You're Neo-cons....

I'm far from a Neo-con; I'm just backing the lesser of the two evils. If any Moderate could get past a primary I would most likely vote for them (Democrat or Republican). I just feel that Kerry is the biggest threat to this country right now. The mans moral character is for sale and he changes his political stance more times then he does his socks. I think he is the poster child for what many Americans considered a political weasel. Do I like President Bush? Aaah he is OK. But Kerry.... scares me to think about it.

Screw it all....Viva McCain!!!!

anyway whats up with McCain....i agree with Bill Mahr.....What ever the republicans are balck mailing John McCain with STOP!

I'm far from a Neo-con; I'm just backing the lesser of the two evils. If any Moderate could get past a primary I would most likely vote for them (Democrat or Republican).

I was speaking of Drag And Baker actually, sorry for the confusion. And i agree on rethinking my choice if there were a more moderate candidate in the race... Like Wes Clark! But i believe John Kerry is the lesser of the two evils. He is a liberal, but not nearly as liberal as the repubs would like you to think. Hell they accused Bubba of that all the time, and he was a centrist!

i doubt it can be intelligbly translated into arabic or korean (even if they use those gitmo creative translators). i cant follow it in english.

kingbee....neither can I!

Because America cannot survive as a single entity, when will Americans learn that there is a world beyond their shores

For once...I agree with Sir Peter! Well said old chap!

Of course, I am referring to Britain and more specifically England. England is the world's greatest nation, that is why America so slavishly imitates us in a bid to appear a "superpower".

Well....So much for agreement!....

Screw it all....Viva McCain!!!!

Well said! Even though i'm a dem, i would vote for Big John in a second! This guy gets it!

I'm guessing that Bush 2.0 has pics/video of him with a bottle of tequila, two naked flight attendants, and big fat spliff in his mouth while watching "Farenheit 9/11"!

The troops that support Micheal Moore,
A WHOLE FAT BOOK WORTH!

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/index.php?id=134

"some forget that out of all the groups in America, it is the soldiers who benefit from peace the most"

I agree with Sir Peter! Well said old chap!

Let all who know nobility follow me.

The troops that support Micheal Moore, A WHOLE FAT BOOK WORTH!

I can't quote for all the soldiers about this, but the two people in my unit that thought they agreed with Micheal Morre wanted to quote "Bash his teeth in" after they seen the movie. They are still going to vote for Kerry, but they were ashamed Moore had anything to do with Kerry.

I wonder if the families of all the dead soldiers Moore rides on appreciates him waving the bloody shirt to further his career.

I'm sure they'll appreciate far more than they did knowing their family members died for nothing.
No WMD, no terrorist connections, no thown flowers, no flowering of democracy...Ever notice that
now the only reason most conservatives give is that Saddam was a really evil man, and its a good
thing he's gone? Sure its good. No one disagrees. But that wasn't the justification for the war. And
its EXTREMELY unlikely the American people would have been as supportive had that been put
forward as the justification. But this is part of the Bush flip-flop M/O. He claims something to accomplish
a goal, then just changes or reverses himself, confident the poodle-press will roll over and never point
out his flip-flop, or question his deception. Anyone remember him in 2000, attacking Clinton/Gore for
nation building? Something he would never, ever do? And now we're in the middle of the biggest
nationbuilding effort since the Marshall Plan! And it wasn't forced on him, it was a war of choice!

Moore isn't an activist, he is P.T. Barnum, enjoying his well-earned seat in the Presidential box at the DNC.

Contrasted against whom? Bush's guest for the SOTU Address, sitting right next to Waura? You know,
Ahmed Chalabi, his good buddy who turned out to be passing our classified info to the Axis of Evil member,
Iran! I think most Americans would prefer Moore to Bush's friends.

Moore makes documentaries, ones which pose interesting questions, ones in which he seeks out
the answer. But they are not ones that necessarily supply you with an answer. But they do make you think!
I didn't see "Bowling for Columbine" in a theatre, waited for cable. But I kept hearing, especially from the
right, how it was an "anti-gun" movie. Except when I saw it, it was pretty obvious to me it wasn't anti-gun.
Moore is a lifetime member of the NRA; when comparing the dramatic differences in gun violence
between the US and Canada, he goes to great pains to point out per capita there are almost as many
guns in Canada as in the US. The movie wasn't anti-gun; it was a try at figuring out why we seem unique
in the industrialized world re: gun violence against our own citizens! And he never comes up with an
answer, he just explodes all the old myths (ie. blame it on the quantity of guns, blame it on TV).

Finally, I've not yet seen Fahrenheit 911, but I do know he has repeatedly asked anyone who claims there
is a factual error to document it, and as yet I've seen none. Many people I know who have gone to see it
are quite surprised and upset when they realize that the President of the United States, Commander-in-Chief,
was told in no uncertain terms that America was under attack, yet he sat down and listened along with the
small children for 7+ whole minutes, doing nothing. Personally, I've watched that scene many times and
I'm convinced what we're seeing is fear and uncertainty, which left him literally frozen until the class
session was ended. I've heard many Bush fans talk of Kerry's statement he sat frozen in horror for a long time.
But that ignores Kerry wasn't Commander-in-Chief; Kerry had no responsibility to do anything, to protect America.
Bush did.
We can draw a comparison here, which is very fair: Kerry in combat in Vietnam did NOT freeze, quite the opposite.
All witnesses and evidence (ignoring those who've decided 35yrs later to change their mind and contradict
themselves). Bush's one and only face-to-face meeting with war, and he froze solid. Is that what we want in
a Commander-in-Chief? Not me!

Zoomie

"youre not seriously suggesting that candidate k will be less effective than candidate b because candidate k's domestic opponents succesfully ressurected a 30+ scam originally engineered by a president whom, prior to being forced out of office in disgrace for attempting to conceal his complicity in similar scams, had ordered us forces (in that president's capacity as their commander in chief) to violate the geneva accord--as reported truthfully by candidate k? "

Scam? Nope. I'm not talking about anything other that what Kerry himself attested to. Kerry stated that he violated the Geneva conference, burned villages, etc. Now, the Left calls him a war hero and want him to be President.

I just find it odd that people can attack Bush for NOT going to a war they laud others for dodging. Those same people call Kerry a hero for committing "atrocities" in the same "unjust" war, , with no complaints until after he gets home and starts his political career..

Face it, if Moore were so inclined he could rip Kerry to shreds. There's nothing subjective about Kerry's testimony, and it is certainly going to be there for anyone that wants to tear away at the US to use.

Well that obese turd Moore is at it again; hmm. one charlatan defending another. If it only took a band aid, it didn't deserve a medal.

How can moore possibly accuse Bush of going after Kerry's war record when Bush has openly denounced the attacks by the Swift Vets?

The entire basis for that letter is irrelevant, a major tactic of Michael Moore.
Bottom Line: Moore is a fat, lying, blowhard piece of dog crap, and those are his good qualities

www.moorewatch.com

How can moore possibly accuse Bush of going after Kerry's war record when Bush has openly denounced the attacks by the Swift Vets?

You are either hopelessly naive or hopelessly partisan. Does ANYONE with a brain really believe that either candidate lacks control over the direction of the interest group ads? Bush is trying to have it both ways -- let the attacks do their damage, and then after a few weeks take the moral high ground in denouncing them.

and the world's opinion matters...why?

A very odd crowd, which believes that the terrorist threat is so overwhelming that all sorts of American ideals must be jettisoned, yet is so unconcerned about the terrorist threat that we need not care whether we have other countries support. A paradox, eh?

So which American ideals have been jettisoned. Feel free to list those. I am not aware of any ideals that were jettisoned but I'm ready to be educated.

Meanwhile, it is in the interest of other nations to fight the war on terror. As those who have appeased them the most, such as the French, are just as, if not more likely, to become victims of it.  Are Frenchmen going to sweat that we Americans despise Chirac during the next election over there? I doubt it. Similarly, why should I, as an American, give a care what someone in Belgium or France or whatever thinks of Bush?

"You are either hopelessly naive or hopelessly partisan. Does ANYONE with a brain really believe that either candidate lacks control over the direction of the interest group ads? Bush is trying to have it both ways -- let the attacks do their damage, and then after a few weeks take the moral high ground in denouncing them."

But Bush had nothing to do with the attacks! And Michael Moore bases the entire letter on the fact that he started it.

What a way to tell it as it is!!
I think that was incredibly written by Michael Moore and I hope everyone gets the chance to read it.