Things republicans believe in...

[sMiLeYz]

'm a Republican Because...

I BELIEVE the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person?s dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored.

I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.

I BELIEVE free enterprise and encouraging individual initiative have brought this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity.

I BELIEVE government must practice [/b]fiscal responsibility[/b] and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations and that the best government is that which governs least.

I BELIEVE the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people.

I BELIEVE Americans must retain the principles that have made us strong while developing new and innovative ideas to meet the challenges of changing times.

I BELIEVE Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.

FINALLY, I believe the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.

I KID YOU NOT. These are things Republicans actually believe in! Who would have thought...

GOP.com

 

[conjur]

I BELIEVE government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations and that the best government is that which governs least.

*cough*bullsh!t*cough*


At least according to the current administration.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: conjur

I BELIEVE government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations and that the best government is that which governs least.

*cough*bullsh!t*cough*


At least according to the current administration.

LMAO, no kidding. Those a just bold faced lies. Huge bailouts for airline industries, and the war in Iraq are "critical functions"?? Could have fooled me.

 

[nageov3t]

thanks. I needed the laugh

 

[viivo]

If it's posted on the GOP's site it must be true!

Seriously, there was a time when many of those beliefs were held by a majority of the Republicans in power. I hope that time comes again.. soon.

 

[robbase29a]

Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

 

[Darkhawk28]

/yawn

oh and I almost forgot

 

[viivo]

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

Weird. I was just thinking it's time for a new gimmick poster.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: viivo
If it's posted on the GOP's site it must be true!

Seriously, there was a time when many of those beliefs were held by a majority of the Republicans in power. I hope that time comes again.. soon.

:beer:

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

actually their have benn Tons Of Questions.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.

Gays excluded.

I BELIEVE government must practice [/b]fiscal responsibility[/b] and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

ROFL.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: viivo
If it's posted on the GOP's site it must be true!

Seriously, there was a time when many of those beliefs were held by a majority of the Republicans in power. I hope that time comes again.. soon.

:beer:

I'll see your :beer: and raise you a :thumbsup:

I miss the days when I considered joining up with the Republican party.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: viivo
If it's posted on the GOP's site it must be true!

Seriously, there was a time when many of those beliefs were held by a majority of the Republicans in power. I hope that time comes again.. soon.

Actually, that has never been the case.

 

[thuper]

I BELIEVE government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

Well, their preisdents don't follow these lines.*


* (see sig)

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

You HONESTLY don't think it has escalated the terrrorist threat against the world and created a huge breeding ground for terrorism? I disagee.

Before they were just nutjobs, now they are terrorists and most people define them as such, to me they are still just nutjobs, islamic, hindu, atheist, christian, whatever... still just fundie nutjobs.

 

[robbase29a]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

You HONESTLY don't think it has escalated the terrrorist threat against the world and created a huge breeding ground for terrorism? I disagee.

Before they were just nutjobs, now they are terrorists and most people define them as such, to me they are still just nutjobs, islamic, hindu, atheist, christian, whatever... still just fundie nutjobs.

You HONESTLY think that the world was a safer place when saddam was in power?... I bet you can't say it - and be sane. Hussein wasn't just a nutjob, he was killing is OWN PEOPLE! We have stopped the breeding grounds in Iraq. Sure... the terrorists will move to other places, try new tactics, kill other people, but there's no way that you can say that removing terrorists makes the world more dangerous. You are right about one thing though, "fundie nutjobs" can be of any origin. And we must go after these people before they come after us. The world has changed... no more sitting on our butts waiting for another attack.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: robbase29a

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

You HONESTLY don't think it has escalated the terrrorist threat against the world and created a huge breeding ground for terrorism? I disagee.

Before they were just nutjobs, now they are terrorists and most people define them as such, to me they are still just nutjobs, islamic, hindu, atheist, christian, whatever... still just fundie nutjobs.

You HONESTLY think that the world was a safer place when saddam was in power?... I bet you can't say it - and be sane. Hussein wasn't just a nutjob, he was killing is OWN PEOPLE! We have stopped the breeding grounds in Iraq. Sure... the terrorists will move to other places, try new tactics, kill other people, but there's no way that you can say that removing terrorists makes the world more dangerous. You are right about one thing though, "fundie nutjobs" can be of any origin. And we must go after these people before they come after us. The world has changed... no more sitting on our butts waiting for another attack.

Well, after we left the Kurds and Shiites out to hang right after pulling out in '91, Saddam wasn't doing much in the way of killing. His army was decimated after the war and the sanctions prevented it from rebuilding properly. Saddam wasn't much of a threat to anything.

And, now that he's gone, foreign fighters have been moving into Iraq through the unguarded borders (another f-up thanks to Bush/Rumsfeld ignoring Franks' and Shinseki's recommendations). Heck, Zarqawi has now set up camp in Iraq and is exerting his power with impunity.

You have it completely backwards.

 

[raildogg]

Im not a republican. Im not a democrat. I support people who I think is right for America and will work to make this a stronger country.

 

[robbase29a]

Saddam was still killing his own people! Does that mean anything to you? He was still violating UN resolutions, he was still shooting at our airplanes Daily... I can go on and on. He was still a threat after we decided to leave him alone. There is nothing backwards about - now that he is in jail, he can not kill anybody.

Foreign fighters are moving into Iraq because they desperately do not want to see freedom work. They are not for a free iraq. As for Zarqawi... we should have got him when we had the chance, but we didn't. But what is your solution... let him live and allow him "exert his power with impunity"? or aid the Iraqi government to remove him of his hateful, voilent position?

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: robbase29a

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

You HONESTLY don't think it has escalated the terrrorist threat against the world and created a huge breeding ground for terrorism? I disagee.

Before they were just nutjobs, now they are terrorists and most people define them as such, to me they are still just nutjobs, islamic, hindu, atheist, christian, whatever... still just fundie nutjobs.

You HONESTLY think that the world was a safer place when saddam was in power?... I bet you can't say it - and be sane. Hussein wasn't just a nutjob, he was killing is OWN PEOPLE! We have stopped the breeding grounds in Iraq. Sure... the terrorists will move to other places, try new tactics, kill other people, but there's no way that you can say that removing terrorists makes the world more dangerous. You are right about one thing though, "fundie nutjobs" can be of any origin. And we must go after these people before they come after us. The world has changed... no more sitting on our butts waiting for another attack.

I can see you swallowed the bait, hook AND sinker.

No, Saddam wasn't killing anyone, he was contained, posed a threat to NO ONE, not even his own people.

Terrorism has grown since more people got involved after the meaningless Iraq BS war, if you can deny that then you are a bigger fool than i thought.

The problem is that they DON'T stand up and cheer and TELL YOU what their intentions are, you can either kill them after their job (which would be kinda impossible considering how they operate) or you can remove their reasons.

Iraq is a reason for many terrorists, it kinda either proved them right or at least proved that the leader of the free world is insane and will attack based on something no one else believed in.

You will have to excuse me now, but the time is 08.34 here and i am going to bed, i got work at 14.00 and i NEED my beauty sleep.

Take care everyone.

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: robbase29a

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Yes, the war in Iraq is a critical function. The world is a safer place without Saddam Hussein in power, there's no question.

You HONESTLY don't think it has escalated the terrrorist threat against the world and created a huge breeding ground for terrorism? I disagee.

Before they were just nutjobs, now they are terrorists and most people define them as such, to me they are still just nutjobs, islamic, hindu, atheist, christian, whatever... still just fundie nutjobs.

You HONESTLY think that the world was a safer place when saddam was in power?... I bet you can't say it - and be sane. Hussein wasn't just a nutjob, he was killing is OWN PEOPLE! We have stopped the breeding grounds in Iraq. Sure... the terrorists will move to other places, try new tactics, kill other people, but there's no way that you can say that removing terrorists makes the world more dangerous. You are right about one thing though, "fundie nutjobs" can be of any origin. And we must go after these people before they come after us. The world has changed... no more sitting on our butts waiting for another attack.

I can see you swallowed the bait, hook AND sinker.

No, Saddam wasn't killing anyone, he was contained, posed a threat to NO ONE, not even his own people.

Terrorism has grown since more people got involved after the meaningless Iraq BS war, if you can deny that then you are a bigger fool than i thought.

The problem is that they DON'T stand up and cheer and TELL YOU what their intentions are, you can either kill them after their job (which would be kinda impossible considering how they operate) or you can remove their reasons.

Iraq is a reason for many terrorists, it kinda either proved them right or at least proved that the leader of the free world is insane and will attack based on something no one else believed in.

You will have to excuse me now, but the time is 08.34 here and i am going to bed, i got work at 14.00 and i NEED my beauty sleep.

Take care everyone.

Keep using the UN propaganda talking points. Saddam should have been removed a long time ago, but it took a man with guts to do the job.

The UN was and still is the worlds most corrupt organiztion, they still cant account for the billions lost in secret under the table deals with Saddam.

Hamza, who was Iraq's top nuke scientist for decades says that Saddam was a few years off from making a nuke bomb. Yes, Saddam was contained alright

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: robbase29a
Saddam was still killing his own people! Does that mean anything to you? He was still violating UN resolutions, he was still shooting at our airplanes Daily... I can go on and on. He was still a threat after we decided to leave him alone. There is nothing backwards about - now that he is in jail, he can not kill anybody.

Foreign fighters are moving into Iraq because they desperately do not want to see freedom work. They are not for a free iraq. As for Zarqawi... we should have got him when we had the chance, but we didn't. But what is your solution... let him live and allow him "exert his power with impunity"? or aid the Iraqi government to remove him of his hateful, voilent position?

Kool Aid, Kool Aid, tastes great!
Kool Aid, Kool Aid, can't wait!


Wow...you could be the poster boy for GOP talking points!

1) Saddam was not killing his own people. The no-fly zones prevented him from launching attacks on the Kurds or the Shiites.
2) Shooting at our plans did not violate any UN resolution. The no-fly zones were imposed solely by the U.S.
3) I'll take Gen. Zinni's word over yours

I think the first mistake that was made was misjudging the success of containment. I heard the president say, not too long ago, I believe it was with the interview with Tim Russert that ... I'm not sure ... but at some point I heard him say that "containment did not work." That's not true.

I was responsible, along with everybody from General Schwarzkopf to his two successors, that were my predecessors, myself, and my successor, General Franks, up until the war, we were responsible for containment. And I would like to explain a little bit about that containment, because I thought we did it pretty well, given the circumstances. And it began with Bush 41 accepting the UN resolution to conduct the war, staying within the framework of the UN resolution, and not after the war, going to Baghdad, breaking the coalition, ending up inheriting a country that I think he clearly saw would be a burden on us, our military, our treasure, and would break relations around the region, and would put him outside what he considered his international legitimacy for doing this - the resolution by which he operated and conducted the war, and the resolution by which we established the sanctions.

4) Foreign fighters are moving into Iraq because they see it as a prime opportunity to kill Americans. It has nothing to do with Iraq being free or not. Do you think they care if Iraq is a democracy or not? If you do, you're a fool who's been blinded by GOP rhetoric. Think about it. Saddam was a secular ruler. Saddam suppressed any form of religion fundamentalism. Why do you think bin Laden called Saddam a bad Muslim? With Saddam gone, fundamentalists can now achieve control, or at least some portion of control, in the new Iraqi government. Look at how Falluja has regressed into Taliban-like control!

5) Zarqawi needs to be killed, sure. But we're not doing a very good of it, are we?

 

[ReiAyanami]

They believe all the time about everything.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.

Gays excluded.

I BELIEVE government must practice [/b]fiscal responsibility[/b] and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

ROFL.

it doesnt mention sexual preference. so, yes, gays excluded.

 

[robbase29a]

Ok conjur....

1) oh i forgot... saddam needs to fly to be able to launch attacks.
2) shooting at our planes is an attack on us!... even worse than violating a resolution.
3) how was saddam "contained"? i'm sick of that word... was he "contained" when he wasn't allowing the UN weapons inspectors in?
4) They are not only killing americans. And they most definitely care if Iraq is a democracy, and if the Iraqi people are free... it is against their fundamentalist ways.
5) At least we agree on something. But WE arent' in control of Iraq anymore. The Iraqi government wants to do things differently than we do. Fine. It's their country.

as for raildogg... "...the leader of the free world is insane and will attack based on something no one else believed in."

How many countries were part of the "Allies" in WWII, and how many are for war against iraq? I'm sure you wouldn't say that WWII was an unjust war... or maybe you would. But nonetheless.... The war on Iraq is supported by many more nations than were against germany in WWII. Just becuase we don't have Germany and France on our side in the Iraq war doesn't mean that "no one" else believes in it. And terrorism has NOT escalated since the war on terror has begun.

And for everyone: here's a link for a list of UN resolutions that were violated by Saddam Hussein.

Finally for all those who oppose me... what is your solution to the terrorism problem? And please no name calling. That is not only juvenile, but is not appreciated in this forum. I do not "dis" anybody nor do I call names. This is and should remain a "spirited debate" not like the floor of the senate.