This entire story is a fabrication put on by the left wing media to try and hurt Bush. How do I know this? First, CBS didn't know that the NY Times was going to break the story, and they were planning on airing it on election eve
! If they already had the story, shouldn't and wouldn't they want to report it right away? The answer is obviously no, because their goal is to do whatever they can to hurt Bush. Look at the fake Guard Memo's. Only after a few weeks did they finally admit that they were forged. Second, NBC was with US troops when they arrived at the site of the supposed missing weapons, and they said that the weapons were already missing before the US Army even got there
! (video clip)
What you've said there is a lot of time discrepencies and strategic timing for releasing new stories (which is not something I support). But it doesn't change the fact that once upon a time there were weapons there, and now they are gone. Perhaps Saddam moved them before we invaded, but either way we've lost track of them. We knew where they were before the war when there were inspectors there, and now we don't know where they are.
Natan wrote:Three million illegal immigrants is a lot less than what was coming in before.
No it isn't. It's the largest wave of illegal immigration into the country since 2001. Please see the cover story of the September 20 issue of Time magazine.
About the claim that Iran is backing Bush, can you back that up? According to my sources
, Iran could care less who wins.
Sure. Bush Receives Endorsement From Iran
Oct. 19, Associated Press
Natan wrote:How about if I turn the tables. Why are you voting for Kerry? Can you name me at least three things that he has done good for our country in the twenty whole years that he has been in the Senate? And I don't consider voting to raise taxes over 350 times as a good answer.
# Kerry voted 98 times for tax increases totaling more than $2.3 trillion.
# Kerry voted at least 126 times against tax cuts totaling more than $5.3 trillion.
# Kerry has voted 73 times to reduce the size of a tax cut.
# Kerry voted 67 times for smaller tax cuts (Democrat alternatives).
# Kerry voted 11 times against repealing tax hikes.
Oh gosh where to start. Kerry didn't vote to "raise taxes" over 350 times. It's completely incorrect to say that. Voting for a smaller tax cut isn't voting to raise taxes.
Those numbers include voting to not cut taxes on cigarettes and voting not to cut taxes on manufactures to pay for hazardous waste cleanup. (Instead the money to pay for hazardous waste cleanup would've come from somewhere else, and as far as I'm concerned if you make the mess you should be the one to clean it up.)
Those heavily bloated numbers include multiple votes for the same bills. Voting on a single bill 10 times is not a vote to raise taxes 10 times. It's one bill, one tax increase.
43 votes were on setting targets for the budget, not a vote to actually raise taxes.
16 votes on a single package for raising taxes on the wealthiest 2%.
6 votes to raise taxes on cigarettes or keep them the same.
7 votes on one
budget resolution to raise taxes on corporations and people making over 140,000 in order to increase funding on Medicare, veteran's benefits and education.
11 times he voted, not to raise taxes, but to close corporate tax loop holes. But apparently the Bush campaign considers that an act of raising taxes. The money from closing those loopholes were to go to Medicare, veteran's benefits, education, the National Park Service and the Environmental Protection Agency.
All in all, many of the votes to raise taxes the Bush campaign sites are tax increases on the wealthiest people. Which is pretty much what Kerry has promised to do all along. The increased fundings noted above are more than 3 things I believe were good for the country.
Kerry voted to increase the minimum wage in 97. He added an amendment to the 93 Crime Control bill to add 100,000 new police officers. He voted to reduce the deficit in 93 which resulted 23 million new jobs. In 97, he helped balance the budget for the first time in a generation.
Bush has cut taxes for what? To drive our nation into the deepest debt ever. We ARE going to have to pay it back eventually you know. It's not just going to magically disappear. I mean, I wish I could toss my bills in the garbage and not pay them.
And what was Bush doing while Kerry was serving our country in the Senate? Oh I dunno...snortin' cocaine, drinkin', going to AA meetings, driving companies into the ground.
Natan wrote:But compared to a few deaths here and there, I think its better from when they were under Sadaam, because under his rulership, he was creating one mass-grave after another. Just recently they found a mass grave with babies holding onto their baby toys! Thats sick! Obviously its hard to justify one over the other, but in my opinion, it was really worth it to go after Iraq.
Now now, are you trying to pull my liberal bleeding heart strings? Gosh, we have to save those poor, poor Iraqis. I just love those darn muslims so much I think we should drive our country into massive debt and sacrifice over 1,000 American troops to save them. It just makes me want to grab an Arabic speaking taxi driver and say "I love you, man."
This was not meant to sound callous. But if you had asked me about issues that concerned me before 9/11 I would've named oppression of the Afghan people, the Kurds being killed by Iraq as well as Turkey (Turkey is our ally even though they killed Kurds just like Saddam did.) I also would've mentioned my concern for the hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans killed by the Latin American soldiers that we, the US, trained on US soil with US money.
I would love nothing more than to believe that the US would like to help countries that are oppressed. (Help, not destroy.) But I know that is not the reason we attacked Iraq. We attacked Iraq because we don't like them. And I have high doubts that if you asked any Arabic-American if they think they're loved in this country they would say yes.
I can't delete my signature.