Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Here is a very comprehensive website.

http://www.thousandreasons.org/listB.html

I wish everyone who is thinking of voting for Bush would read it.

I looked through it and discovered this is far more slanted a "fact" piece than anything I've ever posted. Hell, I got criticized for posting an account of Kerry meeting some Marines in a Wendy's that the New York Post wrote about just because it was the New York Post. Meanwhile you post 1,000 reasons that people shouldn't vote for Bush that has speeches from Helen Thomas (A long avowed liberal.) articles from the world socialist website, Blackpool and Fylde Cuba Solidarity Campaign, Common Dreams.com, Bush Watch, AFL-CIO's website, United for a Fair Economy, United Steelworkers of America and that's before I get 150 articles down the list. Is that unbiased and factual?

Yeah.... very fair list you've decided to post.

Can I tell PAD it now guys? You know what I always tell him to do?

this is the point i was making in the other thread.

PAD is responding to something with a good argument and thunderscope being the democrat that he is, basically tells PAD to shut up b/c he doesnt agree with what PAD says...

seriously i dont agree with everything PAD says, but its like as soon as yall see a post of his, you automatically tell him to shut up. if you dont agree with somebody, freakin tell em you dont agree and argue your side or something, but dont tell people to shut up... the whole point of the forums is to talk.

Originally Posted by PittsburghAfterDark I looked through it and discovered this is far more slanted a "fact" piece than anything I've ever posted. Hell, I got criticized for posting an account of Kerry meeting some Marines in a Wendy's that the New York Post wrote about just because it was the New York Post. Meanwhile you post 1,000 reasons that people shouldn't vote for Bush that has speeches from Helen Thomas (A long avowed liberal.) articles from the world socialist website, Blackpool and Fylde Cuba Solidarity Campaign, Common Dreams.com, Bush Watch, AFL-CIO's website, United for a Fair Economy, United Steelworkers of America and that's before I get 150 articles down the list. Is that unbiased and factual? Yeah.... very fair list you've decided to post.

What matters is the accuracy PAD. Your defence is to cry LIBERAL!!!! I watched Bill O'reilly debate Paul Krugman on CNBC, and Bill came off like a loon. All he did was call ppl and Krugman names instead of offering facts.
What from the list do you think is not true?

Originally Posted by PittsburghAfterDark I looked through it and discovered this is far more slanted a "fact" piece than anything I've ever posted. Hell, I got criticized for posting an account of Kerry meeting some Marines in a Wendy's that the New York Post wrote about just because it was the New York Post. Meanwhile you post 1,000 reasons that people shouldn't vote for Bush that has speeches from Helen Thomas (A long avowed liberal.) articles from the world socialist website, Blackpool and Fylde Cuba Solidarity Campaign, Common Dreams.com, Bush Watch, AFL-CIO's website, United for a Fair Economy, United Steelworkers of America and that's before I get 150 articles down the list. Is that unbiased and factual? Yeah.... very fair list you've decided to post.

Of course it's a biased site. It's called 1000 Reasons To Vote Against Bush fercrissake. But it can be biased AND factual. I'm not vouching for every item on the list because I was at work when I posted it and didn't have time to read the entire 1400+ list. But just for shits and giggles, let's assume that 95% of the list is total crap. That still leave 70 good reasons to vote Bush out of office.

As long as you're happy with a 5% accuracy rating that's all that matters.

What was that they said about 1,000 monkeys with 1,000 typewriters producing Shakespeare? Yeah, same kind of accuracy.

Want me to find a site on 1,000 reasons not to vote for Kerry? It may have pieces from Rush Limbaugh, the NRA, G. Gordon Liddy, National Right to Life Campaign, the 700 Club, Ann Coultre but I can tell you I will have come up with 1,000 and dammit.... 5% of them might be accurate and that sure is enough to vote for Bush.

Did you ever hear of the 60/40 rule in politics? Basically you're never going to agree with any politician 100% of the time so you vote for the politician you agree with 60% of the time and eat the other 40. Before anyone says I agree 100% with Bush, you're wrong.

I've gone on the record saying his tax cuts weren't deep enough. There should be no prescription drug plan. His domestic spending record is abysmal. His stance on wanting to grant amnesty to illegals is political pandering at its worst and there are others. Unfortunately since we never talk about any of those things you sheep bleat "talking points! BLAH BLAH BLAH!".

If you're satisfied with 5% accuracy, so be it. I'll remember that the next time you smear any article I post.

PAD, most of your posts have 5% accuracy

Tell me, which one. Name them, link them, prove why they are. I'm willing to bet you can't. Now what was that you say again?

What I am trying to say is that you always post part of the story, you take pieces from a article that put Kerry in bad light and don't mention the entire facts

Originally Posted by PittsburghAfterDark Tell me, which one. Name them, link them, prove why they are. I'm willing to bet you can't. Now what was that you say again?

How about the thread where you said that nuclear arms were found in Iraq?

Originally Posted by PittsburghAfterDark As long as you're happy with a 5% accuracy rating that's all that matters.

It's called hyperbole, look it up. I think that most of the reasons are accurate.

I've gone on the record saying his tax cuts weren't deep enough. There should be no prescription drug plan. His domestic spending record is abysmal. His stance on wanting to grant amnesty to illegals is political pandering at its worst and there are others. Unfortunately since we never talk about any of those things you sheep bleat "talking points! BLAH BLAH BLAH!".

I'll see if I can add those to the list.

I would be happy to discuss all of Bush's shortcomings so feel free to start a thread about any of those. I only agree with the "amnesty for illegals = pandering" but if it keeps some Republicans from voting for Bush, I'm for it.

But that would require people to be open minded.

Originally Posted by PittsburghAfterDark Tell me, which one. Name them, link them, prove why they are. I'm willing to bet you can't. Now what was that you say again?

How about the post where you claimed Iraq under Saddam Hussein provided medical care for terrorist Abu Nidal, who you said died in an Iraqi hospital? It took me about five minutes to Google to news articles that found that Abu Nidal took his own life in a Baghdad apartment as Iraqi intelligence agents were coming for him.

I pointed out your error. You never responded to my post.

Here's the link.....your comments are halfway down the page.

http://cheapassgamer.com/forum/viewt...&start=120

Originally Posted by PittsburghAfterDark I've gone on the record saying his tax cuts weren't deep enough. There should be no prescription drug plan. His domestic spending record is abysmal. His stance on wanting to grant amnesty to illegals is political pandering at its worst and there are others. Unfortunately since we never talk about any of those things you sheep bleat "talking points! BLAH BLAH BLAH!". If you're satisfied with 5% accuracy, so be it. I'll remember that the next time you smear any article I post.

Look I could agree with you that the tax cuts weren't deep enough if you're referring to people $20K or lower not getting tax cuts. I remember the Dems arguing this with Republicans. Regardless I'd still right now have the tax cuts just pulled back for the rich because it would be a pain in the ASS to get $20K and below passed by a Republican Senate with a Democratic president if Kerry gets voted in.
What about how Bush feels about the Death Penalty? This is the man who probably had the HIGHEST rate of killings in Texas by the needle if you get what I mean(to my knowledge). I don't know if Kerry would do anything but something NEEDS to be done. We got guards watching who can't take anymore getting nightmares from this shit. If someone like Bush or if Kerry supports it they need to watch multiple executions close up THEN maybe I'll think about letting them keep their view on keeping even when it costs us too much in appeals.
Also what about reform of federal sentencing guidelines? Oh! That's right, Bush did JACK SHIT last time I heard though Kerry won't be any better. We need the prison system reformed to remember the old addage of a criminal "paying back his debt to society" plus have job programs of prisons that give them a chance on outside of getting hired instead of being turned down because they were a felon. Republicans critisize Democrats for wanting to cut the military, well here's an easy place you can cut a LOT of spending from and no, it won't endanger us in the end either. It has to be cut but fixed as well like I say.

Dennis, allow me to point out your error. According to Iraqi police, Abu Nidal shot himself in the mouth and died in an Iraqi hospital eight hours later, per this link from the BBC (not exactly, Fox News, ya know): http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2206991.stm

What's more interesting is that the Palestinians are disputing that this was a suicide, per this link and others: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...?oneclick=true

What exactly was The Hussein regime trying to hide? Or was this a legit suicide? Shot himself in the head four times, huh? Now that's persistent!


These links come from Google, BTW