Michael Moore Strikes Again!

[Timber Loftis]

I can guarantee you that you will not find anyplace where Bush said "EMINENT THREAT." Positively guarantee that one.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: JK voted for authorization to go to WAR, if fact he said if you don't think the WAR was right DON"T VOTE for me then he voted against giving the warriors additional supplies they needed.

The last time I will dignify this with a response:

Kerry voted for authorization to go to war, and entered written statements into the congressional record that his support was conditional on trying once more with the UN, and on coming up with some funding from somewhere -- namely a rollback on tax cuts for the rich. He then voted against issuing that little monkee boy a big fat $87 billion dollar unfunded check that did not conform to the conditions he'd laid out. And, had that bill not passed, the Repugs would have had another version up for a vote in days, one that would have included some of the very fair Democratic demands -- such as funding -- and didn't just roll over and beg the administration for some more fiscal ram-rodding.

Bush has never made money for anyone doing anything in his whole life. He has succeeding in running every business into the ground, and with $5 trillion in debt, he's doing it to the country.

But, you've bought the rhetoric.

And, Harris sucks at baseball. [img]tongue.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]This would have been a nice full count foul-tip, but you hung it up high enough for a little leaguer(sp?) to run under it and catch it.

First, Kerry did a nice job of seperating the Warriors from the WAR, He voted for authorization, a Constitutional duty of a member of the Senate. He preformed his Constitutional duty, then placed the ball in the hands of the President to preform His Constitutional duty. Kerry may give whatever justification his little heart desires, but the fact remains he voted to give the President the authorization to USE FORCE at a time of his(the President of the USA) Choosing. Why should I feel sorry for Kerry in voting for something that may or maynot have resulted in being bent over and RAMRODED, Kerry is a big boy if he can't handle an ramrod, he should have voted against it! Life's hard and manure happens, don't come to me covered in it and try to tell it's rose pettels(sp?)

So what if President Bush hadn't made any money for anybody? Where the "Hale" does that even figure in the discussion? Please show me where the qualification for being President of the U.S.A. is you must make money in business? In which article of the Constitution is that located? Now I have joined you many times in complaining about the Budget increases and spending. "Hale" I went so far as to condem President Reagan for not having the testonterone producing glands to stand-up to Congress and tell them NO. Lordy I even praised President Clinton for standing up and shutting down the gov't, It is one of the few things He did that I said publicly (here on this board) was a good thing.

Harris catches the foul tip behind his back, while eat'n an hotdog he took from one of the fans, smiles and waves to the pretty girls in the stands, as the side retires. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 10-11-2004, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[Timber Loftis]

Yes, life is hard. And Bushie-boy is crying that once Kerry approved his authority, he wanted to fund the fiasco in a more responsible way. Everyone knows the PResident has to get money from Congress. Using the "flip flop" logic the Republicans keep arguing, the resulting scenario is that once a war is approved, no senator may ever vote against a request for money to spend on that war, no matter how much is requested, where the money is to come from, nor whether they agree with the big budget contract giveaways. That is an absurd result.

It's almost as absurd as "you can't support the troops and say bad things about the war." That's another absurdity, one that stifles the free, open, honest debate that is fundamental to a free democracy.

Now, truly, Harris, you know that's a homer. And, it's one I think you could agree with. So, stand up an applaud, and grab the guy selling the beer and peanuts, cause the 7th inning stretch is coming up and I need to load up on booze before they quit serving.

[Stratos]

Bush haven't called Iraq an 'eminent threat', as far as I know, just a 'threat'.

[John D Harris]

So let me get this straight, it's ok by you that Kerry voted to authorize the war, in doing so he fulfilled a constitutional duty, a duty he would have also fulfilled by voting against giving the President the authority, ths constitution say Congres must make the decesion, not how to vote on the decesion, or the manner/form in which the decesion must follow. Kerry votes for authority for the President to take steps at the time and place of his choosing/ when Kerry could have voted against doing that. The President does what Kerry and the rest of Congress authorized him to do, Kerry comes out and says Wrong War, wrong Place, wrong time(Paraphrased by me) talking about a war in which He, Kerry voted for, when he could have voted against the war, BUT DID NOT. After voting to authorize the President to make war, Kerry votes against additional funding of the war, in a tax protest. Then he comes out in the first debate and says we have to seperate the Warriors form the War. ANYBODY that believes suporting the troops means standing on the side lines yelling RAH RAH is foolish. Supporting the troops means making sure they have what they need, as best as humanly possible, if a new need arises then you get them what they now need as fast as possible. Now you want to see a REAL fipflop? Try this one on for size: We've heard the arguement it goes sometime like this. President Bush didn't even send the troops into war with the right body armour, so PGWB is bad. John kerry who voted against giving the troops the right body armour AFTER we discovered they needed more and better armour, so JK is good. Well spank my rear-end and paint it purple. GWB is bad because he can't for see the future and know everything that MIGHT come up, but JK is good because he can't see the present or is willing to do a damn thing about.

As for your budget Thingie: Using the "flip flop" logic the Republicans keep arguing, the resulting scenario is that once a war is approved, no senator may ever vote against a request for money to spend on that war, no matter how much is requested, where the money is to come from, nor whether they agree with the big budget contract giveaways. That is an absurd result.

Sure they may vote against it if they don't like what it is being spent on! Nobody even tried to say anything differant. But Kerry didn't vote for the money because he thought they should spend it on differant things, he voted agianst the money because he thought the rich were getting to much of a tax cut. Now please explain how the rich getting a tax cut means the troops should not get what they need? As for it being absurd, well the majority of what the gov't does is absurd, why the "Hale" should that stop them from doing anything differant? Have you ever seen the pork that is passed on a highway bill?

Radio anouncer:
Man look at Harris go, after delivering a fast ball down the pike,and T.L. swings, contacts, drives the ball deep into centerfield, Harris leaves the pitcher's mound runs the ball down leaps high into the air, streaches out snatches the ball out of a fan's hand 5 rows into centerfield bleachers. Saving his perfect game.

[Timber Loftis]

But Kerry didn't vote for the money because he thought they should spend it on differant things, he voted agianst the money because he thought the rich were getting to much of a tax cut. Now please explain how the rich getting a tax cut means the troops should not get what they need?

Again, let's not be ignorant to how Congress works. A bill comes up for a vote. I agree with items 1 through 25, but disagree with items 26-30. Additionally, I'd like to add a few items. Well, I try to negotiate with the other side of the aisle to get these changes put in the bill, saying that I will not vote for the bill unless the changes are made. The scenario that then follows is one of two things:

1. They bring the bill to a vote, knowing I won't support it in its current form. I vote against it. The bill passes without my support. The other side rammed the bill through, and won -- they got the version they wanted, and all I got was the right to vote "no" as an objection.

2. The bring the bill to a vote, knowing I won't support it in its current form. I vote against it, as do a majority of my colleagues. The bill fails. But, this was an important bill. So, the next day at 7 a.m., I have calls from 10 senators from the other side of the aisle. They tell me they have AMENDED the bill to include some of my concerns. (In this specific example, let's say that for instance, the included a rollback of taxcuts for the wealthy to help pay for the weapons.) They want to know if I will support it now. I say sure. The bill comes up for a vote again.

That's the legislative process. Had Kerry won on voting "no," the guns would have still made it to the troops. EVERYONE was trying to get the needed supplies to the troops. It wasn't a vote for getting them the supplies, it was a fight over HOW to best do it. Come hell or high water, the troops were going to get funded. That's why it makes it "spin" and "misrepresentation" to say that Kerry voted against body armor. The body armor was going to get funded, it was only a question as to how.

*Harris starts pitching wildly. On his fourth pitch to TL, he hits the Durham Bull mascot square in its head. TL walks. Next at-bat, on a 3-1 count, Harris finally lofts a low slider over the plate. TL connects hard, picking the ball up off the ground and sending it sailing. Stadium lights get broken, glass falls, and it becomes a funny scene. Cell phones all over the outfield cheap seats get taken out. Tort lawyers recieve personal injury phone calls.*

[Davros]

So who do you guys ythink will win - the Yanks or the Sox . Mind you, after all those weird baseball fanatasies, I am not sure I can trust any tip that either of you gave me .

[Timber Loftis]

[img]graemlins/whackya.gif[/img] *Seeing a third party to vent their angst against, TL and Harris grab their Louisville Sluggers and charge the loudmouth fan.* [img]graemlins/whackya.gif[/img]

See, and you thought violence was only reserved for footie. [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

[ 10-11-2004, 06:30 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Morgan_Corbesant]

Does anyone remember the roadside bomb that was found on the side of the road and didn't detonate properly? The reason for this was it wasn't an EXPLOSIVE round...it was a Sarin Gas round. Sarin Gas=CHEMICAL WEAPON! They say that they don't exist but they do. The idiots don't mark their different munitions so they can't be identified. People forget this stuff because the media gives a quick blip about it and that is the end of it. Just because we can't SEE it, doesn't mean its NOT there. Lets cut the crap, EVERYONE knows deep down that he has them. SCUD fuel was being produced in Iraq since around 2000. Since SCUDS only run off of SCUD fuel, and NOTHING else runs off of SCUD fuel, why the hell were they still making it if they had no SCUDS to put it in?! This chemical round was found on a road in a lame attempt to detonate it. Given...these are only two examples to the fact that they exist, but what more do you really need aside from a warehouse full of bombs that say "Chemical Weapons" on them?! Unmarked chemical weapons hidden within the confines of an armory full of conventional weapons is a pretty smart thing to do if you think about it.

MM is the king of this crap. He interviews people who's children are at war. All of the ones who hate it and are pissed off, and hate Bush, he puts into his movie. Anyone who isn't opposed to it is left out. Maybe one or two are in, but thats it. You can take anything said and make it out to be something that its not. Thus the "genius" that is Michael Moore. May he burn in a firey lake of vomit for his lies!

On a side note:

I'm currently working on a paper and film titled No "Moore" Lies. It's pretty much the opposite of F 9/11. I will be putting in all the stuff from the guys in Iraq and Afghanistan that aren't opposed to it and believe me, there are alot. I will interview those who support Bush and the war and put their views on tape. Maybe I can make millions too and start an Anti-Moore campaign .

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

Morgan, didn't we just get reports from Bush's own inspector that Saddam had, in fact, destroyed his weapons?