"sure, but you'll have to kill me first sir."

I would vote bush i think kerry just changes his mind about everything so bush need i say more....

He is probably tryin to find out if he could borrow them for his next interview so it looks like he actually did something.[/quote]

Originally Posted by Sooners1

He is probably tryin to find out if he could borrow them for his next interview so it looks like he actually did something.

HAHAHAHAHAHA! You were the first to get me to laugh after a semi-stressful first day of school... LOL!

I'm going with John Kerry, basically I'm just going off the lesser of the two evils IMO. I wish I had some better choices, but I'll have to go with what I got

Like my civics/economy teacher said, if you agree with some of both of their ideas, you should think, "Which of these two people would I feel comfortable inviting into my house for a glass of iced tea?" That's somewhat how I've always felt. yes, the past somewhat matters, not as much anymore b/c I don't think you should judge peoples past. Yes, I have made really stupid choices, some of them things I will never be able to change, no matter how much I regret, but does that make me a bad person? I hope not.

Someone that I will be able to trust as a person, as a president, and I can feel like I know whats going on with. That's who I would want.

True, you shouldnt dwell in the past but the past gives a good idea of the future.

To think though that someone would use their past, as bad as it is, as a presidential campaign would most likely call out for his past to be used. For instance John Kerry saying the men he served with was his "Band of Brothers" yet when he returned he through away the medals he earned while working alongside those same men and accusing them of committing war atrocities doesnt set well with me when I want to look at someone as far as trusting them. At least with Bush I know for a fact...if he says he'll do something, he'll do it.

Originally Posted by soldierzhonor

True, you shouldnt dwell in the past but the past gives a good idea of the future.

To think though that someone would use their past, as bad as it is, as a presidential campaign would most likely call out for his past to be used. For instance John Kerry saying the men he served with was his "Band of Brothers" yet when he returned he through away the medals he earned while working alongside those same men and accusing them of committing war atrocities doesnt set well with me when I want to look at someone as far as trusting them. At least with Bush I know for a fact...if he says he'll do something, he'll do it.

Well, he saved his purple hearts.

I've noticed that most people who say Kerry say "because he's the lesser of two evils." What's with it always being "Anybody but Bush?"

Originally Posted by Damien

I've noticed that most people who say Kerry say "because he's the lesser of two evils." What's with it always being "Anybody but Bush?"

People are scared of commitment.











If no one gets this, I'll post an explanation... kinda far out but that's alright./

I'd vote on Bush. But my system is more fun than serious.

I liked Howard Dean 'cause the the "WAAAA!"

I like Bush, 'cause he thinks he's funny.. But he ain't, and that makes him funny.

Kerry.. Is just Kerry