General Discussion

Originally posted by fizzle322

leftist hippy wankers.

There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody.

What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years.

If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else.

War and conflict are man's natural condition.

And here´s another post from you fizzle322:

"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "

We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons?  Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?

Originally posted by TheSheikh

The Mean Green Ralph Nader Machine 2008 FTW!

 

Actually..... i've been with McCain from the start, and I will agree that was a great speech.

Best of luck to him in the elections, he is definately qualified.

He has my vote.

I find it revealing that the same person who could vote for Nader could also vote for McCain.  It shows just how similar the Republican Party has become to a big government candidate like Nader.

Originally posted by Vemoi

 

Originally posted by DailyBuzz

Originally posted by Arndur

 

We went to afganistion right after 911 which of course had emotion behind it but also a good reason. Also the CIA is to blame as they gave Bush the false info. It was becuase Germany did let the CIA talk the "informant"(not blaming Germany) When the CIA couldnt question him they basicly said screw it and told Bush about the WMDs.

Actually, if memory serves me, the CIA never talked to the informant, but Germany warned them that his credibility was questionable. I think the UN had also warned about his trustworthiness. Of course, neither of these views supported war with Iraq anyway, and the administration got what they wanted plus a clusterfuck to cover it up until we had deep roots in Iraq. I think it would be naive to say the CIA chose to pass false information, completely destroying their credibility, without serious pressure from the administration.

Bush lied...bla bla bla

 

 

That aside though, the Iraq War is not his only blunder.  He has done much more that may not have killed people in this country but crippled their spirit and enthusiasm to succeed and prosper.  If there is anyone who thinks our tax system is okay, then they've got problems and I can't support them.  He has done nothing to try to fix it.  Instead he has grown the government.

Originally posted by fizzle322

leftist hippy wankers.

There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody.

What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years.

If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else.

War and conflict are man's natural condition.

I wonder, did you go over there and put your efforts in to it?  Or are you just someone who likes to sit on the sidelines and enjoy the sport of watching others die?

Originally posted by renstimpy99

Originally posted by fizzle322

leftist hippy wankers.

There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody.

What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years.

If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else.

War and conflict are man's natural condition.

And here´s another post from you fizzle322:

"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "

 

We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons?  Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?

 

The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left.  They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens.  They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system.  I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.

Originally posted by gnomexxx

Originally posted by renstimpy99

Originally posted by fizzle322

leftist hippy wankers.

There will ALWAYS be wars, politics and conflict, its not going to stop with Iraq, we're always going to be in some kind of conflict with somebody.

What difference does it make if theres war in Iraq for the next 100 years.

If its not in Iraq it will be somewhere else.

War and conflict are man's natural condition.

And here´s another post from you fizzle322:

"I am relieved that this is a hoax, though it does not alter my perception of the Democratic party as the party of hippies, treehuggers, cowards, traitors and extreme leftist crackpots. To me Repubs are slightly left "

 

We shouldn't question going to war and have valid reasons?  Next is going to war with Iran because its man's natural condition?

 

The neo-Con Republican Party is much more than slightly left.  They've crawled into bed with the left and their policies of big government and our tax burdens.  They have no intention of fixing this broken and huge system.  I honestly see no difference in the two parties except which way they intend to spend the money they've stolen from us.

What is a neo-con?

I can see why an independant would vote for Nader then McCain.  It really doesn't have to do with Nader's views on Big Government but what he represents.  He could possibly be a step in the right direction because he represents another voice in government, and would want to make more voices be heard.  Despite being Big Government, he is also anti-bipartisan.

Also I think McCain's view on immigration hasn't changed since his bill for amnesty was shot down.  People keep trying to peg him as a completely dishonest bastard.  He said that there is no way to prosecute 34 million illegal immigrants and that it would be less costly to just offer amnesty, then spend the money and man power they would tracking down illegals for better border security.  The intention still being keeping a tighter lock on illegal immigration.

Originally posted by CleffyII

 

Also I think McCain's view on immigration hasn't changed . . .

Comprehensive McCain 'Flip-Flop' list

* McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”

* McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.

* McCain considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.

* In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.

* McCain has changed his economic worldview on multiple occasions.

* McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions.

* McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor.

* McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off than they were before Bush took office.

* McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.

* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.

* McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.

* McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal.

* McCain’s campaign unveiled a Social Security policy that the senator would implement if elected, which did not include a Bush-like privatization scheme. In March 2008, McCain denounced his own campaign’s policy.

* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.

* McCain used to champion the