Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's something I like to toss around.
There are many people, I know, who voted for Bush, and are complaining about him today.
I don't say anything, but I think, you voted for him, take responsibility for your actions.
The writing was on the wall before the last elections, so I don't feel that anyone who voted for him could say they didn't know.
Or I hear a lot of, "there wasn't much choice in the matter, I couldn't have voted for Kerry."
If someone voted for Bush, and is complaining about the current climate, does he/she have the right to complain?
Good Question. If a man marries the "girl of his dreams", and she decides the next year to take a job as a prostitiute, should he complain?---I don't know-he DID marry her, true enough--but didn't SHE misrepresent herself?
It's not like we had a huge number of choices from which to choose our president. And I still maintain we had a reasonable suspicion in the "WMD's" debacle.
Plainly, few people are happy with the performance of "the Decider". But, in retrospect, I don't feel any "guilt". I voted for what I thought was the lesser of two VERY UNINSPIRING evils. Did the man disappoint me, and deceive us, and "change"?....of COURSE he did. Darn right I have a right to complain. You hire a plumber, and he doesn't "plumb"---so you complain. Seems simple enough to me.
Here's something I like to toss around.
There are many people, I know, who voted for Bush, and are complaining about him today.
I don't say anything, but I think, you voted for him, take responsibility for your actions.
The writing was on the wall before the last elections, so I don't feel that anyone who voted for him could say they didn't know.
Or I hear a lot of, "there wasn't much choice in the matter, I couldn't have voted for Kerry."
If someone voted for Bush, and is complaining about the current climate, does he/she have the right to complain?
For those who voted for Bush/Cheney in 2000 I give a little sympathy because I believe there was only a very small tip of the iceberg visible and an incredibly enormous mass hidden from view. It's much more difficult to give sympathy for those who voted Bush/Cheney in 2004.
Still, though, no matter what Party has been elected over the decades, there are always surprises after the pandering for money and votes is over and what is supposed to be the work for the People begins. Some administrations have been worse than others, obviously MUCH worse in some cases.
As to the attitude you mentioned from some that “[they] couldn't have voted for Kerry,†for this I have nothing but disdain. Yes, they could have helped vote OUT the incredibly destructive people who captured and misused their offices as a result of the 2000 elections. So WHAT if it’s a choice between the lesser of two evils, it’s what we’ve got for now: Two Parties and big money after them both with a vengeance. Change the system. But getting the destructive group OUT should have been top priority.
Good Question. If a man marries the "girl of his dreams", and she decides the next year to take a job as a prostitiute, should he complain?---I don't know-he DID marry her, true enough--but didn't SHE misrepresent herself?.
I am curious of this idea of "misrepresentation" as it relates to the second election.
For someone who feels he (Bush/Cheny) misrepresented himself, I would like to ask, what your thoughts were about getting into the war in Iraq in the first place.
I am asking this because I feel that those who did not vote for Bush in the second election, already knew that there was something fishy going on, we didn't like it, and therefore were not going to vote to keep it going. So I would think that if someone voted for Bush in the second election, that they would have somehow agreed with this war. Enough time had passed to at least give some thought to the fact that this seemed strange.
But I guess enough time had not occured. So then I need to ask what it was about the war in Iraq that you agreed with?
And secondly, what was different in chaper II from chapter I, that makes one feel so strongly that he "misrepresented himself?"
Location: In an illegal immigrant free part of the country.
2,096 posts, read 1,470,125 times
Reputation: 382
The whole poll is reeedickaless. You can barely get people to take responsibility for their own actions let alone someone elses. I did't vote for Bush the second time around but if I was forced to vote I still would have chosen Bush over Kerry Hines any day.
Or I hear a lot of, "there wasn't much choice in the matter, I couldn't have voted for Kerry."
I wonder where these folks draw the line.
What if it was Kerry and Mussolini?
How about Kerry or Hitler?
What if it was Kerry or Satan?
Kerry or Genghis Khan?
I'm trying to get just as ridiculous as I can to see how strong those anti-Kerry feelings really are. You see, in my mind, Bush and company are just as bad as the worst I can think of, and anything would have been better.
I am curious of this idea of "misrepresentation" as it relates to the second election.
For someone who feels he (Bush/Cheny) misrepresented himself, I would like to ask, what your thoughts were about getting into the war in Iraq in the first place.
I am asking this because I feel that those who did not vote for Bush in the second election, already knew that there was something fishy going on, we didn't like it, and therefore were not going to vote to keep it going. So I would think that if someone voted for Bush in the second election, that they would have somehow agreed with this war. Enough time had passed to at least give some thought to the fact that this seemed strange.
But I guess enough time had not occured. So then I need to ask what it was about the war in Iraq that you agreed with?
And secondly, what was different in chaper II from chapter I, that makes one feel so strongly that he "misrepresented himself?"
I thought Saddam had WMD's, and that if he did not, he would have gladly opened his doors to the inspectors, let them hunt for what wasn't there, and enjoyed embarassing Bush in front of the whole world, as Saddam increased his own stature in the Arab world by 300%. Obviously, in retrospect, I was wrong.
I favored "getting" Saddam--I thought he was a dangerous, suicidal loony, and I will defend myself to some degree in this. He'd already invaded a neighbor, and torched the oilfields on his forced exit. His threats were becoming more serious, and he was willing to "starve" his own poor in order to "thumb his nose" at the world during the oil embargo. As far as Arab hatred, I figured the Arabs already hated us anyway, regardless of what we did or did not do. For this much, I plead "guilty of naivete in the first degree"
HOWEVER, even before the invasion, I made a pest of myself around here by asking anyone who'd listen, "what is this DEMOCRACY crap?--Who says the Iraqis want democracy?" Bush "slipped this in", and for that I can't excuse him. That was condescending nonsense, and I was insulted that "the Decider" thought so little of our intelligence as to try that tactic.
In short, I thought we'd rush in, blast Saddam, and be home by Tuesday. The Iraqis would be relieved, and no one would miss him, and they'd take over from there, glad to be rid of him. For this mistake, I'll take the blame. But at least you're not PAYING me like you are Congress. I do work cheap.....
Location: In an illegal immigrant free part of the country.
2,096 posts, read 1,470,125 times
Reputation: 382
Quote:
Originally Posted by pslOldTimer
I wonder where these folks draw the line.
What if it was Kerry and Mussolini?
How about Kerry or Hitler?
What if it was Kerry or Satan?
Kerry or Genghis Khan?
I'm trying to get just as ridiculous as I can to see how strong those anti-Kerry feelings really are. You see, in my mind, Bush and company are just as bad as the worst I can think of, and anything would have been better.
From reeedickaless to fairy tale land? I think all those guys are dead except maybe Satan. Draw the line in at least remote possibilities.
What if it was Kerry and Mussolini?
How about Kerry or Hitler?
What if it was Kerry or Satan?
Kerry or Genghis Khan?
I'm trying to get just as ridiculous as I can to see how strong those anti-Kerry feelings really are. You see, in my mind, Bush and company are just as bad as the worst I can think of, and anything would have been better.
If you're trying to get ridiculous, you're succeeding. Common sense, please....common sense. Obviuosly, the four choices you gave us would have seen a Kerry victory. That's our problem nowadays--the death of common sense. Bush is a disppointment. He's a nitwit. He's an atrocious public speaker, and his condescending smirk and his unconvincing Texas twang render his bumbling speeches well-nigh intolerable to listen to. But he is NOT Hitler; nor is he Stalin, or any of the others. Our system wouldn't let him "get out of hand" to the degree those others did, even if that was his intention. Such silly comparisons cheapen the real life situation.....Isn't he bad enough as it is?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
