What was the deciding factor?

[Langston]

Yeah you did.

[Dancing.Bear]

True, Bush still has a say over the military though. He now could take a very aggressive stance in Iraq, which could be good or bad. It won't get to the point where he can just pass anything straight through congress. It'll just be easier than before.

[Lyion]

Iraq is controlling their own country, and they have elections early next year.
We aren't controlling things there.

Bush hasn't manipulated the military, despite what you may have read. He has let the ground commanders run things in Iraq, and now the Iraqi government is running the show there.

[The Kizzy]

Bush is EVIL, EVIL I SAY


Vonkaar, the repost counter is too long, seriously man, I can post something, and click to another thread, read 4 responses, post something else, and it fucking makes me wait. Very annoying.

[vonkaar]

28 seconds is too long?

[Langston]

When you're high on crack, I guess....

[Tacks]

15 seconds is too long (i got a you must wait error while writing this...funny)

[vonkaar]

Sorry... 30 seconds 'was' my limit but I changed it a while back.

If I make it too short, someone will come by and flood every topic.

This is more than a little off-topic, btw.

[bugthurn1]

Edcuation, Economy, SSI, Health Care and the Enviroment. Those are "my" top issues, and those are what the reasons why Bush didn't get a vote from me.

[Phantomfist]

Phantomfists' blind conservative cock-worship

Show me one example of this. And not one where I was mocking, being sarcastic, role reversing,..etc, to make my point. Just one where I was being serious.

I only need to look at any abortion or death penalty thread which you posted in to show you examples of your own utter blindness.

Last time I checked, you still never answered my "when does self-defense become murder" question, Mr Openmindedonlyinhisdreams.

[Phantomfist]

Oh yeah, one other thing. 28 seconds isn't too long on the repost timer.

[The Kizzy]

If people start spamming, then ban them. I just find it annoying that I am constantly having to retype posts because I get an error, and the back button clears whatever I just typed up. And sometimes, I have these doozies, and I look all smart and intelligent and stuff, and then when I click the back button, its just lost.

[vonkaar]

Phantomfists' blind conservative cock-worship

Show me one example of this. And not one where I was mocking, being sarcastic, role reversing,..etc, to make my point. Just one where I was being serious.

I only need to look at any abortion or death penalty thread which you posted in to show you examples of your own utter blindness.

Last time I checked, you still never answered my "when does self-defense become murder" question, Mr Openmindedonlyinhisdreams.

You were beat on every fucking point in that thread... it got boring. You had 1 bit left and I simply didn't feel like hammering that one home.

Also, the 'blind cock-worship' bit was 95% raillery... the whole point of that brilliant post seems lost on everyone . Way to pick your own insignificant bit out of an otherwise pristine insult on Fin...

Also also... I think that 'willing to accept change' fits the being open-minded description a lot more than its opposite. Close-minded = "abortion is wrong, always always always always always."

to me, anyway...

[vonkaar]

If people start spamming, then ban them. I just find it annoying that I am constantly having to retype posts because I get an error, and the back button clears whatever I just typed up. And sometimes, I have these doozies, and I look all smart and intelligent and stuff, and then when I click the back button, its just lost.

Ezboard's topic flood timer was 1 minute. It's not going any lower than 28 seconds. Holy shit, stay on topic... Bush Sucks.

[Dosi]

I will answer this thread's question: ignorance.

Here's why:

In presidential elections you have 4 groups: left wingers, right wingers, educated voters, and ignorant voters. Left wingers will always vote for a Democrat; right wingers will always vote for a Republican; educated voters vary dependent upon important issues facing them (this is where most 3rd party votes come from); and ignorant people vote for the candidate who can turn them out in the most numbers on certain issues.

The biggest chunk of ignorant voters this year were the Christians (not normal laid back Christians, I mean crazy-fuck Christians) and these people came out in droves to make sure the person who would most impose their values on others won. If you voted for Bush because he took the strongest stance on abortion, same-sex marriage, or other moral issues, sorry, you're an ignorant voter and you are the problem.

In a few years Iraq will be a distant memory, terrorism will still be there no matter who's elected; so if you voted for Bush or Kerry for either of these reasons, sorry, you're an ignorant voter and you are the problem.

If you voted for Bush or Kerry because one of their wives is more likable, sorry, you're an ignorant voter and you are the problem.

Let me tell you the issues that right/left wingers and educated voters base decisions upon: economic issues, broad foreign policy, healthcare, government programs, and education. The reason is that those issues are there now, and they'll be there 20 years from now. So, if you didn't vote with these issues as the only ones that mattered, you're a fucking ignorant idiot, you're the fucking problem in this country, and you really shouldn't be voting. Here's a tip on how to take the bridge over the river of bullshit: 90% of what presidential candidates argue over is actually just nonsense to get ignorant voters. The issues they actually want to push are ones they don't want to talk about and you have to look for.

It will not affect me one way or another as a heterosexual, white, male, upper-middle class business owner who wins the election, because I win no matter what. If you're a minority, you just lost big time, and it's a shit sandwich for you; however, you can take solice in the fact that I will be ok, while you're being fucked.

P.S. Hillary Clinton, Obama, Powell... none of these people, no matter how much you like them, will be elected. Prejudice and ignorance are still very, very real in this country and will not likely be overcome in four years or even my lifetime.

[Harrison]

That WAS ignorance you just posted.

. If you voted for Bush because he took the strongest stance on abortion, same-sex marriage, or other moral issues, sorry, you're an ignorant voter and you are the problem.

No that means you voted for Bush because he has your same stance on issues that are important to you. Just because YOU dont agree, that doesnt make the others ignorant.

In a few years Iraq will be a distant memory, terrorism will still be there no matter who's elected; so if you voted for Bush or Kerry for either of these reasons, sorry, you're an ignorant voter and you are the problem.

You're an idiot and that barely requires me to point out.

If you're a minority, you just lost big time, and it's a shit sandwich for you; however, you can take solice in the fact that I will be ok, while you're being fucked.

How are minorities being fucked? ...I dont see this...

P.S. Hillary Clinton, Obama, Powell... none of these people, no matter how much you like them, will be elected. Prejudice and ignorance are still very, very real in this country and will not likely be overcome in four years or even my lifetime.

You just MIGHT be wrong here, if only slightly. A woman I believe wont have the ability in 2008 to be president. But a black man might in my opinion. We will see though.

All in all your post was by far the most ignorant for today.

How is voting for someone who supports or has a stance equal or similar to your own ignorant?

[Phantomfist]

You really don't expect him to answer your questions, do you?

I suppose there's always a chance he might...

Everytime I hear someone claim a woman won't be elected President, I just think about the real Iron Maiden: Margaret Thatcher.

No, make that Prime Minister Thatcher. If those gits across the big pond can do it, we certainly can.

[Dosi]

No that means you voted for Bush because he has your same stance on issues that are important to you. Just because YOU dont agree, that doesnt make the others ignorant.

These people are not ignorant in having their opinion they're ignorant in their opinion itself. If you call gay people "faggots", women who have abortions "whores", or call black people "niggers". They are one and the same and they are all ignorant statements.

You're an idiot and that barely requires me to point out.

How does military action in Haiti, Grenada, or Somalia affect you today? I'd also be interested in hearing more about why I'm an idiot...

How are minorities being fucked? ...I dont see this...

How are minorities not being fucked?
Let's start with representation: Name a poor senator. Are the House and Senate more than 50% women, like our country? How many black representatives/senators are there? How many gay representatives/senators are there?
How about government programs: How is the single mother of 2 down the street doing, or is she a whore and we shouldn't worry about her? How is your gay (or even non-gay) friend who just got his health benefits taken away, because civil unions are being taken away in this country?
Move on to the economy: Do you know how the federal deficit works? I do, and it makes me richer and it makes the poor people poorer. How about the tax cuts that deepened that deficit, do you know how those help me and hurt the lower classes? I do, and it makes me richer and it makes the poor people poorer.

You seem to think that when I say "minority" it's a race issue, if you think that race is what makes a minority then you're delusional.

You just MIGHT be wrong here, if only slightly. A woman I believe wont have the ability in 2008 to be president. But a black man might in my opinion. We will see though.

Fair enough to disagree with me, but I think it's optimistic thinking about the prejudices of America on your part.

All in all your post was by far the most ignorant for today.

Have you read these boards?! You see my post as ignorant, because you disagree with it. I call people ignorant, because they fail to see a larger picture of what's happening because of their own prejudices and beliefs. I have my own morals and beliefs, but I don't think it's necessary to push them upon anyone through laws; and I certainly don't let them cloud my judgement in voting for who will be a better leader. In attempting to do so, by voting for someone for those reasons, people are ignorant in the most precise usage of the word.

How is voting for someone who supports or has a stance equal or similar to your own ignorant?

By all means I hope you do vote for a person with an equal stance, on issues that will affect you, not prevent someone else from being affected. If you think tax cuts and a business side economy are the way to go, fuck yeah, vote for Bush. If you think social security should be saved and want to rebuild alliances, Kerry's your man. Let me give you an analogy to voting for someone based on abortion or gay-marriage:

I want to plant corn in my field, but my two neighbors don't want me to grow corn in my fields because they think corn is evil; so they go and get and get legislation passed to keep me from planting corn in my field. What I grow in my field will not affect my neighbors in any way, except that they believe it is evil. I don't think corn is evil, but my right to grow corn has just been taken away, because my neighbors do. That to me is a lack of understanding for my own beliefs, and that, by definition, is ignorance.

[Langston]

I can tell you what you could do with one of those ears of corn...

I think what Finawin meant to say is that you're one of the most ARROGANT posters today - not the most IGNORANT. Glad to see that anyone that disagrees with you is ignorant, unenlightened, and doesn't see the big picture. Next time God's on vacation, I'll know who to call for all of the answers.

[vonkaar]

She's just bitter because she's a homosexual, African-American Jewish woman who thinks society owes her something.

[Langston]

don't they all?

[vonkaar]

whiners!

[Minrott]

I want to plant corn in my field, but my two neighbors don't want me to grow corn in my fields because they think corn is evil; so they go and get and get legislation passed to keep me from planting corn in my field. What I grow in my field will not affect my neighbors in any way, except that they believe it is evil. I don't think corn is evil, but my right to grow corn has just been taken away, because my neighbors do. That to me is a lack of understanding for my own beliefs, and that, by definition, is ignorance.

No it's not you twat, it's majority rules. You know, Democracy? You whining liberals talk about social injustice left and right, about ignorance and lack of empathy. All the while you try to steal other rights away from other people. Rights that you don't believe in. Rights that offend your sensibilities. My firearms won't harm you. My hunting won't harm you.

Maybe if the left went a little softer on the hipocracy for one fucking election, they'd pick up voters like me, who are concerned by all liberties, rather than just the PC ones that get prime time on MSNBC.

[Dosi]

I can tell you what you could do with one of those ears of corn...

I think what Finawin meant to say is that you're one of the most ARROGANT posters today - not the most IGNORANT. Glad to see that anyone that disagrees with you is ignorant, unenlightened, and doesn't see the big picture. Next time God's on vacation, I'll know who to call for all of the answers.

I'd say arrogant is a close, but slightly exaggerated adjective for me.

I would like to point out that no where in my statements did I mention people of differing opinions from my own are ignorant, I said people who vote for ignorant reasons are ignorant. I would like you to point me to the paragraph where I said that people who disagree with me are ignorant, cause I don't remember writing that. In fact, when Finawin disagreed with what I said, I did not call him ignorant or unenlightened; I simply gave more explanation for my argument.

[Dosi]

No it's not you twat, it's majority rules. You know, Democracy? You whining liberals talk about social injustice left and right, about ignorance and lack of empathy. All the while you try to steal other rights away from other people. Rights that you don't believe in. Rights that offend your sensibilities. My firearms won't harm you. My hunting won't harm you.

Maybe if the left went a little softer on the hipocracy for one fucking election, they'd pick up voters like me, who are concerned by all liberties, rather than just the PC ones that get prime time on MSNBC.

Let's break this shit down real quick...

So, you're saying that if a majority voted to take away your right to free speech, then you would be fine with that and you'd accept it without question.

You don't know what I believe in, nowhere in any of my posts did I mention my political leanings, I mentioned people being ignorant for why they vote. As far as I'm concerned my corn analogy holds true for your guns too, I think you should have a gun if you want a gun, am I still a liberal? I appreciate being labeled though, good call on that. You choose to jump out and make bad assumptions about my political lean, because I chose to use the two biggest moral issues in this election as examples.

Next completely unfounded, presumptuous, and inflammatory post, please... or are we actually going to have a discussion?