gigantikok: Oh wait, we can't, because he keeps flip flopping on every issue he talks about!
Oh well. :
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Oh well. :
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Javierdude22: I cant help myself either. From -Howard Dean Goes nuts-
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1075582480;start=0#11 date=02/14/04 at 12:54:25] Notice I didn't knock any other candidates like Kerry or Edwards becase they are not liars, but Dean is. [/quote]
I think this is a case of supporting anyone who isnt a threat, but dog them when they become one.
I think Kerry will make an excellent President, ive heard more outta him in the primary than from Bush in the last 3 years. The only thing ive heard from Bush is -war on terrorism- , well, that gets really old really fast. I would love to see a dbate between the two.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1075582480;start=0#11 date=02/14/04 at 12:54:25] Notice I didn't knock any other candidates like Kerry or Edwards becase they are not liars, but Dean is. [/quote]
I think this is a case of supporting anyone who isnt a threat, but dog them when they become one.
I think Kerry will make an excellent President, ive heard more outta him in the primary than from Bush in the last 3 years. The only thing ive heard from Bush is -war on terrorism- , well, that gets really old really fast. I would love to see a dbate between the two.
gigantikok: I guess at the time I wrote that I wasn't as familiar with Kerry as I am now, but when you go one moment saying you don't support gay marriages but do support equal rights to saying that you do support gay marriages... it just seems kinda fishy to me is all. I think most people will vote for him because they are of the opinion that anyone will be a better president then Bush. I can't say I agree with that, not because I am in love with Bush, but because I prefer the candidate that sticks to his guns. I prefer the candidate that doesn't flip flop and say to the public what the public wants to hear. I think that's just a weakness with any democratic candidate this time around. Now most people are going to say I am trying to find reasons to hate them because I am not in support of the Democratic Party. That might have truth to it, but the same can be said with their reaction to Bush. I guess I just don't appriciate a party who's every candidate basically seems to base their entire campaign on "You hate Bush? I do too! Let's get rid of him!". I mean, after 10 minutes of any Democratic candidate's speech (including Kerry) they all seem to just start pointing fingers at Bush and slinging mud to a degree. I don't think Bush has done the same, but I am sure someone will come out and give me a link proving me wrong.
Either way my vote goes to Bush this year. Surprise, Surprise...
(I shouldn't even be regarding you with a response, jonb, but you are one mean bastard. If you don't like me, as you most obviously don't, then leave me alone. But to try and discredit everything I say by even beginning to suggest I am a troll is unfair. I may be ignorant on some topics, maybe a lot, but I've been damn smart and made a good amount of sense on a lot of issues too. Maybe your ignorance is never wanting to accept that you might be wrong once in a while, you pretentious prick.)
Either way my vote goes to Bush this year. Surprise, Surprise...
(I shouldn't even be regarding you with a response, jonb, but you are one mean bastard. If you don't like me, as you most obviously don't, then leave me alone. But to try and discredit everything I say by even beginning to suggest I am a troll is unfair. I may be ignorant on some topics, maybe a lot, but I've been damn smart and made a good amount of sense on a lot of issues too. Maybe your ignorance is never wanting to accept that you might be wrong once in a while, you pretentious prick.)
Javierdude22: [quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#3 date=03/06/04 at 00:18:43]I guess at the time I wrote that I wasn't as familiar with Kerry as I am now, but when you go one moment saying you don't support gay marriages but do support equal rights to saying that you do support gay marriages... it just seems kinda fishy to me is all. I think most people will vote for him because they are of the opinion that anyone will be a better president then Bush. I can't say I agree with that, not because I am in love with Bush, but because I prefer the candidate that sticks to his guns. I prefer the candidate that doesn't flip flop and say to the public what the public wants to hear. I think that's just a weakness with any democratic candidate this time around.
I guess I just don't appriciate a party who's every candidate basically seems to base their entire campaign on "You hate Bush? I do too! Let's get rid of him!". I mean, after 10 minutes of any Democratic candidate's speech (including Kerry) they all seem to just start pointing fingers at Bush and slinging mud to a degree. I don't think Bush has done the same, but I am sure someone will come out and give me a link proving me wrong.[/quote]
Gig...One moment Bush is saying there is proof there are WMDs in Iraq, the other he says there arent
One moment he says Iraq bought Uranium from Niger, the next moment he says they didnt.
In his electionspeech (2000) he says he will still support the Kyoto protocol, 3 months later he doesnt.
Need I go on? I would rather have someone flip flop (a word literally taken over from Bush) over gay marriage than a war in the middle east which has farreaching global economic and political effects.
I do not hate Bush, I think too less of him to actually hate him, and I do not oppose him simply cause he is Reopublican, although it helps. I oppose him cause he is an idiot in a suit. If Powell were to have a decent program, and run for president I would hope he would become president, even if he was affiliated with the repùblican party.
Bush hasnt slung mud yet, cause his campaign started no less than a week ago. But still, he called Kerry a flipflopper already. How different is that direct hit from Kerry trying to discrdit Bush.Its American Politics, its what they do.
I guess I just don't appriciate a party who's every candidate basically seems to base their entire campaign on "You hate Bush? I do too! Let's get rid of him!". I mean, after 10 minutes of any Democratic candidate's speech (including Kerry) they all seem to just start pointing fingers at Bush and slinging mud to a degree. I don't think Bush has done the same, but I am sure someone will come out and give me a link proving me wrong.[/quote]
Gig...One moment Bush is saying there is proof there are WMDs in Iraq, the other he says there arent
One moment he says Iraq bought Uranium from Niger, the next moment he says they didnt.
In his electionspeech (2000) he says he will still support the Kyoto protocol, 3 months later he doesnt.
Need I go on? I would rather have someone flip flop (a word literally taken over from Bush) over gay marriage than a war in the middle east which has farreaching global economic and political effects.
I do not hate Bush, I think too less of him to actually hate him, and I do not oppose him simply cause he is Reopublican, although it helps. I oppose him cause he is an idiot in a suit. If Powell were to have a decent program, and run for president I would hope he would become president, even if he was affiliated with the repùblican party.
Bush hasnt slung mud yet, cause his campaign started no less than a week ago. But still, he called Kerry a flipflopper already. How different is that direct hit from Kerry trying to discrdit Bush.Its American Politics, its what they do.
gigantikok: [quote author=Javierdude24 link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#4 date=03/06/04 at 09:14:47]
Gig...One moment Bush is saying there is proof there are WMDs in Iraq, the other he says there arent
One moment he says Iraq bought Uranium from Niger, the next moment he says they didnt.
In his electionspeech (2000) he says he will still support the Kyoto protocol, 3 months later he doesnt.[/quote]
Javier, a lot of the examples you bring up are taken out of context. First off, there still isn't proof that there aren't WMD's, and I dont want to get into an argument about that. There is a difference between changing your mind about an issue over a few month span, and COMPLETELY contridicting yourself within a week span during your campaign. Anyway, presidents lie sometimes, hell, Clinton did it ALL THE TIME and people on your political end of the spectrum always seem to defend him. Clinton lied far more then Bush ever has, so bringing up a few examples where Bush may or may not have been telling the truth is irrevelant. What is relevant here is that fact that we have a presidential candidate who doesn't seem grounded or strong in his opinions. The issue isn't lying, Javier, it's asking for a candidate who actually BELIEVES in what he is saying and not just telling people what they want to hear to get elected. I think that's far more dangerous then a presidential candidate who made an assumption that there were WMD's and might have been wrongl. Thus far, Bush has not flip flopped during his campaign, and thus far Bush has not slung mud and I appriciate that. I don't think pointing out that Kerry is contridicting himself is slinging mud, persay, I think it's just pointing out a fact. The man is contridicting himself. But when Kerry and the Democrats start to blame every problem in American on Bush and the Rupublicans, that's where I consider that mudslinging. And maybe you are right, Bush prolly is an idiot in a suit, but if you are trying to convince yourself that Kerry isn't an even bigger idiot in a suit, then you sorely mistaken. At least in my opinion...
Gig...One moment Bush is saying there is proof there are WMDs in Iraq, the other he says there arent
One moment he says Iraq bought Uranium from Niger, the next moment he says they didnt.
In his electionspeech (2000) he says he will still support the Kyoto protocol, 3 months later he doesnt.[/quote]
Javier, a lot of the examples you bring up are taken out of context. First off, there still isn't proof that there aren't WMD's, and I dont want to get into an argument about that. There is a difference between changing your mind about an issue over a few month span, and COMPLETELY contridicting yourself within a week span during your campaign. Anyway, presidents lie sometimes, hell, Clinton did it ALL THE TIME and people on your political end of the spectrum always seem to defend him. Clinton lied far more then Bush ever has, so bringing up a few examples where Bush may or may not have been telling the truth is irrevelant. What is relevant here is that fact that we have a presidential candidate who doesn't seem grounded or strong in his opinions. The issue isn't lying, Javier, it's asking for a candidate who actually BELIEVES in what he is saying and not just telling people what they want to hear to get elected. I think that's far more dangerous then a presidential candidate who made an assumption that there were WMD's and might have been wrongl. Thus far, Bush has not flip flopped during his campaign, and thus far Bush has not slung mud and I appriciate that. I don't think pointing out that Kerry is contridicting himself is slinging mud, persay, I think it's just pointing out a fact. The man is contridicting himself. But when Kerry and the Democrats start to blame every problem in American on Bush and the Rupublicans, that's where I consider that mudslinging. And maybe you are right, Bush prolly is an idiot in a suit, but if you are trying to convince yourself that Kerry isn't an even bigger idiot in a suit, then you sorely mistaken. At least in my opinion...
Javierdude22: Gig, thank you for that well put post. Of course, I do have some comments:
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
Javier, a lot of the examples you bring up are taken out of context. First off, there still isn't proof that there aren't WMD's, and I dont want to get into an argument about that. [/quote]
Me neither, weve covered that in a gazillion posts already. I would like to point out though, that in a democracy one is innocent till proven guilty. So saying they havent proven yet there arent WMDs yet, is standing at the other end of the democratic spectrum.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
Clinton lied far more then Bush ever has, so bringing up a few examples where Bush may or may not have been telling the truth is irrevelant. [/quote]
It is of course very relevant. We are not adding and subtracting actions from Democrats over Reupblicans. Clinton lied, so now that Bush lies it should not be mentioned. You mistake me for a blind democratic supporter. Even though I am not American I would simply like to see a president hold on to his promise for once. Clinton lied like theres no tomorrow, but as far as I can recall, it was about his personal life. Maybe I am very Dutch about this, but I could care less about Clintons personal life. I care if he is doing a good political job as president of the USA.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
What is relevant here is that fact that we have a presidential candidate who doesn't seem grounded or strong in his opinions. The issue isn't lying, Javier, it's asking for a candidate who actually BELIEVES in what he is saying and not just telling people what they want to hear to get elected. [/quote]
If you would not have said it was a -fact- then I would have little problem with this. Cause it is of course very much an opinion on Kerry, which I dont share.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40] I think that's far more dangerous then a presidential candidate who made an assumption that there were WMD's and might have been wrongl.[/quote]
Come on Gig, even you cant really believe this. So a president -flip flops- over gay marriage in a week. You think that is more dangerous than a president who did not have prrof when he engaged in a war that killed hundreds of American Soldiers, almost a hundred non-American Soldiers, and thousands of Iraqis? I am sorry Gig, but the world doesnt work like this.
And the thing why I can understand flip flopping over gay marriage, is that hardly anyone really knows what the judicial deal is with this. No one knows if by law this can be prohibited or if it is a constitutional right. No wonder people flip flop over it. In my opinion, it gives Kerry a certain rationalism where he might wait for the law to decide, instead of Bush who by his conservative opinion is trying to pass a law so they will not be able to marry. I guess what some people call flip-flopping, others call flexibility and an open ear for diverse opinions.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
Thus far, Bush has not flip flopped during his campaign, and thus far Bush has not slung mud and I appriciate that. I don't think pointing out that Kerry is contridicting himself is slinging mud, persay, I think it's just pointing out a fact. The man is contridicting himself. But when Kerry and the Democrats start to blame every problem in American on Bush and the Rupublicans, that's where I consider that mudslinging. And maybe you are right, Bush prolly is an idiot in a suit, but if you are trying to convince yourself that Kerry isn't an even bigger idiot in a suit, then you sorely mistaken. At least in my opinion...
[/quote]
I wish you would just let go of that word -fact- cause, again, it is your opinion. Bush has held his opening speech for his campaign discrediting Kerry on every point he made. And look, I am not saying that is wrong, it is American Politics. But trying to give Bush some sort of credit for supposedly not joining in on the fun doesnt really work for me.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
Javier, a lot of the examples you bring up are taken out of context. First off, there still isn't proof that there aren't WMD's, and I dont want to get into an argument about that. [/quote]
Me neither, weve covered that in a gazillion posts already. I would like to point out though, that in a democracy one is innocent till proven guilty. So saying they havent proven yet there arent WMDs yet, is standing at the other end of the democratic spectrum.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
Clinton lied far more then Bush ever has, so bringing up a few examples where Bush may or may not have been telling the truth is irrevelant. [/quote]
It is of course very relevant. We are not adding and subtracting actions from Democrats over Reupblicans. Clinton lied, so now that Bush lies it should not be mentioned. You mistake me for a blind democratic supporter. Even though I am not American I would simply like to see a president hold on to his promise for once. Clinton lied like theres no tomorrow, but as far as I can recall, it was about his personal life. Maybe I am very Dutch about this, but I could care less about Clintons personal life. I care if he is doing a good political job as president of the USA.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
What is relevant here is that fact that we have a presidential candidate who doesn't seem grounded or strong in his opinions. The issue isn't lying, Javier, it's asking for a candidate who actually BELIEVES in what he is saying and not just telling people what they want to hear to get elected. [/quote]
If you would not have said it was a -fact- then I would have little problem with this. Cause it is of course very much an opinion on Kerry, which I dont share.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40] I think that's far more dangerous then a presidential candidate who made an assumption that there were WMD's and might have been wrongl.[/quote]
Come on Gig, even you cant really believe this. So a president -flip flops- over gay marriage in a week. You think that is more dangerous than a president who did not have prrof when he engaged in a war that killed hundreds of American Soldiers, almost a hundred non-American Soldiers, and thousands of Iraqis? I am sorry Gig, but the world doesnt work like this.
And the thing why I can understand flip flopping over gay marriage, is that hardly anyone really knows what the judicial deal is with this. No one knows if by law this can be prohibited or if it is a constitutional right. No wonder people flip flop over it. In my opinion, it gives Kerry a certain rationalism where he might wait for the law to decide, instead of Bush who by his conservative opinion is trying to pass a law so they will not be able to marry. I guess what some people call flip-flopping, others call flexibility and an open ear for diverse opinions.
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1078518851;start=0#5 date=03/06/04 at 21:16:40]
Thus far, Bush has not flip flopped during his campaign, and thus far Bush has not slung mud and I appriciate that. I don't think pointing out that Kerry is contridicting himself is slinging mud, persay, I think it's just pointing out a fact. The man is contridicting himself. But when Kerry and the Democrats start to blame every problem in American on Bush and the Rupublicans, that's where I consider that mudslinging. And maybe you are right, Bush prolly is an idiot in a suit, but if you are trying to convince yourself that Kerry isn't an even bigger idiot in a suit, then you sorely mistaken. At least in my opinion...
[/quote]
I wish you would just let go of that word -fact- cause, again, it is your opinion. Bush has held his opening speech for his campaign discrediting Kerry on every point he made. And look, I am not saying that is wrong, it is American Politics. But trying to give Bush some sort of credit for supposedly not joining in on the fun doesnt really work for me.
gigantikok: Actually, Javier, to think that all Clinton lied about was his personal life is naive. Yes, the Monica scandal was in the public's eye the most, but Clinton engaged in seedy behavior his entire presidential career. He lied about many many things. I could bring up a list if you are interested, or if you want to find out for yourself, do some research. And I mean do some research from a non-biased source (non democrat or non republican bias, if you can find that).
Either way, we will have to agree to disagree because I think the Iraq war was neccessary whether or not we found WMD. It was very easy to conceal biological weapons, so there is no proof that he wasn't a threat. I think it was better to take him out of power, and give the world a message that America can't be messed with. Again, that is where opinions differ. Some people were completely opposed to the war, and claim that Bush lied about WMD's to support their opinion. Some people supported it and thought it was neccessary and overlooked the WMD issue to see the bigger picture. I don't think Bush lied. Everyone at one point thought that Iraq had WMD. Even Clinton made a speech in 1998 about how Iraq had weapons and about how they needed to be stopped. Bush went into Iraq with what he thought was evidence, and has found it more difficult to find the weapons then he thought it would be. That WMD's werent the only reason we invaded Iraq anyway. Either way, I hardly think Bush was coldly lying in the face of America, I think he was just doing what he thought would be right for the nation. And many people in this country agree with him.
So no, I know Bush didn't lie anywhere near as much as Clinton did, and I appriciate that.
Kerry is flip-flopping on more then just the gay marriage issue. That, in my opinion, is an indiciation that he is not a strong leader because he keeps changing his mind every two seconds. I want a strong leader. For that reason, I won't be voting for Kerry no matter what side of the political spectrum he is on.
Either way, we will have to agree to disagree because I think the Iraq war was neccessary whether or not we found WMD. It was very easy to conceal biological weapons, so there is no proof that he wasn't a threat. I think it was better to take him out of power, and give the world a message that America can't be messed with. Again, that is where opinions differ. Some people were completely opposed to the war, and claim that Bush lied about WMD's to support their opinion. Some people supported it and thought it was neccessary and overlooked the WMD issue to see the bigger picture. I don't think Bush lied. Everyone at one point thought that Iraq had WMD. Even Clinton made a speech in 1998 about how Iraq had weapons and about how they needed to be stopped. Bush went into Iraq with what he thought was evidence, and has found it more difficult to find the weapons then he thought it would be. That WMD's werent the only reason we invaded Iraq anyway. Either way, I hardly think Bush was coldly lying in the face of America, I think he was just doing what he thought would be right for the nation. And many people in this country agree with him.
So no, I know Bush didn't lie anywhere near as much as Clinton did, and I appriciate that.
Kerry is flip-flopping on more then just the gay marriage issue. That, in my opinion, is an indiciation that he is not a strong leader because he keeps changing his mind every two seconds. I want a strong leader. For that reason, I won't be voting for Kerry no matter what side of the political spectrum he is on.
Javierdude22: Gig, I cant add much to that. Its your opinion, and your vote, and your entitled to it. Well see what happens..
Javier
Javier
Similar threads
