Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (10093)	4/14/2004 2:24:36 AM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

Right, Pat. We went into Vietnam and then snuck into Cambodia though we'd signed an agreement not to. This led to genocide there. Something like 2 million slaughtered. If this Iraq thing spreads the same kind of killing will happen. IF!!! When.

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (10093)	4/14/2004 2:26:07 AM
From: Asymmetric	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

REPUBLICANS AGAINST BUSH.... —Kevin Drum 5:13 PM Permalink \| TrackBack (6) \| Comments (105) washingtonmonthly.com On Saturday I mentioned that I had seen an uptick in my mail from Republicans who have finally had enough and no longer support George Bush. As a followup, I thought I'd share some of the comments to that post. You can decide for yourself how seriously to take them: Roxanne: "My bartender, Scuba Steve, who has never voted for a Dem in his life, ditched Bush on the day he announced his new foreign guest-worker program." Lucienc: "My 81 year old mother and my 81 year old godmother, both native Texans still living there, and both of whom voted for Bush in 2000, are hopping mad at him and plan to vote against him in '04....They are furious with Bush over Iraq....My Mom is also livid over the Bush's kowtowing to Big Pharma - she is one of the legion of people who have to order her prescription drugs from Canada in order to afford them." William J. England: "I am a life long member of the Republican Party (73 now), have been a candidate for office with the party, city chairman, county chairman, and a member of the state committee. I have worked on number campaigns and intended doing so this year, for Maine type Republicans. I must confess that I am an 'anybody but George W. Republican' also." Ryan_B: "A good friend's brother, young but lifelong Republican, just got back from Iraq. His family had just moved from NY to NJ, and one of the first things he did was to register to vote in NJ, specifically to 'vote against George W. Bush.' His argument: 'we've GOT to get Rumsfeld out of there.'" Ev: "My profoundly Catholic, conservative father-in-law told me he will not be voting for Bush this time, and it's because of Iraq. He says he likes Bush, but the problem is the 'bunch he brought in with him.'" Ya Think: "A republican friend decided against voting for Bush after reading Ron Suskind's book about Paul O'Neill. Said it was 'disturbing.'" Aaron: "Add me to the list of Kerry-supporting Republicans. Well, technically, I'm not one anymore, as I switched my party affiliation this year for the purpose of voting for Joe Lieberman and against Kerry. But we can't take four more years of Bush. ....The worst part is, he could have had me. After September 11, I thought he was great. When he went after terrorists, when he told Arafat to shove it, when he attacked Iraq, I said, if the Democrats can't nominate someone who takes the war on terrorist Islam seriously, I have to vote for Bush. But it turns out Bush doesn't take it seriously either. We're at war, and the man is on vacation. We're at war, and the justice department is going after pornography. We're at war, and nobody is asked to sacrifice. We're at war, and we're still buddy buddy with the absolute worst country in the world Saudi Arabia." "Republicans Against Bush"? Sounds like a good campaign theme for someone....

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (10093)	4/14/2004 3:51:47 AM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

Did Shrub actually say that this is his new rationale: We have to support the war so that those who have died will not have died in vain? OMG