PDA

View Full Version : Edwards is in



moblsv
12-28-2006, 08:08 AM
http://johnedwards.com/

This campaign is about each of us taking responsibility for our country's future -- and ensuring America’s greatness in the 21st century.

It is a campaign not just about what we can do in the White House -- but what we can do on the way.

We all must take responsibility and take action now to:

* Provide moral leadership in the world
* Strengthen our middle class and end poverty
* Guarantee universal health care for every American
* Lead the fight against global warming
* Get America and other countries off our addiction to oil

If we want to live in a moral and just America tomorrow, we cannot wait until the next President is elected to begin to take action.

Tomorrow begins today

cushioncrawler
12-28-2006, 01:45 PM
Looks too good to be true. Iz there a hidden downside to JE???

pooltchr
12-28-2006, 07:13 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cushioncrawler:</font><hr> Looks too good to be true. Iz there a hidden downside to JE??? <hr /></blockquote>

As a Senator from North Carolina, JE did absolutely nothing during his term other than run for Vice President. He has been the biggest "do nothing" Senator I can ever remember.

Hmmmmmm...that might be a good thing! /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Steve

eg8r
12-28-2006, 07:29 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Looks too good to be true. Iz there a hidden downside to JE??? <hr /></blockquote> There was the last time around, and his name is Kerry. The cost of medical help is definitely a downside of Edwards. How about the time he held a seance in the court room? Now, I know that some here do not like the religion of the current President, but do you really want someone in there that is "speaking with dead children" to bilk the insurance companies out of millions? I can already hear the arguments for those on the board about the current President bilking millions from oil, but if that is true, then what is the difference between the two of them other than the source of their millions which both come at the cost of the everyday man and woman?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
12-28-2006, 09:58 PM
ANYONE!!!...but another Republican!!!!

I like Edwards, and his wife, but my choice, would be Biden. Joe Biden, is one of the few who actually answers questions. No double talk with him. Intelligent, and has shown very good judgement, IMO. He came out with his solutions for Iraq, long ago, and afterwards, the committee said almost the same thing.

I don't think we have to worry, anyway, Bush will get us all bombed to smitherines before the next election. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

The more I read about this bunch, the more I am worried about the prospect of George Bush calling the shots for another two years! If we survive his idiocy, it will be a miracle!

gayle...

moblsv
12-29-2006, 02:17 AM
agreed. I like Biden and think Edwards is electable. As long as we don't get a Republican!!!!

There are many good Democratic choices. My choice is still Gore. I can only imagine how things might be had we not been duped by our $300 bribe in '00 and elected the moron we have now. But, I can't live in the past. Just hoping we survive the next two years.

In other choices: I just read The Audacity of Hope, Barack seems to have the right ideas on most every subject but I am afraid he tries too hard to be diplomatic to the Right. I understand uniting the country and working for compromise but I also don't want somebody who is too soft on these Neo-Cons who are destroying our Country, and the world.

I also like Hillary. I'm afraid she might not be electable though. The Right has been demonizing her since Bill was elected and the P.R. war may be too much. I am also turned off by the dynastic aspect of electing another Clinton. This country was founded partly on removing the Monarchy from Government and I find this Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton trend disturbing.

Dean is probably not electable either. I followed him closely last election and thought he matched up issue-for-issue with me closer than anyone else. He did a good job working stategy for the '06 cycle. Hopefully he can do more of the same in '08

pooltchr
12-29-2006, 05:24 AM
Gayle,
Edwards made his money as an ambulance chasing lawyer. You have made it clear you think GW thinks he is above the law. Edwards would give you a whole new outlook on the white house...a lawyer who knows how to twist the law to work in his favor. He has a history of getting elected to political office for the single purpose of advancing his own political agenda. He showed the people of NC that in no uncertain terms. Within a week of being elected Senator, he was in Vermont on the campaign trail. After he lost the election, he got a very nice job at UNC where he was able to control mega-bucks in grant money. It has nothing to do with his political afiliation...I just wouldn't trust him farther than I could throw him.
Once again, I would caution you to look at a candidates past actions rather than listen to what they are saying when the cameras are on.
Steve

Rich R.
12-29-2006, 06:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> He has a history of getting elected to political office for the single purpose of advancing his own political agenda. <hr /></blockquote>
And which politician, of any party, can't you say this about? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Getting elected it the main job. Doing the job is just a hobby, with all of these politicians.

moblsv
12-29-2006, 08:28 AM
This site seems to be a good resource for info. Although, it seems to be missing the insightful Rightwing info akin to "I think I saw Edwards touch Kerry's Butt" that people seem so interested in hearing.

http://senate.ontheissues.org/Senate/Joe_Biden.htm
http://senate.ontheissues.org/John_Edwards.htm

Gayle in MD
01-03-2007, 12:41 AM
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> Gayle,
Edwards made his money as an ambulance chasing lawyer. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> OIC, but Bush's dealings involving insider trading were fine? His grand father's dealings with Hitler? I'm just pointing out how partisan your thinking is, Steve. Edwards was an attorney, Bush dumped stocks, and his daddy got him out of it.

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> You have made it clear you think GW thinks he is above the law. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

I think Bush, has made it clear, with his seven hundred plus signing statments, and his on-going lies against our country, and our troops.

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> Edwards would give you a whole new outlook on the white house...a lawyer who knows how to twist the law to work in his favor. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

Bush has done nothing BUT twist the law, Steve. How come you still support him?

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> He has a history of getting elected to political office for the single purpose of advancing his own political agenda. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

OIC, Bush didn't do that?


[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> He showed the people of NC that in no uncertain terms. Within a week of being elected Senator, he was in Vermont on the campaign trail. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

Campaigning is against the law?


[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> After he lost the election, he got a very nice job at UNC where he was able to control mega-bucks in grant money. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

Jobs at UNC are illegal? Controling grant money is worse than dumping stocks? Or worse than being in bed with the Saudis, Enron and Halliburton? Or having a grandfather who sold arms to Hitler?


[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> It has nothing to do with his political afiliation...I just wouldn't trust him farther than I could throw him. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

Steve, if you think you're not partisan, you're kidding yourself. Forgive me, but I couldn't possibly take your advice on who to trust, after watching you defend George Bush low these many years!

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> Once again, I would caution you to look at a candidates past actions rather than listen to what they are saying when the cameras are on. [ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
Steve

Steve, did you study George Bush's past before you voted for him? Did you vote for him in 04? I think that if one of us needs some advice on how to determine for whom to vote, and how to see through a lying SOB politician, your suggestion that that would be me, is not only funny, but in your case, sad.

Gayle in Md.

pooltchr
01-03-2007, 05:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> Gayle,
Edwards made his money as an ambulance chasing lawyer. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> OIC, but Bush's dealings involving insider trading were fine? His grand father's dealings with Hitler? I'm just pointing out how partisan your thinking is, Steve. Edwards was an attorney, Bush dumped stocks, and his daddy got him out of it.
<font color="red"> I'm just pointing out that Edwards in no better than the current president, whom you have deamonized for the past 6 years </font color>

&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> You have made it clear you think GW thinks he is above the law. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>

I think Bush, has made it clear, with his seven hundred plus signing statments, and his on-going lies against our country, and our troops.

<font color="red"> And what makes you think Edwards would be any better? </font color>

&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> Edwards would give you a whole new outlook on the white house...a lawyer who knows how to twist the law to work in his favor. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>

Bush has done nothing BUT twist the law, Steve. How come you still support him?

<font color="red"> Actually, I will be glad when his term is over </font color>

&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> He has a history of getting elected to political office for the single purpose of advancing his own political agenda. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>

OIC, Bush didn't do that?
<font color="red"> So you are putting Edwards and GW in the same class....so how can you support him? Is it because he is a Democrat? </font color>


&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> He showed the people of NC that in no uncertain terms. Within a week of being elected Senator, he was in Vermont on the campaign trail. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>

Campaigning is against the law?
<font color="red"> No, it's not against the law. However, when you start a new job, then spend all your time looking for another job, it usually gets you fired. At least, in the world where I live. </font color>


&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> After he lost the election, he got a very nice job at UNC where he was able to control mega-bucks in grant money. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>

Jobs at UNC are illegal? Controling grant money is worse than dumping stocks? Or worse than being in bed with the Saudis, Enron and Halliburton? Or having a grandfather who sold arms to Hitler?

<font color="red"> Jobs at UNC are not illegal. I do have a problem with high dollar jobs being CREATED for one individual. Edwards has no background in education...which is the core business of a STATE University. </font color>


&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> It has nothing to do with his political afiliation...I just wouldn't trust him farther than I could throw him. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>

Steve, if you think you're not partisan, you're kidding yourself. Forgive me, but I couldn't possibly take your advice on who to trust, after watching you defend George Bush low these many years!

<font color="red"> I would be willing to bet that I voted for more Democrats in the last election than you voted for Republicans. Which one of us is partisan????????? </font color>

&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote> Once again, I would caution you to look at a candidates past actions rather than listen to what they are saying when the cameras are on. &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
<hr /></blockquote>
Steve

Steve, did you study George Bush's past before you voted for him? Did you vote for him in 04? I think that if one of us needs some advice on how to determine for whom to vote, and how to see through a lying SOB politician, your suggestion that that would be me, is not only funny, but in your case, sad.
<font color="red"> The past few presidential elections have not, in my opinion, offered us any candidate I could fully support. I didn't vote FOR anyone...I voted AGAINST what I considered to be the worst choice. If you want sad, that is it! Millions of people in this country, that we get to pick from the likes of Bush, Kerry, and Gore????? Yes, that is truely sad! </font color>

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

DickLeonard
01-03-2007, 12:23 PM
Pooltchr the only argument I have about your picking the better of the two. I think that the person who went to war had a Memo on his desk about Osama planning to Bomb us by flying airplanes into buildings would do something more than put it on the bottom of the pile.

If he did that, I don't think he would have the nerve to do a Photo Op at the Grave Site.####

pooltchr
01-03-2007, 04:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Pooltchr the only argument I have about your picking the better of the two. I think that the person who went to war had a Memo on his desk about Osama planning to Bomb us by flying airplanes into buildings would do something more than put it on the bottom of the pile.

If he did that, I don't think he would have the nerve to do a Photo Op at the Grave Site.#### <hr /></blockquote>

The key word is "IF". I have seen no proof that your suggestion is true. If it is true, someone along the way would surely have "leaked" that memo. Speculation just doesn't hold any water. Do you know for a fact that this information was available before 9-11?
Steve

moblsv
01-03-2007, 06:32 PM
National Security Archive
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/index.htm

Declassified "Bin Ladin Determined to Attack in US"
http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/pdb080601.pdf

pooltchr
01-03-2007, 07:05 PM
The document states BL was considering attacks on the US with bombs, or possibly hijacking an airplane to negotiate the release of his guy. We have had hijacked airplanes for years for similar reasons. We have had buildings bombed for years.
I am talking about difinitive proof that GW knew they were going to fly passenger airliners into buildings around the country. Prior to 9-11, something like that was beyond most people's wildest imagination.
We had intelligence dating back into BC's administration that BL wanted to attack us. I don't see how the document you sited would be any different from anything we had already. In fact, it could easily be considered more of the same intel we had for years.
It's kinda like reading some of the posts on this forum...you get the feeling there is nothing new...just the same old rhetoric.
Where is the specific proof?
Steve

Gayle in MD
01-03-2007, 09:15 PM
There is plenty of proof, Steve, and I've written many posts documenting it. You refuse to accept any of it. Richard Clarke's book, for one, and many others. Richard Clark gives the full story, including the expected flying of jets into buildings in NY. All of the books I have written about here tell the story.

As for Edwards, personally, I find him tremendously more presidential than Bush ever was. Although, Edwards is not my choice, at this point, I don't count him out. Your written statements about him do not light a candle to George Bush's unfit profile for office. You voted for him in 04???? Even after all his lies??? Even after all his incompetence??? After all those who have died due to his lies and incompetence???? I'd call that partisanship.

Gayle in Md.

Qtec
01-03-2007, 09:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Looks too good to be true. Iz there a hidden downside to JE??? <hr /></blockquote> There was the last time around, and his name is Kerry. The cost of medical help is definitely a downside of Edwards. How about the time he held a seance in the court room? <font color="blue"> If I ever get arrested, I want him! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif</font color> Now, I know that some here do not like the religion of the current President, but do you really want someone in there that is "speaking with dead children" to bilk the insurance companies out of millions? <font color="blue"> Everybody hates the Insurance Comps! /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif</font color> I can already hear the arguments for those on the board about the current President bilking millions from oil, but if that is true, then what is the difference between the two of them other than the source of their millions which both come at the cost of the everyday man and woman?

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

Why are you suddenly concerned with 'the everyday' man? /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif You moan about all the time about what the everyday person gets from the Fed purse but the no-bid BILLIONS handed to Haliburton - who have already been caught 9 times STEALING from the taxpayer- you overlook.

Better that that money go to helping a lot of people than ending up in the pockets of an elite few , [ie GW's base. He said it.]

A former President with great insight warned of the Military Industrial Complex. First there was the USSR. That went OK for a while[ billions were spent on nukes] but when the USSR collapsed, there was no threat anymore.


Time to create one maybe?

Q

DickLeonard
01-04-2007, 07:29 AM
Pooltchr I agree with your assessment of Lawyers they are nothing but Pond Scum and on the Top of My List are the 5 lawyers on the Supreme Pond that Elected George Bush. ####

Qtec
01-04-2007, 08:54 AM
Hundreds of people heard explosions in side the towers.
There were many eye witnesses to the fact that there were explosions in the basement. One man who worked in the basement levels was so badly burned he was in intensive care.
Workers inside the TTs and firemen are documented on video making these claims and there is also actual video/audio proof that explosions did occur, but it has never been mentioned in the media or in the TT collapse report.
I find that very strange.
Q

hondo
01-04-2007, 10:25 AM
I was thinking about running for President but
once I was fined $150 for taking a piss in public.
I'm sure my moral character and criminal record
would be carefully scrutinised. I'm screwed.
Plus, I consulted a oiuja board once to find out
who I was going to marry. If only I had considered
my future political ambitions at the time! Sigh.
If Jesus came back and ran as a Democrat I can hear
the republicans now.
Soft on military defense- all that turning the other
cheek stuff. Flip flopper, too liberal,criminal
record, shady sidekicks, bastard, supports taxation,
looks like a hippy, critical of current administration,
supports big government ( heaven), evasive,vague.
BTW, the public place was a dark, secluded alley at 2A.M.
30 years ago. The only people who saw me (unfortunately)
were the po-lice.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Looks too good to be true. Iz there a hidden downside to JE??? <hr /></blockquote> There was the last time around, and his name is Kerry. The cost of medical help is definitely a downside of Edwards. How about the time he held a seance in the court room? Now, I know that some here do not like the religion of the current President, but do you really want someone in there that is "speaking with dead children" to bilk the insurance companies out of millions? I can already hear the arguments for those on the board about the current President bilking millions from oil, but if that is true, then what is the difference between the two of them other than the source of their millions which both come at the cost of the everyday man and woman?

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

Deeman3
01-04-2007, 12:18 PM
Hondo,

LOL, yep, maybe even Christ would have a tough time in a presidential election, he sure had a tough time in winning over the crowd 2,000 years ago.

I wonder why any sane person would run for president? For now and probably the near future, he/she simply can't win and the opposition will always belittle whatever they do, positive or negative. What the Democrats are doing to Bush, we will do when the next Democrat is elected (after an appropriate honeymoon). It is not as if there can be other expectations as one side slams the other and the vileness is started. Once that happens, it's open season on the guy not in your party.

So, we will just all get more hostile with each turn of election and become more partisan. Why would anyone want that as a career move? Ego

DeeMan

cushioncrawler
01-04-2007, 06:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> ... maybe even Christ would have a tough time in a presidential election, he sure had a tough time in winning over the crowd 2,000 years ago....<hr /></blockquote>
Jesus IZ coming, its all in the book. If he runs for prez even the dead will get a chance to vote -- but nothing new here -- the dead have voted lots of times in USA elections. madMac.

Gayle in MD
01-05-2007, 11:11 AM
JFYI...As the days pass, and more information is revealed, more lives lost, more money missing, more expert military patriots and friends of our troops are axed by Bush for dissenting accurate opinions and projections, which all prove later to have been correct, more evidence arises that George Bush is incompetent, dishonest, unlawful, and self serving, even at the cost of the lives of our best and brightest, there is nothing that I am more proud to say, then that I did not vote for George Bush, and that I have, and will, continue to speak against his vast destructive, decietful, attack against my country.

As for Edwards, to say that he is no better than George Bush, is yet one more indication that many on the right, live in denial, refuse to acknowledge the facts, fail to stand against illegal activity of this administration, and continue to deny the unamerican activities and dangerous threat which George Bush, and his cabinet present to our country, and to the world. It isn't just that the right is ignorant, and that they choose to deny reality, but that they do so without conscience, and in the face of a vast documentation that they are wrong headed, and that their wrong headed thinking exacts such a devastating price to so many innocent victims of their hero, George Bush. In short, they have much blood on their hands, and have little remorse over their choice of a few measly extra dollars in their bank accounts as the only compensation for purely evil purposes, at the expense of the lives and well being of so many, and against the laws and principles of a civilized international society of the men and women of humanitarian values.

To compare George Bush to anyone at all, must surely fall far short of any reasonable justification. Never before have so many, lost so much, purely for the sake of one sick man's ego.

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
01-05-2007, 02:32 PM
Gayle I had a Vision
I saw George in Prison
Dick and Condi too
George made such a stink
Show them the Pardon
They had used disappearing Ink
Them dam Democrats.####

pooltchr
01-05-2007, 08:11 PM
Gayle,
Once again, you have taken my statements and turned them around so you can continue your never ending tirade against GW. My point in commenting about Edwards was to bring to light some facts that those of us who live in North Carolina have probably had more exposure to. Edwards has been one of the worst excuses for a Senator that I can recall in the 40 some years I have lived in this state. I think one's past actions are the best indicator of who a person really is. In the case of Edwards, his actions as my Senator would rule out any possibility I could support him for higher office.

Based on discussions I have had with other people around here, I would be surprised if he could carry his home state in a presidential election. Those of us who have had him represent us aren't likely to ask for more of the same.

You can go ahead and believe what you will. Nothing I can say here is going to open your eyes.
Steve

Gayle in MD
01-07-2007, 05:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote> Once again, I would caution you to look at a candidates past actions rather than listen to what they are saying when the cameras are on.
Steve
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

Steve, here is what you wrote. Seems your words, not any twisting on my part, were worthy of my response. Suffice it to say...I don't get the impression that you are in the habbit of studying candidates very closely, nor distinguishing between their true intentions, and their camera ready rhetoric, given that you voted for George Bush twice!!!

Nuff said.

Gyale in Md.

pooltchr
01-08-2007, 05:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> ..I don't get the impression that you are in the habbit of studying candidates very closely,
Nuff said.

Gyale in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Since you have no idea whatsoever what kind of research I do prior to casting a vote, your comment is nothing more than an opinion. And we all know about opinions. Refusing to vote for anyone simply because of their party affiliation would seem to indicate a lack of research much more than any decisions I have made at the voting booth.
Steve

DickLeonard
01-08-2007, 06:06 AM
Maureen Dowd had a column in the NY Times about Obama lack of experience as an issue. The Gist of the column was that nobody in Washington had less experience than George Bush and he has been in office 6 years.####

Gayle in MD
01-08-2007, 12:58 PM
Steve,
I couldn't disagree more. You voted for Bush in 04. In the last elections, last year, I voted against any and every Republican running, and for very good reasons, as did the majority of voters. Republicans of recent years, since Bush, have been known as the do-nothing Congress, and the most corrupt of any. But, the most serious of all their many illegal, immoral, and incompetent actions was the fact that they refused any and all investigations on the prosecution of this war, leaving the welfare of our troops, in the hands of war profiterring, and gross incompetence, a war that all experts agree has been the worst foreign policy decision ever made in our history! There was absolutely nothing more important for our country, and our troops, than removing the Republican, blank check, ear mark addicts, majority in order to restore the Constitutional responsibility of oversight.

Anyone who voted for George Bush, especially the second time, after so much documented failure, arrogant incompetence, outrageous spending, abuse of power, FAILURE TO RESPOND TO THE BEST INTEREST OF AMERICAN CITIZENS AND CIVILIANS IN PERIL, deceit and fear mongering, would be the last person to be giving advice to others who predicted his incompetence, on how to vote, IMO.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
01-08-2007, 01:05 PM
Very true, and she's usually right on the money, too, one of my favorites. As I understand it, as soon as little bushy decided to run, his daddy sent Prince Banadar over to give him a crash course on the Middle East. Guess he didn't listen to that, either! but then, does he EVER??? We're still at Stay The Course, after every General but two, have spoken out to say we can't win this war militarily. Even the troops said so in the last edition of the Army Times. The only way to stop George Bush's ego, is to impeach him. Our kids are dying for his sick, stubborn, ignorant refusal to accept what is already defeat. He's absolutely disgusting!

Gayle in Md.

pooltchr
01-08-2007, 06:10 PM
Of course, you are right. Anytime there is corruption by some members of a political party, the best thing to do is get rid of everyone in that party. Guilty by association. Here I was thinking you probably shouldn't throw out the baby with the bath water. How silly of me. I'm such an ignorant pooh-pooh head! /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif
You are right. All Republicans should be tarred and feathered and run out of the country. Democrats are the only ones worthy of being elected to office.

I have seen the light! I'm healed! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Steve

Gayle in MD
01-09-2007, 05:37 AM
Steve,
When the Republicans were bringing earmarks to an unprecedented level, I don't recall a single Republican speaking out against the spending, nor did Bush veto a single spending bill. When they were pulling sneaky tactics, to prevent Democrats from having the opportunity to review important issues before voting, I didn't hear a single Republican speaking out against it. When we began to understand how dishonestly the Bush Administration sold their agenda for a war in Iraq, how incompetently they followed up the occupation, how money was being squandered, lives lost, lies told by Bush, his cabinet and White House staff, and then restated by Republicans in the house, the attacks by Republicans on our traditional values of separation of church and state, the vast use of signing statements to avoid the letter of the law, the tremendous corruption by large numbers of law breaking Republicans, the cruel attacks on patriotic whistle blowers, intimidation and censorship of scientific publications potentially devastating to the world, denials of factual information, failure to honor traditional bi-partisan access, overall poor decision making, corruption through the roof, dirty tricks against those who questioned their decisions, and worst of all, blocking of thorough investigation into the irresponsibility of the administration in advance of our attacks on 9/11, these are just a few of the reasons why I decided that the worst thing that could happen to our country, was for the Republican Party to maintain majority control. Based on a healthy amount of reading, study, and application of my own personal values, I could not in good faith have supported ANY Republican for office. In my own state, the Governor had done absolutely nothing to address the influx of illegal aliens, for example, and proved himself to be in bed with big business, beyond the best interests of our state, and particularly my county.

Without addressing any of my points in previous posts in this thread, your response has been little more than sarcastic and condecending. Responding to factual information by twisting it into some extremly skewed, unrelated and unflattering version, other than what it truly is, is another typical tactic of the Reputlican party, hence, we have to listen to such contentions as Democrats being for the terrorists, for abortion, and cowardly and weak, because their values are to avoid war except as a last resort, maintain the constitutional right of women to have a choice in their reproductive lives, and avoid nation building on the other side of the world. I have very deep personal issues with the overall mentality, lack of reasonable values, and the actual actions of the Republican Party of today, and find them to be dishonest, arrogant, pompus, destructive to the nation, divisive in their actions, and a threat to the Constitution, the laws of our land, and the welfare of our future. Hence, unless or until they come to their senses, and overhaul the agenda of their party to a less destructive, less divisive, less dishonest and less unamerican, overall, to a more humanitarian philosophy, I will not vote for ANY Republican.
While I respect your own right to form your opinions as to how you vote, suffice it to say, that Republicans were already on my hit list before Bush ever crashed the Presidency, years before. The last six years have only enforced my previous opinions regarding the Republican Party, and for many many reasons, all the way back to Ronald Reagan's lies, and Kenneth Starr's perversions. I find Republicans, generally speaking, of course, to lean toward dictatorship, autocratic thinking, and lacking in any reasonable grasp of factual, practical, reasonable philosophy from which to form their policy decisions, hence, we have blown a country like Iraq, vacant of any weapons of mass destruction, or potential threat, into imcreased destablization of an already volital region, increased the threats to America, lost credibility, fueled the cause of terrorists, and placed a devastating burden, on a very small number of American troops, who now must continue to pay with their lives for the extremely poor judgement, and incompetence of a Republican President, supported by a corrupt Republican Party, who failed to perform any oversight of his ill conceived policies, and you, of all people, who voted for this president twice, are critical of my voting values???? Believe me when I tell you, your criticism is a true compliment!

Love,
Gayle

pooltchr
01-09-2007, 06:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Believe me when I tell you, your criticism is a true compliment!

Love,
Gayle

<hr /></blockquote>

You're welcome!
Steve