|I grew up in
New Jersey, not 20 minutes from where Bruce
Springsteen also grew up.
In the early 70's,
when I was 13, I used to go to Asbury Park. I got into clubs because of
an older musician friend and I got to meet, and see
Bruce play very early in his career.
Even then it was
apparent that this was a man with an immense talent and stage presence.
I don't know if
Bruce would remember me, but I remember talking to him and he just seemed like a very cool guy. He talked to me like I was an adult when I was just a snotty nosed kid.
Bruce then went on to record his famous early albums. I became a huge Bruce
Springsteen fan early on.
When he released
"Born to Run"
I knew he would become the superstar he is today.
Over the years
I've enjoyed all the incarnations of his music and still love the music
he writes today.
I've seen him countless times all over the East Coast. I went to 4 shows on his most recent tour.
I always admired not only his music but his commitment to helping people. Bruce has donated many, many thousands of dollars to food banks all over the country. He donates money from almost every show he plays. I always loved the way he kept the little guy in mind.
Bruce Springsteen has recently broken my heart. I can't tell you how dismayed I was to recently go to his web page brucespringsteen.net
and find this announcement from him;
"A few weeks ago
at N.Y.U. Al Gore gave one of the most important speeches I've heard in
a long time . . . It's my PLEASURE to reprint it here for my fans."
a PLEASURE to
reprint the LIES Al
Gore has been spewing?!!!
where has your sanity gone?
He then goes on
to reprint Al Gore's speech. In this speech Al Gore states:
May 26, 2004 Al Gore stated:
"He (George Bush Jr.) promised to "restore honor and integrity to the White
House." Instead, he has brought deep dishonor to our country and built
a durable reputation as the most dishonest President since Richard Nixon."
Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction
of justice for lying to a Federal grand jury. Talk about dishonor!
In fact you, Al
Gore, lashed out at Congress when they asked for a vote of Impeachment. You said "I
don't believe it's in the interest of the United States or the American
people to go through this impeachment process with a trial in the Senate". Hiding the TRUTH would not be in the best interest of the American people? Talk about dishonest! What a blazing hypocrite!
you are a FLAMING hypocrite! What about what you said about George Bush's
We have video of you saying it, so you cannot deny it.
Today you bash
Jr. but before you said this about his father:
"Bush (Sr.) deserves
heavy blame for intentionally concealing
from the American people the clear nature of Saddam Hussein and his regime
and for convincing himself that friendly relations with such a monster
would be possible and for persisting in this effort far, far beyond the
point of folly."
But today you
say about George Bush Jr. "To begin with, from its earliest days in power, this administration sought to radically destroy the foreign policy consensus that had guided America since the end of World War II. The long successful strategy of containment was abandoned in favor of the new strategy of "preemption."
Back then you
said: "And most significant of all, in the same month, September of 1989, the CIA reported to secretary of state Baker and other top Bush administration officials that Iraq was clandestinely procuring nuclear weapons technology through a global network". . . "Did all of this make any impression at all on President Bush(Sr.)? Did his judgment on foreign policy come into play when he was told that this nation (Iraq), with a record of terrorism continuing was making a sustained, concerted effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical, and biological? Well, evidently not."
Today you say:
(Bush Jr.) has exposed Americans abroad and Americans in every U.S. town
and city to a greater danger of attack by terrorists because of his arrogance,
willfulness, and bungling at stirring up hornet's nests THAT
POSE NO THREAT WHATSOEVER TO US."
Before you said
"He (Saddam) had already conducted extensive terrorism activities, and Bush (Sr.) had looked the other way. He (Saddam) was already deeply involved in the effort to acquire nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, and Bush(Sr.) knew it, but he looked the other way."
Today you say
about George Bush Jr.:
"He betrayed this country! He played on our fears!
He took America
on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure
preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place."
Isn't that what you were calling for back then? After
all it was YOUR administration
that gave the Saddam terrorist
tie threat to George Bush Jr.
Gore, said on Larry
King's TV show after Bill
Clinton bombed Iraq in December of 1998
Iraq was the right thing to do" to rid Saddam Hussien of his weapons
of mass destruction".
you believe this?!!!
was demanding action on Iraq because Saddam was associating with terrorists,
was gassing people with mustard gas and other chemical weapons, his own
people, and was trying to develop nuclear weapons along with other weapons
of mass destruction, consorting with terrorists, Lebanon, and so forth,
and demanding that George H. W. Bush (Sr.) do something about it. Now, you just contrast this with the rhetoric coming out of this guys mouth today, "There
was never any reason to go to Iraq, Bush (Jr.) lied."
up your mind Mr.Gore!!!
a 100% HYPOCRITE!!!
of these comments by Al Gore
you can see the actual video clip of him making them.
it didn't make any difference to you when you and Bill
Clinton got in the White House because you didn't do anything about it, either (other than bombing a baby asprin factory in the middle of the night!).
This is utter
dishonesty, it is utter hypocrisy and I'm just going to suggest to you
that when you've got somebody as deranged as this, Albert
Arnold Algore, you've got to take into account
now what he's saying about Global Warming. How can you believe anything somebody like this happens to say?
Al Gore want's
us to believe in his nonsense of Global Warming, which thousands of scientists dispute? He refuses to even debate the topic! Who's "playing on our fears"NOWMr.Gore?!!!
making millions giving speeches and won't even debate the issue because
it would affect his bank account!
He's lied before
and been caught, including these examples, and about inventing the internet(!),
and he's LYING
about Global Warming
now so he can get rich.
|Al Gore now
wants us to believe in his nonsense of Global
Warming, which thousands of scientists dispute.
He refuses to
even debate the topic!
Why should he,
he'll only be proven wrong!
on our fears"NOW Mr.Gore?!!!
making millions giving speeches and won't even debate the issue because
it would affect his bank account!
has lied before and has been caught, including these examples, and about
inventing the internet(!), and he's LYING
about Global Warming
now so he can get rich.
HERE to view the "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
and learn the TRUTH about the many
misrepresentations in Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" movie.
While Al Gore flies gas guzzling private jets to all his paid speeches, and uses more than 20 times the electricity than most Americans, he sells himself useless "Carbon Offsets", through a company he owns!
Al Gore is the ultimate hypocrite!
Instead of investigating with scientific
fact, Al Gore has turned Global Warming into a RELIGION
that he allows NO ONE to question.
That's NOT science,
it's political-religious dogma.
W. Bush Dishonest?!!! About what?!
Yes, he did restore
the honor of the previous administration, YOUR
administration who thought that committing the crime of perjury in court
depositions, and lying about it to the American public was good policy.
So when you talk about the honor of the White House remember YOUR
president was IMPEACHED Mr.Gore!
response to all the terrorists acts of the 90's including the first WTC
bombing, or the attack of the USS Cole.
was a LOT to
clean up from your administration Mr.Gore!
He goes on to
"He (George Bush Jr.) decided not to honor the Geneva Convention. Just as he would not honor the United Nations, international treaties, the opinions of our allies, the role of Congress and the courts, or what Jefferson described as "a decent respect for the opinion of mankind."
Hold on a second! What part of the Geneva Convention did he violate?
Nations had over a 17 sanctions against Iraq
which it failed to enforce for well over a decade!
FOR the war. Everyone of these charges is FLAT
It was Saddam
Hussien who signed treaties was supposed to
be cooperating with UN weapons inspectors.
Hussien was siphoning off the Oil
for Food money, meant only to feed Iraqi's,
to the tune of 50 BILLION DOLLARS
dollars, yes folks, that's
dollars, which makes that the LARGEST
financial scandal in history!
Meanwhile Saddam ran torture, and rape camps, and gassed to death his neighbors in Iran,
OWN CITIZENS, with chemical weapons of mass
Why didn't the
either the UN
or the CLINTON-GORE
administration force Saddam to abide by the sanctions he agreed to? The
is who were
enforcing the treaties they signed with Saddam for over 12 years.
goes on to say:
"To begin with,
from its earliest days in power, this administration sought to radically
destroy the foreign policy consensus that had guided America since the
end of World War II. The long successful strategy of containment was abandoned
in favor of the new strategy of "preemption." And what they meant by preemption
was not the inherent right of any nation to act preemptively against an
imminent threat to its national security, but rather an exotic new approach
that asserted a unique and unilateral U.S. right to ignore international
law wherever it wished to do so and take military action against any nation,
even in circumstances where there was no imminent threat. All that is required,
in the view of Bush's team is the mere assertion of a possible, future
threat - and the assertion need be made by only one person, the President.
Wait a second!
law was NOT ignored,
it was FULFILLED when the US attacked Iraq with the cooperation of many countries. No one man attacked Iraq, a coalition of many countries did.
In fact the only
major countries not willing to attack were those DIRECTLY
INVOLVED in the Oil for Food scandal, those
being France, Germany, China, and Russia!
a direct threat, and the war was preemptively carried out to protect not
only us, but many other countries as well.
and BILL CLINTON
said time and time again there was a threat for over 10 years.
ARE YOU LEAVING THAT PART OUT?
of torture and sexual abuse came to us embedded in a wave of news about
escalating casualties and growing chaos enveloping our entire policy in
Iraq. But in order understand the failure of our overall policy, it is
important to focus specifically on what happened in the Abu Ghraib prison,
and ask whether or not those actions were representative of who we are
as Americans? Obviously the quick answer is no, but unfortunately it's
more complicated than that. "
Hold on! Are you
actually going to say that we should not have invaded Iraq because a dozen
or so soldiers, some already convicted
of crimes and serving time in federal prison,
violated the rules and abused some prisoners.
In fact this crime
was reported by the Army itself, there was NO
Just to show you
how biased and left wing the press is, it is interesting to note that in
2004 alone there have been over 50
front page stories in the New York Times about the prison scandal, but
only 3 about
the 50 BILLION DOLLAR
Oil for Food United Nations scandal!!!
Which story do
you think is more important?!!!
The Oil for Food
program was run by the United Nations. Up to 50 Billion dollars were funneled through Saddam. That's more money than the Enron, Worldcom, and all the other financial scandals here added together. In fact it's the largest white collar crime in history.
More and more
will be coming out about this, you'll hear much more of it in the future.
It's now coming
to light the officials in the UN who ran this program, who now have millions
in their bank accounts, although their highest paid salary was only $186,000
per year, and who have NO
explanation where all this money came from, were actually bribed by Saddam.
It's now been
proven Saddam sold his oil to France, Russia, Germany, and China at below
Gee, do those countries names sound familiar?
Might they be
the countries who opposed this war?
Bank in Oil-For-Food Program Probe
a treaty at the end of the first Gulf War which he NEVER abided by.
He was in FULL
& COMPLETE violation for the last 12 years.
After dozens of sanctions by the UN , and NOTHING
actually being done to enforce them we went to war.
The entire time
the sanctions were in effect, as was the Oil for Food program, people starved
in Iraq and went without medicine while Saddam got rich and built palaces.
Yet Saddam, with
no other LEGAL
source of income, built dozens of opulent palaces.
We now have the
records of him buying hundreds of Mercedes, thousands of cases of Johnny
Walker Red, and many other things he was not supposed to be able to buy,
nor to even have the funds to, since he was cut off by the UN, Iraq signed
One of the companies
supplying Saddam with these goods is owned by UN president Kofi Annon's
son. How convenient.
Here to read more about the Oil for Food scandal.
Now it turns out that the UN was so corrupt because they were in bed with Saddam behind closed doors.
Even though there
is a full scale investigation going on, Paul
Volker, the former Fed chairman who is heading this investigation has NO subpoena power.
So he really can't force anyone at the UN to testify and answer questions. How convenient.
Do you think
he's going to get the full story behind who got what out of this?
So Saddam cheated
the Oil for food program for up to 50 BILLION dollars for over 12 years.
People starved in Iraq, millions died. He refused to disclose his weapons
or let the UN inspect for them.
Where else was
all this money going?
Now it has come
to light that Saddam Hussien tried to bribe UN weapons inspectors to say
that no weapons existed.
$2million offer to WMD inspector.
bin Laden did have a fortune to spend on Al
Queda, he certainly did not have the money that is in that organization
now, or that has been found in bank accounts by held by it's members.
We are just now
on the fringes of finding out that Saddam was funneling money to Osama
and Al Queda. When this is proven, and it will be it will become more and
more apparent that Saddam was supporting terrorism against America, and
getting richer everyday, and having a greater capacity to wage war against
why we HAD to
invade Iraq to protect the security of America.
More from the
Gore speech on Bruce
Springsteens web page:
at the prison (Abu Ghraib) , it is now clear, was not the result of random
acts by "a few bad apples," it was the natural consequence of the Bush
Administration policy that has dismantled those wise constraints and has
made war on America's checks and balances."
become a routine procedure for the U.S. Army"
Hold On Again!!! What EVIDENCE
has been presented to support that allegation?
Absolutely None!!! While some soldiers have stated these abuse policies came from superior officers, none have even gone past their immediate officers much less up the chain of command all the way up to the president.
Not only is that
allegation false, it is a totally reckless charge on Al Gore's part.
Gore is quite simply, UNHINGED!!!
is that before the war Abu Ghraib was
a REAL torture/murder prison run by Saddam
Ghraib was by Iraqi soldiers of other "dissedent"
Beatings at Abu Ghraib prison.
at Abu Ghraib prison.
Uday Hussein personally
beats Iraqi soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison.
being taught how to perform a proper beheading.
I can't even show
the worst of these pictures, they are too disturbing.
Al Gore has become unhinged is evident when he screams "Bush
betrayed this country, he played on our fears, he LIED
About what? Oh, are you saying he lied about, the weapons of mass destruction?
You do know that
Bush acted on the intelligence he was given.
The intelligence from the CIA, FBI, England, & Russia?
WAS THE SAME INTELLIGENCE THAT CAME OUT OF THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION WHO
FAILED TO ACT UPON IT!!!
did NOT lie,
he acted to preempt an attack by Saddam Hussien.
Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff says Bush's
statements are 100% true and that he was operating on the same intelligence
that Bill Clinton had
Said Bush Did Not Lie About Intel
First off let's
get one thing straight. The WERE
weapons of mass destruction.
The liberal media
had this crazy idea that were were going to find them all in one huge pile
with Elmer Fudd sitting on top of it!
be more ridiculous!
The weapons are
hidden all over the place. Some have been found, mobile labs were found,
many missile delivery systems have been found.
Shells have been
found in other countries with residues of chemical weapons, and these shells
came out of Iraq and were made by the FRENCH!
is these shells are still being smuggled out and melted down to avoid detection.
Parts that could
have only been attributed to future nuclear weapons systems have been found
buried in the sand/
You can also be
assured that many of Saddam's weapons went straight to Syria.
|Here's a nice picture of some of the dead Iraqi's murdered by Saddam Hussien.
These are the Kurds killed by Saddam's chemical weapons.
These people did not die from imaginary weapons.
Neither did the
Iranians he gassed in the Iraq-Iran war.
Do you think they
believe the weapons really existed?
I guess we'll
never be able to ask them.
the liberal Washington Post admits WMD's were there.
13 2005 -- U.S. troops raiding a warehouse in the northern city of Mosul
uncovered a suspected chemical weapons factory containing 1,500 gallons
of chemicals believed destined for attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces and
civilians, military officials said Saturday.
Here to read the story.
If Saddam didn't have weapons of mass destruction why did he throw out the UN weapons inspectors countless times?
Why didn't he
simply let the inspectors have unfettered access to search for the weapons?
Why would he
give up his entire presidency, give up his sons lives, loose EVERYTHING
he didn't have something to hide?
It makes absolutely
SENSE as to why if he was innocent, he wouldn't
let the inspectors in.
He didn't let the inspectors in because he wanted to keep the weapons, that's why.
He knew Bill
Clinton and AL
GORE would not fulfill the terms of the UN resolution that he signed after the first Gulf War. He knew these men were cowards from whom he had nothing to fear.
In fact years
later it would be Bill Clinton
embracing one of the worlds greatest terrorists Yasur Affafat, on the White
House lawn, in attempt to appease him. PATHETIC!
Just because we
didn't find a single pile of weapons as high as Mt. Everest doesn't mean
they didn't exist.
Who really thought
a man as cunning as Saddam
would have all his weapons in one or two places when he knew for over 10
years that eventually a Republican with a BACKBONE
would coming knocking on his door asking for them?
Bush did not lie, even if there were no weapons of mass destruction, and there obviously were, it would not have been his fault because he was simply acting on the intelligence, once again,
TO HIM BY THE CLINTON-GORE ADMINISTRATION!
Either way blaming
Bush for trying to do the right thing is simply
in fact it's
a set up!
liberal Greenpeace admits Iraq had
uranium to make nuclear weapons.
1.8 tons of enriched
uranium were flown out of Iraq in 2004, an additional 500 tons of
cake nuclear material were also secured. This is a conservative estimate as initially reported by Coalition personnel from the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA). Ironically, this initial figure is backed up by, of all organizations, Greenpeace. "Spent" yellowcake was also found suggesting that a nuclear weapon had already been made.
admits Iraq had
UN, Al-Tuwaitha, and The Nukes
Why don't you stop reading
the far left's talking points and actually look at the FACTS!
Money-laundering operations were discovered
between Iraq and Al-Qaida
the months following Sept. 11, 2001, when authorities raided the homes
and offices of two Arab bankers, Youssef M. Nada
and Ali Himat, principals at Nada Management (formerly al-Taqwa Management). al-Taqwa was formed by Nada, Himat, Ahmed
Huber. Ahmed Huber is a 74-year-old
who converted to Islam in the 1960s. The Chronicle of Foreign Service,
published in Bern, Switzerland, says Huber has praised Adolf
Hitler and the Ayatollah Khomeini and
has been quoted as saying: "We will bring down the
Israel lobby and change foreign policy. We'll do it in America. When it
happens you'll understand." Huber also has been quoted as saying, "Muslims
and Nazis were
involved in the same fight."
Iraq-al-Qaida link revealed
panel: New evidence on Iraq-Al-Qaida
Qaeda Link Seen in U.N. Oil-for-Food Program
Misleads on 9/11 Commission
re Iraq-al Qaida
hijacker Mohamed Atta trained in Baghdad
months before the attacks
Who said : "Saddam
Hussein was attempting to develop nuclear weapons."?
Who stated unequivocally that; Iraq has chemical and biological weapons. and that most elements of Iraqis chemical and biological weapons programs are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf War. ?
Who said : "These
weapons represent an unacceptable threat.?
Who Stated : Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating agents and is capable of quickly producing and weaponizing a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery on a range of vehicles such as bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers, and covert operatives which could bring them to the United States homeland. ?
the record, these are ALL
I guess John
Kerry is a liar as well. Why isn't Al
Gore going after him?
Why isn't Bruce
Springsteen criticizing him as well?
Kerry IS a liar
on many things, but that's a whole different subject.
In the months
prior to the U.S. invasion, rather than challenging the lies of the Bush
Administration, Senator Kerry rushed to its defense, claiming that The President laid out a strong, comprehensive, and compelling argument why Iraqs weapons of mass destruction programs are a threat to the United States and the international community.
John Kerry was
simply going on the intelligence that had been given to him by the Bush
administration, much of which came from the CLINTON-GORE
Who's the liar
now, AL GORE?!!!!!!
Kerry has even stated if there were no weapons of mass destruction he STILL would have voted to take us to war anyway. Of course, this position changes from week to week so it's hard to know what he really believes.
Kerry now ads the that statement saying he
only gave the President the authority to go to war, not the go ahead.
The build up to the war lasted almost one year.
anyone really believe Kerry didn't
really know we were headed in that direction?!!!
he is the ONLY
person who didn't think we were actually going to war with the BRUTAL
dictator Saddam Hussein.
Bruce Springsteen has
"I knew after we invaded Iraq that I was going to be involved in the election, "Mr. Springsteen told Rolling Stone last week. "It made me angry. . . I felt we had been misled. I felt they had been fundamentally dishonest and had frightened and manipulated the American people into war."
Fundamentally dishonest? How was the administration dishonest when it was acting, as has been proven, on the SAME EXACT INTELLIGENCE
as the Clinton - Gore
Where is the dishonesty? Bruce have you lost your mind? Explain it to me, I just don't get it.
And if George
Bush was dishonest wasn't also John
he said he STILL
would have gone to war EVEN
if he knew there were no weapons?
Bruce you've turned into a hypocrite.
Bush for the EXACT
SAME THING John Kerry
Kerry and John Edwards BOTH voted to send troops to Iraq.
If they didn't
believe in the war why did they send the troops?
the ONE being
here is YOU BRUCE!!!
can you POSSIBLY
ignore what John Kerry also
In October of
2005 Al Gore
said "We would not have invaded a country
that didn't attack us."
Clinton and you ALREADY attacked Iraq in
December of 1998!
said "Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces
to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British
forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's
nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs
and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."
said "Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten
his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological
said "The international community had good reason
to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction
and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has
used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing
weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long
war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles
at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only
against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish
civilians in Northern Iraq. The international community had little doubt
then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
use these terrible weapons again"
even went on Larry King's
TV show after Bill Clinton's
speech and said "bombing Iraq was the right
thing to do" to rid Saddam
Hussien of weapons
of mass destruction.
Read the Transcript:
Clinton explains Iraq strike
But now Bruce
Springsteen supports Al
Gore's statement that President
Bush lied to us when it is clear that Al
Gore, the Vice President of Bill
Clinton says he bombed Iraq FOR
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!
the two of you insane, lying, or are you just ignoring the facts?
of whom Bruce Springsteen
is a member of, strongly supported the toppling of Saddam for years because
he was an EVIL
man who had hundreds of thousands of human right violations.
International supported the Iraq invasion!
Just because the
people being oppressed weren't living here in the US, and they have had
a darker skin color than many of us, you're telling me freeing them from
an evil dictator wasn't a nobel cause?
Because although it was billed by the left as a war for oil, a war for money, we have not taken one drop of oil from Iraq, and it has cost the US billions to free that country from Saddam.
We lost a lot, in money and lives. But we made the world a safer place free of Saddam and we freed millions of people.
We also honored
our dead soldiers from the first Gulf war, who up until Saddam was toppled,
were disgraced because they had fought for nothing since the sanctions
were never met.
They said THAT
war was about money but we didn't profit there either.
So these wars
were NOT about money.
They were about
making the world a safer place, and freeing oppressed people.
says we are better off having Saddam out of power.
So what's the
Do you want us
to leave Iraq in the lurch when they are going to have elections in January?
Gore & John Kerry call the war In Iraq a miserable failure because
of all the American deaths.
Let's do the math. 3500 US troops are dead, and 50 MILLION
Iraqi's are now free!!!
The Prime Minister
of Iraq states that 90% of Iraq is now violence free.
that make this the most successful war in history by hundreds of times.
The fact is that
there were 325 MURDERS in Washington DC in
To read about
In fact there
have been well over 500 MURDERS in Washington
DC since the start of the Iraq war.
That's half of
all the soldiers killed in Iraq and that's just in ONE
Do we EVER
hear that Washington D.C. is a miserable failure as a city as well?
Let's get a grip
on REALITY here!
So to say that
because 35000 American lives have been lost in the liberation of an ENTIRE
COUNTRY one has to put into perspective what
that number really means.
is another interesting fact:
The Democrats are constantly saying there have been 3500 American deaths in Iraq and isn't that enough because we are being slaughtered. But the Democrats number one issue is abortion.
In the United
States 3500 reported ABORTIONS
carried out EVERY SINGLE DAY!
States Abortion Statistics
That's a conservative
That means since
the start of the Iraq war there have been at least 3,000,000
abortions in the
United States! That number could even be closer to 4 million abortions!
While many people
don't consider a human fetus a valid life, at minimum, 50% of Americans
That means 50%
of the people in America consider that well over a million babies have
been murdered in the abortion holocaust since the start of the war.
That may seem silly and inconsequential to some people, but it's not to those who believe abortion is murder.
with a million abortion deaths in the United States, the 2200 US troop
deaths are only a fraction of that "death" number.
Of course pro
abortion people will not understand that comparison at all.
What about the
constant bombings in Iraq? How can we call the war a success while the
How long did
it take to stabilize Germany after the war? At least 4 years, that's how
Because the US
abided the Geneva Convention, and didn't execute all the Iraqi soldiers
they captured at the start of the war, many of them have now turned into
insurgents who are fighting back.
Many other terrorists
have entered Iraq from other countries to cause unrest.
The truth of the
matter is that 90% of Iraq is at peace.
The power is on, people are working and being fed, the oil is flowing thanks
to the "demon" Halliburton Corporation.
In fact not one
drop of oil has been stolen from Iraq as the "War for Oil" protesters shouted
2 years ago.
All we hear about
here are the isolated incidents of violence in Iraq. Very little of the
good has been reported. The government institutions of torture, rape and
murder are all out of business.
Iraq now has
it's own FREE
government that had open free elections in January 2005, and is about to
ratify a new constitution.
No one said that the insurgents would simply lay down and give up their arms without a fight.
told us this would be a long fight.
John Kerry and
John Edwards BOTH voted to send troops to Iraq.
If they didn't
believe in the war why did they send the troops?
And why did John
Kerry vote against giving the money to our
soldiers after he voted to give it to them so that they could be better
protected with equipment such as body armor?
goes on to say that Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror.
Who the heck
is he trying to kid?!!!
the Achille Laurel hijacker, who pushed a man in a wheelchair off the side
of the ship, was found to be comfortably living in Baghdad. So was the
terrorist murderer Abu Nidal.
knew they were there. In fact Abu Nidal
was murdered, most likely by Saddam,
so that he never spilled the beans on the terrorism he carried out in Saddam's
What about the
meetings the 9/11 hijackers had with Iraqi officials in Iraq and The Sudan
as outlined in the bipartisan 9/11 Commission Report?
Misleads on 9/11 Commission
re Iraq-al Qaida
hijacker Mohamed Atta trained in Baghdad
months before the attacks
Was that just a coincidence? These people all had support from Saddam.
We all know Saddam
had a big smile on his face the day the World Trade Center came crumbling
to the ground.
Saddam Hussien was the Weapon of Mass Destruction,
Hussien was a terrorist.
asserts in his film that Saddam
was NO threat to America and never threatened us. Along with the other
59 main points of his movie that have been disproved, that is simply not
Iraq was a nation that "had never attacked the United States. A nation
that had never threatened to attack the United States. A nation that had
never murdered a single American citizen." Each of these assertions is
a terrorist named Abu Nidal who
is certainly (self proclaimed) responsible for killing Americans to have
Iraq as a safe haven; if Saddam Hussein funded suicide bombers in Israel who did kill Americans; if the Iraqi policenow this is not a murder, but it's a plan to murderto assassinate President
Bush which at the time merited air strikes
from President Clinton once that plot was discovered; does that not belie the claim that the Iraqi government never murdered an American or never had a hand in murdering an American?
shot at, and therefore attempted to kill, American and British pilots enforcing
the "no-fly zone" over portions of Iraq. The no-fly zone was created, by
the United Nations, to prevent Saddam's
air force from being able to mass murder his own Iraqi citizens like he
did to the Kurds.
to the no-fly zone as a condition of the ceasefire in the 1991 Gulf War,
but then refused to abide by the ceasefire conditions. As he likewise refused
to abide by the conditions requiring him to prove that he had destroyed
all his weapons of mass destruction.
Moore as you may
remember claimed to have a team of lawyers ready to sue ANYONE
who even discounted ANY
of the "Facts" in his movie. If so why hasn't he sued a single person,
or author Dave Kopel who has discounted at least 59 points Moore asserts
in his film, WITH PROVEN DOCUMENTATION.
evidence, something Michael MooreNEVER
Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11 shows exactly the deceit, lies, and misrepresentations
of the facts presented in his film.
Moore has presented
NO evidence to date disputing any of Kopel's or any one else's provable
facts against him.
He created a fictitious
version of the truth, with EVERY major
point having been disproved, and yet he is still taken seriously by some.
Back to the speech
published on Bruce Springsteen's
web site, Al Gore states:
" As many as 37
prisoners may have been murdered while in captivity, though the numbers
are difficult to rely upon because in many cases involving violent death,
there were no autopsies."
Hold on! What EVIDENCE
is there that any of these prisoners were "murdered"
as Al Gore claims? Once again Gore
has made a slanderous charge with absolutely NO
facts to back it up.
Do you see a pattern
here where Al Gore
makes charges against George Bush and
the administration with ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE
to back these charges up?
Why is my hero,
Spingsteen, publishing a speech by a man who
is making reckless charges with ABSOLUTELY
NO EVIDENCE to back these charges up?
Bruce, what's the deal here? What about the facts?
Why are you giving
this RECKLESS MANIAC space
on your web site to make these unsubstantiated charges?
I really don't get it. If he had some PROOF
of ANY of these
charges, I could respect that, but not when he simply makes these off the
cuff claims with no proof whatsoever.
did you ever bother to ask Al Gore
why he and Bill Clinton
never urged the UN to force Saddam Hussien
to abide by the resolutions he agreed to after the first Gulf war?
For that matter
did you ever ask him why they never went after Osama
Bin Laden after the first World Trade Center
bombing, the Embassy attacks, or the attack on the USS Cole?
Did you ask Al
Gore why Bill
Clinton refused to take Osama
Bin Laden into custody on the
separate occasions he was offered to him on
a silver platter by the Saudi's?
did you ever ask Al Gore
why he and Bill ClintonWERE
MISERABLE FAILURES in not protecting us from
these terrorists in the first place so that we would not be forced into
the situation we find ourselves in today?
It seems to me
the reason we are in Iraq, and Osama is still on the run, is the COMPLETE
FAILURE of the Clinton-Gore
administration to do ANYTHING
about them when they were in office other than bomb an aspirin factory
after hours in the middle of the night when it was closed?
In fact if anyone
is to blame for the current situation it is Al
Gore and BIll Clinton!!!
In my eyes Al
Gore is part the reason we have the terrorist problems we have today.
Bruce, you've broken my heart, why out of all the political idiots that exist are you supporting
who makes unsubstantiated claims without any evidence?!!!
On August 9, 2004
Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry
on Monday he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing
force against Iraq "even if he had known then
no weapons of mass destruction would be found."
Taking up a challenge
from President Bush,
whom he will face in the Nov. 2 election, the Massachusetts senator said:
"I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have
voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a President
to have but I would have used that authority effectively."
So if President
Bush was wrong, John
Kerry has just admitted he would have been just as wrong also. Why did you support John
Kerry when he voted for the war and says he
would have gone to war even if he had known then no weapons of mass destruction
would be found?
Bruce, I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, I really just don't get you.
You claim the
President is a liar, a misleader, yet you supprot another man who said
EXACT SAME THING!
You're not making
logic in this? Please explain it to me!
I KNOW you're
a well meaning guy, but have you really thought this through?
In an interview
with Backstreets.com, Bruce
had this to say:
this is probably the most important election of my lifetime. I think that
the government has drifted too far from American values. After 9/11, I
was like everybody else -- I supported going into Afghanistan, and I felt
tremendous unity in the country that I don't think I've ever felt exactly
like that before. It was a moment of great sadness, but also tremendous
possibility. And I think that was dashed when
we jumped headlong into the Iraq war, which I never understood, and
I talked about that on the road. I never understood
how or why we really ended up there. We offered
up the lives of the best of our young people under circumstances that have
Discredited? What are you saying here? We've already stated there were weapons of mass destruction. We know Saddam was a murderer and a torturer.
We know 50 million
people have been freed.
We went to Iraq
to FULFILL the
many United Nations sanctions that you're friend Al
Gore ignored for 8 years. We had intelligence from HIS administration
that there were weapons in Iraq.
The UN said Saddam
turn over his weapons and let the inspectors in to search.
threw the UN out. THAT'S why we had to invade Iraq. What part of that don't you get?
Are you a child
like Cindy Sheehan
who can't understand the facts?
Bruce, do you have be be told the reasons over and over again simply because you can't understand or refuse to accept them? You simply CHOOSE
NOT to look at the facts.
If you REALLY want to know the reasons we went to war then you should read the resolution that Congress authorized for the use of force in Iraq.
Resolution on Iraq
by Congress October 2002
The measure passed
the Senate and House by even WIDER
margins than the 1991 resolution that empowered the United States to go
to war to expel Iraq from Kuwait. The Kuwait vote in the Senate was 52-47
to go to war, but the 2002 Iraq vote was passed by an overwhelming majority
of 77-23 the Senators.
the way the war did not start until almost 6
months after this resolution passed after
Hussien was given many more chances to let the weapons inspectors back in.
ALL he had to do, was to let the inspectors back in, but he refused to do so. If there were no weapons what was he hiding? Saddam
Hussien violated the UN treaties he signed
for over 12 years.
He was given another six months after the Congressional resolution was passed. When was this "rush to war" as you call it? Where were you the last twelve years? Twelve years is not a "rush to war".
Here is the twelve
year defiance of the sixteen resolutions that Saddam Hussien violated.
ANY ONE of these
was enough to allow us to attack Iraq.
Here: Saddam Hussein's Defiance of United Nations Resolutions
Why don't you
read the FIRST
resolution that was given to Saddam TWELVE
YEARS before we attacked them on November 29, 1990: "Iraq must comply fully with UNSCR 660 (regarding Iraq's illegal invasion of Kuwait) "and all subsequent relevant resolutions." Authorizes UN Member States "to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area."
Bruce, did you fail to pick up a newspaper for twelve years? Maybe you should have paid a little more attention to the subject before you came out to criticize President Bush.
Waiting for twelve
years and sixteen resolutions is not "jumping
headlong into a war".
why don't you get your facts straight before you start mouthing off with
half truths and lies?
I can't tell you
how much I'm really disturbed by what you're saying.
"Along with that, the deficits, the squeezing of services like the after
school services for the kids who need it the most, the big windfall tax
cuts, the division of wealth that has threatened our connection to one
another over the past 20 years that is increasing.... these are things
that as the election time neared -- I couldn't really keep true to the
ideas that I'd written about for 30 years without weighing in on this one."
Wait a minute.
Let's get the facts straight here!
George W. Bush has DOUBLED
the funding of the "No Child Left Behind" program from the amount that
Clinton and Al Gore funded it.
Here's the facts: Fiscal Year 2003 funding for No Child Left Behind programs increased by more than 36 percent over 2001, and 60 percent over 2000 levels. This year America will spend more than $8,200 per student of which the federal contribution is now 8.4 percent. (Department Of Education, Record Spending And A Commitment To Success Fact Sheet, 5/19/03).
Title 1 spending for needy and disadvantaged children increased more in the first two years of the Bush administration that it had in the previous 8 years under Bill Clinton. In fact as of January 2004 the states are sitting on a 5.5
BILLION dollars of unspent federal education money!
The states can't
spend the money fast enough that is being to them.
George Bush's fault if the states don't spend
the money they are given for education.
Here: No Child Left Behind Funding
So Bruce, YOU
DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!
Bush's Record on Poverty: The Facts
along with many other media stars have claimed that President
Bush doesn't care about the poor. Let's go over the REAL facts:
At the peak of
his spending on the poor in 1996 Bill Clinton
funded Federal entitlement programs like Welfare, Supplemental Security
Income, Food Stamps, family support assistance, and child nutrition programs,
the sum of $191 Billion dollars.
In 2005 President
George Bush funded these same Federal entitlements
$368 Billion dollars
and added a prescription drug program.
has more than doubled the funding of "The
No Child Left Behind" program than the Clinton
did not cut a single
low income program that Bill Clinton
Should we then
conclude that President Bush cares
AS MUCH as Bill
Clinton did about poor people since he is
spending almost double on the poor than Bill
Clinton ever did?
are the programs that help the poor. These programs benefit the poorest
Americans, not the "top 2% of the wealthiest
No other president
in history has done more to fund programs for the poor than George
America now has
tightest safety net EVER
in our history for the poor because of President
George W. Bush.
Bill Clinton was
able to balance the budget because of the pressure put on him by the Republicans
led by Newt Gingrich
and by gaining extra revenue by stripping our military bare.
George W. Bush is now rebuilding the military, which takes lots of money.
We are also post
9/11 and fighting a global war on terror.
Tax Cuts: The Facts
Windfall tax cuts
for the rich? Not quite, how about for EVERY
Let me remind
you sir, that taxes are OUR
money to begin with. Maybe YOU
don't need a tax cut, but the more poorer of us do. EVERY
American taxpayer got a tax cut under George
The middle class
got one of the LARGEST TAX CUTS IN HISTORY!
People got a
fair, balanced tax cut according to what they earn. The poorest Americans
got a HIHGER PERCENTAGE
back in tax cuts than the richest Americans.
23 2004, Congress approved a $145.9
BILLION DOLLAR package of tax relief that
extended President Bush's MIDDLE CLASS
Without this action,
the three provisions affecting an estimated 94 million Americans would
expire at the end of this year. The legislation keeps the per child tax
credit at $1,000, retains an expanded 10% income bracket that affects virtually
all taxpayers and retains provisions to provide tax relief for married couples.
said "We would not have taken money from the
working families and given it to the most wealthy families."
Are you insane
Gore? How is giving EVERY
AMERICAN WHO PAYS TAXES a tax cut taking money
from working families and giving it to the rich? It's NOT you moron! You not crazy just DISHONEST!
and Al, lets
go over the REAL numbers. First off who do you think pays the most taxes in America?
Yes, the "rich"
as you call them got more total money back in tax relief, BUT
THAT'S BECAUSE THEY PAID FAR MORE TO BEGIN WITH!
And let's define
"rich". John Kerry said
that anyone making over $125,000 was rich.
But that TRUE
FACTS are that 80% of the jobs in America
are created by small business owners, NOT
mega corporations. 60% of these small business owners only make between
$200,000 and $500,000 a year. That may sound like a lot of money, but not
when Bill Clinton
was taking close to 50% away in federal taxes. These people provide jobs
and benefits FOR MOST OF AMERICA.
By giving them
a tax break you help the lower end working families they employ.
if you don't
give these "rich" people a tax cut you will NEVER
stimulate the economy which was the whole point of the tax cut to begin
The fact that
government tax revenue income is now at record levels PROVES that these tax cuts work to help the economy. More taxes are being paid because more people are working, yet individual tax rates are down.
says that President Bush only lowered the taxes for the rich and now the middle class and the poor pay most of the taxes in this country.
He says that
Bush only cuts taxes for the top 2% of Americans.
could be further from the TRUTH
even though the Democrats echo this lie as truth over and over again.
is that the wealthiest Americans pay MOST
of the taxes in this country.
is that the Top 5% of Wage Earners Pay 50% of all Income Taxes.
overwhelming majority of federal income taxes
paid by the wealthiest of Americans.
The top 1% of the highest income earners pay about 32% of all income taxes.
The top 5% of the highest income earners pay about 53% of all income taxes.
The top 10% of the highest income earners, pay about 65% of all income taxes.
The top 20% of the highest income earners pay almost 80% of all income taxes.
means that 80% of Americans only carry
of the tax burden!
tax cuts were NOT
even accross the board.
income payers got the highest percentage of the cuts.
They say taxation is not fair in this country.
DARN RIGHT IT'S NOT FAIR!
"RICH" pay MOST
of the taxes!
also provide almost all of the jobs in this country!
This is NOT
fuzzy math or Republican spin, this is sourced information.
CBO Report: Effective Federal Tax Rates Under Current Law, 2001 to 2014
are STILL saying
the tax cuts were for the rich.
is that these people are lying because the true taxation numbers don't
They think that
if they repeat this lie over and over the American public will for for
taxes ALWAYS LOWERS
tax revenue to the government.
the incoming tax revenue.
Anyone who studies
economics knows that.
It's always better
to lower taxes and increase tax revenue.
to raise taxes so that they can implement more social programs
that keep control
over more people.
The only institution that does not have to work for it's money
is the government
who steals our money.
Americans to be in control over thier OWN
money and grow the economy.
to control YOUR
money and keep you DEPENDANT
has stated that we should pay a tax rate of 70%!
Not while I'm
armed with my shotgun is that going to happen!
want to keep the Estate Tax alive. Let's think about this. When you are alive the federal government can tax your income close to 50%
of your earnings. Notice the word EARNINGS.
MONEY, YOU EARNED
Tax allows the government to tax the money
ALREADY PAID TAXES ON when you die and pass
it on to your children at a rate of another 50%! That means out of the original money you earned 75% of it can be taken away by the government! Even when your children get that 25% of what you actually earned they will pay even more taxes on it like sales taxes, property taxes, gasoline taxes etc. By
the time all the taxes are paid your children will only be left with about
10-15% of the original money that YOU EARNED!
Getting rid of
the Estate Tax
is what the Bruce Springsteen
and the Democrats call "tax cuts for the rich".
So Bruce, you're saying we should not have tax cuts? You do understand that
EVERY TIME since the second world war that
there has been a tax cut, be it under John
Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, or George Bush that
there has been substantial economic growth in our economy.
Do you understand
that if I, as a small business owner, loose my George
Bush tax cut that I will have to lay off one
of my employees, who will then go on unemployment, be without health care
and cost the government far more than if I kept them employed and productive.
Of course my work
will be strained and I'll sell less product. Then I'll pay less taxes.
The we won't use services like Fedex as much because we won't be selling
as much. Then they will pay less taxes, maybe even lay someone off.
You do understand
the low tax, high productivity concept of SIMPLE
economics don't you?
This is not a
maybe concept that's EXACTLY
what will happen if I loose the $35,000 I was returned of MY
OWN MONEY because of the Bush tax cuts.
I don't mean to
berate you sir, I can understand that you may not have been in a Walmart
recently, but that's EXACTLY
what happens when taxes are increased.
You're not affected,
you're beyond rich. And the people who in low paying jobs won't really
feel much difference in their paycheck, UNTIL
THE SMALL BUSINESS OWNER LIKE MYSELF WHO WILL SHOULDER MOST OF THE BURDEN
OF THE KERRY TAX INCREASES HAS TO LAY THEM OFF BECAUSE WE CAN NO LONGER
AFFORD TO KEEP THEM EMPLOYED.
I don't have an
endless supply of cash to hire workers.
I need to pay
my mortgage and send my kids to school .
I have to keep
products on hand, I have a payroll, I have bills.
But John Kerry
states that I'm "rich" because I make over $200,000 a year.
Let me tell you
brother, I'm just keeping my head above water here.
When I got my
tax relief I hired a new worker, which increased my productivity and let
me make more money and I paid more taxes.
Lower taxes are
good for everybody.
I make more money.
I pay more taxes. FedEx makes more money. They pay more taxes.
Someone has a job and health care because of me. They pay taxes, stay off unemployment.
They buy a house
and put builders to work, the builders stay off unemployment, they pay
Remember one thing:
POOR MAN NEVER GAVE ANOTHER MAN A JOB!
Then again John Kerry, the richest man to ever run for president, has no real experience going to Walmart either. He flies halfway across the country to get $2000.00 haircuts.
How can he POSSIBLY
understand my economic situation?
On the other hand
raising taxes has NEVER
increased revenue for the federal government because it stunts economic
growth. You do understand how the chain works don't you Bruce?
How about the record low mortgage rates, low unemployment, and low inflation rates?
How about the record high home ownership rate and the record high black and minority home ownership? Did you know that next year millions of Americans will get prescription drug benefits and many will get their drugs for free?
How about the
nice tax cuts that EVERY American got. Actually every American did not get a tax cut, the
people who don't pay taxes didn't get a refund.
This whole notion
that George Bushonly
gave tax cuts for the rich is simply ridiculous.
Bill Clinton had the highest taxation rates in this country's history, yet the total collected tax revenue by the government was way down. Bill
Clinton left office with a recession on his
Bush taxes are LOWER
but the tax revenue collected is HIGHER than it has ever have been!!! That PROVES
that lowering the taxes for everybody helps the economy.
In fact the national
debt reduction is happening much, much faster than even George
is up. Productivity is up. US Economic growth is up. Unemployment is at
some of the lowest levels in our countries history.
are still below 6%, a far cry from the 18% that some people paid for homes
under the Jimmy Carter administration.
Home ownership is at it's highest level in American history.
Black home ownership
is at it highest level EVER!
imaginary numbers, these are US Dept. of Labor statistics.
Bruce, something you said has now REALLY
" the division
of wealth that has threatened our connection to one another over the past
20 years that is increasing.... "
WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN?!!! THE DIVISION OF WEALTH?!!!
Yes, there has
always been a division of wealth. There will always be a division of wealth.
Even in COMMUNIST
and SOCIALIST societies where the wealth should
have been divided equally, there was always a division of wealth.
90% of Americans
still fall into the "middle class".
Are you saying
that people who work hard and make themselves "rich" should have thier
money taken away from them and given to the poor?
What are you saying here? Is what you want, SOCIALISM?
We live in a
the concept of FREEDOM
being the cornerstone of America.
We are all FREE
to earn whatever we can.
You want to take
MONEY that I busted my butt to earn and give it to those who choose not to work as hard as me? BULLSHIT!!!
No one gave me anything. Less than 7 years ago I existed on a $550.00 month disability check.
With a computer
and a $200.00 investment I turned that $200.00 into a very successful business.
I don't have a
college education, I just had an idea and the desire to make it happen.
Believe me, just
about anyone could have done it if they worked as hard as I did.
It's not MY
RESPONSIBILITY if Joe Schmo doesn't want to
go to college and is perfectly happy pumping gas the rest of his life,
and doesn't try to better himself.
He doesn't DESERVE
to make as much money as me because I struggled for what I have, and Joe
was busy behind the gas station drinking beer and watching Beavis and Butthead!
I certainly don't
want MY "wealth"
redistributed to some slacker.
That may sound
cold, but tough shit, this is AMERICA
where we are all FREE
to earn whatever we can.
choose not to put in the hard work to educate yourself to get a better
job, then you must live within your means. If you choose not to finish
high school, like you didn't Bruce,
or to have a baby as a teenager, you will most likely live in poverty.
That's a personal choice, YOUR
personal choice, not mine.
We are all FREE to succeed.
America is supposed
to be a FREE
ANYONE in America can work a minimum wage job, get a school loan, and go to community college and better themselves. Right now the federal loans for college are being threatened to be cut.
Do you know why? Because they are getting so few applicants.
People are not applying for the money! Why should the government offer all this money for college tuition if it is not being used?
It's the same
way with Food Stamps. The money taken out of the Food Stamp fund by applicants
is down by 20% in 2005, even with a multi million dollar television ad
campain advertising them.
People are simply
not applying for Food Stamps.
I would assume that they don't need them then. If people are starving why aren't they going to get Food Stamps?
people are working than ever before and less people need them.
And don't give me the argument that people don't know how to get them. There are TV and print ad's advertising Food Stamps. Every poor person knows where the Welfare office is. Even homeless people are eligible for Food Stamps.
ANYONE can find the Food Stamp office. All it takes is one phone call. It's not our responsibility to drag these people to the Food Stamp office. If they can't find it on thier own that is thier fault.
Food Stamps are still not being used
Do you believe
in this statement Bruce?
"from each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
I bet you do.
It was said by the Father of Socialism, Karl
ANYONE can succeed
can start a business on the internet if they really want to.
I know, if I did
it, ANYONE can!
FAIR is the fact that more you earn, the more taxes you pay.
Why is that? How come this is not a FAIR
country where we all pay the SAME
please tell me how do you intend to redistribute MY
to someone who didn't care to finish high school or work as hard as I did?
You're pushing the line now here buddy. I can understand how you might not get the war thing, or how the Clinton-Gore
administration was ultimately responsible for causing the war, or maybe
even how you don't understand the economics of tax cuts or job creation
since you're filthy rich.
But I can't for
the life of me understand how you intend to redistribute the countries
wealth, or how kicking George Bush
out of office will accomplish that.
The raising of my taxes will redistribute the wealth. I'll have less of it, I'll be forced to fire an employee. They may loose their home.
Then they'll be
drawing unemployment sucking the life out of the governments revenue, which
of course there will be less of since I'll be making less, paying less
in overall taxes, then they, of course, won't be paying ANY.
I repeat this
so that you understand how it works.
Personally I want to be a man and don't want anyone giving anything to me, much less the government. I'm here to be a good citizen who pays taxes to run and protect our wonderful country.
I just want the chance to make it on my own and not to be choked to death by taxes and have
MY OWN MONEY
ROBBED FROM ME by the government.
From the Backstreets interview with Bruce: "Some fans seem to have been taken aback by the posting of Al
Gore's speech on your web site, or the
jokes on stage..."
"It is time to
impeach the president and put in somebody that knows what they're doing."
Whoa!!! Hold on Here!
Impeachment? For what? For ABIDING
by and ENFORCING
the 17 UN sanctions against Saddam Hussien?
Bush listening to the same intelligence from
the CLINTON-GORE administration.
For taking the
SAME PATH TO WAR as
Kerry, Bill Clinton and Al Gore stated they
For giving us
the largest economic growth, lowest inflation, highest productivity, and
the lowest interest rates in over 20 years?
For doubling the
money for social programs for the poor like Welfare, Food Stamps, SSI,
SSD, and prescription drug programs?
Did you call for
impeachment when Bill Clinton
LIED in a court deposition, or were you quiet
about that CRIME?
What do you think
about George Bush
for sending ten times more money to Africa to fight AIDS than Bill
Clinton did? What about the billions of dollars of African debt President Bush
Yes, that must
be a bad thing.
Listen Bruce, I just want to know where you're coming from.
I just don't
get you anymore.
I thought you
were for the little guy.
The little guy who I'll have to lay off when my taxes go up.
How about his
little girl who'll be pulled out of private school and the chance of a
Maybe the little
girl who would have lost her dad in the next terrorist attack, but got
to keep him because a US soldier blew that terrorist away 3000 miles in
Iraq before he ever got the chance to come here.
Maybe even for
the Iraqi who was forced to watch as his baby daughters foot was immersed
in acid and melted away by Uday Hussein while he laughed, and then raped the toddler in front of her father, then threw her into a wood chipper? That's not a made up story, that's a documented fact.
That was one
of his "hobbies".
please rethink things. I think you may have lost touch.
All I want is a fair America for ALL. I want people, even in far away lands, who might not be the same color as me, to live in freedom also.
I want terrorists
who kill women and children to die a horrible death.
I want an "eye
for an eye" as you have said.
My city may still
be in ruins, but at least no other American city is because George
W. Bush has made it much harder for terrorists
to attack us.
I can't listen to your music or watch your DVD's without getting mad as
I'm angry because you don't want to give the support to defend our country, and to free oppressed people, and prevent future terrorist attacks.
I'm angry because
while we have a president with a proven record in strengthening our economy
and is REALLY helping
people, with a prescription drug plan,
savings accounts, and lower
taxes for the middle class, you oppose him.
I'm also really
pissed off that not only do you oppose the President who is trying to
do the right thing you support an idiot like John
is a traitor, who doesn't even bother to vote and attend the meetings which
are his job.
When he does
vote it is almost ALWAYS
against helping Americans by helping to defend them, and helping them be
more financially stronger and self reliant.
think Kerry is
Why do you support
him and a LIAR
like Al Gore?
You broke my heart
man . . . you broke my heart.
I think the main
reason Bruce Springsteen and many other celebrities think they way they
do is that the rely on the news reports of the mostly left wing media.
ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, ALL have a left wing tilt to their version of
Many people don't
believe this but examples can be given time and time again. Just take a
look at CBS reporter Bernard Goldberg's books
Bias and Arrogance. In it he describes working
in the Dan Rather
newsroom, long before the scandal that pushed Rather out of the anchor
chair, about the countless examples he found of left wing bias. As a Democrat
simply could not believe what he saw go on in the news room.
: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distorts the News - Bernard Goldberg
What is Dan
Rather smoking? Even if it wasn't true is was still a good story?
Rather was interviewed about the story which
cost him his job as the CBS news anchor, the false story about George
Bush being AWOL in the National Guard.
this quote Dan Rather
gave to Marvin Kalb
during the interview. Dan
said "Even if the story wasn't factually true,
it was still a damn good story". What?!!!
if it wasn't true it was a pile of dog pooh! You guys MADE
CBS worked on
this story for FIVE YEARS
trying to make it fit because THEY WANTED
IT TO BE TRUE. All they came up with was document
they say PROVED
that George Bush was AWOL. The problem is the document was written in a font used by Microsoft that wasn't even in use back then.
It was a forged
document, plain and simple, but Dan Rather
refused to let go of the story.
It's the same
thing with the infamous "Downing Street Memo" they tried to hang George
Bush with concerning the preplanning of the
war. The ONLY
document they had was a HANDWRITTEN
But the media
salivated all over it thinking that this time they really had caught George
Bush doing something wrong. If it wasn't so devious it would be laughable.
So it goes today
with most of the media. What they do is repeat an untruth over and over
again until finally they get people to believe that it is true. They distort
the news constantly.
How many positive stories have you heard coming out of Iraq? Not many, they are almost all negative. Yet when soldiers are interviewed they tell us great progress is being made there.
I am personally
in contact with a soldier and a civilian worker and they tell me that what
we see on the news is NOTHING like the way it really is in Iraq.
Sure there are terrorist bombings, but there have also been dozens of schools and hospitals being built. Children are in school, people are working, the economy is getting healthy there. 95% of the country is peaceful.
They have had
free elections for the first time ever and are voting on a free constitution.
They day they
were ratifying their new constitution most of the news reports talked about
a terrorist caused blackout, NOT the fact that this monumental document
was being ratified.
It's their July
4th for goodness sakes, but the BIG story in the news is one small bombing!
Over and over the
media, with the help of their close friends the Democrats, try to spin
the news their way, whether it is true or not.
After letting him
speak for a few minutes O'Reilly then
read him the REAL NUMBERS
on poverty. Poverty is down in America under
Bush, and the money being spent on poverty
has doubled under George Bush
as it was under Bill Clinton.
was on Bill O'Reilly's Factor
TV show. All he kept talking about was the poverty that hurricane Katrina
"exposed", and he compared President Bush
to Bull Connor
the Southern racist who whipped and shot blacks with high powered hoses
in the 60's.
simply ran over the facts and started talking about how George
Bush doesn't care about the poor. O
'Reilly again confronted him with the REAL
NUMBERS but he just kept on going and going
with his "George Bush hates poor people"
It was almost
comical, but truly sad because Rangel
in his bid to scare people simply ignored all the facts.
Even today with record job creation,
record low unemployment, lower taxes (for EVERYBODY, not just for the rich
as you morons keep repeating), higher tax revenue, low interest rates,
higher spending for the poor, lower poverty rates, the highest home ownership
rate ever, even for minorities, the public still gives President
Bush a poor job rating!
Well people, if this isn't enough for you then I don't know what is, and I have no idea what you expect from a President. You need to STOP listening
to this left wing bull that ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN
SINGLE DAY about how George Bush is
Hey boys, the numbers don't lie. Once again
the TRUE FACTS are that George
Bush has DOUBLED the amount of money spent on poor people than Bill
|The same thing happened
with former Vice Presidential Candidate John Edward's
as he was being interviewed by Bill Maher.
Over and over again he talked about
poverty and how "nothing was being done by this president".
just agreed with him and the two of them had a mutual masturbatory Bush
has not cut a SINGLE poor program that Bill
Bush's record on Poverty - The Facts
But these guys don't want to hear the facts, they just want to sucker people into voting for Democrats and keeping them on the public dole. Since the media is so left wing they just go along with what these yahoos say and thus millions of Americans, who never bother to look up the REAL NUMBERS end up believing this trash because they trust that the media is being honest with them.
Well people, MOST
of the media is not being honest with you, and THAT'S
John Edwards went on to talk about the tax cuts only for the rich.
No John, do we have to keep going over the numbers again? What you say is not true, not true in the least: Tax Cuts - The Truth.
Then Edwards said
that the recent hurricanes proved that Global Warming was getting worse.
He said there are more hurricanes than ever and that they are more severe. Hey John,
do you simply LIE about EVERYTHING? If you check with the National Weather Service who have the actual facts they will tell that there are no more hurricanes now than there used to be, nor are they any more severe. Neither has "Global Warming" ever been proven.
Warming - The Facts
true about John Edwards is that he collected
about $50 million dollars in medical malpractice
settlements. Some for suits concerning cerebral palsy and the fact that if a doctor didn't perform a cesarean section on time he could cause this condition. Edward's
gave impassioned pleas in the courtroom and even mimicked the "channeled"
the voice of a baby crying for justice!
The problem is that Edward's
had to interview forty-one obstetricians as
medical experts before he could find even ONE
to back up his claims.
So what has John
Edward's REALLY done for ordinary Americans? Ordinary women in labor are far more likely to have cesarean sections, not so much for medical reasons but because of legal reasons. Doctors call this "Defensive Medicine" to avoid lawsuits.
While trial lawyers like John
Edward's have gotten filthy sinking rich for suing over these cerebral
palsy cases there is NO REAL EVIDENCE to support
this blame on the doctors part. That's because lawyers don't need REAL evidence. All they have to do is convince 12 people on a jury that something is true, and they can win the case. Hundreds of trial lawyers have also won suits like this, with no real evidence.
So while John
Edward's says he fights for the "little guy" he really got rich by making up unproven claims, and forcing American women to have far more cesarean sections than they really need.
This drove up malpractice insurance for doctors, which increased the cost of health care for every American. Way to go John, you've been a real big help
for the "little guy"!
I shudder to think that this guy, who seems to lie about everything, almost became our vice president. What's more scary is that he may even try to run for President again.
"What about the 200 million people who were lost in the Atlantic crossing? Very
conservative estimates say that the slave
trade, just the crossing of the Atlantic, bringing the slaves across, there
were 200 million people who died just coming
across. So great was the number of people
who were thrown overboard that it altered the ecology of the ocean. The
sharks even now trace -- or follow after ships along a trail seeking the
flesh that was thrown overboard in all those years 200 years of the slave
|New York Democratic Congressman
Owens in an effort to claim that black people are owed reparations for slavery said on the floor of the Congress:
Altered the ecology of the ocean?!!! That's the silliest thing I have ever heard of!
Let's look at the FACTS here rather than the gross exaggeration. Let's say slavery in America lasted for 100 years. Here's the math:
= 18 Ships Carrying 304 Slaves Every Day for 100 Years!
It's simply not possible. There are only 298 million people in America today!
In fact there were not even 200 million
people in Africa during the 1800's.
Besides why would the slave traders
be throwing over that many slaves, which would be thier profits?
Surely many slaves were thrown
overboard in a horrible fashion during the heyday of slavery.
But to make such a gross exageration,
the floor of the Congress like it is an accepted fact, not only
makes the Congressman look silly, but it sets back his own message because
it it very clear that he is simply making up the numbers.
But this illustrates the Democratic
way of doing things. The TRUTH doesn't have
to be correct, just the idea in thier heads.
now just another in a line of who I like to call Dumb
Celebrities who think they know more than
we do. They say stupid things, get proven wrong yet never get called on
rantings proves that he is a dumb celebrity.
are some more examples:
said that if George Bush was re-elected that he would reinstate the draft.
Hasn't happened yet. Actually John,
it was the DEMOCRATS who tried to reinstate the draft.
get your facts straight. Click
Here for the story.
maybe you should go look for all that Farm
Aid money you collected that never seemed to make it to all the farmers! Moron!
said on the Oprah
show that "if you don't vote (for John Kerry)
that rape could become legal"!
Is that law being worked on yet? Maybe you should lay off the hair dye!
Ted Danson said in 1988 that in ten years the world's oceans were so polluted that in ten years they would be essentially dead. Go take a swim Ted,
and take Whoopie
|The ten year
clock has been restarted.
Al Gore now states that we are doomed and there is no hope! OH
says that we are heating up our earth like a "frying pan" and that we have
less than 10 years
to save the planet from total destruction!
He claims that
scenes like those shown in the movie "The
Day After Tomorrow" will soon come true mainly
because of George Bush's
irresponsible environmental policies.
Streisand knows all about Global Warming
Never mind the
REAL science, world renowned Global Warming Expert(!) BARBARA
STRIESAND gives us the final word: "We
are in a global warming emergency state". What a moron!
the singer, and renound global scientist(!), says that "We
are in a global warming emergency state".
"I mean, for
the United States not to be part of the Kyoto treaty is unforgivable."
Dozens of other
idiot celebrities are also talking about that they KNOW
FOR SURE that global warming is happening,
and it is SURELY man's
Britain has just backed off the Kyoto treaty as well because of a lack
of real evidence of Global Warming. Several countries in Europe have already been caught violating the Kyoto treaty they signed. REAL
scientists know that you can't take a 100 year slice of the million year
old Earth and proclaim that they know for sure global warming actually
how much energy does it take to run the air conditioning at your mansion?
Maybe you should
downsize since you have enough space to house a dozen families!
Ya friggin' hypocrite!
The main source
of greenhouse gasses, what the envirowackos claim is causing global warming,
is NOT the use
of fossil fuels, it is because of WATER VAPOR!
Warming and Junk Science
what? Antarctica's getting colder, not warmer!
Warming Is The Greatest Hoax Ever
Research Indicates the Earth May Be Cooling
Cooling -- Newsweek Magazine
that back in the early 1970', before they ever dreamed up this global warming
nonsense, that certain scientists were sure that the Earth was cooling
and that we were headed into another Ice Age! The
truth is no one knows for sure either way if the Earth is actually warming,
not the envirowackos who are hell bent on ruining the economy of America
for their Socialist
agenda, nor certainly not Barbra Streisand.
is Junk Science costing the world trillions of dollars.
Here to see the Kyoto Treaty cost meter.
Since coming into
effect February 16, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol has cost at least
while the potential
temperature saving by the year 2050 so far achieved by Kyoto is an undetectable
We are also in
an increased period of high activity on the Sun right now where it is hotter
would far surpass whatever man could do on this planet. But the libs don't
wan't you to know about this, they simply want to BLAME
Warming from Increased Sunspots
of the Sun
to Blame for Global Warming
the Sun that's to blame - not man
Streisand think George
Bush is creating this also?
Warming on Mars
A little about my politics
Although I may come off to some that
I am a rabid, war mongering, Republican but I'm really not.
I'm a registered independent who, regrettably,
voted for Bill Clinton in 92'.
But I did vote for Ronald
I grew up in the Kennedy
generation and was a Democrat.
I thought even with all his personal
John Kennedy was a great president.
VERY strong on defense, not backing down in the Cuban missile crisis which was the right thing to do.
He was also for cutting taxes which
strengthened the economy. He helped poor people and championed the civil
rights movement. I even think his brother Bobby had great promise for president.
interesting even with his flaws, and brilliant for getting us to meet with
I think Jimmy
Carter was a total failure, one of our worst presidents ever. Terrible
with the economy, weak on defense. A terrorist sympathizer who kissed Yasur
That's when I really had my Democratic
roots shaken up by his complete incompetence.
Severe retaliatory action should have
been taken in Iran. We never should have let Russia's invade Afghanistan,
which is partially why we're in the mess we are today.
When mortgage rates topped 12% and came
close to 18% I knew this guy didn't have a clue as to how to be president.
seemed to have a clear message so I voted for him and I think he saved
this country, won the cold war without firing a shot, and rebuilt the economy.
I don't know why, but I wanted to give
the Democrats one last chance, so I voted for Bill
But the dishonesty of his presidency
really turned me off.
Bill Clinton raped the poorest Americans by raising thier taxes to the highest levels ever. Make no mistake about it- the budget was ONLY
balanced by the Republicans led by Newt Gingrich
and the fact that Clinton raped the military he detested.
slashed the military and didn't defend this country from the numerous terrorist
attacks against it.
didn't take Osama bin Laden into custody the
three times after he knew he had committed terrorists acts against America.
eventually destroyed the economy that Ronald Reagan had carefully set into place landing us in a recession, even with the internet boom.
He raped the military until it was
a shell of what it had been under Reagan's
firm hand that won the cold war.
then embarrassed himself with his sex / lying / impeachment scandal and
I felt he should have been should have been thrown out of office.
By the end of Clintons
term I had concluded the Democratic Party I knew, champion of the underdog did not exist any longer. I still stood in the same place. I didn't leave the Democrats, they left me.
There's was no way I was going to vote
to for Al Gore, and I really didn't know enough
about George Bush to believe in him enough
to vote for him so I didn't vote in 2000.
But the MOMENT
second plane slammed into the World Trade Center I realized he was the
right man for the job and that Al Gore would
have been just as incompetent as Bill Clinton
was in defending America.
Most Americans never got the chance
to stand on the edge of the rubble of the World Trade Center, see the mess
and be choked by the still burning fires.
But I did, and I realized that we were at war. The Democrats treat terrorism as a crime.
Republicans know that terrorism is an act of WAR.
Their respective actions in handling
this war in the past has proven that war was declared against us.
I just don't trust the Democrats in keeping us safe because the last one to really do so was
almost 40 years ago.
John Kennedy would
have invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.
That's why it will be a LONG time before
I ever vote for a Democrat again.
They don't help anybody. Our new Virginia governor Tim Kaine, who campained
on a platform of tax reductions, raised our taxes FOUR
BILLION DOLLARS less that one week after his inauguration.
In total 24 different
taxes will be increased in Virginia.
This is what this liar said even up
to the day before the election:
called Republican opponent Jerry Kilgore's
plan a "gimmick" that would "take us back to the fiscal recklessness."
Tim Kaine said;
raise your taxes and I won't"
Kaine won the election the Democratic run
organization Raising Kaine said "And we also hope Tim will be able to show all those who voted against him that they had nothing to fear."
BILLION DOLLARS IN NEW TAXES!!!!!
Poorer people & minorities ALWAYS
vote Democratic stating that they think Democrats will help them more.
They fail to realize it is THEY
who will be hurt by these tax increases far more than wealthier people.
If you don't make a lot of money when
they increase your car's insurance tax, gasoline tax, and food tax it's
going to hurt YOU more than someone with more
The greatest job of government MUST
to FIRST defend our country from foreign invaders.
Then we must protect our economy and help it grow.
Without security, or financial stability,
we can't help anyone else.
America is based on the moral principal
that EVERY man is a free man.
That's why we are RIGHT
in our quest to defend ourselves.
Anyone who doesn't believe that Saddam
Hussien was a strong future threat to the world, harbored terrorists,
and was a terrorist mass murderer himself, has his head buried in the Iraqi
It is our RESPONSIBILITY to the help the world to remain free and strong so we can help others enjoy the God given right to freedom. We MUST
be the strongest country in the world and offer the highest morals.
It is our DUTY
because we are the strongest country on Earth.
just that simple.