US Elections 2004

[ollie]

JudgeNot:
The first time I ever cast a vote was for...  NIXON!    Of course, Nixon’s opponent was George McGovern – who was WAAAAAY to the left in those days.  Now days, McGovern would be somewhere to the right of Dubya.

Oh, my! Now we know where the responsibility lies for why America is as she is today.

 
Ollie

[RichardElchrist]

If you want socialized medical benefits in the US – the last ticket you want is one with John Edwards.  John Edwards has made millions upon millions upon millions of dollars (all YOUR money I might add) by preying on the medical system.  As a trial lawyer he specialized in suing doctors.  He has made his money by wheelchair jumping.  If you wonder why our current medical system is so expensive – blame Edwards and his evil cohorts.  Every penny he has made comes out of YOUR pocket through higher medical and insurance expenses.  If John Edwards overhauls the American Medical system he will be jerking the silver spoon from his own mouth.  In my opinion, Edwards is the lowest of the low – no one is more loathsome than a trial lawyer.

Wait a while and I will tell you what I really think.

Pray for John Edwards – but pray harder for his victims.


PS - Hitlary is evil.
 

Hey wait a second. By your arguemnet then George Bush would be much worse then Edwards. I mean George Bush cut in front of 100's and 100's of people in line to get into the Nat'l Guard. The majority of those poeple ended up in Nam and suffered the ravages of war. One of those would have been in the Guard if it weren't for Bush.

[RichardElchrist]

– no one is more loathsome than a trial lawyer.

I dunno. Oil men who claim to be Christian but are really sober dunks are prtty low. Especially since the blaspheme.
Also rich Americans who traded with the Nazi's after Pearl Harbor during WWII is pretty low too. Of xcourse I'm talking about Dubya's garndaddy Prescott 'love that Nazi money' Bush. :-)

[RichardElchrist]

Meet the real Bush.
These are from a NONPARTISAN site ok? If it is a partisan it's going to be mendacious. But this is a non partisan site whicjh also has some bad stuff the DNC did too. But since today's GOP uses so much deception they can be compared accurately to 'old red and scaly', the DNC is behind on distortion and mendacity. If anyone really want the truth spend time on this site:

(PS I am a former Republican. But my Love and devotion for the Light of God has made me a man without a party. )

Know the facts. And don't be fooled by the wolves in shepherds clothing!

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=145

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=143

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=102

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=109

http://www.factcheck.org/SpecialReports.aspx?docid=171

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=118

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=167

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=186

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=177

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=187

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=173

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=159

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=152

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=153
 
 
 

[JudgeNot]

RichardElchrist,
Hmmm: "nonpartisan" adjective, free from party affiliation or bias  
Free from party affiliation I can go along with.  Free from bias is humanly impossible.  Just as you are openly biased against Bush, yet you are free of party affiliation (as I am.)  Biases are perfectly within your rights and freedoms.  As are mine.  

I could care less about what Kerry or Bush did 20 years ago or 30 years ago or 40 years ago.  I could care less about whether Bush owns an oil well or a baseball team.  The fact that George Bush flew jets in the N.G. rather than going to Vietnam doesn’t impress me one way or another.  The fact that Kerry managed three purple hearts in 4 months (one a well documented “splinter” in his forearm) does not impact my vote one way or another.  And I could certainly care less about what Bush’s grandfather may have done.  That’s ludicrous! What has THAT got to do with anything other than fueling your bias?  Your biased and open accusation that Bush is lying about being a Christian and is a blasphemous lying dry-drunk does more to lower my impression of you than it does him.  I’m glad I don’t have your apparent ability to see so far into another man’s heart to know what’s really there – it would drive me totally insane.  

My biases, politically, are based on several very distinct and identifiable things:  The candidate who interprets The First Amendment and the Second Amendment most closely to my interpretation and the candidate who is willing to give more than lip service towards stopping 30 years of infanticide is the one who gets my vote.  Bush is well ahead of Kerry in all of those categories.  However, as I stated in a previous post, I intend to vote for neither.

One final thought – this website you tout as NONPARTISAN – who judges that?  Is there a “committee” out there somewhere that “certifies” things as partisan or nonpartisan” and under what rules?

As for me: I am partisan, and I am biased – that’s why I am able to have an opinion.  

[RichardElchrist]

RichardElchrist,
Hmmm: "nonpartisan" adjective, free from party affiliation or bias  
Free from party affiliation I can go along with.  Free from bias is humanly impossible.  Just as you are openly biased against Bush, yet you are free of party affiliation (as I am.)  Biases are perfectly within your rights and freedoms.  As are mine.  

I could care less about what Kerry or Bush did 20 years ago or 30 years ago or 40 years ago.  I could care less about whether Bush owns an oil well or a baseball team.  The fact that George Bush flew jets in the N.G. rather than going to Vietnam doesn’t impress me one way or another.  The fact that Kerry managed three purple hearts in 4 months (one a well documented “splinter” in his forearm) does not impact my vote one way or another.  And I could certainly care less about what Bush’s grandfather may have done.  That’s ludicrous! What has THAT got to do with anything other than fueling your bias?  Your biased and open accusation that Bush is lying about being a Christian and is a blasphemous lying dry-drunk does more to lower my impression of you than it does him.  I’m glad I don’t have your apparent ability to see so far into another man’s heart to know what’s really there – it would drive me totally insane.  

My biases, politically, are based on several very distinct and identifiable things:  The candidate who interprets The First Amendment and the Second Amendment most closely to my interpretation and the candidate who is willing to give more than lip service towards stopping 30 years of infanticide is the one who gets my vote.  Bush is well ahead of Kerry in all of those categories.  However, as I stated in a previous post, I intend to vote for neither.

One final thought – this website you tout as NONPARTISAN – who judges that?  Is there a “committee” out there somewhere that “certifies” things as partisan or nonpartisan” and under what rules?

As for me: I am partisan, and I am biased – that’s why I am able to have an opinion.  

I never used the word biased or unbiased.
I am swayed by one thing - the truth. What you call bias appears to really be convictions which can be dangerous. But you have the right to be convinced that a banana is really a grapefruit. And I respect your right to feel that way.

I don't look into Bush's heart, I look into his policies, his actions and his words and deeds. And they are unChrist like.

It appears that you personally don't factor in Christianity as a motive to vote for a president. That's excellent. But many do. And I believe Bush is decieving Christians by insinuating he walks the path of CHRIST.  And that's why I am here to spread unpartisan truth- not my truth but the truths of that unbiased and inpartisan website.

Partisanship is easily discernable to the open minded. www.bushlies.com and www.nojohnkerry.com- both clearly biased and partisan. www.factcheck.org works extremely hard at seperating the wheat from the chaff on both sides of the aisle. Use it to your advantage.

So if you want unpartisan truth I recommend you check out the site. Afterall if a politican uses mendacity to spin his interpretations of the 1st and 2nd amendments shouldn't that be a factor in your decision.
If Bush says Kerry is against the 2nd amendment and that isn't true then wouldn't you want to know that? Especially considering that he usurped the 1st amendment to get you to think that.  Now I'm not saying Bush said that- I said what if.
Because distortions and mendacity are the grist of the GOP mill right now.

Bottom line: use the the light of truth, not the darkness of distortion and mendacity to make the best decision come election day. And don't confuse convictions for truths.

[RichardElchrist]

I could care less about what Kerry or Bush did 20 years ago or 30 years ago or 40 years ago.  

Hmmm. Do you feel the same way about the Clinton's too?
If so I find your post refreshing!

[Reba]

clinton and kerry edwards all part of the baby killing party (democrate) so they will never get my vote. The so called abortion rights is my first line in the sand so to speak. So my the choice of the democrates them selfs they will never get my vote.

[RichardElchrist]

clinton and kerry edwards all part of the baby killing party (democrate) so they will never get my vote. The so called abortion rights is my first line in the sand so to speak. So my the choice of the democrates them selfs they will never get my vote.

Of course Reba you do realize that the lax in abortion policies all took place under GOP presidents right? Does that matter?
And of course only the Sunpreme Court can stop abortion and that probably will never happen.

Do you care if president's kill babies that were already born? Look how many people have died because Bush sent them off to war. Each one was somebody's baby. And what about the innocent Iraqi babies killed by US bombs. Does that matter to you at all?
Just curious. I'm not attacking you - I jst want to know about your line in the sand.

[Reba]

As i stated abortion is my line in the sand.     Seems the democrateic site that has its platform in it is being updated for the elections just now so i cant post the abortion plank.

[RichardElchrist]

As i stated abortion is my line in the sand.  

So should I interpret that as an unborn is more worthy then the born? The death of an unborn a greater tragedy then the death of a born baby?

[Reba]

Would you think the death of 1000 of greater pain then 10?


Baby killers are evil and anyone who supports them , as you are, or in any way,  are also evil.  You seem to support the killing of the unborn wow what  a man! hold you ground guy kill that child. Feel the warm blood run through you fingers, their blood is on your hands.

Yes i get emotional death is an emotional topic.

[sincereheart]

As i stated abortion is my line in the sand.  

So should I interpret that as an unborn is more worthy then the born? The death of an unborn a greater tragedy then the death of a born baby?

An unborn baby never volunteered....  

[nChrist]

Hello RichardElchrist,

If you are a part of the new Kerry reach out to Christians campaign, it won't work and it's a waste of time. I think that most of us have seen enough actions and heard enough words from Kerry and Bush to make up our minds. This is not to imply that Bush is a wonderful Christian, but it would imply a void of Biblical morals on the part of Kerry.

I really don't need any spins, commentary, or views from partisan or non-partisan web sites, news agencies, or special interest groups. I've heard and seen more than enough from the candidates themselves. The analogy that Bush may be a wolf in sheep's clothing would go in one ear and out the other. I already know that he is far from being a strong Christian. The analogy that Kerry may be the devil in ACLU's clothing is my personal observation that I didn't need any help with.

If there was a third ticket with more Biblical views I would consider voting for them. I would first be concerned about whether they had a chance of winning, and who would get the benefit of a split vote. If I concluded the third ticket didn't have a chance and Kerry would benefit from a split vote, I would vote for Bush. I would have the same concerns for any existing fourth and fifth tickets.

Most of us have heard the stories of the past so many times that they go in one ear and out the other. Most of us have also heard and seen the political machines for what they are - political machines.

I will listen, with interest, what the candidates themselves say. The same will be true of the candidates actions. I have almost no interest in spin, hype, and the messages of the political machines and news media. I'm sorry to be repetitive - the political machines and news media are spin and hype.

I will pay considerable attention to documented stands of the candidates that I have heard and seen for myself. Abortion will be one of those stands. Someone defending or promoting abortion wouldn't get my vote for dog catcher, much less a vote for President of the United States.

I also paid considerable attention to views on a strong military, and more specifically, providing for the needs of our young men and women serving us. I've heard their words and seen their actions from the candidates themselves. In my completely BIASED opinion, Kerry has no concern for either.

I will and have paid considerable attention to morals and Biblical values. In my completely BIASED opinion, Kerry has none.

If other Christians have opinions as BIASED as mine as, very few Christians will vote for Kerry. Regarding our Armed Services and providing for those who protect our way of life, Kerry serves our enemies. I realize that's my completely BIASED opinion, but that won't change. It's an absolute fact that Kerry voted to send our young men and women to war. It's also an absolute fact that Kerry later voted "NO" to buy supplies our young men and women fighting needed to survive. I saw and heard the spin and lies from his own mouth in trying to explain this. "I actually voted yes but I later voted no." This took my single digit respect for Kerry far into negative numbers. There is no explanation, and I'm not interested in the attempt.

I apologize for being so shy on this matter.

Love In Christ,
Tom

[JudgeNot]

Whoa! A lot has happened on this thread since I logged off two hours ago and just logged back in!  My-my!  What passions we have.
 
Passion is good as long as passion is for good.  (I just made that up all by myself!)  

Richard:

I never used the word biased or unbiased.

No – but as I demonstrated ‘bias’ is part of the definition of ‘partisan’.

I am swayed by one thing - the truth

Whose truth?  As I’ve said in other threads, there are three sides to every story: your side, my side and the truth.  Your side is only your side as you wish, according to the stories you make a decision to read or listen to and believe.  Which is exactly what my side is based on.  (Well – I am on the Bible’s side, also.)

I don't look into Bush's heart, I look into his policies, his actions and his words and deeds. And they are unChrist like.

According to whom you believe!  Have you actually WITNESSED these ‘atrosities' or are you depending on what others have told you and then using your brain to weed out the truth you personally want to believe?

It appears that you personally don't factor in Christianity as a motive to vote for a president.

I factor in Jesus Christ into every single minute of my life.  If you accuse me of not doing so because you have a different political opinion from mine, then we have no further reason to exchange any kind of communication.  Period.

And I believe Bush is decieving Christians by insinuating he walks the path of CHRIST.

Give us all an eyewitness account of his atrocities.

And that's why I am here to spread unpartisan truth

Impossible.  As I’ve pointed out you cannot take the 'bias' out of partisan.

So if you want unpartisan truth I recommend you check out the site.

I looked at your site and saw the points back and forth, with most going anti conservative.  But it is all someone's opinion.  If a car salesman is selling both Fords and Dodges does that make him nonpartisan?  Sheesh.

Afterall if a politican uses mendacity to spin his interpretations of the 1st and 2nd amendments shouldn't that be a factor in your decision.

It is.

If Bush says Kerry is against the 2nd amendment and that isn't true then wouldn't you want to know that?

I don’t care what ‘Bush says Kerry says’ or what ‘Kerry says Bush says’.  I care about what comes out of the individual's mouth.  Kerry is liberal – he interprets the 1st and 2nd amendment differently than I do.  I have heard his interpretations coming from his own lips.  Is that not good enough for you?  Do you understand what I just typed?  I AM NOT A LIBERAL.  I will never be or vote for a liberal.  Liberals are socialist baby killers. (As I have witnessed - no one told me that - I didn't get it from a website - I have WITNESSED it.)  Am I clear about my opinion?  YOU won’t change my opinion.  My opinion is based on biblical values.  

Because distortions and mendacity are the grist of the GOP mill right now.

I will not defend the GOP or any “party”.

Lastly, you posted:

And what about the innocent Iraqi babies killed by US bombs. Does that matter to you at all?

 
That is a ludicrous, defensive, childish statement that I wish you liberals would quit making – it shows deep ignorance.  It is obvious you would just as soon Saddam was still in power; even though he was killing 30,000 innocent men, women and babies every year.  His death rate almost equaled the ‘Death by Abortion Rate’ in America.  Sheesh.  Which way do you want it?  Do you care about the unborn AND the troops AND the Iraqi civilians or just your politics and getting your boy kerry elected?