President

[.BatteryPoison.]

Originally Posted by Sandmanhero

If bush wasn't being a self serving person with this war, there would be a lot more men and women alive right now.

Self-serving? Do you think because Bush wanted the war, it just happened? Do you know how many people, including John Kerry, supported this war and made it happen? That's what pisses me off about people who say Bush is a war-monger and Kerry is so much better. Kerry supported the war. A month ago, he said publicly he would have still supported the war in knowing the intellegence was flawed (after Bush challenged him on this issue).

Originally Posted by Xnguela

I'm going to vote for Kerry... because on the chance that I fall in love with a beautiful and wonderful woman, I'd like to be able to pledge my love in the most sacred form I know: marriage.

At the moment, Republicans are a better hope for Gay marriage being legalized than Democrats. McCaine and Schwarzenegger both fully support gay marriage. Cheney's daughter is a lesbian and he fully supports gay marriage. The political pressure is stacking on the side of Republicans for Bush to start seriously considering it's institution.

Kerry has continually supported bans on gay marriage. Edwards has taken the same position.

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

I heart .BatteryPoison.

Just remember to vote .BP. '08!!! :D

[Disfunction]

For the love of sweet jesus... ok... I'm going to draw a picture of a smiley face. The smiley face's name will be "Steve."

Steve is going to be running for president in '08

He'll be as much of an asset to the US as Bush has been and never say anything stupid.

Seriously though, Bush didn't get forced into the war, he has the power to or not to send the troops in, and no one can overide that... Sure, it would have been a potentially bad move politically, but then again, if he had waited for more support on the global playground, all of the children could have played nice.

Speaking of the playground analogy...

-France is the effiminate one that gets picked on all the time because it's weaker than everyone else, but acts all snobby and uppity.

-England is the smarter kind of person that sort of sticks along with America since it knows what it has to gain.

-Canada is like the younger sibling that America never listens to

-America is the biefed up bully that acts before thinking.

Sure these are crude analogies, but on a playground portrayal, that's how it goes down.

[.BatteryPoison.]

Originally Posted by Disfunction

Seriously though, Bush didn't get forced into the war, he has the power to or not to send the troops in, and no one can overide that...

Except of course Congress, who has the power to withdraw troops after X amount of days of their deployment. And no one is saying Bush was forced into anything. But the responsiblity isn't his alone. People forget that this all went through Congress and passed (with Kerry's approval, non-the-less) before we ever declared war. Using Bush as a scape-goat is fine for the average American, but they forget that Kerry's signature was on that declaration of war too.

-America is the biefed up bully that acts before thinking.

Examples of this besides Iraq? The playground analysis extremely subjective (ask a Democrat, then ask a Republican... ask a Russian then ask a German), especially with current events and nations changing their stance on our invasion of Iraq constantly.

[Disfunction]

Lesseee.... I never stated that that was how it always looked, merely that that's how it's made itself today.

[Sandmanhero]

Heaven forbid anyone should have an opnion that doesn't match up to BatteryPoisens.

Look, i never said that kerry would be as great president. He would just be better then bush.

And bush is being self serving. All this has to do with oil when you get right down to it. don't try to suger coat the topic. Bush is after oil and revenge for hi father. He took what happened in 9/11 and squeezed it for all it was worth to get the excuse he needed to get into the mid east and attack peope. For oil. He can say whatever he wants for the actual reason, but the reason is for oil. Period.

[Disfunction]

.BatteryPoison. said:

At the moment, Republicans are a better hope for Gay marriage being legalized than Democrats. McCaine and Schwarzenegger both fully support gay marriage. Cheney's daughter is a lesbian and he fully supports gay marriage. The political pressure is stacking on the side of Republicans for Bush to start seriously considering it's institution.

Ok... Considering that they are pressuring a fundementalist christian to seriously consider same sex marriages is like trying to convince me that Bush is going to be a good president his second term around.

[.BatteryPoison.]

Originally Posted by Sandmanhero

Heaven forbid anyone should have an opnion that doesn't match up to BatteryPoisens.

Damn straight. :D

And bush is being self serving. All this has to do with oil when you get right down to it. don't try to suger coat the topic.

I've stated this before. America's first concern has always been saving a buck. It's what this entire nation was founded on. There are kids out there that still believe we were founded on freedom and all that hooba jooba. Which we were... financial freedom. The USA was not a nation concerned with civil freedom for a long time.

Bush is after oil and revenge for hi father. He took what happened in 9/11 and squeezed it for all it was worth to get the excuse he needed to get into the mid east and attack peope. For oil. He can say whatever he wants for the actual reason, but the reason is for oil. Period.

Revenge for his father? His father had the chance to remove Saddam from power when we had Iraq on it's knees durring the Gulf War, but allowed him to remain. What's there to avenge after that? The reasons were different. The only tie-in with 9/11 was the link we had that connected one of Saddam's officals meeting with an Al-Qaeda operative back in 2000. Our main drive was Weapons of Mass Destruction.

[.BatteryPoison.]

Originally Posted by Disfunction

a fundementalist christian.

You just described Cheney, who fully and openly supports gay marriage.

[Jane13]

I respect .BatterPoison.'s zeal for politics, but I think at least some of these posts are just trying to poke a bit of fun.

[Sandmanhero]

Originally Posted by .BatteryPoison.

America's first concern has always been saving a buck. It's what this entire nation was founded on. There are kids out there that still believe we were founded on freedom and all that hooba jooba. Which we were... financial freedom. The USA was not a nation concerned with civil freedom for a long time.

I don't know about financial freedom. I know that a lot of the people who started settling here did so because they were looking for religious freedom. People in europe thought they were kooks (kinda like how people veiw Mormons now) and so they left so they could practice their religion without anyone giving them lip. funny thing is, when they settled here, they ended up being the least tolerent assholes anywhere. Kinds ironic.

Anyhow, what i also want to say is kinda funny. It seems that all the weirdos end up moving west. the pilgrims here, then the mormons later. Eventually all the really weird people ended up in California. thats' why were the crazy state.

[.BatteryPoison.]

Originally Posted by Sandmanhero

I don't know about financial freedom. I know that a lot of the people who started settling here did so because they were looking for religious freedom.

True, that's why alot, if not all the pilgrims first set sail for this contenent. But the main reason we eventually broke off from Britain was because of absurd taxation, which was the main reason they allowed everyone to migrate to North America (if you want to be farther away, you can pay higher taxes).

Anyhow, what i also want to say is kinda funny. It seems that all the weirdos end up moving west. the pilgrims here, then the mormons later. Eventually all the really weird people ended up in California. thats' why were the crazy state. :D

Yeah, you guys have migration coming in from all sides. North, East, South, and West. Oy! S'why that state is such a zoo. LOL. :D

...no offense

[.BatteryPoison.]

Originally Posted by Jane13

I respect .BatterPoison.'s zeal for politics, but I think at least some of these posts are just trying to poke a bit of fun.

Yeah, I've left most of those comments alone... for the most part. >.>

Seriously though, some may have been kinda marginal and just got thrown in with my bloodthirsty need to debate. :D

[AlKilyu]

Originally Posted by .BatteryPoison.

At the moment, Republicans are a better hope for Gay marriage being legalized than Democrats. McCaine and Schwarzenegger both fully support gay marriage. Cheney's daughter is a lesbian and he fully supports gay marriage. The political pressure is stacking on the side of Republicans for Bush to start seriously considering it's institution.

Kerry has continually supported bans on gay marriage. Edwards has taken the same position.

Just remember to vote .BP. '08!!!

Thank you. I'm just going to save wear and tear on my fingers and have .bp make my political stances for me.

Point me towards a pic of you, and I'll start the '08 campaign!

[MrMaelstrom]

Originally Posted by someone

I'm going to vote for Kerry... because on the chance that I fall in love with a beautiful and wonderful woman, I'd like to be able to pledge my love in the most sacred form I know: marriage.

Then you should get some kind of a piercing. It's a proven fact that men with piercings are better prepared for marriage: they've endured pain and bought jewelry. Now really, the best way you can pledge your love TO A SENTIENT HUMAN BEING OF ANY SEX, RACE OR RELIGION is to turn the word love into a verb, making it something you actually DO instead of something you SHOW.
And even if your premisse holds true, is your pledge of love any less sacred if a man pledges his love to another man or a woman to another woman in the same manner as you?
Does the "sacredness" of your love pledge disappear if gay people do it as well?
Does your love only mean shit when compared to others'?
Really, THINK about it.

Late edit: sorry Xnguela. I thought a heterosexual guy posted that and I replied accordingly. It's pretty hard to determine who is quoting who you quote someone who's in turn quoting someone else and so on...

Originally Posted by someone

At the moment, Republicans are a better hope for Gay marriage being legalized than Democrats. McCaine and Schwarzenegger both fully support gay marriage. Cheney's daughter is a lesbian and he fully supports gay marriage. The political pressure is stacking on the side of Republicans for Bush to start seriously considering it's institution.

Although it sounds perfectly logical when you read it, it doesn't when you think about it.
Even though I can agree that the above-mentioned people feel the way they're described above, one must remember that an official political stand has already been made and repeated over and over again by the leader of your nation.
For your government to change the course of its policies 180º will look like hypochrisy and deceit. It will make the government to look like a turncoat. So they won't do it, no matter how motivated or inclined to do it they may be (which I very seriously doubt).

I wonder what Haliburton Cheney's public views on gay issues were prior to his discovery of his offsring's choice of sex partners gender.

It kind of reminds me of the Reagan administration's (Nancy's) view on abortion which disabled it from even stem cell research in practical terms.
Her view totally changed when she found out that such research would be the last resort ol' Ronnie would have for life.
Now it's too late and it serves the bitch right. If she hadn't been such an arrogant cunt regarding other people's choice of what to do with their bodies, maybe her sack of shit, right wing, corrupt, McArthy loving son-of-a-bitch husband would be alive today.

In another thread I wrote that only idiots don't change their minds.
On an individual level, sure. A politycal party in government needs to look consistentwith its views and general idealistic rethoric. That radical a change of position would be inviting a stampeding dissention from the ranks of hardline republicans.
And would it really bring the people who favour the freedom of gay marriages closer to the republicans, or would it just give enough of an excuse for the democrats to make further promisses on the issue?
Whatever stance the republicans take on issues like gay marriage and pro-choice, the democrats will always be able to make even more liberal concessions and promisses regarding those issues.

[Sandmanhero]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

It kind of reminds me of the Reagan administration's (Nancy's) view on abortion which disabled it from even stem cell research in practical terms.
Her view totally changed when she found out that such research would be the last resort ol' Ronnie would have for life.
Now it's too late and it serves the bitch right. If she hadn't been such an arrogant cunt regarding other people's choice of what to do with their bodies, maybe her sack of shit, right wing, corrupt, McArthy loving son-of-a-bitch husband would be alive today.

no, nO. Don't hold back, Mr. Maelstrom! tell us how you really feel!

And no offense was taken BatteryPoisen. I try very hard to be a good citizen of California and uphold that crazy stereotype.

[MrMaelstrom]

Originally Posted by Sandmanhero

Don't hold back, Mr. Maelstrom! tell us how you really feel!

You're right, godmanit. I gotta stop approaching issues from an objective point of view, like I always do and start spreading the word (my word, that is).

[AlKilyu]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

It kind of reminds me of the Reagan administration's (Nancy's) view on abortion which disabled it from even stem cell research in practical terms.
Her view totally changed when she found out that such research would be the last resort ol' Ronnie would have for life.
Now it's too late and it serves the bitch right. If she hadn't been such an arrogant cunt regarding other people's choice of what to do with their bodies, maybe her sack of shit, right wing, corrupt, McArthy loving son-of-a-bitch husband would be alive today.

What a fucked up thing to say. You should be ashamed on so many levels.

Know that ol' saying about it being better to not say anything and let the world think your an ignorant pompus douchbag that to open your sausage hole and prove them right?

[MrMaelstrom]

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

Know that ol' saying about it being better to not say anything and let the world think your an ignorant pompus douchbag that to open your sausage hole and prove them right?

Sure I know that saying. You've just exemplified it, I believe.

And please, get back to me on the various levels on which I'm supposed to be ashamed of. Thanks in advance.

[Sandmanhero]

ZING!

*anxiously awaits Alkilyu's reply.*

This should be good!

[AlKilyu]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

Sure I know that saying. You've just exemplified it, I believe.

And please, get back to me on the various levels on which I'm supposed to be ashamed of. Thanks in advance.

Whoa, the old "no that's you" response...I'm up against something here. Please refrain from the "I'm rubber you're glue" slam, since it's harshness might be too much to bear.

That's a horrible disease, and your lack of compassion on the subject tells me the kind of person you are, so regardless of whatever political views you come up with henceforth will be a waste, but you'll no doubt bless us with them anyway.

Not only did Nancy not ban a fucking thing, the ban itself lies soley within the US. Nothing stopping any scientist in Portugal from curing it, or are you relying on the U.S. for that too?

If you don't know what is wrong with you thinking that, much less saying it, then you just aren't worth the time it'd take to explain it.

[WolfMoon]

Originally Posted by Disfunction

...and what about ****?

I know a girl that was ***** and is now raising a healthy and happy baby girl.

[MrMaelstrom]

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

Whoa, the old "no that's you" response...I'm up against something here. Please refrain from the "I'm rubber you're glue" slam, since it's harshness might be too much to bear..

You're right, I should've instead reminded you that no matter how I posted my views, I didn't offend you. You offended me, and indirectly, like a coward.

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

That's a horrible disease, and your lack of compassion on the subject tells me the kind of person you are, so regardless of whatever political views you come up with henceforth will be a waste, but you'll no doubt bless us with them anyway..

Sure. It's a horrible disease. I didn't show either compassion for it or otherwise. I referred to the physical condition of one of the ailments patients, I believe.
If Osama Bin Laden turns HIV positive, I hope it develops into a slow, agnizing, full-blown AIDS. Am I taking an insentive position on the disease? No. Am I insulting or offending in any way people who suffer such a disease? No. So get your head out of your arse and start to think a bit.

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

Not only did Nancy not ban a fucking thing, the ban itself lies soley within the US. Nothing stopping any scientist in Portugal from curing it, or are you relying on the U.S. for that too?

The ban itself comes from the general stand taken by pro-lifers, a stand she very much influenced with her role as the real policy maker in two consecutive Reagan administrations.
Oh, as a foreign citizen, then, should I feel I have no right to comment on U.S. issues, despite the fact that they, from everyday life to your choice of president and foreign policies, influence my everyday life and the life of billions around the world?
Piss off.

Originally Posted by AlKilyu

If you don't know what is wrong with you thinking that, much less saying it, then you just aren't worth the time it'd take to explain it.

Neither are you, really, but reading my posts, others of your level might actually learn something.

[WolfMoon]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

Setting aside the point that I truly believe the U.S., Australian and New Zealand armed forces had no business in Vietnam, I'll say that if 'Nam is still so important to U.S. citizens on their view on what a president should be, at least one of the candidates was there. If the fact that he went to Nam and later opposed the war when back in U.S. soil makes him hesitant,
I'd say that only an idiot doesn't change his/her mind.

Once again, for those who haven't been here long enough to have read threads that have long been deleted, please don't confuse a country's government with it's people, don't confuse the church with christianism, and muslims with extremist fanatics.

And for the U.S. citizens who get touchy when U.S. policies are criticized, remember that you're only under fire (both literally and retorically) because your nation is a lot more consistent, advanced and under the spotlight than Europe, who would be under threat a lot more than it has been (remember Madrid?) if the U.S.A. didn't attract attention so much.

There has to be a better way than this for us to solve our differences. Humanity advances in giant leaps technologically, but we still don't know enough about ourselves not to behave in a troglodite fashion to solve present day complexities.

It's true, we had absolutely no business there.I just think he's a douche-bag for be-littling the horror the soldiers went through.

[MrMaelstrom]

Originally Posted by WolfMoon

I know a girl that was ***** and is now raising a healthy and happy baby girl.

Wolfmoon, the girl you know does it because she can. Not all can, and they shouldn't be judged by that girls standards. And there's **** of all kinds and trauma of all kinds.
Where I'm going with this is that one woman is just that, one woman. Not all women.

Originally Posted by WolfMoon

I just think he's a douche-bag for be-littling the horror the soldiers went through.

I don't see how he's done that, but I might have missed something (not being cyinical right now).

[WolfMoon]

Originally Posted by MrMaelstrom

Wolfmoon, the girl you know does it because she can. Not all can, and they shouldn't be judged by that girls standards. And there's **** of all kinds and trauma of all kinds.
Where I'm going with this is that one woman is just that, one woman. Not all women.

Why should it be a woman's choice if it's not the man's?I've always stated that the only circumstances I believe abortion should be done is ****,incest, or medical complications.