posted
i have a lot of respect for the ostrich and i can't believe the dems showed one as kerry.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
the eagle is generally associated with John... so ther ea re biblical undertones in this one too, since most of the evangelists use a lot of scripture from John...
Bush is my sheperd??????
i shall not want???
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited October 24, 2004).]
posted
what , you don't see the allegory in the wolves ad?
who protects the flock from the wolves?
the shepherd does that's who....
it's all so flagrant,i don't believe people aren't laughing about it.....
and little red riding hood?? where does she fit in???
the wolves are the Saudi's tho.... new evidence is coming out that they are funneling funds into Iraq thru Syria...and it makes sense since they benefit from it BOTH ways ...higher oil prices and we don't get Iraq oil...
they are the ones that insisted we not take Baghdad as i recall too, altho i'm not sure...
does anybody remeber the rumor that they wanted to pay 10,000$ to each troop in the first gulf war? it got turned down..
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited October 24, 2004).]
posted
the wolves are all that want to harm us. for me terrorists. then they come at you personally. its a decent add. no big woop. we get the picture.
remember the reagan/bush ad with the bear, similar. although i think this one generates more of an awareness of our current predicament.
but symbolism crap bores me and if they ran it in my love all democrats state, i'd change the channel.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
i understand why the symbolism stuff bores you.... the whole of advertising is based on it tho.. it seems like oversimplification, but when you only have 30 seconds to tell us something, it's efficient...
you gotta admit, the big bad wolf is pretty lame....
posted
i was watching that, the eagle reminded me of busch, the ostrich of iraq and something dropped out of the bottom of the eagle. That was kerry.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Kerry said, (correct me if I am wrong) in an interview aired tonight, that he can stop terrorism. He is kidding (right?), whatever he is smoking I think he should stop. Seriously. It only takes one nut-job to do something horrific, if he thinks what he stated, he really is insane and full of %^#@ up to his ears.
[This message has been edited by futuresobjective (edited October 24, 2004).]
quote:Originally posted by futuresobjective: Kerry said, (correct me if I am wrong) in an interview aired tonight, that he can stop terrorism. He is kidding (right?), whatever he is smoking I think he should stop. Seriously. It only takes one nut-job to do something horrific, if he thinks what he stated, he really is insane and full of %^#@ up to his ears.
[This message has been edited by futuresobjective (edited October 24, 2004).]
absolutely right FO..... and Bush said the same thing last week... after he said we couldn't win it, before he said we could...it's getting nuts (even here..LOL) i've been keeping score...LOL
Bush is only beating Kerry by 10 lies to 9 right now...LOL
But I really do think Bush meant that we could win the global war on terror. I also think he stated that we could never really win. What I take that statement as isthat is is all about getting it to managable levels. And that goes for anyone who would be in office for the next 4 years or in 20 years from now. There have always been people who want to destroy those which they resent and there will always most likely be. I just don't think kerry has a grasp on the reality of it. I mean I really have not seen read or heard on single thing that shows he does. And when I do hear something like that it only involves stating that the President is wrong. To me that really means nothing. He will not get any other countries involved, but he acts like he can. It amazes me. It just seems to me that kerry still bases his campaign on trying to say how wrong the President is rather than what he would do to fix any given situation. Then on things like the economy, and the job situation, I just disagree. He claims that the President has been the first President to lose jobs. But he fails to recognize that over 1,000,000 jobs were lost directly due to 9/11. If those jobs were not lost, President Bush could not be criticized on that aspect. At least not to the levels some do now. The unemployment levels are not even 1% higher than they were before he took office. The facts that I see show that the President has done a really great job when it comes down to the economy and jobs. Healthcare, there might be less people with coverage now, however I look at it long term. (this is just my opinion, not based on fact, just my observations) but I do see a trend. As medicine advances price goes up. As that price rises, some people will lose coverage, either free from the city, state, or gov. or they could no longer afford higher premiums. I do see that the trend will bring levels of coverage back up to par naturally over time. It is these same advancements that are providing better treatment and care, which will benefit these same people in time. It is unforutnate for anyone who is in the position of not having coverage, but in order for our health system to advance and provide better care, it is inevitable. For a dumb example: Moore's Law. As that had been proven true (don't know if it still is) the prices of the new hardware soared. Over time the price averages down. That average down is due to further advancement and initial coverage of output. Anyway you get what I am trying to say. I just really do see that people are treated to a better and more complete coverage now, then several years ago. In time I do believe that many if not all of the people who did have covereage will have it again. Then years from then, the same thing will happen again. Just my opinion though.
posted
both guys have said the same things and critisized each other for saying it... i can post links...
i don't think either guy will make nearly as much of a difference as everybody is saying... the govt. is run by a LOT of GOOD people and some real schmucks too....
it isn't Bush's fault jobs are down...
911 COULD have been used to create jobs too...
when it comes down to it , i am voting based on the WMD thing...my choice and i don't expect anybody else to agree with me..but it's important to me that we fight JUSTLY...and then we KIKBUTT.... just my gig...
i don't like Kerry, i like BALANCE, and we don't have that in anything right now do we?????
posted
glass, I am not trying to take away from your opinion. I agree that the majority of people will vote based on the war, and terrorism. I do think President Bush will make a difference. But one thing I don't understand is how you think 9/11 could have been used to create jobs? That one act cost us more than a million. We needed time to recover. In order to recover the economy had to recover first, and that includes the recession we had been in. One other thing that I do like about the President is that he was right here in ny after 9/11. From what I have seen, he really is a man who cares, and felt (like many) what happened that day was the single worst act ever commited on the US. It is the way he acted that day, and the days after that just add to my respect for him.
From other things I have read (assuming its true) we are the only country to have ever asked permision of teh UN to go to war. So all of this talk from around the world, that we should not have is rediculous. (I posted those links on the other thread) But I do find the reasons we are in Iraq to be just. Bringing democracy to the middle east will in time, have a positive effect on this war on terrorism. Kerry has had the luxury of backing down from his vote to go to war. But the President did not. And if he ever did say that he was wrong according to the reasons we went in, it would be political suicide (the point is they all agreed, at least the majority, that this should happen, and now kerry flips his actions around, makes no sense to me. Also, we are there now, so what good is debate by someone who changed his opinion after the fact?). I know Kerry voted for the war. But then he says I voted for the authority to go to war. I do not get him, he knew what his vote meant, and now he tries to do the backstroke? He claims the president has lied to the people? I do not see that. really I don't. The president went to war based on the same information that kerry based his decision to vote on. Looks like they were both in agreement. Kerry has not apologized for his vote, nor has he ever ever ever said he was wrong. If the president lied, his entire platform on the war on Iraq, is a lie. He claims that the president mislead? He had the same facts, and voted for the war. I just do not understand how anyone can see him as honest, and someone who can be trusted. In that way he is the biggest liar of all. But again, just my opinion.
[This message has been edited by futuresobjective (edited October 25, 2004).]
posted
that's a big question FO... i've spent weeks showing why i think the iraq war was a strategic error even in the long run... simply put--Iraqi's aren't like US, and we have stuck our hands in a hornets nest... yes we can make it work, we have NO CHOICE NOW, but not the way we have been going...
i'm not particularly emotional about the war...Bush used OUR emotions to propel us to a war his crew was already asking for... and the bad intel????? Bush is the one that showed it to everybody to get the vote...it came from Iraqi expatriates and they pretty much admit they concocted it...
911 COULD have been used to galvanise the country to DO almost ANYTHING...he used it to invade a third world country... Afghanistan was a MUST DO....
the rest of the money could have been spent to get US off oil...(not 100%, not even 50%, but maybe 25% or better)
posted
what do you mean "get the us off oil" ? That is no easy task. It is already happening, and nomatter how much money would be put towards that effort, well, it would still take 20 years or a little more. You can not just "get the country off of oil". There are thousands of jobs dependent on it. thousands and thousands. The promotion away from oil started, in time it will come. The knowledge is already there, so is the manufacturing. The war, in my view was not an error. There were more reasons to go into it than not, WMD's aside. Bringing democracy to the middle east is probably the best way to spread the peace over there. Everything takes time, and I am sure it will be some time before it happens, but this is a start. Look at the history of sadam. 14 years of nonsnes. 14 years of the un putting sanctions on it, 14 years of countries, doing nothing about a growing threat. It is just nonsense. However long the war may take, and the unfortunate loss of any of our men and women who volunteered to be there (if you volunteer for the army you volunteer to be anywhere the military puts you, during peace or war, you volunteered for it. Those men and women knew what they signed up for) are worth it when looking at the entire picture long term. People try to say that some of our military men and women died for no reason? That is insane, completely insane. Not only does it take away from the honor and respect they have earned, but it undermines the efforts that are being put forward. I do think that there are things that could be going better, what war does not have those aspects. But I also think that the president has done a good job in doing what is best for our country over time, and while doing that he is bringing a deprived nation peace and choice for the first time in their lives. Some proof of the Iraq people are begining to get fed up with the insurgents (heard on the news, probably true) is that tribal leaders chased and killed on of the insurgent leaders, or top men. When I hear that, I begin to think that for the first time they are realizing they can do for themselves. Not the tricky part will come when they elect a president. Once that happens, they will have to learn they can get what they want through channels. Anyway, what we are doing over there makes me prouder to be american. The situation called for action (if for nothing else than to free the Iraq people) and we took action.
[This message has been edited by futuresobjective (edited October 25, 2004).]
posted
FO.... there are more than a few minor mistakes being made... Bush REFUSED to listen to the correct advisors... from what i can see, the correct advisors were sent home early because they didn't like the way the WMD "intel" was presented...it becomes an issue of integrity(as opposed to PRIDE) for some people....
look at the news today.... more explosives in the hands of terrorists...
Sadam was effectively contained ...he was a bad guy but not running around loose...we had a good training ground for our fly-boys...
i don't need a lecture from you on how hard it is to switch away from oil...
70 billion$ spent so far and my bet is that we spend another 150billion$ on Iraq.... and we won't have what you think of as a democracy....it will be very, very different... you don't GIVE people democracy..it's not possible....
the war on terrorism will ONLY be won by winning the hearts and minds of the children of the mid-east.... no matter how many fighters we kill, there will be more to replace them. and we will have to give up ALL of our freedom to be completely safe from it ourselves..
if you REALLY want to end terrorism, you have to start assassinating ANYBODY who promotes it..financially, or religiously... quickly and efficiently... you have to convince the youth that they have something worth living for...
[This message has been edited by glassman (edited October 25, 2004).]
posted
glassman you stated: if you REALLY want to end terrorism, you have to start assassinating ANYBODY who promotes it..financially, or religiously... quickly and efficiently... you have to convince the youth that they have something worth living for... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Okay, you can go around murdering what probably amounts to 100k or so, or you can help kill the ideology by spreading democracy and choice, accomplanied by a twist of freedom.
[This message has been edited by futuresobjective (edited October 25, 2004).]
posted
Glass, I am not to familiar with all the people he fired. The only one who I did know the name of (escapes me now) was already set to retire. he was not fired, but replaced after his retirement date. the explosives missing, I agree it is outrageous! the Iraq men that were killed, I am sadened by that, however you act as if you were suprised that it could happen? You do realize that we are dealing with people that gladely kill their own countrymen, right? Support for the insurgents in their own country is dwindling. Do you really believe that our country is not doing what its top advisors are suggesting? It is insane to think otherwise. You take the examples of several people, that were relieved of their duties, but you fail to mention the hundreds more behind the scenes that have been there all along. This is not a personal vendetta, this is war. The war was called for, it is just, WMD's or not. I have more faith in the Bush camp then I could ever have in the kerry camp. There is simply more experience within it. Lots more. Things are not going perfectly in Iraq, how can anybody in their right mind ever expect that when you have morons running around, house to house, trying to murder their own people. Seriously, you are almost suggesting the only way to win this war is to nuke Iraq (exageration). This is gorilla warfare, lives will be lost, plans will not always work out to perfection, that is just how it is. But in time, we will win. And by our winning, we are giving people back their country. We are letting people take control of their own lives, their own country and bringing a more lasting peace, and a faster end or slowdown to the ideaology of hate or the preaching of it.
[This message has been edited by futuresobjective (edited October 25, 2004).]
posted
LOL- you don't like the wolves as an analogoust towards terrorists, but find the ostrich and bush appropriate......how ya leanin? and how that rose collored glass treatin ya....sorry to hear about that nascar family.
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
hey keith... i'm jes fine.... yeah, the Childress accident is pretty bad.. consider these guys fly all over the country every weekend......
FO... all i can say is i've done my DD... i've named the names do a google on Valerie Plame.... that will tell you ALL you need to know about how Bush treats the people who aren't his YESMEN.... it's the most visible story but there are plenty others...
don't tell me now you are gonna vote for Bush cuz of his sperience... Kerry's been in DC for 20 years... Bush showed up 4 years ago...LOL
tell me you like Bush's smile..i can at least accept that..
quote:Originally posted by glassman: hey keith... i'm jes fine.... yeah, the Childress accident is pretty bad.. consider these guys fly all over the country every weekend......
FO... all i can say is i've done my DD... i've named the names do a google on Valerie Plame.... that will tell you ALL you need to know about how Bush treats the people who aren't his YESMEN.... it's the most visible story but there are plenty others...
don't tell me now you are gonna vote for Bush cuz of his sperience... Kerry's been in DC for 20 years... Bush showed up 4 years ago...LOL
tell me you like Bush's smile..i can at least accept that..
Bush showed up 4 years ago, yes you are right. And in 1/5th the time, he has done more than the other has done in those 20 years. It just seems to me he is more about doing, than talking. Just my opinion though. I will look up the names and others when I can get to it ... thanks..
posted
speaking of wolves, well first nascar, a bunch of other pilots refused to fly over there due to landing conditions....that hurts.
back to wolves, surprised you haven't jumped all over the missing weapons story. Its all over the front pages, the only problem is we found out the weapons weren't there when the troops arrived a long long time ago.....kerry's crew even has clinton harping on it like it just happened. and no one will check.....and the front pages will continue to ask how this happened...
hmmm......media bias.....of course not, only 7 days to go till voting.
I hope repubs say they found bin laden and after voting is done, say it wasn't bin laden it was someone else...
[This message has been edited by keithsan (edited October 26, 2004).]
Posts: 9110 | From: boston, ma | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
