Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Bush vs Kerry

  • Thread starter Thread starter 46Driver
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 13

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
I AM going to vote against Arlen Specter, though. He is without a doubt the most liberal republican in the Senate.

A little late here, but I gotta disagree. I think that John McCain (my home state senator) is the most liberal republican in the senate. He lost my primary elecion vote about six months ago, but he hasn't lost my general election vote.

Another beef I have with him is that he seems to air his dirty laundry too quickly and in a very public fashion.
 
Tinpusher said:
Aside from the abortion issue its quite simple...if you are rich and accept killing civilians as an acceptable price for fixing a former president's mistake vote W. If you work for a living and believe that concentrating our nations wealth in the top 1% is not in your interest and dont support runaway deficit spending vote Kerry.

Hey, I've got a few of my own. If you're rich and would prefer to throw money at a problem, rather than fix it, in order to alleviate your white guilt, vote for the demosocialist. Hear that, celebrities? If you're a civil servant who retires at 50 and doesn't have to worry about being fired or overworked, vote demosocialist. If you're a minority who uses race as an excuse for failure, vote demosocialist.
 
Actually Bart, I do have an issue with the stats you posted. The first is that the population of eligible workers surely increased during that period. I think the only way to really understand what happened is to look at the annualized growth rate of jobs versus the annualized growth in that population. Second, you only show the endpoints. While it is true that there appears to have been a gain in jobs of almost 1MM, that really only looks impressive if the numbers in 2000-2002 were lower than in 2003. In other words, we can't see whether the number of jobs in 2000, 2001, and 2002 were greater than the number you show for 2003 and therefore we don't know where the peak is.

If jobs have gone up steadily each year then maybe 2003 is the peak. But if jobs in 2000 were say 130,000,000 then there has been a net decline versus the peak.

Dave
 
Aside from the abortion issue its quite simple...if you are rich and accept killing civilians as an acceptable price for fixing a former president's mistake vote W. If you work for a living and believe that concentrating our nations wealth in the top 1% is not in your interest and dont support runaway deficit spending vote Kerry.

This is a good illustration about what it means to be drinking the democrat Koolaid.



I thought you would pick up on the fact that the GOP logo is an elephant. Apparently you didn't.

I thought I had explained the Condi would still get my vote with the same credentials and beliefs, even if she was a democrat. I was trying to show you that I don't care what the graphic symbol is at all, I care about the validity of the ideas. Right now, that is mostly a republican domain.

I just have trouble with the fact that you complain so loudly about being formerly brainwashed by the Democrat scumb, but you appear to be equally and willingly brainwashed by the Republican scumb. In other words, you are amenable to the concept of brainwashing, but selective about who holds the hose. That fascinates me.

And well it should fascinate you, my friend. My journey is a story of one who escaped the darkness of victimhood and totalitarian socialist government control as icons of mistaken goodness, and made it to the light of freedom, rugged individualism, and the basic ideas of the founders of the United States.

As Spock was quoted in another thread, "you proceed from a false assumption." I have not been brainwashed by any republican, I changed parties AFTER, several years after, I had examined and rejected the ideas that I had accepted as gospel and which I had willingly communicated to others as such. In other words, it was the fact that I had begun to think for myself that caused me to seek the party that most closely represented the ideas and conclusions that I had reached independently.



By the way, the ballots were NOT rejected. They were accepted and counted nothwithstanding that they were clearly illegal and therefore invalid. They were accepted precisely because it was presumed that they would be favorable to Mr. Bush and by a wide margin, it turned out they were.

Let's see. If they were illegal, then at some point they had to have been declared illegal. I frankly don't recall any authority saying that the ballots were illegal. If you have that info, please post it or send me a PM. Remember, the ballots "being" illegal is different from someone "saying" that they were illegal.



That's right. If you say so I guess the governor has no standing. He doesn't appoint any of the election officials, doesn't head up the canvassaing commission, has no political influence in the Sate and might as well live in Siberia as in Tallahassee. The entire process is operated by PFM. Since it doesn't really matter, I will accept that you are an expert on Florida election law.

I'm not talking about any kind of appointee, I'm talking about some kind of direct action he took with reference to this particular election. No one has found any impropriety, as far as I know. I'm sure the democrats on the Florida Supreme Court have tried to find something, though. The fact that they didn't is the proof of Jeb's innocence, as far as I am concernend.

Political influence cannot change the outcome of an election. Even democrats busing seniors and the mentally retarded to vote couldn't change the outcome. The NY Times could not change the outcome. The most powerful woman, and the smartest, no less, could not change the outcome.

In other words, you must be saying that George and his brother must be a whole heap smarter than their detractors are saying they are, huh?


What could be more simple than one person voting for one person of his/her choice and having that vote counted as one? But no, I guess that would never work, it might turn out to be honest and deprive the politicos of their manipulative powers.

The elctoral college system was designed to prevent a mob mentality from taking over in an election. How could that happen? try this tidbit, spread among the old, the fearful, and the poor:

"The republicans are trying to take away your social security and put you out in the street without any medical care."

This is what was being said when a system was proposed to give seniors a choice in healthcare that would help to improve care, save money, and keep the system from going bankrupt.


That's why we need the electoral college: liars. Al Franken's friends. (that's why he considers himself an expert on liars)
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top