WWW.RIDESIDE.NET

Posted by tgl on 2004-11-10 02:31:54 +0000

Found some that shared mine too... in the comments.

Posted by tgl on 2004-11-10 02:53:17 +0000

Like this one.

Posted by dawnbixtler on 2004-11-10 06:57:18 +0000

What a poor argument that woman comes up with, mostly classic conservative talk. The real laugher came with her break down: "He (Kerry) said that he would bring allies to our side to share the burden, but he also said he would be sending 40,000 more of our troops. He said that we must finish the job, but he also said it was the wrong war at the wrong place and the wrong time. Huh?" Sorry your so confused young lady. Seems like sending more of our troops and getting international forces would get the job done faster, or do you want to drag it out? Then she doesn't understand how one can finish the job and recognize the war was a catastrophe. The man went to Vietnam, the king of bad wars. He understands this shit we're in, and then she says she doesn't "see the relevance" of Kerry's combat service when we're a nation at war. Was that a "huh" or a "duh?" I love the bit: "Your constant references to the opinions of the rest of the world scared me, and I'm not talking about the "global test" comment. I don't care what Europeans think about me or my country. I learned in high school that living my life with one eye on the opinions of everyone else leads only to unnecessary turmoil and pointless pain." Gee, why don't we take over Saudi Arabia where the terroists come from? Do you want the U. S. to be like Switzerland except we have no international trade? Europe matters. I'm glad you learned to be such a rock in high school, but did you value your friend's opinions? Did you have friends? "He (Bush) won because he has values, clearly defined values, and even though I agree with little of what he believes, at least I know what he believes. At least I know that he really does believe in something. At least I know that he will do what he says he will do." Bush values: raising the tax burden on the lower and middle classes, oil, heterosexual marriage, his down-home image, and dishonest discourse. This is a reason to vote for him? Clearly defined, but a reason to vote for him? Why don't you vote for the leader of the KKK, his values are crystal clear? I'm not being rhetorical; being clearly defined means nothing if the belief sucks ass. I don't know how to solve all of the racial problems our country has, but killing blacks is not the answer, right? And like most politicians he did not do what he said he would, less than most I would think. There's nothing new here. Earnestly stated, but nothing new...

Posted by uncle on 2004-11-10 10:11:24 +0000

Yeah, Still waiting for some kind of substantive explaination of why someone voted for Bush. I think I have begged for it 9 or 10 times in different posts. Still no reply. From this reading, one can determine most of the rhetoric that she bought in order to find a reason not to vote for Kerry and basically goes on to state no reason to vote for Bush asside from saying that he has clear values. I would please like a conservative member of the quire to please explain to me what the Bush values are. It seems that this perspective is missing something very important- Liberality has been under attack since Reagan, not conservatism. "Liberal" is currently a dirty word in the main stream American political vocabulary. It is only in recent days that people like Michael Moore and Air America have gotten any press. It has been over a decade that Rush L (the most widely listened to radio show in America) has been hitting us with beligerent politics- not to mention Bill Oriely, Jay Sevren, all the way back to Morton Downy Jr. And the idea that someone could vote Republican under the guise that the democrats attacked Bush too venomously is laughable. Did you watch the RNC and DNC? I mean come on! Bush was hardly mentioned by any of the key note speakers at the DNC. They kept talking about a new positive direction for America. The RNC key notes contructed their speaches out of tearing people down. Did you see Zell Miller? And please, venomous, again, try Rush on for size. Perhaps Kerry was not capable of explaining himself in a short concise fashion, fit for the news. But then that perhaps brings one of the real problems to light. Political decision making has a lot of variables. Its complex. If you have a long math problem, and you only solve only the first three lines and neglect the rest, you got the problem wrong, no matter how may times you solve those first three lines. As a matter of fact, failure to recognize the fact that you are doing the problem wrong and failure to at least attempt another method is not commendable. Why is being thoughtful and intelligent a crime? So once again, I am begging someone to give a reason, a substantive reason, that Bush was the better candidate. If you site his clear values, please let me know what those are. I really ernestly want to know not what is wrong with Kerry, but what is right about Bush.