matt1122
-
Posts
8,190 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Events
Store
Bug Tracker
Posts posted by matt1122
-
-
What about each candidates personality and or lives made you vote the way you did?
I'm just curious.
For me, Kerry seems like a fake and I don't like fake people. Bush seems like a family guy, and I like family guys, even if they are presidents because they are family guys - f*ed if I care. George seems so much friendlier than Kerry, too.
Even if George was a complete idiot, I'd trust him before I trusted botox face man.
-
I like the quote, and all that red looks pretty convincing until you look at a population density map.
Look at some $$$$ maps, while you're at it.
My (immensely flawed) logic - poor peopel voted for Kerry because they are too busy working trying to support there families to actually know what is going on. College students are too busy watching TV and getting drunk. Which leads them to be poor, anyway.
I'd say I blame 25-30% of Kerry's vote on that group of people. I also blame 25-50% of Bush's vote on the fact that most of those rich people know darn well know bush is better for them keeping their own money and don't really care what happens to anyone elses, if it makes you feel better.
Again, this logic is incredibly flawed, but I like it!
-
at least its not a run on sentence...
-
Me biased? And you're not. Nice.
I'm not whining and complaining though.
And don't pretend you're an intellectual "big boy" when the position you're taking on this issue and the points you are using point to an incredibly limited outlook on the economical situation of this country. You're clearly far, far off to the left. You should have voted for nader - a $10 minimum wage would probably be right up your alley. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but don't come on the poli forum pretending its the Bush administrations fault. The economic state cannot be affected by the president nearly as much as you like to pretend it can when you make these outrageous attacks on Bush, whether you like it or not.
"Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?" is a question posed by a politician to use the negative economic trend against an incumbent opponent, nothing more.
-
Dana - you just hate Bush, your point here is incredibly weak and shows how biased you are for one reason or another.
White850T5 - Isn't the parts division of Volvo Cars run out of the USA? I remember someone recently saying they needed to order parts from the USA and that they were glad the dollar was down as a result. The person saying this was from Sweden and they were talking about Volvos.
-
More likely the person who started this post likes to whine.
-
The economy was f*ed before 9/11, it contributed but it was still going to do what it was going to do.
It's not G.W.s fault, it's the all of the administrations from the past 24 years' faults.
-
*counts money*
Yup.
-
Many people think hitler was gay.
I think there are a few entire books on the matter.
-
A friend just sent this to me. Quality.
Sweetness.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=....800&print=true
Pentagon reveals rejected chemical weapons* 15 January 2005
* From New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.
THE Pentagon considered developing a host of non-lethal chemical weapons that would disrupt discipline and morale among enemy troops, newly declassified documents reveal.
Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says.
Other ideas included chemical weapons that attract swarms of enraged wasps or angry rats to troop positions, making them uninhabitable. Another was to develop a chemical that caused "severe and lasting halitosis", making it easy to identify guerrillas trying to blend in with civilians. There was also the idea of making troops' skin unbearably sensitive to sunlight.
The proposals, from the US Air Force Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio, date from 1994. The lab sought Pentagon funding for research into what it called "harassing, annoying and 'bad guy'-identifying chemicals". The plans have been posted online by the Sunshine Project, an organisation that exposes research into chemical and biological weapons.
Spokesman Edward Hammond says it was not known if the proposed $7.5 million, six-year research plan was ever pursued.
http://www.sunshine-project.org/
I'm watching Planes, Trains and Automobiles, thus making me obviously too busy to read up on this, but someone let me know how funny it turns out.
-
Saying "monkey this national preserve, we need oil!" Sets a dangerous precedent in my opinion.
It's just a small step in the process of aquiring a particularly nice piece of park land upon which to build my mansion.
-
-
-
It's called a PRESERVE for a reason, it doesn't just mean preserve it until a later date.
Silly, we all know that preserves are just stronger tasting Jellys.
You know what's really sad? How monkeyed up and uneducated the people of this country are. monkey drilling for oil in Alaska, monkey all the stupid pro-con arguements, everyone just shut the monkey up and go back to school, you dumb as mothermonkeying idiots.Your mom is uneducated, and your post is silly.
-
Do you think it's alright to drill for oil in Alaska?
I do. I've been there. It's not that great.
Screw wildlife, I need more oil.
-
I found this for you:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/files/story2679.php
The right definitely agrees with me, except on the team america part.
So you can consider your last comment vastly pwnd.
-
Oh, please don't tell me you are that ignorant.
Alright, you're right, but there's nothing wrong with islam and there is islam in iraq. I don't think it should matter whether we are attacking an islamic state or not anyway, we are attacking iraq, who the hell cares what religion they are.
Insert a lot of hippy liberal stuff here.You're an idiot AND arnold schwartzeneger should punch you in the face.
It's not tough guy talk or machoism, its being tough - period. America is a tough country. We don't put up with stuff because we don't have to. If you have a problem with that maybe you should move to a girlfy country, like France. (Disclaimer: France is t3h suck, but no offense to the great people over there.)
Let me fill you in.
You suck at life.
I gave up on trying to use common sense with these common Americans long ago only to be labeled a liberal and the like. THE reason for the Iraq war was because Bush had no other way to retaliate against the terrorism of 9/11. He was lost and he knew if he didnt do anything he wouldnt get re-elected. Obviously 52% of americans are ignorant to how politics work. Casualties have kinda fallen off the front page haven't they?Bush retalliated against the terrorism of 9/11 by messing up Afghanistan in a huge way. Why do you think 52% of Americans are ignorant of how politics work? We elect Bush so we're ignorant. Sounds like someone thinks they are superior to everyone who voted for George W. Bush.
Newsflash - you lost. Get over it. You're not better. You're worse. You're the losers.
Let me sum this up for all of you.
The people running this country, the most powerful country in the world, agree with me, and they know more than you do about the situation with Iraq, so I must be right.
Game over. I'm done with this weak thread.
-
I don't care if they call themselves secular or what, there was an overwhelming (and should still be) presence of islam, so I most definitely consider it an islamic state.
-
Even I will admit that was a quality spelling error.
-
NEWSFLASH: Even bush has admitted there are NO hard ties between Iraq and 9/11. However Saudia Arabia has hard ties to 9/11, terrorism and Bin Laden but Bush has chosen to pardon them for some reason. There was no insurgency in Iraq until we invaded. We have taken a non-islamic state and turned it into a haven for radical islamists to live and attack our troops.
First off, let me give you my biggest award ever - you are now officially the "Biggest Liberal Media Lemming I Know." No one cares if there are direct ties with 9/11 and Iraq. The war on terrorism is a war on terrorism, not a war on the people who hurt us on 9/11, and if you think Iraq isn't a terrorist nation then maybe it's because you've only been watching the news for a few years now. Go back and watch all of the news on Iraq from the past 20 years and say that Iraq isn't a terrorist (and terrorist run) nation.
Do you know what insurgency is? I think I defined insurgent a few threads back in this forum for every idiot who doesn't know. There was no insurgency because Saddam instilled an overwhelming sense of fear in his people who might think of rebelling. There certainly were some who tried and they ended up locked in Saddam's basement and tortured to death.
And if you think Iraq is a non-islamic state you need to go read a book. If you think turning it into a US warzone makes it a haven (and go look up haven, too, you obviously don't know what it means, either) then you need to go read about a thousand books.
Apparently you don't watch the news. The Iraqi oil infrastructure is attacked everyday. It is sorta hard to pump oil and when it's on fire. I suppose someone as stupid as yourself wouldn't know that though.Apparently you think watching the news gives you a clear view of what is going on in Iraq, but you are either watching an icnredibly biased news source or you're not even paying attention? Were you doing your pre-algebra homework while you watched?
You think we are trying to take the oil? We aren't theives. We are changing Iraq, but we don't own it. It's not our oil. We aren't going to take it whether we would like to or not. The only way oil plays into this war is (1) yes it will be a better source, perhaps, if the new iraqi government decides they like us and (2) the insurgent forces have been lighting oil fields on fire in order to distract US troops from their real mission in iraq. US forces have had to spend time putting out fires which have nothing to do with the war because it is our duty as citizens of this world to protect its scarce natural resources from idiots like the insurgents who keep lighting it on fire to create a distraction. It's part of what we call "guerilla warfar" - it's the use of annoyances to fight against an army much more powerful than the army of the insurgents. We wouldn't be pumping oil though, even if it wasn't on fire, because it isn't ours.
Edit: and another thing, we haven't pardoned Saudi Arabia, we're just not as worried about them for good reasons.
-
Sweet I was so wasted I couldn't spell.
There is a plethora of reasons to go to war in Iraq. I'll give you my personal top 10, though there are probably deeper reasons I can't contemplate in my current state of mind:
10. So that Team America: World Police would be made.
9. Regime Change and to Liberate the Iraqi People from Saddams Dictatorship
8. Because Iraq has links to Al Queda.
7. To be ABSOLUTELY sure that Iraq doesn't have weapons of mass distruction. Do you really want to take that risk? Would you want to have been the president who believed Saddam and allowed us or the middle east to fall under attack? One that could have been prevented if we had followed through and made ABSOLUTELY sure (because, you know, he's never lied before)?
6. To show that even though the U.N. doesn't usually enforce it's own resolutions WE WILL.
5. To show that we are going to run an ACTIVE war on terror and to stay on the offensive in that war.
4. To scare anyone else who might be interested in weapons of mass destruction, or at least make them think twice and take us more seriously than they have in the past where we used sanctions and really really mean letters as our method to prevent their spread.
3. To create a major power that supports the United States in the middle east and hopefully begin to transform a hostile region into a less hostile one.
2. To finish what we started in 1991.
1. Because we can.
-
Sorry that was kind of harsh - let me refrase:
who cares? WMD's were only a small part of the problem in Iraq.
-
Freedom of speech cuts both ways.
I thought the phrase was "freedom of speech is a double edged blade" or something like that. ;)
-
YAY!!!! PARRRRRTAY!
Why'd You Vote For Who You Voted For?
in Political Discussions
Posted
Obviously personality isn't everything, but I guess the fact that you didn't look at personality at all is why you voted for a boldface liar flip flop man who thought botox could win him the election.
I really don't think GW is faking a thing. I don't think he's good at faking. He might say things here and there because he has to, but I don't think his personality is faked at all, and I think it shows a lot. I'm not talking about the campaign trail so much as his time in office, btw.