Zell Miller is on the stage...
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:15:42 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  Zell Miller is on the stage...
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
Author Topic: Zell Miller is on the stage...  (Read 43284 times)
Patunia
Rookie
**
Posts: 202


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: September 01, 2004, 10:33:36 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?
Because he wouldnt be able to flip flop on it later if he didnt.
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,024
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: September 01, 2004, 10:33:51 PM »

If the party was like that ... there would just be two identical parties, what's the point of that?

That's a question that I've always wondered when people like StatesRights claim that the Democrats need to be conservative.  What do you want?  Two right-wing parties?

I want at least three parties, and scrap the "right/left" argument.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: September 01, 2004, 10:34:54 PM »
« Edited: September 01, 2004, 10:36:04 PM by Philip »

I wouldn't have a problem with this guy if he just admitted that he's changed.

I disagree. He is a real Democrat. I would be a Democrat if the party hadn't been hijacked by the Liebral Left.

We'll return to our roots if you return to yours.  Then we can both switch parties and you can instead bitch about the Republicans. Cheesy

This is actually a good idea. I'd like to be able to hate Republicans for once. Cheesy
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: September 01, 2004, 10:34:55 PM »

How can you explain his vote against the Gulf War?

Bush went to the UN. Full backing of a war resolution. Assembled an international coalition. Went to the Senate.

Kerry voted no.

When you think about it, that alone impeaches any of his credibility. How can you complain about no coalition, when the largest ever assembled wasn't enough?

How can he praise the UN, when the UN wasn't enough?

How can he wait for the enemy to strike, when that wasn't enough?
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: September 01, 2004, 10:35:03 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?
Because he wouldnt be able to flip flop on it later if he didnt.

Yeah I'm sure he though of it that way when he casted the vote.

Plus even if he voted the other way he could stil 'flip-flop'.
Logged
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,903


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: September 01, 2004, 10:35:27 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: September 01, 2004, 10:38:40 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.

How do you know his motives?  Were you there?

My opinion?  He voted for the war because it felt it was the right thing to do.
Logged
Patunia
Rookie
**
Posts: 202


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: September 01, 2004, 10:42:04 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.

How do you know his motives?  Were you there?

My opinion?  He voted for the war because it felt it was the right thing to do.
Then he woke up the next morning; consulted his magic 8 ball; and decided it was the wrong thing to do.
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: September 01, 2004, 10:45:11 PM »

But the first Gulf War was wrong?

Explain the hypocrisy.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: September 01, 2004, 10:46:39 PM »

I don't care whether he's changed or not.  Did Kerry or did Kerry not vote against all those weapons systems?  Did he or did he not vote against using force to kick Saddam out of Kuwait?  I've seen enough.

You mean the very same wweapon systems Dick Cheney opposed while Sec of Defense under George H W Bush???
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: September 01, 2004, 10:47:34 PM »

Lie. Most of what Zell listed long predates HW Bush.

The B-2 is an exception, but Bush just cut it back, he didn't want to cancel it.
Logged
Patunia
Rookie
**
Posts: 202


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: September 01, 2004, 10:47:59 PM »

I don't care whether he's changed or not.  Did Kerry or did Kerry not vote against all those weapons systems?  Did he or did he not vote against using force to kick Saddam out of Kuwait?  I've seen enough.

You mean the very same wweapon systems Dick Cheney opposed while Sec of Defense under George H W Bush???
Highlight it some more. I would love for a debate along these lines. Send this to the retards over at the DNC and maybe theyll fall for it.
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: September 01, 2004, 10:49:23 PM »

So, calling Bush a Nazi is treason.....but saying Kerry hates America and thinks it is a force of evil in this world is fair game?  Wow.

There's no basis for calling Bush a Nazi. He's actually very far from Nazi-ism. There IS a basis for arguing that Kerry clearly sees the USA as the bad guys and the aggressors. WHY can't you guys see that?

Have any of you libs ever listened to how he smeared our vets in front of Congress?

MAYBE THE MAN DOESN'T THINK THE US SHOULD BE THE AGGRESORS IN THE WORLD!  MAYBE HE WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT TO CHANGE THIS COUNTRY FOR THE BETTER!  MAYBE HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN DIE IN VAIN!  

Wow, so you guys DO see defending ourselves as acting as aggressors. Amazing. Or I should say the war on terror.

Iraq posed no clear threat to us or anyone else.  I know all to well of Saddam's horrible history, but attacking him did not change the past and people hundreds of thousands of soldiers into harm's way on false pretenses.  

Logged
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,903


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: September 01, 2004, 10:50:21 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.

How do you know his motives?  Were you there?

My opinion?  He voted for the war because it felt it was the right thing to do.

That's fine if that's your opinion, but I disagree. He votes against the Gulf War, smears our vets, the AZ Democrat just 10 years ago says he's proposing cuts far deeper than anyone else, he was against standing up to the Soviet Union, he was for a nuclear freeze, and then he turns around in 2002 with a Presidential run coming up and votes for authorization to use force. Well that goes against everything he had said and done 30 years before it, so it's obvious to me he didn't want it thrown back in his face. But it hurt him a bit anyway, because it showed up as just him trying to cover all the bases.
Logged
Patunia
Rookie
**
Posts: 202


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: September 01, 2004, 10:51:20 PM »

So, calling Bush a Nazi is treason.....but saying Kerry hates America and thinks it is a force of evil in this world is fair game?  Wow.

There's no basis for calling Bush a Nazi. He's actually very far from Nazi-ism. There IS a basis for arguing that Kerry clearly sees the USA as the bad guys and the aggressors. WHY can't you guys see that?

Have any of you libs ever listened to how he smeared our vets in front of Congress?

MAYBE THE MAN DOESN'T THINK THE US SHOULD BE THE AGGRESORS IN THE WORLD!  MAYBE HE WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT TO CHANGE THIS COUNTRY FOR THE BETTER!  MAYBE HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN DIE IN VAIN!  

Wow, so you guys DO see defending ourselves as acting as aggressors. Amazing. Or I should say the war on terror.

Iraq posed no clear threat to us or anyone else.  I know all to well of Saddam's horrible history, but attacking him did not change the past and people hundreds of thousands of soldiers into harm's way on false pretenses.  


What false pretenses? WMDs have always have been a red herring to me because they are insignificant to the greater goal of transforming the region. But who did not believe WMDs were there before the war? Cant argue false pretenses when there is no basis for your argument.
Logged
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,903


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: September 01, 2004, 10:53:02 PM »

So, calling Bush a Nazi is treason.....but saying Kerry hates America and thinks it is a force of evil in this world is fair game?  Wow.

There's no basis for calling Bush a Nazi. He's actually very far from Nazi-ism. There IS a basis for arguing that Kerry clearly sees the USA as the bad guys and the aggressors. WHY can't you guys see that?

Have any of you libs ever listened to how he smeared our vets in front of Congress?

MAYBE THE MAN DOESN'T THINK THE US SHOULD BE THE AGGRESORS IN THE WORLD!  MAYBE HE WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT TO CHANGE THIS COUNTRY FOR THE BETTER!  MAYBE HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN DIE IN VAIN!  

Wow, so you guys DO see defending ourselves as acting as aggressors. Amazing. Or I should say the war on terror.

Iraq posed no clear threat to us or anyone else.  I know all to well of Saddam's horrible history, but attacking him did not change the past and people hundreds of thousands of soldiers into harm's way on false pretenses.  



It's another place where terrorists will not be offered a haven. Read the 9/11 Commission Report.

We can't set around and wait for an atomic weapon to be detonated over one or more of our cities or for another terrorist attack to happen before we respond. I'm glad George W. Bush understands that!
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: September 01, 2004, 10:53:22 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.

How do you know his motives?  Were you there?

My opinion?  He voted for the war because it felt it was the right thing to do.

That's fine if that's your opinion, but I disagree. He votes against the Gulf War, smears our vets, the AZ Democrat just 10 years ago says he's proposing cuts far deeper than anyone else, he was against standing up to the Soviet Union, he was for a nuclear freeze, and then he turns around in 2002 with a Presidential run coming up and votes for authorization to use force. Well that goes against everything he had said and done 30 years before it, so it's obvious to me he didn't want it thrown back in his face. But it hurt him a bit anyway, because it showed up as just him trying to cover all the bases.
\


As far as the Intel Cuts goes, yeah the cuts Republicans also passed/
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: September 01, 2004, 10:53:33 PM »

So, calling Bush a Nazi is treason.....but saying Kerry hates America and thinks it is a force of evil in this world is fair game?  Wow.

There's no basis for calling Bush a Nazi. He's actually very far from Nazi-ism. There IS a basis for arguing that Kerry clearly sees the USA as the bad guys and the aggressors. WHY can't you guys see that?

Have any of you libs ever listened to how he smeared our vets in front of Congress?

MAYBE THE MAN DOESN'T THINK THE US SHOULD BE THE AGGRESORS IN THE WORLD!  MAYBE HE WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT TO CHANGE THIS COUNTRY FOR THE BETTER!  MAYBE HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN DIE IN VAIN!  

Wow, so you guys DO see defending ourselves as acting as aggressors. Amazing. Or I should say the war on terror.

Iraq posed no clear threat to us or anyone else.  I know all to well of Saddam's horrible history, but attacking him did not change the past and people hundreds of thousands of soldiers into harm's way on false pretenses.  


What false pretenses? WMDs have always have been a red herring to me because they are insignificant to the greater goal of transforming the region. But who did not believe WMDs were there before the war? Cant argue false pretenses when there is no basis for your argument.

Are you joking?  Bush said there were WMDs.  Bush said there were connections to Al Queda.  They were the 2 arguments for going to war, and both weren't true.  That's called a false pretense.  
Logged
Patunia
Rookie
**
Posts: 202


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: September 01, 2004, 10:55:42 PM »

So, calling Bush a Nazi is treason.....but saying Kerry hates America and thinks it is a force of evil in this world is fair game?  Wow.

There's no basis for calling Bush a Nazi. He's actually very far from Nazi-ism. There IS a basis for arguing that Kerry clearly sees the USA as the bad guys and the aggressors. WHY can't you guys see that?

Have any of you libs ever listened to how he smeared our vets in front of Congress?

MAYBE THE MAN DOESN'T THINK THE US SHOULD BE THE AGGRESORS IN THE WORLD!  MAYBE HE WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT TO CHANGE THIS COUNTRY FOR THE BETTER!  MAYBE HE DOESN'T WANT TO SEE GOOD MEN AND WOMEN DIE IN VAIN!  

Wow, so you guys DO see defending ourselves as acting as aggressors. Amazing. Or I should say the war on terror.

Iraq posed no clear threat to us or anyone else.  I know all to well of Saddam's horrible history, but attacking him did not change the past and people hundreds of thousands of soldiers into harm's way on false pretenses.  


What false pretenses? WMDs have always have been a red herring to me because they are insignificant to the greater goal of transforming the region. But who did not believe WMDs were there before the war? Cant argue false pretenses when there is no basis for your argument.

Are you joking?  Bush said there were WMDs.  Bush said there were connections to Al Queda.  They were the 2 arguments for going to war, and both weren't true.  That's called a false pretense.  
Its only false pretense if you can provide evidence to the contrary. But even the left, along with every other intelligence agency in the world, belived WNDs were there.
Logged
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,903


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: September 01, 2004, 10:55:52 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.

How do you know his motives?  Were you there?

My opinion?  He voted for the war because it felt it was the right thing to do.

That's fine if that's your opinion, but I disagree. He votes against the Gulf War, smears our vets, the AZ Democrat just 10 years ago says he's proposing cuts far deeper than anyone else, he was against standing up to the Soviet Union, he was for a nuclear freeze, and then he turns around in 2002 with a Presidential run coming up and votes for authorization to use force. Well that goes against everything he had said and done 30 years before it, so it's obvious to me he didn't want it thrown back in his face. But it hurt him a bit anyway, because it showed up as just him trying to cover all the bases.
\


As far as the Intel Cuts goes, yeah the cuts Republicans also passed/

Once again:

If I have to choose between cuts and cuts that will completely gut the Intel community, I guess I'll have to just go with cuts.

They were a bad idea, but read what Kerry wanted to do! If he could have, he'd have smashed our Intel community to virtual nothingness.
Logged
Patunia
Rookie
**
Posts: 202


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: September 01, 2004, 10:56:26 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.

How do you know his motives?  Were you there?

My opinion?  He voted for the war because it felt it was the right thing to do.

That's fine if that's your opinion, but I disagree. He votes against the Gulf War, smears our vets, the AZ Democrat just 10 years ago says he's proposing cuts far deeper than anyone else, he was against standing up to the Soviet Union, he was for a nuclear freeze, and then he turns around in 2002 with a Presidential run coming up and votes for authorization to use force. Well that goes against everything he had said and done 30 years before it, so it's obvious to me he didn't want it thrown back in his face. But it hurt him a bit anyway, because it showed up as just him trying to cover all the bases.
\


As far as the Intel Cuts goes, yeah the cuts Republicans also passed/
God, Im gonna go to bed tonight praying you are on Kerry's debate team Tongue
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: September 01, 2004, 11:00:32 PM »

Hes kicking ass because of the circumstances surrounding the race. Ryan was right to step down. But the Illinois race will be the shocker of the election I believe. Go ahead and hug those early polls while Keyes is just getting started. Keyes wont lose by more then 5 points and could possibly win it.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

You actually think Keyes has a snowball's chance in hell? Or that he could even come within 5 points? Gore beat Bush there by 12 points! And you actually think Keyes will bring in some Keyes voters and Kerry voters?

Oh wait, do you actually think Bush will win Illinois too? AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: September 01, 2004, 11:01:01 PM »


Of course they do. Any US military operations in our own self interest and not sanctioned by the UN is evil.

Then why did Kerry vote for the 2002 war resolution?

Why does he vote two ways on everything? So he can try and please everybody. He voted for the war in 2002 so it couldn't be thrown back in his face, obviously, but it didn't matter if he had because it just ended up another inconsistency.

How do you know his motives?  Were you there?

My opinion?  He voted for the war because it felt it was the right thing to do.

That's fine if that's your opinion, but I disagree. He votes against the Gulf War, smears our vets, the AZ Democrat just 10 years ago says he's proposing cuts far deeper than anyone else, he was against standing up to the Soviet Union, he was for a nuclear freeze, and then he turns around in 2002 with a Presidential run coming up and votes for authorization to use force. Well that goes against everything he had said and done 30 years before it, so it's obvious to me he didn't want it thrown back in his face. But it hurt him a bit anyway, because it showed up as just him trying to cover all the bases.
\


As far as the Intel Cuts goes, yeah the cuts Republicans also passed/

Once again:

If I have to choose between cuts and cuts that will completely gut the Intel community, I guess I'll have to just go with cuts.

They were a bad idea, but read what Kerry wanted to do! If he could have, he'd have smashed our Intel community to virtual nothingness.


Completley gut the Intelligence Community??  Based on what.  Their was very little difference in the total cuts
Logged
ThePrezMex
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 730
Mexico


Political Matrix
E: 5.25, S: -1.69

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: September 01, 2004, 11:04:53 PM »

Please listen to David Gergen right now on Larry King.
He said that Miller's speech was full of 'venom' and 'hate'.
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: September 01, 2004, 11:04:57 PM »

I'm still trying to figure out why John Kerry opposed the Coalition-led, UN-backed, mission-centered Gulf War, only to support Bush's non-UN, more limited coalition, complete takeover war.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.075 seconds with 13 queries.