The #1
Real Estate Investing
Community

Submit an Article | Article Archive | Topic List | Polls | Search

Sun, Nov 22, 2009

703-778-5755
Login Problems?
Sales
Support
Feedback
Recommend Us
History and Purpose of TCI

Advertise on our site
Advertising Login
Sell Your Product Here!

Current Poll Results

If the elections were today, who would you vote for?

George Bush	60.90 % (394)
John Kerry	32.30 % (209)
Ralph Nader	1.70 % (11)
Michael Badnarik	0.93 % (6)
Pee-Wee Herman	2.63 % (17)
Undecided	1.55 % (10)

Total Votes: 647

[ Voting Booth | Other Polls ]

"If the elections were today, who would you vote for?" | Login/Create an Account | 19 Comments

Logged In members can moderate all comments.

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? (Score: 2, Insighful)
by SKHunter on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 @ 11:32 AM EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)

I think if we don't take this election seriously, we will take the chance of losing rights that millions fought and died to give us. Over 1000 of our kids, spouses, parents and siblings, have died in Iraq. How many more will die? We need to fight to keep church and state seperated. If we don't do so, those of other faiths may not be able to live their lives according to their own beliefs. The Patriot act has already infringed on our personal lives in the name of security.
Keeping people in fear is one of the best ways to control them. This is according to a famous Nazi!
We live in the best country in the world, let's fight to keep it that way.

[ No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register ]

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by wwiler on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 @ 03:21 PM EDT
- Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by SKHunter on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 @ 01:43 PM EDT
- Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by SKHunter on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 @ 02:20 PM EDT
  - Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by SolutionsKid on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 @ 11:27 PM EDT
    - Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by mots32 on Saturday, October 23, 2004 @ 05:32 PM EDT
- Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by rek769 on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 @ 01:40 PM EDT

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? (Score: 1)
by rek769 on Tuesday, October 05, 2004 @ 01:31 PM EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)

Why is Michael Badnarik not listed as an option? With so many entrepreneurs here I can't beleive that the Libertarian Party doesn't get a fair shake...

To the previous poster: I could not agree more...if you are concerned about personal freedom you owe it to yourself to read the Libertarian Party Platform: www dot lp dot org / issues

[ No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register ]

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by joel on Wednesday, October 06, 2004 @ 11:10 PM EDT

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? (Score: 2, Insighful)
by SKHunter on Sunday, October 10, 2004 @ 09:38 PM EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)

Do you know that if Bush is re-elected many of the rights and laws laid down in the past will be lost for generations to come? Do you know that we have already lost some of those rights and many of our rights to privacy? There have been accounts of people arrested who have not been given the right to an attorney nor have they been allowed to call their families to let them know where they are. One was an attorney himself , he was lucky enough to be released after people went to his defense. Wake up and really get to know what is going on out there.
The fear that is created and kept alive is used to keep us from noticing that our lives are forever being changed. This was the same tactic used by the Nazis! Look and listen and pay attention to what is happening in our world and in our country.
Please, Vote and vote with knowledge. Women, and all minorities and those who haven't voted before, get out and make use of the right our forefathers and mothers fought to give us. Don't forget, they can't take your freedom away if you gladly give it away!

[ No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register ]

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by joel on Monday, October 11, 2004 @ 11:19 AM EDT
- Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by JamesStreet on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 @ 10:35 AM EDT
Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by Lteger on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 @ 12:14 PM EDT
Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by baporated on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 @ 10:28 AM EDT
Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? by freemw on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 @ 02:27 PM EDT

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? (Score: 1)
by Barbann on Tuesday, October 12, 2004 @ 01:38 PM EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)

I would and will vote for Bush. Below is just one example of why
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Before you jump to conclusions read this. Have you seen the John Kerry commercial in which George Bush pledges to help Seniors on Medicare and "the very next day imposes a 17% premium increase - the biggest in history"? That ad is a stoke of genius on Kerry's part and will surely gain him many votes among the uninformed.
++++
I found it so amazing that I did some homework on the issue. As it turns out the 17% increase was not imposed by President Bush but was mandated by the "balanced ! budget agreement" signed by President Clinton, voted into law by Senator John Kerry, and was scheduled to come into effect during the Bush administration. President Bush had no authority to reverse what had been voted into law by Senator Kerry during the Clinton administration.
++++++
Once again Kerry is counting on the ignorance of the American people. Don't be duped by his mendacity

[ No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register ]

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? (Score: 1)
by freemw on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 @ 02:19 PM EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)

Goerge Bush is a man with convictions and when he says he'll do something he does it and stands by his decision. He does some things that irritate me however he's the leader we need.
John Kerry doesn't have any plans only empty promises. He's a liar and a person that can't be trusted to lead this country.

[ No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register ]

Re: If the elections were today, who would you vote for? (Score: 1)
by GaleWelch on Thursday, October 28, 2004 @ 01:23 AM EDT
(User Info | Send a Message)

A Choice:

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
--George Santayana
America faces a critical choice: The Bush Doctrine of pre-emption VS The Kerry ‘Plan’ of appeasement, UN ‘approval’ and Response.
Once upon a time long ago and far away (in 1389) the Ottoman Turks were rolling across Europe. They crushed everything and anyone in their path. It was a religious war. Anyone failing to convert to Islam was doomed.

Like our terrorist enemies today, they could not be appeased, compromised with, or offered any accommodation.

Serbian women were raped and sold into slavery with their children. Men who survived the battlefield were castrated and blinded to make them compliant slaves.

Entire cities became funeral pyres predating (as foreshadowing) our national disaster of 9/11. The Turks at one point nailed over 12,000 Serbians to crosses to mock the death of Christ and the faith of the Serbs.

The Turkish invasion of Europe appeared unstoppable, inevitable, and a done deal…until they reached the Kosovo Plain.

A Serbian prince, Lazar Hrebeljanovic, resisted the Turks with faith, unbridled courage, and commitment.

The June 1389 battle at the Field of Blackbirds saw some 77,000 Christian knights and soldiers meet the Turks. They all pledged (to each other and to Christ) they would die rather than convert to Mohammedism. Much like our founding fathers pledged, “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

The liberal left has turned America into an effete sectarian society eschewing anything ‘religious’ as a false violation of separation of church and state. The misused fictional axiom ignores the intent of the framers. The founder’s intent was to keep ‘government’ out of religion…not to banish religion from government.

77,000 Christian soldiers led by Serbian Prince Lazar engaged in an horrific battle to the death. They literally sacrificed their lives to stop the advance of Mohammed’s horde…not just to save the freedom of Serbia from the advance of Mohammed’s barbaric hordes…but of all Europe.

When the battle was over the best of Serbian men and their prince were dead on a field soaked with their blood. However, the martyrs for their faith fought so valiantly, ripping such an epic cost from Mohammed, that the advance into the heart of Europe was stopped.
When word of the Prince’s death reached a group of knights they raced headlong through the enemy lines…charging into the center of the enemy camp. They killed the Turkish leader Emir Murad I in his tent. Then they too died in hand-to-hand combat outnumbered two hundred to one.

Masada, Thermopylae, and the Alamo were mirrored in Kosovo. Kosovo Field became to the Serbian people ‘Acampo Santo’, The Holy Field. It is considered by many historians of the Christian Church to be the single greatest tomb of Christian martyrs killed in a single day.

Even if you ignore the religiosity of the framers, historical fact demonstrates waiting to respond to aggression is fatal.
It was Bill Clinton’s aggression siding with Albanian Muslims against the Christian Serbs that wasn’t only counter-intuitive but literally put us on the wrong side of a conflict destined to touch our shores.

Six hundred years ago on the field of Kosovo the Christian army marched toward death. In Constantinople they remained in the town hoping to the last moment that death would somehow turn its back on them. It didn’t.

We are reluctant and diffident crusaders in a holy war no one (other than our enemy) dare acknowledge. Political correctness, revisionist history, and a silent, cowardly collection of alleged ‘moderate’ Muslims ignore the empirical (and historic) reality. Osama bin Laden and his gang consider this ‘war on terrorism’ as a conti

Read the rest of this comment...

[ No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register ]

Username or Email

Password

Remember Me:

The Creative Investor web site was created for Landlords, Property Managers and Real Estate Investing community.
Through using our forums, investors will be able to talk about finance, no down payment purchases, debt payoff, purchase strategies and current real estate news.
Privacy Agreement and Terms of Use. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest 2002 by PropBot.com L.L.C.

The #1Real Estate InvestingCommunity

The #1
Real Estate Investing
Community