My guess, he's probably voting for one of these guys, or maybe he will vote for Kerry. Probably not much difference. http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=BZZ91748 http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=MZZ75354
i think if someone wants to make a case against bush for fighting terrorism shouldn't be using the war in iraq as their talking point. i think it would be a much better arguement to say that if bush wanted to protect the united states against terrorism that he should put more funds into homeland security. bush said in the debate that they've spent 30 billion on homeland security, so is that enough to protect out country and citizens? we can easly look at the tax cut for the top 1% which was around 80 billion, combine just that with the 30 billion and that would make a really big difference on our first responders and protecting our borders. you can look at the tax cut for that 1% in many fifferent ways, yes it does create jobs but if it lessons our country's ability to protect themselves it can cause for job loses than it creates. just imagine another 9/11 attack and what that would do to our economy. we have still not recovered from what 9/11 did to our economy and another attack would just build on that. one of bush's problems is that a lot of the programs he passed were underfunded because of the economy, there is only so much he can do with what he had to work with. i just don't think that the democrats trying to use the war in iraq to defeat bush is gonna work because the majority of the country understands that iraq is a very important part of fighting the terrorist. as i said in a previous post it would be nice to see people express their opinions about the elections without using the political talking points because it really puts the person in a disadvantage to defend the opinion when its not their own opinion, if you're gonna argue a political point try to make it your own point, exactly why does something affect you and in what way.
it is becoming more and more apparent that rex doesnt have the intellect required to play the role of the indignant liberal.
It is important to realize that throwing money at a problem does not fix the problem. Rather than how much money has been spent, I'm much more interested in how many qualified people have been put on the street and behind computers to do the actual "work" of homeland security. Homeland Security is still a new government agency, and all the restructuring and hiring of skilled, qualified, individuals takes time, unfortunately. Simply giving them a huge budget does not fix anything. As for the protection of our borders, I feel the only organization with the manpower and equipment to do an adequate job is the US military. I believe that is one thing Bush is a addressing when he talks of removing troops from Europe and Korea and bringing them back to the US. Whether the sitituation in Iraq allows for this to work remains to be seen.
Just think in a month the :cry: :cry: :cry: ING left liberals will be able to dry their wittle eyes and move on. We can only hope. they'll have 4 more years to find pictures of W on the web. bless their wittle hobbyless hearts LOL :thumb:
