Trending Search Settings

Bush is gonna win this November

50 replies · 17907 views · Started by PimpTight™ · Sep 2004
PimpTight™
well, all i have to say is that i went out and got registered last week just so i can vote for kerry. to be honest, i don't know that much about kerry, but i known bush for 4 years and kerry can't possibly be any worse! but really, i might have to move to canada or something if bush wins again lol.
Share
Reply
Page 4 of 5 First<12345>Last
Hahaha · Oct 2004
#31 Reply
*PURE*Kindnezz wrote:
^^^*raises hand* oooo! oooo!...i got one! "Becuz the rappers said it's COOL!" :roll:
i laughed out loud when i read this... and don't forget modonna. who the hell is going to get thier political advice from modonnna? she's the idiot paying $25 from yarn for her....ahem...kabala... and not to mention **** red teddy bears on stage while singing "like a virgin"... if you agree with this chick i dunno who's more stupider, you or her.
Report
Quote
Hahaha · Oct 2004
#32 Reply
MikeCheck wrote:
**** who?? Saddam Hussein didn't bombed me.....he didn't terrorize me neither... that was Osama Bin Laden who terrorized us..... PS I am nonpartisan too
the war on **** is broader than just osama bin laden!!! that's what you and kerry don't understand. in the debates kerry said that bush's going into iraq would be like roosevelt going into mexico after JAPAN bombed pearl harbor. after pearl harbor, roosevelt bombed AFRICA!!!!! you go whereever the enemy is. bush unlike kerry and YOU understand that the war on **** is more than just capturing bin laden and securing our borders. it's about being on the offensive! like bush keeps shoving down our throats, we need to fight these cats over there so that we don't have to fight them here. he may seem repetetive and dull with that message, but it makes alot of sense. and it's not a scar tactic, it's truth... and by the way, is this mikchek mikcheck?!!
Report
Quote
MikeCheck · Oct 2004
#33 Reply
BUSHpimp (HARTline) wrote:
MikeCheck wrote:
**** who?? Saddam Hussein didn't bombed me.....he didn't terrorize me neither... that was Osama Bin Laden who terrorized us..... PS I am nonpartisan too
the war on **** is broader than just osama bin laden!!! that's what you and kerry don't understand. in the debates kerry said that bush's going into iraq would be like roosevelt going into mexico after JAPAN bombed pearl harbor. after pearl harbor, roosevelt bombed AFRICA!!!!! you go whereever the enemy is. bush unlike kerry and YOU understand that the war on **** is more than just capturing bin laden and securing our borders. it's about being on the offensive! like bush keeps shoving down our throats, we need to fight these cats over there so that we don't have to fight them here. he may seem repetetive and dull with that message, but it makes alot of sense. and it's not a scar tactic, it's truth... and by the way, is this mikchek mikcheck?!!
What do you mean thats not what I dont understand...i know that the war on **** is broader than Osama. But shouldn't we go after the one who got us first...to relate it to your WW2 statement, thats what the U.S did....the first went after the Japanese First, then went toward the broader since of the war which was **** Germany. And even then the United States had a reason for going after Germany because their Subs were sinking American ships(a direct act of aggression). Now to relate this back to Iraq, what has Iraq done directly to the U.S. and by the way, is this mikechek mikecheck?!! ..... :arrow:
Report
Quote
Afro-American · Oct 2004
#34 Reply
in response to the war on ****... well if are really trying to create a free world, where human rights are not being violated why isnt anything being done in ****, hmmm how about ****, no here's a GOOD ONE, how bout BURMA???...well the reason why we havent tried to intervene in those countries, where by the way sudanese women are getting **** in public in front of their husbands and children by the janjawi....is because IRAQ HAD THE MOST POWER AND ECONOMIC wealth which we could gain from*cough*****....simple as that...sadamn is more financially and economically important than osama....HECK WHATS A FEW THOUSAND PEOPLE **** in the world trade center compared to billions of dollars in ****.........now where is bush at when all these other minorities across the world are suffering....open your eyes people and stop looking at THE AMERIKKKA MEDIA!!! :roll:
Report
Quote
MikeCheck · Oct 2004
#35 Reply
Shoya_Star wrote:
in response to the war on ****... well if are really trying to create a free world, where human rights are not being violated why isnt anything being done in ****, hmmm how about ****, no here's a GOOD ONE, how bout BURMA???...well the reason why we havent tried to intervene in those countries, where by the way sudanese women are getting **** in public in front of their husbands and children by the janjawi....is because IRAQ HAD THE MOST POWER AND ECONOMIC wealth which we could gain from*cough*****....simple as that...sadamn is more financially and economically important than osama....HECK WHATS A FEW THOUSAND PEOPLE **** in the world trade center compared to billions of dollars in ****.........now where is bush at when all these other minorities across the world are suffering....open your eyes people and stop looking at THE AMERIKKKA MEDIA!!! :roll:
Thats what I'm sayin......
Report
Quote
BrownSugar · Oct 2004
#36 Reply
BUSHpimp (HARTline) wrote:
in the debates kerry said that bush's going into iraq would be like roosevelt going into mexico after JAPAN bombed pearl harbor. after pearl harbor, roosevelt bombed AFRICA!!!!! you go whereever the enemy is. bush unlike kerry and YOU understand that the war on **** is more than just capturing bin laden and securing our borders. it's about being on the offensive! like bush keeps shoving down our throats, we need to fight these cats over there so that we don't have to fight them here. he may seem repetetive and dull with that message, but it makes alot of sense. and it's not a scar tactic, it's truth...
And there, folks, is the reason why so many people overseas hate Americans. "We" take the idea of eternal vigilance to the extreme and tend to think it is up to us to police the world and inforce our politcs onto everyone. Being on the "offense" against countries who have never done anything to us (as seen many times before in history) will create more animosity and hatred against America than it will good. There was a viewing party here in London for the Foreign Policy Debates. Before it started there was a discussion. Many Pepole here,both Americans and non-americans, sided with Bush until they watch the debate. Afterwards they realized that bush really had no foreign Policy. To me, that says a lot about his politics. As some of you know i am an independent and i was straddling the fence between Bush and kerry because their domestic policies were so similar. I was one of the many people who were won over by the Foreign Policy Debates. Bush has done a lot of harm to America overseas. It is evident that there will be backlashes to his actions in the future because of the intensity of the hostility of what has been done. I only hope that the next person in office, be it Kerry or whoever, will be able to smooth out some of the damage that has been done. Being her has really opened my eyes and this election, i will not one of the Americans who votes for Kerry becasue he is the least objectionable candidate to Bush. I will be voting for Kerry because my eyes have been opened and I have seen first hand the amount of damage a that has been done.
Report
Quote
Hahaha · Oct 2004
#37 Reply
Quote:
What do you mean thats not what I dont understand...i know that the war on **** is broader than Osama. But shouldn't we go after the one who got us first...
BUSHpimp (HARTline) wrote:
nope...evidence cherrypicked by the bush admistration pointed out that going after saddam was the next step in the war on ****...i think it made more sense to go after a state that was defiant to international law (12 UN MANDATES REGARDING WMDs) and possibly sponsored **** than to go after bin laden...
Quote:
to relate it to your WW2 statement, thats what the U.S did....the first went after the Japanese First, then went toward the broader since of the war which was **** Germany. And even then the United States had a reason for going after Germany because their Subs were sinking American ships(a direct act of aggression).
BUSHpimp (HARTline) wrote:
this is WRONG! we bombed northern africa first because that's where the enemy was...mousilini's italian army. roosevelt declared war on japan and it's allies. bush declared war on **** and states that defied international law dealing with WMDs and possibly supported **** (IRAN, IRAQ, ****)...we haven't dealt with all of these countries yet because there are different ways of dealing with them...diplomacy might work in ****, sanctions may work in iran, and force will be successful in iraq. plus, you just can't spread your army everywhere at once in this modern age. you're just asking for defeat. what if we had begun war with ****, iraq, and iran all at the same time? disaster...it's different now from what it was in the 40s... "Iraq ain't had no WMDs..." :roll: well, we weren't sure, and saddam was not making it easy because he wasn't letting the UN inspectors go whereever they wanted to go. and hehadn't accounted for what happened to the WMDs that he did have in the 90s and 80s... as bush said, "do i trust the word of a mad man, or do i stand up and defend my country?"....(get's rudely intterrupted by wacko protester who does nothing but hurt kerry by tring off soccer moms)..."face with that chioce, i will defend my country everytime!"
Quote:
Now to relate this back to Iraq, what has Iraq done directly to the U.S.
BUSHpimp (HARTline) wrote:
i dunno....ask vadimir **** who told bush that russian intelligence said that iraq was co conspiring with a ****network to strike the US...other than that, they gots all the **** and gas prices are high as hell... :roll: what else do you want from me? :roll: BOTTOM LINE IS, WHEN IRAQ IS FANALLY STABALIZED AND BAGDAD LOOKS LIKE TUCSON, AMERICANS GET THIER THUMB OUT OF THIER REAR END AND REALISE THE STATEGERY OF THE IRAQ WAR....ALL americans will preptend like they were always for the war...BUT THERE WILL BE A POLITICAL PARTY THAT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO SO BECAUSE THEY'RE "CAUGHT ON TAPE"! americans will rememeber who was for and against invading bagdad, and this whole thing is going to blow up in the democrat's faces! nuff said... 8) :arrow:
Report
Quote
BrownSugar · Oct 2004
#38 Reply
BUSHpimp (HARTline) wrote:
BrownSugar wrote:
BUSHpimp (HARTline) wrote:
in the debates kerry said that bush's going into iraq would be like roosevelt going into mexico after JAPAN bombed pearl harbor. after pearl harbor, roosevelt bombed AFRICA!!!!! you go whereever the enemy is. bush unlike kerry and YOU understand that the war on **** is more than just capturing bin laden and securing our borders. it's about being on the offensive! like bush keeps shoving down our throats, we need to fight these cats over there so that we don't have to fight them here. he may seem repetetive and dull with that message, but it makes alot of sense. and it's not a scar tactic, it's truth...
And there, folks, is the reason why so many people overseas hate Americans. "We" take the idea of eternal vigilance to the extreme and tend to think it is up to us to police the world and inforce our politcs onto everyone. Being on the "offense" against countries who have never done anything to us (as seen many times before in history) will create more animosity and hatred against America than it will good. There was a viewing party here in London for the Foreign Policy Debates. Before it started there was a discussion. Many Pepole here,both Americans and non-americans, sided with Bush until they watch the debate. Afterwards they realized that bush really had no foreign Policy. To me, that says a lot about his politics. As some of you know i am an independent and i was straddling the fence between Bush and kerry because their domestic policies were so similar. I was one of the many people who were won over by the Foreign Policy Debates. Bush has done a lot of harm to America overseas. It is evident that there will be backlashes to his actions in the future because of the intensity of the hostility of what has been done. I only hope that the next person in office, be it Kerry or whoever, will be able to smooth out some of the damage that has been done. Being her has really opened my eyes and this election, i will not one of the Americans who votes for Kerry becasue he is the least objectionable candidate to Bush. I will be voting for Kerry because my eyes have been opened and I have seen first hand the amount of damage a that has been done.
this is what i'm talking about.... WHO CARES WHAT YOU DAYUM EUROPEANS THINK ABOUT OUR FORIEGN POLICY! F#CK YOU, THIS IS ABOUT US AND OUR SECURITY, NOT YOU! GET A PIECE OF FAT AND SLIDE OFF! dayum **** with this global test...f**k A GLOBAL TEST! what's with yall **** and this whole "oooh...i hope we don't make the europeans upset with us kick? f**k 'EM! i don't get a f**k if europeans like us or not....what are they going to do, opt not to send in troops from the UN? the UN can't even handle the situation in ****....don't even let me get started on RWANDA! what has the UN magic army gave us? over 1 MILLION **** black AFRICANS!\ the only reason why russia, germany and france were against invading iraq was because it hurt thier economic relations with saddam!!! THERE'S NO MAGIC UN ARMY COMING TO SAVE THE DAY IN IRAQ! A UN COMMITMENT IN IRAQ JUST MEANS THAT US TROOPS WILL BE ABOUT 80% OF COALITION CAUSUALTIES INSTEAD OF 90%... and that excludes the causualties of IRAQ TROOPS defending thier own nation... THERE IS NO DAYUM MAGIC UN ARMY! if there is...then why in the hell aren't they in ****? and by the way, germany and france have said that they will not commit trooops to IRAQ no matter who's elected...and pollls say theyamericans actually trust BUSH more on foriegn policy! go to usatoday.com...
ok demmeri/bush **** or whatever you go by. Can you read? I was talking about how Americans, like myself, over here feel too. And what they hell is this talk about a magic army? We already know that France and Germany wont come to our aid in this. The reason why they wont come to our aid is because of the way Bush started this. That's what Kerry and others like him havea problem with. This is why i hate getting into political debates with "mental ****" (I stole that phrase from the Republican convention). They curse and get angry and they miss every point you bring up. You have a very myopic viewpoint. Demmeri, I really want you to grow up and see the world the way it really is. That's about the only advice I can give to you. You talk about other blacks being brainwashed into believeing in the Democratic Party, and i think there is some truth in that. But you, son, have been brainwashed in a different way. Oh well, it's not like you'll read this anyway, you will probably only take what you want to hear from this and twist it around in your own demented way. So i wont waste anymore of our time. PS: and for the sake of your future, and your childrens future. You should care what people in other countries think about our country.
Report
Quote
ReSe · Oct 2004
#39 Reply
Ladi_NYC wrote:
well, all i have to say is that i went out and got registered last week just so i can vote for kerry. to be honest, i don't know that much about kerry, but i known bush for 4 years and kerry can't possibly be any worse! but really, i might have to move to canada or something if bush wins again lol.
i second that..im gettn outta hea :!:
Report
Quote
King_J · Oct 2004
#40 Reply
Ladi_NYC wrote:
to be honest, i don't know that much about kerry, but i known bush for 4 years and kerry can't possibly be any worse!
That is one of the stupidist comments ever. That's like if I am bullying u, and u switch schools, does that mean there is no one at your new school who could bully u worse than me? SMH How do we know kerry won't do any worse? *thinks* *thinks* Exactly, we don't :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: Please give a better reason than that to vote for someone
Report
Quote
More Discussions
African-Americans in Afrikah
cafe-aulait · Nov 2016
45
HALLE OR ANGELA
Afro-American · Nov 2012
32
Ghetto Baby Name of the Day!
Rubberband Man · Aug 2012
132
Name that movie
AFROdytee · Feb 2011
44
My Brother & Me: THE MOVIE
P o e t i q R e i g n · Feb 2011
34
Reply To Topic

Join the conversation! Login or sign up to reply.

Don't have an account? Sign up free

Page 4 of 5 First<12345>Last
Featured Jobs & Internships

W.W. Norton & Company
College Publishing Sales Representative, Oklahoma/Arkansas in Tulsa, OK

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Director of Exhibition Design and Production in Cambridge, MA

Columbus Zoo and Aquarium and The Wilds
Marketing Coordinator in Powell, OH

Columbus Zoo and Aquarium and The Wilds
Zookeeper (Aquarist), Shores in Powell, OH

Columbus Zoo and Aquarium and The Wilds
Rides Maintenance Technician in Powell, OH

Framatome
Mechanical Robotics Design Supervisor in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Robotics Control Engineer in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Civil/Structural Lead Engineer in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Component Engineering Supervisor in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Welding Engineer in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Advisory Component Analysis Engineer in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Robotics Control Engineer in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Business Systems Analyst I in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
ICU Quality Manager in Lynchburg, VA

Framatome
Ultrasonic Testing Development Program Manager in Lynchburg, VA
Subscribe!
HBCU CONNECT
Follow Us!
Facebook Instagram Bluesky YouTube Flickr LinkedIn
Featured Members