© Copyright 1995 thru 2008 - The Mustang Works™. All Rights Reserved.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
MustangWorks.com is designed and hosted by Aero3 Media.
08-17-2004, 05:35 PM | #21 | |
Domestic Rice really sucks!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: KY
Posts: 973
|
I don't base my decisions on how the bastards look. No matter who wins the election, he who voted for kerry is going to blame the one who voted for bush and vice verse. If kerry wins, I am going to get a sticker that was once on half of the cars in america. "DON'T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR BUSH" I am glad this only comes around every four years. If it didn't we would kill each other arguing to death.
Quote:
__________________
The sig says it all. |
|
08-17-2004, 05:38 PM | #22 |
Domestic Rice really sucks!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: KY
Posts: 973
|
I got this in an email a couple of days ago. I thought a few would like to read it.
Another voice heard from Observations by an Air Force Pilot. > I'm confident that in approximately 15 minutes this article will be in > the inboxes of every resident of the free world and maybe even a few > people in France. > Chris Thomas, Air Force Pilot: > I would like to add my two cents about my John Kerry experience. > During my career as an Air Force pilot, I spent two years flying a > small twin engine prop plane around the Pacific from my base in > Okinawa, Japan. On one trip we had to fly Senator Kerry, his > congressional aide, and a Navy Captain (Vietnam, A-4 fighter pilot) who > was also in Kerry's party to various locations in Vietnam and Cambodia > as part of the MIA/POW talks. > When I met him, he was wearing a shirt with a picture of his sailboat > on it. I told him I had a 27' sailboat in Okinawa, he remarked "Oh I > never sail on anything less than 135 feet." > Thanks, Senator, "I feel even better about the meager salary I get paid > for flying you around the Pacific." > When we first flew him into Phnom Penh, he went to the back of the > airplane and grabbed the pizza that was put aside for the crew and > passed it around to his staff. He was never offered any pizza because > they were supposed to have lunch with the Cambodian government when we > landed. The pizza was the crew's only meal for that day and he ate it. > Then when we picked him up in Cambodia, he was an hour late getting to > the airport. Because fuel was an issue, we could not start the engines > and therefore the air conditioning until he arrived. Phnom Penh at > that time was over 100 degrees with 95% humidity and we were basically > sitting in a greenhouse behind the cockpit windows. > When he finally did arrive, we were wringing out our clothes from the > perspiration. He walks out of the air conditioned car, into the > airplane and asks us "Could you guys get the air-conditioning running, > I'm a little warm?" The other pilot had to physically restrain me from > going back there and picking a fight. > Then we took him into Noi Bai airfield in Hanoi. > After we picked him up the next day (he stayed the night in Vietnam, we > stayed in Bangkok) we taxied out, ran up the engines for take off and > noticed that our prop rpm was vibrating all over the place. We taxied > off to the side to look at it, but there was a good possibility that > there was an engine malfunction and the engine may fail if we took off > with it. > Well, Mr. Senator sticks his head up in the cockpit and says "This > > plane WILL take off, I have a press conference in Bangkok in three > hours!" > (Maybe this is an indication of how he will run the FAA). > American service members lives be damned, we had our Senatorial orders. > We ran the engines again, and did not have the problem, so we took off > and made it back. During the flight, he told everyone how he had taken > a Cessna (a small General aviation plane) up with a fighter pilot, and > the fighter pilot remarked that Kerry was one of the best pilots he had > ever seen. I don't know about other pilots out there,but it's hard to > imagine a little, single-engine prop plane pilot being able to show the > "right stuff." > After Kerry left the plane, the Navy Captain came up to us, apologized > and said basically that "he knows Kerry is a jerk" and that we should > be glad we don't have to deal with him every day. > Your choice folks. Elections in November. You want a mega-millionaire > ego-maniac it's-all-about-me crew-eating-pizza-ite like Kerry or maybe > a Green Party candidate like Ralph Nader? Or, God forbid, maybe even > re-elect George Bush, a nice God fearing Christian bent on protecting > us from terrorist attacks on US soil? > Hmmm, let's see?
__________________
The sig says it all. |
08-18-2004, 01:15 AM | #23 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: tucson,az/luray,va
Posts: 243
|
Economy- The bankrupcy rate and unemployment rates have been the highest in history. Interest rates have been the lowest. This is not the sign of a strong economy. People losing part of their health and welfare benefits is not a good sign. Have you been to the grocery store lately? So I guess if folks losing thier homes, jobs and retirement is the sign of a good economy then... the last 42 monthes have been swell.
first the economy started tanking under clinton and his policies of higher taxes on the wealthy(anyone making money). second the unemployment rate under bush was at 5.6%, or that same as under clinton(hmmm, perhaps we give clinton a pass on this because people liked him?? sorry no go here). third, yes there were 3 million jobs lost, but that also started under, hmmm who was it? oh yes CLINTON!! and there have been nearly 2 millions jobs created in the last 10 months, sounds to me like the job market is coming back. as far as interest rates are concerned, they are moving upwards, slowly as they should to prevent a relapse, and to prevent excessive inflation. home construction is also up. the stock market is back around 10k, yes i would say the economy is rebounding. oh yes, the growth rate for the economy is much higher than it was under clinton, and is as high as it was under reagan! National Security- Now I agreed and always have agreed that attacking Iraq was justified, I just couldn't figure out why he used the broad "WMD" reason. The fact that they broke the treaty was cause for action. I figured it out last week when Bush made comment of Iran having nuclear weapons. I guest that falls under "WMD". So now I see that everyone is at risk of being invaded by Bush. WMD?!? ATTACK!! So I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that most of the middle east doesn't want Bush in power. If I lived over there I would probably be afraid of being attacked, which is probably why Saudi has bought radio ads in 16 major US cities saying they never had anything to do with the terrorist and don't support them. So if you feel safe ticking off the rest of the world.. its a false sense of security, my friend. on national security, hmmmm yes kerry is all for our armed forces having the best equipment, well except for the F14, F15, F16, F18, F117, F22, B1, B2, tomahawk cruise missles, and dozens of other weapons programs that they have now that he voted AGAINST. also consider that people keep saying bush lied about wmd's in iraq, but if that is the case, then why does clinton, gore,KERRY, EDWARDS, kennedy, daschle, gephart, the UN, france, germany, russia, egypt, jordan, and dozens other countries, and comgressional democrats get a pass on the fact that they also claimed iraq had wmd's? oh thats right, they hate bush with a passion, and so they develope a memory loss about what they said, and focus only on what bush said. sorry again that does play here pal. the democrats cant claim micheal moore is right, when they proclaimed themselves that saddam had wmd's. according to the men who served with kerry, he wasnt a leader in vietam, and they will tell you that he isnt a leader here either. sorry but kerry is just plain wrong for the country, and our "cowboy" president is the right person for the job. read this regarding cowboys www.catsprn.com/cowboys.htm yes i want a cowboy fror president as you can trust them to do what they say the will. kerry says he only wants to raise taxes on the rich(same definition as clinton, anyone making money), and he wants to reverse the tax cuts created under bush, but he doesnt want to.....raise.......taxes......on the middle....class..........hmmmmm how does that work again??? according to my math....IT DOESNT. come people think about what kerry is saying, if he actually says anything when he talks.
__________________
define irony: a bunch of idiots on a plane, dancing to a song made famous, by a band who died in a plane crash. fordsix.com admin |
08-18-2004, 05:36 PM | #24 |
Domestic Rice really sucks!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: KY
Posts: 973
|
You have made a very good point, rbohm. For some reason, the Kerry folks can't see this.
Everyone should read the link rbohm posted. Cowboys have always been the sh!t.
__________________
The sig says it all. |
08-19-2004, 05:09 AM | #25 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 1997
Posts: 3,028
|
Quote:
also consider that people keep saying bush lied about wmd's in iraq, but if that is the case, then why does clinton, gore,KERRY, EDWARDS, kennedy, daschle, gephart, the UN, france, germany, russia, egypt, jordan, and dozens other countries, and comgressional democrats get a pass on the fact that they also claimed iraq had wmd's? oh thats right, they hate bush with a passion, and so they develope a memory loss about what they said, and focus only on what bush said. sorry again that does play here pal. the democrats cant claim micheal moore is right, when they proclaimed themselves that saddam had wmd's. You are changing the subject or trying to slide around it. How are you going to prove me wrong when you don't address what I said?? I never said Iraq didn't have wmd, I believe they do/did. What I said was that Bush used that as an excuse and bought the support of other countries. We didn't/don't have the agreement with the rest of the world that we had with Iraq. Sadam broke the treaty we made with him after desert storm and that was reason enough to take action. Instead we now have a war that is not justified to alot of the world and a reason to invade anyone. according to the men who served with kerry, he wasnt a leader in vietam, and they will tell you that he isnt a leader here either. sorry but kerry is just plain wrong for the country, and our "cowboy" president is the right person for the job. read this regarding cowboys www.catsprn.com/cowboys.htm yes i want a cowboy fror president as you can trust them to do what they say the will. kerry says he only wants to raise taxes on the rich(same definition as clinton, anyone making money), and he wants to reverse the tax cuts created under bush, but he doesnt want to.....raise.......taxes......on the middle....class..........hmmmmm how does that work again??? according to my math....IT DOESNT. come people think about what kerry is saying, if he actually says anything when he talks. I don't know where you are getting this information but I keep hearing two sides to this story so nothing is proven. Even if it is true it proves what?? that some people don't like thier boss or that Kerry is a jerk? So what? I don't particularly like Kerry, hell I don't know him but I think he will be a much better choice than Bush. Both the democrats and republicans have thier good/bad points. What really bothers me, is that some folks are soo extreme in thier views that they can't see anything else. They choose the left or right and do all they can to defend themselves or attack the other, counter-productive I say, and leads me to believe they have a hidden agenda. I'd like to see folks come to thier own conclusions and realize there is a middle ground and good/bad on both sides, instead of having someone else tell them what they believe or try to force thier views on others. I really get sick of facts being twisted and taken out of context, which is why I don't really care for politics, I suppose. Look, I don't have internet access right now so I will check back when I can, but I doubt I'll have much more to say on this subject. People will believe what they want and vote how they want. I've said my piece. There is one question I'd like to ask though.. How is it that the 'liberal media', I've heard so much about, is allowed to keep spewing out all these 'lies' when they are owned by conservatives??
__________________
Tis better to be hated for what you are than loved for what you are not. |
|
08-19-2004, 02:46 PM | #26 | ||||||||
Conservative Individualist
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Wherever I need to be
Posts: 7,487
|
Fallacy-based assumptions and wrong conclusions
I've been busy and just now have had to time to respond to this:
Originally posted by RBatson Quote:
Quote:
There are facts and there are opinions. I look at the facts and from those facts - and my political ideology, which happens to be conservative - I form my opinions, or my 'views', as you put it. That I won't consider any views but my own is simply not true. Think about it: I have to consider pro-Kerry, liberal political views before I can decide to reject and oppose them and to do that, I have to understand the ideology behind them, as well as know the facts. So your supposition that I simply refuse to consider political opinions other than my own is fallacious. What you probably mean is that I actively oppose liberal, Democrat-party opinions and conclusions, which is true. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, Rick: 'WMD" (Weapons of Mass Destruction) would include nuclear missiles. Theocratic, Islam-dominated Iran is a major threat to the region and ultimately, the U.S. if and when (it's just a matter of time) they possess nuclear capabilities. The president and all Americans have a right to be concerned about this. We want the terrorist-supporting Arab nations to be 'afraid' of being attacked. It's called 'deterrence' and it worked fairly well with the old U.S.S.R. for over 50 years. If you feel safe ignoring that reality then it's a false sense of security, my friend. Quote:
__________________
5.0 Mustang Owner 1990 - 2005 |
||||||||
08-19-2004, 05:21 PM | #27 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: tucson,az/luray,va
Posts: 243
|
Quote:
__________________
define irony: a bunch of idiots on a plane, dancing to a song made famous, by a band who died in a plane crash. fordsix.com admin |
|
08-20-2004, 02:44 AM | #28 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: tucson,az/luray,va
Posts: 243
|
if you think kerry would be a good president here are a few things to ponder;
http://www.charliedaniels.com/soapbox/04/030.html http://www.charliedaniels.com/soapbox/04/025.html http://www.charliedaniels.com/soapbox/04/048.html
__________________
define irony: a bunch of idiots on a plane, dancing to a song made famous, by a band who died in a plane crash. fordsix.com admin |
08-22-2004, 12:56 AM | #29 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: tucson,az/luray,va
Posts: 243
|
a few more points to ponder;
if what kerry said under oath to congress about his actions in vietnam are true, then why isnt he in jail convicted as a war criminal and for crimes against humanty? and if what he said was false, then why wasnt he convicted for perjury? kerry loses both ways here. also regarding alternative fuels like alcohol, have oyu been around the race track when alcohol cars are running? if not then let me tell you that it can be an eye watering experience. if you have then multiply the experience with all the cars that are driven in your area(an if you live in LA, san francisco, new york, chicago, st louis, etc. i pity you.
__________________
define irony: a bunch of idiots on a plane, dancing to a song made famous, by a band who died in a plane crash. fordsix.com admin |
08-24-2004, 01:42 PM | #30 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 1997
Posts: 3,028
|
Re: Fallacy-based assumptions and wrong conclusions
I'm going to try to keep this brief, I don't enjoy politics as you do, Jim.
Quote:
Spare me! Windmills have been tried and failed as a source of energy becuase they are unreliable most of the time. Solar has it's own major drawbacks, obviously and ethanol is a boondoggle that makes corn farmers rich but has environmental drawbacks and requires more energy to produce than it saves. These flawed energy 'alternatives' have been around for decades and the Democrats have nothing new to add here, just political rhetoric. BS! http://greenenergyohio.org/default.c...iew&PageID=805 , http://www.eere.energy.gov/RE/solar.html I'm not saying they can completely replace oil but they can help conserve it and make us less dependent on oil. www.MotherEarthNews.com Now I'm not a hippy but I do think we could be a little more conservative and use our heads. Did you know that we could use the Earth's tilt to our advantage? You can build a home so that a tile floor gets sunlight, in the winter, and it helps keep your house warm. Your water heater can be warmed by the sun. You can get warmth by cutting a hole in the roof and placing a box with a glass lid, cut aluminum cans, paint the inside of the box black and place it over the hole (with a hole to match the roof). I found this stuff intriguing when I was a kid. ANWAR is a large frozen tundra in a near-uninhabited section of Alaska and drilling on a tiny portion of it won't do anything or anyone any harm, environmentally or otherwise. The Caribou don't seem to mind and the Alaskan natives don't mind (they've said so, to congress) and we could use the oil but no, a handful of environmental whackos with more concern for frozen dirt than the American people and their welfare - when it comes to energy - block ANWAR drilling while patting themselves on the back for how 'sensitive' they are. Yet folks like you get all upset when gas prices go up because we have to depend so haevily (60%) on 'foreign oil'. Go figure. People like me?!? You mean people with gasoline engines?? What a politian you are, Jim, now you are making me out to be the bad guy. We don't have to be so dependent on oil to start with... I'm not familiar with ANWAR because I'm not an activist but I'm sure I can find other examples besides what you are talking about. What makes the oil companies any better than anyone else?? The Caribou don't own the land so why ask them?? I'm not going to go looking this stuff up but I'm sure it is a national reserve for a reason. I still don't think Bush is the best man for the job. I don't dislike him but he does things I don't agree with like recently changing overtime laws.. going backwards in my opinion, work more pay less. I don't like the 3 yr work permit for illegal aliens. At the same time I don't like what Clinton did with NAFTA. Anyhow, you are going to have to find someone else to play this game with, I just hate to see all that political propaganda go unchecked. I try not to offend you and its getting harder and harder to do so I'll stop now while we can still talk. |
|
08-24-2004, 01:59 PM | #31 |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 1997
Posts: 3,028
|
rbohm, While Charlie Daniels is from this town, I don't value his opinion anymore than anyone else's. I did scanned over the first link you gave and saw something about the UN, I agree with him on that issue. I don't think we should be in the UN either.
As far as Kerry's military service, I'm not concerned with that he said- she said bs. It has been proven that the advertisements you got your info from was taken out of context(dirty politics). He has the records and that is all that matters. I'm not concerned with Bush's military bs either. If you don't think we should study alternative means of energy then I have to wonder if you don't have some stock in oil. As far as the media goes.... http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-liberalmedia.htm later. |
08-24-2004, 03:13 PM | #32 | ||||
Conservative Individualist
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Wherever I need to be
Posts: 7,487
|
Re: Re: Fallacy-based assumptions and wrong conclusions
Originally posted by RBatson
Quote:
Quote:
Seriously, though, I can give you as many articles that clearly show windmil-power as energy-inefficient and not a realistic alternative as you can post pro-windmill pieces. I think the proof lies in the fact that they have not been used much, except as experimental efforts, and they are generally shown to be simply not feasible. One such article I read stated: Wind power is a much dispersed power source. It gives a comparatively small amount of energy in relation to its volume. Energy has to be concentrated from a large surface. The force of the winds in the area must be just right; not too weak (or it does not produce enough) and not too strong (the wind mill shuts down). Therefore, those few areas that have winds that meet these conditions must be developed extensively. Even the windmills themselves are still not that efficient. A medieval windmill had an energy efficiency of 17 percent, while a modern one is barely 50 percent -- with some of percentage lost in the storage of energy. If windmills were a feasible alternative - even a partial alternative - to what we have now, they would have begun to prove that by this late date. They haven't. Of course we can always do more and find ways to conserve but I've seen studies that show conservation will only make a 10% impact - at best - in our energy demands. We are a very technically advanced nation of almost 300 millions people on a large landmass. We need a lot of energy. Solar, wind and so on is fine but nowhere close to a solution to our energy demand realities. Quote:
Quote:
As for finding it 'hard' to be civil with me: I'm an opinionated guy, as you should know. I'm also civil with those who post civilly to me, as you have, making our exchange fairly enjoyable, for me. In politics, I know what I believe and why. If you don't want to be rebutted, don't post. If you do post to refute some of my contentions, which is fine, do expect an argument when one is warranted. Whatever you do, don't post and then complain if I respond with a challenge of your opinion. The exchange of ideas and opinions is what this board is about, Rick. I'm glad to have been able to share a few of mine with you, and vice versa.
__________________
5.0 Mustang Owner 1990 - 2005 |
||||
08-24-2004, 03:57 PM | #33 | ||
Conservative Individualist
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Wherever I need to be
Posts: 7,487
|
Liberals, conservatives and the FRee Market of political ideas
Originally posted by RBatson :
Quote:
Quote:
That article says the following: The U.S. media are rapidly being monopolized by a dwindling number of parent corporations, all of whom have conservative economic agendas. The media are also critically dependent upon corporations for advertising. As a result, the news almost completely ignores corporate crime, as well as pro-labor and pro-consumer issues. Stop right there. That's just nonsense. Ever hear of Enron, Aldelphia,, Martha Stewart? You sure have, because the media never stopped covering them...and many other corporate scandals. The media covers corporate malfeasance throughly. To deny that, as this article tries to do, is simply sophistry. Local TV stations often have a 'consumer' editor who does consumer-related pieces and labor always get's it's side of the story aired in all the newscasts I've seen. This article is simply hogwash. Surveys of journalists show that the majority were personally liberal in the 1980s, but today they are centrists, with more conservatives than liberals on economic issues. However, no study has proven that they give their personal bias to the news. Now this is getting really absurd. Journalists are heavily liberal in their politics and have been polled as such for years. 'Centerists', indeed! The only 'economic' issue journalists are more 'conservative' on is the issue of tax cuts, which liberals see as 'favoring the rich', no matter how much the reality says otherwise. On the other hand, the political spectrum of pundits -- who do engage in noisy editorializing -- leans heavily to the right. The most extreme example of this is talk radio, where liberals are almost nonexistent. The Fairness Doctrine was designed to prevent one-sided bias in the media by requiring broadcasters to air opposing views. It once enjoyed the broad support of both liberals and conservatives. But now that the media have become increasingly owned and controlled by corporations, conservatives defiantly oppose the Fairness Doctrine. This is probably the best proof that the media's bias is conservative, not liberal. What a manifest distortion of the truth! The 'Fairness Doctrine' squelched free speech rights by keeping anyone but liberal network newsmen, like Walter Cronkite, from telling us what they wanted us to hear; that is: editing the news with their 'liberal' slant. There were very few 'conservative' voices on talk radio (which couldn't cover politics) or anywhere on TV. Williiam F. Buckley was a notable, but almost lone exception with his 'Firing Line' TV discussion show that centered on politics. Finally, in 1988, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the 'Fairness Doctrine' as unconstitional, which it certainly was. That opened the door for talk radio and the likes of Rush Limbaugh, who has been a dominate force for conservative thought ever since. He has many imitators and they all do very well, financially. Question: Why is that? Answer: Because they appeal to the wide base of Americans who are conservative in most political issues. They never had a voice in the liberal-dominated mass media of TV and radio. Now they do...and the liberals hate it. They especially hate the loss of their 'Bully Pulpit' that restricted conservatives to the fringe and gave the public one point of view only: the liberal POV. That's over, now. You bet conservatives oppose any whiff of trying to revive the mis-named 'Fairness Doctrine'. There are plenty of liberal outlets, like CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, plus the three big networks that still dominate the airwaves. Conservatives have FOXNEWS and talk radio. Liberals have tried to get a 'liberal' talk radio network going, to no avail. It flopped. See, Americans can get all the liberal slant on the news they need every night on the CBS, NBC or ABC newscasts. The conservative talk radio shows draw a big audience and thus, many high-paying sponsors. People want to hear what Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and all the others have to say. It's called 'the Free Market', something liberals never understand or accept. That's why they want the 'Fairness Doctrine' restored. Liberalism only works in a very controlled media environment, as it was before 1988. Once liberals have to battle their ideas on the open 'market', they fail...and then they whine about ti and write ridiculous little articles like the one linked by RBatson, which you may now safely ignore. You're welcome.
__________________
5.0 Mustang Owner 1990 - 2005 |
||
08-24-2004, 05:39 PM | #34 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: May 1997
Posts: 3,028
|
ROFLMAO!!
I just realized something Jim. Why the hell do I need an opinion? You can just give me yours. Unfortuately the rest of us don't have the liberty of knowing everything. Quote:
Oh and if solar power is so complicated and unfeasible then why does the government give low interest loans so folks can buy them? Passive Solar Heating, Cooling and Daylighting Buildings designed for passive solar and daylighting incorporate design features such as large south-facing windows and building materials that absorb and slowly release the sun's heat. No mechanical means are employed in passive solar heating. Incorporating passive solar designs can reduce heating bills as much as 50 percent. Passive solar designs can also include natural ventilation for cooling. That article I gave the link to said that 2 windmills were enough to power 785 homes.. what a joke, huh? I'm not saying windmills are the wave of the future, which they may be, (but solar seems more logical) all I'm saying is that alternative sources should be explored. Let this be a lesson to me for getting involved in political/religious discussion. I was warned the extremely conservative were close minded to anything but thier views. |
|
08-24-2004, 09:31 PM | #35 |
Factoy Five Roadster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Sevier Co,Tennessee
Posts: 1,681
|
Sorry, I had to play my Duo card!
__________________
Frank |
08-25-2004, 02:51 AM | #36 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: tucson,az/luray,va
Posts: 243
|
Quote:
__________________
define irony: a bunch of idiots on a plane, dancing to a song made famous, by a band who died in a plane crash. fordsix.com admin |
|
08-25-2004, 04:39 PM | #37 | |||||
Conservative Individualist
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Wherever I need to be
Posts: 7,487
|
Energy, proactive politics and hurt feelings
Originally posted by RBatson :
Quote:
Quote:
Of course, the major difference between Iran and the old U.S.S.R. is that, unlike the well-organized U.S.S.R., Iran is a rogue nation, run by unstable, hostile Islamic fundamentalist mullas who are a major force for terrorism (funding, arming) and must be considered a major foe of the U.S., as they have been since they kidnapped our embassy employees in 1979. By the invasion of Iraq, the overthrow of the dictator Saddam Hussein and the democratization of that once-repressive nation, the U.S. has shown that we have the capability and the will to destroy a regime - any regime - that threatens our national security; whether with missiles, biological or chemical weapons or anything else they can dream up. Also, having a democratic Arab nation next to Iran can't do us any harm and it gives us an excellent military base, allowing the U.S. to withdraw out forces from our dubious 'ally': Saudi Arabia. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
5.0 Mustang Owner 1990 - 2005 |
|||||
08-29-2004, 01:10 AM | #38 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Franklin, NC
Posts: 49
|
BUSH:
I hope I was able to vote. My vote will go to Bush, Why? Because as a women I think all this right to choose is simple crap, nobody has the right to take an innocent life away just because you feel like it, so democrats say that is ok to kill an innocent baby but it is NOT ok to kill somebody that is a criminal by the death penalty, I don't think that is right, it doesn't make any sense.
__________________
Cupcake |
08-29-2004, 02:09 AM | #39 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: tucson,az/luray,va
Posts: 243
|
Re: BUSH:
Quote:
__________________
define irony: a bunch of idiots on a plane, dancing to a song made famous, by a band who died in a plane crash. fordsix.com admin |
|
08-29-2004, 02:32 PM | #40 | |
Conservative Individualist
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Wherever I need to be
Posts: 7,487
|
Re: BUSH:
Originally posted by CupCake :
Quote:
Your views on abortion 'right's' and the death penalty are a welcome breath of fresh air, coming from a woman and an immigrant who appreciates the United States as many native-born American, sadly, do not. I agree that killing an unborn baby in it's mother's womb - which should be safest place on earth for that baby - is a monsterous act that far too many women use as a form of birth control in this country. As 'rbohm' stated: personal responsibility must be returned as the status quo in America. The 'victim mentality' ideology of the political left is simply an excuse for failure, usually based on a lack of responsible behavior. The Democrat/liberal ideology that allows too many people to be indolent and irresponsible is hurting our nation, which is why I speak out against it on this and other internet forums. The death penalty is a punishment used in 38 states. Each state decides the issue - there is no federal death penalty - and it's used with caution, after many appeals and many hearings that usually take years, sometimes 10 or more years, before the convicted murderer is actually executed. While some past murder convictions have been problematic, most are not and the convicted murderer's guilt is clear-cut. That Democrats protest the death penalty and sometimes work for the release of murderers while casually condemning innocent unborn babies to death in the womb as a 'woman's right' is a dichotomy that I have been never been able to understand. I expect that it has to do with the fact that supporting abortion 'rights' (what about the unborn child's rights?) allows a woman to avoid the consequences of having sexual relations and, in the case of opposing the death penalty, allowing murderers to avoid the ultimate consequences of murder. Thus, we come full circle and see that avoiding personal responsibility is the hallmark of Democrat/liberal ideology, along with wealth distribution and other discredited socialist schemes that have failed miserably elsewhere, for generations. Cupcake, we're pleased to have you as a member of our country (and MustangWorks) and I personally applaud your clear-thinking and support for President George W. Bush, a decent man doing a good job against heavy opposition. Although you may not be able to vote (if you have not obtained U.S. citizenship as yet) in this presidential election, your heart (and your political sympathies) are definitely in the right place. I hope you'll spread your enthusiasm to all you meet that may still be undecided as to how to vote on November 2nd. President Bush is in a tough fight with most of media and some powerful forces arrayed against him but with enough energized folks like you on his side, he'll win. When he does, we'll all be better off and you'll know that you did what you could for what you thought was right, just as President Bush is doing.
__________________
5.0 Mustang Owner 1990 - 2005 |
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shift Points | TRICKFLOW 66 STANG | Stang Stories | 2 | 02-15-2002 10:02 PM |
points and timing specs | xfernal | Classic Mustangs | 1 | 12-30-2001 04:20 PM |
Best shift points from dyno graph? | 302 LX Eric | Windsor Power | 20 | 06-29-2001 02:15 PM |
Optimal Shift points | JamGtStang | Windsor Power | 5 | 02-15-2001 07:27 AM |
Results & Points Updated | StangFlyer | Racer's Club House | 0 | 05-21-1999 06:11 PM |