A Link for Pabst
- Thread starter Error 404
- Start date
Don't you realize that those who love GWB aren't going to be swayed by monkeys on message boards. He will be re-elected no matter what you say on ET. Get it through your liberal head.
Oh how illuminating. Get real RS.
While the economy is certainly not vibrant, only an ass with no sense of history would insinuate, let alone state, that this is the worst economy in history. I don't exactly see guy's jumping from window ledges onto apple cart vender's ala' 1929. Hell, the economy under Bush Sr. was worse than this. WTF, I mean jobs are going overseas, guess Clinton's support of NAFTA didn't help that did it! The stock market. Wow!!! The dow is 6% lower since Bush's inaugural. Interest rates spike because of "Bush's war"..just coming off the lowest levels in history. I'm not a bull on the economy but the hyperbole from the left does nothing but lessen liberal's credibility. Want to talk about a $ collapse, look at the greenback's decline during the LBJ years. Make's the dollar's recent decline look like a hayride. Besides, if government is an absolute barometer of economic activity, maybe we should elect Hu Jintao since China is growing at such a vast economic pace.
Other points in your article are equally scatter brained. I can't tell where the author is coming from. Killing Saddam in '91 was cool, but in '03 suddenly not kosher? Prescott Bush was a Nazi for being an isolationist? What was the diff between the U.S. and Britain entering a war with Hitler or going to war with Saddam? Don't even attempt to tell me Germany was a threat to the U.S. Hitler agonized over bombing Britain, but Churchill like Roosevelt saw war as the ultimate economic stimulus to restart a manufacturing economy that had never rebounded from the depression. If anything, taking down rogue, anti-Developed nation, fundamentalist Islamic states is more in the national interest, than defeating Hitler ever was. Tell the long enslaved communist states of East Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Czechoslovakia that the U.S. provided them with a keen post Hitler solution.
Am I enamored with George Bush? Not at all. Do I think he's a better candidate than any one trying to win in 2004. Clearly. Ain't saying much. But at least he perceives the long term danger emanating from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Algeria, and Saudi Arabia, and is willing to step up before those nation's have obtained the weaponry that could do us in. Rs, you and your friend's can post all you want. Free country. But never will I prefer to live in a quasi-socialist state. Not saying by a longshot that this is nirvana, but I'll take the present over a class-warfare Dean regime any day of the week.
Interesting stufff, Pabst. The bottom line is what you said above. Am I enamored with GWB? NO! Is he clearly better than the alternative of Gore? Absolutely! I only shudder to think of what Gore wouldn't be doing right now.
Is he a better candidate than the other democrats trying to win in '04? Absolutely! That's why he'll be re-elected.
As far as Dean goes, when he appears on O'Reilly show, then I'll be able to assess his qualifications. He's being a total stupid moron refusing to go on that show. And he wants to be elected president?
You gotta be fucking KIDDING me. O'Reilly's a bullying fuck. It's like Morton Downey, Jr. crawled up O'Reilly's ass and took over.
Anyone who writes trashy romance novels CANNOT be taken seriously. :LOL
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_6/102-8705603-1420942?v=glance&s=booksQuote from bungrider:
You gotta be fucking KIDDING me. O'Reilly's a bullying fuck. It's like Morton Downey, Jr. crawled up O'Reilly's ass and took over.
Anyone who writes trashy romance novels CANNOT be taken seriously. :LOL
sorry, bunglehead. I was not referring to his past, I was referring to his TOP rated program, and the perfect audience thast a person like DEan needs on his side to win. You are sooo stupid! If he gets O'Reilly's viewers on his side, he may actually have a chance.
That would be a great one. How 'bout Hillary? Aren't these politicians supposed to have enough conviction in their views to talk for a few moments with a "romance novel" writer??