Hell, Kerry should welcome a comparison of military records. Just look at Bush -- weaseled his way into the National Guard then didn't even bother to show up for most of the time.
"Maybe both sides should stop attacking each others military records. You think?"
Theres a difference here on these mens military records. One man served honorably while the other didn't. One has the means to prove it, the other doesn't.
It's inexcusable to be attacking an honored veteren. That is territory they have no right to infringe.
When Pres. Bush has a role in a war he hasn't started then it wouldn't be excusable to attack him, but he can't even prove where he, ect. during vietnam.
Damn... are Americans so shallow as to vote for someone on what he did in the past? Personally, I wouldn't care whether he was an honorable member or dishonorably discharged. What matters is leadership skills. If a candidate was a general, he'd likely get my favor. But personally, I don't really care if he's a coward or not, just as long as he doesn't let it bother his judgement (like with Blair).
Besides, the Vietnam war was one of those wars that were unjustly fought and very heavily biased in history books (like most of the other wars between USA and 3rd-world nations). Anyone who kills innocent people just because they were told to loses my vote. Much more anyone who was good at killing them .
(Oh, and in case I don't have the time to reply to whatever reply I get from this, yes, I know that soldiers don't count as 'innocent people')
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
" are Americans so shallow as to vote for someone on what he did in the past? "
I don't want to be electing any murderers, or anything crazy like that. Often looking at their past is the only way to determine true leadership skills. Furthermore, look at the leadership skills of George W. Bush.
He was told what was going on, a national emergency; and he sat there and continued to listen to little children read. Surely to some people it seems like he was respecting the youth, and respecting those people. Who gives a shit? There were people dying, c'mon now. National emergencies are priority # 1.
LOL, Bush is one of the worst leaders history will ever know. The only reason he got elected was because his main competitor was Al Gore (and maybe a little help from Daddy) .
What real leader would attack a country, claiming it had weapons of mass destruction when the UN couldn't find any. Heck, they attacked just before the UN would give them the red light. Shame on the rest of the world for slaughtering innocent Iraqis? Do they not know that the other countries (e.g. America, China, North Korea, Russia, India, Pakistan, France, Germany, etc) also possess weapons of mass destruction? I guess those who did attack did so just to cover up the fact that they too were potential victims.
Seriously though, Saddam was just a strict, tough, yet really nice guy. Kinda like ShadowCaster. The main reason he was so harsh on his people was because they were the chaotic types that didn't like to be ruled. I actually wrote a storyline about how Iraq would fall into chaos after the US won, and strangely enough, it's going almost exactly to plan (though I expected it to start on July and it seems that Spain's going for the democratic communism, not China).
Heck, if Bush stays in power for about another decade and Iraq is quelled, I'm willing to bet 50 DC points that Hawaii and/or Alaska would be nuked.
Either way, John Kerry would get my vote over Bush any day.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
No matter who we elect there just gonna screw it up, so quit your complaining. Were supposed to be electing the best, but this is what we get? These two clowns? I don't think either of them can govern this country well. I usually laugh at people that say they can do a better job, but now I'm not so sure. But is it really they who govern our country? In some parts, yes. But then we also have our "Majority" to blame for being retarded. But what shapes our Majority in to this stupid mass of stupidity? You guessed it, the mass media.
The mass media tells us how bad marijuana can be, but I never read anywhere in the news or anything that tells us the good things that majorly outweigh the bad.
Like for instance they don't tell you that Marijuana contains no addictive substances. People who are hooked on marijuana are hooked because of a mental addiction, meaning they smoke it because they want to, not because they are forced to.
What about the nutritional facts of the seeds?
The hemp seeds contain no THC
22.6% Protein
30% Fat
5.7% Moisture
5.9% Ash
35.8% Carbohydrates
Vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B6, C, D, and E
503cal/100g energy
The highest total of essential fatty acids and essential amino acids found in one single food sorce
The stalks of the hemp plant can be used to make alot of stuff, such as the strongest rope, the most durable fabric, a very high quality paper, and building materials such as concrete, particle board, paint, insulation, ect. The list totally goes on with what you can make with it.
Here are some other interesting facts:
The first bibles were printed on hemp paper
The first US flag was made of hemp
The US constitution and Declaration of Independence were printed on hemp paper
An Acre of Hemp produces 4 times the ammount of paper than an acre of trees, and it grows back in less than a year
Henry Ford made a hemp-mobile
Birds live 20% longer when the hemp seed is part of their diet
Hemp seed oil has been used in everything from engine oil and paint, to cosmetics and food for man and other animals
in the 1600's, there were places in the US were growing hemp was enforced by law
you could pay your taxes in hemp for 200 years during the 1700's in the US
Hemp seeds have been a staple and a life-saver during many famines and food shortages throughout history [over 60% of third world children are dying everyday because of protien starvation, but MR. GOVERNMENT says they can't grow it, it's bad for you and against the law]
The depleation of the ozone layer threatens to reduce crops by up to 50%, but hemp is immune to the damages of ultraviolet light, in fact, it actually helps it develop!
There are receptors, scientists have found, in the brain will bind with THC compounds alone, and no other.
Hemp requires little to no industry, it grows in the ground [Cleaning the soil of toxins) then is cut, dried, and utilized.
Hemp is a more profilic producer of ethanol than corn.
Taxing the plant would majorly decrease taxes in the US.
Legalizing it would stop marijana dealers from getting rich.
The one place where it is legal, Holland, only 3% of the teens actually smoke it.
"Prohibtion goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appitite by legislation, and it makes a crime out of things that are not crimes" -ABE LINCOLN, 1840
"And God said, Behold I have given you every green herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat." -Genesis 1:29
Now I'd say that the benefits of this plants totally outweigh the negative effects, which is just some kids get high off of it. But that's kind of happening already.
Now you tell me, which leader would even consider legalizing hemp? And this is just an argument for one of the many things that should be change in this world, but everyone just assumes that their bad because of something some idiot did. People are so stupid because they believe the first thing they hear, but do the majority of voters actually research what they are voting for? All of the people I know never even heard of a benefit of hemp, they just assume, kid get's high, there done. And if you look at it, do you really know who you are voting for? I want to fucking hit anyone who says they do, but no! You can't find out anything about a person in the media. You have to remember that these are the same heartless bastards who try to smuggle scandles out of every fucking celebrity. In my opinion, your local news brodcast is no different then the retards in the tabloids. And now I'm gonna be quite before I get angry. Sorry, I don't mean to yell or anything, it's just sickening how impossible it is to change someones opinions, none the less the whole worlds. Oh well.
The funny thing is that half of you tools probably aren't old enough to vote. The other half probably aren't smart enough, but I guess that never stopped anybody.
Obviously Bush did not serve "honorably" because DEC Stuff says so. Bush did show where he was during Vietnam but some people don't believe him for obvious reasons. As for John Kerry, he served also, so yes he should not be attacked about it.
"Seriously though, Saddam was just a strict, tough, yet really nice guy. Kinda like ShadowCaster. The main reason he was so harsh on his people was because they were the chaotic types that didn't like to be ruled. I actually wrote a storyline about how Iraq would fall into chaos after the US won, and strangely enough, it's going almost exactly to plan (though I expected it to start on July and it seems that Spain's going for the democratic communism, not China)."
So according to Muz, Saddam was a better leader than Bush.:/ Hmmmmmm.......
99 percent chance that the above post is 100 percent correct.
Saddam opressed people because of their specific muslim denominations or culture, and if they fought back they were inhumanely killed. He has killed unarmed women and children. He was not a "nice guy".
And whoever first mentioned marijuana legalisation, shame on you! My friend's uncle got hooken on marijuana. He then became highly scitzophrenic, resulting in him jumping out of the window of a building.
I'll agree that Saddam was a bad guy... but was it our place to take him out? He didn't pose a direct threat to the United States, and it's not like we've done much better than him so far in terms of running his country.
As for the marijuana thing, I have no problem with it. Realistically, it does less long-term damage than drinking. As for marijuana making you go nutso -- it was probably some bad schwag laced with something else.
Teapot:
LOL, you missed my comparison of Saddam to SC? He's nice as is personality, lifestyle, family values, ethics, etc. He was just merciless in the killing of the troublemakers. The only reason he looked as bad as many people think is because of the media. I despise biased media. Especially that ass-kissing CNN.
Trust me, if you asked the average Iraqi off the streets before the 2nd Gulf War, a lot of them LOVE Saddam. Those who didn't were just the power-hungry and the young idiots who thought that Saddam had governed for too long (for some reason people think that it's a bad thing when some guy stays in power for long).
Personally, I don't know a thing about marijuana, so I'll stay neutral on that .
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
" Obviously Bush did not serve "honorably" because DEC Stuff says so"
Yeah your damn straight its that way.
I can't say for certain whether or not Bush served what you call "honorably". I do know he was on drugs or alcohol or both during those years. I know he was a C student in yale. I know he's the only president ever to have a criminal record. I know he has lied, like most presidents. I know according to what we hear that Bush likely dodged the draft, that his father helped him, that he didn't serve completely.
Im not the only one out there who thinks this. It's not just "cause I say it". There are many people out there who also believe this.
I don't know much about marijuana, but I do know that my uncle (dad's half sister's husband) that lives in California is addicted to pot, and is seriously fucked up.
We don't see them much, but once and a while he comes over to Hawaii to surf, and man, he has the IQ of a 6 year old. And he’s paranoid too, he’s a textbook nutcase who lives way out in the woods above half moon bay with no phone or running water in a century old hunting cabin. He lives "off the grid" because the government is out to get him.
Meeting him is the most effective anti drug commercial.
But damn, hemp sounds like it does lost of good.
Steve Zissou: Anne-Marie, do all the interns get Glocks?
It seems that some of you like to skim over stuff don't you? If you read any of it, I said nothing about being for smoking it. And like you all just stated about people smoking it, its just that, people are already smoking it. So instead of holding back the good things that hemp does, lets just allow the good things and try to continue to stop people from smoking it.
Also like I said, Marijana is a mental addiction, therefore while still somewhat hard, it is easier to treat and cure an adiction than cigaretts. Also granted, smoking marijana seems more dangerous, what with the highness and all, in the long run it is far less dangerous than cigaretts. Ever see someone try to stop themself from smoking cigaretts? Thats brutal. And why the hell does our government continue to let all these tobacco companies put all these insane chemicals in it? Because of the money! This country was founded on things like tobacco and such! If I were running this country, Id swap it in a heartbeat. I'm a D-F student, with a minor criminal record and I can run this country better. It might still go into the ground, but the crash will be smoother.
Who ever thought of smoking tobacco and marijana? Maybe I should research that. That seems like it could only be a very funny and akward scene.
Anyways, what's the deal with the draft? I was told Bush is bringing it back because he can't handle Iraq I guess.
Storytime!!!
Okay, in Iraq, I'm sure we all know about people are sending contractors to like build and stuff for an insane ammounts of money, due to the danger and all. Anyways, this one lady (forgot her name) Decided to go there to be able to actually feed her children in the future, and she was having trouble with bills and all. Anyways, in Iraq, she had the privilage of seeing a plane full of dead american soldiers. Now this wasn't like a bunch of bodies piled in a plane, but a very nice decroated plane, with american flags and nice coffins and stuff. Seeing this, she took a picture and sent it to a newspaper. The paper published it, but the Bush admin ended up taking away the ladies job, the lady ended up loosing her house and her kids, and all because bush didn't want the public to see it. Now why the hell would he go and do that? It's not like it was a bunch of dead bodies all scattered about with limbs flying everywhere. This would more likely make someone respect war more. But yeah, so there anyways. Continue.
The Bush, and the right is hellbent on hiding the costs of war. Just last night several ABC affiliates chose not to air there nightline program which was commemorating the falen.
DEC stuff, most people can't even get into Yale, let alone make C's. I don't know what you mean about his "criminal record" (maybe that he did drugs?) but other Presidents have had criminal records (such as Clinton).
I think Muz is from another planet or something. I will give you one example of how "great" Saddam was. He lived in palaces and luxury, while he let his people live in the dumps, to put it bluntly. In fact it was impossible for them to improve there condition because Saddam wanted to be the only one rich and powerful. They had no freedom at all. I could go on about other things he has done but thats enough for now. Also, the media is biased but it depends on what station you watch, as to what there biases are. CNN is biased against the war while Fox would be biased for the war. But can you really blame them? Is it possible to be completely unbiased? I don't think so.
99 percent chance that the above post is 100 percent correct.
Number of times Bush has been arrested: 3.
Number of times Clinton has been arrested: 0.
In response to Mr. Coffee:
Saddam is a piece of shit. No one likes that guy. But also,
It's tough to be unbiased. But Rupert Murdock and many mass media outlets are owned and run by conservatives. They are very biased.
I don't know how much CNN is biased as it is simply trying to be unbiased. Thats the problem. You think your unbiased, and people will call you biased always.
I don't like Saddam, but the my country, Americans, etc. invading a country without propar plans of what to do after we get there, or atleast not implenenting those good plans is NOT what I would call a good thing, even if getting rid of Saddam in general might be.
Obviously, since Clinton has never been arrested that means he has no criminal record. Uh, no. He should have been thrown in jail anyway. Many media outlets are run by conservatives but many of them are also run by liberals (such as CNN).
99 percent chance that the above post is 100 percent correct.
Shadow Caster and Saddam do not compare. We'd be doomed if Gore was in power. Bush is at least better then Gore, and Kerry, well, Kerry is a moron.
Is there a possiblity for a third candadate?
Fine Garbage since 2003.
CURRENT PROJECT:
-Paying off a massive amount of debt in college loans.
-Working in television.
"Shadow Caster and Saddam do not compare. We'd be doomed if Gore was in power. Bush is at least better then Gore, and Kerry, well, Kerry is a moron." (Lazarus)
Saying Kerry is a moron is like saying Saddam was a good guy. It's a lie. Kerry wasn't a C student, Kerry has never gotten a DUI, Kerry actually fought in a war, Kerry has made a lifesworth of accomplishments. Thats a very audacious thing to say.
If you know anything about the governership of Texas you'd know it's very limited in it's power. The experience George W. Bush attained as a governor of Texas and as the owner of a baseball team is probably not going to be more than all the experience John Kerry has recieved as a senator.
It's true Kerry does switch sides a lot. I would rather have someone who switches sides and basis his decisions on the people rather than a president who is stubborn and unwilling to admit his mistakes.
If nadar won, it would be a miracle. I heard this story once about Nadar. Some politicians hired a private investigator to follow him around and get dirt on him. Nadar is not married, and really there is no dirt. The private investigators followed him for 3 or 4 days. He went to the dry cleaners, he went to work, he ate at a local diner. His routine was down to the second. After the 3rd or 4th day the investigators quit, they were too tired and too bored. Nadar was so boring they quit! Thats my kind of politician; no dirt.
Bush most likely did not lie about the WMD's. He thought Iraq had them, and you can't prove he "lied" about it. Clinton on the other hand, lied all the time about many things, thus he should have been thrown in jail. I would probably even prefer Kerry to Clinton.
Also, I know Kerry fought in a war as you like to keep pointing out, but that does not mean he would make a good president. Kind of obvious but I thought I should point it out.
Edited by the Author.
99 percent chance that the above post is 100 percent correct.
Kerry may have not been a C student, but at least Bush doesn't change his mind all the time about where he stands. But I see your point. And I do think we need a new president, but I don't think Bush OR Kerry are worthy.
Besides, did you know Kerry is actually a chipmonk?
Fine Garbage since 2003.
CURRENT PROJECT:
-Paying off a massive amount of debt in college loans.
-Working in television.
I most commonly don't like to take part in political discussions as they always burst out into a bunch of mindless childesh beating of heads between two groups of people in an all out beat down of petyness, but when I saw the comment "but at least Bush doesn't change his mind all the time about where he stands." it reminded me of a thread I saw on my Everquest server's message board under the "Steamvent" (AKA the political dumpyard). While I don't at all trust any political debating extremist when it comes to "Bush vs Kerry" and such, it may enlighten some people. But then again, Bush and Kerry supporters do a lot in the ways of trying to push each other off the edge.
Note: Depending on who you are, the link may not be suitable for you. If you are very much against mindless dravel, harsh language, petty first grade insults, and/orc etc avoid the link and the area it leads to. I apologize ahead of time to the admins if they deem this is inappropriate.
Note2: If you have any commentary on this subject at all, ***DO NOT*** register and post on the message board! Post your commentary here under this thread. Posting on the message board, especially without an EQ character on the Erollisi Marr server, will attract a lot of unnecessary attention to you as well as get you banned (without an EQ Emarr character).
I'm tossing my vote away by writing in John McCain.
I dislike Bush - but I don't hate him as much as all of these anti-Bush wackos do. They're even worse than Bush - hateful people with what they perceive to be the "moral high ground."
I'm against the Iraq War - but I think we should've finished off Saddam Hussein a long time ago. The guy SANCTIONED murders, pillaging, and rape. In my opinion, we're in the right war, but at the wrong time and for the wrong reason.
I'm also against John Kerry, who either flip-flops on issues or avoids them entirely. Nobody really knows who he is or what he believes in - just that he follows the Howard Dean formula of "Attack, attack, attack".
As for Ralph Nader... he's actually starting to look half-decent.
Ah well. Moving to Canada anyway.
For the record: People who say "OMG BUSH IS TEH EVIL HE MUST DIE" or "OMG BUSH IS SO STOOPID" are not any better than he is.
If wishes were fishes then we'd all smell like ladies' underwear.
Advertisement
Post Reply
.
.
Joshtek
GO! 
.
Edited by the Author.
