It is such an overwhelming task to sort through the barrels of information that one tends to throw their hands up and surrender to the mercies of those who seem to know. Time is closing in and the normal daily responsibilities do not warrant any leniency for this important issue. By pulling our resources and time together, we can try to reduce the burden to a manageable duty which we can take seriously and act on responsibly.

The purpose here is not to determine the rights or wrongs of opinions. It is a place to 'pool' the information together where it can be reviewed and commented on. Opinions may be expressed, but also must be respected as what they are... opinions. If you have found information that you feel is relevant and important to the determining of the candidates for this election, please share it here.

The topic here-in is one of deep rooted convictions and can very easily turn into quarantined trash. It will require an extra effort on our part to maintain a civil respect towards fellow posters. Let's try to operate this debate in a manner that would reflect self control and dignity.

Hopefully by the time we cast our vote, it will be with more confidence.

We can start with information that has already been presented here in the break room.

Posted by mikmik in the Who's Watching The Debate Thread...

<mikmik>
Who is scary?

http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbuti...himanyway.com/


THE CONSERVATIVE CASE AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH

and: Holding Politicians Accountable, the truth behind lies and mistruth's in the televised debates, and in campaign ads. Kerry and Bush.
</mikmik>


Then there is a response posted by Flood6:

<Flood6>
mikmik wrote:
Holding Politicians Accountable


I'm not so sure this site is as neutral as they claim to be. I've only read a few of their reports, but I see something of left-lean to a lot of what I've read. Again, I've only read a few reports, but things like FactCheck.org wrote:
And by the way, Poole was the Kenneth L. Lay Professor of Political Science at the University of Houston, a chair named for the former Enron Corp. chairman who was a big donor both to Bush and to his father. Poole is now teaching at the University of California, San Diego.
Taken from this article; now what does Ken Lay and his relation to W and/or W's Dad have to do with that article?

If the author was just trying to fill up some space, pointing out that "Poole" is a homonym for "pool", which are expensive puddles used by people to splash around in, also referred to by the Beverly Hill Billy's as "Concrete Ponds", might have have been equally relevant...

Maybe I'm just reading too much into it, I'm going to read a few more...
</Flood6>

It may or may not be left leaning. That doesn't say anything, it is just an (yours, flood6) opinion. If it is left leaning, can you show that? If there are worse transgressions, or more, reported on Bush, maybe he is worse?
But there must be tons of other sights and blogs that can show otherwise? I found these examples to be very well backed up with example, ie - there is reference to the evidence used to show the 'truth', or objective view.

He is the one who furnished the analysis! He is member of a conservative think tank, so you would think that he is biased towards Bush, if anything. That is the reason for mentioning him, he is relevent.

It just seems that calling someone 'Liberal' or 'conservative' is just silly. It may show a general outlook, but is irrelevent to what precisely a candidate stands for on individual polisies. It seems to me that republican opinion and views in general try to use 'Liberal' and 'left slant' like there is: 1) something tangible to that, when really it is virtually meaningless, and 2), that if the conservative view is 'objective' and all else is 'slanted' or tainted.
'Liberal' is a buzzword that is an argument against authority, and invalid.
It is funny how much pigeonholing and categorizing is supposed to substitute for fact and argument, when really it is an admission of lack of a credible point.
Calling someone or something 'Liberal' or 'left leaning' is a form of personal attack
---------------------------

In fact, this article shows that it is Bush supporters who are, in general, misguided as to what is reality:
Bush Supporters Misperceive World Public as Not Opposed to Iraq War,
Favoring Bush Reelection

Here is food for thought:

__________________
What I am is what I am, are you what you are, or what.
Eddie Brickel

Uh...to put it plainly - I love "bush" - always have...always will! (smiling)

Cheers!
Max

__________________
Maximilian
Maximum Beauty Products Supply Stores

Max can you tell us why?



DUH



Better read that twice!

It must have been the smile that caught me off guard. Being female I can understand that!

mik, my point was, why bring up Ken Lay's connection to W and his dad. The person doing the analysis was Professor Keith Poole. His position is sponsored by Ken Lay, but that was really irrelevant to the topic, then to make the connection to the President's Bush was making a stretch.

I just mentioned that it seemed less "neutral" than it was made out to be by the JohnKerryIsADouchBag site. And I'll freely admit that it is just my opinion and one based on only a few minutes spent there. Further, while I consider myself politically independant, I'll be the first person to admit that I have a right-lean, which further skews my perspective.

I completely agree about the "labels" thing. I try to only use the "liberal" tag when I see a blindly partisan action/stance/comment.

I have equal distain for the conservative who decides he believes one thing or another because the republican party says that is what he should believe: "I'm certainly not a 'liberal', I must be a conservative. Conservatives are Republicans, so I must be a Republican. Republicans believe *insert platform stance here* so I must believe that, too. Wow, that was easy. Those liberals are so nuts."

mikmik, I get the impression that you and I would disagree on several political issues, but I agree that the "pigeonholing" and blind partisan loyalty are dangerous.

__________________
SEO Firefox Extension | Free Link Development Tool | New SUSE Linux Users

flood6You are right, I see your point about the reference to Lay.


The name of the site gives it away (in a sarcastic sense): JohnKerryIsADouchBag LMAO. Your point is well taken.

I thank you for your honesty about yourself.

I was walking today, and it struck me rather hard (yikes!) that I am 'left leaning' in general, and I realized that I am actually quicker to see 'Liberal viewpoints' as true, and suspect 'different veiwpoints' readily and immediately.

It is the bane of being human :O), I suppose, but we don't HAVE to be lazy thinkers!

Thanks.

__________________
What I am is what I am, are you what you are, or what.
Eddie Brickel

Due to stories like this...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=189705... I really can't help but realize that the war that John Kerry calls wrong, is more than right. It shows the monstrous behavior of the animals we are having to deal with. Anyone who will behead or even threaten innocent people, needs to be put out of their misery. It has been commanded that we help the oppressed. And if you think these terrorist are only this way because of troop invasion you are misguided. It is behavior like this that has attracted the troops in the first place.

It doesn't matter to me that weapons of mass destruction were not found, or not. Even with that issue aside, they are a barbaric people who have no respect for human life. They make their decisions for the personal reward they expect in heaven for killing out the sin. They act upon their self-centeredness and not what is morally right. Most important, they have forsaken God and God's word, in the name of and for the sake of God. That is why they hate Christianity, they refuse to accept Christ as God. They live by the 'Old Law' and they will die by that same law. God said they would be drunk on their own blood and you can see that is true through the joy of the esteemed position they portrait as 'suicide bombers'.

They are not alone in 'blindness' and corruption. In this great nation and around the globe self proclaimed Christian people have forsaken the knowledge of God. They/we/I too are guilty of complacency and corruption/errors, giving Christ a bad wrap. It is our own complacency with sin/iniquity/wrong doings/disrespect... that is the fuel and it feeds the fire. It's about to explode. What is one to do?

Finding the truth in this world is no easy task. There are many truths to learn, there are many forces to face. Many of the mysteries take many generations of learning to discover. Knowledge is not poured in, it is learned and that takes time and I became tired and confused was wanting to be comfortable and not even try because everything is bigger than me, on and on. Why didn't God just wipe out the evil from the beginning then I wouldn't have to do anything... why was the burden of salvation placed on the one individual called Christ?

Okay then, I'll do my part, I might be small but it takes every piece of the puzzle to complete the picture. I will probably make mistakes so I will allow enough time for clean up. I know in my heart that God's word is true and I will use it to find the truths with-in the illusions of this world. I will do my best to follow Christ's examples so that I too am not fuel to the fire.

flood6

"pigeonholing" and blind partisan loyalty are dangerous.

</bold>

It is easy to be captured by complacency, thinking things have been this way and will always stay the same. It is easy to generalize and say that all party members think and act the same way. It's easy to trust someone now because you trusted them in the past and it seemed to have worked out okay. I was truly sure I wanted to vote for Bush, because the republican party seemed to be where I had always fit in. Due to information new to me I must re-evaluate my party's position. I have to make sure that the party I support really does reflect my views.

I went to the candidate sites:

http://www.georgewbush.com/

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html


...looking for information concerning the Patriot Act, it is the one thing that makes me question my choice of party. Maybe I didn't look hard enough, but I found nothing about it on either candidates site. I did find it here...
http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html
To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

I understand these are war times but I have to be concerned when things are rushed through such as this was. The "for other purposes" is intriguing as well. The book by William Cooper, former US Navel Intelligence Briefing member titled, 'Behold A Pale Horse' has some very interesting and insightful information which sheds a different light on how I view my government/world. His book isn't new, I have a 1991 publication which I'm only half through. But he offers an insight that very few have opportunity to see, much less share. We don't want to believe things like this really happen. But as I have learned through the years... I can't trust em any farther than I can throw em, and they will never cease to shock me. I realize that our security depends on secrecy and we have to trust to a certain extent, but I have to wonder if this trust is being taken advantage of.

This one issue could be the deciding factor for me. I will have to contemplate it some more... in prayer of course!

Same here, I love the whole Bush family for some inexplicable reason - they may be turds in person, but they're very cool as famous people go

__________________
Portitude - Not as fancy as we look

Thanks for the save there, Vis! (smiling)

__________________
Maximilian
Maximum Beauty Products Supply Stores

I got it the first time!! It made me smile ! How many times have you been sent to the corner?

May the Borg be with you

__________________
http://www.newhistoricalfictionbooks...uth-rebellion/
http://www.newhistoricalfictionbooks.co.uk

Name other companies that are large enough, experienced enough, have the resources, the know how, the distribution mechanisms, equipment, or even the personnel to do what Halliburton is doing in IRAQ.

I would no-bid them too!

Being an ex-CEO of Halliburton, sure the ties are strong, but that is good in this case.

IMO - The Dems just have another pretty-boy Rep that says what he is told to.

I personally believe that a terrorist attack on US soil at this time would push more voters to the Bush camp!

Ken

This is in no way prejudice but, if you want to see an escallation in terror attacks against the US, elect a US leader with Kerry's ancestry.

Do you fully understand the depth of hate between those religous groups?

We all know that religous wars have resulted in more deaths than the sum total of all other wars --- Don't we?

Ken

Going into the heart of Islam on a knowingly false accusation gets terrorists mad. It was Afganistan that caused the al-Queda to target the US. Iraq made it a million times worse than anyones ancestry could. Bush self proclaimed "We are doing God's work".
Don't know if you can get much more religiousely threatening than that.
I don't see Islam trying to blow the Vatican away. I'd say that is pretty much about as genealogically religious as you can get.
I wouldn't be to quick to place any credence on Bushes campaign of fear. The rest of the world would feel safer if Kerry wins, by a 2 to 1 margin.
More on the election tactics as veiwed from Canada:

And let me not forget to add this analysis of Bush and his idea of 'Freedom and Democracy'

THE CONSERVATIVE CASE AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH

__________________
What I am is what I am, are you what you are, or what.
Eddie Brickel

1) Terrorist attacks on US soil certainly didn't start with 9-11.

2) 9-11 was the direct result of the previous administration's letting down the guard while playing in the ovary office

3) Calling "Evil" for what it is, does not demonstrate that a new "Inquisition" is in progress.

Ken

1) Terrorist attacks on US soil certainly didn't start with 9-11.



2) 9-11 was the direct result of the previous administration's letting down the guard while playing in the ovary office
No, it happenned a year and 9 montyh's in Bushes administration, that is where the weaknesses occured.

Tye presence of the US supporting various military dictatorshps, supplying arms to the middle east, investing in countries with oppressive governments, sticking their nose into others business.
That started with Korea, Vietnam, and the middle east long ago.
It was a republican administration that sold drugs to supply arms in Central America.
The Republicans are the supporters of Multi-natonal invasions of other countries. It edid not start with Clinton, but it happened on Bushes watch.
Then, Bush made a grave error and lied abot Iraq, or used uncomfirmed and duious reports from the very republican and hawkish CIA and pentagon, and attacked Iraq who posed no threat to US soil. \That made matters worse, and he continues to compound the issue of fear by preaching more violence.
It is a devastating can of worms, and the present administration is responsible.

3) Calling "Evil" for what it is, does not demonstrate that a new "Inquisition" is in progress.
I do not understand your point :O)


Lieng about a threat, or proclaiming something evil, does not justify going to war and putting your own country at more risk from terrorists.
Calling something evil, is what the Muslim militants cal the US.
Putting your own people out of work, not covering health needs for 15% of your population, building a 400 billion dollar deficit is evil.
There are concerns that the US is coming closer to having an unserviceable debt load, and that a stock market crash is imminent.

That is evil.

I am so happy that I do not have to suffer the propagande and mudslinging arguments by living in the US right now. It is quite a sepectacle to watch you guys put on a circus down there, and make excuses for trying to promote ad campaigns into THE view of reality.

I know what freedom is, I know what democracy is, the whole world knows what it is. And the majority don't think the US really does.
The whole world fears Bush, not Clinton, not Kerry, Bush, and the neo-conservative 'freedom fighters'.
Like the US invented any of this, give me a break, don't let Bush snow you so badly.

The whole election situation, the campaigns, the behind the scenes deals and lobbyists, the emotional multimedia onslaught of sentiment and manipulated emotional rides, on par with Disnyland, no?

What happens when more countries start to cause problems, Ken? You have your hands more than full with the little country of Iraq. Lets throw a few African nations in there, another eastern european, and a couple of more like Syria, Libya.

Don't forget N. Korea. There are a whole lot of places terrorists hide. You going to try to cover the whole globe?

Think about where this is going, man.

Think about outsourcing, lost manufacturing, falling US dollars, rising interest rates, falling house prices, going from a surplus to the biggest deficit in history in a little over a year.

What the hell are you so concerned with Iraq for????
You had that place under control with no fly zones north and south. Now it is Chaos.

There are way morew people in oppressive and needy situations. 10. a 100 timres as many in other places. I don't need to here about 'rescuing' the Iraqi people, either. That doesn't hold water.

Bush screwed up bad, and it will get worse. But you guys will pay for it.

__________________
What I am is what I am, are you what you are, or what.
Eddie Brickel

Borgishsmorg!

Thanks Max, ctabuk,

Your input is most appreciated. It is the perfect example of the dream we are living. We are free spirited individuals who can exercise our birth right.


I tried to copy my table of pros and cons to my notepad to organize my post. The table didn't copy so it is stuck on this page... Just another nightmare... http://www.schoolhouseflash.com/borgishsmorg.htm


As for the economics issue, mayby someone could shed some new light there, but I really don't think it would matter because the economy of all nations are controlled by the 'Elite' of the biggest European Bank. I went back to find detailed information on this but couldn't locate the page. I have contacted the site owner for a lead to the information. This Site is constantly under attack due to the exsposing of the sensitive information put forth...
Ready for the ...

Twighlight Zone...
I found this site to be quite 'frantic' in expression, it certainly could use some WPW insight, but it contains some of the writings of W. Cooper as well as translation/interpretation of bible prophecy.
http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/coope...government.htm

The information presented by Cooper and others like Sherry, are not new to me but just sounded very extreme and outrageous to me in my younger years, however, now that I have more years behind me and more of God's word in me, it doesn't seem so impossible... just extreme!

You can put your head in the sand, but before you do... Kiss Your Ass Goodbye!




"Oops!"... I didn't type/spell the link correctly. there ya go. sorry:(

Ohhh MikMik, you got me hooked now. I am going to abide by the forum rules to help keep this a productive and enjoyable thread for us all. I will be responding to your and “Clicken’s” posts simultaneously. You have expressed many “mainstream” "democratic party” views and being an ex-lay minister, well versed in the Bible and major religions around the world, and being a Scientist by nature, ex-engineering manager and having owned more than one business, let’s address these issues in one fell swoop. These discussions tend to be emotional and impassioned as I can see you were by the number of spelling mistakes in your last post! Let’s preface by saying further that these “democrat party views” do not represent the essence of a democracy.

As far out as Kerry is, perched on that “left wing” bank – It does not represent “democracy”. Look how “Wikipedia” defines “left wing politics”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politics

“In politics, left-wing, political left, or simply the left, are terms which refer (with no particular precision) to the segment of the political spectrum typically associated with any of several strains of socialism, social democracy, or liberalism (especially in the American sense of the word), or with opposition to right-wing politics. Communism (as well as the Marxist philosophy that it relies on) and anarchism are considered to be radical forms of left-wing politics.”

It is completely understandable that residents of more “socialistic” countries sport more “socialistic” views, so I will try to appeal to your “logical” and "Intellegence” sides which I have seen demonstrated multiple times in these forums at WPW.

Many good links to follw there. Surely, you are not going to dismiss that as propaganda too! In fact, I’ll even philosophically grant you the point that the further either side diverges to extremism, the less logical either side expresses reality! I hope that we can keep that focus here