Read Bush a Fault for rising gas prices read in www.gas.com

Posted by: J at May 18, 2004 05:11 PM

Read Bush at Fault for rising gas prices read in www.gas.com

Posted by: J at May 18, 2004 05:11 PM

Obviously I am of the supporting our president category. I have found that most if not all that I run into that are against him, are against only because they dislike him. Nary a one has anything positive to say about John Kerry or Ralph Nader, they just hate GW. At this point I am convinced that if Adolf Hitler were running against GW these people would vote for Adolf.

John Kerry has never stood for anything other than what he thought was politically expediant. He has a record of 20 years of accomplishing nothing. He has been on the wrong side of all issues at all times.

GW was handed a crappy (at best) economy with eroded intelligence and military. He was dealt the worst blow any president ever indured within nine months of being sworn into office. A blow from an enemy that had not been dealt with and in not being dealt with grew stronger and stronger. He made choices that John Kerry himself made. He, being president, does not have the luxury that John Kerry has…being a monday morning coach, a backseat driver.

GW 2004 is our only hope for peace, prosperity and a free society.

Posted by: I ride With the coWboy at October 11, 2004 11:56 PM

I think the message should be pushed more about the food for oil program.
In light of the findings and even the fact that France was selling weapons to saddam right before the war broke.
The multi billion dollar contracts they got should be highlighted why they were not interested in removing the power of saddam at the time.
The greed that France had for oil being the fact they depend on others for their oil.
Also that at the time the UN got it wrong and they have some questions to answer.

Seeing the weekend reports coming directly from the UN reports. I think a point should be made of Kerrys argument about these countries not in the battle with us.
Also the fact that China did support the US in the war by buying up bonds from the US. There are many that are not aware of these points and I don’t think you are hammering the facts that we had support by other means. Also to counter Kerry, why some country were not interested. The real fact being the benefits they were getting by standing on the sidelines.

The point is to discredit Kerrys claim that Bush did it wrong and he could do better on the war and getting more countries involved.
No one would have gotten these countries involved any differently if they were in charge.
I think it has never been approached that Kerry is playing armchair football
and anyone can make claims after the fact.

Also how he has belittled the enormity of what Bush and we took on and he could never had handled such an undertaking, and yes, sometimes things do go wrong. Look at other wars.

I am sure that at this point anyone can now get some of these countries on board, after the fact. Being that the future business in this part of the world will be different now.
I am sure France is now interested in getting in on the bounty now that it is clear their old partner is gone.

A reason why France is not in the war and not let Kerry win the argument he can get more involved and that the war was wrong and that is why some countries stayed out.
And please, please, please, don’t let this hypocrite be my next leader and that bizarre wife of his, First Lady.

P.S. Also the fact that Clinton and Albright let North Korea get away with escalating their nuclear program and blaming Bush on this.

Posted by: tucci at October 24, 2004 03:36 PM