Jump to content

How do we stop Bush?


Jablea

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Cool...you learn something new everyday. Are you familiar with Grayson County and Leitchifeld? I live in Clarkson, which is just east of Leitchfield. About 25 miles southwest of Elizabethtown.

I think that at this point a monkey could beat Fletcher, but I don't think she has enough name recognition outside of Louisville and Jefferson County to carry the state. I think there are several of the Democrats that have entered the race have a pretty good shot winning the Governorship.

I like Steve Henry, and his wife, former Miss America Heather French Henry....too bad he was Lt. Governor under Paul Patton. Patton just lost lost popularity after that sex scandal. <_<

I'm surprised Bunning wasn't a yes man on the troop surge idea like his Republican buddy McConnell...damn I can't stand him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'd rather hug a tree than kill an innocent person in the name of the "fight on terrorism".

The real terrorists are the ones at home. Bush has gotten away with murder, literally. He and his cronies should be ashamed of themselves for what they did (or rather, did not do) for the Gulf region.

Why are we even involved in other countries' businesses when we can't even take care of our own? This is why the rest of the world hates us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yup, terroists are innocent people. I love how blindsided people are regarding this issue.

Please, take this up with my brother when he returns from his THIRD tour in Iraq...which he FULLY supports and sees the good that is being done.

Please, if you want, I will give you his address. You can tell him what a mockery you feel this is and how he is killing innocent people...the same innocent people who were being killed because they did not like Saddam, NOT because they were fighting for freedom. yea, that really adds up people.

Thanks for calling me an ignorant ass. really mature.

If you can solve terrorism on your terms get your ass elected to Congress and as President. You all seem to know more about the world than those who deal with it every day of their lives. PLEASE....because I would prefer NO war, but if you have the smarts and intelligents and can do more than be a big talker on a message board and can solve all the worlds problems from your ass in your chair at your computer desk or coffee shop....THEN DO IT.

Jesus people....NO President and I repeat NO PRESIDENT would kill innocent people on purpose. And if you believe that...its a sad sad time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What is funny is...the reports and information that was supposedely false...is the same information that Bill Clinton had..so he must have made it up to make Bush go to war then right? To destroy the Republicans?

Or maybe the entire world, Nato, Congress...EVERYONE...BUT Bush made it up since they all had the same information which was NOT solely based on just the US's information.

See how ridiculous people are being?

I am totally fine with those who do not support the war. It is their right. But to deface and demean a President for doing what HE thinks is right and had the support for until it went wrong, is just idiotic.

I do not care if their were WMD"s there or not. And when we went in...EVERYONE..thought they were there...as he had used them in the past. So thats not a lie. But what he did to his own people is enough of a reason for me to have gone in.

No one should have to live that way.

And just wait...because we have waited so long with the rest of the Middle East in the past..this is just beginning. We leave them alone...they attack us. for no reason, and kill THOUNSANDS of innocent Americans who are just living their lives. But if we fight them where they are.....we take hits to our military (but as my brother said, thats his job) but our country is safe. And those who die, die in the name of Freedom. I guess we have to figure out a better way huh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

By the way...this Neo-con as I have been called which is highly laughable as I am a centrist who happens to agree with the war on terror....and have familiy in the military and fighting for those of us who decide to compare our President to Hitler and someone who lost family and friends on 9-11....but in any event. I am not saying ANYONE is wrong in their view. I just think the hatred that the ones against the war is just plain pathetic and frightening. It scares me that there are those that have so much HATE built up in them that they are reduced to this demeanor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

To compare Bush to Hitler is an unfair comparison, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Over time I have come to respect Kwing's opinion regarding the war, politics and other "controversial" issues. While I may not agree wholeheartedly with everything he says, you have to respect the man for standing by what he believes in.

I am someone who originally supported this war. A part of me believed that we should have waited for U.N. approval and more support from our allies before starting it. A part of me also believed that we should have had more solid proof that he had weapons of mass destruction but you know what.....I had to believe that what my President was telling me was true. No matter how much I may have disliked him, I had to believe that I wouldn't be misled. It is obvious to me now that I was and my stance on the war has also changed. It's funny how the original reason why we went to war changed so much over time. It went from "he has weapons of mass destruction" to "he's a dangerous man and had to be removed" to "we were liberating the people of Iraq" to whatever the excuse is now.

I am under the firm belief that you can support the troops and not support the war. And that is what I am doing. Not only do I have friends over there, but I have friends of friends and family. My uncle was just deployed to Iraq for his second tour two weeks before Christmas. Anyone who says that if you don't support the war, you can't support the troops is sadly mislead in my opinion. But then again....you are entitled to believe what you want.

Before I go.....I will say this:

Calling someone an "ignorant ass" is not cool. If you can't discuss topics like these with some civility and maturity then they will be banned from SON. I don't care how much you wanna cry censorship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Noone is saying "terrorists are innocent people". Kwing that is an out and out lie. Tell the whole truth, many innocent Iraqis have died in W and Dick's War on Iraq. You say you love how blindsided people are on the Iraq War. That proves you love yourself then doesn't it!!??

A lot of us Kwing, do know more than W which is NOT a hard thing to know. W would kill innocent people on purpose I believe, he cares not about the innocent Iraqis that have died in this war and does care IMHO about the over 3000 troops in Iraq who have been killed, and does not care for your brother either. Although those of us on this board care more for your brother than W and Dick Cheney do, you keep attacking us, etc. So be it. You have a right to your opinions no matter how wrong you are.

The info that Bill Clinton had was CORRECT during Bill Clinton's presidency, but not during W's. That info was several years old at the time of W, Dick, Rumsy and Condi using it. Sorry info that was true several years ago CAN BE and OFTEN IS wrong in present time because things CHANGE. And it is NOT idiotic to be against this war or this horrible, lousy W, who I refuse to call President. He does not respect our troops or the office of the Presidency, so I do not owe him the respect of calling him "President".

The torturing of the Iraqi people, was NOT a reason W and his bunch gave for attacking Iraq.

People are not being ridiculous at all. Sorry but we are not defacing or demeaning W. He did that all on his own. A fact is a fact. Truth is truth. The fact/truth is that this war is illegal, is WRONG, is very, very unpopular (the latest AP-Ipsoso polls shows that only 26% of Americans surveyed support it and only 24% support W's views on Iraq!)

Sorry but the neo-con wing of the Republican party are primarily the only hold-out supporters of W. Some of your posts in the past do make you sound like a neo-con, if you are NOT I'm truly sorry for calling you one. I pray for all of our troops in Iraq, not just the Democratic ones, which btw are at least half of our troops in Iraq. The hate is coming mostly from the neo-cons in support of W, with the "anti-American" ,, "treason" and "traitor" name-calling crap etc. that I've heard on this board (and I may be wrong here, but I think Kwing, you've said some of these things) and on other boards where they've gotten way more nasty --- on some of aol's boards and on a board i've been on cmt, yes cmt.

McCain's supporting W and wanting to send more troops to Iraq will put a nail in his (John McCain's) coffin of running for the presidency. I sorta liked McCain until this. Shame on John McCain for supporting W and shame on Joe Lieberman for supporting W and his war as well. Lieberman (IMHO) showed his true colors here, he's mostly a Republican IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Like Mulder said, no one ever said that. Blindsighted? :blink: I think most people know more than than those idiots (Bush & Cheney). And with all due respect Kwing, you do make it sound like innocent Iraqi civilians aren't being senselessly killed by Bush's war on terrorism. Which is just completely false.

If you had thoroughly read the posts of people who are anti-war, you'd realize that Saddam should have never been an issue. Saddam was terrorizing his people for years and the U.S. did nothing. Why now? Because of 9/11? Saddam had NOTHING to do with that. Why isn't Bush going after Afghanistan and Bin Laden then? And the fight for freedom argument is also pure baloney as well if you again consider the fact that the U.S. waited this long to help the Iraqis out (never mind the Afghans under the Taliban rule). I also mentioned a genocide happening throughout Africa right now yet Bush isn't jumping at the opportunity to save anyone there.

Again, the fight against terrorism is merely a fancy label to get people to support the war. Anyone who bothers to do a little research would know that it's just a crock. You make it sound like American politicians can do no wrong. Just because someone is able to get themselves elected, they're able to run a country? I don't believe that for a second.

That's a completely misguided overgeneralization if I ever saw one. What do you mean by "on purpose"? Bush might not be ordering the executions of innocent people out loud but his refusal to stop wasting millions on a war that is going nowhere and killing many innocent people...money which could be used to help out Americans themselves...very telling. If anything, he obviously doesn't care about people's lives other than his own perhaps.

But what he's doing isn't right. That's the thing! And this isn't just about whether or not you agree with him about something trivial like making Spanish the second official American language, it's PEOPLE'S LIVES. He's indirectly caused the deaths of many innocent people..Iraqi men, women, and children, American soldiers.

Uh, you should care. That's the excuse he gave everyone for attacking Iraq in the first place. To waste a ton of money to look for something you're not even sure is there is just a bit mind-boggling. <_< Also, North Korea definitely has WMDs so WTH didn't Bush focus on them first?

The "they" you are referring to is Bin Laden and Al-Quaeda. Not Saddam. Not the Iraqis. Not even the Afghans. So where is the logic in attacking Iraq? Like I said before, 9/11, while not perpetrated by Bush of course, gave Bush a good excuse to illogically link Iraq to the attack. While it's awful that thousands of Americans were killed on 9/11, I think it's dangerously unfair to lower the value of the Iraqi people. The Americans experienced one awful day of death and chaos. The Iraqis have been experiencing it for YEARS...DECADES. I don't see how anyone can excuse any of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thank God some people actually get that! I can not fathom support for the war and the president using the terms "they" or the "middle east" as some kind of homogenous terrorist mass. The 'middle east' is millions of people, scads of different religions, colours, creeds. Yet because a minority have committed acts of terrorism, they can all be lumped together? Not only does it show a complete fundamental disregard for human life of anyone that isn't "us" but it's downright frightening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • I decided this primetime soap deserved it's own thread as the Primetime soaps thread is very cluttered and why shouldn't NBC's Lorimar soap mot have a chance to shine? In doing a deeper dive into the second season ratings I was surprised to see that FR actually had an uptick in the ratings when NBC moved it to 9pm Tuesdays beginning March 82. I'd always assumed this move was a desperate one as NBC were running short of programming and had given up on the show,deciding to let the final episodes play out and be hammered by 3's Company  and CBS Movie. But the numbers paint a different story. In it's 10pm slot up against Hart to Hart, which regularly finished in the Top 20, FL premiered in 53rd place and placed in the 40's and 50's as the season continued. But come January 82 the numbers surged a little now moving into the 40's hitting #43 in Feb. Hart to Hart was #11 Then in March Bret Maverick was moved to 8pm with FR @9. First week 16th March FR #47 15.1/24 3's Company #3 Too Close for Comfort #5 CBS Movie #60 Not great but #2 in it's timeslot March 23 FR #44 15.6/25 3's Company #4 Too Close for Comfort #5 CBS Movie #33 So even with a stronger movie on CBS FR's numbers went up. March 30 FR #31 16.6/26 3's Company #9 Too Close for Comfort #5 CBS Movie #56 Best rating/position yet Tues April 6 pre empted Tues April 14 FR #36 16.0/26 3's Company #5 Too Close for Comfort #11 CBS Movie #59 Maintaining previous week's numbers Tues April 21 FR #33 15.6/24 3's Company #3 Too Close for Comfort #5 CBS Movie #60 Numbers down a little (reflecting general spring downturn) but best ranking of the season so far Tues April 28 FR #35 15.1/23 3's Company #9 Too Close for Comfort #6 CBS Movie #42 Tues May 4 FR #27 15.2/24 3's Company #5 Too Close for Comfort #4 CBS Movie #41 Season finale and highest position of the season. Looking at those numbers I wonder why NBC cancelled the show? They had very few hits and here was a show that was holding it's own and moving up in the rankings in a tougher timeslot. And being a serial, the storylines could continue to build the following season. And I'm sure the desirable W18-49 demo was good. Some might argue that CBS were shower weaker movies, but even so, soap viewers are pretty loyal. I guess Grant Tinker arrived at NBC and wanted a classier look but there was room for FR on the schedule. I mean, the following season Knight Rider,Powers of Matthew Star and the A Team arrived so there was still room for more populist fare. Flamingo could have stayed at 9pm-the replacement Gavilan bombed (surely FR would have done better} or moved back to 10pm. The following Jan NBC had a hit with A Team Tues 8pm. Had Flamingo followed it, it might have really taken off. As it was they tried Bare Essence, which flopped. Oh well,it was not to be...    
    • Always, in every way, Cass/Wally/Felicia foundational to my viewing. And, I think if we look at the aftermath of the disastrous 90 minute show that we find too many pockets of some kind of lost time at the show plus way too much of change-ups in exec & writing leadership and of course we also reach the first time it becomes notable that NBC wants to get rid of the show so they can put a new soap they own in the timeslot.
    • If the MAGAts were easy prey enough to get manipulated into voting for the tangerine-tinted terror, they'll fall for anything.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • And this came out as the "feud" and the media pushing the protests in Los Angeles got all the media attention. They know the press and the public will not care or can be manipulated into approving.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Hope you will enjoy the 1976 storyline from the Daytime serial Newsletter. The show had just expanded to an hour so new characters and stories were required. The Soderbergs had been writing since late 73 and the show was still #1. Looking foward to comments and discusssion Pt.1  For over two decades As the World Turns has depicted the events in the lives of two Oakdale families: the wealthy and influential Lowells and the less affluent but equally respected Hughes family. Judge Lowell’s granddaughter Ellen is married now to Dr. David Stewart, whose adopted son, Dan, is actually her own illegitimate child. Dan was once married to Dr. Susan Stewart, by whom he has a daughter, Emily. Dan then married Liz, the ex-wife of his late brother Paul. Liz was the mother of Dan’s daughter Betsy, who believes to this day that Paul was her father. Liz died tragically the day after their wedding. Ellen and David have two daughters, Carolann (Annie) and Dawn (Dee), now of college age. Dan has recently fallen in love with Kim Dixon, who was about to divorce Dr. John Dixon until injuries suffered in a tornado caused amnesia and left her with no memory of her love for Dan. John is using this respite to solicitously convince Kim of his love for her. Nancy and Chris Hughes had three children: Bob, a doctor, Donald, an attorney, and Penny, who, after tragically losing two husbands due to automobile accidents, is now living in Europe, where she is married to a racing-car driver. Bob was married while very young to Lisa Miller, then a scheming and selfish young woman, whose machinations destroyed their marriage. She is the mother of Bob’s son, Tom, who is divorced from Carol, who is now married to Jay Stallings. Tom is currently married to Natalie Bannon. Bob later married model Sandy Wilson, a marriage which ended in divorce, and Sandy is now married to Norman Garrison, who is her partner in a beauty products concern. Norman blames Bob for Sandy’s  recent disillusionment with their marriage, and, ironically, Norman suffered a heart attack during his verbal assault on Bob at a Hughes family party; and while Bob rode with him in the ambulance to the hospital, Bob’s beloved wife, Jennifer, Kim’s sister, died in a car crash while driving home alone. Lisa, more mature and considerate of others now, is married to attorney Grant Colman, but her life has been complicated by the recent arrival in town of Grant’s ex-wife, Joyce, and the incredible news that she and Grant had a child after their separation, a child Joyce gave out for adoption but now wants to reclaim. Now the story continues... The picture has now come clear for attorney Grant Coiman. He has learned that his ex-wife Joyce neglected to tell him she had a child shortly after their divorce and had given the boy to Mary and Brian Ellison for adoption. Grant, after seeing the adoption papers and considering the boy’s interests, tells Mary he feels the child should remain with them; they are providing a fine, stable home for him. Grant’s wife, Lisa, is pleased with his decision, feeling he has thus closed the door to the past and they can now go on with their own lives. But Joyce has learned that attorney Dick Martin is now back in private practice, and she tells him she was confused when she gave Teddy up years ago and wants him to represent her in a custody action to get her son back. Dick tells Joyce she has a very weak case but he’ll do what he can. He goes out to Laramie to see the  Ellisons, upsetting them very much. Grant, meanwhile, has confided in Chris Hughes, his law partner, that while his name was on the consent form for the Ellisons’ adoption, he didn’t sign the papers; he had, in fact, never known that he had a son. But he’s afraid to open a new can of worms by signing a consent form now, as that would reveal that the adoption papers are not legally correct. Grant confides the situation to Lisa, explaining that if he wanted to,  he could probably get custody of Teddy himself, but that’s not what he feels would be best for the child. Mary Ellison finally breaks under the strain of Dick’s visit and tells Brian that Dr. Paulk, the doctor who arranged the adoption, told her he didn’t know where to find the baby’s father and so he signed the consent form himself. She painfully explains she kept this secret knowing that Brian wouldn’t go through with the adoption if he learned the papers weren’t legally sound. Brian quickly calls their family lawyer, Jerry Butler, who immediately phones Grant to be sure he backs the Ellisons’ claim. Dick realizes from Joyce’s story that Grant couldn’t have signed the papers and tells him he knows. The only person who has a right to file for Teddy’s custody now is Grant; he’s the only injured party. And the moment he files, Dick can sue for invalidation of the Ellisons’ adoption. Grant finally files, to settle the custody question once and for all, but technically he's filing for custody himself. Tom Hughes and Natalie Porter are married in a small, lovely ceremony at the home of his grandparents, Nancy and Chris Hughes. They honeymoon in the Southwest and return full of expectations of happiness. Natalie is disquieted, however, when flowers arrive which are not from her new husband. She covers by pretending to check with the florist and tells Tom it was a wrong delivery and they have told her she might as well keep them. But she knows who sent them. Natalie is upset when, shortly after, Luke Porter arrives in town and seeks her out. But Luke insists he is there only to assure her this is a final farewell and he has now decided to concentrate on. making his own marriage work. Sandy Garrison, Bob’s ex-wife, is working at the  bookstore to fill in for Natalie. Her estranged husband, Norman, recovering from a heart attack he suffered during a drunken confrontation with Bob at the Colonnade Room, is still telling anyone who will listen that Bob and Sandy are having an affair, but ironically will let only Bob care for him at the hospital. His recovery is hampered by his easily aroused temper. Norman anxiously tries to persuade Dr. John Dixon to convince Bob to swear he slipped at the restaurant, thus making them liable for a costly lawsuit, but John won’t do this. Chris discovers a large amount of money missing when checking the books on the Garrisons’ business, but doesn’t want to upset Sandy with this. More to come...
    • The cynical (i.e., the dominant) me has the very same thoughts.
    • Oh wow that’s pretty awesome! I wish I had  approached him but there was so many people 
    • In the current environment, while it's small, there is a crumb of good news: Apparently, San Antonio voted for a DEMOCRATIC mayor, Gina Ortiz, beating the "right-hand man" of Gov. Greg Abbott, former Texas Secretary of State Rolando Pablos. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5337199-gina-ortiz-jones-wins-san-antonio/
    • Love this! You are both adorable. Wow
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy