Kerry vs Bush

LubeDude

Admiral
Joined
Oct 8, 2003
Messages
6,945
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Joe94th:<br /><br />Its good to see that you can see through all the retoric!! I myself, being registered republican, see many things about bush that I do not like. But Kerry, Give me a break!! Has there ever been a Pesident that did what he said he would do? Not that I can remember. There has to be reasons why he is doing what he is, be it bad advice, or what, I just know that He is doing a far better job putting this country back on track than a Democrate can do!
 

plywoody

Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
685
Re: Kerry vs Bush

I hear all this stuff about Kerry bieng this ultra liberal, and not one example of same. He voted for Nafta. He is for a push for energy independence--not thru drilling but thru technology and invention...<br />He is for re-entering the world stage again.<br />He is for budget restraint and a balanced budget, with balanced revenues.<br />I don't see one thing, other than a little election time political hyperbole, that would put him anywhere but somewhere in the middle, as Clinton was.
 

LubeDude

Admiral
Joined
Oct 8, 2003
Messages
6,945
Re: Kerry vs Bush

"I don't see one thing, other than a little election time political hyperbole, that would put him anywhere but somewhere in the middle, as Clinton was."<br /><br />Hahahahahahahahahahaaahahaahahahahahahah, the funniest thing Ive heard all day!!!<br /><br />Thanks Plywoody for making my day!!!!<br /><br />Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah LMAO. :D :D :D
 

POINTER94

Vice Admiral
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Messages
5,031
Re: Kerry vs Bush

I've changed my mind, there is apparently a Republican attack squad in the country. I hear they are armed with the truth and might even speak it. And guess what, Bush is a "CROOKED LIAR". I would never want a LIAR in the white house. Next thing you know they will be dating interns. Good thing nobody is engaging in personal destruction because that is just mean.<br /><br />You know what else I like, is that someone can just sign a piece of paper and just take my money. I don't even have to argue. They will just take it. Do we need to, well no, but hell I'm rich. (I own a boat, the democrats think we are all rich, fat, and frequently intoxicated) And darn it some people think that's not fair. I was unemployed 10 years ago and didn't take a dime from the country, but some teenager may need a fresh needle or condom in San Fran.<br /><br />I want to vote for a war hero, Bill Clinton. Oh thats right, military service is irrelavent or at least that is what I heard a couple of years ago. I just get so confused :rolleyes: :rolleyes: But you have to admit anyone who can take orders from General Fonda must have a strong stomach. (or a weak spine)<br /><br />I thought Kerry looked real good on TV tonight with that parrot on his shoulder that looked just like Ted Kennedy. Where can I get one????<br /><br />Anyone who can look at Kerry and say Yep, that's my man, needs to read and get out more often.
 

plywoody

Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
685
Re: Kerry vs Bush

I'm glad to see we have the usual republican debating skills on display here:<br /><br />1. If you can't refute the message, distort the message to an unrecognizable form, and dispute that.<br /><br />2. Ridicule and belittle the messenger.<br /><br />3. When all else fails, blame it on the Clintons (Bill and/or Hillary)<br /><br />It is good to see that the result of the current advertising barrage by Bush is that his approval rating continues to go down. Here's hoping the American electorate is not nearly as stupid as the Republicans think they are.
 

JB

Honorary Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Mar 25, 2001
Messages
45,907
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Hmmmm. I'm with Mellow Yellow.<br /><br />What will be done by the President in 2005 to 2008?<br /><br />What are the differences in what Kerry would do from what GWB will do??<br /><br />Clinton doesn't deserve credit for the post-cold-war boom any more than Bush deserves blame for the post-dotcom-post-9/11-bust. Each inherited the conditions that drove the economy.<br /><br />Both candidates are fine, honorable gentlemen. They have very different ideas on how to run our country.<br /><br />We will never convince/convert one another with playground name calling and "you're a liar and a crook" nonsense.<br /><br />Let's talk about what needs to be done and who will do it.<br /><br />I agree with Kerry on a couple of things and with Bush on everything else.
 

SoulWinner

Commander
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
2,423
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Pw, Youcaught me :D Good for you! Do you get The Federalist too ;) Oh, I love you brother. I like the points you brought up, but you say Kerry is like Clinton, not too liberal but somewhere in the middle. Well, what his voting record?<br /><br />
Massachusetts's most liberal senator -- check that, America's most liberal senator -- has, over the years, voted against defense-appropriations bills funding weapons that have proved essential to U.S. national security, including the Patriot Missile, the Tomahawk cruise missile and the B-2 stealth bomber. Kerry's voting record also shows his support for cutting funding or altogether canceling existing weapons systems such as the M-1 Abrams tank, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the Apache helicopter, B-1 Bomber, F-14, F-15, F-16 and AV-8B Harrier. Kerry also voted against the Navy's Aegis Air Defense Cruiser and Trident Missile System for U.S. submarines.<br /><br />The Center for Security Policy, a conservative Washington-based think tank committed to "promoting international peace through American strength," has rated Kerry among the worst on Capitol Hill when it comes to national security and defense. In 1995, the Center gave Kerry a score of five out of a possible 100 points. Two years later, Kerry earned a mind-blowing score of exactly zero.<br />
It's hard to argue that he is anything other than ultra liberal, and he is already promising higher taxes. That means he wants to give Americans a PAY CUT. Why is that so hard to understand? Why not vote foe whats good for your wallet?
 

jimchere

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Jun 30, 2003
Messages
321
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Don't knock the Patriot missile system too hard. I personally know some folks who are alive today because of it. Be careful of what you glean from CBS.
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: Kerry vs Bush

There is so much nonsense here, from the effectiveness of the Patriot, SDI and the economy that it would take an hour to respond and I am not going to change any minds anyway unless I can find a stock chart that definitively dispels the BS ;) <br /><br />Let me say this however, the economic boom of the late 90s was driven largely by the emergence of the Net and Y2K spending. To get over the Y2K glitch, every company on the planet went into a tech spending boom. New hardware, SW, ERP systems, reengineering projects, yada, yada, yada. To carry all the data Telecom went into a building boom (Just ask DNC Chairman Terry McCaliff who made all that money off Global Crossing after playing golf with Clinton and the CEO). Then we had the "peace" dividend gained by gutting our military after the collapse of the USSR.<br /><br />You know, the way Dems can pick stocks and commodities (e.g., Hillary and McCallif) you would think they would be Wall Street Moguls! I would love to make 10,000% gains like they do!
 

plywoody

Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
685
Re: Kerry vs Bush

I agree, JB. I would also like to discuss policies and directions in a positive manner. I posted this in a different thread, but I stick with it.<br /><br />And while some of the items may well be difficult to achieve, it is worth the effort. And if strength of military was the most important thing in fighting terrorism, Israel would have eliminated terrorism, at least against them, years ago. It takes more than that--not to say that having a strong military is not important, but it takes a whole lot more than that to be effective...<br /><br />At any rate:<br /><br />Just a few of the things that need to be done differently:<br /><br />1. We need to build a real international coalition to attempt to solve the problems that we have created in the Middle East. We need to rejoin the world community, and drop the arrogant cowboy "My way or no way" in our foreign policy. that is going to take a fundamentally different direction, and different attitude.<br />There is common ground amoung our European allies that we can find to achieve a common goal in Iraq, and other places, and share the costs and responsibilities, and we need to work to find that--It won't happen when we feel compelled to announce to the press, as Wolfowitz did, that none of the countries that did not support us (and of course it turned out they were correct in their assessment) will get any contracts to rebuild Iraq.<br />Even if that is the policy we want to wrongly follow, there are ways to do it diplomatically, and not with such an arrogant press release.<br /><br />2. We need to enforce and improve the clear air act and the environment, and not trash it as this administration is doing. Let's lead the world in environmental technology--it is good for the economy and good for the environment--and trash this clear skies initiative that trades a few nebulous short term corporate gains for any long term improvement.<br /><br />3. We need to create tax incentives for companies that create jobs here, and disincentives for companies to move headquarters offshore to a PO Box simply to avoid paying taxes.<br /><br />4. We need to revamp the tax policy to get this country's fiscal house in order--Scrap the huge tax cuts for the wealthy that do nothing to stimulate the economy, and offer more tax benefits to the middle class, including some payroll tax relief, that will stimulate the economy.<br /><br />5. Drop some of the irresponsible trade restrictions, like the softwood tarriff against Canada, that goes a long way to angering our closest and biggest trading partner, Canada, at the expense of average Americans and Canadians, for the benefit of a few large timber companies.<br /><br />6. Leave the constitution alone-It has served us well for 200+ years and doesn't need to be changed just to attract the votes of a few religious zealots.<br /><br />7 Fix the health care system so that the current 40 million Americans uncovered now have some chance of some form of healthcare.<br /><br />That is of course, only a start--
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Gee I didn't realize the Canadian constitution was that old :D <br /><br />If Israel had not adopted reciprocity they would have been pushed into the sea a long time ago.<br /><br />According to a report on O'Reilly last night, they have found all kinds of documents in Iraq showing that leaders at the highest levels in the UN, France, Germany and Russia were being bribed by Saddam as part of the oil for food program. So much for international cooperation. I guess Saddam forgot about the Brits and Spaniards.<br /><br />Get ready to have your world rocked to the core. Now that Kerry is on the record about the UN he is going to go down the tubes with the governments that prefer him as President. Sweet poetic justice baby!
 

SoulWinner

Commander
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
2,423
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Ply, I want to respond to your last post:<br /><br />
3. We need to create tax incentives for companies that create jobs here, and disincentives for companies to move headquarters offshore to a PO Box simply to avoid paying taxes.<br /><br />4. We need to revamp the tax policy to get this country's fiscal house in order--Scrap the huge tax cuts for the wealthy that do nothing to stimulate the economy, and offer more tax benefits to the middle class, including some payroll tax relief, that will stimulate the economy.<br />
Number three sounds like you favor what many democrats label "Coporate Wellfare," and number four has me baffles. Where are these huge tax cuts for the rich. Puhlease tell me, I'm diein' over here.
 

Ralph 123

Captain
Joined
Jun 24, 2003
Messages
3,983
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Democrats think "rich people," companies and the "religious right" are the boogie men<br /><br />Republicans think it is Al Qaeda types, communists and government<br /><br />Interesting isn't it?
 

billh1963

Petty Officer 3rd Class
Joined
Oct 14, 2003
Messages
78
Re: Kerry vs Bush

I don't usually participate in these debates since they are more emotional based than fact but I would like to add my thoughts on a couple of topics:<br /><br />1. The Cold War ended as a direct result of the Soviet Union's inability to maintain the spending that was required in trying to match the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI)...also called "Star Wars" by the press. The Soviets had overburdened their economy in the '70's with a massive military build-up (which was brought on by the sense of weakness in the US caused by he turmoil of Watergate and the ineffectual leadership of Carter) and just could not match the US in military spending in the '80's. This is a fact that is easily researched in writings of Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders of the time. Reagan has been given the credit for the fall of the Soviet Union by EVERY relevant leader of the era. Reagan, by initiating SDI, Pershing missle deployment, etc. effectively solved the Democrat and Green party concerns of a US-USSR nuclear war.<br /><br />2. Few things initiate more rhetoric than taxes. Unfortunately, most people are so tax ignorant that they cannot properly debate the issue. To start the topic, let's establish a baseline. For 2004 the U.S. tax rates are (for married couples):<br />10% up to $14,300<br />15% $14,301 - $58,100<br />25% $58,101 - $117,250 (middle class)<br />28% $117,251 - $178,650<br />33% $178,651 - $319,100<br />35% over $319,100<br /><br />The top tax categories pay the majority of tax revenue for the US government. The people in the lower tax category typically get all their money back. To say that the "wealthy" don't pay taxes is a "bald faced lie" and is used by the Democrats to promote the current trend of class envy/warfare. The truth is the majority of low income earners pay NO taxes.<br /><br />By definition, income tax cuts benefit those who pay income taxes. Since we have a progressive income tax system, upper income people pay a disproportionate share of income taxes. <br /><br />For example, in 1994 the top 1 percent of income earners paid more than one-quarter (28.7%) of all Federal individual income taxes, the top ten percent of income earners paid nearly 60 percent (59.1%) of total income taxes, and the top 50 percent (Top 50 percent of income earners equal annual income over $21,817) paid over 95 percent (95.2%). The bottom fifty percent of earners now pay just 4.8% of all federal income taxes. <br /><br />The top 10 percent of U.S. income earners bore significantly greater burden in 1994 (59.1%) than in 1984 (50.6%). Over that same period, the bottom 50% of U.S. income earners experienced a smaller tax burden with a decrease from 7.4% in 1984 to 4.8% in 1994. In fact, in 2001 the top 20% of income earners paid OVER 80% of all Federal income tax revenue.<br /><br />It has been estimated that a 1% increase in the tax rate of the top tier income producers (a change from 35% to 36%) would pay for ALL of the Iraq war. That is unlikely in an election year.<br /><br />The top tier before the "tax break" was 39%...now it's 35%. <br /><br />If you wanted to discuss "fair" then nothing could be more fair than a "flat tax rate". In that scenario everyone would pay a certain percentage (say...15%) of their income. The "deadbeat" low income earners would pay their share of taxes too. Imagine the economic stimulus that would have on the economy! In addition, no deductions would be allowed which would shrink the size of the IRS by 90%.
 

CalicoKid

Lieutenant Commander
Joined
May 27, 2002
Messages
1,599
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Has anyone considered that Bush LET 9-11 happen? It isn't as though Bin Laden hasn't been after the trade center for years. Before he aimed any missiles at Afghanistan, post 9/11, he was pointing fingers at everyone who wasn't giving him reliable intelligence. He then made his case to the world for a preemptive Iraqi invasion based on intelligence from the same sources. Then his brilliant security council took advantage of our insecurities after 9-11 and turned a national police force loose on the American public.<br /> Complain all you like about liberalsim = communism. What we're getting now is far worse. We're loosing our rights, the nation's wealth, both natural and financial, is being procured for the elite, and the affairs of our government are being conducted in secrecy.<br /><br />What should we do? In the short term throw Bush out of office so that the absolute power of the Republicans and their employers is weakened for four years. During that time we need to stop bickering over non-issues that tug our heartstrings and get some representatives into congress that are not affiliated with the two-party system that divides us so deeply. We've been taken advantage of for too long by a system of divide and conquer in the US. A third party president like Nader wouldn't be able to change a thing. Congress is where the power is at for change. Our government was designed to be resistant to factional power but it has been failing for years. Partisan voters do nothing to help.
 

POINTER94

Vice Admiral
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Messages
5,031
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Bil,<br /><br />Thanks for refreshing us on the numbers. Unforturnately, liberals already know this and choose, through some undefined rationalization, selective amnesia, or intellectual dishonesty to somehow ignore the facts.<br /><br />It is apparent to me that if you can get to a condition where greater than 50% of the people pay nothing yet can simply vote more money away from the do'ers (those who pay in) what you have is Socialism. <br /><br />Liberals feel they can pick and choose the rights that are to be observed. One of their least favorite is spelled out about as clear as can be. The right to bear arms. <br /><br />We now limit the type of guns, size of guns, delivery of the guns, amount of guns, licensing of guns, and time frame for purchasing guns, age limits to own, etc. And they are thrilled.. So when they spout off about the constitutional rights it is clearly a smoke screen. <br /><br />Imagine if the same restrictions were placed on speech. Look what they are doing when Howard Stern gets slapped with a fine... The sky is falling and we are all going to end up in a gulog. In the interpretation of the supreme court, financial donations are covered under free speech. Trust me, my government through their taxes are limiting my speech. In addition, a strong case can be made for the first amendment only applying to political speech. Another discussion, another day.<br /><br />What really craws up my dress is when, just a couple of years ago, it was all about the politics of personal distruction, and military service is irrelavant. Well now, when it serves their needs to try and blemish a man reputation with hateful speech and misrepresentations they have forgotten their high moral standards. The democrats now put forth a platform based on everything they were against just a few years ago. This is dishonest. And for the press to ignore what is apparent to even an idiot, is an insult to everyones intellegence. The fine example was laid out by Bil, and can be summed up by saying, "how can you give a tax cut to someone who doesn't pay taxes?" is crystal clear. Somehow we have been able to twist the reality of the situation, to actually give non-tax payers a tax break, and then complain it is not enough. The moral superiority that the left exhibits is just the opposite, and should create moral outrage. Remember when Dich Cheney made an off color comment about a reporter and it was all over the news for weeks? We now applaud democrats for their willingness and unyeilding desire to take charge. Just another double standard.<br /><br />There are some of us here who can't understand satire, or they run over it so they don't have to answer to it. Satire and humor is about all I can give after that hate filled spew that came out of Kerry's mouth and the cowardice to not extend an apology. Not presidential, not senatorial, not polite. :mad:
 

BigDDL

Cadet
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Messages
10
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Bill, <br /> I am greatly OFFENDED by you calling the lower wage earners deadbeats!! That remark was one of the most vile, callous, and disgusting I've ever encountered! The vast majority of these so called "deadbeats" work extremely hard for their money, and every single dollar holds more value for them then a hundred dollars would to a "top 50% income earner" Contrary to what you may believe not all of these lower wage earners are drug addicts, alcoholics, or low-lifes. They are generally good and warm-hearted people.<br /> While your numbers are numerically "fair", you are completely leaving out the human factor. To put this in perspective for everyone, Bill believes that if a "deadbeats's" child has only a sandwich to eat all day, that the child should have to give up 15% of that sandwich, while Bill (whom i'm sure is way up there in the top tier of taxpayers) will dine on a four course meal and will give up 15 percent also, which might equal half of his dessert. Now, anyone, please tell me that this flat tax plan is totally fair? In my reasoning, fair cannot be explained with numbers.<br /> For all of you "Christian" voters this scenario is similar to the story of where Jesus embraced the poor woman who gave a small amount of money in offering and criticized the rich man who gave much money in a pompous fashion. I say "Chrisitan" in a satirical fashion because i believe many people use that term to describe themselves but they "talk the talk, not walk the walk". <br /> As for Pointer, Socialism is what democracy becomes when people lose their sense of morals and compassion as is unfortunately happening in the US. When people stop caring and treating others as they should government must step in and do this for them. I believe people should keep what they earn, but when you can help someone else and not hurt yourself financially i see no reason why you shouldn't. Maybe give your employees a 25 cent raise instead of putting that extra 4,000 into your retirement, or help a family member who has hit rough times instead of going on that second vacation this year. <br /> Now, before you start calling me a "deadbeat", I'll just tell you I'm well into the "top 50% income earners". I'm in skilled labor, and my wife is an education professional.<br /> I'm not a low down democrat. I've voted straight Republican all of my life.<br /> I personally believe because of the lack of COMPASSION in the United States today that a mix of light socialism and democracy is in order for the good of all citizens, not just those who can afford it <br /> Big DDL
 

mellowyellow

Vice Admiral
Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
5,327
Re: Kerry vs Bush

excellent/heartfelt post DDL!<br />it's not the personal tax loopholes that bother<br />me, rather the big corporate ones. take a look<br />at haliburton's offshore corporations and see<br />just how little taxes they pay into the system.<br /><br />I for one would rather pay a little more for some<br />thing BECAUSE it was made in the USA, rather than<br />see all the high paying mfg. jobs going overseas.<br />when the dot.bomb bubble burst, it started taking<br />high tech jobs overseas as well.<br />strating to rant now... :rolleyes: <br /><br />the road to disaster is paved with good intentions!<br />M.Y.
 

POINTER94

Vice Admiral
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Messages
5,031
Re: Kerry vs Bush

Socialism is what democracy becomes when people lose their sense of morals and compassion as is unfortunately happening in the US.
I think I will need some clairification before I can comment. :confused: :confused: <br /><br />I will agree, charity begins at home and then spreads outward. What does this have to do with the government overtaxing people? How does this apply to the Kerry vs. Bush discussion? Does this make our politicians the kings of charity? Government never makes a good conduit for the distribution of charity. Our government has become a means for redistribution of wealth. We were set up to provide equal opportunity to wealth.<br /><br />Flat tax perhaps????
 
Top