The Next Goverment

[*Dissident*]

So, with new elections coming, possibly replacing those in power, and a new presidental election in a few years deffinatly replacing bush, how do you think the power will be distributed? Do you think this will lead to changes, for better or worse? Will things be different? Do you want them to be?

[Phantom]

I hope libertarians take office (which of course will never happen but its nice to dream)
I hope so badly that liberals don't take office, if they do I would seriously consider moving or staying away from tall buildings.

[Dante]

I hope so badly that liberals don't take office, if they do I would seriously consider moving or staying away from tall buildings.

You have some fucking nerve making a comment like that.

[Whisper]

You have some fucking nerve making a comment like that.

Agreed

~~~~~~~~~

America needs the liberals in to shake up the government if nothing else
its gonna fuck up relations with Canada again but meh

[Phantom]

I am serious.
I don't know where you are from but the liberals here are BAD.
I am sure they will pull out of Iraq get rid of ways to tap phones of terrorists and relese the prisoners from guantamo.
Our national security will go to hell and I am sure we will have another attack.

[TheWizard]

I think the democrates will control the house and senate. Better days are on the way. They will take back freedoms Bush took from us.

There will be no major terrorist attacks and the world will settle down without faer of being attacked from the US.


Peace will follow the election of a new president in 2008. The US will finially win the war of terror.

[Bobby]

All, I know is that after this election, things will change, for the better. I think a republican leader would be fine. But a democratic leader would be better for us.

[Phantom]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9DBdokG2D0&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WLqIlt39ws&mode=related&search=

Todays democrat americas shame.
This is not your parents party.

[Phantom]

I think the democrates will control the house and senate. Better days are on the way. They will take back freedoms Bush took from us.

There will be no major terrorist attacks and the world will settle down without faer of being attacked from the US.


Peace will follow the election of a new president in 2008. The US will finially win the war of terror.O yes Bush is such a fascist taking away our freedoms. I mean tapping terrorists fucking phones to prevent ATTACKS is so fascist.
If liberals take office they will be the REAL fascists.
Take away guns. (which BTW is the first thing hitler did)
Impose financial restrictions on what we can do.
Raise taxes
Get us Dependant on their little "programs"
Liberals make me laugh.
NOW adays they just feed off stupid people, kinda like how they rent busses on election day and take mentally handicapped people to vote....FOR THEIR CANDIDATE!
I am going to go find the stats of how many terrorist attacks we have PREVENTED thanks to Bush's nationalistic fascist programs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WH4-7PF7h6M&mode=related&search=

[Bobby]

First of all, no double posting :)
Second of all, my political preference is not based on my parents or anyone around me.

[Phantom]

First of all, no double posting :)
Second of all, my political preference is not based on my parents or anyone around me.Sorry and I never said anything about how your political preference is related to you.
If you mean when I said this is not your parents party you misunderstood it.

[cmpcmp]

Peace will follow the election of a new president in 2008. The US will finally win the war of terror.
hmmm...
so can you tell me again how the election of a new (liberal) president will end the war on terror? i makes no sense, your cause and effects don't seem to have any reasoning behind them. If some one is elected in the US, who im assuming your thinking will be liberal, unless they nuke the world into nonexistence there will still be terrorists. And if there are still people trying to kill us then we should still be trying to stop them.

I think the democrats will control the house and senate. Better days are on the way. They will take back freedoms Bush took from us.

There will be no major terrorist attacks and the world will settle down without fear of being attacked from the US.

No country in the world has to fear US invasion unless there are doing some thing very very wrong, like being a murderous tyrant. Currently the only people that should be afraid are the oppressors in North Korea, Iran, and Sudan.

Which freedoms don't I have that I did before the Bush administration??
-I still got guns
-I still got abortion (unfortunately (well not me technically (biologically)))
-I still got every thing else to... unless you are a foreigner suspected of being a terrorist or you are a known terrorist.

[Phantom]

More terrorists will pop up if a liberal gets in office.
Same thing with the whole Iranian carter Reagan situation.
They knew carter was weak.
But the DAY Reagan got in office they let the hostages go.
Reagan was a strong leader a republican.
If a liberal gets elected he will no doubt be weak.
More terrorists will pop up and not have to fear retaliation.

Iraq will be ditched.
The people there will be brutally slaughtered by the millions.
The civil war will rage on.
One group will take power and begin to ethnically cleanse the rest.
It will be another holocaust.
All because a liberal got in office and people are stupid.
Not to mention that Iraq will be a GIANT save haven for terrorists way worse than Afghanistan ever was.
Liberals seem to not be able to think ahead and instead concentrate on preying on stupid people to get votes.
Feel good actions that do more harm than good.

[*Dissident*]

So, ending the war on terror means pulling out november 2nd 2008? We cant pull out immediatly. We started this thing, we made a mess, and now we need to clean it up. Get the Iraqi police force in order, get the government in order, slowly pull out on regiment at a time, slowly, slowly, and eventually....we wont be there anymore. But it has to start somewhere, and it has to start some time, what better place than here, what better time than now? (anyone familiar with this song send me a PM).

And being weak means not invading a country? since when? Being weak is having to invade a country on false pretenses for your own gain, whatever it may be. Being weak is sending thousands of men to fight your vendettas for you. Being weak is being afraid to not fight. "Fighting is the only way to solve this!!1!" I dont think so.

[Phantom]

So, ending the war on terror means pulling out november 2nd 2008? We cant pull out immediatly. We started this thing, we made a mess, and now we need to clean it up. Get the Iraqi police force in order, get the government in order, slowly pull out on regiment at a time, slowly, slowly, and eventually....we wont be there anymore. But it has to start somewhere, and it has to start some time, what better place than here, what better time than now? (anyone familiar with this song send me a PM). This is what we are doing.

And being weak means not invading a country? since when? Being weak is having to invade a country on false pretenses for your own gain, whatever it may be. Being weak is sending thousands of men to fight your vendettas for you. Being weak is being afraid to not fight. "Fighting is the only way to solve this!!1!" I dont think so. We have been through this NUMEROUS TIMES before.
Its like you have a head made of lead.
Whatever cmpcmp or I say is just deflected off.
False pretenses blah blah more liberal hypocrisy more liberal shit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WLqIlt39ws

Yes yes bush is some evil war monger making moeny off oil :rolleyes:
More liberal shit wait not even that its to low for even liberals the only people that spew the blood for oil shit are micheal moore and stupid hippys.

Yeah bush has some kind of vendeta with saddam :rolleyes:

More like the UN is to pussy to enforce its OWN fucking resolutions
so like usual the US has to bear the burden and hardship to protect the world.
And how do we get repayed for it!
I can't even express my disgust at the people and other countrys that won't even help us or even give a fucking thank you.

[Whisper]

I am serious.
I don't know where you are from but the liberals here are BAD.
I am sure they will pull out of Iraq get rid of ways to tap phones of terrorists and relese the prisoners from guantamo.
Our national security will go to hell and I am sure we will have another attack.

just because the democrats wouldl restore freedom to American citizens, obey The Geneva Convention and take a firm stand on global warming dosent mean you will be attacked again
aka restore American Freedom and the saftey of our planet for future generations

The republicans have been in power for far to long there comftorable and corrupt
the government should be afraid of its people not the other way around

i'm not saying America is the only country this has happened to the Liberals in Canada were in power for over a decade (12yrs) they became extremly corrupt and compacient
thats exactly whats happened to your republicans


I don't like Canadian Liberals they lie as often as American Republicans
they have just recently promised to designate Quebec a nation if there elected again
I was extatic that we got the liberals out of office after 12YEARS and our relations with America are improving greatly
that will change again when democrats take power
which will suck for relations
but oh well
I wish Al Gore had one the last elections
hell in the Canadian elections system he would have

Gore was the Democratic nominee for president in the 2000 Presidential election. Gore won a plurality of the popular vote, with over half a million more votes than the Republican candidate George W. Bush, but was defeated in the Electoral College by a vote of 271 to 266.

http://www.climatecrisis.net/trailer/

"is it possible that we should prepare for other threats besides terrorists?" Al Gore

Earth is in trouble
and nobody in power is doing a dam thing about it why because there filthy fucking rich and they MIGHT loss some cash
so again its the have nots and future generations that suffer

[Phantom]

just because the democrats wouldl restore freedom to American citizens, obey The Geneva Convention and take a firm stand on global warming dosent mean you will be attacked again
aka restore American Freedom and the saftey of our planet for future generations O yes bush is such a fascist :rolleyes:
How are reps not obeying the Geneva convention, how are they taking away our freedoms? You can't answer that because its just more liberal shit.
Tapping phones of terrorists is not taking away freedoms.
Idiots on midnight shift torturing prisoners is not disobeying the Geneva convention.
I feel sorry for Bush. Such a good man gets soooo much liberal shit thrown at him. Blamed for everything.
The republicans have been in power for far to long there comfortable and corrupt
the government should be afraid of its people not the other way around You make no sense.
You think American reps are corrupt? HA
I still don't know where you are coming from about the whole government afraid of its people. I think I smell MORE liberal bullshit.
I would agree with you if bush was in office for 20 years and we were under a brutal military dictatorship with no rights.
You do know that bush CAN be impeached.
Clinton was.

I'm not saying America is the only country this has happened to the Liberals in Canada were in power for over a decade (12yrs) they became extremly corrupt and compacient
thats exactly whats happened to your republicans Republicans are not corrupt. I am sure there have been some scandals but not NEAR the level of liberal scandals.


I don't like Canadian Liberals they lie as often as American Republicans
they have just recently promised to designate Quebec a nation if there elected again
I was extatic that we got the liberals out of office after 12YEARS and our relations with America are improving greatly
that will change again when democrats take power
which will suck for relations
but oh well
I wish Al Gore had one the last elections
hell in the Canadian elections system he would have If reps lie sooo much please prove it.
I don't think you can.
I think a rep will be president again.
People don't want to be attacked again. :rolleyes:

Gore was the Democratic nominee for president in the 2000 Presidential election. Gore won a plurality of the popular vote, with over half a million more votes than the Republican candidate George W. Bush, but was defeated in the Electoral College by a vote of 271 to 266.Well at least you back up your info instead of doing what popo does and just say bush rigged the election LOL.
Bush won fair and square.

http://www.climatecrisis.net/trailer/

"is it possible that we should prepare for other threats besides terrorists?" Al Gore

Earth is in trouble
and nobody in power is doing a dam thing about it why because there filthy fucking rich and they MIGHT loss some cash
so again its the have nots and future generations that sufferGlobal warming Global warming.
What makes you think dems will do any more about it than reps.
Please don't tell me that last comment was implying that reps are greedy corporate basterds lol.

[cmpcmp]

Get the Iraqi police force in order, get the government in order, slowly pull out on regiment at a time, slowly, slowly, and eventually....we wont be there anymore. But it has to start somewhere, and it has to start some time, what better place than here, what better time than now?
To answer your RATM lyrics,
-When our pulling out wouldn't deeply compromise the probability of the government failing, that is a better time than now.
And being weak means not invading a country? since when? Being weak is having to invade a country on false pretenses for your own gain, whatever it may be. Being weak is sending thousands of men to fight your vendettas for you. Being weak is being afraid to not fight.
False pretenses that who believed in?
-foreign countries that had their own intelligence programs
-the people he gassed
HMMM war mongers? well then so are.....
Yes to Disarming Iraq
29 Democrats joined 48 Republicans to pass a Senate resolution on October 11 authorizing President Bush to use military force, if necessary, to disarm Iraq:

* Max Baucus (Mont.)
* Evan Bayh (Ind.)
* Joe Biden (Del.)
* John Breaux (La.)
* Maria Cantwell(mine currently) (Wash.)
* Jean Carnahan (Mo.)
* Tom Carper (Del.)
* Max Cleland (Ga.)
* Hillary Clinton (N.Y.)
* Tom Daschle (S.D.)
* Christopher Dodd (Conn.)
* Byron Dorgan (N.D.)
* John Edwards (N.C.)
* Dianne Feinstein (Calif.)
* Tom Harkin (Iowa)
* Fritz Hollings (S.C.)
* Tim Johnson (S.D.)
* John Kerry (Mass.)
* Herb Kohl (Wis.)
* Mary Landrieu (La.)
* Joe Lieberman (Conn.)
* Blanche Lincoln (Ark.)
* Zell Miller (Ga.)
* Ben Nelson (Neb.)
* Bill Nelson (Fla.)
* Harry Reid (Nev.)
* John Rockefeller (W.Va.)
* Charles Schumer (N.Y.)
* Bob Torricelli (N.J.)

apparently most of the liberals in the senate are war mongers also.

For gain? like liberty? or freedom? oh you mean other than thoes cuz... last time i checked.
-we definitely lost money in Iraq
-we aren't stealing oil or anything
-bushes approval rating has drooped what? 30% or something since invasion?
What was that personal gain?

[*Dissident*]

i wasnt specifically talking about anything. i was talking about what is weak. i didnt mean for those things to mean what is happening now

[*Dissident*]

anyway, If i could vote in the next election (gonna be 17), i would vote for this man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

[cmpcmp]

Being weak is having to invade a country on false pretenses for your own gain, whatever it may be. Being weak is sending thousands of men to fight your vendettas for you.
Call me crazy but everything in this statement shouts liberal anti-Iraq war reasoning. I highly doubt that you just randomly thought about "having to invade a country on false pretenses" with out thinking of Iraq at all.

just because the democrats wouldl restore freedom to American citizens, obey The Geneva Convention and take a firm stand on global warming dosent mean you will be attacked again
-restore freedoms? which ones?
-Obey the Geneva convention? have you read it? do you know who it fully applies to?
According to Human Rights Watch
Specified categories of combatants who "have fallen into the power of the enemy" are entitled to POW status. These categories include members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict, members of militia forces forming part of those armed forces, and inhabitants of a non-occupied territory who take up arms openly to resist the invading forces. POW status also applies to captured members of irregular forces who are under responsible command; have a fixed distinctive sign (such as an insignia, uniform or other marking) recognizable at a distance; carry arms openly; and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

[TheWizard]

Look how long Bush has had to win in Iraq. Yearssssssssssssssss. And he hasn't accpomlished anything. NOTHING.

[Phantom]

Look how long Bush has had to win in Iraq. Yearssssssssssssssss. And he hasn't accpomlished anything. NOTHING.So I suppose establishing a goverment and getting what 20 million Iraqis to vote for who they want instead of having to pick an oppresive dictator or not even vote.
So freeing Iraqis from torture chambers dosn't count?
So establishing ING or Iraqi national guard to defend their own country dosn't count?
So FREEING 27 MILLION Iraqis dosn't count?
So building SCHOOLS, HOSPITALS, and giving medical care to them dosn't count?
I am not even going to go on.
Jesus man THINK

I am a drug dealer.
I kill a 2 people outside my house with a gun.
I make and have been know to sell drugs and use them.
I have the facilitys to make drugs.
The UN emposes santions on my house and wants to take me out.
The police say we are going to raid my house.
Would YOU have the drugs and gun laying around your house? I think not.
Although I don't have evidence to back this up, we shall nullify it.

Anyways the police raid my house.
Can't find the gun.
Can't find the drugs.
Does that mean the police are facsists and just want the drugs for themselves.
Does that make them evil and wrong.
Later the people that WANTED to invade my house in the first place start yelling lies and blah blah facsist, drugs blah blah.
The media makes it into a huge thing and forgets the good that came from me being off the street and no longer a threat.
O yeah and when the police came in they freed my pets that I had been torturing.

[TheWizard]

You are so full of shit. :)

[Phantom]

You are so full of shit. :)Care to back that up.
Facts a liberals worst nightmare.
You provide 0 facts because you can't find them how sad :(

[cmpcmp]

Look how long Bush has had to win in Iraq.
-You make it sound like its something that Bush isn't doing. What needs to happen is that the Iraqi Government on all levels needs to step up and take control. We (nor bush, nor anyone else) can do that for them, it is something that they are slowly doing, and IMO should be doing faster.
---- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- --
You are so full of shit
not really..
-Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, he used them against various enemies and his own people
-He has invaded other country's
-he has had nuclear programs that Israel has blown up.

so...
-he had the weapons
-he made the weapons somehow
-and he used them at some points

So where did they go?

[*Dissident*]

so....wait. hold on...let me find some things....ah, here:


First: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories...And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them.
George W. Bush nterview with TVP, Krakow Poland, 29 May, 2003.

8 months later:
I expected to find the weapons...David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went
bush interview with Meet the Press, February 8, 2004

sounds like he "changed his mind" or "Misspoke".

Members of the Bush Administration are not liars. They are trustworthy. And have just misspoken. It happens sometimes — oops. How about 237 times within the two years surrounding the decision to invade Iraq?

"What? It can't be," you say. Unfornately, it's a fact i don't have to make up. To read the report by the House of Representatives, go to: http://democrats.reform.house.gov/IraqOnTheRecord/. Or browse through their searchable database for the on-the-record lies of:

* George W. Bush
* Dick Cheney
* Donald Rumsfeld
* Colin Powell
* Condoleezza Rice

[Phantom]

so....wait. hold on...let me find some things....ah, here:


First:
George W. Bush nterview with TVP, Krakow Poland, 29 May, 2003.

8 months later:

bush interview with Meet the Press, February 8, 2004

sounds like he "changed his mind" or "Misspoke".

Members of the Bush Administration are not liars. They are trustworthy. And have just misspoken. It happens sometimes — oops. How about 237 times within the two years surrounding the decision to invade Iraq?

"What? It can't be," you say. Unfornately, it's a fact i don't have to make up. To read the report by the House of Representatives, go to: http://democrats.reform.house.gov/IraqOnTheRecord/. Or browse through their searchable database for the on-the-record lies of:

* George W. Bush
* Dick Cheney
* Donald Rumsfeld
* Colin Powell
* Condoleezza RiceIf this is true
:clap: for you!!!
A liberal can accualy back somthing up with facts!
But seriously good job. :yeah:
I am going to take a look at these speachs to make sure its not taken out of context though.

[*Dissident*]

maybe a little. but still...what he said first is a falsehood, that he has admitted.

[Phantom]

EDIT* LOL I am reading through and the liberals are claiming that the trailers were made to make what? YOU guessed it kids hot air for artilary ballons! What a load of shit.
For all of the biological weapons statments they are just dissmissing it by saying the facilitys were made to make HYDROGEN! LOL dems you gotta lie better than that.

I do disagree with how Iraq was connecte to 9/11 at first :x
That pisses me off.

This statement was misleading because it claimed the purpose of the trailers was to produce biological weapons without disclosing that engineers from the Defense Intelligence Agency who examined the trailers concluded that they were most likely used to produce hydrogen for artillery weather balloons.

Do I smell bullshit?
----------------------------
Anyways I agree bush was misleading in some of his statments but no where NEAR the level the liberals try to imply.

[cmpcmp]

Hmmm... lets see we live in a Democracy... with a senate..... with senators.... who get to see classified Information.....

-when ever a liberal describes the senate, or the Government in general they make it sound like Bush comes in, hand picks every body, tells them what to believe so that they can tell him "facts" that he can then tell to the senate so that they will do what he wants. No questions are asked, and only surface facts are given.

-this isn't how the game works, if the intelligence reports were blatantly false, the senate would have known it. over half of the democrats in the Senate wouldn't vote for something that was obviously false/very misleading/ w/e. The senate doesn't get their info exclusively form the president either.

obviously most of the senators on both sides of the isle thought that the info was credible, or they still supported the war anyways.
--------------------------------------------------
Yes there were many false reports of weapons being found, like pesticides next to gas masks and other mistakes that were poorly founded.
-there is no question that Saddam supported some terrorist groups, but not Al Queda directly, to claim that he funded them or was in cahoots with them I think is wrong
-But he wasn't enemies with them either, they had been reported to have gotten medical treatment in Iraq, and generally pass through there also .
--------------------------------------------
Mobile lab that makes chemicals (gas) for use with weapons is confused for a mobile weapons lab that makes chemical (gas) nerve agents (weapons).
-Just a quick question. You see a truck(s) going around with artillery (which can be used to launch nerve agents). The truck makes gas of some kind for use with the artillery, what might you think?
-hmm truck+gas+artillery=gas for weather balloons, for use with artillery
-hmm close to truck+gas+artillery=gassed Iraqi enemies some years ago
==I know that if I saw trucks making gas for artillery (in a country that has gassed people before) I would immediately think oh it must be for the weather balloons used to aim the artillery!
--------------------------------------------
-So do you think that Bush was some how able to Lie, convince every one in his cabinet to go along with it, most of the Dems in the senate, most all of the republicans, and heads of the Intelligence agencies, and some how also convince other countries with their own intelligence agencies of it also, and then on top of it all somehow pass it off to the UN!!

here read the UN report that should be enlightening, please note the amount of previous UN resolutions on Iraq that are mentioned, back to 1990

Text Of U.N. Iraq Resolution

NEW YORK, Nov. 8, 2002
Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its president,

Recalling also its resolution 1382 (2001) of 29 November 2001 and its intention to implement it fully,

Recognizing the threat Iraq's noncompliance with council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security,

Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized member states to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

Further recalling that its resolution 687 (1991) imposed obligations on Iraq as a necessary step for achievement of its stated objective of restoring international peace and security in the area,

Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programs to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometers, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all other nuclear programs, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/08/national/main528675.shtml

so Bush got to the UN to? wow he gets around.