1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Who Will be elected?

Discussion in 'Other Stuff' started by SRG3000, Sep 2, 2004.

  1. Btljuice

    Btljuice New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2001
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tell me again who it is thats cutting the military?

    Republicans proved that they don't match their rhetoric about the military with action when they refused Democrats' proposal for a minor reduction in millionaires' tax breaks to restore $1 billion in critical military housing funds cut by President Bush.



    The veterans' health care system is in critical condition. With some veterans having to wait months to see a doctor, Bush has proposed closing VA hospitals. Bush is cutting benefits for veterans and increasing their health care costs.



    The Pentagon tried to cut the pay of troops putting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The administration cut funds for educating their children. While our men and women in uniform put their lives in danger, their families try to get by with no help from President Bush.


    So WHOSE watch is this happening under? Lemme give you a hint. There ain't a Democratic president in office at the moment.
     
  2. Btljuice

    Btljuice New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2001
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    0
    And even more for your perusal. Back when the same guy that just threatened us with the wrong choices consequences was SecDef....


    A 22 February 2004 Republican National Committee (RNC) research briefing includes the list of weapons systems found in this message and citations that purportedly support the claim that Senator Kerry voted to kill each one. But all the citations stem from votes on three Congressional bills, none of which were about a specific weapons system or group of weapons systems.

    The three votes cited — regarding S. 3189 (1990), H.R. 5803 (1990), and H.R. 2126 (1995) — were bills covering fiscal year Department of Defense appropriations, all of which Senator Kerry voted against. (Two of those three votes were not technically on defense appropriations per se, but on House-Senate conference committee reports for defense appropriations bills.) As the text of a typical defense appropriations bill shows, such bills cover the entire governmental expenditures for defense in a given fiscal year and encompass thousands of items totalling hundreds of billions of dollars — including everything from the cost of developing, testing, purchasing, and maintaining weapons and other equipment to personnel expenses (salaries, medical benefits, tuition assistance, reenlistment bonuses), medical research, hazardous waste cleanup, facilities maintenance, and a whole host of other disbursements. Members of Congress ultimately vote "yea" or "nay" on an entire appropriations bill; they don't pick and choose to approve some items and reject others.

    Senators and Representatives might vote against a defense appropriations bill for any numbers of reasons — because they object to the presence or absence of a particular item, because they feel that the government is proposing to spend too much or too little money on defense, or anything in-between. Maintaining, as is the case here, that a Senator who voted "nay" on one year's defense appropriations bill therefore voted to "kill" a variety of specific weapons systems is like claiming that any Congressman who has ever voted against a defense appropriations bill has therefore also voted to abolish the U.S. military.

    The inclusion of some of the items listed here is all the more ridiculous given that they were weapons systems that a previous Republican administration advocated eliminating. For example, it was Dick Cheney himself, in his capacity as Secretary of Defense under President George H.W. Bush, who testified before the House Armed Services Committee on 13 August 1989 that he had recommended cancelling the AH-64 Apache Helicopter program:

    The Army, as I indicated in my earlier testimony, recommended to me that we keep a robust Apache helicopter program going forward. AH-64 . . . forced the Army to make choices. I said, "You can't have all three. We don't have the money for all three." So I recommended that we cancel the AH-64 program two years out. That would save $1.6 billion in procurement and $200 million in spares over the next five years.
    (Note that this testimony took place over six years before Senator Kerry supposedly voted to "kill" the AH-64.)

    Likewise, on 1 February 1992, Secretary of Defense Cheney complained to the Senate Armed Services Committee that he was being "forced" to spend money on unneeded weapons such as the M-1, the F-14, and the F-16:

    Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements . . . You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s — all great systems . . . but we have enough of them.
    And President Bush noted in his 1992 State of the Union address that he was phasing out several weapons systems, including the B-2, to "reflect the changes of the new era":

    Two years ago, I began planning cuts in military spending that reflected the changes of the new era. But now, this year, with imperial communism gone, that process can be accelerated. Tonight I can tell you of dramatic changes in our strategic nuclear force. These are actions we are taking on our own because they are the right thing to do. After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bombers. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles.



    This came from Snopes BTW.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2004
  3. Cat Fuzz

    Cat Fuzz Qualthwar's Minion. Ph34r!

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,930
    Likes Received:
    4
    When was this, again? I remember waves of base closures during Clintons term in office.

    Government programs are a gift from the American tax payer that is given under durress. Christian charity doesn't depend on others being forced to give.

    Eh, Clinton signed the bill but he certainly did not want to. If it wasn't for a Republican Congress and enormous public pressure it never would have happened.
     
  4. Cat Fuzz

    Cat Fuzz Qualthwar's Minion. Ph34r!

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,930
    Likes Received:
    4


    Yeah, every single one of those points was spelled out from the beginning. I'm sorry for your short memory.
     
  5. Cat Fuzz

    Cat Fuzz Qualthwar's Minion. Ph34r!

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    3,930
    Likes Received:
    4

    Ah, can't stand the taste of your own medicine, eh? :lol: It's called SPIN dude. The Dems have been doing it for decades. They attach all kinds of garbage to a spending bill, say for Head Start, and when Republican Congressman whats-his-name doesn't vote for the bloated bill because of the bloat, they say he's against Head Start. Nothing but spin.
     
  6. bobtheking

    bobtheking Monkey in a bucket

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    and the quoted issue in your sig is exactly the same thing. kerry voted against it because it was a blank check, with some fraction of it going to the men on the ground, yet he gets accused of voting against our men because of it. oh right, nothing but spin.

    i'm not saying it ISN"T spin, but don't use that as a counter argument, unless of course you agree with kerry about voting against the bill.

    edit: and republicans do plenty of what you talked about as well. ANWR? Patriot Act II?

    edit 2: just noticed i put ANWAR not ANWR.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2004
  7. oosyxxx

    oosyxxx teh3vilspa7ula

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2000
    Messages:
    3,039
    Likes Received:
    4
    Fiery! I think there's poop in my Calvin Klein night-pants.
     
  8. Btljuice

    Btljuice New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2001
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since Cat wants to focus on flip flops, his buddy Bush flip flopped yet again yesterday on the issue of the Intelligence Czar's responsibilities.
     
  9. .altan

    .altan Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2001
    Messages:
    1,336
    Likes Received:
    1
    I have a feeling that George W. Bush is going to win the election. I don't particularly want him to, but it's just a hunch.
     
  10. Btljuice

    Btljuice New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2001
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    0

    You don't remember the late 80's very well do you? Bush 41, in one of his speeches was proclaiming the merits of reducing the military by 30% by 1990.



    No, they just like to pick and choose whom they let starve whereas the gov't doesn't.




    Proof. Back it up with links
     
  11. Btljuice

    Btljuice New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2001
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    0

    Where is the spin dude? These are quotes directly out of you buddy Cheneys own mouth on what HE wanted cut as SecDef. And is you want to talk spin, then your sig quote is the same thing. Hello Pot? Kettle on line 2.
     
  12. Hourences

    Hourences New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    some international polling station did a wideworld poll to see who the world would want to see elected, quite fun, gives you some perspective on how the world views bush
    basicaly only 3 countries in the entire world would vote for bush..
    the population from 35 countries were asked, and 30 of the 35 would for kerry with a large majority, 2 were more or less undecided and 3 were for bush

    if my holland would be the usa, only 6 percent of the people would vote bush, that is less than 1 million people, hell my operation na pali mod already got almost so many downloads...

    Europe
    Misc
    Asia
    South America
    Africa and Eurasia
    heres another funny quote

    http://www.globescan.com/

    these billions of people arent wrong, wake up
    if you want to be the leader of the world then listen to what your world is telling you, you cannot lead those who you ignore
     
  13. bobtheking

    bobtheking Monkey in a bucket

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    there is a map (US only) that shows the corrolation of college graduates vs bush voters, maybe someone can find it.
     
  14. SRG3000

    SRG3000 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    On behalf of the united states...

    Bushes quote:
    On behalf of the united states, we want you to go f**k yourselves.
    I am a dickless ho that has sex with sheep!
     
  15. BangOut

    BangOut ...smells like groin.

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Messages:
    3,028
    Likes Received:
    0
    SRG: If you're going to troll or alias, I shall bring my rare ban hammer down on you.

    Differing opinions are one thing, stupidity is another altogether. The Kristina schtick is old.
     
  16. SpiritWalker

    SpiritWalker Tattooed Beat Messiah / Prime Mover

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,493
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey Hourences, it's a good thing that the world don't elect the US President...

    Personally I think that Bush has done a fine job.. questionable in some things.. that I still say.. "fine...".. but you can't really say that Gore would have done anything different..

    except for one thing.. I seem to remember one certian "dem" that said that "The US should have asked for premission from the UN before the attack on Afganistan"... hold on there.. ask premission??? To strike back??? And IF premission was asked.. and someone said "no".. the US is just supposed to go.. "ok.. thanks..."
    Erm.. "F" that....

    The war in Afganistan.. great job.. now when the Reps finally show the body bin Laden.. or that he is captured.. (some time around the end of Oct prolly)...Bush will win hands down...

    The war in Iraq.. ermmm.. more of an excuse to go in and do what needed to be done.. sucks that there were so many lives lost, and continue to be lost.. but I still agree with conflict... as I stated before.. give me more bush.

    At the very least Bush should be admired for making a decision... and standing behind it.. no matter if you think it's wrong or right.. he hasn't waivered.. which is not the past action of Gore in the first election.. and definately not the actions of Kerry.
     
  17. Btljuice

    Btljuice New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2001
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    0
    Admired for flipping off the entire world community? For going in Iraq when EVERYone else was saying that ain't a good idea? There is a Neocon group (of whom most of Bush's admin is made of) website that has been pushing for the invasion of Iraq since Desert Storm. If it had been a good idea to finish it off, don't you think Bush 41 would have gone ahead and marched into Bagdad?
    WE have caused more people to join up with terrorist organizations since the beginning of this last conflict than bin Laden and others of his ilk could have recruited in 10 years. bin Laden has been warning about 'US designs to invade a middle eastern country' for a while. And what did we do? I'm NOT siding with the terrorists here BUT, Bush ain't had the balls to stand up and say he screwed up. Iraq was NOT in cahoots with bin Laden, although Bush and co tried everything but saying it that they were.
    I heard Bush himself say, when cornered on the WMD issue, that it wasn't for WMD but because Saddam was 'a Bad Man'. That si NOT a reason to start a war my friend. There are a LOT of Bad Men in this world. If its a case of that then why haven't weee gone into Darfur before now? That was going on before we went to Iraq. Where are the WMDs that Bush and co said they knew they were there. They have even gone on record as saying they knew WHERE they were. Where are they?
    Bush self proclaims himself a War President. Where has he learned or earned his war experiences to claim that title? Or for that matter, most of his Administration? Cheney didn't serve. Rumsfeld avoided most of the Korean conflict. Bush got set up with the Champaign Squadron and even THEN refused orders to undergo a physical to maintain his flight status.

    Attorney General John Ashcroft: No military service

    Defense Policy Board member Richard Perle and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz: No military service.

    Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.; Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss.; House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas; former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich; radio commentator Rush Limbaugh. No military service. No military service. No military service. No military service. No military service.


    But they sure as hell are willing and able to send others to fight and die for something they themselves avoided. If you're gonna have the balls to start a war (Iraq), then you should have had the balls to be in one yourself just so you KNOW what you are sending our boys and girls into. And every damn one of those people that have NOT served are plenty old enough to have served in Viet Nam in SOME capacity. But no, they had other 'priorities.

    Gore did enlist. So did Kerry. Even though BOTH of them could have opted out in one form or another. Tell me again what Bush did?

    Bush is using his religion to codify discrimination into our Constitution. There aren't any SECULAR reasons for it. He's using his influence to get faith based initiatives passed. Based on HIS religion. I honestly can't think of many things that I can say Bush has done right. Can you?
     
  18. bobtheking

    bobtheking Monkey in a bucket

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    the tax cut, but he didn't reduce spending along with it and ****ed the budget.
     
  19. oosyxxx

    oosyxxx teh3vilspa7ula

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2000
    Messages:
    3,039
    Likes Received:
    4
    I'm just wondering tho if Bush has ever admitted to having done anything wrong since being in office. Don't quote me (lol) but I don't think he's ever apologized for anything, nor has he admitted that his way of having done things, after that fact, wasn't the wisest or most well thought out. There's merit to sticking to a decision but more imporant, imo, is to realize when you are wrong, admit it, and then beware not to repeat the mistake, or continue using the same line of thinking that lead to the mistake.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2004
  20. SpiritWalker

    SpiritWalker Tattooed Beat Messiah / Prime Mover

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,493
    Likes Received:
    0
    public opinion was highly against it.. but I was for it then..


    Blt.. that's called propaganda.. totally unture.. if you remember you will find that binny was a buddy for a long while.. and we have only invaded one middle eastern country.. and we don't even run it anymore..
    this isn't a terrorists vs us thing.. they ****ed with us.. we ****ed them back harder!! And with a smile.. don't **** with us.. we won't **** we you.
    I personally belive that the connection with Iraq and binny was pretty slim to begin with.. but it's a good enough reason to get that freak out of power.. A) Killing your own people and lording over them like the tyrannt he was is just plain bad.. the use of chemical weapons on his own people even worse.. I would love to see Saddam and his sons at The Haige.. oh yeah.. we freaking killed them... :)

    Disagree.. there have been many reports to the contrary that the info that "Bush and co", went off of.. that pointed to binny and Saddam being butt buddies... if they weren't.. well.. "opps" Saddam should have complied with the UN and stopped "F"ing around with weapons inspectors.. it sucks that so many have died.. but I refuse to lable their deaths as pointless..


    Darfur is a place.. The government of Sudan is responsible for “ethnic cleansing” and crimes against humanity in Darfur, not ONE person. And to be honest.. prolly 90% of the people here have never heard of Darfur.. and that would make "going into Darfur" a bad move, since the President does have to stay on the popular side of the US people. And if I remember correctly.. that whole thing there never got huge til last year.. we can't police the world.. and the Sudan government hardly has the ability to attack the US or it's interests.

    got a better question.. where is all of the gas that is commonly know that they have stock piled...

    And Kerry is any different.. or Gore or Clinton?

    wrong o.. he asked to be trans back to Alabama in a non flight status to start work on a political carrer..which didn't need him to be in active flight status..

    and Gore/Clinton/Hell back ot Nixon were different?

    enlisted


    wow.. seriously jumping topics there aren't you...

    Yes I can.. name all the wonderful things that Kerry has done.. Clinton did.. we can play match
     

Share This Page