Printable View
In his speech to announce John Edwards as his running mate, John Kerry stated that he and Edwadrs would never send young men and women into harms way (reffering to Iraq)
Well gee there Johnny Boy, seems to me that you DID VOTE TO SEND THE TROOPS TO IRAQ.
Open Mouth, Insert Foot.
SHEESH!
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">CGQuote:
Originally posted by cincygreg:
In his speech to announce John Edwards as his running mate, John Kerry stated that he and Edwadrs would never send young men and women into harms way (reffering to Iraq)
Don't you get tired being wrong so often and so badly?
Your misquote above is indicative of the laziness and unwillingness to question that fuels the bush jihad.
Your "quote", like most of the misleading crap you tend to post, is taken out of context and is incomplete. A favorite tactic of the carl rove attack squad, by the by.
The pertinent passage from kerry's speech is as follows:<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">How you mangled this into your self serving "quote" truly baffles but hardly surprises me.Quote:
We?ll be fighting to build a strong military and lead strong alliances, so young Americans are never put in harm?s way because we insisted on going it alone.
You need to rethink your information sources and maybe, gee I don't know, research things just a tiny little bit to avoid being so predictably wrong.
Open Mouth, Insert Foot, indeed.
So you are going to deny that both the Democratic nominee and his new partner (John Edwards) both voted in favor of going to war?
Keep lying to yourself pina, just keep trying to convince yourself that the thing you are so against is exactly what you support.
PINA IS A WAR MONGER!
PINA IS A WAR MONGER!
HE LIKES THE CANDIDATES THAT SUPPORTED THE WAR!
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
JOHN EDWARDS SUPPORTED THE WAR WHOLE HEARTEDLY
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
LOL!
<font color="#000002" size="1">[ July 06, 2004 11:12 PM: Message edited by: cincygreg ]</font>
Besides being stupid your ranting is entirely off the point of your misquoting and apparently deliberate misrepresenting of Kerry's address on choosing Edwards as his running mate.
I had expected at least a pretense of actual discussion but I suppose your junior high school style of jousting will have to do.
pina,
Your such a fool. Nobody here gives a shit about you or what you have to say.
Your getting boring.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I would prefer that you drink more before you type.Quote:
Originally posted by cincygreg:
Actuallly Pina, I had not had one drop of alcohol when I typed that. LOL!
And now I have still only had one beer.
Just say it one time.
LIBERALS SUPPORT THE WAR!
<font color="#000002" size="1">[ July 07, 2004 09:50 AM: Message edited by: reason ]</font>
I, for one, think the selection of Edwards for VP will make the Kerry/Edwards ticket a more formidable opponent come November.
I happen to like Edwards (despite being a trial lawyer...sorry Lew) and wish he would have been the nominee instead of Kerry.
People like Kerry because they hate Bush. Not because they think Kerry is the solution to the nations problems.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You forgot to add, "Nyahnayhnayhnayh-nayhnayh"Quote:
Originally posted by cincygreg:
So you are going to deny that both the Democratic nominee and his new partner (John Edwards) both voted in favor of going to war?
Keep lying to yourself pina, just keep trying to convince yourself that the thing you are so against is exactly what you support.
PINA IS A WAR MONGER!
PINA IS A WAR MONGER!
HE LIKES THE CANDIDATES THAT SUPPORTED THE WAR!
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
JOHN EDWARDS SUPPORTED THE WAR WHOLE HEARTEDLY
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
PINA IS A WAR MONGER
LOL!
<font color="#000002"><font size="1">[ July 06, 2004 11:12 PM: Message edited by: cincygreg ]</font></font>
ROTFLMAO!
How could I have forgotten that part?
Thanks for bringing that up Reason.
Just another tragic example of drinking and typing.
Actuallly Pina, I had not had one drop of alcohol when I typed that. LOL!
And now I have still only had one beer.
Just say it one time.
LIBERALS SUPPORT THE WAR!
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Agreed. I had thought maybe Clarke but I'm glad he went with Edwards.Quote:
Originally posted by Jumper69:
I, for one, think the selection of Edwards for VP will make the Kerry/Edwards ticket a more formidable opponent come November.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nothing wrong with trial lawyers, well not from being trial lawyers anyway, they help keep the system going.Quote:
I happen to like Edwards (despite being a trial lawyer...sorry Lew) and wish he would have been the nominee instead of Kerry.
Actually voted for Edwards at our democratic caucus here. Didn't think he'd make it but thought he'd make the best president.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well I think that's true to a certain extent. I do believe that the hatred for bush is overshadowing the kerry message and that's a bit of a shame as I think he'll make a damned fine president.Quote:
People like Kerry because they hate Bush. Not because they think Kerry is the solution to the nations problems.
As much as it pains me to say it, Kerry did pick a hell of a choice, as the democrats weeded each other out, Clark was my first choice, then Edwards... but even if he is Vice President, I still will vote for Nadar, and indirectly vote for Bush in the process.
Shame to throw away your vote like that.
Why in the world would you vote for ralph?
Maybe he's voting for Nader because Nader is the only one who didnt support this war by voting it into existance.
Maybe it's because Kerry flip flops on everything.
Maybe if you paid attention you would know that Raven was a big supporter of Edwards during the primaries.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, I know this is going to result in you jumping on my back. It is because, being a democrat I supported every candidate expect John Kerry, I never have supported Kerry and I really don't feel right with some of the things he preaches. I actually was hoping Wesley Clark or Jon Edwards would have worked something out, because I think a Edwards/Clark, Clark/Edwards ticket is the right way to go, but that is neither here nor there anymore. So why aren't you voting for Bush you might ask? Well it is because while I think Bush is the lesser of the two evils, I do not support him either, however, since it is my right to vote I will vote for neither, although I know I am indirectly voting for Bush, which is fine with me because in my eyes he is the lesser of the two evils. So I vote for Nadar because I stand up against both the major parties, but in a way still give Bush that edge.Quote:
Originally posted by Pi?a:
Shame to throw away your vote like that.
Why in the world would you vote for ralph?
While you may think I am throwing my vote away, it is something I believe in. I can?t support Kerry at all, and Bush, well I don?t support him, but he is an evil we know.
Simple question to ask yourself.
Is change for the sake of change good?
If you truly believe that a change in the oval office will make things that much better, then you should vote that way.
But if you look at the grand scale of things and the way the economy is going and believe that things are going in the right direction, then you vote that way.
You just have to belive that the change is what's best for America and not just because you just want a change.
Change for the sake of good is good
Change for the sake of change often isnt.
Raven
So just what is it that you have against Kerry anyway?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The only vote that is "thrown away" is the one not cast.Quote:
Shame to throw away your vote like that.
Why in the world would you vote for ralph?
Ok, I will play, lets see if we can do this like two people having a nice conversation.
Because one of my issues, is Kerry's stance on issues. It seems whatever he feels will win him favor is the side he goes on, whether or not he disagreed/agreed with it in the past:
My biggest cripe with him is that he did vote for the war only to then vote no, which he only made one vote, note many like the Bush ad depicts, which is wrong on Bush's part, on better body armor, heathcare for soldiers, and higher combat pay. That is an issue that has stuck in my head and I think about it everytime I see Kerry. Your are going to send our boys over there, then not give them the best of the best? Granted Bush should have thought about that before even sending them over there, but still... there both wrong on that. That is why I will vote for Nadar.
It is something I believe in.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Besides, whether this is true or not is irrelevant. The bottom line is:Quote:
Because one of my issues, is Kerry's stance on issues. It seems whatever he feels will win him favor is the side he goes on, whether or not he disagreed/agreed with it in the past:
PERCEPTION IS REALITY!!
If Raven feels like he does, then others do too and that's bad news for Kerry.