Question:
This is not meant to start any stupid fights and I don't know if this is a repeat thread but:

If you could vote this year for President, who would you vote for?

Choices:
Kerry
Bush
Bullet (a blank ballot)
I don't want to vote

 

quote:

---

He only likes rich people.

---

Oh yeah? Prove it.

MTLBYAKY

Voting for Kerry is a reasonable idea, vetiver, but before give some more logical reasons than that. Like the effect of Bush's tax cuts, based on Time's report... NuShoesAgain is correct, in that way.

However, I still have a problem with some of his claims.

quote:

---

O'
Neill is being completely manipulated (and, no doubt, paid) by the leftists for political gain.

---

According to the interview, Paul O'Neill was not alone in his complaints against Bush, as a representitive of the White House. Apparently, the author recieved info about this from other Congressman.

I want Bush out of office.Vote for anyone except Bush!!He only likes rich people.

As far as the Paul O'Neill propaganda, I'm quite sure that Bush and his cabinet did look at military action against Iraq, but O'
Neill is being completely manipulated (and, no doubt, paid) by the leftists for political gain.

Sure, no doubt Bush did plan for military action against Iraq. Good. Guess why that's so very critical and necessary. He's the Commander-in-Chief; he's responsible for that national security of this country. Any responsible Commander-in-Chief should - before he does anything else as president! - sit down with his national security advisors and identify who the top threats are and how to deal with them. Planning well in advance is a fundamental rule in the security business, whether you are talking about national security, information security, or even mall security. You have to have pre-developed plans ahead of time, because the middle of an emergency is no time to call a meeting and decide what you're going to do.

I'm quite sure Bush and the national security advisors sat down and discussed Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, and probably Syria and China as well, and developed both diplomatic and military plans should the $h!t hit the fan.

Frankly, I'd be a lot more concerned about a president and CiC that doesn't care enough to do that.

In regards to your previous statements, I can understand your political viewpoint on this issue.

However, during 60 minutes on January 11, 2004, Paul O'Neill talked about the real reason why Bush sought to invade Iraq. There is documentation concerning the oil fields in Iraq. Here is a quote from CBS

quote:

---

At cabinet meetings, he says the president was "like a blind man in a roomful of deaf people. There is no discernible connection," forcing top officials to act "on little more than hunches about what the president might think."

This is what O'Neill says happened at his first hour-long, one-on-one meeting with Mr. Bush: “I went in with a long list of things to talk about, and I thought to engage on and as the book says, I was surprised that it turned out me talking, and the president just listening … As I recall, it was mostly a monologue.”

He also says that President Bush was disengaged, at least on domestic issues, and that disturbed him. And he says that wasn't his experience when he worked as a top official under Presidents Nixon and Ford, or the way he ran things when he was chairman of Alcoa.

---

Then, later in 60 minutes, Paul O'Neill also claimed that:

quote:

---

“From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go,” says O’Neill, who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.

“From the very first instance, it was about Iraq. It was about what we can do to change this regime,” says Suskind. “Day one, these things were laid and sealed.”

As treasury secretary, O'Neill was a permanent member of the National Security Council. He says in the book he was surprised at the meeting that questions such as "Why Saddam?" and "Why now?" were never asked.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying ‘Go find me a way to do this,’" says O’Neill. “For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap.”

---

Then even later in the report, O'Neill stated:

quote:

---

Based on his interviews with O'Neill and several other officials at the meetings, Suskind writes that the planning envisioned peacekeeping troops, war crimes tribunals, and even divvying up Iraq's oil wealth.

He obtained one Pentagon document, dated March 5, 2001, and entitled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield contracts," which includes a map of potential areas for exploration.

“It talks about contractors around the world from, you know, 30-40 countries. And which ones have what intentions,” says Suskind. “On oil in Iraq.”

---

Just because Bush hasn't taken the oil yet doesn't mean he doesn't plan to. There is documentation over it.

And regarding NuShoes's statement about Kerry... I did read the website, and there is some truth there. I am willing to admit that. But at least he served in the miliatry. So far, only one person has claimed he served under Bush. Kerry has received a Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, and three awards of the Purple Heart for his service in combat.

(And I'm sorry for the spelling errors.)

quote:

---

The war for Iragi oil which was planned before September 11

---

The only people taking oil was the anti-war crowd, who were bought off by Saddam.

BTW, if the Iraq War was about oil, why is gas still $1.60 a gallon and going up? The problem is, Bush DIDN'T take the oil.

quote:

---

Kerry, on the other hand, doesn't seem to invest in the oil bussiness and is a Vietnam War hero.

---

Whoat the very least betrayed his fellow soldiers and put their lives in danger, and at most, may have participated in the very atrocities of which he spoke agaisnt once he was safely discharged from the military, making him a war criminal.

Kerry obviously isn't a hero web pageto a lot of fellow Vietnam vets.

quote:

---

He seems to speek better than Bus

---

I sure hope he can spell.

quote:

---

and would probably be more diplomatically correct abbroad.

---

Ah, you mean "politcally correct"? You mean "doing whatever tyhe U.N. and foreigners tell us to do, such let Al-Qaeda bomb the crap out of us, or let bought-and-paid-for anti-war leaders allow murderous dictators to support murder and terror? Yeah, that sounds like a true leftists, alright.

Of all the Democrats who ran, Kerry is the last one I'd vote for. That's how far gone the party now is.

Third party's actually have had some influence on political policies that have gone on in this country, for ex: there have been three President's elected from third party's for ex: John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, and Zachory Taylor were elected to President from the "Whig" party...And not to mention Theodore Roosevelt ran on the "Bull Moose" ticket in the 1912 elections...As far as Ralph Nader, he'll never be elected so why bother?...

quote:

---

I just want Bush out of office.

---

quote:

---

I plan on voting for Kerry, because we need to get Bush out of office.

---

Don't you love the logic of the left?
Vote for someone, ANYONE, to get the president out of office. Who cares about his policies or platform, right demos?

Would Stalin be a good man to replace Bush? How about Castro?

You can always rely on the logic of the left....for a good laugh.

Put simply, a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. Third party candidates may have never won the presidential election, but they have certainly had their impact: in 1992, if it hadn't been for Ross Perot splitting the Republican vote, Clinton would not have become President. Similarly, in 2000, had Nader not taken votes from Gore (and he did take far more from Gore than Bush), Gore probably would have won. Nader can hope to accomplish nothing more than ensuring Kerry never enters the White House.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of Kerry, I just stated for the record that the Republicans are critizing Kerry on his foreign policy, when in fact(Yes Pres. Bush did serve in the National Guard), but he was only Governor of Texax for 3 years before he was elected to office, that's why I critize his foreign policy

Id never vote for a democrat ever... Id rather give my vote to an extreme.

Id vote for nader because I want to give the 3rd party some hope, hopefully some people will catch on and see its ok to vote for the 3rd party. Id like to see the 2 party system gone. I dont agree with nader at all, but I know he's not going to win, so I dont care..

I live in CA so it doesnt matter who i vote for Kerry will win the state. Id vote for bush because the reason our country sucks so much is this whole back and forth party bull****, if we want anything done someone has to stay in office for a longer time.

quote:

---

who is Bush to critize on Foreign policy

---

Somebody who has a lot more experience than Kerry, that's who. Kerry's only foreign policy experience is shooting a Vietnamese. And, because of his anti-war comments after Vietnam, he quite possibly shot at innocent people. (Or, are we to believe that everyone else in Vietnam killed women and children but him?)

I will vote for anybody but Kerry. Bush isn't my favorite guy in the world, but Kerry's pretty much the last person on earth I would vote for.

How does Ralph Nader rule out over John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential elections?...Yes Ralph Nader is a Consumer Advocate, but Kerry is a Die-hard Democrat(with some Republican qualities and misfaults), but Kerry has a plan of knowing what he wants to do for Domestic policy as far as jobs, he clearly knows what to do in Foreign policy(after all he did fight in Vietnam), so who is Bush to critize on Foreign policy?, he was only Governor of Texas for 3-years, where's the foreign policy in that?...

Nader or Bush, eh?

How exactly do you come to that, my retro-gothic-band friend?

I'd vote Nader before I vote Bush, but Kerry will be the new President in 2005, Ha!Ha!

Nader or Bush.

Don't complain about Gov. if your trying to make it bigger.

i get to too. kerry as well... though I wish edwards had pulled through.

I also get to vote this year in Nov., and I plan on voting for Kerry, because we need to get Bush out of office.