Do You Want To Re- Elect Bush For Presendent!

[sentrido]

You are actually going to look at a report of income from two years ago and relate that to the current economy? How ludicrious.


A person is smart, people are sheep. People think that the economy is doing bad because that is all that you see reported in the press. Even though jobs are being created left and right, un-employment is down, inflation is low, interest rates are low, housing starts are way up, first time home buyers are way up.

Reality and perception are two different things all together and the reality of things are that the economy is going strong but if the perception is otherwise, then sKerry actually has a chance of getting elected.

I Dont think its gone to crap cause of what the media says, I thnk its gone to crap cayse i'm living in it. After losing my CAREER to the events of 911, I started a new career. Making a lot less money. then,after about a year, I got to TRAIN MY INDIAN REPLACMENT, Who took my job with him when he went back to
Mumbia. (and even though that company is based in Burmuda, the F1!@#ing GOP thinks they would be greate to rin IT for the Department of Homeland Defense)Then I found another job. I got hired cause I was willing to work for half of what the nice 50 somethings who had been with that comapny for 25-30 years were making, before they were asked to leave. Then, my comapany got baught out by a competator. So 2 competative and profitable comapnies became one, only with a lot less employees. Me being one of those out on the street again. Thats great for the customers( less choice) and great for the workers ( less jobs), right?.People dont think the economy is great cause it isnt for most of them. Who cares if some corporation has record profits, mostly du to the great Tax windfall of the Bush administration, if it doesnt get down to them? They remeber the late 90's and this economy doesnt compare. The awsome 3 months of job growth are gone, and the numbers are back to where they were, about 100K a month, witch is just enough to absorb the people entering the workforce for the first time.GDP is back to is slow pace.4 more years of this? NO WAY.

Jobs arent being created Left and Right and unemplyment is not down. The housing bubble is just a side effect of low rates, wich is a side effect of the crap economy.

 

[mweiss]

Just so things about Kerry's performance in Vietnam are clear, it's worth reading a newly published article in Snopes about it.

 

[FredF]

So something that may or may not have happened the way he says it did is the centerpiece of his campaign? :huh:

What has he done since? Someone tell me, this is your perfect opportunity to tell the rest of us two things.

1. What he has done for the contry as a U.S. Senator? How has he demonstrated leadership and the ability to create an environment where businesses can grow and provide jobs? Not create job within the federal government, because that does not help the economy, but provide an environment where businesses can grow, make a profit, and create jobs.


2. How is a Lientenane(jg) from over thirty years ago qualified to wage a "more thoughtfull war against terrorism"? What is his actual plan? Other than to say, "I can do a better Job"? HOW? Tell us, we would love to hear it. Give us some details.

 

[Captain Ed]

I don't like either one.

They are both brother Bonesmen from Yale's Skull and Bones Society, and both multi-millionaires.

 

[sentrido]

Winning The Peace In Iraq



More than a year ago, President Bush stood on an aircraft carrier under a banner that proclaimed "mission accomplished." But today we know that the mission is not accomplished, hostilities have not ended and our men and women in uniform stand almost alone with the target squarely on their backs.

Our military performed brilliantly in the war's first mission: ending the regime of Saddam Hussein. Today, Americans share a desire for Iraqis to live with the blessings of democracy and security. John Kerry and John Edwards have a practical plan to win the peace in Iraq and bring our troops home.

We must change course in Iraq. Having gone to war, we cannot afford to fail at peace. The United States must take immediate measures to prevent Iraq from becoming a failed state that inevitably would become a haven for terrorists and a destabilizing force in the Middle East.

John Kerry and John Edwards will forge a new policy to promote stability, democracy, protection of minority and women's rights in Iraq, and peace in the region. John Kerry and John Edwards will work to gain new military and financial commitments from other nations so America isn't carrying the burden and risk virtually alone.

John Kerry and John Edwards will make the creation of a stable and secure environment in Iraq our immediate priority in order to lay the foundations for sustainable democracy. They will:

Persuade NATO to Make the Security of Iraq one of its Global Missions and to deploy a significant portion of the force needed to secure and win the peace in Iraq. NATO participation will in turn open the door to greater international involvement from non-NATO countries.


Internationalize the Non-Iraqi Reconstruction Personnel in Iraq, to share the costs and burdens, end the continuing perception of a U.S. occupation, and help coordinate reconstruction efforts, draft the constitution and organize elections.


Launch a Massive and Accelerated Training Effort to Build Iraqi Security Forces that can provide real security for the Iraqi people, including a major role for NATO. This is not a task for America alone; we must join as a partner with other nations.


Plan for Iraq’s Future by working with our allies to forgive Iraq’s multi-billion dollar debts and by supporting the development of a new Iraqi constitution and the political arrangements needed to protect minority rights. We will also convene a regional conference with Iraq's neighbors in order to secure a pledge of respect for Iraq's borders and non-interference in Iraq’s internal affairs.

 

[Fly]

Bush In Verbal Gaffe
Says White House never stops thinking about ways to harm U.S.

AUGUST 5--In an unfortunate, though not uncommon, verbal miscue, President George W. Bush today told a White House audience that his administration never stops thinking about ways to harm the United States. The embarrassing malapropism came as Bush appeared before military brass to sign a new $417 billion defense appropriation bill. Referring to the country's enemies, Bush said, "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." Click below if you'd like to view a video excerpt from today's ceremony.

Click here to view clip via Windows Media Player.
Click here to view clip via QuickTime.

 

[uafa21]

I will not vote for Bush! What exactly has he done in the four years he has served?

 

[AgMedallion]

Why is it that so-called 'Socialized Medicine' is good enough for Dubya and the folks of the Executive Branch, the entire Legislative and Judicial Branches and the US Military but as soon as someone proposes such a thing for the rest of us it becomes 'Socialism'?

I don't know what Democratic "talking points" you got that from, but it's pure bovine excrement. If you want the facts, check here:

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/04rates/h...npostal/ffs.asp


Government employees pay premiums for insurance through private health insurers and there's nothing socialistic about it. I'm not sure "Dubya's" is the same because the President normally goes to military hospitals, e.g. Walter Reed, Bethesda Naval, etc. Even ex-Presidents are covered e.g. even Clinton can get heart problems, STD's, etc. treated, though I don't think he is still entitled to treatment through military hospitals.

 

[KCFlyer]

I don't know what Democratic "talking points" you got that from, but it's pure bovine excrement. If you want the facts, check here:

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/04rates/h...npostal/ffs.asp
Government employees pay premiums for insurance through private health insurers and there's nothing socialistic about it. I'm not sure "Dubya's" is the same because the President normally goes to military hospitals, e.g. Walter Reed, Bethesda Naval, etc. Even ex-Presidents are covered e.g. even Clinton can get heart problems, STD's, etc. treated, though I don't think he is still entitled to treatment through military hospitals.

[post="176410"][/post]​

Any idea if you can tell me a web site that would show which plan Bush opted for? I can't seem to find it in a google search.

 

[whlinder]

Do You Want To Re- Elect Bush For Presendent?

No, I would like to elect John Kerry President.

 

[AA-MCI]

I don't know what Democratic "talking points" you got that from, but it's pure bovine excrement. If you want the facts, check here:

[post="176410"][/post]​

You sure have a persuasive way of dealing with folks, don't you? You had to go all the way back to the beginning of July to find something to argue about? Thankfully I'm not a Republican and am not expected to parrot anybody's 'talking points' or defend George's failed policies.

Government employees pay premiums for insurance through private health insurers and there's nothing socialistic about it.

[post="176410"][/post]​

Which of those plans is Trent Lott covered under? Bill Frist? How about William Rhenquist? How about Condoleeza Rice? Who was talking about the rank and file government employees covered by the plans you linked?

The Iraqi Constitution that George's boys wrote says that the Iraqi people have a right to health care. What's wrong with having the same rights for us?

Even ex-Presidents are covered e.g. even Clinton can get heart problems, STD's, etc. treated, though I don't think he is still entitled to treatment through military hospitals.

[post="176410"][/post]​

STD's? Funny. Maybe they'll help George with his little drinking problem, I mean 'choking on pretzels' problem.

 

[delldude]

you make me laugh

Bangert, who lived in Hanoi for about five years in the 1990s and still travels to the Communist totalitarian capital, in 2001 called Jane Fonda a "heroine" for her controversial visits to North Vietnam during the war, according to G2 Bulletin.

 

[KCFlyer]

Bangert, who lived in Hanoi for about five years in the 1990s and still travels to the Communist totalitarian capital, in 2001 called Jane Fonda a "heroine" for her controversial visits to North Vietnam during the war, according to G2 Bulletin.

I'm sorry...is Jane Fonda running for Office? What do you think will happen if Nixon is impeached? What's that? we're not running in 1972? Whaddya mean it's 2004?

 

[AgMedallion]

You sure have a persuasive way of dealing with folks, don't you? You had to go all the way back to the beginning of July to find something to argue about? Thankfully I'm not a Republican and am not expected to parrot anybody's 'talking points' or defend George's failed policies.
Which of those plans is Trent Lott covered under? Bill Frist? How about William Rhenquist? How about Condoleeza Rice? Who was talking about the rank and file government employees covered by the plans you linked?

I went "all the way back to the beginning of July" as you say, because I hadn't looked at this thread in a while. If there's some rule on this forum about not responding to material more than X days/weeks old, please let me know.


I just couldn't believe that anyone could provide such misinformation. I don't mean you because I doubt you invented it. It's just some BS (and that's the only way to describe it because it's so inaccurate) you read elsewhere. Trent Lott, Condoleeza Rice, et al, ALL have the same federal employee health plan benefits and none of them involve payments by government for medical care, i.e. socialized medicine. They all involve payments of premiums by both government (~75%) and the employee (~25%). I can't guarantee that members of congress pay the same percentage. It could be more or less. I do know that Postal Service employees pay a helluva lot less , probably because their union was involved, or maybe because of the politics involved when they went semi-private (or whatever term you want to use...they are not considered in the same category as "regular" government employees). Here's the actual statement and website where I got it re health benefits for Congress (I'm fairly certain that the Judiciary is the same, though I don't want to do endless googling to guarantee it).

This is from:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031200a.htm

Congress: Benefits
Members of Congress receive retirement and health benefits under the same plans available to other federal employees.


Regarding what health insurance benefits the President has, as I said before, I think it's different because they get medical care from U.S. military facilities, even have a U.S. Navy physician, afaik.

 

[AgMedallion]

Any idea if you can tell me a web site that would show which plan Bush opted for? I can't seem to find it in a google search.

[post="176419"][/post]​

As I replied to AA-MCI, I doubt that Presidents are under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. I'd be willing to bet that their health care isn't even through an insurance plan, but is instead through the military, except in emergencies like when Reagan was shot and they took him to the nearest facility, in his case George Washington University Hospital. Likewise, JFK was taken to that private hospital (Parkland Memorial?) in Dallas after he was shot.