Presidential Election - Let the polls begin! (Oct/12/2004 )
Why do you guys say what you do?
Nothing that you say means anything because you have no facts to back up what you say.... 
I'm still for Bush 
He turned a $5 trillion surplus into a $5 tillion deficit. He destroyed 3 million jobs.
As president, Bush had his first big legislative victory in a tax cut that turned a $127 billion surplus into a $288 billion deficit.
As governor, Bush inherited a $6 billion surplus, and two years later, he left a $10 billion deficit.
In dubyah’s claim he had been a successful governor, he boasted “we still have no personal income tax.”…. he bragged about “two largest tax cuts” he achieved in Texas. In fact, he had nothing to do with keeping Texas from adopting personal income tax. An amendment to the state constitution, proposed and approved by a Democrat controlled legislature BEFORE dubya took office, prohibited the imposition of an income tax without a voter referendum. BUSH WAS ASSUMING CREDIT FOR A POLICY ESTABLISHED BEFORE HE WAS EVEN THERE!!!!
The two tax cuts? Much of the tax cuts were offset by other tax hikes made necessary due to the cuts dubya was praising. Bush glosses over the real facts.
In 1997, Bush proposed a tax overhaul that would lower school property taxes, but wold raise the sale tax and impose a new business activity tax. But, that year he had pledged NEVER TO ENDORSE RAISING THE SALES TAX OR CREATING A BUSINESS TAX. Yet he did both. In 2000, ABC new’s This Week, instead of saying, oop’s I stuffed up majorly… he said “There are pledges all the time”. I translate this to mean, “I lie often just to get people on my side, then stick ‘em where it hurts.”
Also, in 1997, under Dubyah, a $1 billion reduction in school property taxes was passed. After they took effect, school districts across Texas had to raise local tax rates to compensate for the lost revenue. In 1999, Dalas Morning News analysed the 1046 school discricts and found that “MANY ARE STIL PAYING AS MUCH AS THEY DID IN 1997, OR MORE”. Rick Pretty, a republican lieutenant governor, said, and I quote, “the tax cut didn’t stand the test of time as well as many of us would have liked it to.” He also said these tax cuts were “ILLUSORY”.
In 2003, a report released by the House Research Organisation of the Republican-controlled Texas house of Representatives noted, “in 1997, the then gov. George W. Bush sought to revamp state taxes… That effort was unsuccessful, and many of the concerns cited at that time remain unresolved.”
When workers at Panhandle meatpacking factories won lawsuits against the company, gov. Bush pushed through tort reform legislation that made it impossible for workers to sue their employers. Which also ment that an employee consulting a lawyer about workplace hazards could be fired.
Must I continue??
and for him being prolife.... well how i fell on that matter doesn't really count. there are decisions that dubyah's made about pro life that really suck.
According to an ABC News – Washington Post poll released in January 2001, 59% of Americans supported a woman’s right to choose abortion in all or most cases. 46% of republicans also supported that right. 14% of Americans thought that abortion should be illegal in all cases.
When *dubyah* first started “working” in office, January 22, 2001, he issued an executive memorandum blocking U.S. federal funding for international organizations that perform abortions or to provide abortion counseling or services overseas. The announcement coincided with the anniversary of Roe v Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion across the U.S. You have heard of Roe v Wade? I'm assuming you're not that ignorant on the facts.
Organizations that lost funding as a result of Bush’s actions were active in distributing condoms and providing AIDS education. The International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) lost around $20 million in cash and supplies – more than 20% of it’s budget. I get peeved if I loose $20.
The Family Guidance Association of Ethiopia – where abortions were ONLY permitted to protect the health of the mother, where maternal mortality rates are among the world’s highest, and more than 4 million people are infected with HIV – lost 60 percent of its annual budget. Bush’s actions “translates to clinics closed, contracteptives not available” and AIDS programs curtailed, IPPF’s director-general said, “There is a clear and direct relationship between women’s ability to control their fertility and their ability to escape poverty”.
The European Union’s Social Affairs Commissioner called Bush’s announcement, simply, “a step backwards.” The chairwoman of Republicans For Choice remarked, “He’s supposed to be measuring drapes on his first day, not interfering with women’s rights.”
In the 2003 budget, funding for abstinence programs increased by 33%, which equates to $135 million. This was the largest percentage increase for any area outside defense. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT ABSTINENCE PROGRAMS WERE EFFECTIVE. Dubyah also diverted $300 million FROM welfare funding to promote MARRIAGE for WELFARE MOTHERS. If you don’t believe me, check out your country's budget for 2003.
Dubyah had committed $500 million to prevent mother-child AIDS transmission…he hasn’t paid up yet. During his second month in office, it was announced that the White House office on AIDS would be shut down, along with the office on Race Relations. But when people started to get more than antsy about this, the press office said that this was all a big mistake and blamed Andrew Card, the Chief of Staff. SCAPEGOAT!
In August 2002, Bush blocked a spending bill that included $200 million for global AIDS programs. WHY? Because the Christian movement, which spends heaps of money supporting this creep, have no interest in AIDS prevention or birth control methods other than abstinence. They also put pressure on him since January2002 to eliminate funding for the UNFPA because they may fund or advocate abortion…even though this organization was set up to provide HIV prevention, family planning and other services.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used to have a web page that advised teens to practice safe sex, it also had fact sheets on preventing STD’s, effective condom use… pretty useful info for teens who are going through major changes with their bodies, experimenting, MAKING MISTAKES, and have questions they don’t’ necessarily want to talk to their parents or teaches about…well this page was shut down.
how you feel personally about abortion should not affect the prevention of AIDS, and teen pregnancy. Sure, abstinence is the only 100% effective method of preventing pregnancy. But it's not the only way, and refusing to teach kids about the other methods... well you're just looking for trouble, aren't you.
Because he's a bad leader. his actions effect the rest of the world.
Maybe you have to be outside the US to get a real idea of how Bush is completely unacceptable as a leader. I don't think american's have a real conception of how much regrett and contempt the rest of the world feels toward Bush.
IMO it's ok to be pro life... it's ok to back someone who has the same convitions as you.... it's not ok to back an idiot just because he's prolife as well.
lol, and you didn't realize the bad characters about kerry? 
...shallow...
You probably picked all that info up from an extremist group too.
You've seen men like him before. He's smart, he's well-dressed, he has a pretty impressive resume. He's advocated some moderately blasphemous policies, but he has the ability to please his constituents-whoever they may be. He talks, but doesn't really pay attention what he's saying. When he's not talking, he's waiting to talk. He can't even make up his mind about certain issues, but always finds a way to disguise that in his speeches and declarations. You know all about men like him. This one just so happens to be a Democratic candidate for the 2004 presidency.
Senator John Kerry contradicts himself sentence after sentence. The Massachusetts senator declared himself blatantly "anti-war" regarding Iraq, yet says we need to spend more money on supplemental supplies. He said the Bush administration "did not do almost anything correct" but has recently supported the effort in Iraq by advocating more funds. Besides, he's the most non-photogenic man in the history of non-photogenic men, and I personally couldn't watch someone like that give the State of the Union.
Kerry's background is pretty characteristic of a presidential candidate. He can happily put a "Yale Alumni" license plate frame on his car, and talk about his days back in 'Nam. In fact, if you've ever heard Kerry speak, he's sure to remind his audience several times that he did indeed fight in the Vietnam War. No one can really blame him for his incessant cockiness regarding the war; after all, he did earn a bronze star, a silver star and three Purple Heart medals. Then again, though, didn't Forrest Gump earn the Medal of Honor? This is not to belittle Kerry's achievements; but please, man. Sometimes we'd like a break from hearing about 'Nam.
One would think that Kerry would be less eager to discuss his wartime experience - after all, Kerry was not a patriotic Eisenhower-esque leader... Along with Jane "Hanoi" Fonda, Kerry was cited by retired General George S. Patton for "giving aid and comfort to the enemy". Kerry penned a pro-Hanoi book entitled "The New Soldier". Best of all, long after Kerry switched sides to supporting the enemy in congressional hearings, he began lobbying for renewed trade relations with the communist Vietnamese government. During this same time, Kerry's cousin, C. Stewart Forbes, was brokering a $905 million deal to develop a special deep-sea port at Vung Tau, Vietnam. Quite the coincidence, no?
Since the beginning of Kerry's political career, several contradictory statements have been noted by a slue of political analysts. Kerry tried running for the House of Representatives in 1972, but the emerging 'Nam addict wasn't able to gain a position the first time around. Ten years later, Kerry was able to gain the position of Lieutenant Governor. During his time at the helm, Kerry advocated the ideals of fewer penalties for gun violations and maintained a very peace-oriented position in terms of issues that may have needed military attention. While peace is fine for a flower child who has Vietnam memories flooding through his mind, Kerry may have not thought through his war decisions too carefully. In 1991, Kerry voted no on the resolution approving the set up of ground troops against Saddam Hussein. Yes, that's right...the one and only Saddam Hussein. The same man who, twelve years later, we were still trying to contain. Yeah, yeah, he couldn't have predicted Saddam's future offenses, but why then, were so many other political leaders so concerned about Saddam's behavior? Could it have been, maybe, that Hussein really was a threat? One can only wonder.
Recently, Kerry has been very concerned with funding Operation Iraqi Freedom. He's concerned with funding the war that he doesn't think should be going on. That's not even the bad part. As a pretty characteristic Democrat, Kerry thinks that wealthy Americans should have to pay for the war. That makes sense, right? Obviously it's the wealthy Americans' faults that we're in this war in the first place. Hardly.
On October 2, Kerry joined Senator Joseph Biden (Democrat, Delaware) in proposing that the wealthiest 1% of Americans should help pay $87 billion for supplemental aid in the War in Iraq. This would mean that about 2,920,000 Americans would be paying a little less than $30,000 each to fund Iraqi operations. Kerry did not stipulate where the money would come from (taxes, etc.) but the numbers are seemingly outrageous.
Kerry says, "I am confident that these patriotic Americans are prepared to sacrifice." What gives him this confidence? His proposal reaffirms one thing: his policies and legislation tend to be mildly extreme and certainly do not gain him the respect of many prospective voters.
Kerry's college debate team partner, William Stanberry, says it all when he describes Kerry. "John is not so much aloof or standoffish as he is reserved. He is not by nature a gregarious, outgoing person. Some people take a slightly private, serious personality as being elitist or snobbish."
A president can't be private, and he certainly can't be reserved. A president is in the business of making friends, and if Kerry's old-time friend says he's not very people-oriented, I'm going to believe him.
John Kerry once said that what we need is "regime change" here in the United States. Apparently Kerry sees George W. Bush as a dictator, and wants to unseat him - to place himself on the throne. Well I have news for you Mr. Kerry: the United States are not buying what you're selling. You might have better luck creating a regime somewhere like... Vietnam.
1) "Hanoi John": After his service in Vietnam, Kerry reverted to traiterous behavior.
Senator Kerry served his time in the military in Vietnam, that is true. But did you know that when he returned home he joined the likes of Jane Fonda in anti-war protests? Not just your average type speaking out against the evils of war, though; Jane Fonda and Senator Kerry were among those who derided our troops, calling them "international rascists" and accusing them of committing genocide... http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/2/9/134218.shtml
Senator Kerry testified before Congress of American soldiers committing such atrocities as rape, beheadings, and murdering small children in the Vietnam War; he was never able to produce ANY proof. http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040210-094330-7435r.htm
Check out this video: John Kerry's Testimony
'Hanoi' Jane decided, after the rally in Valley Forge, PA, that her public support would be mainly in favor of Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War; she then went off to North Vietnam for a tour of the country and returned home telling stories about how the G.I.'s were being treated well and that they were not being tortured... which we now know is just simply not true. What really happened is that Fonda LIED about what was really going on over there in the concentration camps. http://www.1stcavmedic.com/jane_fonda.htm
Be sure to also check out this website for a LOT more condemning information: Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry
When Mr. Kerry pontificated at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on Veterans Day, a group of veterans turned their backs on him and walked away. They remembered Mr. Kerry as the antiwar activist who testified before Congress during the war, accusing veterans of being war criminals. The dust jacket of Mr. Kerry's pro-Hanoi book, "The New Soldier," features a photograph of his ragged band of radicals mocking the US Marine Corps Memorial, which depicts the flag-raising on Iwo Jima, with an upside-down American flag. Retired Gen. George S. Patton III charged that Mr. Kerry's actions as an antiwar activist had "given aid and comfort to the enemy," as had the actions of Ramsey Clark and Jane Fonda. Also, Mr. Kerry lied when he threw what he claimed were his war medals over the White House fence; he later admitted they weren't his. Now they are displayed on his office wall.
2) "Senator Kerry": As a member of the U.S. Senate, Kerry has made numerous moves to crush our military.
As a future U.S. President, one would hope that Kerry has a good, strong foreign national policy. One of the tools that are vital to a strong foreign national policy is a strong, vibrant military; without one, any two-bit country can just thumb their noses at us and do as they like. As a Senator, Kerry's voting record speaks for itself. He has introduced military-cutting bills so ludicrous that NOT A SINGLE OTHER MEMBER OF THE SENATE DARED CO-SPONSOR HIS BILL NOR DID *ANY* VOTE FOR IT!!! Some of the anti-military items that he has voted against as a U.S. Senator:
* Introduced a bill in 1996 to slash $6.5B from the DOD... the bill was never co-sponsored and was never allowed to come to the Senate floor for a vote!
* In 1993 Kerry introduced a plan to cut numerous defense programs... among these were to cut the number of subs we have, reduce the Army's light infantry units down to just one, reduce tactical fighter wings in the USAF, and terminate the USN's mine-hunting ship program... this last one is a bit personal for me... though I won't go into any details, the fact that I am still alive today is quite possibly due to the hard work of one of those mine-hunting ships and her crew... I sure am glad this bill of Kerry's never was passed!
* In 1993 Kerry voted against the military pay raise bill... which is pretty ludicrous considering anyone who knows anything of how little the military used to get paid in the 80's and 90's would *NEVER* have imagined that someone would decide to cut their pay even further!
* Over the years Kerry has introduced bills, or voted for bills, to cut some of our most important weapons programs... these systems were the same ones that proved vital in the Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, and other recent conflicts... without them, the U.S. not only may not have enough of an edge to win but it would have CERTAINLY COST NUMEROUS ADDITIONAL DEATHS OF U.S. SERVICE MEMBERS... in an era when this same man is constantly criticizing President Bush's record on the Iraq War and how many troops are dying, it is amazing to look back and find out that Senator Kerry was constantly voting to tear down programs and systems that would prove to protect so many of the men and women in our Armed Forces!!! Here are just a few of the programs that he wanted to cut... remember, these systems are the POWERHOUSES of the U.S. Military... they aren't old antiquated weaponry: F-15/16's, B-1'2 & B-2's, M1 Abrams tanks, Patriot Missiles, Apache Helo's, Tomahawk Cruise Missiles, and the Aegis Air-Defense Cruiser (there goes MY ship!)
3) "Senator Kerry": Does he even know what he believes in???
Kerry, it would appear, seems to constantly be waffling on what it is that he believes in... it seems to change depending on which way the political wind is blowing... I, for one, am much more capable of accepting a Presidential figure that screws up from time to time but KNOWS WHAT HE BELIEVES IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO over some numb-skull who seems like he has to constantly be gauging the political "air" to decide how he should believe! A U.S. President should have his basic beliefs down to a "core"... it shouldn't be something that is constantly challenged by everyone else's voice... yes, he serves the people... but he still needs to be certain about what he believes in and not waffle around so much... how can we have faith that he will have the strength and fortitude to stand up and to do what is required in a time of crisis when he can't even stand up tall under scrutiny???
* Is he FOR or AGAINST gun rights???
4) "Presidential Candidate Kerry": Apparently he thinks that putting profanity on his official webpage is professional and the right image for a future LEADER OF THE U.S.!
I really don't need to say much here... suffice it to say that someone trying to attain the Presidency of the U.S., the lead candidate for the Democratic Party, and a U.S. Senator, should not be posting articles on his website proliferating obscenities... it is completely unprofessional and totally unbecoming a person of such stature. And yet, he has done so... something like 11 "F" words and 6 "S" words! Check it out for yourself at his official website!
5) "Presidential Candidate Kerry": Not the 'moderate' as he'd like you to think...
He speaks one way on the TV but on the Senate floor his voting record speaks VOLUMES as to the REAL Kerry! He is no more a moderate than Reagan was a liberal! Kerry is about as liberal as they come... 'course, I guess if you are also a liberal, he should be your man! But ponder for a minute that he is currently selling himself as something that he clearly IS NOT... what does that say about him???
Kerry is a big jerk.
this is why i hate politics. no one is good enough for the top job.
everyone knows that kerry went to vietnam, and then was an active participant in the antiwar movement. 
heheh,
noooo, actually i got out a few reputable newspapers and had a brief look though the budget papers, they are public information. and what do you mean "too". is the only way you could find dirt on kerry was to go to an extremist site? 
that was uncalled for.... she made excellent fitness videos. don't bag janey out. that's it, Jane Fonda for President.
You've been very busy cutting and pasting.
In 1966, John Kerry, a graduate of Yale University enlisted in the navy… god only knows why…probably seemed like the right thing to do. I saw that movie with Tom Cruise in it…and the one with tom hanks, too.
Between 1968 and 1969, Kerry led PCF-44, and when that boat was shot to bits, he lead another one, PCF-94,… on dangerous raids up the Mekong Delta, and along the Cambodian border. He was wounded three times.
John Kerry returned back to the states in 1969 as a hero…with his arms and legs intact….once again, I saw that movie with Tom Cruise in it, lots of people weren’t so lucky. and didn't gump's friend loose both legs?
Kerry was on of 1000s of veterans who went to Washington for 5 days of antiwar protest in 1971.
last time i checked, tom cruise was way to young to have actually have been in 'nam. so's tom hanks. but...THAT'S JUST A MOVIE! i don't think there is actually a guy called forrest gump, who sits on park benches holding chocolates. mmmmmm, chocolates. and if i could remember more about cruise's movie, well, i don't know what i'd do. he annoys me.
So what about his medals. My grandfather was in World War 2. He was in the Polish Army, that was relocated to France, and then he was in the British Army… it’s a long long story, but anyway the point is, he didn’t even pick up his medals. And this was not Vietnam, not a war that people were protesting about. Everyone pretty much agreed that World War 2 was a good fight. I had his medals sent to me last year. Big wooop, they’re just bits of metal on a ribbon.
Kerry was perhaps the most articulate antiwar veteran on the public speaking circuit.
He was the only veteran to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
I’m going to get back to you on this… my enzymes are degrading.
BACK..., and from fresh from my cluttered desk at home.... now where were we, let's see, you're bagging Kerry, a genuine war hero, not the greatest looking guy in the world, and i was bagging bushy, an economic dunce, with beady little eyes.
35.8 million people now live below the poverty line.
12.9 million of those living in poverty are children.
The official poverty line is an income of $18,810/yr for a family of four.
A single parent working full-time for minimum wage makes $10,712/yr.
45 million people lack health coverage.
1,600,000 jobs lost in the private sector since Dubya took office.
40 per cent of homeless men are VETERANS.
Let's have a little looksie into Bush's millitary records....
"New information with regard to the meaning of a special code which appears on George W. Bush's Air National Guard discharge papers indicates that he was being thrown out of the Air National Guard for failing 'to possess the required military qualifications for his grade or specialty, or does not meet the mental, moral, professional or physical standards of the Air Force.'In other words, despite the fact that Bush had an unfulfilled six year Military Service Obligation, he was discharged from the Air National Guard not because he moved to Boston, but because he failed to meet his obligation to maintain his qualifications as an F102 pilot." (10/21)
"A newly released document from President George W. Bush's military records lends credence to rumors that the recent flap over 'forged memos' was in fact engineered from within the White House, Raw Story has learned. At the very least, the timing of the release shows that the White House deliberately withheld a genuine document which contained the characteristics of the memos which are said to have been forged. From the beginning, Bush's supporters have claimed that typewriters of the period could not produce the documents. It's also the fourth time the White House has released Bush documents since they said they had released all of Bush's non-medical documents." (See also Bob Fertik/Mike Hersh's "CBS 60 Minutes Documents May Have Been Real"). (10/11)
President Bush sure talks a good game when it comes to the military, doesn't he? Whether he's embedding the media with troops in combat or flying jet planes to victory celebrations, Bushy has used the military as a political backdrop more effectively than any president in U.S. history. Bush's record as president shows a pattern of disrespect to the military that the Army Times describes as "nickel-and-dime treatment." Whether he's opposing an increase in payments to families of troops killed in action or capping raises for low-ranking soldiers, Bush never matches his pro-military rhetoric with action.
"I met with [George W. Bush] down in Nashville before the Gulf war started. And he was the most self-assured man I ever met in my life…. He was just sitting there, like, I'm on top of the world, and I warned him about this war. I had deep misgivings about this war, deep misgivings. And I was trying to say, 'Mr. President, you better prepare the American people for casualties.'
"'Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties,' Robertson quoted Bush as saying. 'Well,' I said, 'it's the way it's going to be. . . . The Lord told me it was going to be, A, a disaster and, B, messy.'"
Pat Robertson's recent statement to CNN's Paula Zahn.
Bush tried to remove Yellowstone from UN World Heritage Site list.
President Bush proposed changes to labor laws that could mean millions of workers lose overtime pay. How many millions? A study from the Economic Policy Institute showed that 8 million American workers would lose the right to overtime under the proposed rule changes from Bush's Labor Department.
One thing we learned from the war in Iraq and the search for weapons of mass destruction is that if there's evidence that doesn't support the Bush administration's agenda, it won't see the light of day. But this doesn't just apply to foreign policy. When then-Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill commissioned a report to gauge the long-term U.S. budget picture under Bush policies, he should have known President Bush wouldn't like the answer. So the post-O'Neill Treasury department kept the news -- which warned of a disastrous $44 trillion federal debt -- out of the annual budget report. After all, catastrophic deficits aren't a very good argument for new tax cuts for the super rich.
Bush interferes with Canada's decriminalization of marijuana. That is just so wrong on so many levels.
What's next, banning the sales of TimTams? The man's mad!! Here's a quiz. If you have a large group responsible for about $9 billion in fraud and a small group responsible for $54 billion in fraud, which group do you pursue? If you answered the big group responsible for one-fifth the fraud, you might be President Bush! Bush's IRS creates stringent new rules for the working-poor families who receive the earned-income tax credit, requiring "documents that will be difficult or impossible for people to get within the six-month deadline." When it comes to choosing between going after the working poor (responsible for $8-5-$9.9 billion in tax fraud in 1999) or going after big corporations (responsible for $54 billion in tax fraud in 1998), this administration bravely takes on poor families every time.
"We have it in our power to change the world again, but only if we're true to our ideals - and that starts by telling the truth to the American people. That is my first pledge to you tonight. As president, I will restore trust and credibility to the White House."
-- John F. Kerry, Democratic Presidential Nominee
OMG, I just came across a forum, "Why you should be happy george w bush is our president."....they're so happy because when a politician cry's, well, it's gotta be sincere.
anyway, it's saturday, the sun's out, and i'm going to have lunch,maybe a nap, and then finish my lit. review.
The fact about kerry and his 3 purple hearts really gets me.
To think that he recieved 3, and people died just to recieve one purple heart award.
By the way, what are your "reputable newspapers and budget papers"?
Did you have any idea that even the most reliable news sources are slanted in a left way?
You crack me up vetticus, you tend to be a ignorant to everything I say
...just like every other left wing liberal...
left wing pinko's rule!
budget papers are found at the us government printing site, off the top of my head, i think it's www.gpo.com... .org... this may be wrong, but it was something like that.
reputable news papers, well they're the ones that don't have as a cover story, "an alien stole my baby." let's see there was the abc, the australian (which is a major newspaper here, run by murdoch aka right wing).... there was new york times, the washington post.... what is this, the spanish inquisition? i didn't keep track.
papers are slanted in a away that'll increase sales. during the olympics, in the women's regatta, the aussie team had a really good chance of winning...then one of the rowers "collapsed from exhaustion"...we came last. the team was a little more the peeved. the morning newspapers came out with the story blaming the girl for ruining our medal chance, how could she, what the hells goin' on with her.... they didn't sell that well, so by afternoon, the story changed, and it was oh, poor little sally, the team's not standing by her, the pressure she has to face. what they print is what the know will sell. if the news is left wing, maybe it's because the audience is left wing. but then again, maybe the news is right wing, but being sold as left wing, because the right wing public prefer to be seen as left wing public, reading left wing material that is really right wing material.... it's all a conspiracy. 
you're comment on ignorance goes both ways mister. ignorance is bliss. and given that the bush is more sneaksie than nixon, well, america is probably in a state of utter uphoria.
you were talking about profanity before, well, i think that it is a useful expression, at times. background....our gov parties are labour, liberal, and national.... labour is like the democrats, liberal is republican, and national is for the farmers... the liberals and the nationals joined to form one party called the coalition.... our labour leader called the coalition "a conga line of suckholes"... it was very appropriate at the time, and it still makes me laugh.
cya
ps, have you seen fahrenheit 9/11 or outfoxed?
pps, are you voting bush because you dislike all the other candidates, especially kerry, or because you actually like dubyah, and think he's a good leader?
Like I mentioned before, I voting for Bush because he supports pro-life
And also disregards homosexual marriage
Yes I saw Farinhight 9-11 it was a 98% bias movie...
Man, Moore is a jerk