O.K., I didn't really need a reason not to vote for him, but if you need a reason, here it is:

Following the Democratic National Convention, the Democratic Party
published "The Kerry-Edwards Vision for A Cleaner Environment, A
Stronger Economy and Healthier Communities".

On page 8 of this "Vision", the following information is contained and I
quote it verbatim: "PROTECT OUR FORESTS - In addition, the Kerry-Edwards "Conservation Covenant" will end the logging of rare old growth trees on our public lands. These public resources will be protected in the
Kerry-Edwards administration. Honor the Solitude and Beauty of
Wilderness Areas and Our National Parks by Keeping Snowmobiles and Jet
Skis Out of Yellowstone and Other Sensitive Areas, and by Honestly
Addressing Visitor and Wildlife Needs in Our National Parks. John Kerry
will reinstate the Clinton administration's phase-out of noisy and
polluting snowmobiles, which have been overrunning some of our most
precious national lands, including Yellowstone Nation Park and Grand
Teton National Park. While snowmobiles, jet skis and all terrain
vehicles have their place, they do not mix with sensitive wildlife
resources and our nation's treasured wild places."
--------
In other words, let's not use the parks for the people.........jerk

you know kerry, he changes his opinion about everything :D

another reason not to vote for him is his wacko wife...

Well John Kerry, SHOVE IT!!!

Originally posted by Droptop@Aug 3 2004, 11:47 AM
you know kerry, he changes his opinion about everything :D

another reason not to vote for him is his wacko wife...
oh oh ! so does it mean 4 more years with Bush ?

Originally posted by paul yarek@Aug 3 2004, 01:02 PM
oh oh !* so does it mean 4 more years with Bush ?
i like bush for a number of reasons (and do hope for another four years with him)

I think George W. represents more of he middle class families in America. He is ovbiously well off, but has one primary residence and is "humble". Now John Kerry has over 6 estates each worth well over 1 million. Then Edwards is saying how he grew up poor (during the DNC), then made millions as a lawyer. They are FAR from a middle class America. Yep, it's the DemocRATS.

Yeah, there's no doubt this country will be worse off with Kerry at the helm.
Some people just don't see it though.
:confused:

i am from Canada, and so far i have been mostly happy with bush and the way he has handled things. i could live with 4 more years of bush. Heck of a lot better than what we got up her in Canada.

so in other words you will be better off with one bonehead then the other.

I guess you pick the bonehead that most reflects your values, if the only choice is a bonehead. Nader is a self-aggravandizing moron, so It's one of the other two.

Who would you pick Paul if you were voting here?

i think paul wants to run for pres..... :D

Man I knew that I really didn't like Kerry. I was not going to vote for the *&%& anyway.

I like hearing the guys a work talk about kerry is going to take my guns. I tell them They are going to need there guns to hunt for food or sell them to make ends meet with no job. I work for one of the big 3. From what I can see people get to cought up in hot button issues and not the big picture. Democrats from what I see are for the working class. But when you get that high up in goverment money makes people do strange things. But dont make your decisions on one issue like yellowstone or guns look at the overall picture. George bush is a big business man comes from oil now look at gas prices there pretty high.

Just spouting off
Duane

Kerry's Resume :p

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JOB APPLICATION

NAME: John Kerry

RESIDENCE: 7 mansions, including Washington DC, worth multi-millions.

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE:
Law Enforcement. I voted to cut every law enforcement, CIA and defense
bill in my career as a US Senator. I ordered Boston to remove a fire
hydrant in front of my mansion so that I could park my SUVs closer to my front
door, thereby endangering my neighbors in the event of fire.

MILITARY:
I used three minor injuries to get an early discharge from the
military and service in Vietnam (as documented by the attending doctor). I then
returned to the US, joined Jane Fonda in protesting the war, and insulted
returning Vietnam vets, claiming they committed atrocities and were baby
killers. I threw somebody else's ribbons representing my medals, or something
away in protest. Or did I? My book; Vietnam Veterans Against the War: The New Soldier shows how I truly feel about the military.

COLLEGE:
I graduated from Yale University with a low C average. Unlike my counterpart George Bush, I have no higher education and did not get admitted to Harvard nor graduate with an M.B.A

PAST WORK EXPERIENCE:
I ran for U.S. Congress and have been there ever since. I have no real world experience except marrying rich women and running HJ Heinz vicariously through my wife Teresa.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS:
As a US Senator I set the record for the most liberal voting record, exceeding even Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton. I have consistently failed to support our military and CIA by voting against budgets, thus
gutting our country's ability to defend itself. Although I voted for the Iraq War,
now I am against it and refuse to admit that I voted for it. I voted for every liberal piece of legislation. I have no plan to help this country but I intend to raise taxes significantly if I am elected. My wealth so far exceeds that of my counterpart, George Bush, that he will never catch up. I make no or little charitable contributions and have never agreed to pay any voluntary excess taxes in MA, despite family wealth in excess of $ 700 million. I (we) own 28 manufacturing plants (Heinz) outside of the U.S. in places like Asia, Mexico and Europe. We can make more profit from the cheaper cost of labor in those Countries, although I blame George Bush for sending all of the jobs out of Country.
Although I claim to be in favor of alternative energy sources, Ted Kennedy and I oppose windmills off Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard as it might spoil our view of the ocean as we cruise on our yachts.

RECORDS AND REFERENCES:
None.

PERSONAL:
I ride a Serotta Bike.
My Gulfstream V Jet I call The Flying Squirrel.
I call my $850,000 42-foot Hinckley twin diesel yacht the Scarmouche.
I am fascinated by rap and hip-hop and feel it reflects our real
culture. I own several "Large" SUVs including one parked at my Nantucket summer mansion, though I am against large polluting inefficient vehicles and blame George Bush for the energy problems.

PLEASE CONSIDER MY EXPERIENCE WHEN VOTING IN 2004.

Looks like a good resume to me. lol Now why wouldn't anyone want to vote for Kerry?

Watch the name calling gentlemen, whether its towards Kerry or Bush. Opinions are welcome, just keep the name calling out of it before everyone is at each others throats.

registered dem here,however they always run someone I choice not to vote for.I would like to here Kerry quit bashing the current admin. and tell us about his voting record.as for bashing this admin. he is part of it. bash the the war(for fighting on the ccheap ) while he voted to not give them the money.is that politcally motivated? I am sure he knew he would run this time around.I am not bashing.people just take my post as a reminder to investigate the ones running ,and make an educated choice.but one thing for sure this dem will not vote that way come election day.and never ever vote strait ticket.as my good buddy kidrocker, (who I have not seen here lately) would say peaceout.

John Kerry rides a 91 puma 340 with a homemade silcencer to make er sound fast

Originally posted by dawg@Aug 3 2004, 02:49 PM
i am from Canada, and so far i have been mostly happy with bush and the way he has handled things. i could live with 4 more years of bush. Heck of a lot better than what we got up her in Canada.
Dawg, i like you man, you a straight shooter,. i also like Bush and will vote for him. nice to hear a good opinion from our friends from the north :thumbsup: w00t

Moving topic to Chit Chat.... Be nice everyone.

Wasn't trying to start a war, but I thought people on this site should know what his plans for us are. On the other hand, George W. and that picture on a Polaris, though Of course, I would have chosen a more sophisticated ride (see, we can do that instead of politician bashing!).

Originally posted by paul yarek@Aug 3 2004, 08:00 PM
so in other words you will be better off with one bonehead then the other.
Sadly, yes.

how could anyone be against OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM?!?! listen to the name IRAQI-FREEDOM to free iraq from suddamn. he killed his own people, what are we spose to do? look the other way?!?!?

and what gets me is how people call bush a moron, or dumbass. i like to see the them at havard. then winning the popular vote for the election of the president of the united states

BUSH 04

Looks like I'm somewhat of a minority here, so here it goes :D As much as I love snowmobiling and would hate to see us shut out of nat'l parks, I have to say there are more important issues on our plates today. I think the country needs a new leader simply to try to save face with the rest of the world. We were drug into this war at the wrong time for the wrong reason. I support our troops 100% and feel sorry for them and thier families...almost a thousand dead ones by now, a year after "the end of major combat" :cussing: What's happened (and not happened in reference to WMD's) in Iraq has made the US look like a trigger-happy gun slinger. At first I was motivated when Bush surrounded himself with the panel of people that he did to get this movement going. But unfortunately, it stopped there, as we did not get a strong group of allies to go with us. And then to find it was all used to get to the oil (we all know that now, don't we?). Yes, Saddam needed to be taken out sooner or later (what he has done to his own people is still not comprehendable by me), by someone, but how could we just take the heat off of Bin Laden? He ACTUALLY COMMITTED A CRIME ON OUR SOIL!!! We didn't have to search for weapons to build a case against him, the evidence was in N.Y., PA, D.C. This country needs to save face asap, before it's too late.

Remember, IMO.

Originally posted by JIM FRITCH@Aug 4 2004, 10:22 PM
Looks like I'm somewhat of a minority here, so here it goes :D As much as I love snowmobiling and would hate to see us shut out of nat'l parks, I have to say there are more important issues on our plates today. I think the country needs a new leader simply to try to save face with the rest of the world. We were drug into this war at the wrong time for the wrong reason. I support our troops 100% and feel sorry for them and thier families...almost a thousand dead ones by now, a year after "the end of major combat" :cussing: What's happened (and not happened in reference to WMD's) in Iraq has made the US look like a trigger-happy gun slinger. At first I was motivated when Bush surrounded himself with the panel of people that he did to get this movement going. But unfortunately, it stopped there, as we did not get a strong group of allies to go with us. And then to find it was all used to get to the oil (we all know that now, don't we?). Yes, Saddam needed to be taken out sooner or later (what he has done to his own people is still not comprehendable by me), by someone, but how could we just take the heat off of Bin Laden? He ACTUALLY COMMITTED A CRIME ON OUR SOIL!!! We didn't have to search for weapons to build a case against him, the evidence was in N.Y., PA, D.C. This country needs to save face asap, before it's too late.

Remember, IMO.
I have to respectfully disagree with you.

We (the US) are FIGHTING terrorism and FREEDOM for Iraqi citizens. This is very similar to the Holocaust. The actual Holocaust began in 1939. The US become involved in 1941, when WE WERE AFFECTED. Between those years were just sitting on the sidelines and WATCHED as innocent people were being killed.

Because of our involvment, the Holocaust ended in-directly because of us in 1945. That was a relief for everybody.

I believe that the US should have been fighting in 1939 when they were needed.

The US need's to take force because we/they are the strongest country. What if we sat on the sidelines again and God for bid another 9/11 scenario happened. Then would we get involved?

Originally posted by JIM FRITCH@Aug 4 2004, 10:22 PM
* I think the country needs a new leader simply to try to save face with the rest of the world.*


I also have to disagree, we need to tell the rest of the world whats what, the only time they need us is when they need money other than that they don't want anything to do with us and have the nerve to criticize us while they do nothing.
We need to keep busch in office to avoid a complete catastrophe, Kerry cant make his mind up on anything but raising taxes and double talk.
Bush may not be everyones favorite but you have to give him credit he did something about the problem where the previous administration let the US be attacked 4 times and did nothing, because he was more concerned about world opinion than doing what needs to be done.
just my take on things.

Our choices

Anyone watch Bill mahr on HBO. Gotta love that show. He doesnt hold anything back.

Originally posted by Droptop@Aug 4 2004, 09:45 PM
What if we sat on the sidelines again and God for bid another 9/11 scenario happened. Then would we get involved?
Respectfully, that is exactly my point also. We know who orchestrated 9/11, and we chose to take our focus off of him and go chase Saddam because we THINK he may have WMD's. We have to remember, we were told we were going to this war to find WMD's, not "to save innocent Iraqi citizens." We can go back through all the footage we want leading up to the war, and very seldom will you hear the words "we are going over there to free innocent citizens", it was overwhelmingly to find these weapons. So after we're there, turn the country upside down, find no WMD's, then we say we're there to save the Iraqi citizens. All this while Bush and Cheney's pockets.....never mind, I'll stop there.

I agree if we have the resources, we need to help less fortunate souls, it's God's way. But we still had hot ashes on our own grounds, and big fish to fry so that we may be here in the future to help others. Do we know how thinly our borders are protected right now? Do we know that we are nearly out of soldiers? If another major military event happens, we don't have the resources to support it.

Oh, we weren't just sitting on the sidelines during the Holocaust, there was that little incident with Japan. The Holocaust was a terrible tragedy, and I can't even fathom something like that happening. But it's not much different from what Bin Laden and Saddam are doing.


PolarisXC600, I can appreciate your idea about the US having to show that our spirit won't be broken and that we will stand up to defend this great nation 'til the end. However, when we're not the only country with a little red button to push, I think we have to be a little more debonair than "showing the rest of the world what's what" by going into other countries when we don't have our facts straight.


Perm, Bill Mahr and Tim Russert are my favorite two guys to watch. I love it when Tim's interviewing a politician and pulls up some old footage and says "what did you mean by this, you're saying something completely different now." :cool:

Originally posted by JIM FRITCH@Aug 5 2004, 11:11 AM
Oh, we weren't just sitting on the sidelines during the Holocaust, there was that little incident with Japan. The Holocaust was a terrible tragedy, and I can't even fathom something like that happening. But it's not much different from what Bin Laden and Saddam are doing.

That not so "little" incident with Japan was Pearl Harbor. On December 7, 1941, Japan attacked the U.S. The NEXT DAY, the U.S and Britan declared war over Japan. Then, on December 11, 1941, Hitler declares war on the United States. Roosevelt then declares war on Germany saying, "Never before has there been a greater challenge to life, liberty and civilization." The U.S. then enters the war in Europe. Nearly 90% military resources to are used to defeat Hitler.

Droptop i think it is pretty obvious that he was using sarcasm when he said little incident. Try to remain level headed as we dont want this thread to close.

sorry, a little too off-topic there

Originally posted by permafrost@Aug 5 2004, 11:16 AM
Droptop i think it is pretty obvious that he was using sarcasm when he said little incident. Try to remain level headed as we dont want this thread to close.
Thanks Perm for clarifying that. I didn't think the word "little" would be taken so literally.

I do hope this thread remains clean and open also.

Wow-this certainly opened up a can of worms. I originally put this in the General Snowmobiling category because it was Kerry's position on snowmobiling that frosted my posterior. Jim, I understand your well stated position, though I disagree with some things you've said. Osama Bin-Hiding is doing just that. Note, no new terror attacks-hard to coordinate while hiding in a cave under some woman's Burqua. And guess what-there are soldiers and sailors and airmen out there looking for him as we speak.

The military is not running out of personnel. I am a retired member of the U.S. Air Force and now work in a civilian capacity for the Air Force. People carry on to the press for several reasons:

1. Need to gratify their ego
2. I joined so I could get the college benefits-guess what? You don't get something for nothing.....ever.
3. I'll lose my real job because I'm activated with the guard/reserves. No, you won't-The Soldiers and Sailor's Act guarantees your job.
4. I didn't join up to do this. Yes you did. You raised your right hand, took your oath and signed on the dotted line. There is no draft, so you must have volunteered.
5. I want to get out, my time is up. No, it's not-it was made perfectly clear to every individual when the signed up that this is a committment and you are subject to the needs of your government.

Saddam was killing his people off in heinous ways-like gassing entire villages and oh yeah, other countries, namely Iran. That, by the way IS considered a weapon of mass destruction, so why would you doubt there's any of them? Saddam invaded Kuwait and his soldiers killed, tortured, raped and stole. What is to stop him from doing it again as soon as the heat is off? Oh yes, us Americans. I worked and lived in that part of the world after Desert Storm. Every single day Iraq tried to avoid everything they agreed to with the U.N. from smuggling to ground attacks on aircraft to the whole Oil for Luxury items program administered by the U.N. (and did you read about the list of people who got kick backs, including U.N. 'Diplomats' and the French? Don't see much about that in the press) and we put up with it for how many years? Saddam attempted to assassinate one of our former presidents. What did we do? We waited for the U.N. to respond-and they didn't respond.

Some of the things the press doesn't report very much about. An exploding shell in Iraq that was filled with Sarin (a weapon of mass destruction) gas. WHere did it come from? Are there more? My guess would be yes.

The open association of Al-Quaeda personnel with the 'Iraqi resistance'. The press says there's no Al-Quaeda link, and yet, didn't they arrest one of that goat-herder's top men in Iraq? Doesn't that qualify as a link?

Where is the collective outrage of the world when it comes to U.N. involvement in the sex scandal in Africa? Where U.N. workers were giving out food and medicine in exchange for sex. Where is the press? Busy denigrating our president while promoting a marginal Naval Officer/Senator who made his money the old fashioned way-by marrying it.

To me, it seems as if the world is very selective about who they condemn-except when it comes to our money......just a touch two-faced, don't you think?

O.K. off the soapbox.........

I too dis-agree with the statement about it being for oil,oil is not getting cheaper (which it would if we got more of it).gas is at a high of 2.05 for premium here.as for not finding the wmd's,I really feel it was flawed intel,which would not be lies but a mistake.question jim(not slamming you,I like you well and you have the right tto you opinion) how much foriegn oil do we use?? in the whole country?? you might be suprised to see the numbers are very low ,compared to what you think.the majority of oil in that regoin goes the europe not the u.s. politics they get everyones opinion,as long as you can not take it personal. :thumbsup:

Well living here in Massachusetts, I am not a fan of Kerry, but also not impressed with Bush. But between the "boneheads", I'd rather see Bush.
Regarding the atrocities in Iraq, please this is not the only country that killed its own citizens, this also is happening in Africa, no, we are not talking about Aids, that is another issue. Iraq does have the one natural resource most interested...oil. AFrica has diamonds. US is the largest consumer of oil and gas, Europe is not a country. The oil fields were the first item secured on the attack and you cannot deny there is no personal issue on Bush's side against Saddam. Saddam did try to ax his dad but failed. Oil prices are not just affected by Middle East, Russia also is a huge producer and recently the hike in prices were caused by Russia where the largest oil producer is being used as a pawn by the current President for political muscle reasons. There are a lot of pluses and minus to all this crap and we will never get it solved. All I want to see is the economy to get a little better and a Presisdent who has something else to say than start a sentance about "Healthcare", "Medicare" and "Prescription Drugs".
Actions speak louder than any political word.

Gary, I understand where you're coming from. The media can surely show IT's side of an issue, as has been demonstrated time and time again. That is why I rarely put much faith in what any one media source distributes. I don't watch CNN for the daily info, I rather listen to and watch independent analysts. I tend to look at what's available and form my belief's from what I hope to be an educated guess (which is really all that any of us can do).

My father is also retired 27 years from the USAF, I grew up on military bases, and have my roots in a community that is supported by Scott AFB. My father in law is also retired ARMY, and working for the DOD in D.C., and can't tell me where he's going when he heads overseas every month. I consider him a pretty good source and value his opinions. Military members are in my church, grocery stores, schools, etc. I listen to what these guys have to say when we get together. It's not easy seeing a mother and her children in church, knowing the father will never be there again, when you're used to seeing the family together.

Looking for Bin Laden? I wish I could have full faith that we're doing that with all our ability. But we found Saddam pretty quickly. We didn't let him sit in that little hole did we? Even though he obviously couldn't do much damage from there, could he? But his people are still carrying out his mission, and our troops are dying daily from them. As long as Bin Laden is among the living, his people will carry out his work too. We can't be satisfied just to know that he is hiding. There is Al Quaeda activity on a daily basis, even though it may only be training and communication, and not actual destruction, yet.

I don't doubt that there are some WMD's somewhere, but obviously we haven't found anything like we were led to believe. With the overwhelming intelligence and technology that our DOD has, we should have found at least one stockpile of WMD's by now. We did hear about the sarin too.

Barry, we've known each other long enough that nothing you say would appear as an attack to me, as is the case with most of the people on this forum. As for the oil though, remember that if you own (i.e., have large amounts of stock) part of an oil company, it doesn't matter where that oil goes, you still see the profit when it's sold. You gotta know how much I wish I was (and still may be) wrong about it being for the oil, but only time will tell. I sure wish we could take a sidestep in time and see if we would have handled things differently with Bin Laden if his country was rich with oil...what do you think? I know it's hard to comprehend someone could have that amount of greed, but just look at Mr. Ley (sp?) from Enron...in all my naivety, I would have never thought a group of individuals could be so selfish and destructive as those CEO's were. I hope they all choke on thier greediness now.

I think we can all agree that we can't trust the mainstream media for an accurate account of what's going on. All we can do is pick and choose who we believe, which leads to our different opinions. None of us can PROVE our beliefs. We actually benefit from asking each other questions, as long as they're done tastefully. For every negative point someone wants to make for one of our candidates or an issue, another person can list at least another negative for the other, plain and simple. Therefore, I value all the stated opinions, and am not attacking them or trying to make people see things my way. My statements have not been made in favor of Kerry, or against Bush personally...I still don't know who I'm going to vote for :dazed: They've been made out of my opinion that this country simply needs a change.

I'd rather disagree with friends, than argue with strangers!!!!

even if he was the only choice. I would choose bugs. b.

Originally posted by dooman@Aug 5 2004, 11:51 PM
how much foriegn oil do we use?? in the whole country?? you might be suprised to see the numbers are very low ,compared to what you think.the majority of oil in that regoin goes the europe not the u.s.
I don't know if our (canada's) oil would be considered as foreign oil to you guys, but you do take a huge part of our oil, and thats lots of oil coming out of the ground up here.

I, being a canadian farmer, would like to see bush in again. If Kerry gets in, we will NOT see the borders open for our live cattle, (due to BSE, and it is scientifically proven our beef IS safe for consumption, it is all politics now) and that will, literally, destroy ALL small farms with in the next 4 - 5 years. Now, if you guys are looking for a reason for me saying this. If we small farmers die, as will the countries economy. We support the local industry in the area. Local industry supports major economics here in canada. Major economics are in direct corrolation to the us economy. If we don't buy, the locals don't, if the locals don't, neither do the major economic companies. Trade will go down and with it all of the economy.

If any one want to question my knowledge on this effecting the economy, ask any dealer ship or store of any kind in a farming area, be it, quads/sleds, cars, machinery, clothes, electronics. ALL OF THEM HAVE LOST MAJOR AND I DO MEAN MAJOR SALES NUMBERS. It will go down the line, sooner or later.


My 2 cents


Bauer

Here's hoping for Bush.

Gary, you took the words right out of my mouth.
Jim, also very well put. I don't completely agree, but can see where you're coming from at least.
Side note....we (US military, CIA, etc) have by no means stopped looking for Osama. There is a much stronger military presence over there than most realise. It's the BS media coverage that picks and chooses what it wants to report and HOW it wants to report it. Could we be doing more to find Osama? It seems there always is more that can be done, but don't you think Bush would love nothing more than to get his hands on him before the election? I'd say we're looking pretty hard even if it's not reported all over the nightly news.

Jim, well said and as above, I don't agree completely, but respect your right to say it. It's frustrating sitting where I sit and seeing the distorted stories and/or outright media bias.

Kind of like the Dixie Chicks: one of them bashed Bush, publicly, which is her right. Radio stations, listeners and sponsors objected to it-which is their right. They objected with their dollars, whether it be not buying their music, not advertising on radio stations that played their music, etc. And this is called censorship by the press. It's not, it's just people exercising their rights, just like the Young Lady from the Dixie Chicks did.

We haven't gotten oil from Iraq since what, 1991 or so? So, why are we experiencing the latest round of price hikes? Certainly not becuase of a shortage of oil from Iraq. Could this be OPEC tightening supplies? More of a logical explanation. Russia's president also flexing his muscle? Also logical. Corporate greed? More than likely.

So, I'm sure that somewhere, there are WMDs in the form of at least chemical weapons somewhere in a bunker (several is more liekely). I'm sure Saddam didn't use them all up on the Kurds and Iranians. As to the people of Iraq, Saddam was torturing, killing, etc., etc. Now, they hate the Americans. They are killing people that are working to bring safety, health and happiness to the country (not just Americans either). A friend of mine, a contractor from a major company in that part of the world said, They would rather Fight than F**k. I'm thinking he was right.

On the assassination attempt, yes, it was his father, but, where is the outrage that someone would attempt to kill ANY current or former U.S. president? I hope the reaction would be the same if someone tried to kill Bill Clinton. Though I disagree with his politics, I would still be outraged. I hope our Canadian brothers and sisters would feel the same if someone attempted to kill their current or any of their former Prime Ministers.

BTW, Al-Jareeza shows Osama to be a hero and 25 million muslims still think of this pus-bag as a hero. Saddam never had that kind of allegiance in his own country, even before the war. That's why he got caught. Same with his sons.

A point I'd like to clarify: I do not think Islam is a terrorist religion. I believe it's been hijacked by people doing horrible things in it's name. Just as we Christians did on many occasions, including the Crusades, The Inquisition, etc.

While living in Turkey, I was exposed to Islam and some of it's adherents and found them to be not so different from me and what I believe in. Actually the Koran has some of it's basis in the books of the Old testament of the bible. It's unfortunate that because some people use religion as their excuse for killing people, that an entire religion is looked upon with suspicion. :bash:

Iraq may have a lot of troops, but you should have seen the amount of gunships, and every police force from MA to VT, RI here in Boston during the Democratic Convetion. They even shut down the only major highway through Boston. Too funny, and it was a big money loss. What will the Republicans have ...USS Missori pulled out of moth balls?? I am not fan of politics and I strongly agree the press really edit things to make it more "News worthy" even if it is completely blown out of text to the point its not factual.

Vote for Bugs...now that is debatible. HAHAHA I vote for Coachroaches, they never loose. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Originally posted by Do the Doo@Aug 6 2004, 09:17 AM
Vote for Bugs...now that is debatible. HAHAHA I vote for Coachroaches, they never loose. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
LOL I'm thinking he meant bugs bunny. :wink:

Jim, when i said we need to show thwe world whats what i was refereing to the total lack of support from the un when we said we were going to get saddam. I am totally aware we aren't the only country with a rd button but there does come a time when diplomacy fails and you have no choice but to act and 12 years of diplomacy failed. IMO the un is totally useless, how much credibility can it have when the current leader is from a terrorist nation, and whenever there is a crisis who picks up the brunt of the bill and does most of the work , we do. im just fed up with my tax dollars going to people who don't appreciate it, and then criticize the way we do things.
As for finding bin laden, the major difference between him and saddam is that bin laden an go anywhere in the world and find help thanks to al jazzera, sadam couldn't.
there is one thing that im sure of and that is i want this situation over as soon as possible and all of our friends and countrymen to come home.
Just one last thing [B] let it snow let it snow let it snow!!!!

:withstupid: Amen.


Oh yeah, did I mention, John Kerry doesn't like snowmobiles?

Originally posted by spikegary@Aug 6 2004, 12:24 PM
Oh yeah, did I mention, John Kerry doesn't like snowmobiles?
I think that was brought up somewhere along the line, lol! :)

John erry is a lbieral wiener. I may be 13, but my mom always has those annoying talk shows on, and I'm forced to listen to them, so i know alot.

I'm with Bush 100%!! John kerry is a weeney. Stand up for the little guy, YEAH RIGHT! Send some of your money to charitysd instead of buying mroe friggen houses. Stop flip flopping on every issue. WE WANT TAXBREAKS!

I'm lazy and really do not wanna say anymore, but i will say one more thing

All of you on here who like kerry.

You will lvoe spending almost 3 dollors a gallon on gas for your SUVs to pull your sdnowmobiels, I mean, lets go spend a couple hundred bucks on gas, cause Kerry wants to increase the gas tax 50 CENTS! Thats insane!

The way I see it, is that Snowmobiles SHOULD be allowed into the Nat'l Parks, period.

In response to the many previous arguments/statements:
George Bush did absolutely NOT GO TO IRAQ FOR OIL. We went there on falsified information (which were given to us by several important people, which we payed for.) Have you noticed recent attacks aimed at VP Dick Cheney's previous Company, Haliburton, and how they allegedly showed favoritism in giving No-Bids for the reconstruction of Iraq? That is what most of the Mass Media will tell you, they'll regret to tell you that Haliburton was the only company who could even perform that task.....but that's quite a different story.

On the subject of the U.S. needing to be "with good terms with all Countries"...... I really think that is quite a load of crap. The 12 years of using the United Nations to inspect Iraq for the said WMD's was certainly not working, the Food-For-Oil system was being exploited, and like I said, we had (or what we thought we had) proof of WMD's in Iraq. We went to Iraq, and even your Candidate voted to authorize Military force to seek them. We found Saddam because we had quite a bit more information on him (like his recent whereabouts) and were able to act upon it. As for finding Osama, I'm absolutely sure that we are still looking for him, but it's not getting the publicity because....well.... that's just the liberal media for you. They'd rather tell us about the deaths in Iraq than the progress in Afghanistan.

I could go on and on....but it gets nowhere...

I agree totley. Not everyones perfect.

I always vote Republican except when a "Bush" is on the ballot. Kerry supports
banning of snowmobiles in national parks, I guess its a vote for the independent party this year. (Same as none of the above)

Tom

Since this is the United States of America, I believe every American should vote for the most correct person for the president of the United States.

Just because one canidate sways toward one issue does not mean that canidate believes deeply in it. It is called politics and almost every person in history has used it to their advantage.

In my opinion, vote Kerry-Edwards 2004.



Psxbs

Does anyone really believe there are no WMD's anywhere in Iraq? It's not like searching Grandma's basement. Iraq is a good sized country and there is stuff hidden anywhere and everywhere. Did you see the pictures of the airplanes wrapped in plastic and buried under sand? If he could do that with airplanes, do you really think he would hesitate to do the same with shells full of chemicals?

Let's see, he dropped Gas (a WMD) on the Kurds and the Iranians (during the Iran/Iraq war), killing lots of those people. There are NO records of these WMDs being destroyed, so where do you think they are? I'm guessing they'll be found sooner or later, but in our 'Gotta have it now' society, that just won't be fast enough.

I'd like to see the media hold everyone (especially the United Nations) to the same standards they hold the Bush Administration to. But, that's not really on their agenda. How about Clinton? He's still the media's darling, although he violated several laws, including sexual harrassment, lied about it under oath, lost his license to practice law, etc., etc., but Bush is the bad guy? I guess if we need to have standards, we should make them double, huh?

Thank you, more info.

That was rally good what you said. Couldent have said it better.

Bush, Cheney 04!

Originally posted by Steven Hohman@Aug 9 2004, 08:16 PM
The way I see it, is that Snowmobiles SHOULD be allowed into the Nat'l Parks, period.

In response to the many previous arguments/statements:
George Bush did absolutely NOT GO TO IRAQ FOR OIL.* We went there on falsified information (which were given to us by several important people, which we payed for.)* Have you noticed recent attacks aimed at VP Dick Cheney's previous Company, Haliburton, and how they allegedly showed favoritism in giving No-Bids for the reconstruction of Iraq?* That is what most of the Mass Media will tell you, they'll regret to tell you that Haliburton was the only company who could even perform that task.....but that's quite a different story.

On the subject of the U.S. needing to be "with good terms with all Countries"......* I really think that is quite a load of crap.* The 12 years of using the United Nations to inspect Iraq for the said WMD's* was certainly not working, the Food-For-Oil system was being exploited, and like I said, we had (or what we thought we had) proof of WMD's in Iraq.* We went to Iraq, and even your Candidate voted to authorize Military force to seek them.* We found Saddam because we had quite a bit more information on him (like his recent whereabouts) and were able to act upon it.* As for finding Osama, I'm absolutely sure that we are still looking for him, but it's not getting the publicity because....well.... that's just the liberal media for you.* They'd rather tell us about the deaths in Iraq than the progress in Afghanistan.

I could go on and on....but it gets nowhere...
you hit it on the head, i work in gas and oil, and halliburton is the only company in the world with the iron to do the work, they have the trucks, and all the pumps and specialty equipment that it takes, there is alot to it, it's very complicated and each well has to be worked maybe a little different then the last, some kick from the day they are drilled others have to be worked. whenever i hear the halliburton/cheney talk start i just block it out, or chalk it up to ignorance of the task. :rolleyes: as for WMD they were there, don't know where now, but they WERE there

Originally posted by Steven Hohman@Aug 9 2004, 07:16 PM
George Bush did absolutely NOT GO TO IRAQ FOR OIL.

On the subject of the U.S. needing to be "with good terms with all Countries"...... I really think that is quite a load of crap.

and like I said, we had (or what we thought we had) proof of WMD's in Iraq. We went to Iraq, and even your Candidate voted to authorize Military force to seek them.

As for finding Osama, I'm absolutely sure that we are still looking for him, but it's not getting the publicity because....well.... that's just the liberal media for you.

They'd rather tell us about the deaths in Iraq than the progress in Afghanistan.

I could go on and on....but it gets nowhere...
Wow! I've been gone for about a week and come back to find out this thread is like the Energizer battery...good for us. I'd like to take a moment to clarify a few things, because apparently some people haven't read all the posts clearly.

For one, no one has stated in this thread that there are NO wmd's in Iraq. The question wasn't if there were ANY, but were our actions justified by what we've found so far, after being there well over a year. If we're going to attack countries just because (we think) they have wmd's, we better start attacking a few other nations right away. Steve, you mentioned "...even your candidate voted..." I'm not sure who you're talking to there, you weren't very clear. If you took the time to ever listen when Kerry was questioned about this, you would know that he made that judgement precisely with the info that was given to him by Bush's admin, which was on paper in black and white from Bush's aids. So if you're saying Kerry was at fault there, well I guess he was for thinking he could trust a president's panel for doing their homework.

Also, NO ONE has stated in this thread that we are NOT looking for Bin Laden. Some folks have felt the need to say that they're sure we're looking for him. Well, of course we're looking for him. My original statement simply posed the question, would we have Bin Laden (since this is the guy that ACTUALLY did committ a terrorist act on our ground just a few short years ago) by now if we gave half the effort to him as we've given in Iraq? So let's say both of these guys have wmd's, and both have killed thousands of US citizens on our soil (which only Bin Laden has), what difference is left between them, that would give us a reason to go after Saddam instead of Bin Laden with this military force?? This is where the little three-lettered word comes in...you know, the one that starts with an "o" and ends with an "l". Now, wouldn't it be awful convenient if we just happen to find Bin Laden, oh let's say, before the end of November?

No one said we need to "be on good terms with all countries", we all know that will never happen, it's just not possible. It's like a person wanting to be liked by everyone, impossible. However, we had better be able to support our actions when we take on a military action like we're in right now. Just for a second, try to put yourself in the shoes of someone from another country that's not directly involved in what's going on right now. You see this country (the US) invade another country because the US believes that country has wmd's and is a threat. So after you watch all this unfold and no LARGE stockpiles of wmd's are found, the US is ready to admit and states that it committed to this mission due to "false information" presented by it's own entities, who's technology and intelligence gathering methods are the best in the WORLD. Wouldn't that cause you to question the motives and integrity of that country, the US? I mean, if the US came to your country for support in the future, would you be willing to help them with open arms?

Sure, many of the Iraqi people have been freed from a future of Saddam's torture. But if we want to use this as (another) reason for being in Iraq, then shouldn't we be committed to go into every country where the majority of the population is grief-stricken, whether it be from a demon-like leader, a natural disaster, or serious illness? If we're tauting ourselves as "liberators of Iraq", then we have no option but to liberate other unfortunate countries also, don't you think?

And Steve, since the press isn't bringing it to us, please bring me up to date on the progress in Afghanistan. I don't really trust the media anyway. The deaths in Iraq are pretty damn important, more than anything else, because those are our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters over there losing their lives. So I don't think anything else could be much more important than that.

Willy, who do you work for and what is your position? My cousin is an exec at one of the big oil companies. You just might know him.

I am of a minority view here, and I'm ok with that. Afterall, they are just opinions. I'm not supporting anyone here, or putting Bush down personally. If I wanted to make personal attacks on the man, all I'd have to do is say look at his grammar and the way he stumbles on simple words when presenting a speech. I'm simply posing questions that need to be answered. It is far more dangerous to support a leader blindly, than to ask him to account for his actions in hope that he will be able to do so. Many folks in this thread are quick to state that "Bush didn't do this or that" with such conviction, in support of his actions thus far, when you have nothing concrete to back up your comments. Sure it's easy to say "Bush didn't go to Iraq for oil", but I say prove it to me! I am blown away by how some people can support him (any leader for that matter) and the military action when they have no substantial proof from him to do so. In fact, we've been given more reasons to question our actions than to support them. I guess there's some underlying reason, that the liberal press is keeping from us of course, why Powell won't be out in support of the republicans in the upcoming elections. It just can't be because he's not supportive of the way things have turned out, since he's been in the middle of the Bush camp for a few years now, can it?

Please let our troops be safe and come home soon to their families!!!!

Originally posted by JIM FRITCH@Aug 12 2004, 03:43 PM
Wow! I've been gone for about a week and come back to find out this thread is like the Energizer battery...good for us. I'd like to take a moment to clarify a few things, because apparently some people haven't read all the posts clearly.

For one, no one has stated in this thread that there are NO wmd's in Iraq. The question wasn't if there were ANY, but were our actions justified by what we've found so far, after being there well over a year. If we're going to attack countries just because (we think) they have wmd's, we better start attacking a few other nations right away. Steve, you mentioned "...even your candidate voted..." I'm not sure who you're talking to there, you weren't very clear. If you took the time to ever listen when Kerry was questioned about this, you would know that he made that judgement precisely with the info that was given to him by Bush's admin, which was on paper in black and white from Bush's aids. So if you're saying Kerry was at fault there, well I guess he was for thinking he could trust a president's panel for doing their homework.

Also, NO ONE has stated in this thread that we are NOT looking for Bin Laden. Some folks have felt the need to say that they're sure we're looking for him. Well, of course we're looking for him. My original statement simply posed the question, would we have Bin Laden (since this is the guy that ACTUALLY did committ a terrorist act on our ground just a few short years ago) by now if we gave half the effort to him as we've given in Iraq? So let's say both of these guys have wmd's, and both have killed thousands of US citizens on our soil (which only Bin Laden has), what difference is left between them, that would give us a reason to go after Saddam instead of Bin Laden with this military force?? This is where the little three-lettered word comes in...you know, the one that starts with an "o" and ends with an "l". Now, wouldn't it be awful convenient if we just happen to find Bin Laden, oh let's say, before the end of November?

No one said we need to "be on good terms with all countries", we all know that will never happen, it's just not possible. It's like a person wanting to be liked by everyone, impossible. However, we had better be able to support our actions when we take on a military action like we're in right now. Just for a second, try to put yourself in the shoes of someone from another country that's not directly involved in what's going on right now. You see this country (the US) invade another country because the US believes that country has wmd's and is a threat. So after you watch all this unfold and no LARGE stockpiles of wmd's are found, the US is ready to admit and states that it committed to this mission due to "false information" presented by it's own entities, who's technology and intelligence gathering methods are the best in the WORLD. Wouldn't that cause you to question the motives and integrity of that country, the US? I mean, if the US came to your country for support in the future, would you be willing to help them with open arms?

Sure, many of the Iraqi people have been freed from a future of Saddam's torture. But if we want to use this as (another) reason for being in Iraq, then shouldn't we be committed to go into every country where the majority of the population is grief-stricken, whether it be from a demon-like leader, a natural disaster, or serious illness? If we're tauting ourselves as "liberators of Iraq", then we have no option but to liberate other unfortunate countries also, don't you think?

And Steve, since the press isn't bringing it to us, please bring me up to date on the progress in Afghanistan. I don't really trust the media anyway. The deaths in Iraq are pretty damn important, more than anything else, because those are our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters over there losing their lives. So I don't think anything else could be much more important than that.

Willy, who do you work for and what is your position? My cousin is an exec at one of the big oil companies. You just might know him.

I am of a minority view here, and I'm ok with that. Afterall, they are just opinions. I'm not supporting anyone here, or putting Bush down personally. If I wanted to make personal attacks on the man, all I'd have to do is say look at his grammar and the way he stumbles on simple words when presenting a speech. I'm simply posing questions that need to be answered. It is far more dangerous to support a leader blindly, than to ask him to account for his actions in hope that he will be able to do so. Many folks in this thread are quick to state that "Bush didn't do this or that" with such conviction, in support of his actions thus far, when you have nothing concrete to back up your comments. Sure it's easy to say "Bush didn't go to Iraq for oil", but I say prove it to me! I am blown away by how some people can support him (any leader for that matter) and the military action when they have no substantial proof from him to do so. In fact, we've been given more reasons to question our actions than to support them. I guess there's some underlying reason, that the liberal press is keeping from us of course, why Powell won't be out in support of the republicans in the upcoming elections. It just can't be because he's not supportive of the way things have turned out, since he's been in the middle of the Bush camp for a few years now, can it?

Please let our troops be safe and come home soon to their families!!!!
Jim, i now work for a major oil and gas field supply company, i'm 34 now, but i started out on a "work over" rig, and moved to drilling rigs when i was 18, and moved up from there. If your cousin works in northern Michigan or central Michigan there is a good chance i know him.

Sure, many of the Iraqi people have been freed from a future of Saddam's torture.

This is one of the worst problems IMHO, as even though he is a bad guy there are far worse extremist waiting in the wings to take over. Under this new rule it will be the women that are punished the most, as in Afganistan under Muslem extremist law. ITs the middle east no matter what happens it will be a mess.

Willy, he's from Chicago, but has been living overseas for Exxon for many years now.

I for one will be voting for Bush... Kerry in my opinion is to close to the greenies and that 50 cent gas tax?? You got to be kidding me. I don't agree with everything GW does But I diffinitely think he is better than the alternative....

It's good to see some honest opinions about this subject. I don't agree with all of the President's programs, but I feel like we would be far worse off with Kerry in the office. If you are following the Swift Boat Veterans Organization information, you start to understand why. And Kerry has flip-flopped on both sides of the war-he's now saying he still would have voted for the war, even knowing what he knows now-which is a 180 from what he said at the democratic convention.

Jim, welcome back-and again, I respect your opinion and right to have it, though I disagree with your sentiments.

BTW, Did I mention John Kerry doesn't like snowmobiles? :D