Kerry is right, Bush is wrong, quit the fucking debate. (1209 hits)
Category: PoliticsRating: -0.07 on 50 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by KoolMang (View user info) at 2004-09-20 09:21:21 EDT
Here is my news source for my point:
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/18/kerry.medals.ap/index.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Navy's chief investigator concluded Friday that procedures were followed properly in the approval of Sen. John Kerry's Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals, according to an internal Navy memo.
Vice Adm. R.A. Route, the Navy inspector general, conducted the review of Kerry's Vietnam-ear* military service awards at the request of Judicial Watch, a public interest group. The group has also asked for the release of additional records documenting the Democratic presidential candidate's military service.
*it was supposed to be spelled "era". Don't trust CNN a little bit more...
Anyway, my point. If all they're going to do is attack each other's Vietnam service record, then the case is closed, in my opinion! It has been found that Bush is possibly one of the worst pilots in history, or the most unreliable and non-trustworthy, because ALL he did was dick around on/especially OFF the job.
Whereas Kerry, on the other hand, each time the Right attacks him, the investigators do their little search, and they find "Okay, it seems that your record is intact, and everything you say you did happenned. You're an ace soldier, John."
Bush is probably going to use cheat sheets in the Presidential Debate, because he's out of gas.
Political Strategies:
Bush: "He voted for this - didn't vote for that, YEE-HAW!"
Kerry: "Bush fought these 2 wars, killing this many people. He put this many people out of jobs. He tried to destroy the Constitution, etc, etc."
Ubersite, honestly, those who attack Kerry, why do you do it? Don't you believe in the lesser of 2 evils? Do you LOVE Bush? Do you love him enough that, if PATRIOT ACT 2 comes out, you're going to rot in your prison cell writing "I HEART BUSH" on the walls?
User Reviews
Submitted by cigar (user info) at 2004-09-24 00:41:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by Snake <snak3pl1ssk3n.at.gmail.com> at 2004-09-22 20:55:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Look, man, I don't want some aging hippie douche running the country.
I'd rather have a somewhat war-obsessed Texan, than some massachusetts, fag loving, hippie cockwad.
I swear to god, I tried peace and love once, it gave me diarrhea. In fact, some people at school were doing it. I think I got some again. Better go grab the pepto.
P.S. Fuck you, fucking hippies.
Submitted by Glad I'm not American at 2004-09-21 17:17:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
HAHAHA
Americans are so fucking stupid.
Your all fucked anyway... almost every other country in the world hates you.
No matter if Bush wipes out Iraq on his so called "War on Terrorism", someone else will try to kill you.
America is full of nothing but trigger happy puppets on welfare.
Honestly...all this "Patriotism"? GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!!! Why don't you people open a fucking book, ask questions, don't just sit there thinking, "Duh...I like bombs"
HAIL TO MICHAEL MOORE!!! MAYBE HE'LL DRILL SOMETHING IN YOUR FUCKING HEADS BESIDES A BULLET!
Submitted by Schwarzes_Glas (user info) at 2004-09-21 11:07:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
KoolMang - I'm surprised! I didn't think you'd buy into all the sheepish anti-American bullshit going on in Canada. You disappoint me pal.
Submitted by Slovin (user info) at 2004-09-20 20:25:13 (#)
Ranking: 0
Terrorism is the number one issue because Bush says it is.
There hasn't been a terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11.
-----------------------------
Terrorism is the number one issue because there were planes flown into buildings.
Who the fuck are you Slovin? This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. "There hasn't been a terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11." OH yeah, that was fucking forever ago. Get your head outta your ass, for fuck's sake. There has been a terrorist attack every fucking DAY since 9-11! Bin Laden BEAT us that day and accomplished everything he wanted - which is for us to live in FEAR - and we are.
When you think, you weaken your nation.
Submitted by Brianthetruthspeaker (user info) at 2004-09-21 08:32:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Come punch me!
Or my kids, or my friends.
I am not afraid of some fat slob. In his mothers basement.
Your facts are wrong. So they are just lies.
Submitted by Brianthetruthspeaker (user info) at 2004-09-21 08:30:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2004-09-21 01:14:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I have no problem with you, but since you want to "punch an american" in the face, and one that is a Bush supporter .... I would gladly see you try with this republican I know named Dwayne Johnson.
Dwayne is a nerdy name, right? I'll bet you can mop the floor with him.
Do you want me to arrange a meeting? I'm sure Dwayne would have no problem facing off against you.
Submitted by Zeccs (user info) at 2004-09-21 00:58:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Kerry is far from the best man for the job, but at least he's a step in the correct direction.
Submitted by yidele (user info) at 2004-09-21 00:18:02 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
" War is also too important to be left to gold digging morons with questionable loyalties" - you are correct, bob. This is why Gold digging morons with questionable loyalties - such as Bush - ought not to even stand for this election. And you DO realize, of course, that Bush is a Gold Digger? His entire carreer is a string of fuckups and bailouts by his daddy's saudi friends, to the tunes of multiple millions. This makes Bush not only a gold digging moron, but one whose loyalties are squarely NOT on the side of the american taxpayer, and THIS, Bob, is a matter of public record.
Furthermore, while you may pretend that their war record is not an issue, that certainly isn't the position of your doof in chief or his handlers. Why is that, you ask? It is because a military record is one of the very few way one can attempt to gauge 1) where one's loyalties are attached 2) Character 'under fire' 3) leadership acumen.
If we look at what both of the candidates represent with regard to these areas,
it becomes obvious that Kerry was:
1) willing to risk his life for his country
2) not afraid to lead men in battle, actually had a command.
3) was in a war zone, being shot at AND wounded
4) awarded medals for his actions
while Bush was:
1) willing to have his daddy pull strings in order NOT to risk his life for his country
2) afraid to lead himself to a yearly medical examination, much less men into battle
3) In The Rear With The Gear, and did his level best to stay there
4) wore medals never earned
It is therefore no surprise that proponents of Bush declare that what happened 30 years ago was insubstantial AND at the same time give lie to their denial by attacking the Kerry war record, seing that Bush actually doesn't have one....
I would like to add that a good war record does not in and of itself a good politician make; furthermore, since Warriors turned politicians tend to be authoritarian, I don't think that electing a warrior to office is necessarily agood idea from the point of view of democracy & individual freedoms, and this point of view was shared by america's last great politico, Esenhower, himself a former military man. If you MUST have a man to lead you into battle ( and this seems inevitable) the only reasonable choice is a man who has actually proven that he can do that, and Kerry for all his flaws, certainly has.
What did U.U Bush do during the attacks of 9-11? He shamefully fled and wasn't to be found when should have been taking care of the situation. That's what the executive branch of the government is for, doing things, and I don't mean quaking in fear in a bomb shelter, either. Bush is a failure at everything he's tried - and now he's a failure at being the president, too.
Another thing that amazes me is that each time a sordid chapter of Bush's life is revealed to the public, various "pundits" "columnists" and "spokepersons" keep reminding us of Clinton. It's ALMOST as if they themselves forgot WHOM their poxy candidate was actually running against. Let me clue you in: It isn't Clinton. Unfortunately.
Submitted by Spinder (user info) at 2004-09-20 23:07:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Yes... Pie...
http://www.pieism.tk/
Someone sence a independent party forming?
Fuck the separation of church and state,
ALL HAIL PIE!! - 2008!
Pie will need a running mate, any idea's?
Submitted by Tom (user info) at 2004-09-20 23:05:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by gibberish (user info) at 2004-09-20 22:22:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Oh yeah, everyone debating this shit is a complete moron, myself included.
But I'm drunk, so who cares what I think?
Eat pie, bitches.
Submitted by gibberish (user info) at 2004-09-20 22:19:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Dude, you know what we should do? WE SHOULD ANNEX FUCKIN' CANADA!!!!!
WOOOOOOO YEEAAAAHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bush sucks. Kerry sucks. Lets all eat some pie instead.
Submitted by KoolMang (user info) at 2004-09-20 21:40:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
If I ever saw an American that wasn't a family member or a friend in my country, I'd punch him in the fucking face. I'd even punch a woman if she was American. Fuck you.
I'm sick, also, of this "Let's annex Canada because we can" mentality of dumbass Bush-lovers.
Submitted by Yams (user info) at 2004-09-20 20:47:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2004-09-20 20:33:13 (#)
Ranking: -2
Aren't you canadian?
Seriously, why the fuck do you feel you have to get into American politics? If I had my way, Canada wouldn't exist anymore. It would be one giant farm...And we would own it. Along with Mexico, but that's a different story.
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2004-09-20 20:33:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Aren't you canadian?
Submitted by Slovin (user info) at 2004-09-20 20:25:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Schwarzes_Glas (user info) at 2004-09-20 12:33:36 (#)
Ranking: 0
I support Bush because I think terrorism is the number one issue, and I think he'll do the best job when it comes to the number one issue.
I see two choices - and instead of disliking both with the "two stiffs running for president" attitude a lot of people have, I am of the mindset that I HAVE to pick a side, because it is what it is.
_____________________________
Terrorism is the number one issue because Bush says it is.
There hasn't been a terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11. Does this mean we're fighting a war and winning, or does it mean THERE IS NO TERRORIST THREAT?
Judging by the lack of any real additional security I'd say it must be the latter. The war was created to justify the Bush administration's dirty work, and that is that. The "War on Terror" is Bush's war and it will end soon after he leaves office, whenever that may be.
_____________________________
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2004-09-20 13:15:17 (#)
Ranking: 0
Yidele, you and your ilk didn't think draft-dodging was a big deal when Clinton was in office. Why would it matter now?
_____________________________
It matterts now because Bush, the Texan from Connecticut, claims he can lead our troops to victory against a foe very similar to the wind, and does so after having dodged his service.
Clinton, in contrast to our "War President" (his words), wanted - and got - peace, for quite some time. So it doesn't really matter what he dodged, as he never claimed to be some great military commander.
This is why it at least seems to matter.
Submitted by Evil_Morg (user info) at 2004-09-20 14:34:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
You know, if it was Hitler running instead of Kerry, I still wouldn't vote bush.
I just don't get it, people don't really think bush is competent, do they? I'm just waiting for him to unveil his super army of imbrued monkeys with stun guns as his new plan for stability in the Middle East.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2004-09-20 14:32:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Someone needs attention:
http://www.ubersite.com/m/45198#816341
http://www.ubersite.com/m/45489#816342
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2004-09-20 14:04:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I've read a worrying report that Britain is reducing its troop levels in Iraq as a sign that everything is going well. Maybe the folks at Downing Street haven't read the papers recently. This should do wonders for the 'stability' of the region. Just when you think that the situation in Iraq couldn't get any worse.
I don't think that the deaths of Iraqis are America's fault, no more than 9/11 was Bush's fault. But when you invade a country, depose its dictator, disband its army and take responsibility for its security, you are responsible for its security. Sucks don't it. Bush administration officials don't seem to understand the concept of responsibility. To make it very plain, the authorities are responsible when citizens cannot live with any measurable degree of physical security. In fact, it's the first responsibility of any governing body. Read Hobbes. Also read Hobbes to see what happens once confidence in order collapses, when the people don't know who in charge, when insufficient force is deployed to keep civil order, and on and on and on. We either have to ramp up our forces, retake Fallujah and Ramadi, which would involve quite a bit of bloodshed on both sides. And simultaneously redouble our faltering efforts to rebuild the Iraqi army - or we can run like a bitch and leave a new terror-state behind. Those are the options. Bush has to tell us which before November 2. I'll bet any amount of money that he won't articulate a coherent vision before the election.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2004-09-20 13:54:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I think trees has it. Americans, like AOL users, don't like to think for themselves.
Submitted by slowlyrotting (user info) at 2004-09-20 13:49:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
shut up and draw something
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2004-09-20 13:26:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I think that we are totally missing the point here.
The big question is:
What if the moon were made of barbecue spare ribs. Would you eat it then?
I know I would. Heck, I'd have seconds. Then polish it off with a tall, cool Budweiser.
Submitted by runninginplace (user info) at 2004-09-20 13:24:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by trees <trees.at.notmail.com> at 2004-09-20 13:24:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
the problem is what i call the puff-daddy syndrome.
kerry can't run a campaign to save his life. he would most likely be a (very slightly) better president than Bush. but people don't care about the product, they care about the marketing. bush's presidency has been horrible. but the marketing is great!
puff daddy makes really, really shitty music. but he markets it expertly and so it sells.
to support my point, i recently saw a survey of AOL customers. they were overwhelmingly for bush.
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2004-09-20 13:15:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Yidele, you and your ilk didn't think draft-dodging was a big deal when Clinton was in office. Why would it matter now?
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2004-09-20 13:09:38 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Yidele, I never said that the Vietnam War was trivial. However, BOTH of the candidates service records should be a non-issue. Both candidates had cushy positions. Both served to the best of their capacity, considering their respective positions. Where is the evidence of the cowardace and desertion that you speak of? That's right, there is none, unless you want to start making more forgeries, which is a perfectly acceptable thing to do it seems to the Kerry camp. Serving stateside is not dodging the draft. Moving out of the country or disfiguring yourself is draft-dodging.
It's laughable that you even quote Clemenceau, considering that his country was and still is such a mighty military power. War is also too important to be left to gold digging morons with questionable loyalties.
Submitted by yidele (user info) at 2004-09-20 12:35:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Bob: vietnam wasn't trivial. Cowardice ain't trivial and neither is desertion. ESPECIALLY if you expect the posessor of said "qualities" to lead your armies to war. Clemenceau once said that war was too important to be left to generals. I think it's time to re-examine what he said, seeing as nearly every war since has been run by politicians with horrible effects; War is too important to be left to politicians, especially draft dodging cowardly morons.
Submitted by Schwarzes_Glas (user info) at 2004-09-20 12:33:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I support Bush because I think terrorism is the number one issue, and I think he'll do the best job when it comes to the number one issue.
I see two choices - and instead of disliking both with the "two stiffs running for president" attitude a lot of people have, I am of the mindset that I HAVE to pick a side, because it is what it is.
Submitted by yidele (user info) at 2004-09-20 12:28:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Wow. All that pointless arguing reduced to a malox for the soul, easy to swallow formula...
...
And it ain't "the lesser of two evils" but, as someone wise once said, "the evil of two lessers"
Submitted by KoolMang (user info) at 2004-09-20 12:26:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
The dumbass thing is about people in general, we're all dumbasses. For example, you have one intelligent candidate, and one obviously retarded one. The intelligent one'll make a good point, and the retarded one will attack it with anything he's got. If the intelligent dude replies at all, he's automatically on the same level as the retard, because he's pulling out MORE shit to reply with.
I don't care if Kerry is a dumbass, we're not all perfect. It's our intentions which matter. I can't imagine a pussy-face guy like John Edwards helping lead our armies to world domination, or John Kerry screaming "DIE TERROR!" at conventions or w/e. With Bush, we knew. Bush's face looked like DUMBASS, and Cheney looked like "Bitter evil old man." Like I said, nobody's perfect, let's just admit that. What's more important: base intentions, or appearance?
Let's factor out the personality traits of each candidate. Bush's agenda is quite radical compared to Kerry's. Bush's agenda is to promise (again) the stuff he did in the 2000 election, but didn't carry out, plus a few filler items. Kerry's agenda is to FIRST carry out the shit that Bush not only DIDN'T DO, but fix the mistakes he's already made as best as Kerry can.
Nobody has given, EVER, on this site, a good reason why they support Bush, one who will not bat an eye during times of war to lock up dissidents.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2004-09-20 11:59:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Something so trivial that happened 30 years ago should be a non-issue in either case.
The debates should be interesting.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2004-09-20 11:50:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
No Comment
Submitted by PersonMan (user info) at 2004-09-20 11:45:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I personally believe Bush is the lesser of the two evils. Not that you really care, I'm just saying it in the hopes that it will piss somebody off.
P.S. Is there a reason hasn't Kerry released all his records? Makes it look like he's got something to hide.
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2004-09-20 11:38:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by Schwarzes_Glas (user info) at 2004-09-20 11:31:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
What's with the dumbass thing?
I don't understand how anyone can like Kerry at all. I guess he's pretty much the anti-Bush default, regardless of credential.
Submitted by 1Point21Gigawatts (user info) at 2004-09-20 11:19:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Plus two for your confusion. I am mystified by the fact that most people think Bush is doing a good job.
Submitted by fluff (user info) at 2004-09-20 11:12:38 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
That thing about the lesser of 2 evils is the point. I don't really like Kerry, but Bush is intolerable and frightening. Yes I fear him and his administration. Are there really people believing one word dick, rumsfeld and rice say?
Submitted by domenad (user info) at 2004-09-20 10:57:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by hcp28 (user info) at 2004-09-20 10:54:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No one cares....
If you die or not.
Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-09-20 10:52:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Now if we could just get people under the age of 65 to vote.
Submitted by I_Have_a_Kristen_Fetish (user info) at 2004-09-20 10:41:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by dragonninja (user info) at 2004-09-20 10:24:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Cheney is the real threat. Bush is just his puppet.
Fuck Cheney.
Submitted by KoolMang (user info) at 2004-09-20 10:12:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
What determines if a person is a dumbass or not? Bart is a fucking dumbass, Razor is a fucking dumbass, even I am a dumbass. We're all dumbasses, so let's factor out the "dumbass" thing.
Sure, they're figureheads, but they have power. What they do with their power is the thing. War, or prosperity? Pick one.
Dumbasses.
Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-09-20 10:03:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Don_Megga (user info) at 2004-09-20 09:55:33 (#)
Ranking: 0
People need to realize that no matter who is President, Bush or Kerry, it wont drastically change anything. The President is nothing more than a figure head. A puppet, controlled by other government agencies, and especially the oil companies. Dont believe me? Look at how much of a moron Bush is. Do you really think he is capable of running this great nation by himself? I dont. So when the time comes to vote, please vote for the lesser evil (whoever you think it is), or in this case, the lesser dumbass (let's face it, Bush and Kerry are both retards).
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I agree, although it does sound like he needs to stop drinking the bong water.
Submitted by Don_Megga (user info) at 2004-09-20 09:55:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
People need to realize that no matter who is President, Bush or Kerry, it wont drastically change anything. The President is nothing more than a figure head. A puppet, controlled by other government agencies, and especially the oil companies. Dont believe me? Look at how much of a moron Bush is. Do you really think he is capable of running this great nation by himself? I dont. So when the time comes to vote, please vote for the lesser evil (whoever you think it is), or in this case, the lesser dumbass (let's face it, Bush and Kerry are both retards).
Submitted by Jesus_Loves_TwEE (user info) at 2004-09-20 09:54:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2004-09-20 09:36:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Because eventually, when America, gestapo police of the world, does gain control of the middle east, and have all the oil, and rise to complete and unquestioned global power, it will come after wherever the hell you live, cheesedick. We stop it now and that doesn't have to happen. The problem is that no one seems to give a crap. It's vote Bush because a vote for Bush is a vote for War and a vote for War is a vote for Patriotism
Submitted by Judoka (user info) at 2004-09-20 09:31:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by cheesedick (user info) at 2004-09-20 09:29:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Who gives a fuck. America is full of stupid people.