Sorry you wrote a song on a misunderstanding. I have never been anti-Iraq war. I am against the crappiest foreign relations that I've seen in my lifetime, and they revolve around the way this war was handled. I think many Americans seriously underestimate how this hurts our Country. And FWIW, I'm confused about '...their hate will not end until they have won'.... Who is 'they', the Iraqi people? Please don't tell me that you're grouping all Muslim or Arab Nations or people into one bucket. That's analagous and no less dangerous than Islamic fundamentalists claiming that all Westerners want to colonize the Middle East.
It has entirely to do with the fact that these "enemies" were lurking as civilians. There was nothing to denote them as enemies until they had perpetrated their evil deed-- then it was too late.
If for no other reason, I would vote for Bush so that Kerry doesn't have the opportunity to select a Supreme Court justice or two. That's more important to me than anything else that could happen.
If we can trust all the gun owners to be non-threat to others or the police, why are we afraid that every country in the world just owns their own nuclear bombs?
Now, now. Cohen is speaking to Republicans. We should restrain ourselves, no matter how tempting it may be to jump in.
This is what happens when you wake up to annoying anti-everything but Bush e-mails from your parents' friends. One tends to get a little testy.
To add to this, I don't believe Bush gives one whit about small businesses. His focus seems to be finding ways to make it easier for large corporations to do business. Some times, the government must choose between what's best for small business (which is, quite often, the engine of the economy) and what's best for big business.
ROXRAN - you haven't met my neighbors (I think they are an Al Queda cell). Your passion for this subject runs much deeper than mine, so we will just have to agree to disagree. What is funny about that is I generally consider myself pro gun ownership. I would never willingly surrender my everyday guns. I am curious, however. What arms/weapons (including machine guns, rpg's, bazookas, missiles, tanks, fighter planes, chemical and biological weapons, along with anything else you can think of) don't you think should be available to the public? How do you distinguish between what is acceptable and what is not? I am not a gun expert, so keep it simple. Thanks.
1. Bush lowered my taxes 2. Bush acted when he needed to act (you can argue he acted at the wrong people att eh wrong time, basically he could have selected his targets better) 3. The economy is stronger now than when he took office 4. He is a man of action and in my mind he is more believable than Kerry. I respect those 2 traits much more than the ability to give a speech.
Your grade scale was "A" through "F" If you wieght each letter as follows... A=1 B=2 C=3 D=4 F=5 then add your responses F C- C- F F D B+ F A add their numerical equivalent 5 3 3 5 5 4 2 5 1 and take an average you get a 3.66 which rounds to a D If you go the other way A=5 B=4 C=3 D=2 F=1 and add then 1 3 3 1 1 2 4 1 5 You get a 2.33 Which is a B ---- Anyway, I do know that Bush is the GOP candidate, and the GOP sees the: 1) abortion issue the way I do. Vote BUSH 2) gun control issue the way I do. Vote BUSH 3) tax issues the way I do. Vote BUSH 4) separation of church and state issue the way I do. Vote BUSH 5) spending and deficit as it pertains to military and defense issue the way I do. Vote BUSH 6) help of small businesses issue the way I do. Vote BUSH I also have more than I had 4 years ago... And I am still below the government poverty line, but no longer by as much. Also, my family has a better chance of being protected by a President that sees a threat and handles it, rather than a candidate that leaves a war mid-stream to protest it. The job market collapsed in my area because of things that ran rampant under the fromer administration. Since then, it has begun to rebound, yes, thanks to the tax relief. My family has been able to purchase new vehicles and better our home thanks to tax cuts and relief - And I am still below the government poverty line - Don't let them fool you that the tax breaks are only for the rich. When was $34,000 a year or less for a family of for rich? Didn't think so.
I see, so you believed in 2000 that you should shoulder a greater share of our nation's tax burden than you did before? and that rich folks were paying too much, and that you needed to help them out? Very altruisitc of you. Thanks for pitching in.
I got a better position at my job. If I pay more taxes, it is because I make more. Not because a democrat told me so. Make more money = pay more taxes. Oh, how observant of you. btw- When did you become a "conservative" again?
Uhh no, the point went whistling over your head. Regardless of any promotion you may have received, your share of the tax burden is higher than it was before. You now fund a greater percentage (of course, we are in the red, anyway, guess who!) of government expenditures than you did before. Consequently, richer folks fund a lesser share. Everybody is in agreement on this. http://www.house.gov/georgemiller/article6403.html Thanks for pitching in. I'm not going to bring up your state & local tax problems, it would be too complicated, or the fact that you'll be giving back your tax savings now in the form of interest on the nat'l debt later...
The point went whistling through your head. I understand what you're getting at "economics prof" but you do realize what I said is the basic truth, right? More income (money) = more taxes Right? Democrats didn't need to make me feel all scared about me "shouldering more of the load" to make me realize that basic 101 fact. It in the "duh" category. Have more responsiblity? Well that = shouldering more load.
4chuckie and IROC it, None of your decision factors seem to address the future. Care to tell me how you feel Bush is doing on issues that effect the future? 1) Do you think his foreign policy will help or hurt us? 2) Do you think that Bush has helped the environment? 3) How has Bush done on education? 4) You like the tax cut, as do I, but how do you address the giant deficit? 5) I agreed that Bush doesn't hesitate to take action. Would it bother you if those actions were later proven to be wrong, and/or they soemhow hurt our country in the longterm more than it helped us in the shortterm?
To me the 2nd admendment means alot...and that is about firearms...But what is this? When our forefathers thought of firearms, the implication is either shoulder fired weapons (rifles/shotguns)...or hand weapons (pistols)... Of course, arms can be anything from sticks to nuclear missles, but firearms in my mind is regulated to the firearm definition in the above paragraph... and of course, firearms have advanced...Police and military should have the edge ...They do with selective fire and advanced optics... What is acceptable is semi-auto. only capability for civilians...Magazine capacity should not be restricted... (which is better in reality overall...The full automatic mode is only advantageous in CQB, and engaging multiple targets/enemies) The 1934 NFA imposed reasonable restrictions that I believe should NOT be taken any further whatsoever...The only aspect I wish changed was allowing shotguns to be shorter than 18 inches...
