oh jesus christ, stop talking and just ban the kid.

It amazes me that people are so ignorant when it comes to the economy. Go ask your economics professor about the short-term and long-term economic policies and how long it takes each of them to reflect on the economy. Then ask your professor about the fallout from Clinton's short-term policies that began before Bush even took office officially.

Tech Crash.
Dot Com Crash.
9/11
War in Afghanistan
War in Iraq
Still funding all of Clinton's peacekeeping missions
Etc Etc

Of course we have a defecit. We wouldn't be NEARLY as bad off if Clinton wouldn't stopped banging interns long enough to realize that he was practically disarming the country. He tried to cut intel spending along with Democrats by $7.5 billion. He practically halved the military and closed bases down all over the country. So yeah, he had a surplus. At the cost of two significant raises in taxes in two terms and the utter destruction of our military. Good fucking game.

ddo the wars not generate money in ways, via arms spending, into companies like GE. + a 400 million surplus easily covers the cost of those 2 wars over twice....+ its not like we really needed the war in Iraq...I don't want to get all personal about this noc, but aren't wars good for buisness is a lot of ways ?.

Of course wars generate spending in the economy, but it takes time, and isn't instant. Also, it's not like it was in 1941 when we started building hundreds of tanks. We already have most of the equipment. Once we get a handle on Iraq and the oil starts flowing like it should be, paying for reconstruction as well as our own costs, and everyone's gas gets back down to $1.40 a gallon, people won't bitch so much.

so what is more important... gas or the lives of the people who have died for it ?

If someone came to me and asked me to trade the lives of 1,000 brave soldiers for the lives of millions of innocent civilians, I wouldn't be likely to hesitate before accepting. I know that not one of those soldiers died in vain or for a cause that was unjust. I don't care why we went there or whose toes we stepped on to get there. The bottom line is that those soldiers saved hundreds of thousands, possibly even millions (Saddam was on track to break being responsible for over 2 million deaths within the next decade) of lives and that's where we are now. No one can change anything prior to where we are right now.

And anyway, when did the ACLU tote bag Liberals decide that American lives were more valuable than the lives of any other human beings?

>>And anyway, when did the ACLU tote bag Liberals decide that American lives were more valuable than the lives of any other human beings?

Dunno when the ACLU did - but Johns Kerry and Edwards did when they put a pricetag on the safety of American soldiers in Iraq by voting AGAINST the appropiations bill.

i voted green party, fuck the majority

my party won't become the majority. however, the more support they receive the more legit their stand on the issues become. a party that doesn't receive any votes has no legitimate plans since they are just ideas without followers. democracy is not choosing between just 2 parties. they don't always offer the best. i dont like either kerry or bush so i'm voting for what i think would be the best choice for receiving my support.

Okay look kids...

The "shut the fuck up" - "no you shut the fuck up" - "no no you shut the fuck up OMFG someone ban0r him and his pen0r" conversation is getting real annoying. This is not just another calmdown: quick post of mine - appropriate action will be taken if I'm bothered into reading pages upon pages of bullshit again.

No finger pointing please I can read and I have k thx.

P.S. Short Hand, on a related note I seriously think you should show a little more respect for our moderators, whether he is appointed by me or elected by your fellow members.

Back on topic...

[quote="Old Reliable":a6007]my party won't become the majority. however, the more support they receive the more legit their stand on the issues become. a party that doesn't receive any votes has no legitimate plans since they are just ideas without followers. democracy is not choosing between just 2 parties. they don't always offer the best. i dont like either kerry or bush so i'm voting for what i think would be the best choice for receiving my support.[/quote:a6007]

Understandable, but most "third parties" seem like nothing more than policy specific pacs more than actually "parties" - since their platforms are so finely tuned to a certain aspect of government that compromising on other platforms invalidates much of what theyd like to do. The green party - in my estimation and opinion - is one such example of this. Parties need to offer a total package, not just form a party on a single ideal and hope thats enough to resonate with the people.

yeah, well thats the hope, that if they garner enough support they will spread their opinions and become something that resembles a party. right now its more or less an interest group. with more support though, who knows

This is offtopic, but wasn't there supposed to be another election?