More Stupid Democrat Criticisms

Originally posted by A4Blk98SS
You guys are the most paranoid bunch of people I've ever seen. Are you really afraid that we're going to get attacked by terrorists all the time? Seriously, I think Bush has done almost nothing to make us "safer." If anything, he's made us more of a target. He took out Saddam, but Saddam was not a threat to us. He had no weapons that had the range to hit us, and were any of you really worried about Iraq attacking us? Bush is completely fiscally irresponsible, his border policy is a joke, he's alienated almost every other country on the planet, and the oil companies are raping us more and more everyday. Of course Bush wouldn't do anything about that because they're all his friends....... I'm pretty much in the middle politically, but I can't stand another day of Bush. If I had my way we'd put an electric fence on the border, stay out of other countries conflicts, and worry about fixing our country instead of spending 200 billion dollars in Iraq. Bush is a disappointment on every level, if he's running "on his record," he's in trouble because he hasn't done ANYTHING. Why can't the Republicans run a real candidate, I mean I didn't love Bob Dole, but he's miles ahead of Bush. In short, I hope gas hits $3 dollars a gallon, because if anything will sink Bush, that'll be it. WORST PRESIDENT EVER!
Click to expand...
Paranoid?... Son, this IS reality. Being in law-enforcement, I get many status updates on national security from the FBI, Dept. of Homeland Security and Michigan State Police. Let me assure you, the enemy IS around us, among us, and trying to sneak stuff into this country. Ever hear of this??...NO. The FBI, Homeland Security Dept and other agencies are on top of these matters. Do you think it's coincidence we haven't had another homeland attack since 9/11? Anti-terrorist activities are going on behind the scenes but because our strategy and tactics aren't broadcast for YOU to hear and read about, you automatically assume Bush isn't doing squat. You sir are totally clueless.

His border policy is a joke, as were previous administrations. This is a political hot potato and I wish someone had the balls to seal our southern border.

Personally, I don't care if we alienate every country on the planet. As long as American's don't get attacked and/or murdered I could care less if France "feels good" about us.

You complain about the oil prices?... Well, it must destroy the notion we went to war with Iraq for their oil huh. How about putting blame on the oil prices where it's due, with OPEC. Ever hear of them? They're cutting production and since the bleeding heart liberals of this country scream bloody murder about domestic oil drilling (Anwar, Alaska) we are completely at the mercy of OPEC. Open up Anwar and other domestic sources of oil and decrease our dependency on OPEC and they loosen their grip on us.

Is any of this sinking in? Am I making sense? C'mon.....wake up. :mad:
 
I'm not trying to cause a stir here. All I am trying to say is this. Alot of people on this thread are complaining about the democrats bashing the president. Yet in the very same thread are bashing the democrats and the liberal media and Kerry. Let's not be hypocritical.

Yes, as Americans we are allowed to disagree. I believe that's what I stated at the end of my post. I agree with you on that Mr. Dicarlo. I bet there's alot we would agree upon.

The electoral college is the law and I accept it. No argument from me. That still does not change the fact that more people in this country voted for Gore.

I agree that small town America has different views from the big city folks. That still does not change the fact that more people in this country voted for Gore.

Yes President Bush is not responsible for what I do with my money. I am. I accept that. I'll make due no matter who's the President.
I was just stating an observation. A thought as to how I would vote. I said Kerry might not be any better than Bush. Take a breath and read my thread . Relax. You think better in an eased state of mind rather than an angry state of mind.

Please, guys don't get worked up. I'm just stating some observations. You guys are getting a little too worked up. I'm not bashing anyone. I've got my views and I'm not gonna push them on you. Your views are your views, I respect that. I think we all need to go jump in our turbo buicks and release -- put the smile back on our faces. We can agree on that right?
 
Well stated soman22. I see you're level headed enough to see through some of the fog, to put blame where it is (and isn't) due. So many people like to jump on the President's back for things that are completely out of his control. This is explained by a lack of one's understanding of our government structure and the powers of the Office of President vs. the powers of Congress.

Let me provide one example. Kerry is championing the cause against outsourcing of labor to other countries. He places blame squarely at Bush's feet. How's that? Congress dictates tax policy/law, passes laws regulating outsourcing etc...not Bush. NAFTA was passed when and signed by whom? I'd like to know exactly how John Kerry plans on stopping companies from outsourcing. He can't. It's not within the powers of the President to do so.

I didn't care for Clinton too much but understood what he could and couldn't do with his Presidential powers. The President is solely responsible for national security. He was asleep at the wheel for 8 years while al-queda grew into what it was in 2001. That's one MAJOR responsibility of the Office of President.

A quick review of the US Constitution will reveal what the President has control over and what he doesn't.

In conclusion, blame Bush for items of national interest that he actually has control over, I call that fair. However that's not what I hear from the liberals. They blame him for 9/11, failure of public schools (not in the pervue of a US President), high unemployment (not within the pervue of the President) though unemployment is currently 5.6% and was 5.5% under Clinton. I could go on and on.

Fair? :confused:
 
TT/A1233, I totally agree that they are all around us and in the country. That's why I think it's rediculous spending 200 billion in Iraq when we could spend it here. We should worry about ourselves, not everyone else. I also never said we had to make every other country happy, but we also don't have to take unneccessary unilateral action over "WMD's" that don't exist. I agree we need to seal the border, nobody has the balls to do it, but it's not that hard to actually put a fence across. Finally, I NEVER said the war was about oil, I didn't think that when we went in, and I don't think that now. I do however think that Bush isn't doing **** about the problem because he, and all of his friends, are all oil guys who are making billions of dollars. ExxonMobil posted a what, 21.5 billion dollar profit last year - rediculious. Law enforcement is very important, which is why we should have spent the Iraq money on beefing up security here. Saddam was NOT a threat to us, and the terrorists are out there. Afghanistan was perfect example of how we should handle the terrorists, not the disaster that is Iraq. I think we agree on more than you think, keep up the good work.
 
A quick check of the US Constitution shows the Office of President has these powers:

The following are the powers of the Executive: veto power over all bills; appointment of judges and other officials; makes treaties; ensures all laws are carried out; commander in chief of the military; pardon power.

I may be missing something but I don't see anything there that will give our hopeful John Kerry the power to tell a private company they can't send their business overseas.

Don't get me wrong, I hate seeing companies outsource. My family was affected directly. What gets me are the lies Kerry's spreading about Bush and how much he'll "fix". He can't.
 
Originally posted by A4Blk98SS
snip, but we also don't have to take unneccessary unilateral action over "WMD's" that don't exist
Click to expand...

Uni? What was it 35? 38? Countries over there? The critics are happy if just TWO countries have their way. Can you guess them?

"unilateral" is a media inspired term brought on by critics. You may not even realize you are repeating that junk since its pounded into us all the time.
 
Bush cant change things but a Majority of Rebulicans can and haven't. I like how some like to jump on the Kerry voting issues. First off nothing is voted on in a single case to case. One good amendment may have 30-50 BS add on that go with it. So when somone FLIP FLOPS what are they really voting for ?? And as far as Kerry flip flopping on the support of the war,he voted initially to support when Bush told the price tag was like 10b not 87 billion. That makes a little difference. I also like how Bush Is there to provide a Democratic election but He wants to appoint the first ruler. Why did his DAD flatten the country now his son feels obligated to rebuild the country? Also how does opening our work force to mexico help the American workers,I still have never had a good reply for that one.
 
Originally posted by chevyII
And as far as Kerry flip flopping on the support of the war,he voted initially to support when Bush told the price tag was like 10b not 87 billion. That makes a little difference.
Click to expand...


This is a complete fabrication, Chevy II.

Kerry has said, with his own words:

"I actually voted for the $87 Billion Dollars... right before I voted against it"
 
Ill believe you on that one although Im not sure of it. But isnt flip flpoing better than just going along to go along? I think possibly Kerry may have changed his mind when it was to liberate then changed to rebuild. Its kind of like the people who say Kerry is a bad guy for being against the vietnam war. I cant see why anyone in the last 15 years could have supported that war as the Government made it a non winable war. Maybe he knew something then that most know now? I will say this again as i have before. John Kerry is no better than Bush but Its the lesser of two evils and Im willing to give the guy a chance. Bush directly didint put us in these situations were in but I dont see good ideas from him on how to get out.
 
Originally posted by chevyII
I will say this again as i have before. John Kerry is no better than Bush but Its the lesser of two evils and Im willing to give the guy a chance.
Click to expand...

That's a valid argument but one that I answer according to an old saying.

"Never trade the devil you know for the devil you don't know"

Besides, I'd much rather be led by a man with morals and conviction than one that leans whichever way the popular wind is blowing.

The other parts of the "axis of evil" must be salivating at the very thought of getting a milquetoast like John Kerry in the President's chair. They'll walk all over him (us).
 
Originally posted by chevyII
snip. I also like how Bush Is there to provide a Democratic election but He wants to appoint the first ruler. Why did his DAD flatten the country now his son feels obligated to rebuild the country?
Click to expand...

I assume you mean Iraq? If you are going to make this statement know that Clinton did a lot more "flattening" that Bush SR. - in the capital no less. Know that supposedly its the Clinton administration that set forth FIRST the policy of removing SH.

If you mean Afghanistan, know that Iraq did the flattening.

S
 
It wasn't unpatriotic to be against the war in VietNam. It was in the way he did it. "Eyewitness accounts" by men who had never been to VietNam, only taken the names of real men who had. He could have done it honestly, but instead it was a huge media side show with people who had not been there to witness the things they "saw." They lied.

The medals he threw over the fence. Oh, I guess not his.

Attending meetings about assasination of US Senators? And now he is one?

He is not a patriot in my book.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=5468

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12386

Now lets see if I have this straight. Senator Kerry served four months in VietNam, took an early out of the war and then seven months at sea and took an early out of the service.

Someone should count up the actual days in uniform. President Bush may have had more!

One of the big lines from the Democratic side is Senator Kerry knows more about leading the military than the Bush leadership. Since the Vice President was The Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State was the Commander of the Joint Chief's of Staff, and the President may have more time in uniform, I think we have the right people there for right now.

Walk on to any military post and as those people who they want to lead them.
 
Originally posted by sixgun86gn
I also hear recently that Kerry supports an additional fifty cents per gallon gas tax.Please add this to the list.
Click to expand...

Thank's, I will. I'll put "supported" though, because he did support it, but he's such an FFF (F'n Flip Flopper) that I can't say for sure if he still does.

I also have another Revision to the list. I said Kerry supports 40 MPG Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards for Cars, trucks and SUV's (he DID). Well just today, he's realized the error in his ways, and now supports a 36 MPG CAFE for Cars, Trucks and SUV's. (the real reason for this is the Billions the Government get's from "gas guzzler" taxes... soon to be known as the "tow vehicle tax" F'n POS :mad: )

The list:

#1. Against the Death Penalty.

#2. Anti-gun.

#3. For a CAFE of 36 MPG for SUV's and Pickups (say Goodbye to the Lightning and Newtonian Physics )

#4. Against Drilling for Oil in ANWR

#5. For "Partial Birth Abortions" (but against the death penalty... I guess murderers: OK, Babies: Not OK)

#6. For NAFTA, GATT AND wants to EXPAND trade with China (betcha didn't know that)

#7. From a wealthy family and has NEVER been Poor.

#8. Married 2 Rich Widows, but NOT a Goldigger.

#9. Served in Nam for 4 months, got three Purple Hearts but never missed a day of Duty.

#10. Missed 64% of Senate votes in 2003 including a $29 Billion Homeland Security Bill that Provided additional funding for "First Responders"

#11. Voted to fund the War in Iraq, right before he voted against it.

#12. Can Snowboard, Ski , Ice Skate and Surf (If I only showed up for work 36% of the time, I bet I'd be as good as he is)

#13. Voted against penalties for harming unborn babies during the commision of a violent felony but favors "hate crime legislation" (as long as you hate babies, it's OK)

#14. Supported a $.50 per gallon federal gasolene tax.
Click to expand...
 
Food for thought:

Kerry has many foreign leaders who would love to see him become president-including socialist dictators and terrorist supporters/funders. I wonder why?
 
I didnt read this whole thread, but must expunge some basic thoughts. This election is most serious. It is no longer Dem vs Repub of the old days. It is near Communism/globalism against Capitalism. There was a time when the Dem party stood for the working man and its policies were noble. That's not the case now. They want your wallet and they want increased population so that they can gain power and be needed to "protect" you. As the population booms, the rest of the country will becomes like California. (socially fractured, over taxed, broke, pc, chaotic).
Both parties seem to like globalism, and population increases so I am unimpressed with each. We hear about the realities of globalism but I dont believe the strongest nation on earth, ever, has to bow to it. Anyway, the Dems will take us there faster no doubt.
The stakes are higher than ever and the philosophies are more disparate than ever. Given that, we are a nation truly divided.
And know that the party of the free ride that has the press on their side will eventually win-(the Dems). This, because our culture is rapidly changing, and the analysis of these culture's voting habits doesnt lie. Those who vote Dem will be a majority in due time given factual population/birth stats. The fool who pawns his car title, or has a paycheck advanced, or who rents to own his big screen has the same amount of voting power as you.
Head for the hills.

BTW-how could anyone with a GN be a Dem? They certainly are acknowledging many a Repub concept by owning such a car. Let them be aware, their kids will not have the same luxury-probably even if Repubs win in 20 years.
 
Originally posted by soman22
I'm not trying to cause a stir here. All I am trying to say is this. Alot of people on this thread are complaining about the democrats bashing the president. Yet in the very same thread are bashing the democrats and the liberal media and Kerry. Let's not be hypocritical.

Yes, as Americans we are allowed to disagree. I believe that's what I stated at the end of my post. I agree with you on that Mr. Dicarlo. I bet there's alot we would agree upon.

Click to expand...

I'm sure we would agree on a great many things. I chose to respond to you because you're interested in talking about some issues, however, I think you're missing my point. I referred to the stupid criticisms of President Bush. Anyone is welcome to debate the economy, the Patriot act, the war, immigration and other issues. This thread is about the repeated personal attacks on the President for which the Republican leadership doesn't even respond to. They play fair and only react policy differences. To me, a person who respects what the President has done since he was elected, that's the sore spot. This is the tact that the Democratic leadership has taken and the left wing media re-enforces over and over. I believe the democrat strategy has been to create and distort as many things as they can. Many anti Bush posters here, only reflect personal attacks put forth by the DNC.

I can bash Kerry and the liberal media. Not only do I vehemently disagree with their tactics, but I'm not a member of the Republican leadership. If the personal charges against the President had any basis in truth, this thread wouldn't exist.
 
Democrat tactics:

personal attacks, talking points, flat out lies.

Republican tactics:

bringing up voting records(facts), using democrats own statements against them(actual quotes), showing 9/11 images(reality).

and the "unbiased media"(FOFLMAO)reports how both sides are using dirty politics.

I'm anxious to see some debates between these two.........oh wait a minute, I mean three. Kerry will need two podiums, so he can represent both sides of any given issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Some useful advice when working on cars/suvs
Replies
19
Views
2K
Bruce Urie
B
R
It Was One of Those Days - Pt 46
Replies
5
Views
2K
Raven
R
T
things that make you think a little
Replies
1
Views
350
gn85
G
T
A City of Two Tales
Replies
4
Views
497
2quiktocare
2
G
Another Great Story - Worth reading Steakhouse Night Date:
Replies
5
Views
657
blackbird
B
Top