree on this. You wont change my mind about it and i cant change yours, so its probally useless debating his voting record.

You brought up his record. Just thought maybe you could cite your problems with it. I cited specific instances where he voted strong on defense, as well as very specific instances where the GOP is misrepresenting Kerry's record.

Oddball Wrote:You brought up his record. Just thought maybe you could cite your problems with it. I cited specific instances where he voted strong on defense, as well as very specific instances where the GOP is misrepresenting Kerry's record.

Damn you are going to make me quote stuff, i'll be back :roflol:

Some fun reading in the mean time
:) :)


Kerry Voted For Authorization To Use Force In Iraq. (H.J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237: Passed 77-23: R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kerry Voted Yea.)

In First Dem Debate, Kerry Strongly Supported President’s Action In Iraq. KERRY: “George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.

Oddball Wrote:

UCBearcats1125 Wrote:Oddball would you rather the world just be communist so we dont have to worry about everyone else being different?...Answer the question with a yes or no not a maybe then explain your answer...I feel like a teacher telling a liberal what to do because he does not have enough common sense to do what is said in the first place.

Would you want the entire world to be fascist? Don't you think the world would be better if we could combine Mussolini and Hitler into one person and then just turn the keys over to them? Just a yes or no, please. :rolleyes:

I knew you would avoid the question like most if not all democracks do...The democracks are the ones that would want to combine Mussolini and Hitler...they are the ones that want everone the same...Does everyone now see how "wishy washy" democracks are?

UCBearcats1125 Wrote:

Oddball Wrote:

UCBearcats1125 Wrote:Oddball would you rather the world just be communist so we dont have to worry about everyone else being different?...Answer the question with a yes or no not a maybe then explain your answer...I feel like a teacher telling a liberal what to do because he does not have enough common sense to do what is said in the first place.

Would you want the entire world to be fascist? Don't you think the world would be better if we could combine Mussolini and Hitler into one person and then just turn the keys over to them? Just a yes or no, please. :rolleyes:

I knew you would avoid the question like most if not all democracks do...The democracks are the ones that would want to combine Mussolini and Hitler...they are the ones that want everone the same...Does everyone now see how "wishy washy" democracks are?

You, in your infinite capacity to simplify and be led by the nose with propoganda, decided to paint anyone with views to the left of your own with the label "communist". If communism is the "logical" extension of being a progressive, then it follows that anyone on the right is a fascist. By extension, anyone on the neo-con tip of the right wing must be extremely fascist. You show your complete ignorance by trying to place Hitler and Mussolini on the left.

Maumee:

On the Iraq vote - The President used falsified evidence to present his case, and promised to seek UN approval and build a coalition. Any sensible person who voted yes under these circumstances should be on the other side of the aisle now that we know that the WMD's don't exist and that willfull deception occurred.

Marriage Tax - Do you know what that bill was actually about that Kerry voted against? The marriage tax issue was merely a rider tacked on to it. For Kerry to vote for it would have meant voting for something not so nice that the Pugs wanted to slide past the American people.

Patriot Act - Again, in the wake of 9/11 a lot of things were done in reaction that, in retrospect, were too hasty. This is understandable and excusable. In addition, while legislators should have anticipated that the thugs running the show would abuse these powers, after 9/11 there was a lot of (mistaken) bi-partisan good will towards the current administration. I don't see how anyone could vote for someone who didn't change their mind regarding this anti-constitutional act.

Gay Marriage - Kerry has been consistently against allowing gays to marry, per se. Supporting a constitutional ban on these marriages, particularly without a provision for civil unions, does not necessarily follow. As for the alleged "flip-flop", saying "I’ll have to see what language there is

Oddball Wrote:

UCBearcats1125 Wrote:

Oddball Wrote:

UCBearcats1125 Wrote:Oddball would you rather the world just be communist so we dont have to worry about everyone else being different?...Answer the question with a yes or no not a maybe then explain your answer...I feel like a teacher telling a liberal what to do because he does not have enough common sense to do what is said in the first place.

Would you want the entire world to be fascist? Don't you think the world would be better if we could combine Mussolini and Hitler into one person and then just turn the keys over to them? Just a yes or no, please. :rolleyes:

I knew you would avoid the question like most if not all democracks do...The democracks are the ones that would want to combine Mussolini and Hitler...they are the ones that want everone the same...Does everyone now see how "wishy washy" democracks are?

You, in your infinite capacity to simplify and be led by the nose with propoganda, decided to paint anyone with views to the left of your own with the label "communist". If communism is the "logical" extension of being a progressive, then it follows that anyone on the right is a fascist. By extension, anyone on the neo-con tip of the right wing must be extremely fascist. You show your complete ignorance by trying to place Hitler and Mussolini on the left.

progressive? Do you call aborition progressive? If the Bush administration was not in power during the 9-11 attacks I am almost positive that there would be more terrorists attacks in america...Liberals want everything to come to them...They dont want to take care of foreign affairs...Prove to me that there is global warming also...And why did Al Gore speak about global warming in New York on one of the coldest days of that year?

<a href='http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36624' target='_blank'>GORE in New york</a>

UCBearcats1125 Wrote:progressive? Do you call aborition progressive? If the Bush administration was not in power during the 9-11 attacks I am almost positive that there would be more terrorists attacks in america...Liberals want everything to come to them...They dont want to take care of foreign affairs...Prove to me that there is global warming also...And why did Al Gore speak about global warming in New York on one of the coldest days of that year?

<a href='http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36624' target='_blank'>GORE in New york</a>

Thanks! Well, we're all dumber for having read that. :rolleyes:

It's spelled "abortion", and that genie is out of the bottle. Maybe you should concern yourself with the lives of those who are already born, and how this administration affects them.

Your post 9/11 opinion is silly and based on absolutely nothing but talk radio type babble, as is your drivel about liberals. What are you 12?

My guess is that you could step out of your house into 150 degree temps in January and still deny global warming exists. The evidence is there if you choose to get your science from scientists instead of from Dr. Rush. Did your anecdote about it being cold when Gore spoke have a point?

<a href='http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/NewsandEventsScienceandPolicyNews.html' target='_blank'>http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming....PolicyNews.html</a>

<a href='http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=572&ncid=572&e=1&u=/nm/20040416/lf_nm/environment_warming_dc_3' target='_blank'>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...nt_warming_dc_3</a>

<a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1225064.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1225064.stm</a>

<a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1068907.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1068907.stm</a>

<a href='http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/climate/climate.jsp?id=ns99994310' target='_blank'>http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/clim...p?id=ns99994310</a>

There are fewer and fewer scientists who argue against global warming. The only reasonable debate left is the causes and how much each cause is responsible.

Can you give me a non-liberal source?

Its just ironic that Gore speaks on an extreemly cold day trying to tell us that the world is getting warmer...During the Ice Age was it called Global Cooling? Earth's temperature is a cycle but right now it is going up; big deal it will go back down after we all die. And arn't most of these scientist you "cite" liberal?

Okay, you're right...unless a scientist uses the word "ditto" a few times in his report, he must be a liberal, and therefore lying to embarrass Bush. :roflol:

Oddball Wrote:Okay, you're right...unless a scientist uses the word "ditto" a few times in his report, he must be a liberal, and therefore lying to embarrass Bush. :roflol:

Source?

Look up, foolio. Those are stories reporting the science you disagree with. It isn't science's fault that you cling to flat earth views.

Oddball Wrote:Look up, foolio. Those are stories reporting the science you disagree with. It isn't science's fault that you cling to flat earth views.

Ok with a background with computer I prob will understand this better than you...These scientists make these programs for computers that they put data through and it will "predict" the future and most even make graphs...but these liberal scientists put in these biased "numbers" to make it look like global warming is a major issue so they can get money to help "fix" this "problem."

I am talking about the light grey line...

Look at that wild prediction it is going striaght up...Thats not even possible. Those are the biased numbers that are used to make that "prediction".

Look at 150 thousand years ago it goes up pretty quickly...Now look at about 115 thousand years ago. It goes back to where it was...

Now look right to the left of the zero...It is ast its lowest point since about 55 thousand years ago