BuffettNews.com

aquaholic wrote:I slept good....but I think it was the hydrocodon's

you should have taken the whole bottle

NYCPORT wrote:
No, I don't think it was the sole reason. But I do think it had alot to do with his clouded judgement which in hindsight his been proven to be pretty shitty. I also think it had alot to do with his willingness to lie about many of the reasons why we were invading. You should know I was all for the invasion before we got the info that most of the reasons we went in for were B.S. We look like a bunch of idiots to the rest of most of the world. We really f**** this one up in my opinion. I guess I'm a little p*** off about being lied to about something so important. If I were close to someone who died in Iraq I'd close to going postal.
And it wasn't just thinking about killing Bush. They later found out they were in the country following him and got really close more than once.

so it is bushs fault that he got bad intelligence.the same bad intel that your hero kerry looked at and believed,the same that the brits based their actions on.
unless you are saying that bush himself made up fake intel to go to war,or ordered it,then this whole thing is a bunch of bull.
what worries me most is that kerry is now pretty much saying that if it were him he wouldnt have gone in,despite the fact that he had been shown evidence of WMDs which he had every right to believe was accurate.

Still not sure where my vote is going but aside from Iraq and the "War on terror", can a Bush supporter tell me what Bush has done to help this country the last 4 years? Not trying to flame Bush, honestly trying to get answers to help my decision.

November 3rd.... November 3rd.... WHERE ARE YOU?!?

tommcat327 wrote:so it is bushs fault that he got bad intelligence.the same bad intel that your hero kerry looked at and believed,the same that the brits based their actions on.
unless you are saying that bush himself made up fake intel to go to war,or ordered it,then this whole thing is a bunch of bull.
what worries me most is that kerry is now pretty much saying that if it were him he wouldnt have gone in,despite the fact that he had been shown evidence of WMDs which he had every right to believe was accurate.

Bu$h has tried to make the CIA the scapegoat is this mess, though they are not completely without fault. However, the blame goes to the top. This started as soon as Bu$h took office. People like Paul Wolfowitz & Donald Feith were pushing for regime change as soon as Bu$h took the oath. Some Department of Defense employees were forced out if they didn't subscribe to the new doctrine.

Bu$h created the Office of Special Projects inside the Pentagon. The objectives were to scour any intelligence from any source in an effort to extract ANY nugget of information that could possibly link Iraq to Al Qaeda, terrorism, WMD, etc and to undermine and contradict CIA findings that were contrary to their agenda. The CIA was always leery of the info from Ahmed Chalabi & the Iraqi National Committee. The OSP bit and Chalabi became a vital figure in this. Remember he was seated behind Laura Bu$h at the last SOTU Address.

So the Bu$h administration created an agency to feed him the intel he needed to make the case to the already scared American people. This doesn't even scratch the surface when you consider all the questionable intel they used to make their rock-solid claims despite CIA warnings.

Yes Bu$h should be held accountable.

Amen.
Bottom line is this clown is worse than his father, which is not an easy thing to do. And he's got to go.

tommcat327 wrote:

aquaholic wrote:I slept good....but I think it was the hydrocodon's

you should have taken the whole bottle

that's not very nice.................U would have to find someone new to pick on.....Oh by the way....I hate snow and hockey....especially hockey leagues!!!!!

tommcat327 wrote:

NYCPORT wrote: what worries me most is that kerry is now pretty much saying that if it were him he wouldnt have gone in,despite the fact that he had been shown evidence of WMDs which he had every right to believe was accurate.

I agree, it scares me more that Kerry beleives that public opinion and the opinion of other nations should be considered before we can (or should) defend ourselves.

I am not saying that every decision that Bush has made has tuned out to be good for this county, but at least he doesn't hide from these decisions or change his stance(s) to get elected.

I really wish that Kerry was a strong idividual who stood up for what he believes (and not what Howard Dean believes). It would have made my decision easier on November 2nd. But the way it stands now, Kerry comes accross as a typlical politician... he will say anything and make every promise to get elected... and I'll take a head strong fool over a weak "yes man" anyday!

If you can sleep after voting for a "fool"...

7lords wrote:Still not sure where my vote is going but aside from Iraq and the "War on terror", can a Bush supporter tell me what Bush has done to help this country the last 4 years? Not trying to flame Bush, honestly trying to get answers to help my decision.

he has returned some of my rights as a gun owner and hunter,and let snowmobiles back into yellowstone because he relaized clintons ban on them was based on false information.while this isnt everything i'd like,kerry has made it clear he wants to change those policies back to the way they were

aquaholic wrote:

tommcat327 wrote:

aquaholic wrote:I slept good....but I think it was the hydrocodon's

you should have taken the whole bottle

that's not very nice.................U would have to find someone new to pick on.....Oh by the way....I hate snow and hockey....especially hockey leagues!!!!!

what hockey league?

land_shark3 wrote:November 3rd.... November 3rd.... WHERE ARE YOU?!?

NYCPORT wrote:If you can sleep after voting for a "fool"...

No, but voting for the unknown, or worse yet, voting for someone who is without political backbone is even scarier!

Don't worry everyone . . . Chaney will tell Shrub that there isn't slavery anymore and he'll go back to playing cowboy again.

NYCPORT wrote:If you can sleep after voting for a "fool"...

YOU'LL BE VOTING FOR A FOOL NO MATTER WHO YOU CHOOSE

puckhead wrote: I agree, it scares me more that Kerry beleives that public opinion and the opinion of other nations should be considered before we can (or should) defend ourselves.

Perhaps you would be wise to pay more attention to what Kerry actually said and consider the context. Here is Kerry's answer in the first debate that began this (emphasis by me):

No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do in a way that passes the test—that passes the global test—where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.

Kerry's words are no different than those of our past leaders. In 1917 Woodrow Wilson said, during his request for declaration of war, "While we do these things, these deeply momentous things, let us be very clear, and make very clear to all the world what our motives and our objects are."

puckhead wrote:I am not saying that every decision that Bush has made has tuned out to be good for this county, but at least he doesn't hide from these decisions or change his stance(s) to get elected.

You cannot honestly say this is you have been paying attention the last four years. The Bu$h/Cheney campaign has cleverly attached the flip-flop label to Kerry making it seem as if he has no convictions, when in truth Bu$h is the one who has swayed back and forth again and again. I'll be happy to name a few: steel tariffs, mandatory caps on carbon dioxide, same-sex marriage was a state's rights issue but now needs a constitutional amendment, opposed the Dept of Homeland Security and now touts it, opposed the 9/11 Commission and then claimed to fully cooperate and support it, campaign finance reform, 527 ads (defended them in 2000 and now opposes them). I have plenty more if you would like to know a little more about the resolve of Bu$h.

Fins in Low Places wrote: The Bu$h/Cheney campaign has cleverly attached the flip-flop label to Kerry making it seem as if he has no convictions,

i dont listen to anything from the bush campaign,yet i know that kerry is a liar and stands for whatever gets him the most votes at the time.
he has proven it over and over in regards to guns and hunting.claiming he wants nothing to do with taking away hunters or gun owners rights yet votes to do just that every time he gets the chance.
and the fact that he goes around claiming to be a hunter when he is not really pi$$es me off.

Bush did a number on Texas when he was Gov and he's doing a number on the US now.

ph4ever wrote:Bush did a number on Texas when he was Gov and he's doing a number on the US now.

texas is still better than MA

I don't know about y'all, but...

I want A BETTER CHOICE than Bush - OR - Kerry!

And what the HECK are "Weapons of Mass Destruction"? (Shouldn't they say nuclear, biological or chemical weapons?) And aren't ANY weapons in sufficient quantity capable of mass destruction? That's like using the term "assault weapon". It's a null term. It doesn't mean anything'. Long arms are either single shot, semi-automatic or fully automatic. Who CARES what the STOCK looks like?!?!

I think I'm just going to write in Jimmy Buffett...

-=mw=-