He only opposes it because the President opposes it. Otherwise, Cheney would be for gay marriages. They had a big news conference about it quite some time ago.
then leave [/b][/quote] Start to show some respect to other members or you will get your 3rd warning very soon.
#### like that pisses me off so much. You sit there and tell everyone who doesn't think like you to go away and then say others are judging you on your opinions. Grow up. So far most of your posts or have managed to attack others and piss them off. Way to go, I'm sure we'll all be partying once you finally cross the line and get banned.
And then you wonder why people think Bush supporters are arrogant. I myself am one of those (cause personally I just cant stand Kerry and I think I'm entitled to that right) and I dont appreciate you acting the way you are. Grow up or face a third warning. While I do agree that some democrats are wacked the f*ck out (mostly heavy liberals) I dont think you being republican has anything to do with you getting warned. I think it has to do with your foul attitude and complete urge to do everything a moderator tells you not to do.
Take that back. You should be respecting others opinions, politically opposite or not. Judging by that statement, I could say republicans are difference-intolerant and moronic, but I won't.
Why? [/b][/quote] Call my reasons stupid if you want but I just cannot stand his character. For one, people criticized Bush's grimaces during the debate and yet if you look at Kerry he was smiling like a jackass the entire time. I dont know what is worse, making a disgusted face because you believe that what your opponent is saying to be lies, or smiling in an almost mocking manner and not respecting what your opponent has to say by doing so. I believe his immature smiling was childish, and that right there made me lose some respect for Kerry. Also the guy cant keep his mind straight on anything. People claim Bush is a flip-flopper as well but I just cannot trust Kerry with the way he acts. My reasons might sound personal but the way Kerry acts just makes me lose respect for him as a president. If he acts more mature tonight and doesnt do the smiling, maybe I'll respect him more. After all, I did say he has 2 more chances to impress me.
Call my reasons stupid if you want but I just cannot stand his character. For one, people criticized Bush's grimaces during the debate and yet if you look at Kerry he was smiling like a jackass the entire time. I dont know what is worse, making a disgusted face because you believe that what your opponent is saying to be lies, or smiling in an almost mocking manner and not respecting what your opponent has to say by doing so. I believe his immature smiling was childish, and that right there made me lose some respect for Kerry. Also the guy cant keep his mind straight on anything. People claim Bush is a flip-flopper as well but I just cannot trust Kerry with the way he acts. My reasons might sound personal but the way Kerry acts just makes me lose respect for him as a president. If he acts more mature tonight and doesnt do the smiling, maybe I'll respect him more. After all, I did say he has 2 more chances to impress me. [/b][/quote] You don't like a candidate because of the way he smirks? And Kerry didn't smirk. According to you, I thought he was passive! Look at Bush, he's a condescending jackass throughout this debate and the last one. Too many wisecracks. I'd rather a serious commander in chief than a goofball. That's the worst reason to vote for something so important.
Right. And I suppose Bush's wisecracks and grimmaces at Kerry were A-OK with you? That's messed up. [/b][/quote] I never said Bush's grimaces were okay, so please do not put words in my mouth. You wouldn't respect it either if it was done to you. I was saying that you CANNOT attack Bush's facial expressions when Kerry himself seemed to be immature himself by smiling almost sarcastically during some of Bush's big points. Both candidates were wrong in the way they acted, and as you saw from this debate..Bush spent more time sitting and taking notes and looking directly at his candidate then making the 'grimaces' the Kerry campaign is trying to use against him. Same with Kerry and his smiling, there was a lot less of it this time around. It's pretty pathetic when a campaign has to stoop as low to use facial expressions against an opposing candidate. If you said something to me that I knew in my heart not to be true I wouldn't stare at you like you're the best person in the world. I'd be pretty uncomfortable.
If it's so pathetic, why did you even bring it up to start with? I mean, come on. Also, you're very hypocritical. In the other thread, you said, "Who the hell cares what Bush did?" If that's your damn rhetoric, then who cares what Kerry did?
If it's so pathetic, why did you even bring it up to start with? I mean, come on. Also, you're very hypocritical. In the other thread, you said, "Who the hell cares what Bush did?" If that's your damn rhetoric, then who cares what Kerry did? [/b][/quote] I brought up the point of Kerry's smiling because you need to fight fire with fire sometimes to get the point across. While I do not agree with criticizing Bush for his grimacing, I made a point that you should look at what both opponents were doing during that debate before attacking just one person. And you can call me very hypocritical, but just like I went from supporting Kerry to Bush..I STRICTLY remember you being for Bush a few months ago. You weren't always so democratic and I know this because several people approached me going "What's with Will? He's a democrat now?". If you are going to accuse me of being hypocritical, remember that you once supported the way Bush was working as president before you went against him. Just like I supported Kerry before he started to come off as an untrustworthy candidate, you supported Bush before you started to believe the "Bush knocked down the towers" theory and much more. I might be a hypocrit by saying I dont care what Bush did when I'm attacking Kerry, but I'm not going to support a president who has been absent/voted no for some very important bills. He criticizes the president for not providing proper armor, and yet he voted against providing our troops with that exact same armor. Something is clearly not right here.
Bush changed the deal on that one. Kerry was for providing troups with armor. Bush then tried to pull a fast one using pork barrel politics. He tried to (I believe this is right) put in a payment to haliburton of some kind in the bill, and tried to put off payment for the plan to future generations. Kerry did not support that part, and since it was all or nothing, Kerry chose to vote against the bill. Can you really blame him? Kerry makes decisions based on information as it becomes available. He doesn't rush blindly forward relying on what he was told years ago, and he doesn't expect the American people to do that either. Bush does. I want a president who isn't afraid to realize mistakes, and who will make damn sure he's making the best decision with all the current information. Bush simply uses whatever 'intelligence' suits him best.
I brought up the point of Kerry's smiling because you need to fight fire with fire sometimes to get the point across. While I do not agree with criticizing Bush for his grimacing, I made a point that you should look at what both opponents were doing during that debate before attacking just one person. And you can call me very hypocritical, but just like I went from supporting Kerry to Bush..I STRICTLY remember you being for Bush a few months ago. You weren't always so democratic and I know this because several people approached me going "What's with Will? He's a democrat now?". If you are going to accuse me of being hypocritical, remember that you once supported the way Bush was working as president before you went against him. Just like I supported Kerry before he started to come off as an untrustworthy candidate, you supported Bush before you started to believe the "Bush knocked down the towers" theory and much more. I might be a hypocrit by saying I dont care what Bush did when I'm attacking Kerry, but I'm not going to support a president who has been absent/voted no for some very important bills. He criticizes the president for not providing proper armor, and yet he voted against providing our troops with that exact same armor. Something is clearly not right here. [/b][/quote] I had put this in another thread explaining the whole $87 billion thing" The '$87 billion bill' Kerry voted for was a different bill than the '$87 billion bill' he voted against. Originally Kerry voted for the $87 billion to supply soldiers with the proper armor, ammunition, etc. But afterwards a change was made to that bill. What was going to happen was $67 billion of that would go to the soldiers(Kerry liked that) but the other $20 billion would basically be a blank check to the Bush Administration for the rebuilding of Iraq(Kerry didn't like that). It was basically a scam to benifit big companys, a.k.a. Halliburton. And we all know how Halliburton has overcharged the Government before and where'd the extra money go? Most likely straight into Cheney's pockets. Since being discovered Hallibuton has agreed to refund the Government but that has yet to happen. Another reason Kerry later disagreed with the bill is on how the money would be collected. Kerry supported the Democratic-Way of getting it - By taking it from the rich people's tax cuts. Bush has given them enough, maybe it's time they gave back to the US. But nooo Bush doesn't want to upset his rich buddys so he thought getting the money through loans would be a better idea. Kerry didn't like this because by getting it through loans that would mean young people/kids would be paying it back for years and years to come. Kerry thought that was wrong and taking money from the rich people's tax cuts was a much better idea. And personally, I'd have to agree. So when it came time for another vote for the bill Kerry voted against it. He knew for a fact that no matter which way he voted he knew the bill would pass and the soldiers would get their money. He voted against the bill as a form of protest on how the Bush Administration was handling it. He wouldn't have protested with his vote if there was a chance the soldiers wouldn't get their money. He only did it because he KNEW the bill would be passed no matter which way he voted. Yes, that was a flip flop but I think the reason for flip flopping was a good one. Just because you're a politician doesn't mean you can't change your mind once in awhile, or learn new things about something and change your standing on a particular event(aka Iraq War). And if there's anyone out there who still wants to complain about Kerry's "flip flops"(no one really shows any flip flops though) then go look here, here, and here. I'd also like to note that Bush several times threatened to veto the bill if things did not go the way he wanted. $1.2 million of that was going to go to reservists and veterans - Not under Bush's watch. Bush's people said that unless that was removed from the bill they would tell Bush to veto the bill. Bush also threatened to veto the bill if soldiers did not sign up for longer terms. Now seriously, what kind of bullsh*t is that? Which is worse: Threatening to "veto the soldiers safety" so more would sign up for longer terms or use your vote(that would mean nothing) in a way to protest the way the Bush Administration was handling the bill? About the whole faces thing: In the first debate Bush's were ridiculous looking. I think people mainly made a big deal out of it because it made him look really stupid. Second debate it was obvious Republicans had a talk with him and he did much better. As for Kerry's face I get what you're saying about the "Jackass-Smirk" but I think that's just how it came out. He's trying to have a smile on his face while listening but when you're hearing all these lies and attacks from Bush it's probably hard not to have that smile look a little strange. And I don't think you can call the Kerry campaign pathetic for making fun of those faces. The Bush campaign would have done the same thing. And with all the attacks that the Republicans have fired at Kerry, Kerry should have the right to walk up to Bush and kick him in the nuts several times. Back to that bill. Yes, Kerry does critisize Bush. George Bush sent about 40,000 troops to Iraq/Afghanistan without the proper armor needed. That's wrong. John Kerry wouldn't have done that. He would have made sure they had the proper armor to begin with. And he voted against it for a good reason, which I explained up there ^. I don't get why Kerry won't simply take one of the 2 minutes or 90 seconds and explain this. A lot more Americans might understand why he voted against it then. He should at least say why he did it at a speech or something. Does anyone else find it funny that no one ever laughed at Bush's jokes? Tough crowd...
Flip Flopping. Why do I hear so much **** about Kerry flip flopping? I imagine that most of you watched last night's debate and noted Bush's respone to the question, "Name three mistakes you have made." He said that he might have made a few mistakes in his appointments, but nothing else. I would rather have an open minded, so-called "flip flopping" president than a president so set in his ways that he won't admit to being wrong, much less change. Bush's grimaces bothered me more than Kerry's smiling. (I expect a few attacks saying that that's so only because I'm liberal. It's not. I have a lot of experience in debate/public speaking, and I know what bothers me.) Bush used really bad debate form. Did you notice that, in the first debate, whenever Bush was speaking, Kerry was taking notes or at least LOOKING attentive, rather than grimacing and making monkey faces? Yeah. What would put you off more? Monkey faces, or someone looking pleasant and taking notes?