I admire the Liberals on this forum and their ability to....

[Wake up CALL]

1) Remain optimistic in the face of certain defeat in November

2) Trust in biased polls in order to maintain number 1 above

3) Defend their "Anybody But Bush" candidate publicly while privately cursing the rotten luck

4) Call out the Republicans for smearing their heroic veteran while at the same time attempting to smear other heroic veterans of the Vietnam era without a 2nd thought

5) Look back on the "Good Old Days" of President Clinton awaiting Hillarys climb to the top in 2008.

6) Ignoring the fact that even if a nuclear explosion eliminated every viable Republican candidate for President that Congress will stay in control of the Republicans and this country would still have a fighting chance of survival

I salute the disingenuous Liberals here and everywhere. Don't feel too bad the French still love you! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[cardcounter0]

"5) Look back on the "Good Old Days" of President Clinton awaiting Hillarys climb to the top in 2008."

Wow! Somebody must have mixed up a batch of the "Hillary" kool-aid again.
/images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Remain optimistic in the face of certain defeat in November

2) Trust in biased polls in order to maintain number 1 above

[/ QUOTE ]

What are the unbiased sources you are using to reach the conclusion of a certain victory for Republicans?

[ QUOTE ]
3) Defend their "Anybody But Bush" candidate publicly while privately cursing the rotten luck

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you have a point here. Liberals should/could have chosen a better candidate. However, elections against incumbents by their nature tend to be an indictment on the status quo. To a certain extent, the 2000 campaign that the Republicans ran was an indictment on the Clinton administration, not a pro-Bush campaign.

[ QUOTE ]
4) Call out the Republicans for smearing their heroic veteran while at the same time attempting to smear other heroic veterans of the Vietnam era without a 2nd thought

[/ QUOTE ]

Total crap. There is a world of difference between the two. It is an absolutely fair criticism of Kerry challenge his post war behavior and have people vote up or down based in part on whether that matters today and, if so, does it favor Kerry or Bush. Had they down just that, I doubt there would be much flack. However, instead of taking that approach, they decided to attack the actual service that Kerry performed while in the military.

I don't know exactly what "other heroic vets" you are referring to, but notice that Kerry is not attacking the swifties because of how they performed when serving their country, rather he is attacking them for how they are behaving now. Further, the statements made by Kerry before congress after the war was an indictment on the war, not all of the warriors (as has been claimed ad nauseum). If you can't read his statements and see that, I honestly don't think you are reading them fairly.

[ QUOTE ]
5) Look back on the "Good Old Days" of President Clinton awaiting Hillarys climb to the top in 2008.

[/ QUOTE ]
The boogeyman is coming...


[ QUOTE ]
6) Ignoring the fact that even if a nuclear explosion eliminated every viable Republican candidate for President that Congress will stay in control of the Republicans and this country would still have a fighting chance of survival

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, now that's a good argument.

[Wake up CALL]

I appreciate your well thought out response Elwood but don't you think you took my post a bit too seriously? I never once implied that my post was unbiased nor had any basis in fact. If I was 100% sure of the outcome of this election then why would we have an election in the first place?

Thanks again,

[CORed]

[/ QUOTE ]5) Look back on the "Good Old Days" of President Clinton awaiting Hillarys climb to the top in 2008.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Clinton years: 8 years of economic prosperity. Combat missions that accomplished their goals (except for Somalia, which was initated by Bush, Sr,).

Why on earth would we want to go back to that when we can have recession and never-ending occupations?

[sameoldsht]

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
If I was 100% sure of the outcome of this election then why would we have an election in the first place?


[/ QUOTE ]

Because you might just be wrong and our elections aren't based on how certain you are of the outcome.

[Toro]

I'm definitely not a Liberal. In fact, I'm pretty conservative about many issues. But it is very strange because I despise the Republican Party. I think you're all a bunch of frauds.

[Sundevils21]

couldn't have said it better myself.
I've heard from a couple democrats that they are voting for Bush even though they don't like him. That way Hillary will have an unimpeaded path to the White House in 2008. Anybody else feel that way.

[ThaSaltCracka]

you know it should have ended with....... their ability to take everything seriously. geesh! Funny post BTW /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Remain optimistic in the face of certain defeat in November

2) Trust in biased polls in order to maintain number 1 above

3) Defend their "Anybody But Bush" candidate publicly while privately cursing the rotten luck

4) Call out the Republicans for smearing their heroic veteran while at the same time attempting to smear other heroic veterans of the Vietnam era without a 2nd thought

5) Look back on the "Good Old Days" of President Clinton awaiting Hillarys climb to the top in 2008.

6) Ignoring the fact that even if a nuclear explosion eliminated every viable Republican candidate for President that Congress will stay in control of the Republicans and this country would still have a fighting chance of survival

I salute the disingenuous Liberals here and everywhere. Don't feel too bad the French still love you! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Like most conservative propaganda, your six statements above are one-sided and purely devoid of facts. But it was a nice try, someone may believe it.

MEGADITTOS!....LOL

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm definitely not a Liberal. In fact, I'm pretty conservative about many issues. But it is very strange because I despise the Republican Party. I think you're all a bunch of frauds.

[/ QUOTE ]
My sentiments exactly. The conservative "talking heads" would have everybody believe that anyone who disagrees with the Republican party is a "liberal".

The Republican Party loves to spout "family values". I saw a good article a while back that detailed the personal "family values" histories of many top Republicans. It was very entertaining!

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
couldn't have said it better myself.
I've heard from a couple democrats that they are voting for Bush even though they don't like him. That way Hillary will have an unimpeaded path to the White House in 2008. Anybody else feel that way.

[/ QUOTE ]
I sure don't. The only place I have ever heard that was on the Limbaugh show. Maybe there are a few whack jobs that believe that, but I have never seen a real news story about it nor heard anyone say they will do that. Limbaugh's rantings are the source of this misinformation.

[cardcounter0]

Heard from democrats voting for Bush to help Hillary in 2008?
/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Now I know why Oxycotin is a Class III narcotic.

[nicky g]

I don;t really think of myself as a "liberal", but I'm sure most people here would call me that, and I've said that I think Bush will win and that I don't like Kerry at all (which Chris has said too), although I would still much prefer him to Bush.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
I would still much prefer him to Bush

[/ QUOTE ]

Easy for you to say, it's not your money he wants to confiscate with higher taxes to expand his political base /images/graemlins/smile.gif. Bring it on /images/graemlins/cool.gif !

[nicky g]

It's true that it doesn;t directly affect me. But just expressing my opinion as a "liberal".

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
What are the unbiased sources you are using to reach the conclusion of a certain victory for Republicans?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably Diebold and Jeb Bush.

[adios]

....