Until you have reached the rank of Arbiter of Bigsoccer Truth, some things may not be challenged. If any of the Arbiters of Bigsoccer Truth decide something is true, your only choice is to accept it and take the next boat to Jonestown...
Y'know, I find it funny how conservatives always decry political correctness and claim to be in favor of open, unfettered debate ... ... right up until the moment someone from the left gives them what they say they want. Then they whip out the victim card and run home crying to mommy. And the thing of it is, they're not nearly as good at rolling around on the ground as Carlos Ruiz, let alone having his productivity.
As liberals often do, you miss the point... As I said before, I wasnt even talking about that issue, I was refferring to this http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d099:12:./temp/~bdmw2v:: A bill which is titled "A bill to provide for a comprehensive bilateral and verifiable freeze between the United States and the Soviet Union on the testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons systems." So congrats to all of you for proving that the budget cuts, that i wasnt even talking about, were used by bush to mislead the public!!! So while you accomplish that, you can't deny that he tied to get rid of our nukes at the height of the cold war! I really just dont get it with you people, are you really not aware of things like this, or do you just hope that no one else is aware of them???
ok.. that link doesn't even work.. damn, you'll have to go to the Library of Congress site or just google "s.1500 99th congress" and you should be able to find it
So what, exactly, is wrong with trying to get rid of the Soviet Union's nukes in 1985? Wasn't Reagan trying to do the same thing?
Wow, youve managed to prove that Kerry has for almost 2 decades been very concerned about nuclear proliferation. F'ing brilliant, this guy is a dangerous to us all, he doesnt want everyone to have nukes!!! Meanwhile our President is giving stern menacing lookos to Iran and North Korea while getting us so tied up in Iraq we couldnt actually respond to a real threat. Kerry is going to doom us all, its so clear now.
Im sorry, but imho, there is nothing you can do or say that can justify the actions that john kerry wanted to take.... Sometimes diplomacy fails, and instead of making consessions to our enemies when they refuse to cooperate, you go to war... Let me make it very clear that I am not assuming that John Kerry's record proves that he will fail to defend us from terrorists, if the need arises. That being said, I cannot, and will not, vote to elect a man who has been against every war in our lifetime.
Damnit, your right! We should have invaded those pansy ass ruskies when they didnt unilaterally give up their nukes! Yeeeehaaaawwwwww!
actually, what I have proved is that john kerry has made every effort, to stop every war, every time... Liberals make such an effort to cloud the vision of the public with lies and half-truths about the draft, medicare, the economy, the war, voter intimidation... You are so caught up in this little game of always trying to "out-spin" the spinners, that you dont even realize that you have become eveything you were against.. The democratic party is a party that no longer has morals, will go to great lengths to scare the most vulnerable among us, and stop at nothing to regain control of this nation, even if it means completely eliminating the values and morals that it was founded upon...
Oh boy, you are a piece of work arent you? First, Im not a liberal. I could find a lot of things wrong with Kerry if I chose to. The thing is, in the face of the glaring and painful and frankly rather dangerous tendencies in their own candidate, the Bush campaign is hellbent on painting Kerry as a threat to America. Now here's the thing, your arguement is the same that every republican argument is in my eyes. At his absolute worst, Kerry is no more dangerous than George W. Now as for lies and half truths.. have you even ********ing looking at the douchebag in office? Or is that (R) beside his name or that tough talk about terrorists just gospel for you? Put it this way. I dont support Kerry. I OPPOSE Bush. Is Kerry a bit too much of a dove? Yeah, maybe, but hes not so much of a dove that it worries me. On the other hand, Bush's hawk tendencies do scare me, as I see in Iraq a great big cluster******** that the administration is just fine and dandy with.
oh my bad, that was a misstatement, like "global test" or "I actually voted for it, before I voted against it"... i should've said - not by underhanding our threat of nuclear assault... Lemme guess, you think we should've taken the " Please, please, pretty please, listen to us" approach?
First off, let me say that I understand where you are coming from with the argument being a traditional republican argument.. Honestly, both candidates have lied, but the biggest problem I have with Kerry's are that they are going after the weak and unknowing, and he is making large strides in areas such as healthcare and the economy by telling boldface lies... Now, i am sure that you ar someone else will argue that Bush is doing the exactly the same thing, its just a difference of opinion.. The reason i argue for bush in the way i do is because people dont have the same fundamental values as me, and so they just dont get it.. Im sure that you could also say that about me, but i truly, truly believe that while bush has made some mistakes in iraq that have left the door open for the left and extreme left to try to destroy family values, religion, and patriotism, that is no excuse to elect a man who wants to further the damage that has already been done to our country's collective principles..
Waitaminnit here. Are you a moral relativist, as the first statement seems to imply, or a moral absolutist, as the second statement seems to imply? Or are you a flip-flopper?
You seemed to be rather confused as to the difference between a freeze and disarmament. BTW, Foos asked you if getting rid of the Soviet Union's nukes was wrong, and you replied that getting rid of ours was wrong. Happily, the Soviet Union fell apart, but why in the world would you expect the Soviet Union to unilaterally disarm when you're opposed to that action for the United States?
We and the Commies were building nukes to "show resolve" rather than meet defense needs loooong before the nuclear freeze movement.
Kerry was for the Afghanistan war. So, I must say...you are the smartest 2 year old I've ever come across.
my thoughts on this issue can best be summed up with this quote by a guy named Patrick Garrity. " Communists ruled by fear and intimidation. (Reagan) believed that policies of peaceful coexistence, or of passively containing the Soviet Union, would be disastrous. The Communists would over time use the Western fear of war, especially nuclear war, to undermine the confidence of free peoples."
It's probably better just to not comment on this, but you're right, i have misspoken again... but you get the gist of what im saying and can't dispute that he had no choice but to support the war in afghanistan..
you're right i did, i was too busy intimidating black voters and trying to stop stem cell research, to remember to put that in
And you don't think Bush is? No it's not. They're both lying spinners, that is a fact. Check out factcheck.org and read up. You need to rephrase that, because it isn't a reason. "You're on Bush's side because people don't agree with you." Huh? So essentially you want the evil we already know instead of the evil we don't.
No.. bush is not making large strides on with voters on the issues of healthcare and economy by telling boldface lies, check any opinon poll for proof of that one re-read my post.. you cut out this part of it, but i never disputed that bush has lied, i was merely stating that its just a matter of opinion and interpretation, of who is worse.. Again, re-read my post.. i was saying that the reason I argue traditional republican views is because if you dont have the same moral beliefs as me, i cant justify thoughts in the same way that i could to someone with like views.. im just accepting that if you dont have conservative views you wont get what im saying.. I dont agree that this administration should be considered the "evil we already know".. again difference of opinion