Country Living
Country Living, Country Skills
Country People - A Country Living Resource and Community
Message Board
Country Topics
Trading Post
Memory Lane
Country Skills
Country Cooking

The Kitchen

Photo Gallery
Vintage Photos
Special Collections

Country Humor
Country Sounds
Coloring Book
Interactive Story

Farm Tractors
Tractor Parts
Tractor Manuals

Classic Trucks
Antique Tractors
Modern Tractors
Site Map
Links Page
Contact Us

Country Discussion Topics
To add your comments to this topic, click on one of the 'Reply' links below.

Is Bush trying to throw the election???
[Return to Topics]

screaminghollow    Posted 10-14-2004 at 09:01:21       [Reply]  [No Email]
I have now watched a majority portion of all three debates. Quite frankly, sometimes I wonder if GW is trying to lose. When he responds to a question or Kerry's statement in a moment that is dead serious, he pauses after the beginning phrase and gives that little nervous chuckle. Almost as if he thinks the subject is funny.

He and his folks have truely failed to get some of the message across. For Pete's sake, the Brits are already there with us. What allies are Kerry going to get together to fork out personnel and a share of that 200 billion to help us in Iraq. I'd be highly PO'd if he gave anything to the French to get them involved. Those lousy snail sucking SOB's were to busy sucking down profits administering the Iraq Oil for Food program. They didn't give a rats behind about the security of US citizens so long as the gazillion euros a month kept rolling in administering the program. Look at history. For the Past 100 yrs the French have done nothing but ignore problems and looked to us to bail their chestnuts our of fires. Of flippin course they weren't convinced of the existence of any danger to them, so long as the oil profits were flowing in their direction. As for the Germans, they were also profiting from Iraq the way it was.
I'll bet the Russian's might now be interested in a little action, but they have trouble paying their own fright right now.
It was GW's duty as president to protect the US from foreign threats. If there was any danger of Iraqi, WMD's or material for them falling into the hands of terrorists, it was GW's duty to err on the side of US security. It was his duty to act, even if the other allies wanted more proof. Had GW stalled waiting for the "so called Allies" and another terrorist strike hit the US or it's citizens, he'd be in far worse trouble with the voters.
I have some real dislikes for some of what GW has done, but I totally distrust Kerry and don't want him as President.
I sincerely hope GW does have an ace up his sleeve, but I watched his father do the same darn thing at the end of his second campaign.

Farmall    Posted 10-14-2004 at 19:23:49       [Reply]  [Send Email]

First off, I put on a uniform 3 times so that ALL could say what they thought about our elected officals, tho doing it with respect to those listening. Second Burr made the point about Bush being a loser in business. Heck, most presidents were losers. Jefferson couldnt farm. Several of them wernt lawyers, including Lincoln, who like others saved himself by getting into politics. Grant couldnt farm OR run a business. The Roosevelts wernt businessmen. They ran on there forebrears money. TR surly wasnt a military leader. Truman went bust in 21 in business. Clinton was busted because of too much white water. Third. Steve, as was sorda said earl;ier. What difference does it make why we went over there. Were there. Whether it was to get sand to pave more of the USA, get a superior breed of camel, or get oil. We went there cause we needed to be there (so we were told). Myself. I think wed a done better in Iran, but I also think it would have cost us much higher. I think, the war that is dragging Bush down will bring him back to office, cause old folks dont like changing horses in the middle of the stream as Abe said, Anyway, I got $100 on it going that way. and ive yet, except for Periot have never voted for a loser

Burrhead    Posted 10-14-2004 at 19:48:23       [Reply]  [No Email]
Naw Farmall if you'll check Scrub has never been a loser in business. The folks who invest in his companies are the losers.

Scrub and the Carlyle group are making millions, or possibly billions from the so called *War On Terrorism*.

No matter which direction you look at the Scrub team they are crooks and appear slimey.

If you'll check on your Whitewater comment, there was found to be no wrong doings on Clinton's part.

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 20:05:58       [Reply]  [No Email]
There was found no wrongdoing? Wasn't that because Rose law firm records were lost until the day after the statute of limitations prosecution date had expired? RN.

Burrhead    Posted 10-14-2004 at 20:21:06       [Reply]  [No Email]
he did'nt give a reason,, all Ken Starr said was there was nothing to prosecute there.

Coming from Ken I figger if there had been that after a $68mil investigation there would have been charges.

$68mil plus and all we found out was Slick Willie likes wimmin. I could have answered that question for a lot less taxpayer money.

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 20:29:20       [Reply]  [No Email]
And ex-governor of Arkansas with felony conviction died in prison (Tucker), couple others in Ark political scene pled guilty/convicted, information going to civil courts and judical hearing to pull Bill clinton law license for misconduct/ false or misleading statements. Another 20 years and might get some more information. RN.

Les    Posted 10-14-2004 at 15:49:29       [Reply]  [No Email]

Pretty much sums up my feelings.

Burrhead    Posted 10-14-2004 at 19:22:03       [Reply]  [No Email]
I would have figgered an official pivot man would'nt have feelings. Does'nt sound very professional of you BrudderLes.

little historical tidbit-    Posted 10-14-2004 at 13:54:50       [Reply]  [No Email]
did ya'll know that we fought the french before we fought the germans in w.w.2? we lost men in Morocco to french who ambushed us - cut us down.
Mehdia, Port Lyautey, or hows about them pess-ant vichy french in algiers? oran was a massacure of american troops caught in ambush by them frogs. happened nov. 8th. 1942 i believe.

------------- oh but wait! -----------------

them frogs seen that maybe we was serious about whippin up on hitler and they capitulated. that is what they do best--- capitulate.

---------------- so? ----------------------

you want a president who wants to gain the favor of the french? i want no part of that notion.


VADAVE    Posted 10-14-2004 at 11:39:01       [Reply]  [Send Email]
I agree with you. Bush will get the job done. I don't agree with everything he has done or wants to do BUT he will finish this fight.
I trust Kerry to do exactly what he did in Vietman and in the Senate. Actually if you listen to what he says he is telling us that's what he will do. Oh and higher taxes and more welfare.

Burrhead    Posted 10-14-2004 at 11:32:35       [Reply]  [No Email]
I tuned in to watch a debate but all my TV would pick up was about some Kerry feller with a trained talking chimpanzee.

There was never a terrorist threat from Iraq, there were no terrorist training camps in Iraq and according to the Whitehouse' own investigation, Hussein did not financially support bin Laden and in fact hates the man and el-kada movement.

The US investigation also shows that Hussein had lived up to the UN agreement and had started destroying WMD capabilities in 1991 and there is not, and has not been any attempt to produce bio or nuclear weapons.

I cannot accept the fact that Scrub can shake his pants leg and have Americans living in fear.

The American people are scared of imaginary threats brought on by misinformation from the conservative propaganda ministers.

I know the Cheneyburton 60 cent per gallon fuel tax really helps folks alot, and I also really enjoy paying $2.00 per gallon for propane to heat and cook with.

I just hope Scrub don't get drunk and attack a country with an army or defence plan. He does poor on war leadership in 3rd world countries and I think his shoot from the lip war plans would not play well in North Korea or Russia.

The *Leave No Child Behind* plan sounds good but just like all the other Bush plans it was not funded and only exist on paper. In other words he lied about education too.

Social security and medicare are being legally plundered to support the medical corps that financed Scrub, Cheneyburton, and John Ashcroft into power to begine with.

Scrub is worse than a TV preacher. He tells whatever it takes to get more power for him to misuse.

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 17:47:11       [Reply]  [No Email]
Burrhead: relatively mild comments for you. I saw last part of debate-Kerry had some job loss figure, correction comments at end of debate stated that the figure Kerry quoted was incorrect- about double correct figure. Sometimes hard to verify quoted figures for politicians- now media is correcting statements? Somebody in the newsroom doesn't want to be called Dan Rather? Another 3 weeks of fun to go. RN

bob    Posted 10-14-2004 at 15:20:21       [Reply]  [No Email]
Burr you have been reading a lot and I feel that you are right on all accounts, Scrub will be hitting the unemployment lines in Jan. He might have a hard time finding a job,.

Burrhead    Posted 10-14-2004 at 17:44:21       [Reply]  [No Email]
One other point the ratwing folks won't take into account is that EVERY company that Scrub has EVER been involved with running has gone bankrupt. Now he is doing for America what he did for Harken Energy and Arbusto, on top of that, George Bush has lied, there are no WMD in Iraq.

Yeah contrary to what the uneducated ratwings say I do stay updated on polytix. With real facts and do not use that Bill O'Really-Rush Limbaugh drug addict or sects assault brand of news either.

The brainwashed ratwing answer to every question is that we would be in bad shape in America if Gore had been put into office. My question would be, what could Gore have screwed up any worse than the Sheriff of Nottingham and his merry men have done??

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 19:44:11       [Reply]  [No Email]
Gore possible srewup after 9/11? Probable tried to confiscate American firearms as terrorism threat while saying can't profile Arabs for any search- didn't Pinneta say can't profile Arabs for search? Retry Hilarys health care plan and tax workingmans health benifits to provide rehab for junkies? No armed pilots as he had taken airline bribe/campaighn contribution to hold up security upgrade? Completly block 1984 Beck decision so union workers would be required to give money to Democrat party when ordered to by upper level union leaders regardless of workers own choice and without his permission? RN.

Burrhead    Posted 10-14-2004 at 19:53:13       [Reply]  [No Email]
The point is that Gore could not have screwed it up any worse than Scrub has screwed it up.

If I were paranoid enough to believe that Scrub is the American messiah like the ratwingers believe I would commit suicide instead of living my life in fear and confusion generated by propaganda from for hire propaganda ministers like Karl Rove.

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 20:12:03       [Reply]  [No Email]
Bush messiah? Not the question to ask, rather is Kerry the anti-Christ, or was Gore or Clinton trying for that honorific. We are getting into Religion now as well as politics? RN

Burrhead    Posted 10-14-2004 at 20:16:44       [Reply]  [No Email]
not really but Scrub is the one who told the Amish folks how he respects their religion and that Jesus tells him what to do.

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 20:40:48       [Reply]  [No Email]
Amish require less oil, less oil needed from troubled areas= less trouble. Jesus tells Bush what to do? And Karl Marx and Lenin tell Liberal Democrats what to do? Burrhead- Bible does not encourage suicide, besides we would miss your example(not perhaps a good example) here on board. RN.

Griz    Posted 10-14-2004 at 14:27:04       [Reply]  [No Email]
Burr usually has some good points when you are talking about anything other than politics. When it comes to politics, he is the typical liberal and hides his head in the sand ignoring the most obvious of facts. Instead of educating himself on what is really going on, he simply sits back and believes the lies of the media and the liberal left. His political points simply are not based in fact. He does however know a bit about farming! ;)


PDB    Posted 10-14-2004 at 12:59:40       [Reply]  [No Email]
Do a web search for "salman pak" or just click on the link below.

What was that airplane fuselage for? Flight attendant training?

Oliver    Posted 10-14-2004 at 11:48:37       [Reply]  [No Email]
Burrhead/Butthead, at least 50% of the people in American disagree with you. Of the ones that agree with you, 50% of them are on welfare, and 100% of them are fools, so you fit right in.

And a nuther thing    Posted 10-14-2004 at 12:36:18       [Reply]  [No Email]
You can always tell a diehard dimcrat but ya can't tell em much........gfp

steve19438    Posted 10-14-2004 at 10:59:53       [Reply]  [Send Email]
i truly find it hard to belive that ANYONE believes that the incursion into iraq was about terrorism.
it's about OIL. (for us) always has been always will be!

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 16:02:51       [Reply]  [No Email]
Iraq attack was unfinished business from Kuwait incident. Clinton should have finished the job in his second term at latest, UN should have acted at same time. Clinton and Democrats reduced Army, got distracted elsewhere. UN peolple supposed to be watching apparently decided to fill their own pockets with Saddams bribe money. Saddam acted like a threat, was treated as a threat. Democrats- including Kerry saw the intelligence reports and probably the Russian intelligence/warnings, voted to attack. Now cussing out Bush for political gain. RN

MW/Ks    Posted 10-14-2004 at 11:11:51       [Reply]  [No Email]
Most would disagree with you.However,I for one am glad that the Iraq oil supply is not in the hands of Saddam.We(the world)simply would cease to function as we now know it,if we were to suddenly lose the flow of fossil fuel.So what if you're right?Are you willing to ride a mule to work at the buggy plant?I'm not,and thanks to our troops and our current leadership,I won't have to any time soon. Respectfully,yet disagreeingly, Mark in Kansas

tacon1    Posted 10-14-2004 at 09:39:47       [Reply]  [No Email]
I said the same thing, last night, as we watched the deate. Why does the president insist on putting that little chuckle/smile in there? He does it in his speeches too, not just debates with Kerry. I think someone should tell him that it just doesn't go with the statement he just made.

RN    Posted 10-14-2004 at 19:59:26       [Reply]  [No Email]
Verbal quirks- when trying to speak proper English when mind says the reply really should be in Texan- as when Cheney told Democrat to F----. Bush probably translating honest if possibly obscene thought to English that FCC won't cuss about. As media man a magor horses rear end(he was more explicit on open mike)- reasonable honest statement, clean up for mixed company. Like some poster here do to keep Kim calm and let the kindern read postings. Burrhead sems to bring out some impolite language from some people. Kerry statements could also bring out a strong response- on TV a slight hesitation would be needed to express thought without getting bleeped for telling truth in vulgate, no matter how well deserved.. RN.

MW/Ks    Posted 10-14-2004 at 09:22:13       [Reply]  [No Email]
George just isn't as articulate as Kerry.My hope is that there are enough voters out there smart enough to understand that our choices are
1)Go with Bush,who,like it or not,has pretty much did what he said he'd do(hunt down and kill or otherwise bring to justice,those responsible for the attack on 9/11) or
2)Go with Kerry,who is trying to capitalize on the change of circumstances that attack presented to the Bush presidency.
Hindsight is always 20/20.We were all for the war when it was time to go.Those who understand that it will take a long time to win it,will more than likely vote for Bush,stay the course,and enjoy a world where freedom is for everybody. Mark in Kansas

Doc    Posted 10-14-2004 at 19:55:55       [Reply]  [No Email]
No, not all of us were for war when it all started and I stated on this very board that I was afraid Bush was opening up a can of worms. Now how do you get them back in? Kill them all?

Bkeepr    Posted 10-14-2004 at 09:21:12       [Reply]  [No Email]
Watching these debates was painful to me, every time.

Kerry always gives me the same "not to be trusted" feel I had with Mr. Clinton. He talks a lot but doesn't say anything of substance. Mr. Bush has a very good case he could make, but didn't do it very well in any debate. I always feel like I could make his case better than he did.

So I'm worried. Our great country will survive no matter who wins, but I really think it'll be better if we stay the course and reelect President Bush.

Tom A

Rowdy Yates    Posted 10-15-2004 at 05:57:29       [Reply]  [No Email]
I agree with Bkeepr. Scary Kerry. I will be sick if Kerry gets elected. Clinton makes me want to scream, I can't stand the site of him or his wife or to even hear their names, but I'd take him before Kerry.

Give us a choice!!!

[x] None of the Above

(Should be on every ballot!....start over!)

Les    Posted 10-14-2004 at 11:16:09       [Reply]  [No Email]
I don't watch them. That kind of stuff makes my hair hurt. The scary part is that some people are going to make up their mind on how to vote by what they saw and heard there??????? Puhleeze.

[Return to Topics]

[Home] [Search]

Copyright © 1999-2013
All Rights Reserved
A Country Living Resource and Community