Originally posted by ZahlanziIt is only too obvious that the main problem for President Bush is that there is an ( R ) after his name. As far as the 2000 Election goes, consult the Florida election laws, upheld by Katherine Harris. The Florida Supreme Court was responsible for much of the problem, and they had to be smacked down by the US Supreme Court. You know the one, the same court that the dems & libs love for Roe v. Wade.
oh i never said he is a dictator. the congress is much to blame. it is just the fact that he lied about the reasons to war iraq and he lied about the elections in 2000 and he lied about a bunch of other things.
personally i don't understand why his supporters try so hard to defend him. i mean, if you take away the wars, he is really a totally unremarkabl ...[text shortened]... of a lesser reagan. so why in the world would you deffend a totally common, mediocre president?
The voters guilty? I would just love for the powder blue helmets to show up from across the river, and I’ll be waiting with a white flag…and tell them where they can go with it.
Originally posted by Merk"i had nothing to do with rigging the 2000 elections"
What did he lie about in regards to the 2000 election?
Most wartime presidents are are known mainly for the wars that happen during their administration. Wars tend to consume a lot of the Commander in Chiefs time.
"sadam hussein has weapons of mass destruction"
"we must win the war on terror"
"there will be no need to send aditional troops in iraq"
"i have the iq above that of a chimp"
these are some of his lies.
1 edit
Originally posted by joneschrwhat really bakes my noodle is not bush being an idiot. fine you americans elected a moron. it happens. my president is also a moron. no problem here.
And is this a big surprise? What leaders have been severely punished for anything without toppling the government on which they stand?
It drives me nuts when the ignorant blame the American public. The majority of which hates and does not support George Bush, and is extremely critical of congressional leaders.
What, are we supposed to stockpile we thread. This discussion is getting really old, but burns by bottom every time I engage in it.
the funny thing is when most of america yell at bush to bring troops home and he refuses. when the congress takes so much time to forbid bush to get out of white house. when his approval rate is aprox 30% and he still thinks he is the champion of the american people and that "we must continue the war on terror" a deserter who got his daddy to save him from going to vietnam talking about sacrifices that need to be done to win the war really pisses me off.
and of course, the people do have some blame. when you have to choose between a chimp and a human being(not very charismatic humans gore and kerry) and you choose the chimp, well that is not very nice.
Originally posted by ZahlanziMaybe we should bomb Romania next.
what really bakes my noodle is not bush being an idiot. fine you americans elected a moron. it happens. my president is also a moron. no problem here.
the funny thing is when most of america yell at bush to bring troops home and he refuses. when the congress takes so much time to forbid bush to get out of white house. when his approval rate is aprox 30% ...[text shortened]... very charismatic humans gore and kerry) and you choose the chimp, well that is not very nice.
Originally posted by slimjimWe won't have to bomb Romania. When the terrorists make a shift from killing Muslims to killing Europeans, things will change. And we all know that they have plans to do it.
Maybe we should bomb Romania next.
Besides bombing Romania will disrupt their dirt based exporting economy. 😛
Originally posted by slappy115look ma, i found me a couple of redneck, ignorant, idiotic, bigots.
We won't have to bomb Romania. When the terrorists make a shift from killing Muslims to killing Europeans, things will change. And we all know that they have plans to do it.
Besides bombing Romania will disrupt their dirt based exporting economy. 😛
it really pains me to see america, the light of democracy(and i am being serious) being called stupid, warring, ignorant, brutal, decadent because of ...err people(term used loosely) like you.
Originally posted by slappy115and the euros are more civilised. the spanish don't bomb barcelona because of the ETA organisation. the uk don't bomb dublin because of the IRA.
We won't have to bomb Romania. When the terrorists make a shift from killing Muslims to killing Europeans, things will change. And we all know that they have plans to do it.
Besides bombing Romania will disrupt their dirt based exporting economy. 😛
the ironic thing is that the iraqis didn't even threaten to destroy the US. it was just an average muslim country run by your average dictator. much like congo and the other dictatorships in africa. of course, what would bush gain from invading congo? some peanuts and some tanned marines?
and yes, the forces stationed in iraq are an invading force.
Originally posted by ZahlanziGood thing you didn't mention their mamas or it would have qualified as a personal insult.
look ma, i found me a couple of redneck, ignorant, idiotic, bigots.
it really pains me to see america, the light of democracy(and i am being serious) being called stupid, warring, ignorant, brutal, decadent because of ...err people(term used loosely) like you.
As it is, they're only Americans, so ... carry on.
Looks like a bunch of pussys critisising the lion for being large and in charge.
Poor you, you're weak and live in weak Countries. You're subject to our whim and pleasure.
More "victims" of life .. of America, of Bush the evil one.
If we were half as bad as you continually screach you'd all be dead by now. As it stands you're under our protective bumbershoot and free to run your gobs like schoolgirls.
Pretend you're men .. try.
Originally posted by ZahlanziThe congo isn't in a region that exports terrorism. There is a big difference.
and the euros are more civilised. the spanish don't bomb barcelona because of the ETA organisation. the uk don't bomb dublin because of the IRA.
the ironic thing is that the iraqis didn't even threaten to destroy the US. it was just an average muslim country run by your average dictator. much like congo and the other dictatorships in africa. of course, ...[text shortened]... nuts and some tanned marines?
and yes, the forces stationed in iraq are an invading force.
Originally posted by jammeroooh the world will die without america. what would poor us inferior men wannabes do?
Looks like a bunch of pussys critisising the lion for being large and in charge.
Poor you, you're weak and live in weak Countries. You're subject to our whim and pleasure.
More "victims" of life .. of America, of Bush the evil one.
If we were half as bad as you continually screach you'd all be dead by now. As it stands you're under our protective bumbershoot and free to run your gobs like schoolgirls.
Pretend you're men .. try.
the universe will continue to exist if america disappears. (of course this is my humble oppinion. i might be wrong)
Originally posted by Merkone of the arguments bush used to invade irak is that the mighty americans are liberating the poor oppressed iraqis from the iron fist of the madman hussein. well, people are suffering under the iron fist of other madmen, why not liberate them as well?
The congo isn't in a region that exports terrorism. There is a big difference.
of course, there is a big difference: the other people don't have oil to donate to their liberators
Originally posted by ZahlanziThats a good question? How would the world be if America was never established, hmm who would most of the nations borrow from, hmm, how would have WW1 and WW11 turned out?
oooh the world will die without america. what would poor us inferior men wannabes do?
the universe will continue to exist if america disappears. (of course this is my humble oppinion. i might be wrong)