Poor Bush... ;)

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2004-03-26 05:47pm

Axis thread hijack has been split to here.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-03-26 06:03pm

Glocksman wrote:
Superman wrote:Note to ALL Americans here: VOTE FOR KERRY!
No thanks.

For me, it was either Dean, a third party, or skip the Presidential section of the ballot.

Looks like I won't be voting in the Presidential race this year.

You could always write him in anyway.

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2004-03-26 06:07pm

HemlockGrey wrote:What I don't get is if they knew there were no WMDs, why did they say there were? Are they simply relying on the media to sweep it under the carpet (seems like its worked so far)?

I think Bush honestly believed the weapons were there. They knew the intelligence was bad, they flat out lied about that, and I think they knew that Iraq wasn't an actual threat, but they had really convinced themselves that WMD's were hidden away somewhere. It's what you call an institutional lie. The bureaucracy wants a certain thing to be true, and so they only believe evidence that supports their desires and ignore evidence they don't like, and they reward workers who tell them what they want to hear and punish those who bring up unpleasant realities. They didn't set out to lie, but they created a lie that even had them convinced. Then, because he knew the weapons were there, he took a gamble on the intelligence, expecting to win.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2004-03-26 11:47pm

Glocksman wrote:
Superman wrote:Note to ALL Americans here: VOTE FOR KERRY!
No thanks.

For me, it was either Dean, a third party, or skip the Presidential section of the ballot.

Looks like I won't be voting in the Presidential race this year.

There is Nader or if you don`t want to vote for him two other options (Kang or Kodos)

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-03-27 12:18am

Glocksman wrote:
Superman wrote:Note to ALL Americans here: VOTE FOR KERRY!
No thanks.

For me, it was either Dean, a third party, or skip the Presidential section of the ballot.

Looks like I won't be voting in the Presidential race this year.

You see; I don't understand that response. For me voting is all about choosing the lesser of two evils, which is always the reason Australian political comentators say that the <insert politician> lost, and hardly ever <insert politician here> won.

But that's just typical Australian apathy and general distaste for politicians for you.

Oni Koneko Damien · Post by **Oni Koneko Damien** » 2004-03-27 02:11am

Glocksman wrote:Looks like I won't be voting in the Presidential race this year.

So then, by default, you admit that you don't mind if the worst candidate running (to you) gets elected. Yes, granted, it sucks when voting turns into an exercise in choosing the lesser evil, but that doesn't make it any less relevent to you.

Fine, so you don't like anyone running, I'll take that as implied in that statement. Now, I highly doubt that you dislike everyone exactly equally. Thus, technically, you like one candidate more than the others. Don't vote for him because you like him, vote for him because you hate him slightly less than all the others. Bitching and moaning about how all the candidates suck will *not* change which candidates run for president, voting for the least worst of the bunch, on the other hand, *does* make the best out of a bad situation.

So, you hate all the candidates. Do you hate them more or less than Bush? If you hate them less, then vote for one of them, that makes it less likely that the greater of evils (in yours or my subjective opinion) will make it back in office. Don't just sit their and bitch about how all of them suck. If you don't at least attempt to salvage the situation even slightly, you have no right to complain. (Well, okay, technically, you do have the right to complain no matter what, but if you don't vote, your complaints are, at best, good material to laugh at).

-Damien

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2004-03-27 02:47am

I probably would have voted Edwards, but he dropped out. So I don't know who I'm going to vote for now, but it's not going to be either Kerry or Bush.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-03-27 02:49am

Well, I *could* vote Libertarian, but I disagree with them as much as I agree with them.

To whomever said it, I forgot about the write in vote.
I'll probably write Dean in as a protest.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-03-27 04:56am

Invader ZIm wrote:Brilliant.

You would have thought the Iraqis would have come up with a "No WMD Here" indicator that did not require the 1st MEF to be rolling across the Tigris river.

I love The Daily Show. Click on "Stephen Colbert Faces the Imaginable."

Some choice excerpts ...
STEWART: So how does realizing that Saddam had no weapons vindicate our case for war?
COLBERT: Well, Jon, it shows just how crazy Saddam was. Think about it. What kind of a mad man refuses to produce evidence that he doesn't have what he said he didn't? Saddam had to be taken out, or who knows what else he might not have done? It's ... imaginable.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-03-27 10:31am

Wait, so what's wrong with Kerry, other than the highly publicized "flip-flops"?