What was the deciding factor?

[Tacks]

You're not much of a debater because you don't have a fucking clue as to what is going on. All you do is basically reword what everyone else here says and then call it your own. Other than when you say WE SHOULD BLOW THEM UP IF THEY'RE MEAN TO US.

[Harrison]

Taxx, I would say Lyion over the other two. Phantom just goes on these long winded rants that noone actually reads.

Lyion most of the time says everything Ive said already just more calm. How is that riding his coat tails?

[Lyion]

Leah, explain to me what rights were stripped?

[Tacks]

Taxx, I would say Lyion over the other two. Phantom just goes on these long winded rants that noone actually reads.

Lyion most of the time says everything Ive said already just more calm. How is that riding his coat tails?

Umm because during this entire past 2 months you have not made ONE original arguement or comment regarding the election other than "they're mean so Bush would blow them up".

[Harrison]

I said what I said. Lyion said what he said. He just explained it more calmly and thorough. I admit this and bow to him saying he did it better saying everything I have and more.

I dont give a fuck what you think, you just type in caps and pat yourself on the back thinking you're right in every situation.

[Martrae]

Even me? Wow...thanx.

Here's a few of my reasons:

I think terrorism is the biggest problem facing us today. I don't think Kerry would be able to do more than appease. Bush on the other hand made a promise in regards to terrorism and is following thru on it.

The economy is rebounding following the Bush tax cuts. It's slow but seems to be pretty steady. Kerry would reinstitute them and sink us further into a depression.

Bush is the only high profile person I have seen to even seem to seriously consider the Fair Tax Plan. This is another biggie for me.

Bush is a horrible public speaker but from all reports is very persuasive on a one on one basis. This makes him more human and likeable to me.

I like Laura Bush better than Teresa Heinz Kerry.

[leah]

well the way i understand it is that homosexual couples are not allowed to have a civil union, and as such they don't receive medical benefits that married couples would receive and they can't file jointly for taxes.

i will admit that i don't have all the information, and that's my bad. but my opinion is this: not allowing homosexual unions ISN'T going to do away with homosexuality. people are going to keep being gay whether they can make their union official or not. so why discriminate against them?

[Tossica]

Even me? Wow...thanx.

Here's a few of my reasons:

I think terrorism is the biggest problem facing us today. I don't think Kerry would be able to do more than appease. Bush on the other hand made a promise in regards to terrorism and is following thru on it.

The economy is rebounding following the Bush tax cuts. It's slow but seems to be pretty steady. Kerry would reinstitute them and sink us further into a depression.

Bush is the only high profile person I have seen to even seem to seriously consider the Fair Tax Plan. This is another biggie for me.

Bush is a horrible public speaker but from all reports is very persuasive on a one on one basis. This makes him more human and likeable to me.

I like Laura Bush better than Teresa Heinz Kerry.

In other words, you swallowed all the bullshit that has been served to you over the last 4 years. Thought so.

[Lyion]

well the way i understand it is that homosexual couples are not allowed to have a civil union, and as such they don't receive medical benefits that married couples would receive and they can't file jointly for taxes.

i will admit that i don't have all the information, and that's my bad. but my opinion is this: not allowing homosexual unions ISN'T going to do away with homosexuality. people are going to keep being gay whether they can make their union official or not. so why discriminate against them?

You are claiming rights are being taken away. Please provide proof for your accusations. I do not know of any rights that have been taken away, personally.

President Clinton signed the Defense against Marriage Act, not GW. Gay Marriage has never been legal, and Civil Unions are not the province of the Federal Government anyways, so what is your point?

You've made a statement with no backing, so please provide a reasoning why you've said what you've said.

You could just as easily say Goat Fuckers are discriminated against and cannot have civil unions, but I do not see them being harassed or losing any rights

Please explain.

[Martrae]

You have your opinion of what's 'true' and I have mine.

Bullshit isn't what I swallow tho.

[vonkaar]

If you all really want to argue the military bit, we'll need a whole 'nother' thread... It's about time we hashed this out...

For Lyion's points...

1. Military benefits. We can cover this elsewhere.

2. Unless you are part of the $250k+ crowd, Bush has done sooo very little to help you out with tax cuts. We can get into this if you want... however, Google a quick comparison on the beneficiaries of his supposed tax-cuts before you decide on the merits of this argument.

3. The bread-crumbs that Bush has given to the struggling small-business market has surely helped out... but if we scaled down the big-business tax cuts, personal wealth gains and ... oh yeah, holy shit, rampant corporate crime that he almost ENCOURAGES in big-business, Small Business owners would be rolling in cash. But, why encourage small businesses when they contribute less than 5% of your campaign funds?

4. Healthcare. Not going to happen in the next 4 years. The lobbyists have about 30 times the control on the fate of healthcare than the president. Voting for a president based on his healthcare ideas is blind.

5. Agressive on terrorism? What has he accomplished? He's a fucking poster child for Al-Qaeda. He invaded a country and sold the idea to us on false ideas. He completely ignored the warnings for 9/11. Pre 9/11, his contributions to anti-terrorism can be summarized by pointing to the 13th green. Post 9/11, his contributions can be summarized by pointing out the rising death-toll in Iraq. We still don't have a credible justification for invading and occupying Iraq. We *still* don't have the world's support in this. Bush's anti-terrorism platform is so weak, I'm surprised you even mentioned it.

6. Education. Another bit we can really delve into if you want. In short, we are now $7-8billion short on education reform because he's put so much emphasis on defense. It's at cold-war ratios now... this might be an even weaker platform than anti-terrorism.

[vonkaar]

Lyion has said everything I need to, Im not much of a debater.

You have now officially made my CA shit-list. Get the fuck out of this thread... hell, the whole CA forum could do well in losing you. Holy fucking hell, think for yourself or SHUT THE FUCK UP.

[leah]

okay sir, i will admit that i was wrong.

let me rephrase. rights aren't being taken away. but the way i see it, the chance of receiving these rights is being taken away.

[DangerPaul]

Lyion has said everything I need to, Im not much of a debater.

You have now officially made my CA shit-list. Get the fuck out of this thread... hell, the whole CA forum could do well in losing you. Holy fucking hell, think for yourself or SHUT THE FUCK UP.

[smiley poster=grins]you need to make the :oh snap: smiley for that one [/smiley]

[Tae-Bo]

well the way i understand it is that homosexual couples are not allowed to have a civil union, and as such they don't receive medical benefits that married couples would receive and they can't file jointly for taxes.

i will admit that i don't have all the information, and that's my bad. but my opinion is this: not allowing homosexual unions ISN'T going to do away with homosexuality. people are going to keep being gay whether they can make their union official or not. so why discriminate against them?

You are claiming rights are being taken away. Please provide proof for your accusations. I do not know of any rights that have been taken away, personally.

President Clinton signed the Defense against Marriage Act, not GW. Gay Marriage has never been legal, and Civil Unions are not the province of the Federal Government anyways, so what is your point?

You've made a statement with no backing, so please provide a reasoning why you've said what you've said.

You could just as easily say Goat Fuckers are discriminated against and cannot have civil unions, but I do not see them being harassed or losing any rights

Please explain.

i like how gay people are comparable to goat fuckers

[Harrison]

Lyion has said everything I need to, Im not much of a debater.

You have now officially made my CA shit-list. Get the fuck out of this thread... hell, the whole CA forum could do well in losing you. Holy fucking hell, think for yourself or SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Waaah, damn you get pretty worked up over this.

Because someone comes and supports what I said, I have no place here.

Oh I see now, because I have a different opinion on this all you just plain dont like me now...I get it. Pathetic.

[Tae-Bo]

okay sir, i will admit that i was wrong.

let me rephrase. rights aren't being taken away. but the way i see it, the chance of receiving these rights is being taken away.

leah gays aren't acceptable to jesus, they don't need rights

[DangerPaul]

okay sir, i will admit that i was wrong.

let me rephrase. rights aren't being taken away. but the way i see it, the chance of receiving these rights is being taken away.

leah gays aren't acceptable to jesus, they don't need rights

I accept Finawin's chosen lifestyle, why won't jesus?

[Tae-Bo]

Lyion has said everything I need to, Im not much of a debater.

You have now officially made my CA shit-list. Get the fuck out of this thread... hell, the whole CA forum could do well in losing you. Holy fucking hell, think for yourself or SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Waaah, damn you get pretty worked up over this.

Because someone comes and supports what I said, I have no place here.

Oh I see now, because I have a different opinion on this all you just plain dont like me now...I get it. Pathetic.

no i think it has something to do with not being able to add anything to a thread that hasn't already been said or thought of

in essence you're just a loud fat cheerleader

[Harrison]

What Lyion said came after what I said.

He just said what I did better, but I've already said this and you like so many others, ignored it.

I voted for Bush because I know if we're going to be attacked again he wont take any shit. From anyone.

That's what I said.

I trust GW more in regards to being aggressive against Terrorism and ensuring the country is safer.

That's what he said later. Same idea except he just words it differently.

[Lyion]

If you all really want to argue the military bit, we'll need a whole 'nother' thread... It's about time we hashed this out...

For Lyion's points...

1. Military benefits. We can cover this elsewhere.

2. Unless you are part of the $250k+ crowd, Bush has done sooo very little to help you out with tax cuts. We can get into this if you want... however, Google a quick comparison on the beneficiaries of his supposed tax-cuts before you decide on the merits of this argument.

I don't make 250k and my tax benefits have been quite nice and I appreciate them. I don't need to GOOGLE. I can look at my personal tax returns and do a comparison of them and what the Kerry crew has said they want to institute.

I'll point you to fact check.org and this article:

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx@docID=106.html

Actually, according to a nonpartisan analysis by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, nearly 75% of all families are getting a tax cut this year from the two tax bills signed into law by President Bush in 2001 and 2002. The amounts vary widely, but the average is $1,217 – a dozen times more than Dean suggested.

Even families making only $20,000 to $30,000 a year are getting an average cut this year of $638. And 98.4% of that group -- "middle-class" by almost anybody's standards -- are getting some tax reduction, exactly contrary to what Dean said. And the amount of money is significant -- it increases their after-tax income an average of 2.7 percent above what it would have been before the Bush tax cuts.

And for those farther up in the middle-class hierarchy -- making $75,000 to $100,000 a year -- the Bush tax cuts are worth an average of $2,543 this year -- 25 times more than the $100 figure Dean suggested. More than 20 million American families earn $75,000 a year or more, and will be getting tax cuts in the thousands of dollars this year, not the the hundreds.

Generally, the only ones who get NO cut are those making less than $10,000 a year -- and few would think of them as middle-class. They’re the ones who earn too little to pay federal income tax in the first place, mostly singles and elderly retirees. Only 7 percent of them get a tax cut.

3. The bread-crumbs that Bush has given to the struggling small-business market has surely helped out... but if we scaled down the big-business tax cuts, personal wealth gains and ... oh yeah, holy shit, rampant corporate crime that he almost ENCOURAGES in big-business, Small Business owners would be rolling in cash. But, why encourage small businesses when they contribute less than 5% of your campaign funds? [i]

Bush has helped grow Small Business and his tax breaks help and promote growth. You can look at the economic charts and see the FACTS in regards to this. More importantly I work with small business owners and they are growing and being successful under Bush's policies. I'm sure their 'bread crumbs' are not important and they'd rather see a 10-15% tax increase from Kerry which any small business owner could tell you would hurt them, but not large corporations, but I personally would rather they didn't get hit with it.

4. Healthcare. Not going to happen in the next 4 years. The lobbyists have about 30 times the control on the fate of healthcare than the president. Voting for a president based on his healthcare ideas is blind.

Agreed, but I think Bush's modest proposals are doable. So, should I vote for a candidate who is full of shit, or one who is making good, workable proposals?

5. Agressive on terrorism? What has he accomplished? He's a fucking poster child for Al-Qaeda. He invaded a country and sold the idea to us on false ideas. He completely ignored the warnings for 9/11. Pre 9/11, his contributions to anti-terrorism can be summarized by pointing to the 13th green. Post 9/11, his contributions can be summarized by pointing out the rising death-toll in Iraq. We still don't have a credible justification for invading and occupying Iraq. We *still* don't have the world's support in this. Bush's anti-terrorism platform is so weak, I'm surprised you even mentioned it.

I disagree with your 9/11 assertions, and believe those are pure political hyperbole based on the facts presented.

Post 9/11, Let me summarize. Qadafi controlled, Most Al Qaeda leadership gone. Taliban gone. Elections in Afghanistan. Elections in Iraq. A devastated terrorist network. Actual Fear of reprisal versus rhetoric.
a Centralized war on terror in Iraq.

This has been beaten to death. Lets agree to disagree, or start a new thread.

6. Education. Another bit we can really delve into if you want. In short, we are now $7-8billion short on education reform because he's put so much emphasis on defense. It's at cold-war ratios now... this might be an even weaker platform than anti-terrorism.

Education spending is vastly higher. Educational accountability is in place. We'll always be short on educational spending, but do you honestly believe the Democrats, who are completely in bed with Teachers Unions can do anything to enforce accountability?

[Agrajag]

leah gays aren't acceptable to jesus, they don't need rights

Haha! Too funny!

[Agrajag]

1. Military benefits. We can cover this elsewhere.

Why cover this elsewhere? Would it hurt your arguement if you tried to say anything against it?

[Minrott]

Deciding factor = Kerry saying we need to pass the world's litmus test.

[vonkaar]

95% of your rebuttal was 'but Kerry blahblah'. This doesn't work. I'm asking why you vote for BUSH. My response focuses on BUSH. Stop using 'voting against Kerry' as justification on why you worship the Bush cack.