Da Election!

[Salad Man]

George Bush is a sandwich.

[Softpaw]

www.ranting-gryphon.com<br><br>This guy makes fun of Bush in his weekly show, 2 Sense. He's very vulgar though, not for the kiddies. I find him amusing <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Foxchild]

.... what, no Llewellyn?<br><br>Im tired of bush Bashing, i' tired of mud slinging, i'm tired of people just joining hte bandwagon because it's the popular thing to do. Noone can deny that happens, a LOt. i frankly hate american politics. there should be some MAJOR changes in how things are done as far as ettiquite goes! if there was't so much mudslinging, perhaps everyone could then understand the PLATFORMS of a candidate and their stand on the issues... not where one or the other has done something along the way. should past experience and mistakes be taken into account? of coarse, but not at a 3rd grade schoolground mentality of "Look what he did! vote for me!"<br><br>Note: i really don't like bush's performance in the whitehouse, and do believe that he should be put out, but if kerry's main campaign is just mudslinging, then he may very well just as ineffective. (i think i've managed to stay rather kind through this...)

[Sakie]

ok i dont want to get in a argument i HATE john he has done so many dunm things and i am to lazy to type them all ITS 2:03 am any ways u guys got to stop ragging on bush i mean we were never to expect 9/11 i mean cut him some slack and we just save a lot of people bye freeing iraq man saddam sone puled an ak47 and shot people at his birthday saddam was an evil dictator and he gave wepons to osamma so we just save innosent lives and made a little more peace in the middle east. (and if kerry is elected for prez. he is gonna high the taxes like crazy)

[Softpaw]

Must...resist...bashing...<br><br>Seriously, I'm tired of hearing all the same old rhetoric bull*** from Bush supporters. We didn't do much freeing of Iraq, we just plunged the whole country into chaos. I'm no fan of Hussein, and I agree he was an evil dictator, but he posed no threat to anyone other than his own people, he had no hope of ever having weapons of mass destruction (as witnessed by some investigation into Israeli military actions against Iraq), and he gave NOTHING AT ALL to Osama Bin Laden. Those two guys HATE each other, why the hell would they be exchanging weapons with each other!? Osama wanted to KILL Sadam, not buy weapons from him.<br><br>And about the taxes thing, we CANNOT keep lowering taxes and expect the economy to just fix itself, especially when those tax cuts are directed at the wrong people. Trickle-down economics (giving money to rich people and expecting them to reinvest) does NOT work. It didn't work in the 80s, it's not working now. When you give more money to people who are already rolling in it, they're not going to turn around and spend it, they're going to sit on it or give it to the candidate who wants to give them more. And giving extra tax refunds to families and such is a nice gesture, but it's not a solution. Tax cuts are nice, but WE CAN'T AFFORD THEM. We are in a record-level budget deficit, we spend more money on our military than the rest of the world COMBINED, at the expense of numerous domestic programs, the last thing we need is to cut the government's only source of income. We need someone in office who can balance the budget in two ways, cutting government spending by a significant amount, and temporarily raising taxes to fix the mess that the cowboy-wannabe "president" Bush has gotten us into.<br><br>Simply put, this country CANNOT afford another day of a Bush regime, much less another four years. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to either take a hard look at the facts, or get their priorities straight. Invading another country that posed no threat to us, regardless of motives, is not the way to make friends, especially in the middle east, where the people ALREADY hate us for getting involved in everyone else's country. And trying to "fix" another nation when our own is falling apart at the seams is not a good move no matter how you look at it.<br><br>We need Bush out of office fast. He had his four years to be the big-shot bully, but his time is up and his mess needs to be cleaned up, since he's either too stupid or too immature to do it himself. He needs to be sent home for his behaviour, and voting for Kerry is the only realistic way to do that. Voting for Nader or some other third-party candidate is only going to divide the not-Bush votes, making it much easier for Bush to win the presidency (legitimately this time).<br><br>Whew, sorry, couldn't hold back.

[Dr. Dos]

^^^ What he said.

[Henohenomoheji]

so... why is it again that none of the smart and good people have made it into the white house recently?<br><br>Edit: smart<b>er</b>. don't wanna offend anyone accidentally...

[Ankaris]

Well, if I had to guess, I'd say it was because most of us had a look-see, and decided we didn't want to apply. Not worth the trouble.<br><br> <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... iggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> <br><br>Just kidding. But there is some sense behind the old adage that those least willing to have power are those most suited to using it.

[Miles E Traysandor]

<!--QuoteBegin-FelixLockhart+May 20 2004, 02:46 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (FelixLockhart @ May 20 2004, 02:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Must...resist...bashing...<br><br>Seriously, I'm tired of hearing all the same old rhetoric bull*** from Bush supporters. We didn't do much freeing of Iraq, we just plunged the whole country into chaos. I'm no fan of Hussein, and I agree he was an evil dictator, but he posed no threat to anyone other than his own people, he had no hope of ever having weapons of mass destruction (as witnessed by some investigation into Israeli military actions against Iraq), and he gave NOTHING AT ALL to Osama Bin Laden. Those two guys HATE each other, why the hell would they be exchanging weapons with each other!? Osama wanted to KILL Sadam, not buy weapons from him.<br><br>And about the taxes thing, we CANNOT keep lowering taxes and expect the economy to just fix itself, especially when those tax cuts are directed at the wrong people. Trickle-down economics (giving money to rich people and expecting them to reinvest) does NOT work. It didn't work in the 80s, it's not working now. When you give more money to people who are already rolling in it, they're not going to turn around and spend it, they're going to sit on it or give it to the candidate who wants to give them more. And giving extra tax refunds to families and such is a nice gesture, but it's not a solution. Tax cuts are nice, but WE CAN'T AFFORD THEM. We are in a record-level budget deficit, we spend more money on our military than the rest of the world COMBINED, at the expense of numerous domestic programs, the last thing we need is to cut the government's only source of income. We need someone in office who can balance the budget in two ways, cutting government spending by a significant amount, and temporarily raising taxes to fix the mess that the cowboy-wannabe "president" Bush has gotten us into.<br><br>Simply put, this country CANNOT afford another day of a Bush regime, much less another four years. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs to either take a hard look at the facts, or get their priorities straight. Invading another country that posed no threat to us, regardless of motives, is not the way to make friends, especially in the middle east, where the people ALREADY hate us for getting involved in everyone else's country. And trying to "fix" another nation when our own is falling apart at the seams is not a good move no matter how you look at it.<br><br>We need Bush out of office fast. He had his four years to be the big-shot bully, but his time is up and his mess needs to be cleaned up, since he's either too stupid or too immature to do it himself. He needs to be sent home for his behaviour, and voting for Kerry is the only realistic way to do that. Voting for Nader or some other third-party candidate is only going to divide the not-Bush votes, making it much easier for Bush to win the presidency (legitimately this time).<br><br>Whew, sorry, couldn't hold back. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> I agree totally on that opinion. I never really liked Bush, long before Kerry ever announced his candidacy for President. And while Kerry may not be the greatest of candidates, he would almost certainly make a much better President than Bush is.

[norsenerd]

<!--QuoteBegin-FoxChild + May 20 2004, 12:58 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (FoxChild @ May 20 2004, 12:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> i' tired of mud slinging, i'm tired of people just joining hte bandwagon because it's the popular thing to do. Noone can deny that happens, a LOt. i frankly hate american politics.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>This has been American polotics since day one an especialy since hte "democratic revolution" of 1820 when Jacksonion democracy became the norm. The mud slinign ain't going to stop and it is the biggest factor in any American political race besides incumbancy.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin-darkdragon + May 20 2004, 02:08 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (darkdragon @ May 20 2004, 02:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> u guys got to stop ragging on bush i mean we were never to expect 9/11 i mean cut him some slack<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>o.O. This is a non sequitor. It's just like praising Bush Senior for pushinf Iraq out of Kuwaite or praising Lincon for fighting the Civil War. Because soemthing bad happens on your watch does that make you a good priesident? Aparantly it does. Lincon is viewd as one of our best prisidents but after studing him I have to disagree. He fought a war that happened to him that he hould have tried more diplomacy to avoid. His decisions were bad and I think Lincon wasn';t that good of a prisident. And Johnson (Andrew) was a big improvment but he coudlnt; do anythgin because the Republican congress didn;t let him and instead started the military reconstruction that was a complete fialure. The was the worst American polotics right there. Why shoudl we cut slack becuase of the 9/11 atacks. I looked to him for leadership and he basicly said f*** you to the rest of the world and did what he wanted. He promised to restore honor and dingity to the white house but he has done the exact oposite starting after those atcks, and even before. We have broken so meny of our words since Bush became priesident and acted unilateraly I'm surprised the world still trusts us the little that they do. The 9/11 atacks was a direct result ofour polocy over the past 50 years and Bush has done nothign but make that problem worse. <br><br><!--QuoteBegin-darkdragon + May 20 2004, 02:08 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (darkdragon @ May 20 2004, 02:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> saddam was an evil dictator and he gave wepons to osamma so we just save innosent lives and made a little more peace in the middle east.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>What inocent lives have we saved? Teh death rates for all sides in Iraq is much higher then before our invasion. More inocent lives are beign lost atr present and it's nto clear yet if we will stay long enough to secure the country. Also starting a war is not making peace. That's another huge non sequator. There is more war in the middle east of anytime since the last Israli war at-least and more people hate us int he middle east right now and that just brings in reqruits to groups like Al-quada. Our actions in Iraq has in every way made America more dangerous. Sadam should have gone, I agree, but we oversteped our bounds and made several mistakes including horably handaling the situation ever since the invasion started. Blunder after blunder.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin-darkdragon + May 20 2004, 02:08 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (darkdragon @ May 20 2004, 02:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> (and if kerry is elected for prez. he is gonna high the taxes like crazy)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>Is that such a bad thing? HAve you ehard the defict numbers? The budget was balanced under Clinton and surpuses were there for an indefinate amout of time and since Bush has became priesident, not only has the surpluss disapeared we are facing recorddeficits again. Since when has the Republican party been teh iscaly responable party. We need to fix our deficit and rasing taxes is the way to go.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin-FelixLockhart + May 20 2004, 02:46 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (FelixLockhart @ May 20 2004, 02:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> trickle-down economics (giving money to rich people and expecting them to reinvest) does NOT work. It didn't work in the 80s, it's not working now.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>Actuly trikle down economics achives its goal. Regan said that the economy will stink when his polocies were implemented and it did but the country got back on its feet. Reganomics is suposed to make the countries economics strong reguardless of the people. That it did. Our economy became stronger int he later 80's and didn;t go into reccesion until the end of the first Bush term. Of course it left out all the people that the country is suposed to serve. The sucsess of the national economy was achived at sacrificing the well beign of tens ofmillions of people.<br><br>Waht I hate in kaynsian economics. We've been practicing this ever since FDR. We can spend money when the economy is down and run deficits but when the economy is up we hve t make up for it. We have always done the former but never the latter. Our polotics is totaly irresponsable in terms of that because people don;t know about economis at all. Kaynsian economics might work if we ever falowed through but we can;t take a part a sound economic system and onyl do what sounds nice and ingore what dosn;t. Every economic system has trade offs and if we insit on running defisits we have to make it up. In the long run the US won;t ahve any credit and boy will we be scrwed then.<br><br>I agree that Bush shoudl be out of office but I just don;t know enoguh abotu KErry and the democratic platform to know if I shoudl suport it or not. I want to make an infromed decision and if the democratic platform isn't going to solve the problem I cannot suprot that. Polotics shoudln;t be vote for the lesser of two evils and they way to fix that is to put preasure on the major parties to fix their platforms with sound government plans. The way to do that if they are out of wack is to devide the suport until the party realizes there is somethign to fix. We need perminant solutions to meyn problems, al ot of which were created during the Bush presidancy, and I don't knwo if Kerry or the democrats right now have the guts to do that. Sound plotics is very unpopular but we need a dose of it soemtimes and we shouldn't wait until a crisis to fix it, or screw ti up.<br><br>Both sides have doen a lot of mudslinging. I find it both entertaining and disgustiong. what we realy need is a nother policital revoluton. One that takes emphisis away from peoples emotions and towards thought. Peopel base thair vots almsot entirly on emotion and mud slinign is the way to get that done. Peopel say they hate it but it's what works best, by far, in our polotics. If peopel woudl realize that they can't make the disisions themselvs adn instead try to elect peopel who would be able to make the decisions for then, it woudl go a long way to solving the problem. I ahvn;t taken any economics classes but I know far mroe then most poeple but I realize that I don't know enough to make sound decisions on economic polocies but most people think they do. Enough to know that tax cuts are a good thing or which spending iniaties are good. The peopel shoudl set the priorites, the burocracy whoudl work out the detailes, and the polotitions should be there to make sure the burocracy is workign out the details to fit the priorites of the people, waeather it bea strong national economy or suprot for the nations citiznes.

[Sakie]

<!--QuoteBegin-norsenerd+May 20 2004, 04:43 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (norsenerd @ May 20 2004, 04:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <br>o.O.  This is a non sequitor.  It's just like praising Bush Senior for pushinf Iraq out of Kuwaite or praising Lincon for fighting the Civil War.  Because soemthing bad happens on your watch does that make you a good priesident?  Aparantly it does.  Lincon is viewd as one of our best prisidents but after studing him I have to disagree.  He fought a war that happened to him that he hould have tried more diplomacy to avoid.  His decisions were bad and I think Lincon wasn';t that good of a prisident.  And Johnson (Andrew) was a big improvment but he coudlnt; do anythgin because the Republican congress didn;t let him and instead started the military reconstruction that was a complete fialure.  The was the worst American polotics right there.  Why shoudl we cut slack becuase of the 9/11 atacks.  I looked to him for leadership and he basicly said f*** you to the rest of the world and did what he wanted.  He promised to restore honor and dingity to the white house but he has done the exact oposite starting after those atcks, and even before.  We have broken so meny of our words since Bush became priesident and acted unilateraly I'm surprised the world still trusts us the little that they do.  The 9/11 atacks was a direct result ofour polocy over the past 50 years and Bush has done nothign but make that problem worse.  <br><br><!--QuoteBegin-darkdragon +  May 20 2004, 02:08 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (darkdragon  @  May 20 2004, 02:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> saddam was an evil dictator and he gave wepons to osamma so we just save innosent lives and made a little more peace in the middle east.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>What inocent lives have we saved? Teh death rates for all sides in Iraq is much higher then before our invasion. More inocent lives are beign lost atr present and it's nto clear yet if we will stay long enough to secure the country. Also starting a war is not making peace. That's another huge non sequator. There is more war in the middle east of anytime since the last Israli war at-least and more people hate us int he middle east right now and that just brings in reqruits to groups like Al-quada. Our actions in Iraq has in every way made America more dangerous. Sadam should have gone, I agree, but we oversteped our bounds and made several mistakes including horably handaling the situation ever since the invasion started. Blunder after blunder.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin-darkdragon + May 20 2004, 02:08 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (darkdragon @ May 20 2004, 02:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> (and if kerry is elected for prez. he is gonna high the taxes like crazy)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>Is that such a bad thing? HAve you ehard the defict numbers? The budget was balanced under Clinton and surpuses were there for an indefinate amout of time and since Bush has became priesident, not only has the surpluss disapeared we are facing recorddeficits again. Since when has the Republican party been teh iscaly responable party. We need to fix our deficit and rasing taxes is the way to go.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin-FelixLockhart + May 20 2004, 02:46 AM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (FelixLockhart @ May 20 2004, 02:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> trickle-down economics (giving money to rich people and expecting them to reinvest) does NOT work. It didn't work in the 80s, it's not working now.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>Actuly trikle down economics achives its goal. Regan said that the economy will stink when his polocies were implemented and it did but the country got back on its feet. Reganomics is suposed to make the countries economics strong reguardless of the people. That it did. Our economy became stronger int he later 80's and didn;t go into reccesion until the end of the first Bush term. Of course it left out all the people that the country is suposed to serve. The sucsess of the national economy was achived at sacrificing the well beign of tens ofmillions of people.<br><br>Waht I hate in kaynsian economics. We've been practicing this ever since FDR. We can spend money when the economy is down and run deficits but when the economy is up we hve t make up for it. We have always done the former but never the latter. Our polotics is totaly irresponsable in terms of that because people don;t know about economis at all. Kaynsian economics might work if we ever falowed through but we can;t take a part a sound economic system and onyl do what sounds nice and ingore what dosn;t. Every economic system has trade offs and if we insit on running defisits we have to make it up. In the long run the US won;t ahve any credit and boy will we be scrwed then.<br><br>I agree that Bush shoudl be out of office but I just don;t know enoguh abotu KErry and the democratic platform to know if I shoudl suport it or not. I want to make an infromed decision and if the democratic platform isn't going to solve the problem I cannot suprot that. Polotics shoudln;t be vote for the lesser of two evils and they way to fix that is to put preasure on the major parties to fix their platforms with sound government plans. The way to do that if they are out of wack is to devide the suport until the party realizes there is somethign to fix. We need perminant solutions to meyn problems, al ot of which were created during the Bush presidancy, and I don't knwo if Kerry or the democrats right now have the guts to do that. Sound plotics is very unpopular but we need a dose of it soemtimes and we shouldn't wait until a crisis to fix it, or screw ti up.<br><br>Both sides have doen a lot of mudslinging. I find it both entertaining and disgustiong. what we realy need is a nother policital revoluton. One that takes emphisis away from peoples emotions and towards thought. Peopel base thair vots almsot entirly on emotion and mud slinign is the way to get that done. Peopel say they hate it but it's what works best, by far, in our polotics. If peopel woudl realize that they can't make the disisions themselvs adn instead try to elect peopel who would be able to make the decisions for then, it woudl go a long way to solving the problem. I ahvn;t taken any economics classes but I know far mroe then most poeple but I realize that I don't know enough to make sound decisions on economic polocies but most people think they do. Enough to know that tax cuts are a good thing or which spending iniaties are good. The peopel shoudl set the priorites, the burocracy whoudl work out the detailes, and the polotitions should be there to make sure the burocracy is workign out the details to fit the priorites of the people, waeather it bea strong national economy or suprot for the nations citiznes. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> o.O. This is a non sequitor. It's just like praising Bush Senior for pushin Iraq out of Kuwaite or praising Lincon for fighting the Civil War. Because soemthing bad happens on your watch does that make you a good priesident? Aparantly it does. Lincon is viewd as one of our best prisidents but after studing him I have to disagree. He fought a war that happened to him that he hould have tried more diplomacy to avoid. His decisions were bad and I think Lincon wasn';t that good of a prisident. And Johnson (Andrew) was a big improvment but he coudlnt; do anythgin because the Republican congress didn;t let him and instead started the military reconstruction that was a complete fialure. The was the worst American polotics right there. Why shoudl we cut slack becuase of the 9/11 atacks. I looked to him for leadership and he basicly said f*** you to the rest of the world and did what he wanted. He promised to restore honor and dingity to the white house but he has done the exact oposite starting after those atcks, and even before. We have broken so meny of our words since Bush became priesident and acted unilateraly I'm surprised the world still trusts us the little that they do. The 9/11 atacks was a direct result ofour polocy over the past 50 years and Bush has done nothign but make that problem worse. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--> ok dude i did think it was a good idea to go to war with the talaban i mean i dont really think we should of gone to war with iraq i mean i dunno<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> What inocent lives have we saved? Teh death rates for all sides in Iraq is much higher then before our invasion. More inocent lives are beign lost atr present and it's nto clear yet if we will stay long enough to secure the country. Also starting a war is not making peace.  That's another huge non sequator. There is more war in the middle east of anytime since the last Israli war at-least and more people hate us int he middle east right now and that just brings in reqruits to groups like Al-quada. Our actions in Iraq has in every way made America more dangerous. Sadam should have gone, I agree, but we oversteped our bounds and made several mistakes including horably handaling the situation ever since the invasion started. Blunder after blunder.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--> ok dude sadam killed people for just no reason and he just came up and killed people for no reason. sure the death rates for both sides are higher but thats a sacrafice we have to make for this crap country were trying to make better and free place. do you not agree that kicking the talaban out of agfganastan was bad. In that country a man HAD to have a beard if you did not you would be killed. for women all there body had to be coverd if not, they would be killed also. the death rates are high i know. did it every occur to you that we lost about 100,000 in 9/11? we lost more men in the veitnam war that this one. like 100 times that the death rates are high dude there probley the lowest war death in all american wars <!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Is that such a bad thing? HAve you ehard the defict numbers? The budget was balanced under Clinton and surpuses were there for an indefinate amout of time and since Bush has became priesident, not only has the surpluss disapeared we are facing recorddeficits again. Since when has the Republican party been teh iscaly responable party. We need to fix our deficit and rasing taxes is the way to go<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--> well did ya know our ecomeny has been one of the highest its ever been i kerry gets rid of bushes tax cut... i mean my family is haveing trouble with the taxes now...Damn IRS IT WAS LIKE 16 YEARS AGO...now getting back on to subject rasing the taxes is a bad way to go. abnd clinton was a HORRIABLE president

[Muninn]

<!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Dark Dragon wrote -<br>"and we just save a lot of people bye freeing iraq man saddam sone puled an ak47 and shot people at his birthday saddam was an evil dictator and he gave wepons to osamma so we just save innosent lives and made a little more peace in the middle east."<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>As i said, the only defence seems to be getting rid of Saddam, and look at us now. As for the Bin Laden connection, last i heard they were planning to elope to south Texas on an H-Bomb a-la Dr. Strangelove.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Dark Dragon also wrote - <br>"ok dude sadam killed people for just no reason just come up and killed people sure the death rates for both sides are higher but thats a sacrafice whe have to make to make this crap country a free place to you not agree that kicking the talaban out of agfganastan was b ad in that country a man HAD to have a beard if you did not you would be killed women all there body had to be coverd if not they would be killed the death rates are high did it every occur to you that we lost about 100,000 in 9/11 we lost more men in the veitnam war that this one like 100 times that the death rates are high dude there probley the lowest war death in all american wars"<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>I'm sorry but having so litle punctuation and grammar this paragraph is unreadable. What i got was that this war has had the least deaths in almost any American war. That's a strange analysis. What do you base it on? Lenght of time they've fought? Geographical situations? Enemy intelligence, tactics, numbers? Effective military? All these factors will be very different for every war, i think it is foolish to compare deaths when that's the case.<br><br>Oh and inspired by that paragraph i present a genuine quote by Bush Snr. that i keep because of its utter revelation that poor grammar may be genetic...<br><br>"I mean a child that doesn't have a parent to read to that child or that doesn't see that when the child is hurting to have a parent and help out or neither parent there enough to pick the kid up and dust him off and send him back into the game at school or whatever, that kid has a disadvantage."<br><br>Me what i seen?

[norsenerd]

Darkdragon: please make you psosts a little more readable. I know my spelling is bad but I can't make sense out of any of your responses. You also have to back up what you say a little more with discussion. You have made asertions but havn't bothered to back them up.

[Softpaw]

I'm not going to waste anymore rant energy on DarkDragon, simply because I see no virtue in debating with someone no older than my little sister (and obviously no more mature). No offense, DD, but I suggest you broaden your world view before engaging debates like this. I myself supported Bush when I was 13, but that was before I know what the Republican party stood for. At that age, my political views were the same as those of my parents, and I've yet to see anyone under 15 who had the sort of knowledge/experience necessary to support a candidate based on the real issues. Your claim that our economy is the best it's ever been is direct evidence of this, combined with the blanket statements like your claim of Clinton being a horrible president.<br><br>Oh, and please learn how to type better. If you're intelligent enough to comprehend O&M, you really should be able to use basic punctuation and capitalization.<br><br>[EDIT: And I'm glad I haven't got flamed yet for my previous outburst <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> ]

[Miles E Traysandor]

<!--QuoteBegin-FelixLockhart+May 20 2004, 03:38 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (FelixLockhart @ May 20 2004, 03:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> [EDIT: And I'm glad I haven't got flamed yet for my previous outburst <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... /smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> ] <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> I won't flame you for it, considering I agree with pretty much everything you said with in it.<br><br>However, there are a couple of members hanging around that wouldn't mind setting you on fire if given the chance... <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... s/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->