Why should I vote for Bush

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 01:33 PM

The election will be in 10 months and I don't see any substantial accomplishments from this administration. The annual deficit is now over $600 trillion when war funding is included, there is a net loss off 2 1/2 million jobs (no president in history has failed to add jobs during his administation), my property taxes have gone uo by 30%, and my state income tax 3%, Bush wants to allow all those who criminally entered this country to be given amnesty while there are millions waiting for permission to come here to work legally, John Ashcroft is threatening my liberty, Cheney's friends from Halliburton friends are raping us with inflated costs in Iraq, the price of gasoline has never been higher (hmm, an oilman president), our foreign policy is that of bully rather the voice of reason.

The worse is the tax policy. My children will be paying the combined debt of Reagan, Bush I and Bush II for the rest of their lives. The Republicans used the phrase tax and spend liberals for years. They are now the party of borrow and spend. The tax cuts were so heavily in favor of the extremely wealthy as to be immoral. The president said that after his tax cuts the rich will be paying are a higher percentage of the income tax. This is true but what he doesn't say is that your kids will be paying the rest in later years because of borrowing making the share of the rich actually lower.
The recession that began in the beginning of his term cannot be blamed on the previos administration. It was started by Bush and Cheney in Novenmber following the election when they began talking down the economy and lowered consumer and investor confidence.
Bush has failed miserably except in his further widening of the gap of the super rich and the middle class. I couldn't possibly vote for this man and dread the next 4 years if he is re-elcted.

**spywizard** · 02-10-2004, 01:39 PM

Actually.......... your vote doesn't count......... that's why we have the Electoral college......

sorry........

**tryingtogetbig** · 02-10-2004, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

Actually.......... your vote doesn't count......... that's why we have the Electoral college......

sorry........

yes...you are in PA...it will go towards Dean anyway...whether you vote or not. That should make you happy!

peace,

ttgb

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

Actually.......... your vote doesn't count......... that's why we have the Electoral college......

sorry........

No, my vote does count. The electoral college votes withe the majority in each state (they don't have to but it would be eliminated by public outrage if it didnt). So, do you have anything intelligent to add to this conversation or are you just going to make wise*ss remarks?

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by tryingtogetbig

yes...you are in PA...it will go towards Dean anyway...whether you vote or not. That should make you happy!

peace,

ttgb

Another wise remark. I guess since there is no reason to vote for Bush that's the best you can come up with. BTW Pa will go for Kerry. We have quite a few educated people in this state. In case you may be wondering I am not a one party voter. I like John Mcain and also Pat Buchanan. I believe either of these two Republicans would have done better than Bush who was anointed by the Republican establishment before the 2000 primaries even started.

**spywizard** · 02-10-2004, 02:11 PM

Wise a$$ remarks........

there are too many examples of how the electoral college selects the President..

it was in part created, because of the uneducated masses... you see they were suppose to know the presidential candidates better than the masses.. thus they could make the decission better than we could.......

most recent example........... florida.................

silly rabbit

Originally Posted by markas214

No, my vote does count. The electoral college votes withe the majority in each state (they don't have to but it would be eliminated by public outrage if it didnt). So, do you have anything intelligent to add to this conversation or are you just going to make wise*ss remarks?

**Mart651** · 02-10-2004, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

Another wise*ss remark. I guess since there is no reason to vote for Bush that's the best you can come up with. BTW Pa will go for Kerry. We have quite a few educated people in this state.

Yes you do. I counted them the last time i drove through.

Hey bro, this is more democratic bull if you ask me. There is no way I will convince A lib to vote Republican no more than you can convince me. What I will say is< all my little Lib buddies are now singing a different tune. They were all saying go Dean go Dean and now they are saying Kerry is a better choice. WTF at least I can pick a candidate and stick with them. I was on Clintons campaign the first term but as i aged I found that these views were not truely mine but my families. I wish everyone could stand back and try to remember why they became what ever party they are. I think everyone would see that it was given to them not decided by them.

**tryingtogetbig** · 02-10-2004, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

Another wise remark. I guess since there is no reason to vote for Bush that's the best you can come up with. BTW Pa will go for Kerry. We have quite a few educated people in this state. In case you may be wondering I am not a one party voter. I like John Mcain and also Pat Buchanan. I believe either of these two Republicans would have done better than Bush who was anointed by the Republican establishment before the 200 primaries even started.

And you wonder why I'm not even trying to argue..."we have quite a few educated people in this state."

Better things to do with my time bro...believe it or not, most states have quite a few edumecated type hillbilly folks.

BTW...I did like John McCain also...he would have done good I believe. At least there's something we agree upon.

peace,

ttgb

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

Wise a$$ remarks........

there are too many examples of how the electoral college selects the President..

it was in part created, because of the uneducated masses... you see they were suppose to know the presidential candidates better than the masses.. thus they could make the decission better than we could.......

most recent example........... florida.................

silly rabbit

But that is not the topic of this post. If I wanted to be educated about the electoral college I would have titled my post "Please tell me why my vote doesn't count because the electoral college really elects the President". Florida is not an example. In Florida the electoral college voted the outcome of the popular vote recount. The true example from 2000 is that Gore won the popular vote by 1/2 million but lost because of the way the electoral college votes are distributed among the states.
Now how about some reasons to vote for Bush and also not reasons to vote against his opponents please.

**QbHunter** · 02-10-2004, 02:19 PM

where is Berm in all these political threads???I love his sig...

**spywizard** · 02-10-2004, 02:21 PM

So.........true...............

By the way............ I will still vote....

and i don't have an argument or reason .............

didn't mean to jack your thread.......

i'll shut up now........

Originally Posted by markas214

But that is not the topic of this post. If I wanted to be educated about the electoral college I would have titled my post "Pleae tell me why my vote doesn't count because the electoral college really elects the President. Florida is not an example. The electoral college voted the outcome of the popular vote recount. The true example from 2000 is that Gore won the popular vote by 1/2 million but lost because of the way the electoral college votes are distributed among the states.
Now how about some reasons to vote for Bush and also not reasons to vote against his opponents please.

**QbHunter** · 02-10-2004, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by spywizard

and i don't have an argument or reason .............

didn't mean to jack your thread.......

i'll shut up now........

he is just keeping his post count up

**tryingtogetbig** · 02-10-2004, 02:56 PM

Dude...all the reasons in your initial post are way fuked up to begin with. Your stats are way off...even for New York Times and CNN stats! Obviously you know everything already...so why would anyone opposes your "I know everything" view. I could go and look up the stats proving all of your "facts" listed above wrong, but it would be to no avail. Kind of like kissing your own sister...there's not much to be gained from it.

I'm not going to change your mind...nor do I really want to. Vote for whomever you choose. Be unhappy when GW gets reelected. It's all the same to me bro. Vote the same as every other minority in the United States. Vote for whatever puts a zip in your zipper. Really!

peace,

ttgb

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by tryingtogetbig

Dude...all the reasons in your initial post are way fuked up to begin with. Your stats are way off...even for New York Times and CNN stats! Obviously you know everything already...so why would anyone opposes your "I know everything" view. I could go and look up the stats proving all of your "facts" listed above wrong, but it would be to no avail. Kind of like kissing your own sister...there's not much to be gained from it.

I'm not going to change your mind...nor do I really want to. Vote for whomever you choose. Be unhappy when GW gets reelected. It's all the same to me bro. Vote the same as every other minority in the United States. Vote for whatever puts a zip in your zipper. Really!

peace,

ttgb

My stats: the defecit is from the CBO, job losses are from the dept of Labor and reprted monthly, I know how much I pay in property and state taxes (idoubt you could dispute that, Ashcroft speaks for himself, Halliburton is being investigated, have you bought gasoline lately or in the past 2 years for that matter, Bush tax policy is a matter of record as are our massive national debt (who do you think will pay for it if not future generations?). I stand by my information. Saying you can dispute it but won't even try seems like denial of how f*cked up this president is.

**Jackman** · 02-10-2004, 03:41 PM

You need to remember alot of statistics are streached for there own personal welfare. Like you for instance putting only bad ones. Im sure there are just as many good ones...

**mfenske** · 02-10-2004, 04:22 PM

Today 03:41 PM
Jackman -
Like you for instance putting only bad ones. Im sure there are just as many good ones...

Such as? And you can't use he got Saddam and did a good job on 9/11. Mark

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 05:07 PM

Do you remenber the frst 24 hours after we were attacked? Bush looked confused when he went on TV that evening and didn't use the word war until the next day. It was obvious he wasn't up to the task and needed to be coached. Saddam posed no threat to anyone except hi9s own citizens. It will be proven there were no weapons capable of attacking us or our allies. His army was devestated after the first war. Bush and co were fullfilling a personal vendeta.
If the numbers I cited were positive I would vote for Bush. They're not. So what reason would I have to vote for him? That is the question. Democrat or Republican there has got to be a better man in the Whitehouse.

**tryingtogetbig** · 02-10-2004, 05:17 PM

okay braniac...I'll start providing some actual truth to your accusations...I already know that I won't change your mind and that you will still have the same obscure view afterwards...but oh well.

Okay...you mentioned oil prices. Well, as it turns out, OPEC really has the major say so in what the cost of a barrel of oil is. Since we import a large percentage of our oil, their regulations are what sets the final price at the pump. Except for local, state and federal gas taxes, of course.

Here's information that has just happend regarding OPEC. Looks like we all could be paying more. And guess what...it has been this way with both democratic and republican presidents. If the liberals would let us drill in Alaska, then we all could pay lower amounts at the pump...but they won't. Hence the term "tree hugger."

This is from Fox News and AP:
In a surprise move, OPEC agreed on Tuesday to immediately cut excess production of crude oil and lower output quotas by 1 million barrels a day effective April 1. The move sent crude prices higher and drew a warning from the United States about the risk of stunting world economic growth.

The deal slices four percent from production limits for the group that controls half the world's oil trade to 23.5 million barrels a day, effective April 1. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (search) also immediately eliminated 1.5 million barrels a day of leakage being pumped above existing supply quotas. It expects the combined cuts to curb its production by about 10 percent, or 2.5 million barrels a day.
OPEC members agreed to the two-stage output reduction in an attempt to keep oil prices stable when warmer weather is expected to erode demand in major importing countries.
"The inventory, where it is now, is fine, we don't want to see it building," said Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi. "We don't want to see a precipitous fall in prices."
Oil prices rose in New York and London on the news, but the brief buying spree lost momentum later.
London Brent futures (search) climbed 54 cents to $29.65 a barrel on the surprise cut, while U.S. light crude (search) gained 66 cents at $33.49 a barrel.
Dealers said the agreement would protect OPEC against a price slump but could undermine cartel credibility because of the ballooning gap between official quotas and actual output.
"It's a clever move by OPEC, giving the market some support before the second quarter," said Oystein Berentsen, head of crude trade at Norway's Statoil.
"But given the amount they are leaking people will want to see how much of the cut they implement. There's a question mark over their credibility."
And after an initial price leap, buying lost momentum after UAE Oil Minister Obaid bin Saif al-Nasseri said the cut could be reversed at the group's next meeting on March 31, if necessary.
"It a big call," said Kevin Norrish of Barclays Capital in London of the proposed one million bpd cut and 1.5 million bpd clamp down on leakage.
"After the market's initial knee-jerk reaction, it will be more skeptical, probably with good reason."
Prices are still near the top of their $6-a-barrel winter rally, fueled by tight supplies combined with cold weather in key heating energy consuming regions.
For consumer nations the pact looks like a threat to world economic recovery and a reminder that OPEC appears prepared to defend prices above its official $22-$28 target range.
"It is our hope that producers do not take actions that undermine the American economy ... and American consumers," said a spokesman for the White House.
The decision casts doubt on assurances from Riyadh that it wants no more than $25 a barrel for OPEC benchmark crude.
Saudi Arabia had appeared to soften its tone on oil price policy since OPEC last met. Naimi said at a December meeting that higher prices were justified by the impact of the weak dollar on producers' spending power.
Since then, and again in Algiers, he has made a point of re-emphasizing Riyadh's commitment to OPEC's central $25 target.
"Doing what they've done today clearly shows they want to support a $28 basket, rather than $25," said Nauman Barakat of brokers Refco in New York. "It's a big call," said Barclays Capital analyst Kevin Norrish. "Our own view is that OPEC does not need to cut by as much as it appears to be aiming at."
Naimi said cuts were justified by projections for a heavier-than-normal seasonal second quarter fall in demand
The International Energy Agency, adviser on energy to 26 industrialized nations, provided OPEC with plenty of ammunition for its decision.
The Paris-based IEA is forecasting demand will undercut world supply in the second quarter by as much as four million barrels a day, more than double the normal seasonal gap.
OPEC's urging its members to better comply with agreed quotas was expected, but its decision to make an additional cut in its formal output came as a surprise.
The group is still smarting after its 1997 decision to increase production just before an Asian financial crisis that sent oil prices plummeting to $10 a barrel. OPEC has tried recently to take pre-emptive steps to prevent another such price collapse. In September, it defied predictions of an unchanged production target by announcing a 900,000 barrel cut in its output ceiling.
OPEC has a long history of pumping oil in excess of its quotas, but Kuwait's Oil Minister Ahmad Fahad Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah said its members would be much more serious this time.
"All the signals and all the studies show that the second quarter will be a very bad quarter ... Everybody, for his benefit, has to be strict with these resolutions," the Kuwaiti minister said.

Okay...that addresses your issue over the price of oil.

peace,

ttgb

**tryingtogetbig** · 02-10-2004, 05:25 PM

Okay, new report on jobless rates and the economy. As it turns out, the jobless rate is at the lowest since right after GW took office. The jobless rate was already climbing at the end of Clinton's term because of the technology bust. If you are not aware of the late 90's stock market crashing down and all of the tech stocks being the major losers (yes...while Clinton was president), then I truly am wasting my time. Anyway, interesting read about current jobless rate and the economy. This was in regard to the end of last week, by the way.

NEW YORK — Stocks rose sharply Friday as investors opted to focus on the bright side of a rather lukewarm jobs report, betting that the data should keep the Federal Reserve (search) from raising interest rates any time soon.

The Nasdaq Composite Index (search) surged 44.45 points, or 2.2 percent, to 2,064.01, notching its biggest daily percentage gain since late November. The Dow Jones industrial average (search) rose 97.48 points, or 0.93 percent, to 10,593.03. The broader Standard & Poor's 500 Index (search) gained 14.17 points, or 1.26 percent, to 1,142.76.
For the week, both the Dow and the S&P 500 registered gains of 1 percent. But the Nasdaq fell 0.10 percent, marking its third down week in a row as it was unable to overcome a big drop earlier in the week sparked by a cautious outlook from Cisco Systems Inc.
The Labor Department (search) reported the unemployment rate fell 0.1 percent to 5.6 percent last month to its lowest level since October 2001. The economy created 112,000 new jobs in January, and while analysts and economists had been expecting a higher number, the report was enough to motivate buyers who had been dormant for more than two weeks.
"It's a Goldilocks report — not too hot and not too cold," said Hugh Johnson, chief investment officer at First Albany Corp. "When you have interest rates declining and stock prices rising, like we do today, you get a great return on a balanced portfolio."
Although the new job figure wasn't as high as the 150,000 to 175,000 pundits had hoped for, the economy hadn't created as many jobs in a single month since December 2000, near the peak of the last bull market.
"There were some solid gains in the report," Johnson said. "You can no longer characterize the current recovery as a jobless recovery. It's a job-creating recovery."
Furthermore, the lower-than-expected job creation could be a boon to investors fearing an interest rate increase by the Federal Reserve, as well as those who have part of their portfolio in bonds.
However, investors should think about a move to large-cap stocks, since small- to mid-caps could suffer if the dollar continues to weaken, according to Kevin Caron, market strategist at Ryan, Beck & Co.
"With the global economy accelerating in 2004, the large-caps will be able to take full advantage of that, whereas the smaller companies don't have the resources, especially with the weak dollar," Caron said. "There's still some room for positive surprises in earnings in the first and second quarters, however."
In the meantime, strong first-quarter earnings reports added fuel to the session's buying.
Intel Corp.(INTC) and Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) led the Dow higher, while U.S.-traded shares of Swedish telecommunications equipment maker Ericsson gave technology issues a lift.
On the downside, U.S. health insurer Cigna Corp. (CI) said it would cut about 9 percent of its work force after its membership ranks fell sharply in the fourth quarter. It posted a fourth-quarter net profit but said it would slash its quarterly dividend.
Cigna fell $5.55, or 8.9 percent, to $56.55.
The technology sector picked up momentum from the U.S.-traded shares of Swedish telecoms equipment maker Ericsson after it reported surprisingly strong fourth-quarter profits and signaled a return to growth in 2004 with healthier margins. Its ADRs jumped $3.07, or almost 13 percent, to $26.77.
Technology shares also got a boost from Maxim Integrated Products Inc. (MXIM), a supplier of analog microchips used in a variety of electronics. Maxim reported a higher quarterly profit Thursday and said it has accelerated its production schedule by about nine months in response to increasing demand.
Maxim rose $3.76, or 7.7 percent, to $52.48.
General Motors Corp. (GM) added 13 cents to $48.64 despite saying it would recall 1.8 million cars to repair ignition switches that could cause a fire.
McDonald's Inc. (MCD) posted a 19 percent increase in January sales despite the mad cow disease discovery. Shares were up 46 cents at $27.16.
Electronic Data Systems Corp. (EDS), one of the rare decliners, fell $1.39 to $21.90 after swinging to a loss in the fourth quarter even though it managed to beat analysts' expectations before one-time charges.
Volume was active with 1.46 billion shares traded on the New York Stock Exchange and 1.85 billion changing hands on the Nasdaq. Advancers outnumbered decliners by about 3 to 1 on the NYSE and the Nasdaq.
The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies was up 14.53, or 2.6 percent, at 584.07.
Overseas, Japan's Nikkei stock average closed flat. In Europe, Britain's FTSE 100 and France's CAC-40 both closed 0.4 percent higher, while Germany's DAX index gained 0.8 percent for the session.

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 05:26 PM

Brainiac? The first sign of a small mind is name calling. Quoting Fox News is the second.

**mfenske** · 02-10-2004, 05:27 PM

Okay, OPEC controls the price of oil. We knew that. That still doesn't answer Markas' question. Yes, drilling in Alaska would temporarily lower the price of our oil. Until, that is, when it runs dry. With the popularity of gas guzzling vehicles these days (I'm just as guilty. I'm lucky if I get 28 on the freeway) that day will come. Then OPEC will have us over a barrell (no pun intended). Mark

**tryingtogetbig** · 02-10-2004, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

Do you remenber the frst 24 hours after we were attacked? Bush looked confused when he went on TV that evening and didn't use the word war until the next day.

No shiet...that is the stupidest thing I have heard today. You win the award. Was he suppose to be smiling and clapping and saying "here we go"???? GW did a dam fine job bringing this country together during the 9/11 attacks. You are fool if you say otherwise.

As a matter of fact...why am I wasting my time with you. That statement there just woke me up. Have a good day.

peace,

ttgb

**jbol** · 02-10-2004, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by tryingtogetbig

No shiet...that is the stupidest thing I have heard today. You win the award. Was he suppose to be smiling and clapping and saying "here we go"???? GW did a dam fine job bringing this country together during the 9/11 attacks. You are fool if you say otherwise.

As a matter of fact...why am I wasting my time with you. That statement there just woke me up. Have a good day.

peace,

ttgb

the growing ecomomy shows how good bush has done......

**shootdeep** · 02-10-2004, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by tryingtogetbig

No shiet...that is the stupidest thing I have heard today. You win the award. Was he suppose to be smiling and clapping and saying "here we go"???? GW did a dam fine job bringing this country together during the 9/11 attacks. You are fool if you say otherwise.

As a matter of fact...why am I wasting my time with you. That statement there just woke me up. Have a good day.

peace,

ttgb

hey bro, don't even bother with it. you're wasting precious minutes of your life by pissing into the wind.

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by tryingtogetbig

No shiet...that is the stupidest thing I have heard today. You win the award. Was he suppose to be smiling and clapping and saying "here we go"???? GW did a dam fine job bringing this country together during the 9/11 attacks. You are fool if you say otherwise.

As a matter of fact...why am I wasting my time with you. That statement there just woke me up. Have a good day.

peace,

ttgb

You sure got your panties in a bunch. Take a deep breath and kiss your Ronald Reagan picture. Do you feel better now? Bush brought the country together briefly. He then proceeded to f*ck up the economy and put us into debt so he could reward his wealthy friends. He is where he is today because of his father. He was a mediocre student and given breaks in life none of us will ever see.

**DADDYDBOL** · 02-10-2004, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

Do you remenber the frst 24 hours after we were attacked? Bush looked confused when he went on TV that evening and didn't use the word war until the next day. It was obvious he wasn't up to the task and needed to be coached. Saddam posed no threat to anyone except hi9s own citizens. It will be proven there were no weapons capable of attacking us or our allies. His army was devestated after the first war. Bush and co were fullfilling a personal vendeta.
If the numbers I cited were positive I would vote for Bush. They're not. So what reason would I have to vote for him? That is the question. Democrat or Republican there has got to be a better man in the Whitehouse.

Bro you are just lost....just straight liberal crap....

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 05:37 PM

You quote the jobless rate vs the total jobs lost ttgb. Totally different.

**shootdeep** · 02-10-2004, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

You sure got your panties in a bunch. Take a deep breath and kiss your Ronald Reagan picture. Do you feel better now? Bush brought the country together briefly. He then proceeded to f*ck up the economy and put us into debt so he could reward his wealthy friends. He is where he is today because of his father. He was a mediocre student and given breaks in life none of us will ever see.

mmmmkay

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by DADDYDBOL

Bro you are just lost....just straight liberal crap....

Wow that was an intelligent and enlightening reply.

**jbol** · 02-10-2004, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

You sure got your panties in a bunch. Take a deep breath and kiss your Ronald Reagan picture. Do you feel better now? Bush brought the country together briefly. He then proceeded to f*ck up the economy and put us into debt so he could reward his wealthy friends. He is where he is today because of his father. He was a mediocre student and given breaks in life none of us will ever see.

id rather kiss a picture of ronald reagan than one of bill clinton.....

**DADDYDBOL** · 02-10-2004, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

You sure got your panties in a bunch. Take a deep breath and kiss your Ronald Reagan picture. Do you feel better now? Bush brought the country together briefly. He then proceeded to f*ck up the economy and put us into debt so he could reward his wealthy friends. He is where he is today because of his father. He was a mediocre student and given breaks in life none of us will ever see.

How many economies improve during war time?

**jbol** · 02-10-2004, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by DADDYDBOL

How many economies improve during war time?

exactly

**shootdeep** · 02-10-2004, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by jbol

id rather kiss a picture of ronald reagan than bill clinton.....

yeah doesn't clinton's breath smell like cigar? what a fine, upstanding president he was. i mean really..he brought no shame to the white house..did he?

**jbol** · 02-10-2004, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by shootdeep

yeah doesn't clinton's breath smell like cigar? what a fine, upstanding president he was. i mean really..he brought no shame to the white house..did he?

all politicians are crooked.......but none more crooked than bill clinton

**markas214** · 02-10-2004, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by DADDYDBOL

How many economies improve during war time?

Yes but in war time people are asked to sacrifice for the good of our nation. This President told us to continue as usual and go shopping. Instead of asking for all of us to contribute to the war effort he's pushing the costs off onto future generations.

**DADDYDBOL** · 02-10-2004, 05:47 PM

[QUOTE=mart651]Yes you do. I counted them the last time i drove through.

Thats good bro...lmao

**jbol** · 02-10-2004, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

Yes but in war time people are asked to sacrifice for the good of our nation. This President told us to continue as usual and go shopping. Instead of asking for all of us to contribute to the war effort he's pushing the costs off onto future generations.

ok,i can see this is going nowhere.....im done

**DADDYDBOL** · 02-10-2004, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

Yes but in war time people are asked to sacrifice for the good of our nation. This President told us to continue as usual and go shopping. Instead of asking for all of us to contribute to the war effort he's pushing the costs off onto future generations.

Bro bro bro, if we all stopped spending what would happen?? If we all got scared and pulled our money out of the banks...wait isn't that how the depression started?????

**DADDYDBOL** · 02-10-2004, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by jbol

ok,i can see this is going nowhere.....im done

Me too, DD

**jbol** · 02-10-2004, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by markas214

Another wise remark. I guess since there is no reason to vote for Bush that's the best you can come up with. BTW Pa will go for Kerry. We have quite a few educated people in this state. In case you may be wondering I am not a one party voter. I like John Mcain and also Pat Buchanan. I believe either of these two Republicans would have done better than Bush who was anointed by the Republican establishment before the 2000 primaries even started.

i guess your not one of the educated people