<p>"the current democratic party is as conservative as the conservative party in such a system needs to be."</p>
<p>That's certainly a matter of opinion. If we get any farther left than the current Dem leadership, we'll be nearing socialism. (<--That was a joke.) But still--the GOP seems to be just as conservative as a majority of Americans, so I'd leave it at that. Some people might think that the GOP (w/ Arnold and Rudy) is as liberal as a liberal party needs to be. =)</p>
<p>Complaining isn't going to stop terrorists from attacking the United States. President Bush will.</p>
<p>Bush makes people want to attack America even more</p>
<p>my whole school wanted bush assasinated, then we thought about it and decided it would be for the worst. cheney would be president, i dont think even republicans want that. i mean, the man is the devil! he voted against meals on wheels, and releasing nelson mandela from prison, amongst other things. (this just in, dick cheney has voted against life. ha!) basically, we'll have to deal with GW. When you're feeling sad, distract yourself with his monkey face. Little monkey! curious george. here monkey monkey!</p>
<p>How in the name of Heaven did Dick Cheney get to vote on whether or not Nelson Mandela was released from prison? He may have expressed the opinion that it should not happen, but he was certainly not in the position to "vote" on the issue.</p>
<p>"Complaining isn't going to stop terrorists from attacking the United States. President Bush will."</p>
<p>If only it were so...</p>
<p>I have the sickening feeling that a major terrorist attack is imminent in the near future, and in the end, it will not have mattered which candidate ended up in the oval office ( I think that that is the message Osama was trying to send in that last video tape). There are a mind-boggling, almost infinite number of national security vulnerabilities that exist as characteristic of very free and open societies. Many of them would be almost impossible to absolutely secure. The terrorists know this and are endlessly imaginative in dreaming up ways to exploit these vulnerabilities. Bush will, of course, be blamed when the attack occurs---just as Kerry would be, had he been elected. But the truth of the matter is that there is only so much that any President can do without destroying the very way of life that we all hold so dear. If you think the Patriot Act is scary (and it certainly is!), just wait...</p>
<p>"Bush makes people want to attack America even more"</p>
<p>haha, yeah, right. The middle east knows what's at stake if they strike the US with Bush in charge.</p>
<p>poetsheart-- he did. he just did. it was a vote on whether or not the US should support his release. he's that evil. thats that. he eats babies for breakfast.especially the little fat ones. mmm, juicy.</p>
<p>so babybird a 2 year failed effort to find you sure seems to scare the **** out of me, cmon you guys cant find Osama and you needed the Brits to find Saddam and that was just dumb luck</p>
<p>"The middle east knows what's at stake if they strike the US with Bush in charge."</p>
<p>what a dumb statement. it's not the middle east or just the "crazy muslims" who are threats. the threat that exists are factions of terrorists, and they, in fact, have no exact location. generalizing the whole middle east as evil just contributes the racism and hate that exists today. that is just like saying, russian terrorists will never attack the US, because they know what we will do to strike russia back.</p>
<p>masstech, could you elaborate on how finding saddam was luck?</p>
<p>Well the story I heard reported was that the soldiers had actually missed the hole where Saddam had been hiding, and somehow stumbled back to it, or when they were leaving someone just noticed that they had missed that little place, its been almost a year since I heard the exact story, so I'm forgetting the exact details</p>
<p>AceRockolla-- way to be politically correct.Everybody knows what's being referred to there. If you want racism, go look at affirmative action.</p>
<p>actually, i don't know what you're referring to there. you claim terrorists won't attack because they will know the repercussions of one. we're already bombing the hell out of afghanistan and occupying Iraq. what else can we do, since they don't have an exact location or country. we're already at the pinnacle of a war on terrorism, can the stakes be raised any higher than they are right now?</p>
<p>Sorry, babybird. That really was an ignorant thing to say. "the Middle East" is not the "hive mind of the Borg". It is a vast and complex region, with many conflicting factions and national interests. It is comprised of nations of individuals, just like North America is made up of nations of individuals. "Terrorists" do not equal, "The Middle East" any more than "Republican" equals "racist rednecks", nor "Democrats", "environmental extremists".</p>
<p>Nice poetsheart!</p>
<p>cry about it, poetsheart. Why am I not surprised with an sn like that?</p>
<p>"we're already at the pinnacle of a war on terrorism, can the stakes be raised any higher than they are right now?"</p>
<p>Ace-- when we hit Iran, North Korea, Syria etc. Simple.</p>