|
Comments
Without a doubt, the terrorists would love to see Kerry in office. Not only would it give them a break from Bush's relentless search, but it would be a victory for them to claim they contributed to unseating an American president. I think Bin Laden is laughing at the US right now, because they can kill Americans with no public outcry, because the Americans are too busy trying to blame their own elected officials. HansMay 16 2004 10:49pm No doubt these terrorists will celebrate if Kerry wins in November. If that happens, the US as we know it is history. The next step will be an Islamic state. LarryJun 17 2004 6:02pm Bush has failed to do anything about bin Laden. Bush removed a secular dictator in Iraq, a country that will now be overrun with religious fanatics. Terrorists are having a ball, and Bush has succeeded in making America look like a bunch of idiots to the rest of the world. Mission Accomplished, Mr. bin Laden. Smarter than LarryJun 25 2004 10:25am Don't forget to thank the Democrats for doing everything in their power to interfere with the war effort. As far as Mr. bin Laden is concerned, he can't hear you because he is too busy trying to hide from President Bush. JerryJun 25 2004 3:51pm If you still think this is a war on terror, you're easily fooled, Jerry. Smarter than Jerry and Smarter than LarryJun 25 2004 8:44pm No matter which side you are on, you are all easily fooled. Richard M. NixonJun 27 2004 10:51pm I have supported Democratic candidates all my life, but I must admit I do not have faith in the Kerry ticket when it comes to terrorism. I think the party is trying to downplay the threat, and that is a fatal mistake. DonJul 08 2004 9:10pm Terrorists would vote for Kerry and his trial lawyer side kick. Kerry is worried about what France and the EU think. I think Kerry is an appeaser and far too worried about what people think, that is not leadership, that is a popularity contest. If Kerry wins I am concerned he will be busy asking France what we should do or worrying how we might ?look? while radical Islamic terrorists attack. I do not agree with everything Bush does but I want a leader, not a guy who will change his mind based on popular opinion. smart fella not a fart smellaJul 12 2004 12:37pm Bush has no idea how to deal with terrorists. It's worse now than it was 2 years ago. They want 4 more years of manipulating W. AnonymousJul 14 2004 6:36pm After 9/11 the whole world poured out our sympathy and support to the US. Anything you asked of us, we were there. Bush's myopic and short-sighted world view has managed to turn you into the bad guys and make too many Americans hate and fear the rest of the world. If he had said something like the sanctions in Iraq aren't working, we want Iraq back as an ally because we need some strong Mid East allies since 9/11 and that can't happen with Hussein... Something along those lines, you might have continued to enjoy unprecedented world support. Instead he digressed into his dementia about WMD and terrorists links to Al Qaeda. Unfortunately, Kerry is also weak. Maybe if Bush wins in Nov. both parties will field strong candidates in 08. If Kerry wins, he'll be another one term president. It's too bad your parties always feel obligated to stick with the encumbent. I'm not an American but my parents are and so is my older brother. I have an American passport and can probably vote but I don't because I've never lived there but obviously I do feel close ties to you. I hope you get out of the political morass your in next election because a strong, confident United States benefits everybody. Right now you might be strong but you're not confident. You're scared and suspicious and that has to end. AnonymousAug 18 2004 8:12am Bush is the greatest president of all time. AnonymousAug 23 2004 10:16pm I don't know who they'd vote for but if they want a good laugh they should watch the Republican convention. Comparing Bush to Churchill and Iraq to Nazi Germany. It's gut splitting humour. I can't watch it while eating because the milk comes out of my nose. It's just fantastic deadpan humour. AnonymousSep 02 2004 8:09am True. Bush has accomplished so much while enduring the constant attacks of the left. Churchill probably would have folded by now under such pressure. LonnieSep 28 2004 5:56am Lonnie, Churchill was retired because of the left. He was asked to return to politics. He was a lone beacon for over 20 years. Even during WW1 he frequently stood alone. Bush has never experienced any intragovernmental opposition. None what so ever. There was a period when to even question his administration was considered treasonous. Conversely, Churchill was about the only one who did question his government and to do so was almost treasonous. You obviously don't know anything about Churchill at all do you. You just decided to post a comment despite your appalling ignorance. AnonymousOct 05 2004 5:45pm I should add that it is abundantly evident that you didn't watch the republican convention and you're probably not even watching the debates. AnonymousOct 05 2004 5:48pm BUSH RULES! AnonymousNov 06 2004 12:26pm No doubt those who want to harm USA should support Democrat. Modern Democrat is very much like Comminist Party like what we had in Poland at one time. This is very dangerous because many support without knowing harm they can cause. KKNov 18 2005 1:36pm #019 - 11/30/04 THE END OBSOLETEFeb 14 2007 8:26am hello idiots everyone who says democrats are softer on terrorist needs to ckeck the facts. bush a republican was president during the worst terrorist attack in u.s history AnonymousApr 25 2008 10:16am A terrorist attack which would not have happened if Bill Clinton (a Democrat) was not so weak. DonSep 05 2008 5:23pm bush is a coward who used family connections too dodge the war while kerry was in the jungle fighting it. AnonymousMay 10 2011 5:32am iCw25i Great, thanks for sharing this article post. Awesome. xvrkNXflAOTcgyjQAug 05 2014 7:20am wH4Wf9 There is evidently a bunch to identify about this. I believe you made some good points in features also. bDTDoulmtdKNiUzPgDec 21 2014 10:38am I haven't heard any Democrat actually try to exaipln this bill. Why do you suppose that is? Obama said they don't because the people wouldn't understand it yet they had to coerce members of their own party into voting for this bill. Why do you suppose that is? O'Reilly was interviewing a Democratic member of the House. He asked him who was going to enforce the mandated health insurance. Weiner wouldn't answer. He just said its the law. He would not admit that the IRS will enforce the mandate even though its public knowledge that the IRS is hiring 16,000 new employees for that very purpose. 16,000 new hires whose salaries are not included in the bill.Debby Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat, said just before the vote that if the Stupak amendment was in the bill, some of members of the House would vote no yet the Democrats claim there is nothing in the bill that funds abortion. If that is so, why would they change their vote if Stupak got an amendment stating that it would not fund abortions? I don't believe the Democrats have been honest about this bill in any way, shape, or form judging by the evidence. In fact, what the Republicans have been saying has rung true. You are listening with a biased ear. UbdNQQt1v7Dec 12 2015 6:18pm Add a comment: Vote Results |
