Most Annoying Poster of The Forum

[imported_biggamesjames]

The UN defiance was the issue I was referring to.

[otto_man]

Just because I am a democrat and you are a republican doesn't mean we can't be friends.
I will hug your elephant
and you can kiss my A $ $

[imported_oldblue]

if my theory holds true otto man's daddy and granddaddy were demo's...........

[SWVA-Football]

[ QUOTE ]
if my theory holds true otto man's daddy and granddaddy were demo's...........

[/ QUOTE ]

Demolitionists!?

[imported_oldblue]

demolitionist.......democrat.......same difference [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[SWVA-Football]

[img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Hey, I think you're on to something! [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[imported_oldblue]

and it don't have a darn thing to do with geico......i just found out they offer group discounts for therapy and figure otto man and spudsmac should try to take advantage of it.... [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/getsmile.tmp008106164.gif[/img]

[imported_biggamesjames]

"Well if the fact that gas was already $2 per gallon before Katrina, or the fact that Bush is the only president to have more jobs lost than gained during his term, or the fact we went from record surplus thanks to Clinton to record defecit thanks to Bush isn't concrete, than nothing is. The fact that he is the only president to invade a country (abandoning the hunt Osama who was a bigger threat)is another thing that is concrete, plain and simple the economy is down, morale is down, opinions of our nation are down, Gas is up, and so is inflation. Everytime a republican is in the whitehouse, the nation gets so screwed up, then a democrat digs us out, from 80-92 it was that way with Reagan and the other Bush, and Clinton saved us, and no one can argue that our economy was not the best it had ever been the last 5 years of the Clinton Administration. And it was all squandered on tax cuts for the top 1% income americans, and we were in recession, before 9-11-01, thanks to Bush, the war, Katrina made it worse, but we were on a downward spiral before the attack on the WTC. Unless you are a millionaire, voting republican in a major election, is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders!"


Well I didn't want to respond because I know it won't do any good anyway but you keep turning your rhetoric machine up louder so against my better judgement here goes:

Yes we did go through a recession which was exascerbated by 9/11 and Katrina. Yes gas prices are high...how you can lay all that on Bush I have no earthly idea. If you wanna talk about the reason for the recession well you could point to the fact that the early stages of the recession began before Clinton left office. Why did we go into recession? Well part of it was due to the normal flow of the economic cycle but the larger issue was NAFTA. Yes thats right the huge sucking sound wasn't just Monica...it was the beginning of the huge outsourcing of jobs which even one of your much hated billionaires(Ross Perot) was standing in his ear telling him it was going to happen. I've acknowledged Bush has made some mistakes but the President who let NAFTA go through will forever be remembered as making one of, if not the biggest executive branch blunder of all time. It will be tough to ever top that one for any future Prez. You are wrong to say that Bush's tax cuts were only for the richest 1%...those breaks were given across the board. Didn't you get your check? Whether they were right or wrong in the middle of a recession and war can be debated. If I were prez I wouldn't have done it but in hindsight it probably helped us pull out of the NAFTA induced recession quicker than if John Kerry had been president. We have experienced growth in jobs and the overrall economy in the past year+...if not for some of those tax cuts we probably would still be in the midst of the recession with all the jobs lost due to NAFTA.

You wanna talk about Bin Laden? Just blame your boy Bill again...Sudan had him captured and offered him to us but Bubba turned them down. Wanna talk about why we haven't got him yet? How about the huge downsizing
of the military in the 90's? Commander in Chief Clinton targeted the military for huge cuts in the interest of balancing the budget and directing more cash toward social programs. This made us weaker in terms of national security and less capable of waging a long drawn out battle against terrorism. I'm not going to slam him for it though because in the immediate post soviet era who could have foresaw the rise in Islamic Jihadism and things of that nature so he gets a pass on that deal. I just hope future presidents will take note that you can never target the military for cuts in the interest of balancing the budget or improving social programs. The military is the #1 budget necessity in this ever changing and dangerous world. We have to be strong and we have to stay the strongest in the world because there are alot of people and countries that would like to see us knocked off.
How anyone can say Osama is a greater threat than a country that sponsors terrorism to me is just without warrant. It would have been almost impossible to predict Syria's current level of influence in the war on terror but they have to be considered a huge threat right now with what is going on in Israel and Lebanon. Osama is a threat and I hope we get him but there are alot of threats out there and alot of bad guys and alot of bad countries. Bush was demonized by dems for this stance and for the stance that Iraq was part of the overrall war on terror. The way things are playing out it is looking more and more like Bush was absolutely right and those who criticized him were absolutely wrong. He is the prez and he knows more about whats going on in foreign affairs than we do. Iraq was much more notorious for sponsoring terrorism than Syria and was atleast as notorious as Iran. Look what both of those countries(Iran and Syria) have been able to accomplish with Hezbollah and Hamas...driving the the planet to the brink of WWIII. Bush was dead on with this one. He was right to say that before there can be true peace in the middle east a systematic overhauling of the dictatorial regimes is going to have to take place.

To sum it up I get the overrall point that you are trying to make which makes it sound like Democrats are for the poor and Republicans are for the rich. I'm not going to try to belabor your point because there may be a smidgeon of validity to it. The simpler more correct way to put it is democrats tend to favor a more socialist government while republicans lean more toward capitalism. Which is right? I dunno. Both have there advantages. If you want to draw welfare and never work a day in your life then you definitely would go with the democratic way. But then again I'm not a capitalist pig either. I see positives on both sides and in terms of the economy my views tend to fall somewhere in the middle. With what you said concerning your Colonel Sanders joke well once again its without warrant. The same could be said about democrats regarding social issues and such issues as the military and law and order. If I were to make such a joke about democrats it may go something like this: Unless you are a gay loving, baby killing, weed smokin, flag burnin, army bashing, tree hugging, bible hating, sandal wearing freak, voting democrat in a major election is like Mother Theresa voting for Larry Flynt. [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

But I would never make such a joke though because it would be short sighted, over-generalizing and possibly offensive to some people. [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
The way things are playing out it is looking more and more like Bush was absolutely right and those who criticized him were absolutely wrong. He is the prez and he knows more about whats going on in foreign affairs than we do. Iraq was much more notorious for sponsoring terrorism than Syria and

[/ QUOTE ] Taking out Saddam was not a bad idea, it could have been much better planned. Check the tax cuts, I got 600, the top 5% got 10,000 times that much. And as far as holding Osama , it was against the law at the time. Bad decision, yep but it still was against the law. See who gave the cash and arms to Iraq, they didn't just fall from the sky. The oil industry ties to the region were my biggest gripe about the present adminstration. I can't recall Perot running against Clinton- from Wikiepdia George W W Bush supports NAFTA [ QUOTE ]
The agreement was initially pursued by free-trade conservative governments in the United States and Canada, led by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, and U.S. President George H. W. Bush

[/ QUOTE ] seems you might be mistaken about where this crap started. Neither party seems to care how many jobs leave the States. It MIGHT be time for the whole bunch to try to consider the real needs of the country and quit grandstanding. Here is a line on how the voting went [ QUOTE ]
After intense political debate and the negotiation of several side agreements, the U.S. House passed NAFTA by 234-200 (132 Republicans and 102 Democrats voting in favor) and the U.S. Senate passed it by 61-38. Some opposition persists to the present day, primarily directed towards specific clauses within the agreement.

[/ QUOTE ] As far as the defense budget goes, it boils down to special intrest groups again. Don't recall the name but one of the first C-span programs I ever saw was a Republican in the House wanting to keep a factory in production open in his area even when the planes were obsolete. When you look at these plans, it becomes easy to see why the working people get screwed no matter who is in office. [ QUOTE ]
How anyone can say Osama is a greater threat than a country that sponsors terrorism to me is just without warrant.

[/ QUOTE ] It becomes easy, Bin Lauden has enough cash to start things , he is from Saudia and the ties there are the real problem. He brings the ability to unite the Muslims from several countries. Wonder who made Osama what he is? His brother died in a light plane crash in Texas, Bush insured his WHOLE(Okay, maybe not the whole family, just 20 members) family could escape the country, even when the country was locked down against flights, after 9/11. Here is a little history of the Afgans war with Russia- [ QUOTE ]
The Afghani fight against Soviet invaders in the 1980's ignited the imagination of militant Islamists around the region, who flocked to join the fight against the non-Muslim, communist invader....As a counter-weight to this Cold War era battle, the United States recruited opposition fighters from among the native Afghani tribes, who called themselves, mujahadeen, or those undertaking jihad, holy war. Since this terminology seemed to spur on the fighters, the US encouraged the idea that the Afghani war was a holy one between Islam and communism....the mujahadeen were victorious, a fanatical type of militant Islam took hold in some of the remaining warring tribes in Afghanistan. A further civil war ensued, and the Taliban faction - promoting a highly puritanical form of militant Islam - captured 90 percent of Afghani territory. Who wass the biggest backer? Carter's loss to Reagan in the 1980 presidential election signalled the end of the negotiation track. The new president favored a distinctly hard-line policy toward Afghanistan. Reagan sought to make the Afghan rebels and other anti-communist insurgencies the centerpiece of the "Reagan Doctrine," an aggressive initiative designed to increase the cost of Soviet support for Third World socialist governments. While few believed that the Afghan rebels could force a Soviet withdrawal, Reagan and his advisors hoped to tie Soviet troops down in Afghanistan's Hindu Kush mountains until the cost of occupation became unsustainable...The Reagan Administration was able to gain Pakistan's confidence by offering a huge, six-year economic and military aid package which elevated Pakistan to the third largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid. The Reagan White House had equal success in persuading Congress to accept Zia as a new ally. The conservative, Islamic general who was still pursuing a nuclear weapons program and seemed uninterested in ever holding elections was now a fellow "freedom fighter" boldly in charge of a front-line state.... President Bush's September 2001 address to the American people will live on in infamy. In it, Bush roused the American people to a "war on terrorism," which was to consist of rooting out the financial sources of support for terrorist activities. A global effort ensued in the following weeks. Bush then signed an executive order freezing the financial assets of several alleged charities reputed to be "fronts" for the al-Qaida network. According to a report by Christopher Byron dated 9/24/01 entitled "Terrorists, dollars and a tangled web", however, one glitch got ahead of Bush's fanaticism: following this money trail would require investigators to "probe deep into the offshore activities of America's mightiest banks and the financial affairs of many of America's leading public figures," including George W. and George H.W. Bush. It all starts with the Bank for Credit & Commerce International, now infamous as the "BCCI Scandal." The BCCI, with its main offices in London and New York, was bankrolled by Saudi Arabian money handlers
.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Ironlung]

Is there anyway we can go back and add Burrhead to this topic? [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]