But how long did it take you to figure out the man was an asshole?ATG wrote:
What a crock. Notice the date on this thread:Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
ATG is a flip flopper.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=44074
I am conservative, what does that have to do with Bush?
lol.
I am not obligated to be loyal to a buffoon.
It just occurred to me...if the coalition pulls out of Iraq, what the fuck is this forum going to argue about?
Last edited by Pubic (2007-07-13 08:34:39)
You sir, are a moron.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Kerry was a flip flopper. You sir, are a flip flopper. And unpatriotic to boot. Not supporting the Commander in Chief during wartime. Ashamed you should be.ATG wrote:
What a crock. Notice the date on this thread:Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
ATG is a flip flopper.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=44074
I am conservative, what does that have to do with Bush?
lol.
I am not obligated to be loyal to a buffoon.
Have a nice day.
Truth hurts. And I accept being a moron, though I didn't vote for Bush. Chew on that for a bit.ATG wrote:
You sir, are a moron.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Kerry was a flip flopper. You sir, are a flip flopper. And unpatriotic to boot. Not supporting the Commander in Chief during wartime. Ashamed you should be.ATG wrote:
What a crock. Notice the date on this thread:
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=44074
I am conservative, what does that have to do with Bush?
lol.
I am not obligated to be loyal to a buffoon.
Have a nice day.
Google images type miserable failure, first picture
How many wars did Pierce start?Kmarion wrote:
Franklin Pierce is regarded by many as the worst President in American history, aaaand a notorious alcoholic. He is the only President to not get his own parties re-nomination. The real reason he got elected was because of his old drinking buddy Nathaniel Hawthorne, you might have heard of him. In the 1850's Hawthorne was widely respected. He wrote The Life of Franklin Pierce just prior to the election. This was the "Mass Media" during their time.
Why have I exposed you to this Pierce trivia in a thread about Bush?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstladies/bb41.html
Yes it's true... now slap your forehead.
And I really hated being forced to read hawthorne. Im not exactly a lit fan.. gimme a tech manual and i will be happy
edit: i shoulda read the link 1st. So Bush's crappy governance is genetic?
Last edited by golgoj4 (2007-07-13 08:57:02)
Google images, type "worst president ever", all the pictures.
A little less than two years.sergeriver wrote:
But how long did it take you to figure out the man was an asshole?ATG wrote:
What a crock. Notice the date on this thread:Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
ATG is a flip flopper.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=44074
I am conservative, what does that have to do with Bush?
lol.
I am not obligated to be loyal to a buffoon.
After the second election, that would be 2006. Or back, that would be 2005. Either way, how could you vote for him the second time? Seriously, you are a smart folk, I don't get that. No offense.ATG wrote:
A little less than two years.sergeriver wrote:
But how long did it take you to figure out the man was an asshole?ATG wrote:
What a crock. Notice the date on this thread:
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=44074
I am conservative, what does that have to do with Bush?
lol.
I am not obligated to be loyal to a buffoon.
One word.
Kerry.
Fucking puking dog coward should have been hung for treason after what he did during/after Vietnam.
Besides, we are in the middle of a rather serious war. Dems generally are incompetent when it comes to such matters.
I could probably stomach Hillary, I would have had to climb a clock tower if Kerry had won.
Kerry.
Fucking puking dog coward should have been hung for treason after what he did during/after Vietnam.
Besides, we are in the middle of a rather serious war. Dems generally are incompetent when it comes to such matters.
I could probably stomach Hillary, I would have had to climb a clock tower if Kerry had won.
Yeah, I know, he was such a lame poor candidate. The Dems fucked things up in 2004. They should have worked together instead of having 8 or 9 lame candidates. But, I don't think Dems can't handle a war. Look back at history and you'll see most of US wars were fought under Dems rule. Anyway, in 2004 you didn't have a good choice to pick, I guess.ATG wrote:
One word.
Kerry.
Fucking puking dog coward should have been hung for treason after what he did during/after Vietnam.
Besides, we are in the middle of a rather serious war. Dems generally are incompetent when it comes to such matters.
I could probably stomach Hillary, I would have had to climb a clock tower if Kerry had won.
Last edited by sergeriver (2007-07-13 09:25:58)
/Gore /Kerry-101-InvaderZim wrote:
You KNEW he is a dickhead & voted for him?? What a noob
sergeriver wrote:
After the second election, that would be 2006. Or back, that would be 2005. Either way, how could you vote for him the second time? Seriously, you are a smart folk, I don't get that. No offense.
Invade Mexico this way then America is ours!
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-07-13 09:28:02)
Could be..lol. Both are stubborn, unwilling to listen to criticism or to consider alternatives. As far as wars, Pierce is said to have been a major catalyst in bringing us to the brink of the worst war in Americas history. One of the few decisive acts that he did make was the Kansas Nebraska Act. After the Dems dropped him he turned on the Union and drank himself to death.golgoj4 wrote:
How many wars did Pierce start?Kmarion wrote:
Franklin Pierce is regarded by many as the worst President in American history, aaaand a notorious alcoholic. He is the only President to not get his own parties re-nomination. The real reason he got elected was because of his old drinking buddy Nathaniel Hawthorne, you might have heard of him. In the 1850's Hawthorne was widely respected. He wrote The Life of Franklin Pierce just prior to the election. This was the "Mass Media" during their time.
Why have I exposed you to this Pierce trivia in a thread about Bush?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstladies/bb41.html
Yes it's true... now slap your forehead.
And I really hated being forced to read hawthorne. Im not exactly a lit fan.. gimme a tech manual and i will be happy
edit: i shoulda read the link 1st. So Bush's crappy governance is genetic?
Sorry about the historical outburst . American Presidential history is a strong intrest for me. You can see other opinions.
The only President I would possibly consider as bad would be Harding but that's not because of his incompetence, but rather his corruption.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Let's see....
A fellow who never set foot on a battlefield....
Or fellow that has 3 Purple Hearts from Vietnam.....Oh wait.....swift boat vets say he didn't earn them. And I believe everything I hear.
A fellow who never set foot on a battlefield....
Or fellow that has 3 Purple Hearts from Vietnam.....Oh wait.....swift boat vets say he didn't earn them. And I believe everything I hear.
Mcain was a POW for 5 years and tortured, that doesn't mean he is the man to lead this nation.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Let's see....
A fellow who never set foot on a battlefield....
Or fellow that has 3 Purple Hearts from Vietnam.....Oh wait.....swift boat vets say he didn't earn them. And I believe everything I hear.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
except bush doesnt like listening to his generals when they all tell him "its a bad idea, this is not enough, this is destined for failure, we need more troops, what are you fucking crazy mr president"CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
when there is a war going on, it would be bad to switch presidents especially since the opposing candidates were of the appeasement/containment crowd. Everyone (not me) seems to love Clinton but i say that guy just passed the buck and we're paying for it now. while america slept during the 1990s in semi-isolationism, our friends the Islamo-fascists were gaining strength and plotting. Clinton's failure to nip it in the bud when he had Al Qaeda's chief in the crosshairs just illustrates that party's lack of understanding of the nature of the threat.
i am glad GW is a proponent of taking it to the terrorists. i'd rather do that than sit back and wait for another attack. but this way you won't win friends unfortunately. people see this as being a bully and not fixing the problem (eg, eliminating fascist islam). this is again why everyone loved clinton. he was soft on terrorism and 'played-nicey-nice' with everyone when at the time we probably shouldn't have done that.
Also, i think there is a great amount of problems with Bush's appointees. i think some of them are lackeys and are useless. Rummy wanted to go too light into Iraq and they totally dropped the ball when they disbanded the army and didn't contain all the vast storehouses of weapons. I don't think Bush necessarily was the guy saying not to do this.
Bush is also seemingly a very loyal person to his people. this is to a fault because when his people screw up and screw up badly, he's too loyal to call them out on their mess-up and fix the situation. that's one major fault i think that he needs to fix and fix quickly.
bush just wants yes men in his company. for that, i will never like him better than clinton. forget blaming him for a war that should have never happened, I blame him for the continued mismanagement and bungling of the war so far. his decisions have led to soldiers dying needlessly. but fuck it, yall reelected him...
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2007-07-13 09:50:02)
Sad thing is, if this was a democratic President the past 7 years, he would have been impeached in year 5.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
except bush doesnt like listening to his generals when they all tell him "its a bad idea, this is not enough, this is destined for failure, we need more troops, what are you fucking crazy mr president"CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
when there is a war going on, it would be bad to switch presidents especially since the opposing candidates were of the appeasement/containment crowd. Everyone (not me) seems to love Clinton but i say that guy just passed the buck and we're paying for it now. while america slept during the 1990s in semi-isolationism, our friends the Islamo-fascists were gaining strength and plotting. Clinton's failure to nip it in the bud when he had Al Qaeda's chief in the crosshairs just illustrates that party's lack of understanding of the nature of the threat.
i am glad GW is a proponent of taking it to the terrorists. i'd rather do that than sit back and wait for another attack. but this way you won't win friends unfortunately. people see this as being a bully and not fixing the problem (eg, eliminating fascist islam). this is again why everyone loved clinton. he was soft on terrorism and 'played-nicey-nice' with everyone when at the time we probably shouldn't have done that.
Also, i think there is a great amount of problems with Bush's appointees. i think some of them are lackeys and are useless. Rummy wanted to go too light into Iraq and they totally dropped the ball when they disbanded the army and didn't contain all the vast storehouses of weapons. I don't think Bush necessarily was the guy saying not to do this.
Bush is also seemingly a very loyal person to his people. this is to a fault because when his people screw up and screw up badly, he's too loyal to call them out on their mess-up and fix the situation. that's one major fault i think that he needs to fix and fix quickly.
bush just wants yes men in his company. for that, i will never like him better than clinton. forget blaming him for a war that should have never happened, I blame him for the continued mismanagement and bungling of the war so far. his decisions have led to soldiers dying needlessly. but fuck it, yall reelected him...
No bashing, just don't vote for such an idiot again.
True. But no one is launching a smear campaign against McCain. Because he has no chance. He's too old and up Bush's ass a little too much.Kmarion wrote:
Mcain was a POW for 5 years and tortured, that doesn't mean he is the man to lead this nation.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Let's see....
A fellow who never set foot on a battlefield....
Or fellow that has 3 Purple Hearts from Vietnam.....Oh wait.....swift boat vets say he didn't earn them. And I believe everything I hear.
Lol, I dind't vote for him. I hate that guy! And the guy in the left too, lol. Seriously, this is not a competition. Almost all the politicians suck.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
/Gore /Kerry-101-InvaderZim wrote:
You KNEW he is a dickhead & voted for him?? What a noobhttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/un … Chavez.jpgsergeriver wrote:
After the second election, that would be 2006. Or back, that would be 2005. Either way, how could you vote for him the second time? Seriously, you are a smart folk, I don't get that. No offense.
Invade Mexico this way then America is ours!
you guys don't know what would have happened if kerry would have been elected. i hate when people think we would have been conflict free without Bush.Villain{NY} wrote:
True to a point. He [kerry] would have been the lesser of two evils, and his focus probably would have been on more domestic issues.
QFTGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
forget blaming him for a war that should have never happened, I blame him for the continued mismanagement and bungling of the war so far. his decisions have led to soldiers dying needlessly. but fuck it, yall reelected him...
Imagine if they elected marine.Kmarion wrote:
Mcain was a POW for 5 years and tortured, that doesn't mean he is the man to lead this nation.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Let's see....
A fellow who never set foot on a battlefield....
Or fellow that has 3 Purple Hearts from Vietnam.....Oh wait.....swift boat vets say he didn't earn them. And I believe everything I hear.
Still, /Gore /Kerry...sergeriver wrote:
Lol, I dind't vote for him. I hate that guy! And the guy in the left too, lol. Seriously, this is not a competition. Almost all the politicians suck.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
/Gore /Kerry-101-InvaderZim wrote:
You KNEW he is a dickhead & voted for him?? What a noobhttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/un … Chavez.jpgsergeriver wrote:
After the second election, that would be 2006. Or back, that would be 2005. Either way, how could you vote for him the second time? Seriously, you are a smart folk, I don't get that. No offense.
Invade Mexico this way then America is ours!
"Yeah! We chased down little kids and shot them! Of course I feel bad about it now..."Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Let's see....
A fellow who never set foot on a battlefield....
Or fellow that has 3 Purple Hearts from Vietnam.....Oh wait.....swift boat vets say he didn't earn them. And I believe everything I hear.
Aw, heck. Let's just make Kerry president without a vote...
"And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the – of – the historical customs, religious customs..."
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-07-13 10:19:54)
I totally disagree. I know this fact utterly escapes the average liberal but Clintons impeachment had nothing to do with getting a blowjob.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Sad thing is, if this was a democratic President the past 7 years, he would have been impeached in year 5.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
except bush doesnt like listening to his generals when they all tell him "its a bad idea, this is not enough, this is destined for failure, we need more troops, what are you fucking crazy mr president"CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:
bush just wants yes men in his company. for that, i will never like him better than clinton. forget blaming him for a war that should have never happened, I blame him for the continued mismanagement and bungling of the war so far. his decisions have led to soldiers dying needlessly. but fuck it, yall reelected him...
He lied under oath, which was his own personal failing. That, and that alone is what he was impeached for.
This highlights a failure of liberalism: ya'll want a slide scale when it comes to application of the law; as in lying under oath is an impeachable offense, unless your lying about getting your knob polished. Or about ; when you are driving a car and the passenger dies because of your perhaps DUI and leaving her to drown while you swam to shore is negligent homicide, unless your a certain parties favorite scion and the son of a booze running big business tycoon named Joe Kennedy.
Bush may be a unbelievable disaster in a dozen ways but there hasn't been any impeachable offense. Sorry, I'd like his head too.
My choice is a known or an unknown. I honestly feel Hillary would be a better President than GW has been. I mean let's be honest, how many Presidential candidates could do as poorly a job as he has done?Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Question.GATOR591957 wrote:
Sad Americans, I think the whole country is in morning over this Presidency. The problem is, how do you prevent it from happening again? An Impeachment puts Cheyney in the Whitehouse, well everyone knows most of these moves are his anyway. So you Impeach him as well. So get this Pelosi becomes the first woman President, stealing Hillary's thunder. Got to laugh at that......Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
The sad republicans.
Knowing what you know now about Bush, would you rather have him right now or Hillary Clinton?