If Redskins win, GWB wins! Yikes!

Normally, I don't speak about Politics...except for when it directly relates to me. I was in the Marine Corps from '91 to '99 (most with a Democrat as 'Commander in Chief' "Bill Clinton") and let me tell you about Democrats. Most of the cuts you say that happened as a Result of Bush were all put into place when Clinton was President. Clinton successfully reduced all Military Personnel. The Marine Corps, which is already the Smallest Branch, was reduced from 185k to under 125k in the 8 years that Clinton was President. When Budgets are given to the Armed Service, it is done on a basis of per member. So the fewer members the fewer dollars in the Budget. Fewer Dollars in the Budget means fewer dollars to spend on equipment such as body armour, weapons and vehicle maintenance. When Bush took over, he took over an already depleted Military (Thanks to Clinton) with inadequate weapons and gear. And Clinton had also put into effect Bills that made it more difficult to get emergency funds for the Military.

So if you ask me which has done better for our country and the defense there of, I would have to say Republicans. Anyone who thinks that the war in Iraq is strictly for Oil, then you definitely need to look a the big picture. Bush has successfully proven that Iraq (Saddam) has monetarily supported Al-Qadea (or however you spell it). Yes, Bush has made mistakes but he has also admitted to them. Bush has also made decisions and stuck by them. I would rather have a President that is willing to make decisions (instead of someone like Kerry who jumps from one side of the fence to the other to sastify public opinion) and sticks to them regardless of the public opinion. And if we let another Democrat lead our country, I am afraid that the Military will suffer more than anyone can possibly imagine and the Defense of our Country would be at a greater risk.

You may want to check out this link as well, although I advise caution against it, I don't want to confuse you with the fact's.


http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041028-115519-3700r.htm

While you are at it check this one out: http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html

and this one: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/election2004/10044474.htm?1c

troops apparently didn't search hard enough.

Actually, their was tremendous opposition to the Kosovo operation from both the right and the left. Republicans who say you shouldn't criticize a president during war time should go look at the the things said about Clinton at that time. However, Iraq and Kosovo are not parallel situations. Kosovo was essentially a tactical air-strike conducted under NATO auspices, with multilateral support. The Iraq war, in contrast, was - and is - a unilateral ground operation requiring hundreds of thousands of troops, all of whom are needed in more crucial conflict zones (read Afghanistan). Also, Kosovo didn't increase anti-americanism in a terrorist breeding ground. Iraq has, as CIA reports corroborate. Over a thousand brave men and women have already died in Iraq. Less than 200 hundred died during the entire Kosovo operation. So they are not the same. But that's irrelevant anyway. We are not voting to reelect Clinton, so what does his record have to do with anything.

Actually, their was tremendous opposition to the Kosovo operation from both the right and the left. Republicans who say you shouldn't criticize a president during war time should go look at the the things said about Clinton at that time. However, Iraq and Kosovo are not parallel situations. Kosovo was essentially a tactical air-strike conducted under NATO auspices, with multilateral support. The Iraq war, in contrast, was - and is - a unilateral ground operation requiring hundreds of thousands of troops, all of whom are needed in more crucial conflict zones (read Afghanistan). Also, Kosovo didn't increase anti-americanism in a terrorist breeding ground. Iraq has, as CIA reports corroborate. Over a thousand brave men and women have already died in Iraq. Less than 200 hundred died during the entire Kosovo operation. So they are not the same. But that's irrelevant anyway. We are not voting to reelect Clinton, so what does his record have to do with anything.


Clintons record comes into question because Kerry is running on the grounds that he will return the country to the form of the Clinton Administration...if you run on the premise of a former presidents record then that record becomes relevant...
On a side note, you guys hear Monica Lewinsky has publicly stated she is voting republican this election?.....
She said something about the democrats leaving a bad taste in her mouth...

This statistic has been in discussion on the ExtremeSkins board for a while, and really it just leads to nastiness.

I root for the Skins regardless. I will also be voting for Bush, but I respect those that are voting for Kerry. I dont think we should start a political debate here because at the root of it, politics is a very divisive force, and nothing good will come of it.

Bush or Kerry- Exercise your right to vote, regardless.


Yes, do exercise your right to vote!

Remember, the previous election in 2000 was decided by the smallest of margins!

On a side note, you guys hear Monica Lewinsky has publicly stated she is voting republican this election?.....
She said something about the democrats leaving a bad taste in her mouth...

:lol: It's a good thing I can't find a ten foot pole

> > > Economy on upswing under Bush

what the hell?

I respect those with their opinions, let me just say that I hope History does not repeat itself. I wonder if our country (as objectively as possible) has learned from the 2000 election. Hopefully "the truth will set us free".

Bush's record, on the other hand, is more troubling. He willingilly sent troops into combat without adequate body armor, and banned the media from showing their coffins as they returned home.

How could anyone say Bush banning the media from showing the coffins returned home is a bad decision? That type of footage doesn't need to be taken. Anyone wishing to use the caskets as a political weapon is a disgusting human being. As someone who has multiple miltary ties in my family, I wouldn't want anyone I know and love, who had been killed in combat(which thankfully hasn't happened), to have their caskets video taped and used as a weapon against what they joined the military for and what they were willing to give their lives for.

Historically, when the skins win, the incumbent president wins.

So if you want Kerry to win, the skins better not win. LOL

I'm not superstitous. Go skins!

EDIT AND MERGE: oops, didnt see the existing thread.