 |
| |
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
I have never, ever been ashamed to admit that I voted for Nader in 2000. I never thought that it was something that needed a word like "admit". I say it with pride. I thought he was the best guy for the job. I never thought that Gore and Bush were the same, I just thought that Gore was too much of a lily-livered moderate to get anything of substance done--just like Clinton. He certainly wasn't the liar that the press made him out to be ("I invented the Internet," indeed,) but neither was he the intellectual giant everyone said, either. (And Bush ain't that dumb, folks.) He never did or said anything to earn my vote; Nader did. I hate all these Democrats who just assume that I owe my vote to their candidate no matter what; the people who blamed Nader for Bush winning the election, even though 100 million voters decided to sit on their collective asses on Election Day.
Blame Nader? Why not blame Gore for failing to inspire another 200 Floridians to stop scratching their balls for just ten minutes so they could use one of those busy hands to vote? *******s.
However, 2004 may be different. The way the Democratic race is shaping up, with fundraising and early polling in Iowa & N.H., it looks like it'll come down to two candidates who I could vote for without holding my nose--John Kerry and Howard Dean. Obviously, it's early, and many things could change between now and the start of primary season (what a ****ing silly way of picking a candidate for a national election, but I digress). And it remains to be seen if these guys can inspire people who wouldn't otherwise vote (the bulk of 2000 Naderites), though Dean seems to have the upper hand on this one.
So, my fellow independant liberals, let us hope one of these guys gets the nod. They have balls, they have left-wing cred, and they both actually have a chance of beating Bush--at least, a better chance than the other seven. If one of these two guys gets the nomination, I might just vote for a major-party candidate for president for the first time in my life.
Apropos of nothing, I found this hilarious site via Tom Tomorrow. Go to Google and type in "weapons of mass destruction" and hit "I'm feeling lucky". Hysterical. Here's the immediate link for you lazy bastards: http://www.coxar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
DRoseDARs
|
 |
"My god, it's full of peas..."
Jul 2002
time: 21:29
|
|
quote:
These Weapons of Mass Destruction cannot be displayed
The weapons you are looking for are currently unavailable. The country might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your weapons inspectors mandate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please try the following:
Click the Regime change button, or try again later.
If you are George Bush and typed the country's name in the address bar, make sure that it is spelled correctly. (IRAQ).
To check your weapons inspector settings, click the UN menu, and then click Weapons Inspector Options. On the Security Council tab, click Consensus. The settings should match those provided by your government or NATO.
If the Security Council has enabled it, The United States of America can examine your country and automatically discover Weapons of Mass Destruction.
If you would like to use the CIA to try and discover them,
click Detect weapons
Some countries require 128 thousand troops to liberate them. Click the Panic menu and then click About US foreign policy to determine what regime they will install.
If you are an Old European Country trying to protect your interests, make sure your options are left wide open as long as possible. Click the Tools menu, and then click on League of Nations. On the Advanced tab, scroll to the Head in the Sand section and check settings for your exports to Iraq.
Click the Bomb button if you are Donald Rumsfeld.
Cannot find weapons or CIA Error
Iraqi Explorer
A.R.Cox 2003 |
Oops...Their Intel. services must be glitchy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
Well, I'd think everyone on this board would rather have bush... well, except MrFun and Fez...
...oh, wait a minute...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
Oh. Another one of these
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Templar
|
 |
People's Republic of the East Village
Oct 2001
time: 00:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
I liked Nader best, but I belong to the "Beat Bush At All Costs" camp. With Gore, we would have had greater fiscal responsibility, I can speculate on the economy, Iraq, etc... but that doesn't do anyone any good, and would degenerate into a meaningless threadjack. |
If Gore had not been involved with the PMRC or had not run with Lieberman I could have held my nose and voted for Gore, but the tink was too bad. Seeing the sorts of lunatics Bush is appointing to the bench, I'm just goign to hold my nose this time. Unless it's Lieberman. I would like ot at least vote for an actual Democrat.
quote:
I hope Dean gets the nomination. He's being labeled as the more "leftist/liberal" candidate, but he's really not. He's very fiscally conservative... like myself  But again, "ANYONE BUT BUSH" will be my mantra in 2004. |
Dean is fairly centrist - but given the shrill conservative voices dominating the media, Dean looks liberal.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Guynemer
|
|
I probably won't be available for FF until a week from today, but I'm all for it.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-07-2003 06:49
ACK!
|