By Beauty Damned

Go Nader!

There are other issues besides the war in Iraq. The economy is improving and unemployment levels are dropping.

Perhaps you missed the part when I made the all encompassing statement "all that has happened in the past four years."

Just because people's unemployment benefits aren't being extended doesn't mean that people are getting jobs. And you're right, there is a lot more to consider when electing a president. And apparently, people aren't examining those issues closely enough. Either that or they just don't care.

P.S. Despite all of the inevitable issues that face our country, I can't think of one that outweighs the importance of getting rid of an incompetent president who is squandering every last thing this country has/had and his malevolent administration whose ambitions are anything and everything but what they so unconvincingly claim. I think it's sad that many people are incapable of seeing through something so transparent.

I didn't miss it at all.

Just because people's unemployment benefits aren't being extended doesn't mean that people are getting jobs

Apparently you aren't familiar with how the unemployment rate is calculated.

Either that or they just don't care.

either that, or they realize Kerry would be a greater train wreck.

Tell me what you think Kerry might do that would be worse than what Bush has done.

Tax the piss out of us and stall a growing economy, for starters. Weaken our national security. Bend us over for the UN.

The list is endless.

Our tax situation needs to be reconciled. Bush's taxcuts hurt everyone but those who didn't need them and he put those cuts in place at the worst imaginable time. How does he think he can fund a 500 billion dollar defense budget (not to mention funding for OTHER THINGS such as health insurance and social programs - oh who cares about all that? Let's buy guns from Bush's friends!!!!) by cutting taxes for those who need it the least? It's assinine.

I don't think that Kerry would do anything to weaken our national security. If anything, I think getting rid of Bush would send a message to the world that Americans don't tolerate tyranny within their own government and may actually quell some of the anger coming our way. I also don't think that someone who supports Bush has much room to talk about weakening our national security. Let's not forget whos vacation was ticking by in the months before September 11th or whose watch we were on at the time that we were brutally attacked by terrorists.

If we would have let the UN "bend us over" a little over a year ago, maybe we would have listened to them when they said Saddam didn't have WMD and maybe, just maybe, we wouldn't be embroiled in this failure of a war.

The UN didn't say Saddam did not have WMD. They said to give more time to let the inspections work. The same inspections that hadn't been working for 12 years.

The U.N. weapons inspectors were right though. Weren't they? Saddam had no WMDs. I wonder what it would take for you to admit that. That everyone who has criticized Bush's approach to Iraq and dealing with the U.N. both before and during this war, have been absolutely right. It's amazing that you could still make snide remarks about U.N. involvement and the inspections, when the inspectors' findings were CORRECT and the fabricated Bush findings were INCORRECT! It's crazy! I'm sorry. I have to laugh at the total nonsensical-ness of it!