Who do you want be the next president of the USA?

[Xaenn]

Yeah, I would definately vote against him if I could. I would also argue however it's not that Bush knows much about politics...he's just a fool being told what to do.

[Dingy]

Originally posted by Skinner8
You Americans who don't like Bush are going to vote on Kerry if you can, aren't you? Wouldn't want Bush to win again just because the anti-Bush side doesn't care enough to vote...

You're right, Bush is probably not going to be re-elected for another term because of negative voting, i.e. voting for ANYONE but Bush.
I am of the view that there could never be a greater fool to lead such a great nation into the next generation. He's a cowboy and that's all he'll ever be, prancing around to the tunes of good, bad and ugly and the likes, posting posters of-- WANTED- sex-(with the) dead or alive! Am not just jumping on the band wagon and indulging in midless bush-bashing, which is fun, may I add
Every country has its flaws, I'm not saying that my country is perfect and no one's dissing bush-fanboys/girls, that reminds me..anyone seen reagan:p?
Sad, that America has a bi-party system, not that it doesn't have its advantages, but its kind of like either tweedle dum or tweedle dee, not much choice, is there?

[Xaenn]

yeah, I bi-party system is a sad excuse for democracy.
If we didn't have political parties we'd be SO much better off, as people might have to think a little bit rather than..."oh, I'm republican, time to vote republican".

[Schutzstaffel]

Originally posted by Xaenn
yeah, I bi-party system is a sad excuse for democracy.
If we didn't have political parties we'd be SO much better off, as people might have to think a little bit rather than..."oh, I'm republican, time to vote republican".

For some reason your statement really bothers me..

[31337D00D]

i think hsi statement is valid, every politician should be independent and just have diferent issues.

[Dingy]

In India, we have a multiparty system most multi-party systems are prone to long coalition eras, on paper, i.e., the constitution we have a m-party sys. but in actuality it's just a competition b/w two major parties, but, you know, there's more corruption in a country where there are too many parties, and the govt. is usually unstable because the opposition itself is quite fragmented thus not being able to keep the govt. on it's feet.
Here in India and other m-party systems, even the opposition is a mix of many parties, so I guess every system has it's pros and cons.

[reagan80]

that reminds me..anyone seen reagan:p?

I'm back............

My apologies to reagan if he took anything to heart...

Don't worry about that...........I don't take opposing opinions personally...........I still respect them even when I don't agree with them..........Having a civilized argument is what separates democracy from fascism............

Originally posted by Dingy
Absolutely right! I think you should pay deep attention to the refrain that you have so sarcastically pointed above�YOU DIDN�T HAVE TO Atleast you agree that America�s action in the past has well-earned it�s title as an �imperialistic, Fascist country� Good progress reagan from your uptight, rigid attitude, you have certainly shown signs of improvement!;p

I don't understand.........How does the US's Marshall Plan, defense of Europe from the USSR, and giving the defeated Axis nations their democratic sovereignty back make us bad?

Do you know why the poor �boat people� risked their lives to come to dear ol� sweet ol� America? They were used by the CIA in the secret army that America was developing to overthrow the Castro regime from within.

We still have "boat people" from Cuba(and Haiti) coming to our shores today. I don't see them being trained by us into becoming paramilitary revolutionaries today. One reason Gore lost Florida in 2000 was because the Cuban-Americans in Florida were pi$$ed at the Clinton/Gore administration for sending Elian Gonzalez back to Cuba. Giving Elian back was like throwing a kid over the Berlin Wall. Those Cuban exiles volunteered when they joined the anti-Castro forces used in Bay of Pigs. They weren't forced by us into doing that operation.

Your govt. was quite conniving back then too, they had already arranged for the mass murder of all those �boat people� so they could get their economic rights back and could also shove democracy down another country�s throat.

If we lifted the sanctions on Cuba, Castro would get all of the money. I don't see any economic equity among the Cuban people occurring if we did that. Cuba is a dictatorship. Their people would rather have a democracy if they had the choice.........just look at the "boat people."

Kennedy didn�t renege on anything except shitting in his undies that day, as I�ve already posted before, it was in 1962 when USSR sent pictures of the missile base they had developed in Cuba pointing at America�s ass that US �chickened out�, and fyi this was in retaliation to the missile base that the US had in Turkey.

I admit Kennedy was a chicken..............I admit that Kennedy's reaction to the Cuban Missile Crisis was retarded and hypocritical............My idol (Reagan) deployed nukes in West Germany to deter the Soviets. I admit that it was a double-standard at the time for Kennedy to do that.

America instead of rushing to aid of the Shias and the Kurds, went home, and this was the prime reason of the mass killings of these insurgents in March of 1991. US feared that if the Shias succeeded, Iran�s position would get stronger. I have one word for this�SELFISH!

Before 9/11, we feared having another long-term "quagmire" like the Vietnam War. We didn't want to lose anymore troops than we had to. We thought Saddam would abide by the terms of the cease-fire and that we wouldn't need to invade him. I admit that it was selfish for us not to help the Iraqis overthrow Saddam.

It�s a living proof that your country is wealthy and when you give aid to another country, that country is eternally lost in a debt-trap created by the you-owe-me-a lot-machine�America!

No one has to repay us for our foreign aid. We gave Iraq $20 billion dollars as a grant NOT a loan.

You live in the US, you should know and understand the threat of living in a nuclear world, and if you are paying to the current world political scenario, you�d notice that Bush�s operations of freedom are not going to earn him respect but half the world filled with fanatics is probably sitting in their 3rd world caves planning on how to kick bush�s ass.

I understand the threat of living in a nuclear world, but the threat won't end if the US gives up all of its nukes and abandons the "missile shield" program either.

We aren't going to stop terrorism by doing nothing either. If the Islamic fundamentalists can't tolerate us living, then they must die first before we do. Terrorists fester and breed in failed states. If Iraq becomes a successful democracy, the terrorists won't have much of a talent pool there to choose from if the Iraqi people have hope for a better future and control of their own destiny.

Second, India has more Muslims (app. 102 million) than Pakistan (app. 98 million)�ironical, aint it? And no, these 102 m are not stuffed in Kashmir as you would like to believe.

Indian Muslims aren't the ones committing terrorism because they live in a democratic, capitalist(or socialist?) nation. They don't want to destroy the world because they can make more money being productive workers in a free country.

Pakistani military is still governing PoK. You decide for yourself who�s imposing their police action!

I admit that the Pakistanis can't be trusted, but we need their cooperation in our anti-terrorism operations.

How about if they want to be communist?

I've noticed that quite a number of people on this thread have given pro-communist sentiments............but don't confuse communism with socialism. Socialism is democratic while Communism is IMPOSED on the people by a roomful of cronies or a dictator. I HATE Communism, but I'm not a big fan of socialism either.

At least Clinton didn�t have half the world conspiring to see him crucified!

What did Clinton do that made him so likeable to the rest of the world anyway?

I'm almost certain he does, because he's the newest guy to vote for me, and I'm sure as hell that he didn't give me a rating of 5 simply because I don't have his views.

Sorry about that EGGO.................I did that because I didn't know who gave me the 1 on my first day...............You can either give me a 1 in retaliation or I could try to revise my vote..............

[31337D00D]

Originally posted by reagan80

What did Clinton do that made him so likeable to the rest of the world anyway?

Its not what clinton did, its what he didn't do. Bush made foreign affairs and other things worse, thats why i want to see him bleed!

[reagan80]

Originally posted by madcrow
has any1 noticed how kerry's voice sounds "more presidential" than bush's. yet another reason that i support kerry for prez: he doesn't sound like an f-ing moron.

Don't bash the Southern(Texan) accent of Bush.............Clinton came from Arkansas(just northeast of Texas)........Clinton had a slight Southern accent too even though I don't like him.........

I admit that I wasn't a big fan of Bush's speeches before 9/11,
but when he stopped being dull and PC after 9/11 I began to like him more...........

So you like Bush because he stopped being dull...

I'm not that shallow............I like Bush because he has done more things that I agree with than disagree with. He has done more to strengthen this country's economy and security. He might not be popular with the rest of the world, but he won't sell out this country's sovereignty to the UN just to get their support for 2 seconds. I don't trust Kerry to do what is right for this country. We elect a President of the United States NOT an Appeaser of the World.

Before 9/11, Bush seemed more phony with his personality. I don't like people that are fake. Kerry keeps balking at Bush's "tax cuts for the wealthy," but he's a limousine liberal himself. Kerry also brags about his honorable service in Vietnam, but downplays his anti-military escapades after he left the service.

Yeah, people care about if a president is exciting or whatever, I mean, their policies or intelligence really don't matter...

As I have said, I agree with Bush's policies. Bush isn't stupid. He might sound stupid, but that isn't how you judge good leadership. Jimmy Carter was a nuclear physicist and sucked royally as President.

[EGGO]

So you like Bush because he stopped being dull...

[Xaenn]

Yeah, people care about if a president is exciting or whatever, I mean, their policies or intelligence really don't matter...

[Ziegfried]

You sound as fanatical about communism as your average suicide bomber does about the US, reagan80...

[reagan80]

Originally posted by Skinner8
You sound as fanatical about communism as your average suicide bomber does about the US, reagan80...

I hate forms of government that don't have basic human/civil rights for its people. Communism is oppressive and treats people like expendable resources. If you didn't make good grades in school in the USSR, you were drafted into the army or forced to work in a farm or factory. In other words, you don't have the freedom to choose your own job.

I got this off of this link.........http://www.podval.org/~sds/commies.html

Labor: Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

Implementation: GULAG was one huge labor army, of course, and people were drafted there - you can hardly call the procedure "legal" - by millions. But GULAG probably never accounted for more than 10-20% of the GDP (although most of the military research was done there - people like Tupolev and Korolev were imprisoned and had their "KB" - Design Bureaus - in the prison camps - the celebrated "Sharagas"). This GDP estimate is based on the estimates of the GULAG's population together with the fact the productivity of slave labor is usually smaller than that of the "free" agents outside of the prison camps. On the other hand, the peasants did not have passports until the 1970-ies, and without the passport they could not move in a city, so they were tied to their "kolhoz". During certain periods, city workers could not change jobs either. Being 5 minutes late was a felony.

No..........I'm not as fanatical as the terrorists because I don't condone the intentional killing of civilians. I don't like Communist governments, but I don't hate them enough to nuke them just for being Communist. It isn't the people's fault if their government is Communist. They were just forced(brainwashed) into believing their system was good for them. Just look at North Korea...........



If communism is so great, then why is the North in the dark? http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../dprk-dark.htm

I usually don't like CBS, but they had a good story recently about the North Koreans.............http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in602415.shtml

[Ziegfried]

Oh, ok. You're being level-headed and objective, then. Gotcha.

[madcrow]

communism = bad
social democracy (aka scandinavian countries, canada, france) = good

that's my general set of prinicples.