Goob's Weekly Poll #1 - Politics

i agree with Snook...

anyway do we really want a 70yr old .. wait older... running a country? his brain is failing... he may die anyday.. then u will be stuck with some loser like Palin, who cant answer a question without repeating herself or getting off topic.

let me quote McCain saying "We will make a change in the country!"
however, when George Bush was president, McCain agreed to everything Bush was doing, planning etc. McCain's plans are stupid, he will just put the country into more of a money crisis.... and whats a change when that old man thinks along the same lines as your former president eh?

and theres nothing wrong with abortion, coz its like what Snook said right?, if someones having a baby, thats a big step to bring another person into your life, but if u can't handle another person, because ur neither physically nor emotionally prepared for it, then why would you, because doing so, when the baby is actually BORN and growing up, its life would be more worse. So the person would have choice on whehter or not to have the baby, hence having abortion.

And hey your saying Obama saying abortion is bad? well hey,,, thats killing something that isnt born yet, whereas McCain, has plans to keep the troops in Iraq, where they cause the deaths of many innocent Iraqi's , ranging from the ages or a newborn right until the elderly or the dying. So tell me... which one is worse hey?

Ah, Palin Supports Drilling in National Artic Wildlife Reserves!

GOD.

Count Snookula wrote:

Ah, Palin Supports Drilling in National Artic Wildlife Reserves!

GOD.

Thats Palin for you. XD

Obama said, " We need a leader not a soldier", but when war comes who do you want more. The soldier can be a leader, but if the leader can't be a soldier then we got a problem.

Well we shouldn't be fighting a war anyways. So we need a leader who will stop this madness.

Kasper wrote:

Well we shouldn't be fighting a war anyways. So we need a leader who will stop this madness.

Were never gonna avoid war.

it can be avoided.
you just need the right leader.

Kreepy Kat wrote:

it can be avoided.
you just need the right leader.

That's a very idealistic statement. You try reasoning with those terroists.

whats your definition of terrorists?

Kreepy Kat wrote:

whats your definition of terrorists?

Bin Laden = Terroist. How can you not say he isn't.

so.. thats ur definition of a terrorist...
thats not very broad. and very biased.

Kreepy Kat wrote:

so.. thats ur definition of a terrorist...
thats not very broad. and very biased.

That is not my definition. I was showing you who I KNOW to be one. My definition of a terroist is a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small groups. One who causes threat to others well health. or well being

well. its like i said. war can be avoided.
and im talking about the war of which America has created in Iraq.
with the right leader, with a brain, who can make the right decisions, war in Iraq can be avoided.

Kreepy Kat wrote:

well. its like i said. war can be avoided.
and im talking about the war of which America has created in Iraq.
with the right leader, with a brain, who can make the right decisions, war in Iraq can be avoided.

Ok, first of all you asked me a question, I responded, and you totally just avoided talking about it by switching back to another subject. Obama's plan is to take the troops out of Iraq right? So is that how your gonna stop the war? By taking out all the force on the terroists and then asking them for peace? If that's the case then were heading down a bad road.

Poison Candy wrote:

Kreepy Kat wrote:

well. its like i said. war can be avoided.
and im talking about the war of which America has created in Iraq.
with the right leader, with a brain, who can make the right decisions, war in Iraq can be avoided.

Ok, first of all you asked me a question, I responded, and you totally just avoided talking about it by switching back to another subject. Obama's plan is to take the troops out of Iraq right? So is that how your gonna stop the war? By taking out all the force on the terroists and then asking them for peace? If that's the case then were heading down a bad road.

i wanted to know what you definition was, and you answered. what am i supposed to say? hey thanks for the definition? if you want an answer to your response, then, here it is .
i wonder what source you got your definition from.

now secondly. i thought the reason George Bush planted the troops in Iraq was to keep the people safe? now, i dont see any safety, as more people have died since. and i dont see them "stopping terrorists", all they do is kill the innocent civilians, and when they get a suspicion of someone being a "terrorist" they shoot them straight off and turns out the man never did anything in his life.
Also, why keep the troops in Iraq, when the civilians dont even want them there...

also, your opinion of a terrorist is very biased.. who said all the terrorists exsist in Iraq. how come theyre all middle eastern? why dont the anglosaxons ever get convicted?

Poison Candy wrote:

Kreepy Kat wrote:

so.. thats ur definition of a terrorist...
thats not very broad. and very biased.

That is not my definition. I was showing you who I KNOW to be one. My definition of a terroist is a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small groups. One who causes threat to others well health. or well being

Hey, if you read my definition no where in there did I say anything of middle eastern or Iraq. If we do pull the troops out what do you think will happen everything will be all civil and just and the terroists in Iraq are just gonna give up?

[quote="Poison Candy
That is not my definition. I was showing you who I KNOW to be one. My definition of a terroist is a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small groups. One who causes threat to others well health. or well being[/quote]

Hey, if you read my definition no where in there did I say anything of middle eastern or Iraq. If we do pull the troops out what do you think will happen everything will be all civil and just and the terroists in Iraq are just gonna give up?[/quote]

your implying the fact that they're middle eastern on a daily basis.

why does America have to but into everything hey? they should look after their own country. they're facing a crisis themselves dude.

Kreepy Kat wrote:

[quote="Poison Candy
That is not my definition. I was showing you who I KNOW to be one. My definition of a terroist is a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small groups. One who causes threat to others well health. or well being

Hey, if you read my definition no where in there did I say anything of middle eastern or Iraq. If we do pull the troops out what do you think will happen everything will be all civil and just and the terroists in Iraq are just gonna give up?[/quote]

your implying the fact that they're middle eastern on a daily basis.

why does America have to but into everything hey? they should look after their own country. they're facing a crisis themselves dude.[/quote]

Dude, First of all like you said you were talking about the War in Iraq. I was to so I was talking about the terroists in Iraq, not that the only Terroist in the whole world are from the middle eastern. If I'm not mistaken your the one that kept twisting my words by making it sound like I was biased to middle easterns and that there the only terroist. Second, If you don't remember American took the role as the "international police". If we don't do anything no one will. And how can you say that there is no safety. The troops have done so much, they have even died for us. You acting like it's no big deal.

hey, im not twisting anyones words .
im sorry, but i've already answered those questions. u talked about them before.
i think we've both made our opinions quite clear, and its quite clear we're both on totally different paths, sides, watever you wanna call it.

lets end it here, since its getting off topic. we should be talking about Obama and Palin.. oops i mean McCain.. xD

haha. Ok ur right we can end it here

Amanda Obama Please.

Well let me say a few things about the things you said about Pal...McCain being so great.

Abortion: I agree it is mean but some people can not handle a child, or even thought of giving birth. People should not be dictated on what they do with something they created... now that does not apply to all things as you can imagine, such as drugs. There could be no abortions but kids would be unhappy knowing they came from a teen who cannot care for themselves and will probably have a horrible lifestyles...

War: War is okay as the LAST THING POSSIBLE. If you think about it we are being terrorists in Iraq...

Plus, McCain is no maverick, he barely graduated. Palin has no education at all, if you count a golf field managing and a journalism degree thingy education then say bye bye to school..

Oh, and for you who saw the debate. She lied about several things in there, and when Biden chocked up at the mention of his dead wife and child. She didn't even nod, frown or do anything at all. She's just horrible without cards and scripts..."Just smile, wink and shake those hips girl!" That's what I bet she was thinking at the time.

P.S: If you consider a person who can't even say the "G's" in the end of every word they say a good VP, then bravo for you. :)

Amen to that! :P

Quote :

War: War is okay as the LAST THING POSSIBLE. If you think about it we are being terrorists in Iraq...

at least you know what your talking about. xD