Vote Nader and Green. Screw these slimeball "Democratic" hypocrits. You know the Democrats are trying to stop Nader from getting on the ballot in several states? They are against democracy in the most fundamental sense. They are just as evil as the Republicans disfranchising thousands of voters in 2000.
If anyone thinks a vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush, guess who supports Nader? That's right, conservative Republicans. They've been working hard to help Nader all along.
We have a one party system, with republicans and democrats being the two visible faces of a single coin, both beholden to the lords and masters of US and international big business and banking. This is no conspiracy, merely the way things happen by default when a disproportionate amount of power is available to too few.
Our electoral system, antiquated and archaic, was designed to deal with a very different America than what exists now. We don't have any form of proportionate representation. I've said this in another post but its worth repeating: In 1992, Ross Perot's Reform Party received 19% of the votes, that is one 1 in 5 Americans voted Reform. In a fair system, one would have expected the Reform Party to have gained about 20% of the seats in Congress and Senate, reflecting the proportion of who voted for whom. So how many seats did Reform win, in reality, according to our system? Zero...a big , fat, round, nothing. Is this fair? Is this true representative democracy? Does this allow the peoples' voice to be heard? IMHO, absolutely NOT
We're in the classsic "between a rock and a hard place" situation. If you want to vote Nader, Green, Libertarian, or whatever, the system will not allow your voice to be heard. We don't even have a "none of the above" category. Spoiled ballots dont get counted, so nobody can run under the "Spoiled Ballot Party".
Now that DREs (electronic voting machines) are going to be used (estimates range from 40% to 75% of all polling stations in America), anything can happen. Theses machines have been proven unreliable. (California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley recently banned the use of Diebold machines in many California counties, due to gross unreliability and hackability. Someone who knows what he is doing can place multiple votes without detection. Recounts are not possible using these machines. Even a printed copy does not necessarily mean that your vote was registered in the way you intended. And worst of all, the sourcecode that controls machines being used in [i]public elections to elect people to public office is in the hands of PRIVATE corporations, and remains secret[i].
The whole thing needs a drastic overhaul,but will that ever happen when the folks who benefit from such a FUBAR mess remain holding the reins?
[SARCASM]Some form of democracy we have.[/SARCASM]
Imagine if everyone who doesn't vote (due to apathy or thinking it doesn't matter) were to consider going for Nader and the Greens. Spread the word from the rooftops, vote for an alternative!
A vote for Nader is more of a vote for Nader than a vote for the Greens. It's not so much an alternative, for the reason that it's not exactly a lasting alternative. Aside from Nader, the Greens don't have much cred.
Our electoral system, antiquated and archaic, was designed to deal with a very different America than what exists now. We don't have any form of proportionate representation. I've said this in another post but its worth repeating: In 1992, Ross Perot's Reform Party received 19% of the votes, that is one 1 in 5 Americans voted Reform. In a fair system, one would have expected the Reform Party to have gained about 20% of the seats in Congress and Senate, reflecting the proportion of who voted for whom. So how many seats did Reform win, in reality, according to our system? Zero...a big , fat, round, nothing. Is this fair? Is this true representative democracy? Does this allow the peoples' voice to be heard? IMHO, absolutely NOT
While I agree that the electoral system is an anachronism, the reason Perot's "Reform Party" didn't win in Congress is because a) very few people ran for Congress under the "Reform Party" and b) people didn't vote for them if they did. I put "Reform Party" in quotes because it wasn't a party, it was one very rich man who ran for president. It wasn't a parliamentary vote, it was a vote for one man for one office. This is also the problem with Nader.
I'd support a ranking or instant run-off system so that people wouldn't have to be afraid to vote for a third party. They could vote for their first choice, and then if their first choice didn't make it, their vote would go to their second choice. So if you prefer Nader to Kerry, and Kerry to Bush, you wouldn't be effectively voting for Bush when you vote for Nader. Then we could get a truer gauge of how many people want other parties.
As it is now, conservative Republicans are Nader's biggest backers, who are working hard and signing lots of petitions to make sure Nader gets on the ballot. That's just silly.
Vote Nader and Green. Screw these slimeball "Democratic" hypocrits. You know the Democrats are trying to stop Nader from getting on the ballot in several states? They are against democracy in the most fundamental sense. They are just as evil as the Republicans disfranchising thousands of voters in 2000.
By the way, Kerry's call for a raise in the minimum wage to $7 is a joke. A living wage in this country is a minimum of $10, and that's if one has health insurance. We need universal healthcare and a living wage. Only Ralph Nader has called for these.
You can't just nearly double the minimum wage in one fell swoop without wreaking havoc on the economy. Yes, it should be increased to match inflation over the past 20 years but NOT ALL AT ONCE.
As it is now, conservative Republicans are Nader's biggest backers, who are working hard and signing lots of petitions to make sure Nader gets on the ballot. That's just silly.
While there may be a schism in the republican party right now. The conservative leaders are backing Nader probably more to dilute democrat votes.
Personally I think the system is going to change drastically when the baby boomers are dead. Which won't happen until I'm an old man. How can a nation be directed efficiently when only 1% of its nation votes. With the way things are going, that is what our voting system is going to turn into.
Oh and I'm not voting either. I wonder what would happen if absolutely no one in the entire country at all didn't vote. (impossible I know) But still what would happen?
You can't just nearly double the minimum wage in one fell swoop without wreaking havoc on the economy. Yes, it should be increased to match inflation over the past 20 years but NOT ALL AT ONCE.
Actually you can. More money for people at the bottom = greater consumer spending. It's not a difficult concept. People who earn minimum wage right now are living paycheck to paycheck in abject poverty, often in debt. If you give them more money, consumer spending will increase. Inflation is not a problem because so much wealth is concentrated in the wealthy at this point in history.
Henry Ford paid his workers $5 a day (2-4 times the average pay of the time) so that his workers could afford the cars they were making.
What makes you think that Kerry changed his mind because he was wrong? It's called saying whatever will get you elected.
Nick
Quote:
Originally posted by JimDreamworx
Imagine if everyone who doesn't vote (due to apathy or thinking it doesn't matter) were to consider going for Nader and the Greens. Spread the word from the rooftops, vote for an alternative!
I understand Bush can't say "oops made a mistake." I mean that would be political suicide. But can anyone deny we went to war for the wrong reasons? And then mid way through he changed the reasons and the administration acted as if that was the reason they went to war? They were yelling WMD early on and at the beginning...then War On Terror a few weeks later.
Even presidents can get bad information, it's true...but the shear lack of any wrong bothers me to no end.
Weather Kerry changed his mind to help get elected or because it was the right thing to do (so I think) is up to debate I'll admit. But I'd rather someone who is willing to change their mind based on the facts then someone who will ignore the facts based on principle.
John Kerry is a retard for voting for the Patriot Act. Still a much better choice for the people, and for the environment. What he can do to the economy stands to be determined I think.
Yeah, Bush would never resort to bending the truth to get (re)elected would he?
If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
For Kerry it is easy.
Iraq war resolution
No Child Left Behind
Patriot Act
Those are off the top of my head.
Nick
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004..."We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton,_2/2/04]
?BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 ?I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops.? [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]_
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'...?Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference.?_ [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
?BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: ?Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony.? [President Bush, 3/30/04]
_
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists?including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents?issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT_ OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories?for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons._And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA ?I don't know where he is._You know, I just don't spend that much time on him? I truly am not that concerned about him.?_[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to?establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE _"Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday."_ [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW_ "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
Three pieces of legislation that Bush prevously was against but later signed two into law plus a lot of other flip-flops.
If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
For Kerry it is easy.
Iraq war resolution
No Child Left Behind
Patriot Act
Those are off the top of my head.
Nick
Perhaps if Bush was a Senator that would hold water? Aren't those all Bush laws/acts? It's very easy to pass something that has good intentions...when it starts failing though, don't keep beating it...have enough intelligence to know when the horse is dead.
While there may be a schism in the republican party right now. The conservative leaders are backing Nader probably more to dilute democrat votes.
Yeah, that's exactly my point. They're certainly not supporting him because they agree with him.
Quote:
Personally I think the system is going to change drastically when the baby boomers are dead. Which won't happen until I'm an old man. How can a nation be directed efficiently when only 1% of its nation votes. With the way things are going, that is what our voting system is going to turn into.
Oh and I'm not voting either. I wonder what would happen if absolutely no one in the entire country at all didn't vote. (impossible I know) But still what would happen?
You should vote man. I'd rather people voted for someone I don't like and put him in office than have people not vote at all. Our country asks so little of us. Make a choice and pull the lever, it's not that hard.
The big difference for me, is not that it's kerry or bush it's that Bush out also means all his goons will be out. No more Ashcroft, rumsfeld, powell, and no more fucking cheney.
Thank you WR. It's not that bloody difficult.
And thank you Faust. Again, it's not that ****ing difficult guys.
Just to clarify that OWNAGE, which occured on the 1st page of this thread . . . I think it had to do with this posted response:
Quote:
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004..."We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton,_2/2/04]
?BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 ?I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops.? [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]_
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'...?Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference.?_ [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
?BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: ?Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony.? [President Bush, 3/30/04]
_
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists?including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents?issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT_ OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories?for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons._And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA ?I don't know where he is._You know, I just don't spend that much time on him? I truly am not that concerned about him.?_[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to?establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE _"Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday."_ [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW_ "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
Three pieces of legislation that Bush prevously was against but later signed two into law plus a lot of other flip-flops
Yeah, that's exactly my point. They're certainly not supporting him because they agree with him.
You should vote man. I'd rather people voted for someone I don't like and put him in office than have people not vote at all. Our country asks so little of us. Make a choice and pull the lever, it's not that hard.
Very true. The only problem I have is stupid people voting just because "they like someone" not because they know anything about the issues. If you vote you should get a slight tax break, but you have to pass a test before you can vote. That would help out country out
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004..."We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton,_2/2/04]
?BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 ?I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops.? [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]
So a funding request is a change in policy now? Strange.
Quote:
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'...?Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference.?_ [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
?BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: ?Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony.? [President Bush, 3/30/04]
No change at all. Bush wanted assurance that the historical event would not set a precident. He got that assurance and then gladly let her testify.
Quote:
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists?including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents?issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
You make it sound like the Union of Concerned Scientists has no agenda of their own to push. Just because Bush doesn't adopt Kyoto and other measures they support doesn't mean he supports junk science.
Quote:
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT_ OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
I'll give you this one. All you have to do is remember that planes hitting buildings can change the perspective of pretty much anyone.
Quote:
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories?for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons._And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
Stupid, dishonest parsing nonsense. Weapons versus stockpiles.
Quote:
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
So two specific tariffs in three years equals hates free trade. What is next, declaring that Bush doesn't support free speech because he doesn't allow you to scream fire in a crowded theater? Free trade doesn't equal free from everything everywhere. Kerry supports free trade but wants some provisions of NAFTA revisited. I suppose Kerry is no longer a free trader as well by this reasoning.
Quote:
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA ?I don't know where he is._You know, I just don't spend that much time on him? I truly am not that concerned about him.?_[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
Bush wants justice. The title mischaracterizes the desire. That desire can be achieved whether he is dead or alive.
The second quote, needs some reference. It is clear it is an answer to something. Perhaps an inquiry about a timeframe for his capture I would suspect.
Quote:
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to?establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
New science and a policy adjustment. Bush supported voluntary caps with tax incentives on carbon dioxide gas emissions.
But I see a pattern with most of these here that again is entirely contrary to what is claimed with John Kerry. Bush unveiled a plan to propose legislation. During the "sausage-making" that is making law, changes occur. In the end the final law may not be exactly what was proposed at the beginning. To that I say, big deal. That is the nature of running legislation through Congress. That is very different than no longer supporting the finalized legislation that you VOTED FOR, supported and helped become law before you were running for president.
Quote:
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE _"Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
So Bush did not act IMMEDIATELY (using the quote there) act on calls for an investigation. He did ultimately act when he saw it would be necessary. I didn't even know an independent council was proposed legislation either?
Quote:
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
Again, as I stated...If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
Commissions are not legislation. Just for the record neither are Osama Bin Laden, Weapons of Mass Destruction, or giving testimony.
Quote:
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
Legislation? No. I would say every single item you have posted of this nature had to do with getting an assurance, having it met and then supporting it. So the 9/11 commission gives an assurance that their extension request won't put their presentation of findings right at the height of the election (thereby politicizing the commission) and hey, now there is support. Everything of this nature you have posted has to do with getting an assurance about polical matters, receiving it, and then moving on with support.
Quote:
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday."_ [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
Legislation? No. Also it is the characterization of the commission members in the first quote, and Bush stating his view in the second.
Quote:
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
Legislation? Yes, (finally) I'll say this does appear to be a position change. However I would like to see the full context of the quote with regard to what King was asking. It appears Bush is attempting to avoid a "gotcha" type question.
Quote:
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
I would say that Bush supports regime change more than nation building. That is what the second statement addresses.
Quote:
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
Legislation? No. More like a bluff that was called and letting some allies off the hook by not having to go on record.
Quote:
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW_ "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
You can support a bill after amendment and changes have been made, and not before. Bush didn't sign the law and then claim to no longer support it which is what Kerry has done. Changes can occur that during the process of crafting a bill that can change whether someone would support it. That is not the same as helping to pass the bill by voting for it, and then changing your mind after you already voted on the FINALIZED version of the bill.
You have not shown me ANY examples where Bush supported a finalized version of legislation, signed it into law, and then recanted his support later. All you've shown is that law making can be messy.
So I guess it is you who have been PWN3D as they claim.
unbelieveable . . . I wouldn't believe it if I didn't start to read it for myself . . .but there it is in clear millions-of-colours . . . complete self-deception at work . .
BTW . . . by the time you found it impossible to twist your rhetoric in such a way as to argue against any overt flop and say "finally" you had already given at least one . . . though all the others might as well have been conceded . . .
I can't even . . . its too much . . . . Ill get banned . . .
Comments
Originally posted by Existence
Vote Nader and Green. Screw these slimeball "Democratic" hypocrits. You know the Democrats are trying to stop Nader from getting on the ballot in several states? They are against democracy in the most fundamental sense. They are just as evil as the Republicans disfranchising thousands of voters in 2000.
Screw 'em. Vote Nader for president and Green for your local elections.
If anyone thinks a vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush, guess who supports Nader? That's right, conservative Republicans. They've been working hard to help Nader all along.
Originally posted by trumptman
What makes you think that Kerry changed his mind because he was wrong? It's called saying whatever will get you elected.
Nick
Yeah, Bush would never resort to bending the truth to get (re)elected would he?
Our electoral system, antiquated and archaic, was designed to deal with a very different America than what exists now. We don't have any form of proportionate representation. I've said this in another post but its worth repeating: In 1992, Ross Perot's Reform Party received 19% of the votes, that is one 1 in 5 Americans voted Reform. In a fair system, one would have expected the Reform Party to have gained about 20% of the seats in Congress and Senate, reflecting the proportion of who voted for whom. So how many seats did Reform win, in reality, according to our system? Zero...a big , fat, round, nothing. Is this fair? Is this true representative democracy? Does this allow the peoples' voice to be heard? IMHO, absolutely NOT
We're in the classsic "between a rock and a hard place" situation. If you want to vote Nader, Green, Libertarian, or whatever, the system will not allow your voice to be heard. We don't even have a "none of the above" category. Spoiled ballots dont get counted, so nobody can run under the "Spoiled Ballot Party".
Now that DREs (electronic voting machines) are going to be used (estimates range from 40% to 75% of all polling stations in America), anything can happen. Theses machines have been proven unreliable. (California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley recently banned the use of Diebold machines in many California counties, due to gross unreliability and hackability. Someone who knows what he is doing can place multiple votes without detection. Recounts are not possible using these machines. Even a printed copy does not necessarily mean that your vote was registered in the way you intended. And worst of all, the sourcecode that controls machines being used in [i]public elections to elect people to public office is in the hands of PRIVATE corporations, and remains secret[i].
The whole thing needs a drastic overhaul,but will that ever happen when the folks who benefit from such a FUBAR mess remain holding the reins?
[SARCASM]Some form of democracy we have.[/SARCASM]
BUSH/KERRY 04
Originally posted by JimDreamworx
Imagine if everyone who doesn't vote (due to apathy or thinking it doesn't matter) were to consider going for Nader and the Greens. Spread the word from the rooftops, vote for an alternative!
A vote for Nader is more of a vote for Nader than a vote for the Greens. It's not so much an alternative, for the reason that it's not exactly a lasting alternative. Aside from Nader, the Greens don't have much cred.
Originally posted by sammi jo
Our electoral system, antiquated and archaic, was designed to deal with a very different America than what exists now. We don't have any form of proportionate representation. I've said this in another post but its worth repeating: In 1992, Ross Perot's Reform Party received 19% of the votes, that is one 1 in 5 Americans voted Reform. In a fair system, one would have expected the Reform Party to have gained about 20% of the seats in Congress and Senate, reflecting the proportion of who voted for whom. So how many seats did Reform win, in reality, according to our system? Zero...a big , fat, round, nothing. Is this fair? Is this true representative democracy? Does this allow the peoples' voice to be heard? IMHO, absolutely NOT
While I agree that the electoral system is an anachronism, the reason Perot's "Reform Party" didn't win in Congress is because a) very few people ran for Congress under the "Reform Party" and b) people didn't vote for them if they did. I put "Reform Party" in quotes because it wasn't a party, it was one very rich man who ran for president. It wasn't a parliamentary vote, it was a vote for one man for one office. This is also the problem with Nader.
I'd support a ranking or instant run-off system so that people wouldn't have to be afraid to vote for a third party. They could vote for their first choice, and then if their first choice didn't make it, their vote would go to their second choice. So if you prefer Nader to Kerry, and Kerry to Bush, you wouldn't be effectively voting for Bush when you vote for Nader. Then we could get a truer gauge of how many people want other parties.
As it is now, conservative Republicans are Nader's biggest backers, who are working hard and signing lots of petitions to make sure Nader gets on the ballot. That's just silly.
Originally posted by Existence
Vote Nader and Green. Screw these slimeball "Democratic" hypocrits. You know the Democrats are trying to stop Nader from getting on the ballot in several states? They are against democracy in the most fundamental sense. They are just as evil as the Republicans disfranchising thousands of voters in 2000.
Screw 'em. Vote Nader for president and Green for your local elections.
By the way, Kerry's call for a raise in the minimum wage to $7 is a joke. A living wage in this country is a minimum of $10, and that's if one has health insurance. We need universal healthcare and a living wage. Only Ralph Nader has called for these.
You can't just nearly double the minimum wage in one fell swoop without wreaking havoc on the economy. Yes, it should be increased to match inflation over the past 20 years but NOT ALL AT ONCE.
Originally posted by BRussell
As it is now, conservative Republicans are Nader's biggest backers, who are working hard and signing lots of petitions to make sure Nader gets on the ballot. That's just silly.
While there may be a schism in the republican party right now. The conservative leaders are backing Nader probably more to dilute democrat votes.
Personally I think the system is going to change drastically when the baby boomers are dead. Which won't happen until I'm an old man. How can a nation be directed efficiently when only 1% of its nation votes. With the way things are going, that is what our voting system is going to turn into.
Oh and I'm not voting either. I wonder what would happen if absolutely no one in the entire country at all didn't vote. (impossible I know) But still what would happen?
Originally posted by BR
You can't just nearly double the minimum wage in one fell swoop without wreaking havoc on the economy. Yes, it should be increased to match inflation over the past 20 years but NOT ALL AT ONCE.
Actually you can. More money for people at the bottom = greater consumer spending. It's not a difficult concept. People who earn minimum wage right now are living paycheck to paycheck in abject poverty, often in debt. If you give them more money, consumer spending will increase. Inflation is not a problem because so much wealth is concentrated in the wealthy at this point in history.
Henry Ford paid his workers $5 a day (2-4 times the average pay of the time) so that his workers could afford the cars they were making.
Originally posted by trumptman
What makes you think that Kerry changed his mind because he was wrong? It's called saying whatever will get you elected.
Nick
Originally posted by JimDreamworx
Imagine if everyone who doesn't vote (due to apathy or thinking it doesn't matter) were to consider going for Nader and the Greens. Spread the word from the rooftops, vote for an alternative!
I understand Bush can't say "oops made a mistake." I mean that would be political suicide. But can anyone deny we went to war for the wrong reasons? And then mid way through he changed the reasons and the administration acted as if that was the reason they went to war? They were yelling WMD early on and at the beginning...then War On Terror a few weeks later.
Even presidents can get bad information, it's true...but the shear lack of any wrong bothers me to no end.
Weather Kerry changed his mind to help get elected or because it was the right thing to do (so I think) is up to debate I'll admit. But I'd rather someone who is willing to change their mind based on the facts then someone who will ignore the facts based on principle.
John Kerry is a retard for voting for the Patriot Act. Still a much better choice for the people, and for the environment. What he can do to the economy stands to be determined I think.
----------
http://www.IamVotingForNadarBecausei...shInOffice.com
Originally posted by Northgate
Yeah, Bush would never resort to bending the truth to get (re)elected would he?
If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
For Kerry it is easy.
Iraq war resolution
No Child Left Behind
Patriot Act
Those are off the top of my head.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
For Kerry it is easy.
Iraq war resolution
No Child Left Behind
Patriot Act
Those are off the top of my head.
Nick
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004..."We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton,_2/2/04]
?BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 ?I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops.? [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]_
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'...?Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference.?_ [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
?BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: ?Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony.? [President Bush, 3/30/04]
_
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists?including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents?issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT_ OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories?for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons._And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA ?I don't know where he is._You know, I just don't spend that much time on him? I truly am not that concerned about him.?_[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to?establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE _"Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday."_ [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW_ "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
Three pieces of legislation that Bush prevously was against but later signed two into law plus a lot of other flip-flops.
Originally posted by trumptman
If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
For Kerry it is easy.
Iraq war resolution
No Child Left Behind
Patriot Act
Those are off the top of my head.
Nick
Perhaps if Bush was a Senator that would hold water? Aren't those all Bush laws/acts? It's very easy to pass something that has good intentions...when it starts failing though, don't keep beating it...have enough intelligence to know when the horse is dead.
Originally posted by kraig911
While there may be a schism in the republican party right now. The conservative leaders are backing Nader probably more to dilute democrat votes.
Yeah, that's exactly my point. They're certainly not supporting him because they agree with him.
Personally I think the system is going to change drastically when the baby boomers are dead. Which won't happen until I'm an old man. How can a nation be directed efficiently when only 1% of its nation votes. With the way things are going, that is what our voting system is going to turn into.
Oh and I'm not voting either. I wonder what would happen if absolutely no one in the entire country at all didn't vote. (impossible I know) But still what would happen?
You should vote man. I'd rather people voted for someone I don't like and put him in office than have people not vote at all. Our country asks so little of us. Make a choice and pull the lever, it's not that hard.
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
The big difference for me, is not that it's kerry or bush it's that Bush out also means all his goons will be out. No more Ashcroft, rumsfeld, powell, and no more fucking cheney.
Thank you WR. It's not that bloody difficult.
And thank you Faust. Again, it's not that ****ing difficult guys.
Originally posted by tonton
0wn3d!!!!
Just to clarify that OWNAGE, which occured on the 1st page of this thread . . . I think it had to do with this posted response:
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004..."We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton,_2/2/04]
?BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 ?I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops.? [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]_
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'...?Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference.?_ [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
?BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: ?Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony.? [President Bush, 3/30/04]
_
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists?including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents?issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT_ OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories?for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons._And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA ?I don't know where he is._You know, I just don't spend that much time on him? I truly am not that concerned about him.?_[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to?establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE _"Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday."_ [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW_ "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
Three pieces of legislation that Bush prevously was against but later signed two into law plus a lot of other flip-flops
Originally posted by BRussell
Yeah, that's exactly my point. They're certainly not supporting him because they agree with him.
You should vote man. I'd rather people voted for someone I don't like and put him in office than have people not vote at all. Our country asks so little of us. Make a choice and pull the lever, it's not that hard.
Very true. The only problem I have is stupid people voting just because "they like someone" not because they know anything about the issues. If you vote you should get a slight tax break, but you have to pass a test before you can vote. That would help out country out
Originally posted by faust9
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004..."We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton,_2/2/04]
?BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 ?I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops.? [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]
So a funding request is a change in policy now? Strange.
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'...?Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference.?_ [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
?BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: ?Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony.? [President Bush, 3/30/04]
No change at all. Bush wanted assurance that the historical event would not set a precident. He got that assurance and then gladly let her testify.
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists?including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents?issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
You make it sound like the Union of Concerned Scientists has no agenda of their own to push. Just because Bush doesn't adopt Kyoto and other measures they support doesn't mean he supports junk science.
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT_ OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
I'll give you this one. All you have to do is remember that planes hitting buildings can change the perspective of pretty much anyone.
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories?for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons._And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
Stupid, dishonest parsing nonsense. Weapons versus stockpiles.
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
So two specific tariffs in three years equals hates free trade. What is next, declaring that Bush doesn't support free speech because he doesn't allow you to scream fire in a crowded theater? Free trade doesn't equal free from everything everywhere. Kerry supports free trade but wants some provisions of NAFTA revisited. I suppose Kerry is no longer a free trader as well by this reasoning.
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA ?I don't know where he is._You know, I just don't spend that much time on him? I truly am not that concerned about him.?_[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
Bush wants justice. The title mischaracterizes the desire. That desire can be achieved whether he is dead or alive.
The second quote, needs some reference. It is clear it is an answer to something. Perhaps an inquiry about a timeframe for his capture I would suspect.
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to?establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
New science and a policy adjustment. Bush supported voluntary caps with tax incentives on carbon dioxide gas emissions.
But I see a pattern with most of these here that again is entirely contrary to what is claimed with John Kerry. Bush unveiled a plan to propose legislation. During the "sausage-making" that is making law, changes occur. In the end the final law may not be exactly what was proposed at the beginning. To that I say, big deal. That is the nature of running legislation through Congress. That is very different than no longer supporting the finalized legislation that you VOTED FOR, supported and helped become law before you were running for president.
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE _"Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
So Bush did not act IMMEDIATELY (using the quote there) act on calls for an investigation. He did ultimately act when he saw it would be necessary. I didn't even know an independent council was proposed legislation either?
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
Again, as I stated...If you want to point out several clear pieces of legislation that Bush previously supported, signed into law, and now claims to be against you are welcome to do so.
Commissions are not legislation. Just for the record neither are Osama Bin Laden, Weapons of Mass Destruction, or giving testimony.
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
Legislation? No. I would say every single item you have posted of this nature had to do with getting an assurance, having it met and then supporting it. So the 9/11 commission gives an assurance that their extension request won't put their presentation of findings right at the height of the election (thereby politicizing the commission) and hey, now there is support. Everything of this nature you have posted has to do with getting an assurance about polical matters, receiving it, and then moving on with support.
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday."_ [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
Legislation? No. Also it is the characterization of the commission members in the first quote, and Bush stating his view in the second.
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
Legislation? Yes, (finally) I'll say this does appear to be a position change. However I would like to see the full context of the quote with regard to what King was asking. It appears Bush is attempting to avoid a "gotcha" type question.
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
I would say that Bush supports regime change more than nation building. That is what the second statement addresses.
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
Legislation? No. More like a bluff that was called and letting some allies off the hook by not having to go on record.
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW_ "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
You can support a bill after amendment and changes have been made, and not before. Bush didn't sign the law and then claim to no longer support it which is what Kerry has done. Changes can occur that during the process of crafting a bill that can change whether someone would support it. That is not the same as helping to pass the bill by voting for it, and then changing your mind after you already voted on the FINALIZED version of the bill.
You have not shown me ANY examples where Bush supported a finalized version of legislation, signed it into law, and then recanted his support later. All you've shown is that law making can be messy.
So I guess it is you who have been PWN3D as they claim.
Nick
BTW . . . by the time you found it impossible to twist your rhetoric in such a way as to argue against any overt flop and say "finally" you had already given at least one . . . though all the others might as well have been conceded . . .
I can't even . . . its too much . . . . Ill get banned . . .
hopefully this will encapsulate: