Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 27, 2014, 02:17:34 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 [1033] 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 ... 1258
25801  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Texas Special Session: Eminent Domain on: June 28, 2005, 09:53:21 pm
So you mean that baseball teams owned by George W Bush won't be able seize land in Alexandria, TX by eminent domain? That sounds like a good plan.

You are a douche bag.

Oh, and it was all subsidized by the Alexandria, TX sales tax. How am I a douche bag for pointing out how George W Bush profitted from this? Quit being such a Bush apoligist.
25802  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 09:52:35 pm
I got to say I honestly think these polls are wrong.  Bush cannot be at 40 percent approval in Ohio. lower 40's maybe, mid 40's probably, but not 40. 

It's still much better than Gov. Taft's ratings.
25803  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 09:51:03 pm
It used to fall under defense, and probably still should.

That's not cherrypicking. That's fundamental.

Disecretionary spending is up 45% under Bush
Medicare/ Medicaid are way up thanks to health care spiraling out of control, when most 1st world countries have a much better and cheaper single payer health care
Social Security is actually the most fiscally sound part of the whole federal government
25804  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 09:49:27 pm
I see you didn't actually watch of pay any attention to the speech. Here's part of what you missed:

Hear the words of Osama Bin Laden: "This Third World War is raging" in Iraq. "The whole world is watching this war." He says it will end in "victory and glory, or misery and humiliation."

There are a lot more terrorists in Iraq than before we invaded. Why'd we invade, again?
25805  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 09:48:40 pm
2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

Its nice to know you don't consider people who set off suicide bombs in mosques to be terrorists.  How charming.

We have several thousand troops in Afghanistan right now fighting Al Qaeda.  Its going quite well actually.

That's not what General Franks told Senator Bob Grapham. He was upsetabout how plans in iraq were distracting from the war on terror in Afganistan. I suppose it'd be too much to expect a Bush apoligist like you to understand.

I read Tommy Franks' book, where he says that he advised the invasion of Iraq all along after 9/11.  I also saw his endorsement of the President in the 2004 campaign.  Its a little unconvincing to say he somehow didn't like the policy he himself had crafted and the policy he has continued to advocate since leaving government service.

Of course he didn't put it in his book. He's a team player. It's in Bob Graham's book.
25806  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Is driving a right or a privilege? on: June 28, 2005, 09:40:41 pm

We should also get rid of driver's licenses, which are just another way the government taxes us.

There are enough bad drivers on the roads already, no need to make it easier for sh**tty drivers to drive.
25807  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: jfern's latest crappy logic on: June 28, 2005, 09:39:04 pm
Is that poll supposed to be related to this somehow?

The point of the speech was how vital Iraq is to the War on Terror, regardless of whether we should have gone in the first place.

1. The main reason given for going to war with Iraq was WMD. Where the  are they?

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

4. Bush ignored the 8/06/01 memo, making people like this happy.




How is any of that a response to what I said?

Let me spell my argument out very clearly for you. Iraq is not useful to the war on terror.
25808  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Texas Special Session: Eminent Domain on: June 28, 2005, 09:37:58 pm
So you mean that baseball teams owned by George W Bush won't be able seize land in Alexandria, TX by eminent domain? That sounds like a good plan.
25809  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 09:34:05 pm
2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

Its nice to know you don't consider people who set off suicide bombs in mosques to be terrorists.  How charming.

We have several thousand troops in Afghanistan right now fighting Al Qaeda.  Its going quite well actually.

That's not what General Franks told Senator Bob Grapham. He was upsetabout how plans in iraq were distracting from the war on terror in Afganistan. I suppose it'd be too much to expect a Bush apoligist like you to understand.
25810  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 09:29:24 pm
Hooked on Phonics, jfern?

Discretionary spending unrelated to defense or homeland security

Cherry picking. We didn't have a catagory of "Homeland Security" in 2000.
25811  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 09:27:36 pm
Is that poll supposed to be related to this somehow?

The point of the speech was how vital Iraq is to the War on Terror, regardless of whether we should have gone in the first place.

1. The main reason given for going to war with Iraq was WMD. Where the  are they?

2. These "terrorists" we talk about weren't in Iraq before we invaded. We are creating more "terrorists".

3. Bush let Iraq distract him from fighting Al Qaeda in Afganistan and Pakistan

4. Bush ignored the 8/06/01 memo, making people like this happy.


25812  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 09:23:26 pm
What's your point? I said 48% approval. If anything, that would have implied 52% disapproval.

In the last budget year of the Clinton administration (2001), discretionary spending unrelated to defense or homeland security soared by 15 percent. With the adoption of President Bush's first budget (2002), that growth rate was reduced to six percent; then five percent the following year; and four percent in 2004.

Discretionary spending in billions:

2000: 614.8
2001: 649.3
2002: 734.3
2003: 825.4
2004: 895.0

http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1821&sequence=0

That's an increase of 45.6% in just 4 years.
25813  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 09:14:47 pm
http://pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

I said likely voters.

The only other one I see is Zogby, and he does it differently. It's Excellent/Good 44%, Fair/Poor 56%.

Nice of you to not mention the 51% disapproval rating in the ABC poll. How good are methods of determining likely voters with no election soon?
25814  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: jfern's latest crappy post on: June 28, 2005, 09:13:50 pm
http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us

More biased news stories from the media.

What, did even the media get sick of Bush?

I know you read rather neutral material like DailyKOS, but I was referring to the mainstream, liberal media.

"Bush refuses to set timetable for US withdrawal from Iraq"

Great job completely missing the point of the speech.

Then what the  was the point of the speech?


Gallup poll from June 16th-19th.
"Do you favor or oppose the U.S. war with Iraq?"
37% favor, 59% oppose.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

25815  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 09:07:25 pm
These are adults. Among likely voters, Fox and ABC have 48%.

That's some cherry picking.  Quinnipiac has a 44% approval rating amoung registered voters.
25816  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 08:53:29 pm
37    Ohio    Bush    40%    57%
41    Nevada    Bush    38%    57%

Those ones are kind of weird, to say the least.

1 in 20 and all that.

Yeah, there's that 1 in 20 chance that it's only 43% disapprove, 54% approve in Ohio.
25817  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: jfern's latest crappy post on: June 28, 2005, 08:52:34 pm
http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us

More biased news stories from the media.

What, did even the media get sick of Bush?
25818  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 08:51:12 pm
No data for DC. Here's a map.

25819  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Bysh's 50 state approval ratings from SUSA on: June 28, 2005, 08:41:06 pm
For the country as a whole he has 43% approve, 52% disapprove.

They didn't do DC, but the extremes are:

63-34 in Utah (1 of 2 states to vote Taft in 1912)
32-65 in Vermont (1 of 2 states to vote Taft in 1912)

http://surveyusa.com/Bush50StateApproval0605.htm
25820  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 08:38:45 pm
Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?
Huh

Hint to jfern: avoid non sequiturs.


He gave the speech at a red part of a red state to specially chosen people...

OK, so going to a state or city populated with the opposing party makes you a big man?  Where was the 2004 RNC?  How about the 2004 DNC?

The conventions were indoors and had lots of security to get there. Kerry had a lot of outdoors campaign events.
25821  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 08:33:41 pm
Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?
Huh

Hint to jfern: avoid non sequiturs.


He gave the speech at a red part of a red state to specially chosen people, and no questions were asked of him, and he messed up the reading of the speech, which he didn't write. He gave no plan for an exit strategy, and instead relied on mentioning 9/11 and terrorism, when he ignored the 8/06/01 memo warning of imminent attack on the US by Al Qaeda. I don't believe in hell, but may he spend an eternity there anyways.
25822  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 08:26:13 pm
Hint to Bush: If Iraq has so much do with 9/11, why didn't you have the balls to give this speech in Manhattan?
25823  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Take that Souter! Justice may lose home to eminent domain. on: June 28, 2005, 07:34:26 pm


You sure?

That picture was poven to be doctored.

She doesn't look so great here, either.

25824  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Bush's latest crappy speech on: June 28, 2005, 07:24:25 pm
It's terrible. Shut the  up about Iraq having to do with September 11th already! Bush has absolutely no good plan for Iraq. What do you expect from a chickenhawk?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/28/195710/973
25825  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Take that Souter! Justice may lose home to eminent domain. on: June 28, 2005, 07:13:16 pm
Easier on the eyes?!?  Surely you must have noticed that she looks like a man in drag?  Tongue



That's all woman buddy. Tongue

All plastic and silcone.
Pages: 1 ... 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 [1033] 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 ... 1258


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines