Ahh the peasant: Still believing in the masters ...

Lets quote Billy Connolly: The desire to be a politician should automatically ban you from being one.

he shouldnt have started it, thats precisely why he SHOULDNT be president. whats stopping him from starting another war?

why do people want the discussion shut down? are they against democracy and the free exchange of ideas? it's not like anyone is *forcing* anyone to read this forum. just don't read it if you're not interested.

anyway, BlinkerFluid i lost my response to you in a preview. it was probably too long anyway, but the bottom line is that bush has been a total disaster for the environment. it's only natural Kerry would talk about that as part of his efforts to improve things. most people are totally clueless about how bad big corporate industry is polluting -- they have some idea that things are bad, but far from the whole story -- so it's important to educate them. half the time bush/cheney talk about Kerry, too. i don't see how that really matters.

but what can be compared is the record. bush has the worst environmental record of any president at any time in modern history -- probably the worst record of ANY politician. Kerry has the best. bush's policies HURT you, they don't help you. would you like MORE mercury in your food and water, or would you like LESS? unless they're completely ignorant, 99.9% of people would say less. it's really that simple.

it's interesting from the links you provide how the right tries to discredit Kerry by some more or less irrelevant arguments about how he prefers to hunt, or that he "doesn't do it right." i guess that doesn't make him fit to be president, because he uses a certain kind of shotgun? if he didn't hunt at all, they would slam him for being anti-gun. it's too predictable by far. the point is, they don't give a d@mn what kind of gun he uses, but they want YOU to care so you will base your decision on that instead of things that really matter, like the mercury pollution. they use the "gays guns and god" issues to distract people from the policies they carry out that HURT those same people. it's the only way to get people to vote for them.

try to understand that they WANT to dump mercury in your air and water because it increases their profits not to have to act responsibly. they want to increase health care costs, they want to cut your wages, they want to cut overtime, they want tax breaks at your expense, they want illegal immigration, and a ton of other things that are BAD for you and that you DON'T want. the people who put bush in power want things that are BAD for you. but if they came right out and said they are going to dump more pollution in your food and water, you wouldn't vote for them. so you need to be distracted. that's what the other issues are about, like just last week when the republicans put fliers on car windshields of people in church saying that if Kerry gets in, he is going to ban the bible. it's amazing what they come up with to divert people from what they're really about.

do you really think they give a d@mn about the bible?? of course not. but they know that you do ("you" generically), and they know they can use that to mobilize you to vote for something that will hurt you. that's how they do it. in fact, republican opposition to a democratic candidate (or anyone, for that matter) has nothing to do with "gay marriage" or "the bible" or "prayer in schools," or any of the other non-budget items, but is usually directly proportional to the degree to which that candidate is strong on the environment. look at how they savaged Al Gore. of course they tell you it is about the other things -- gays guns and god -- but in fact "behind the scenes" of what they tell you, for them it's usually about the environment. that's because the republicans make a HUGE amount of profit polluting -- just an obscene amount -- and they want to block anyone who would make that harder for them to do. aside from getting themselves more tax breaks (which also hurt you), the ability to pollute is probably their number one issue.

again, the bottom line is that bush wasn't put in power by people who want to BENEFIT you. they put him there to benefit THEM. that almost always means you will be hurt. but if you think what shotgun Kerry uses is more important than how much mercury bush allowed to be poured into the environment this year, go ahead and vote for bush. i'd say you're only hurting yourself, but unfortunately that isn't the case.

here's Kerry in his own words on his environmental stance:
http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2...griscom-kerry/

and of course there's always his website, johnkerry.com. gl

I'm going to vote for Curious George cause I feel a monkey could do a better job than any of the candidates now, in the past and in the future.

PS. When I turn 35, I'm going to run against that monkey in office if he wins, hopefully my vote counts this time around or at least by the next election in time for me to run.

Explain why you think it should not of been started? Because the UN said no? because Saddam did not have WMD? because he america should mind its own busniess?? Do you ave the reports that bush was given when he made his discission??

I am not thrilled with Kerry. I am not partisan. But the world hates us, our administration did some very stupid things and Bush has not fixed anything, admitted to kistakes, apologized...nothing.

Politics aside...I could forgive Bush if it was just mistakes and inexperience but it is not that...the lies and the dirty play with corporate money, the environment, lying to the world...it is just way too much.

He has taken 38 vacations in 4 years - it averages out to 9 weeks per year. This info is a fact that the NY Times and Washington Post have recorded. He has broken his father's record on that. Plus, he has broken the record on the deficit.

At this point it is not about Banana-Republicans VS. Dummocrats. It is about getting Bush and Cheney out of office and getting our country back in shape.

Alright reading your LINK and have some questions...
What is wrong with the Healthy Forests initiative? Sounds like it is designed to reduce the effects of wildfires. Is it just because they are going to chop some trees down? I would rather have some trees thinned every year and a small fire than a large wildfire every 5. I don't see what the problem with it is the trees grow back, wildlife prefer transition areas, people get jobs.

basically it's just more corporate welfare at the expense of the rest of us. as usual, it only takes a very small amount of digging to find out how the reality diverges from the propaganda.

http://www.sierraclub.org/forests/fi...initiative.asp
http://www.counterpunch.org/donnelly0829.html
http://www.ran.org/ran_campaigns/old...cal_clout.html

it's no surprise that a short time after he got into office Dick Cheney tried to shut down the Rainforest Action Network by attempting to revoke its non-profit status. i wonder why! it couldn't have anything to do with protecting profits for his forest raping buddies, could it?

Nah, he is honest god fearing and has everybodies best interest at heart. So do the people that vote them.

And that other guy definitely had not sex with that woman.

yes. the un said no, because there was no reason. yes, because that was the whole point of the war in the first place. because sadaam was an imminent threat to the united states. that too. you mean hte ones written by a college student?

i think you countered your own argument. what GOOD came from the war? name one thing. if killing 20,00 innocent iraqis counts as freedom, then you have pretty fucked up definition of it. if the capture of sadaam is worth 1.000 american lives, then you should rethink the meaning of "support our troops"

I dont think my post countered my own argument. I asked for your view.

Our views are obviously differen't.

Saddam had killed more of his own people than the US has in this war. So sacrificing a 1000 americans and 2000 iraquis seems like a good trade off. Besides the fact that the american casualties were members of the armed forces, they signed the peice of paper that stated they would step up to battle when called upon to do so. If they thought they were going to get a free ride in the military then it's their own stupidity that put them in harms way.

I am sure most of the ones that have been killed were proud to serve.

why dont you ask the families of the people that died whether it was a good "trade-off".

so is this war just a punishment for the people in the military?

A few kids that I know at my school had a nice memorial for soldiers who lost their lives in Iraq. About 10 of them got up at 3 one morning and wrote the names and ages of all 954(at that point) soldiers who died on little 6inch by a foot pieces of white wood. At about 5 they went to my school and made a "graveyard" of sorts. They put all the names in a straight rows in alphabetical order in our back circle which has a nice small field in it.
I know thats a little off topic, but since someone mentioned the soldiers, it just got me thinking... How many lives (of the innocent and of those who have bravely fought for our nation) must be lost before we have cloned America. I dont think freedom means that we wipe everything already there out completely and try and rebuild( or end) peoples lives. Who asked America to help them? Saddam Hussien was NO immenint threat. Our "president" accused Hussein of the 911 attack, while it was known that Osama bin Laden was behind 911. He also accused bin Laden and Hussein of being a team, when it is widely know that the two dont get along at all. The Bush family has long since had a bone to pick with Saddam Hussein. However, George W Bush can fight with Hussein all he wants for all I care, but he cant do it while hes wearing his "commander in cheif" hat. Anyways...

I thought what those students did was pretty freaking cool.



Thanks for all the posts,
eskiled

they might be hard to find, as they tend to get arrested for exercising their right to free speech at laura bush rallies.

i'm voting for badnarik. sorry, but i'm gonna vote my conscience. bush and kerry do nothing for easing my conscience.

http://www.badnarik.org/