Presidential Debate

[440exnacsracer]

so what do you guys think? i think it was a very good debate, and both parties had good statements, but i think kerry had very good diction and an overall superior speech as opposed to bush's stumbling and rambling:rolleyes: , just my 2cents though.

[I-7]

Bush all the way... :confused:

[440exnacsracer]

im not a big fan of either, but i would rather have a flip-flopper than a lier. lol, its just great to have our countries fate in their hands. NADER all the way....j/k:D

[Honda4trax250x]

BUSH



anyway i loved the way he was so calm and not all flustered like kerry, he didnt try to fit in 1000 words per second, and he was leaning over and stuff, not trying to stand up tall, just acting casual

[Quad18star]

I was hoping someone would start a thread , cuz I didn't wanna be the one to start it up . I'm gunna keep my nose out of the whole War thing , cuz I don't want it to turn into another flame fest like the other dudes thread did a few days ago and it got shut down .

I do have one question .... and I'll then get my nose out of here .

Why is it , that the US is allowed to have nuclear weapons , are able to build these types of weapons , but yet they want to rid every other country from having them and testing them? Keery stated that your President is building and testing nuclear type weapons but wants no other country in the world to have them . Please explain me this !!!!!!!!

[Honda4trax250x]

Originally posted by Quad18star
I was hoping someone would start a thread , cuz I didn't wanna be the one to start it up . I'm gunna keep my nose out of the whole War thing , cuz I don't want it to turn into another flame fest like the other dudes thread did a few days ago and it got shut down .

I do have one question .... and I'll then get my nose out of here .

Why is it , that the US is allowed to have nuclear weapons , are able to build these types of weapons , but yet they want to rid every other country from having them and testing them? Keery stated that your President is building and testing nuclear type weapons but wants no other country in the world to have them . Please explain me this !!!!!!!!

i believe its because of violations the other countrys have racked up in the past

[250x#93]

BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FO LIFE:devil:

[440exnacsracer]

i personally think we need to get our noses out of other peoples arses, americans in general are hipocrits (sp?). everyones like hey no more nukes.......5 yrs later....hey lets make nukes:rolleyes:

[Punk'd]

i hope kerry wins and screws up

[Bush0102]

about the nukes: we didnt really mind when India and Pakistan developed their nuclear programs back in the 90s because they are civil countries with strong leadership and their actions werent unpredictible. We are trying to defer rogue nations (ex. Iran, Iraq, and North Korea) who have irrational, fundamentalist/extremist leaders, and whose actions often defy the wishes of the global community (the UN). If these countries were to possess nuclear weapons, they are going to be 1,000 times more likely to use them as an offensive weapon as opposed to a deterrant of war, and most likely in a covert matter against the US or one of our allies.

Why are the Canadians so critical of our government? Honestly why do you care, its not going to affect you and you cant even vote anyway.

As far as the debate goes... Bush made some key points but looked tired and unprepared. I'd have to say Kerry dominated, but he used a lot of incorrect facts and mostly did what he always does: acted cheesy (how about that intro, thanking florida) and only complained instead of offering solutions.

W04

[I-7]

Originally posted by Punk'd
i hope kerry wins and screws up


That was almost the stupidest thing I have ever heard. You want him to win and then screw up the US? Is that what you are trying to say?


Typical...:huh

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Honda4trax250x
i believe its because of violations the other countrys have racked up in the past Ahh I see .... but maybe the countries building these , think the same way about the United States .

I think if there is going to be a ban on nuclear weapons , it should affect EVERY nation in the World . If no other country has nuclear weapons , what would be it's use for the USA to have them ???

I think Kerry made his strongest points , when he said the USA needs to build stronger relations with other nations . I think he has wind that many other countries do not support the way the USA has handled themselves with MANY issues not just the warm in the past years . Building strong relationships with other countries , will help strengthen the United States ......

Sorry i said I'd get my nose out of this after the first question , but I just had to throw that last bit in . Please I'd like to continue hearing others opinions about the nuclear weapons issue without any flamming .

[440exnacsracer]

Why are the Canadians so critical of our government?


typical american thoughts,....we are in everyone elses crap, so why cant quad18star at least share his opinions:confused: :confused:

[LTandRaptorider]

Originally posted by Quad18star
Why is it , that the US is allowed to have nuclear weapons , are able to build these types of weapons , but yet they want to rid every other country from having them and testing them? Keery stated that your President is building and testing nuclear type weapons but wants no other country in the world to have them . Please explain me this !!!!!!!!

Very simple... because we can... and we want to be the only ones to have them because we're the only ones responsible enough to have em... and we love things that make loud noises with bright lights! :p

now you just hush, or I ain''t bringing the Keystone Ice! :blah:

[stupid driver]

I believe each candidate has his strong and weak points. Kerry is a very intelligent man, and he would most likely make a good president; however, he has a tendency to switch his opinions to make people happy. keep in mind, this will eventually bite you in the ***.

President Bush has the experience to lead our Country. He is quite poised as an individual, and has proved that he handles pressuring situations extremely well. his downfall is his lack of intelligence, not to mention the misleading of Americans about Iraq.

I believe i am being fair to both candidates. True, we have seen much better presidents in the past. But these men would both do a decent job in office.
If my vote counted(15yrs old, damn) I would vote for.....Bush.
He has experience. He knows what to expect. The most important reason IMO, is the fact that he has Colin Powell as Secretary of State.

[derekhonda]

Your old enought to have experienced a bit of the cold war, if not, surely you read something in the history books about it. Its all about deterence, the country with the most weapons...wins, its that simple. Want to be in controll of the world, move out of canada, but trust me it isnt a pleasure to be in controll, with all the fun comes the bull****. we ahve to be the police of the world, and rid all the crazy asses like hussein of their weapons when they have proven over the course of history they are not capable of using their power wisely.



Originally posted by Quad18star
I was hoping someone would start a thread , cuz I didn't wanna be the one to start it up . I'm gunna keep my nose out of the whole War thing , cuz I don't want it to turn into another flame fest like the other dudes thread did a few days ago and it got shut down .

I do have one question .... and I'll then get my nose out of here .

Why is it , that the US is allowed to have nuclear weapons , are able to build these types of weapons , but yet they want to rid every other country from having them and testing them? Keery stated that your President is building and testing nuclear type weapons but wants no other country in the world to have them . Please explain me this !!!!!!!!

[Bush0102]

I never said he couldnt share his opinions. I was just curious as to why the canadians (and the rest of the world for that matter) care so much about this election...tell me buddy, without looking it up on the internet, who were the candidates in the last Canadian election? who cares other than canadians?

and how are we "in everyone elses crap"? maybe a few countries, but how are we screwing with say, Mongolia?

back off jackass i was just stating an opinion. Never did i say nobody else is allowed to share theirs.

And i'm proud as hell to be a typical American. Do you have a problem with that? You're from Georgia, i see. Are you not a typical american?

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Bush0102


Why are the Canadians so critical of our government? Honestly why do you care, its not going to affect you and you cant even vote anyway.

You're right ... I can't vote .... but to be honest with you .... the actions of YOUR President affect the world .

Another reason why our many Canadians critize your government , is because if you haven't already noticed we are neighbouring countries . We do trade every minute of every day with your country . Tonights debate was about your Homeland security and war on terrorist . I agree , terrorists should be brought to justice . But what you haven't heard , is how the trade between our countries is struggling . I would personally love to see a president in the power of the USA that WANTS to do trade with Canada . Not a president that shuts down the borders and doesn't allow our farmers meats to be exported into your country .... or that doesn't want to screw us out of the lumber agreements .

[stupid driver]

Quad18star, you have every right to voice your opinion. You gave your opinion, and backed it up with a good argument, not some form of flaming BS.

[Bad Habit]

I thought it was a very good debate, actually the first debate I have ever watched start to finish, and I've been old enough to vote for....well....several elections. Both of them had the upper hand at one time or another. There is no doubt, however, that Kerry is a better public speaker than W.

IMO, these two could not be more opposite from each other. Bush has a more aggressive position, like a pit bull. Kerry is more passive, like a lamb. Given the condition of things in the world right now, I'd take a pit bull over a lamb. If someone comes up and slaps your sister, do you talk to them and try to come to a peaceful understanding so he apologizes? No, you punch the mofo in the mouth until he is unable to apologize.

[Bush0102]

Originally posted by Quad18star I would personally love to see a president in the power of the USA that WANTS to do trade with Canada . Not a president that shuts down the borders and doesn't allow our farmers meats to be exported into your country .... or that doesn't want to screw us out of the lumber agreements . [/B]

We didnt shut down the border. We tightened security at the canadian border because its a lot easier for a terrorist to fly to canada and then drive into the US. Its a simple security measure. I've been to canada by car 4 times since 9/11. The border didnt seem closed to me...

But honestly, as for the trading part. One of the biggest issues in this election is job creation. Importing Canadian lumber and beef will only hurt our economy. American agriculture and forestry are already struggling industries, and we pour billions of taxpayer dollars into creating agricultural and forestry resources every year. Importing canadian goods costs more, wastes money and resources, and no American jobs or income are going to be created by importing. Canada's a great place and all, but when it comes to the economy i'd rather the USA help itself than its neighbors.

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by derekhonda
Your old enought to have experienced a bit of the cold war, if not, surely you read something in the history books about it. Its all about deterence, the country with the most weapons...wins, its that simple. Want to be in controll of the world, move out of canada, but trust me it isnt a pleasure to be in controll, with all the fun comes the bull****. we ahve to be the police of the world, and rid all the crazy asses like hussein of their weapons when they have proven over the course of history they are not capable of using their power wisely.

I agree %100 with taking the power out of the hands of countries leaders that abuse their power and have the mentality of killing everyone in the world expect themselves . Iraq isn't just in war with the United States .... it is in war with many other countries that want the same thing the US wanted ... that was to Disarm Saddam . I also won't disagree that the USA is the strongest nation in the world because of the weapons that you guys have . But to tell everyone else they can't have the weapons except for you guys , is a double standard . You need a President that will work along side other countries and rid the world of the terrorists and weapons of mass destruction . Like it was mentioned in the debate ...... North Korea is known to have Nukes . No proof was made before Iraq was invaded , that they had Nuclear weapons . Now you have to think to yourself ... as a President .... do you try and Disarm a nation that has publicly said they ahve nukes and will use them ... or go after a leader of a country that you suspect might have nuclear weapons ??


And Bart .... you better bring that damn beer . :devil:

I also wanted to add to this .... you asked why don't I move from Canada . The answer is very simple . As much as I can b1tch and complain about the people running my country , I love the fact that as a Canadian , I have what I have .... the threat of terrorists attacking Canada is very minimal , I have free health care etc . Sure I have a government that has lied straight to our faces , billions of dollars have disappeared and gone into politicians pockets ...sure we're a country thats in debt by Billions of dollars .... but frankly I don't care . When I retire I have my health care , I have a Canadian Pension from my federal government . The debt will never be solved but I won't lose sleep over it . Just like many of you guys and girls love your country ... I love mine and I'm proud to say I am a Canadian.

[Bad Habit]

Originally posted by Quad18star
We do trade every minute of every day with your country . Tonights debate was about your Homeland security and war on terrorist . I agree , terrorists should be brought to justice . But what you haven't heard , is how the trade between our countries is struggling . I would personally love to see a president in the power of the USA that WANTS to do trade with Canada . Not a president that shuts down the borders and doesn't allow our farmers meats to be exported into your country .... or that doesn't want to screw us out of the lumber agreements .

*Disclaimer*
Quadstar, you do make some good points and voice them in a respectful manner. So my comments are also meant in a respectful manner.


This is a problem I have with other countries. Everyone seems to want something from us. Everyone loves to trade (which is mostly the US importing form other countries) with the US, but when Bush stood up and said (paraphrasing)"it's time to smash these threats once and for all, who's gonna help?" All these same countries that need our all might dollar brow beat us and said no, just try to talk it out and be diplomatic. This is the thing I respect the most about how Bush has handled things. In a nutshell he said, we're gonna go after them, if you don't wanna help, than piss off, because we don't need your permission either. They attacked the U.S., so we WILL do something decisive about it.

[Bush0102]

Originally posted by Quad18star
Iraq isn't just in war with the United States .... it is in war with many other countries that want the same thing the US wanted ... that was to Disarm Saddam ..... But to tell everyone else they can't have the weapons except for you guys , is a double standard . You need a President that will work along side other countries and rid the world of the terrorists and weapons of mass destruction . Like it was mentioned in the debate ...... North Korea is known to have Nukes . No proof was made before Iraq was invaded , that they had Nuclear weapons . Now you have to think to yourself ... as a President .... do you try and Disarm a nation that has publicly said they ahve nukes and will use them ... or go after a leader of a country that you suspect might have nuclear weapons ??


1) We are not at war with Iraq, nor is Iraq at war with the US-backed 30 nation coallition.

2) We do not tell everyone they cant have weapons. We're not askin France, England, India, Pakistan, Russia, or China to disarm. We're also not trying to stop South Africa or Israel's weapons programs. If Canada wanted Nukes, i'm sure we'd be fine with that. I listed our reasoning behind disarming rogue nations in an earlier post.


.
Bush0102 wrote: .about the nukes: we didnt really mind when India and Pakistan developed their nuclear programs back in the 90s because they are civil countries with strong leadership and their actions werent unpredictible. We are trying to defer rogue nations (ex. Iran, Iraq, and North Korea) who have irrational, fundamentalist/extremist leaders, and whose actions often defy the wishes of the global community (the UN). If these countries were to possess nuclear weapons, they are going to be 1,000 times more likely to use them as an offensive weapon as opposed to a deterrant of war, and most likely in a covert matter against the US or one of our allies

3) Do you want to invade a country with a 1,000,000 man army whose biggest (and closest) ally is one of our most valuable trading partners and also posesses a 1,000,000 man army? North Korea can be pressured diplomatically by China. Also, North Korea's leader has not invaded another nation, used chemical weapons against its own people, or shot missiles into heavily populated civillian cities in the past. North Korea isnt training or harboring Terrorists, torturing its dissidents (that we know of), and actually somewhat responds to diplomatic pressure.

[Bush0102]

Originally posted by Bad Habit


This is a problem I have with other countries. Everyone seems to want something from us. Everyone loves to trade (which is mostly the US importing form other countries) with the US, but when Bush stood up and said (paraphrasing)"it's time to smash these threats once and for all, who's gonna help?" All these same countries that need our all might dollar brow beat us and said no, just try to talk it out and be diplomatic. This is the thing I respect the most about how Bush has handled things. In a nutshell he said, we're gonna go after them, if you don't wanna help, than piss off, because we don't need your permission either. They attacked the U.S., so we WILL do something decisive about it.


Great point.

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Bush0102
We didnt shut down the border. We tightened security at the canadian border because its a lot easier for a terrorist to fly to canada and then drive into the US. Its a simple security measure. I've been to canada by car 4 times since 9/11. The border didnt seem closed to me...

But honestly, as for the trading part. One of the biggest issues in this election is job creation. Importing Canadian lumber and beef will only hurt our economy. American agriculture and forestry are already struggling industries, and we pour billions of taxpayer dollars into creating agricultural and forestry resources every year. Importing canadian goods costs more, wastes money and resources, and no American jobs or income are going to be created by importing. Canada's a great place and all, but when it comes to the economy i'd rather the USA help itself than its neighbors.

When I mentioned about shutting down the borders , I didn't mean in the security sense ... I meant as in not allowing trade to happen . Once again I agree that tighter border patrol was needed to keep terrorists from roaming freely between countries . Trust me , the last thing I would want to have happen , is for a terrorist to come through a canadian border.

Yes supporting your own Nations economy is a must . But trades happening between the two countries is brought down to a very small percentage ... 1 or 2 % is trade . There has always been trade between our countries , whether it be cattle , lumber , or minerals but President Bush has really tightened it up and on some occasions shut it down . 90% of the worlds Nickel comes out of Canada .... my home town to be exact . Nickel is used to produce those weapons your country uses , bullets etc . When Bush started shutting down the trade between countries , many jobs were lost because the US is one of the major importers of Nickel .

Sure .... I agree to make sure you take care of your own people first , create jobs in your country before helping others . But shutting down borders isn't the way to do it .

[Bush0102]

hmm...i'll have to look into the details of NAFTA to see whats up with all of this. I think Canada is still the #1 trading partner with the US though....not 100% sure but im pretty positive thats the case.

[LazeR]

Originally posted by Bush0102
about the nukes: we didnt really mind when India and Pakistan developed their nuclear programs back in the 90s because they are civil countries with strong leadership and their actions werent unpredictible. We are trying to defer rogue nations (ex. Iran, Iraq, and North Korea) who have irrational, fundamentalist/extremist leaders, and whose actions often defy the wishes of the global community (the UN). If these countries were to possess nuclear weapons, they are going to be 1,000 times more likely to use them as an offensive weapon as opposed to a deterrant of war, and most likely in a covert matter against the US or one of our allies.

Why are the Canadians so critical of our government? Honestly why do you care, its not going to affect you and you cant even vote anyway.

As far as the debate goes... Bush made some key points but looked tired and unprepared. I'd have to say Kerry dominated, but he used a lot of incorrect facts and mostly did what he always does: acted cheesy (how about that intro, thanking florida) and only complained instead of offering solutions.

W04

I know this post goes back to the other page but has great points! I back Bush 110%. He may not have made all the best decisions but the decisions he has made he is sincere with and believes in! He does not flip-flop on them and change his views when other ppls views changes like Kerry!

Bush could of done better in the debate. He did act unprepared and or tired, but i still believe he did do decent. Could of done alot better, but hopefully he will in the next debate!

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Bush0102
1) We are not at war with Iraq, nor is Iraq at war with the US-backed 30 nation coallition.

2) We do not tell everyone they cant have weapons. We're not askin France, England, India, Pakistan, Russia, or China to disarm. We're also not trying to stop South Africa or Israel's weapons programs. If Canada wanted Nukes, i'm sure we'd be fine with that. I listed our reasoning behind disarming rogue nations in an earlier post.

3) Do you want to invade a country with a 1,000,000 man army whose biggest (and closest) ally is one of our most valuable trading partners and also posesses a 1,000,000 man army? North Korea can be pressured diplomatically by China. Also, North Korea's leader has not invaded another nation, used chemical weapons against its own people, or shot missiles into heavily populated civillian cities in the past. North Korea isnt training or harboring Terrorists, torturing its dissidents (that we know of), and actually somewhat responds to diplomatic pressure.

No one has been able to get into north korea for the last several years . It's a mystery to everyone , as to what goes on behind the fences . I have a cousin that has just come back from teaching in south korea ..... he's got pictures and video footage of the guards standing 10 deep all along the north and south korean border . How do you know they aren't harbouring terrorists .... how is the world supposed to knwo they aren't planning an attack . If a country has no intentions of war or terror , what is the point of having Nukes and other weapons of mass destruction? I wouldn't doubt for one second , that North Korea is capable of starting an all out war . For a nation has has said on a global front , that they have nuclear weapons and aren't affraid to use them , makes me scared as to just how mentally unstable the leaders of that country really are . Go see the north korean border .... check out the fences with the guard and their machinery . You wouldn't make it 3 inches onto their land and you'd be shot dead. They are a country that WANTS power in the world .... and I guarantee one day they'll try and have their way .

Who wants to comment on Kerry's report of the US guarding the oil in Iraq and not other buildings with valuble information . ????

[Bush0102]

The 38th parallel has been guarded like that since the mid 1950s...thousands of North Korean troops on one side, thousands of South Korean/US troops on the other. I dont think NK would hold terrorists because of the clash between islamic principles and communism. HOWEVER, North Korea has strong ties with Iran, providing their link to terror. But yeah i've seen pictures of that border, my uncle flew F-16s in Korea several years ago.

Honestly i think they want nukes to be in the Big Boys Club. Plus they probably want to use it as leverage to get more foreign aid put in their country (much of which they lost becuase of punishment for the development of their nuke programs). China wont let this happen, NK is an embarassment to them.

As far as what Kerry said: Attacks happen on Iraqi oil pipelines every week, just as often as carbombings and kidnappings...doesnt seem too secure to me. I dont think the US could "guard" iraqi oil. There is too much OPEC regulation in the Iraqi oil industry, and they certainly arent going to allow the US to directly pipe oil only for use by the US.

[Bush0102]

anybody else want to discuss this with me??? im in the mood again...

[Bush0102]

Originally posted by Quad18star
No one has been able to get into north korea for the last several years.


Last week ambassadors from Germany and England (i think those were the 2 countries) were inside NK. A couple years ago Madeline Albright took a big tour of the country, and in typical Clinton Administration fashion, accomplished absolutely nothing (This is the woman who as the US secretary of state asked the question "whats the point of having the most powerful military in the world if we never use it?"). Of course they werent shown the starving infants and all the bad stuff, but people do get inside of there.

Besides, its not like we "had people" in Iraq. Most of the intelligence is either through Satellite reconiassance or covert information gathering by CIA contacts...

[humboldt hills]

Originally posted by Honda4trax250x
BUSH



anyway i loved the way he was so calm and not all flustered like kerry, he didnt try to fit in 1000 words per second,

Does Bush even know 1000 words?

[Bush0102]

yeah, i'd probably say he does know 1,000 words.

After all, his speech at the 2004 RNC was 4,880 words, his speech to the army war college was 3,659 words, his address to the nation on Iraq was 2,003 words, his 2004 state of the union was 5,282 words.... the list goes on.

Just those four speeches combine to make 15,824 words. I'd be willing to bet the farm on the fact that more than 1000 of those were different.

If you want to be a smartass, i will be too.

[Tommy 17]

Originally posted by Bush0102


If you want to be a smartass, i will be too.


typically most people would say ur a dumbass whos overly obsessed with someone... how many words did he say 3 weeks ago???? what was his 1st word... i bet u know that 2...

humbolt i'm sry but the 1000 word thing was beyond funny...

[Pappy]

Originally posted by Quad18star


Who wants to comment on Kerry's report of the US guarding the oil in Iraq and not other buildings with valuble information . ????

ill tell you why, because it was hit during the opening rounds of air strikes repeatedly. there may have been information inside but highly unlikely anything we didnt already know.

the reason the military took immediate control of important oil locations was two fold...

1) too prevent insurgants from setting them on fire like they did in 1991

2) the key to getting the iraqi people back on thier feet will come from money generated by thier oil production

now i dont know about the rest of you but i have no intelligent arguement as why the USA would want to take iraqi oil. if we did, it would cause such an uproar in opec and the world for that matter that it wouldnt be feasible or rationale. anyone who buys into that theology is nuts. if the USA wanted oil we would take over a nation that could provide us with enough oil for longer then what iraq could give us

[Bush0102]

im not a dumbass, its called research. i'm not obsessed with anyone, i just want people to know the truth. and his comment wasnt really that funny. Do you want me to look up how many words he said 3 weeks ago? I could do it if you wanted me to.

[Pappy]

id say bush having a masters degree will more then likely put him alot higher up the intelligence ladder then the majority of those bashing him

[Bush0102]

both candidates are pretty intelligent... Kerry went to Yale and got his law degree from i think Boston College. Bush is a yale grad too and got his MBA from harvard...

[Quad18star]

Pappy , Thanks for the responce about the oil .... I'd also like to hear your views about the nuclear weapons . If the United States government is all for shutting down nuclear weapons around the world ... why do they still produce and test these types of weapons ??? If the nations around the world agreed to stop making and testing nuclear weapons , do you think the USA would follow and they themselves get rid of all their weapons of mass destruction? This was the subject that caught my attention the most lastnight while listening to the debate . The agreement the nations want to have happen , is to abolish ALL nations of nuclear weapons .... it doesn't matter if you're a threat to the world or not . I think they want to set it out on the table , that if the world goes into another war , we won't kill ourselves with nukes . Hell there's enough nukes on the earth right now to destroy the world 10 times over . Would you support a President that would agree to disassemble his nuclear weapons if the rest of the world did?

Also what is your stand about your government invading Iraq , instead of Invading North Korea who has openly told everyone they have nuclear weapons and will not hesitate to use them?

Just to set it clear with everyone out there , I'm not lookking for this to start any kind of arguement ... I love debates and want to hear the opinions of others . It seems in previous threads , many topics have been shut down not long after I have posted stuff because people take it the wrong way and get all pissy about it.

[Pappy]

Nuclear Weapons:

i think the current state of the world leaves the USA as the most dominate superpower with the capabilty to leverage this power to help reduce the rest of the worlds stock piles. and as stated last night those stock piles are being disolved. the USA more then likely has a missle defense system in place but wont openly reveal it.

North Korea had nukes back when slick willy was running the show and there is proof to that effect. its becoming public knowledge to the majority of the world and i feel its in our best interests to allow China to be the bully in this fight.

I found it damn near insane that Kerry would stand there running for president and proclaim that the USA can tell everyone else no nukes yet we still seek advanced bunker busting missles and plan to use them. That statement alone shows his disregard for the integrity of the USA IMO. mouthing off as a senator is one thing, mouthing off as a presidential candidate is another.

bush seemed to have a grasp on factual information regarding forgeign affairs. i find it uncany that for years the democrats have told us that if the USA would stop meddling in other countries affairs and let its neighbors to the dirty work we would be less hated in the world. well after listening to bush last night it sounded to me like he was doing just that. ofcourse kerry see's it different ....another flip flop i guess

[zephead400ex]

Originally posted by Quad18star
Also what is your stand about your government invading Iraq , instead of Invading North Korea who has openly told everyone they have nuclear weapons and will not hesitate to use them?

Here is my opinion.

At the time we invaded Iraq, the intelligence that Bush received gave him credible evidence that Hussein was possessing nukes and was in the posistion to use them. We all know Saddam's history, why would we or anyone wait until something happens before we take action? Saddam was/is a crazed man who hates the US. He would want to cause more terror in the US than bin Laden and his raghead coherts did on 9/11.

I agree with statements from previous post; NK is not a "threat" to the rest of the world. China will put economic pressue on NK who will not have much choice but to abide by the "rules" China sets. The US can allow other countries to pressure NK before any direct military involvement is needed. The UN must also step in and become a credible committee again.

[Pappy]

they should have let me step in for bush last night....



Moderator: 2 minutes Mr Kerry , new question. "what do you think is the problem with the current policy in Iraq?"

Mr Kerry: well jim, i feel its a coloasal mistake in judgement. i know about war. i have seen war. ive seen the horror of war. ive seen the damge done to families and what the cost is. ive been to disney land and seen the fate of our veterans that muddle along in wheel chairs. ive seen the children weep for thier fathers who will never return. ive stood in front of our aliies and called all of them savages and war criminals. ive.....

Moderator: times up. Pappy 90 seconds to respond

Pappy: WTF ...just answer the question you moron. ive seen ive been...you arent jack chit! you have spent the last 20 years living on my tax money and snuggling up to some rich b!tch and wanting me to feel your pain. stop acting like a damn actor playing a text book politicain and listen to me.....

"WE ARE IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN KILLING ANYONE THAT WANTS TO FIGHT US. THERE IS ONE WAY TO DEFEAT AN ENEMY AND THATS TO KILL THEM. YOU CAN STAND AND PREACH AND FLIP FLOP LIKE A DAMN FISH OUT OF WATER BUT THE FACT IS WE TOOK THE WAR TO THEM, ON THIER LAND AND THEY ARE DYING ON THIER STREETS. THE LAST TIME I CHECKED WE WERENT MOPPING RAGHEADS OFF MAINSTREET IN BOISE IDAHO! SO I TELL YOU HERE INFRONT OF THE AMREICAN PUBLIC.....STFU :eek: "

[BOONE450R]

Bush hes a texan whats not to like,
tx moto (dont mess with tx) usa moto should be (dont mess with the usa):macho

[zephead400ex]

Pappy...I like your style!:D

[MY450R]

everyone *****ed about how the pres.didnt take nessesary precautions regarding 9/11 now he wants to stop terrorism before another attack on the US and everyone critsizes him for taking these precautions
what a world we live in i mean talk about flip flop
thats exactly how we are acting as a nation 1st its one thing then its another
make up your minds either we sit here and talk while terrorist plan an attack or we go kick some *** and dont give them a chance

[Flynbryan19]

Although I don't think of myself as overly political intelligent, I do have to say the one answer that jumped out in my head when quadstar18(I think) asked why we aren't going after NK about the nuke situation.

We are trying to let China do it for us.

I think one of the most common opinions of the US from other nations is that we stick our nose too much in to situations that we don't belong. As it also seems Kerry feels. So shouldn't these people be APPLAUDING Bushes decision to let NK next door neighbor handle the situation, and not us?

I find everyones opinions VERY interesting, and just this year am I starting to develop an interest in politics. I do have to say though that I am a republican and I support Bush. I support his plans for Iraq, but more over I support him for his stand on other topics not just the war.

[gyt-r450]

BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Flynbryan19]

Since the forum I posted this on is slow today I'll let ya'll look at it and see if theres any productive questions/debate material in it.

"I watched the debate last night as well. And though I still support Bush I have to say that there were a couple of questions about the war for which Bush didn't have much of an answer. I think the reason People like Kerry is because he's telling people a definate time span that we'll be out of Iraq.

Notice I said "people" and not "I".

The problem is both Bush as well as Kerry really do not know how long it will take for us to get out. The difference is that Bush is honest, and won't throw a date out just to make people happy. Kerry, on the other hand is giving dates/time spans because its what the alot of the country wants to hear. He doesn't care if its a realistic goal or not as long as it gets him into office. Personally I think Bush's desire to not make up false time lines is what hurt him last night. Bush knows it will take time to teach this country how to stand on their own two feet, and Kerry doesn't care. He just wants to pull us out because he thinks its a "popular" opinion.

Also although Bush was able to retaliate when Kerry said we had no supporters, he did not have an answer for why so much of OUR troops were there in comparison to the other countrys out there with us. Now it could very well be that they just don't have the troop resources we do, but there was not much of a come back for that question. His response was to criticize Kerry for talking down our allies. I think there should have been a better come back for Bush.

What also hurt Bush was that he didn't have much of a comeback (correct me if I've forgotten his response, I may very well have) for Kerry's comment about Bush taking away money from our police/fire/emt funds to up the money available for the war.

What I did find funny though was that Kerry started out his arguement last night saying that Sadam was not the threat, and that the lack of WMD in Iraq was further evidence of this. But later after W called him out on Kerry looking at the same info as Bush he said Sadam WAS a threat.....? Interesting.....And all though it is starting to escape me as time goes on there were other topics Kerry change his stand point on during the course of the debate. Bush also did a very good job of providing proof that Kerry was making inacurrate statments about spendings for supplies and other topics.

Although it doesn't matter much to me, you do have to admitt also that Kerry IS a better speaker than Bush. Whether hes giving factual information or not is questionable at best, but he is smooth and convincing. For people sitting on the fence that can be very persuading..... For myself personally I am voting for standpoints the President has on tax cuts, marriage morals, and pro-life/stem cell research. Not JUST the war. These(as well as other) topics are also VERY important and should also be the deciding factors behind who is picked for president in November. Unfortunately I think Kerry already knows his most strong foot to stand on and will do his best to keep away from those topics(that Bush is strong in), and keep the focus more on telling all the country how he thinks the President was wrong about the war.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that this is by no means going to be a shoe in. If you believe Bush is the right man for the job(like I do) when November rolls around get out there and VOTE! It is tightening up more and more in the popularity polls."

[Quad18star]

Originally posted by Flynbryan19


Although it doesn't matter much to me, you do have to admitt also that Kerry IS a better speaker than Bush. Whether hes giving factual information or not is questionable at best, but he is smooth and convincing. For people sitting on the fence that can be very persuading..... For myself personally I am voting for standpoints the President has on tax cuts, marriage morals, and pro-life/stem cell research. Not JUST the war. These(as well as other) topics are also VERY important and should also be the deciding factors behind who is picked for president in November. Unfortunately I think Kerry already knows his most strong foot to stand on and will do his best to keep away from those topics(that Bush is strong in), and keep the focus more on telling all the country how he thinks the President was wrong about the war.



You're right with what you said you are going to base your voting on . What the leader of your country will do in terms of taxes , marriages, research for better living . I think these are some of the things the people of ANY country should base their votes upon . The war is a major issue for Americans , but there is more to life than just the war . That is another subject I'd like to hear from those that are trying to run your country ( even though it won't affect me as a Canadian .... still interesting to watch and listen to)

As far as the comment that North Korea is not a threat to the rest of the world .... thats hard to believe. When a nation openly admits they will use nuclear and biological weapons , that seems like a threat to me . Were Afghans threats before 9/11 happened? Not that I can recall . I never remember hearing about the Taliban before 9/11 . Will it take an attack on another country from maybe the North Koreans to open up the worlds eyes and say " Well holy chit ... I guess they weren't joking when they said they'd use the weapons"

As far as the "intelligence" the United States had about Iraq having nuclears and biological weapons .... where are these weapons?? There still hasn't been ANY proof to the world that Iraq has or had any types of these weapons . I personally think , this is one of the main reasons that many Nations are now skeptical about commiting troops and funds . People WANT facts and proof now days before they commit to something . Tough to commit troops when 90% of the troops that have died have been from the enforcers side .

Yes Saddam needed to be taken out of power ... I won't argue about that . His people needed to live freely and not under the ruling of an army . I think other nations of the world would have supported this war to remove him from power and allow his people to live freely , but that was not the plan for this war . The plan was to make sure the weapons of mass destruction were seized ..... but none of them have been found .

[Giz400ex]

Originally posted by Honda4trax250x
BUSH



anyway i loved the way he was so calm and not all flustered like kerry, he didnt try to fit in 1000 words per second, and he was leaning over and stuff, not trying to stand up tall, just acting casual Did you watch the same debate I did??? Bush was the one getting all frig-up:huh

[CJ400EX]

BUSH!!

Bush is a true American!! He lets you know where he stands on issue's a nd that's that. He does not back down and change his VIEWS to fit his audience.


It is easy to say what you would do different after the fact. (911)
Most of the time Kerry was saying what the President did not do & most of it is not true

I do not like to here some knock down a person to make himself look good.

If Kerry become President I will guarantee allot of riding areas will get shutdown! Most of your Environmentalist are Democrats!

[2001Toomey]

BUSH!! (But I'm only 15)

As far as everyone saying that we should ban nuclear weapons, it seems like a good idea except for one thing. It is reasonable to think that the USA would follow the ban and get rid of weapons. Other European countries that had such weapons would probaly get rid of them too. The problem is that the countries that we set the bans on that are considered offensive and radical and un-predicatable, will not listen to these bans. Do you think that just because WE ban nukes, that NK or these Middle East countries wil listen? NO. They have them because they want to use them. The rulers are evil and are just waiting for the best time to use them. The same goes with out lawing guns. Of course all of the law abiding citizens will follow the law and not own a gun! The problem is that all of the lawless criminals who use guns to break laws will not listen or follow and anti-gun law! I say let everyone have guns, and just make sure that the police works hard to catch criminals. And put them in jail for a lont time, not 3 months and then set them back to the streets!

I agree with invading Iraq. I cannot understand every time some one says "well they didn't attack us, why did we invade?". Can you imagine if we would have invaded Afghanistan in 2000? There would have been an uproar in the US. People saying, why did we do this, why did we do that. YOU HAVE TO ACT FIRST! What's the reasoning behind waiting to be attacked, and invading after?

Another thing. They are making a huge deal about 1,000 dead soilders. The way that I see it, it is reasonable for 1,000 people who volunteered themselves into the military, to die, and let millions of Iraqis live freely. Not to mention, that it's either the soilders die overseas, or civilians are murdered here at home. So which do you think is more reasonable, 1,000 soilders, or 3,000 innocent civilians?

Pappy, you get a thumbs up from me!

I hope that Bush wins, even though the only things that affects me is which canidate will open more riding places and which will close them down.

BUSH FOR PRESIDENT!!! :D

[CBRSLIDER]

Pappy,

I loved your answer to Kerry's response. I was dying. I am unfortunately working desk work tonight but that sure livened things up. I found it so good that I had to call other guys over to read it.

I respect Kerry for his serving his country when he did but I am sick of hearing about it at every turn. I get a kick out of how he touts his service but never mentions that he then demonstrated against the war, backing those that were once his enemy. I just can't back a man that watched his fellow service men and women die, then returns home a hero and flops to the other side. He pulled a Jane FONDA on us and his fellow service men and women.

As for the debate. Kerry did seem very well prepared. But basically what the debate was, was a critique of Bush and why he went to war in Iraq. All I saw in Kerry's answers were bashes on the war in Iraq. My answer to that is...war is not pretty, mistakes were made, lives were lost, but BUSH ATLEAST had the balls to stick to his guns. He did not get us in there then back out when things looked like they were going bad. Kerry voted for the war, supported it when we were kickin butt, but after it started to south, he jumped ship. Then pointed the finger at Bush for a "failure" in Iraq. That to me shows a man that cannot stick to his beliefs. We don't need a wishy washy, flip-floppin leader that second guesses everything that is done.

Now to us not having the backing of the UN for the war in Iraq. Unfortunately we did not have the backing of the UN but to me there is too much stock put into the UN. We are the strongest nation in the word that does not need the UN to dictate what we can and cannot do. We don't need to have their blessing and I salute Bush for forming his own coalition with other nations. I am not saying that we should disregard the UN but our country was formed due to the over powering English gov. so why would we start bowing now to another larger governing body. We are our own soverign nation and need to seek the help of other nations but don't let the other nations dictate what we need to do for the good of us.

Believe me I hate seeing the number of American soldiers killed growing everyday in Iraq. It makes my heart sink thinking about the families that lost a loved one, a father, a husband, a mother, a wife, a sister or brother, a friend... you get the point. But we made a commitment and our president is sticking to it. If we were to pull out now those lives lost would be for nothing. We committed ourselves to helping Iraq and leaving early without getting the job done would be wrong. I have talked to guys that have come back from Iraq and truely believed what they were doing was noble and just. They have told me they would go back again if they had to without hesitation. The one guy even missed the birth of his daughter and said he would go back if need be. They talked about how the Iraqi people embraced them and thanked them for what they have done and what they are doing. That to me is alot better than a presidential candidate telling me that the war is unjust.

We all have our own opinions on who would make a better president. Since this is an atv oriented website, just remember that we are the enemy of the enviromental movement. In their eyes we should not be permitted to ride our quads in the wonderful woods OR on our man made tracks. They are trying to get rid of us through further restrictions and laws pertaining to who can ride a quad, at what age we can ride, and where we should be able to ride. This is not a scare statment being made by the Bush campaign, but the factual truth of the matter. Senator Kerry is a LIBERAL. He is not only backed by the enviromental elite, ie sierra club, earthfirst, etc, but he is also backed by the National Humane Society, which is against hunting but also against the use of off-road vehicles in the forests because they disturb the animals and their habitat. Yes we are here to share this earth but to shut down every riding area in a national forest because of the spotted owl or Indiana Bat, is wrong. Don't let Kerry fool you. He is a LIBERAL, NOT a hunter, an atv'r, or outdoorsmen. He parades around like a hunter and outdoorsman but only does so for a photo op trying to fool those of us that are weakhearted and can't smell a rat when we see one.

We need to do research to better educate ourselves. We cannot rely on the 90 minute debate or the pundits after the debate to tell us who is better. We need to research each candidate. There was no accountability for false information being quoted last night and there is no accountability unless we research the issues ourselves, and learn who was telling the truth or being accurate. Otherwise we are puppets of the media, the commercials, and the political machines.

Thanks Pennsylvania, the people of EXRiders, and anyone else who read this for your time and understanding on such a tough issue. (how'd I do, president like?)

Let the bashing begin. Pappy give us another round of in your face, hel! ya, smash mouth answers to questions that should have been tackled during the debate.

thanks
Ray

[CJ400EX]

I think Bush told everyone how it is last night.

(We are making progress, but it is hard work!).

I am from the Security Industry & I can tell you that security in the US is being tighten up & brought up to date with the latest technology. There has been alot done with Home Land Security.

Bush has my vote all the way!!

[440exnacsracer]

back off jackass i was just stating an opinion. Never did i say nobody else is allowed to share theirs.

you basically attacked quadstar because he, in my opinion is sharing better points and aspects of the campaign than you,....was he not "just stating an opinion" as you say, ...and yes i am an american, but just using typical, i was directing that towards the people who support Bush because they want to feel like they are a hardass doing stupid crap,...i respect those of you that support him for the thousands of other reasons, but not the ones that support him on the sole fact of the war,....so YOU back off jackass


...and thanks to the rest of you who have replied in a responsible manner, and sharing your beliefs without flaming

[440exnacsracer]

There is too much OPEC regulation in the Iraqi oil industry, and they certainly arent going to allow the US to directly pipe oil only for use by the US.

this is a good point, but we didnt listen to NATO, so why listen to OPEC?

[polabareus]

Alright, everybody just chill. There is a whole lot of BS being thrown around on this thread. And it's coming from both sides. Just so we're straight about this I'm voting for Bush. There is NOTHING Kerry can say to get me to vote for him. Being that as it may, some of you other Bush supporters need to either get the facts straight (and there are many facts that support the claims of President Bush) or don't say anything. I expect Kerry supporters to say things that hold as much water as nylon stockings (ie: "Kerry will bring in more global support") but please, other Bush supporters, don't fall into their trap. Most democrats are very cynical people that think winning an argument makes you right and if you say anything that isn't spot on they'll tear you apart and make you look foolish with their ridicule. Most Republicans speak from the heart, and that can be easily shredded with cynicism. You may think that everybody has got their mind made up, but I run into lots of people who aren't paying any attention at all to the election and if they vote they're going to vote for the canidate that they saw the best story about on tv or who their friends/relatives are voting for. Of course that's if they even vote at all. So to all you Republicans, get out there and get factual information to people, and get them to vote for Bush. All of us enjoy the outdoors and all of us enjoy our country. If you think Kerry is a good thing for either, you're 110% wrong.

[440exnacsracer]

i personally do not think the votes will matter, i think the electorial college will do what they want, just as they did on the previous election:rolleyes:

[polabareus]

Originally posted by 440exnacsracer
i personally do not think the votes will matter, i think the electorial college will do what they want, just as they did on the previous election:rolleyes:

:grr: AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, get a CLUE!

Do you have any idea of how the electoral system in this country works?

[SRH]

i think of the nuclear weapons thing like this


say they banned guns.... and took them away from the cops....any honest person or cop would not have a gun, but all the criminals and everyone who wanted one would have one and if they ever wanted to use it on the cop the cop would be defenseless now instead of guns and cops put nukes and u.s.,because you could take all the nukes from everyone and the us, then the countries that really wanted them and to use them would get them anyway and either take over the world or destroy it



the us isnt in cahoots (sp) with anyone, were not gonan go nuts and blow people up for no reason were the most powerful country in the world so we police it....thats just how it is ,even if its unfair as much as you other countries resent that if it wasnt for us stepping in with stuff and saying knock it off basically, the whole world would be in chaos eventually.

[440exnacsracer]

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, get a CLUE!

yes,...but do you? considering the electoral college is composed of mainly ceo's of large compainies in the us and the worsening of the american economy, i beleive they will vote democratly....i dont have to explain to you to prove my knowledge, ...but what happend in 2000? did bush win the popular vote???? nope, he won it in the electoral college, and illegally i might add by other measures....do you know what those are?:eek: :eek:

[polabareus]

Originally posted by 440exnacsracer
yes,...but do you? considering the electoral college is composed of mainly ceo's of large compainies in the us and the worsening of the american economy, i beleive they will vote democratly....i dont have to explain to you to prove my knowledge, ...but what happend in 2000? did bush win the popular vote???? nope, he won it in the electoral college, and illegally i might add by other measures....do you know what those are?:eek: :eek:

To say the business world is made up of more democrats than republicans sends a huge red flag up on your understanding of the way things really are. It is correct that Bush did not win the popular vote, however, he did win the most electoral votes. The way the electoral process is set up is very important. It keeps people who are only popular in very specific areas from coming to power (some one like George Wallace, for example). Saying Bush stole the election is just more proof of your lack of knowledge. That's wrong. Saying the business world is going to flock to Kerry because you think the economy is going down hill, that's wrong too. But saying that Bush won the election illegally, now that's just plain stupid.

[allmixedup047]

Originally posted by polabareus
Saying the business world is going to flock to Kerry because you think the economy is going down hill, that's wrong too. But saying that Bush won the election illegally, now that's just plain stupid.
recessions happen, its just a part of our economy, and as you will see if you look at our country's economy history you will notice that after every recession, as our economy builds back we have had the best economy up to that date. if you look in history and see recession graphs you will see repitition in our economy. when our first real recession hit on black thursday in 1929 it took a decade to pull out of it, but after the world wars were over our economy was great. the same thing happened in vietnam as its happening today with our economy. it put us into a small recession. i think what was going on with our economy after 9/11 might not of been the best thing for everyone, but most of us knew it was going to happen. now i think bush will be able to pull us out of this recession and put our economy at the best its ever been.
thats just my 2cents.

[polabareus]

A recession is when the economy is diminishing in growth and since our economy has been growing since 2001, we are clearly out of a recession. Recessions have been around since the very start of our country and they are not all alike. I do agree that the recent recovery in the past few years is huge, but I don't yet know if it's the biggest ever recovery.

[humboldt hills]

I am just amazed at how strongly people feel about some of the worst candidates in american history. Everyone has these predetermined views of whats right for everyone.

Just a few facts for you.
1. Not all republicans speak from the heart.
2. Some but not all democrats do speak from the heart.
3. Big business rules the world.
4. Politicians are the biggest liers in the world.
5. We are in a hell of a mess right now, and it is going to get allot worse no matter who is president.
6. A 2 party system is disfunctional to say the least, but happens to work the best.
7. People will hate the USA now matter what we do for them.
8. Seperation of church and state does not exist.
9. Free speech will never exist until seperation of church and state does.
10. No matter who is president, orv and apv areas will continue to close until we, the riders, get involved.
11. Its not our fault, is a childish statement.
12. Your vote counts.
13. George bush is for the rich.
14. Kerry is for the kind of rich, but not really.
15. People that aren't sure who they are voting for, are the only ones with an open mind.
16. and finally, This election will have the biggest voter turn-out by a huge margin.

My name is Jay Wile
And I am part of the American party.
The greatest party in the world.

[Atreyu]

ahhh...what ever happened to good ol' fashioned soverignity..:blah:

[balla250ex]

Although I'm young, I still follow politics perhaps too closely than I should.

I do not follow one specific "party"... I go with whose views seem best. Now, I know the republicans and Democrats have different views every election, but it's the situation the US may be in that draws me toward a candidate.

As for me. Bush/Cheney 04!

[Goat397]

ok everyone is just repeating everyone else so im not going to continue the trend. Im just going to say lets see someone else do a better job and ive seen several places that kerry is against hunting and snowmobileing (must mean four wheeling too) and theres a **** load of people in this country who participate in both of these activities so i think that they all should know how this "wounderful" candidate feels about them.

[dirtriderex]

Kerry's an a*s, Like he would win the war for us. Easy for him to say when he's not in office. Stupid tree huggin Democrate:macho . Bush has stepped up to the plate (unlike Clinton would have done) and is trying to solve world problems. If I got into this I'd be here all night. Oh if Kerry is elected say good bye to alot of your federal funded ATV trails and property. So vote BUSH:D

[polabareus]

Originally posted by humboldt hills
I am just amazed at how strongly people feel about some of the worst candidates in american history. Everyone has these predetermined views of whats right for everyone.

Just a few facts for you.
1. Not all republicans speak from the heart.
2. Some but not all democrats do speak from the heart.
3. Big business rules the world.
4. Politicians are the biggest liers in the world.
5. We are in a hell of a mess right now, and it is going to get allot worse no matter who is president.
6. A 2 party system is disfunctional to say the least, but happens to work the best.
7. People will hate the USA now matter what we do for them.
8. Seperation of church and state does not exist.
9. Free speech will never exist until seperation of church and state does.
10. No matter who is president, orv and apv areas will continue to close until we, the riders, get involved.
11. Its not our fault, is a childish statement.
12. Your vote counts.
13. George bush is for the rich.
14. Kerry is for the kind of rich, but not really.
15. People that aren't sure who they are voting for, are the only ones with an open mind.
16. and finally, This election will have the biggest voter turn-out by a huge margin.

My name is Jay Wile
And I am part of the American party.
The greatest party in the world.

Those are supposed to be facts?:huh

The liberals have already shown us what they do under terrorist attack. When Osama Bin Ladin bombed the world trade center the first time (the basement) Clinton did nothing and instead spent millions trying to convict Bill Gates of monopoly practices in business. Later when terrorists bombed the US Cole, Bill Clinton did nothing and instead spent millions more trying to destroy the American dream of Bill Gates.
John Kerry stated during the debates that he would have picked a different target against terrorism. He mentioned several nuclear capable nations. Does this mean that he would lead us into nuclear war? John Kerry is scarry!

[440exnacsracer]

Those are supposed to be facts?

i kindof likes those topics,...but rather points of veiw than complete facts;)

[humboldt hills]

Originally posted by 440exnacsracer
i kindof likes those topics,...but rather points of veiw than complete facts;)

Sorry,
They kind of started as facts, Then turned into points of view.
NOt as factual as the amount of words in Bushs past speeches for sure.
I'd like to know which points you don't agree with polabarus.
As for atv trails being closed under Clinton.
Its easy to blame people in power, as long as we aren't blaming ourselves. We, the riding community, could stop most of these lands from being closed. I would say less than 5% of the people that use these trails actually wrote their congressman or state representitive on this issue. We have to get in there head, and let them know we exist. The other side is well organized. All it takes is the right wording in a letter to get these flip-flopping politicians on your side.
Here is a fact for you to digest,
The President or politicians in general do not decide what goes on in this country, the people that convince them what is right ultimately decide for all of us. You and evryone you know needs to get involved. If you expect someone else to do it for you, they will, and these riding areas will continue to dwindle away until all that is left is private tracks, which will continue to close due to lawsuits by neibors and parents.
Sorry, a little off topic, just had to get that out.

[Bush0102]

Originally posted by 440exnacsracer
i personally do not think the votes will matter, i think the electorial college will do what they want, just as they did on the previous election:rolleyes:


haha wow you are pretty ignorant. and bush actually wound up winning the popular vote (narrowly) in Flordia, and his electoral election was legitimate. The electoral college has elected every single US president except for Ford, and Bush isnt the first to lose the popular vote but win the presidency.

[dirtriderex]

Bump, Man I hate sore losers. Face it Bush won fair and square. Anything else is a matter of opinion.

[440exnacsracer]

haha wow you are pretty ignorant. and bush actually wound up winning the popular vote (narrowly) in Flordia, and his electoral election was legitimate. The electoral college has elected every single US president except for Ford, and Bush isnt the first to lose the popular vote but win the presidency.

.....im the ignorant one? you definately just contradicted yourself there buddy.....did he win the pop. vote or not:o :huh :huh :huh
.....and the electoral college has elected EVERY president

[allmixedup047]

Originally posted by 440exnacsracer
.....im the ignorant one? you definately just contradicted yourself there buddy.....did he win the pop. vote or not:o :huh :huh :huh
.....and the electoral college has elected EVERY president
i was going to say something about that becasue i noticed the same thing you did!::o

[batgeek]

Electoral College for Dummies(thats in reference to the books of same name...i'm not calling any of you dummies).

http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecworks.htm

[440exnacsracer]

preciate the link batgeek......long time no see huh? been inactive here lately

[batgeek]

all play and no work makes batgeek a very poor boy :(


but in reality, i just haven't seen very many posts on here lately that i would like to reply to.

[Bush0102]

Originally posted by 440exnacsracer
.....im the ignorant one? you definately just contradicted yourself there buddy.....did he win the pop. vote or not:o :huh :huh :huh
.....and the electoral college has elected EVERY president


1) i did not contradict myself. I said Bush won the popular vote in florida but not in the entire nation.

2) you are wrong, again. Gerald Ford was not elected by the electoral college. when nixon resigned he inherited the presidency according to the Presidential succession act.

[allmixedup047]

Originally posted by Bush0102
haha wow you are pretty ignorant. and bush actually wound up winning the popular vote (narrowly) in Flordia, and his electoral election was legitimate. and Bush isnt the first to lose the popular vote but win the presidency.

:huh ,if thats not contradiction i dont know what is! you said he won the popular vote, and then you said he lost it? you said the electoral vote was legitimate, then you said thats what won it for him?

[zephead400ex]

Looks like "family time!" haha!

[Pappy]

is this "W" in high skool:eek2:

http://www.mulletsgalore.com/picturebooks/icons/AC_DCMG.jpg

[humboldt hills]

I'm right...your wrong....nanabooboo!
Where is the love?

[trick450r]

condolisa rice should be our president...that is my official position, she is more educated than anyone in our government...if and when she ever runs if im 18 she will get my vote no questions asked!

[440exnacsracer]

condolisa rice should be our president

i was thinkin oprah winfrey :D , shed be a great pres.

great pic pappy:D :D

[allmixedup047]

Originally posted by Pappy
is this "W" in high skool:eek2:

http://www.mulletsgalore.com/picturebooks/icons/AC_DCMG.jpg

if that truly is W, than my vote goes for him, hes a real american!
and from the pic that zep head put up, it looks like kerry likes to keep it in the family!:eek:

[DEAL]

Originally posted by Bush0102


Why are the Canadians so critical of our government? Honestly why do you care, its not going to affect you and you cant even vote anyway.



W04


Well being right above you ... and sharing the same culture .. products etc does have a little effect on our country :rolleyes:

[chucked]

Originally posted by allmixedup047
if that truly is W, than my vote goes for him, hes a real american!
and from the pic that zep head put up, it looks like kerry likes to keep it in the family!:eek:

HAHAHA! but hell yea, AC/DC! PLAYBOY!

[440exnacsracer]

Well being right above you ... and sharing the same culture .. products etc does have a little effect on our country


lol i came to the conclusion the person you are answering to is a jack***** making stupid statements, and anything he says, he doesnt really mean, so dont take it personally:rolleyes: :eek2: :o

[allmixedup047]

Originally posted by 440exnacsracer
lol i came to the conclusion the person you are answering to is a jack***** making stupid statements, and anything he says, he doesnt really mean, so dont take it personally:rolleyes: :eek2: :o
and anything he says he will contradict in the same post!!!

[Greg Z]

the debate this passed friday bush won hands down he got the facts out and I bet surprised a lot of people!:p

[440exnacsracer]

the debate this passed friday bush won hands down he got the facts out and I bet surprised a lot of people!

even though i am a kerry supporter, i must admit he had a distinct edge. kerry threw out all of his attacks in the first debate, and bush simple went back and had back up plans and was ready for this debate

[I-7]

Kerry says: "I've never changed my position on the war in Iraq"


:rolleyes:


Bush definatley had the edge in the second debate