Who's more qualified?

[wajajaja]

Re: Who's more qualified?

i like bush except for the phony medicare reform and the revamping of the fair labor standard act. <br /> If you work for a living its going to be ok if you work 60 hours for the same pay as you got at 40,, <br />the labor secratary suggest that the way to balance the bottom line is to reconfigure wages so the worker is paid a lower reg time so it equals the total pay, i didnt get that just right but you can check it out, alternative two she suggest that worker near the top limit get a raise on straight time so that they are excluded from overtime.<br /><br /> What ever happened to getting paid for what you do, and the sacred 40 work week. REPUBLICAN <br /><br /> IN 1934 CONGRESS DECIDED THE STANDARD OF LIVING WAGE WOULD BE BASED ON 40 HRS. AND THAT THE WORKER. (DEFINED AS PRODUCTION,NOT SELF DETERMINNING AS IN MANAGEMENT) WOULD BE PAID 50% PER CENT PREMIUM FOR ADDITION WORK. ITS STILL A BARGAIN, BECAUSE THE COST OF BENE'S DONT GO UP. CERTAIN TAXES MAX OUT DURRING THE REG WAGE. <br />DONT PAY ME OVERTIME AND EAT MY DUST AT THE END OF 8/ OR 40 HRS. PERIOD.

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Lubedude, We are just as free here as you are there. Plus, this is the internet. I can say and do what ever I want on it I please.<br />Sorry if you don't like it, but that's your problem.

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Who's more qualified?

I agree snapperbait!

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Originally posted by snapperbait:<br />Back too the question at hand.. Who's more qualified?<br /><br />This Man.. Bob Graham..<br />

EDIT: Sorry, but I think that Bush is better for the job cause I think he really cares.<br />That's all and I'm really done with all this trolling stuff.

 

[JB]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Wrong, Toad.<br /><br />This is iboats bulletin board and you can only say what is acceptable on this board.<br /><br />It seems nobody wants to debate issues that matter, simply to bash one another or one candidate or another.<br /><br />Too bad. The original question had promise.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Who's more qualified?

n/m

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Who's more qualified?

JB,<br />I realize I have to play by iboat rules if I'm on this site, but my post to Lubedude was specifically directed to him. He is telling me I can't voice my opinions or "bash" Bush because I'm not American, not a voter and I'm not a veteran. I'm saying that's BS.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Originally posted by Toad2001:<br />JB,<br />I realize I have to play by iboat rules if I'm on this site, but my post to Lubedude was specifically directed to him. He is telling me I can't voice my opinions or "bash" Bush because I'm not American, not a voter and I'm not a veteran. I'm saying that's BS.

As one of Lubedude's countrymen, and also for my own behaviour in this thread, I appologise, and will try to offer an explaination.<br />Toad, The USA is in flux, like it seldom has been in the past.These are very trying times in the aftermath of 9/11/01, the ecomomy, assault on core beliefs, religous and other lost freedoms, ect...In short, so very,very much rides on the choices we will make in the near future, that the very subject rubs exposed bare nerves. <br />Just as with your country, we allow no dictatorships, no tyranies, or kingdoms.<br />We choose our government. But it has been said that such self-governing has a fatal flaw...Once people realise that they can vote themselves a raise, it's pretty-much chaos from then on.<br />I do not personally feel we have reached that fatal level yet, but we can readily see the effects of this flaw.<br />No Earthly government is perfect and flawless. But we are what we make it. Just as in your country, there are many ideologies that make-up the administrating-forces of our nation.<br />Knowing this, and that, for the past 30-something years, liberal majorities have shaped a nation of lazy people with thier hands out south of your border . Growing sick of that, and allowing the 'pendulum' to swing the other way, there are those who have lost a great deal of power, just as there are those who have gained a great deal. This subject is a very hard one for us to remain unbiased on. I have my own very strong convictions about what we will become after November, one way or the other. One way is simply NOT acceptable...The other way offers little, yet real hope of survival as a nation.<br />When someone from another country posts pictures, funny or otherwise, of one who means the very hope --- or the threat, it's hard to take at times.<br />Regardless of your opinion of your own Prime Minister ,his leadership abilites, or patriotism for his own nation--- How did my posting (as an American) of that pic make you feel?<br />I ask that you place yourself in our shoes when you express your opinion, just as you would if you were an American . The suject of this thread asks a very important question.<br />I've given my opinion already. So have you.<br />Peace, neighbor.

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Who's more qualified?

I guess we are both in the same boat. You feel threatened if Bush doesn't stay in power, I feel threatened if he does. I wonder why more wasn't done to stop the war in Iraq. Particularly its timing. There were plenty of other options. So many who support him today will look back and wonder why more wasn't done to stop him. If he gets another 4 years of war mongering, I fear irreparable damage will be done to the Middle East, and who knows where else. <br /><br />PS-Your picture wasn't offensive. I could care less. You probably can't name the leaders of the other three party leaders who will be running for our Federal election in a couple of months anyway. If you could, without doing a google search, that would be impressive.

 

[Mr.Ladyfish]

Re: Who's more qualified?

What's with you Canadians anyway? Another site I visit has another Canadian *****ing about GW, the war and America in general. Could it be that after all these years we have a president that realizes Canada isn't another state just a leech on our northern border who rides our coat tails?<br /><br />Pay attention to your own politics and we'll take care of ours.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Originally posted by Toad2001:<br />I guess we are both in the same boat. You feel threatened if Bush doesn't stay in power, I feel threatened if he does.

Why?<br /><br />

I wonder why more wasn't done to stop the war in Iraq. Particularly its timing. There were plenty of other options. So many who support him today will look back and wonder why more wasn't done to stop him. If he gets another 4 years of war mongering, I fear irreparable damage will be done to the Middle East, and who knows where else.

We are at war since 9/11, Toad. We will wage and win this war against Islamic terrorism.<br />Iraq was ruled by Sadamn Insane, who was not a good person. He Had and used WMD on his own people (the ones he did not want). He supplied weapons and training to Alqueda and Hamas.<br />You allready knew this, but for some reason, prefere his regime to anything else, and would rather he run America, by your the tone of you posts.<br />America does not want that stinking sand pile, no matter how much oil lays underneath it,given the projected price tag in lives of our sons and daughters, and money.(which, by the way, aint one-fifth of what lies under the North Sea, or half of projected field yieds in the Gulf of Mexico). <br />Why then, aren't we removing that evil Blair guy? if your 'war for oil' theory is to hold any water, we must bomb Anwar into submission.<br /><br />

<br />PS-Your picture wasn't offensive. I could care less. You probably can't name the leaders of the other three party leaders who will be running for our Federal election in a couple of months anyway. If you could, without doing a google search, that would be impressive.

No, I can't. I'm not very concerned with the admins of Canada, France, Germany, or Russia right now. I'm more concerned with N Korea, China, and the the entire Muslim-dominated enclaves of the globe, for the obvious reasons .<br />America asked for help. We got what we got..Kind of pathetic, really. Yet, we deal with it. You can only raise the price of the freedoms we defend. But we will defend them.... allone, if we have to. And for that, I'm done with Germany, Canada, France ETAL, on a very personal level...No Bic razors in 12Footer's home, to say the least.

 

[pjc]

Re: Who's more qualified?

hey toad.boy, what you as a canadian care about my countries politics. mind your own boy. seems that the canadians need to get some of thier house straitened up.<br /><br />I do believe toadboy you post what you do here to pot stir.<br /><br />if this is inflamitory......so are toadboys posts to Americans. I agree w/ JB, this thread had potential. turned into a toadboy troll.

 

[bubbakat]

Re: Who's more qualified?

A big thanks to pat lubdude and 12 footer<br /><br />

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Who's more qualified?

I don't understand what the big deal is that I'm from Canada. I could have left my location blank from the start, or I can log on under my ISP and get a new iboats user ID if I really want to and say I'm from somewhere in the US. What does it matter?<br />Yes I stir things up. Yes I speak my mind. I have good reason to. I have a unique perspective on world events. I watch the US news, British news and Canadian news. I am well informed from web research as terrorism and war imacts everyone's life significantly, but I choose to explore it. I spend a fair bit of time on this topic. What feeds do most people get?<br />If you haven't noticed, this site I would estimate is 90% pro Bush. I really don't care if I strike nerves or stir things up. I realize I'm in the minority, but I love the opportunity to debate the issue of Bush being in power and his policies in particular his decision to go to war in Iraq. More people should be questioning whats going on. Anyone who doesn't is a lemming. <br />I'm sick of people slamming Kerry and then a rebuttal like the one above occurred against Bush, and all of the sudden a line was crossed. Lets make one thing straight. Bush and Kerry are both party nominees. They are fair game for critique and satire until election day. By anyone.

 

[snapperbait]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Toad and your fellow Canadians.. You and I may agree on some things, but on this one I gotta stand with 12Footer, Lubedude, and the boys... This is America.. We'll handle it! <br /><br />However, fellers, I understand why ol' Toady might be worried.... If Bush got some more bad info from his buddies at the CIA, and he got wind that Canada just might have some WMD's stashed away somewheres, and maybe some terrorists too.... Bush just might try to start a war with Canada...

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Who's more qualified?

That's all right Toad, you had Chretian, we've got Democrats. I'll bet you cried all night after he left office.<br /><br />All below, C&P<br /><br />

<br />Last week the North American clone of Jaques Chirac, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, was heard saying that "Canada is a better country than the United States because we've got gun control, abortion rights and no death penalty." Yesterday I was listening to the replay of Fox News Sunday, on C-Span radio, when Tony Snow responded to the effect that "Chretian thinks Canada is superior because their killers aren't executed but their children are, and their citizens can't defend themselves."

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Who's more qualified?

I was never fond of Chrétien. He was an embarrassment. He was publicly overheard referring to Bush as a moron. That was completely inappropriate. (Not saying I disagree with the reference).<br /><br />Now we've got Paul Martin. He's not squeaky clean, and he wasn't elected into office, but I think he's the best candidate for the job, certainly better than Chrétien. I will vote for him.

 

[OBJ]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Had to laugh Toad....sounds like your elections aren't much different than some of ours. Ya' gotta sorta pick the lesser of the two evils????<br /><br />I will say this without getting into a big debate which I don't do.....for a long time the US was the land of the free and wooses....don't know if I spelled that right...meaning if some second or third world party gave us a black eye....they might....just might get a "strong" letter of rebuke saying how upset we are with the situation.<br /><br />Oh we had a couple that tried to show a little backbone but most came up short...even GW senior pulled up short in Desert Storm when he should have finished the job and got Sadaam then.<br /><br />Is GW right for the job? He's got a lotta short comings for sure. But what he has done is given the US back it's backbone. He has made it perfectly clear that if any country, nation or party blacks our eye, don't expect any letters or conversation of rebuke.....we are going to give you two black eyes and a bloody nose.<br /><br />No, I don't like seeing our boys getting killed. And I'd like to see some affrimative progress. But then we aren't ducking bullets and bombs from terrorist on our home soil. GW has taken the fight to them.<br /><br />Will the US, or Canada for that matter, ever see the perfect candidate for government leadership? Probably not. They all have some short comings. But still nice to know that you and I still have the freedom to pick the candidate we like best.<br /><br />AND...as Dennis Miller would say...."That's just my opinion....I could be wrong".

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Who's more qualified?

OBJ-Thanks for the civil reply.<br />Very cool.

 

[SoulWinner]

Re: Who's more qualified?

Toad2001,<br /><br />Just wanted so say " I love you brother." We totally dissagree on prolly just about everything, but that's what some brothers do. I hope Paul Martin does right by your beautiful country. <br /><br />I would like to mention that you might feel safer because of Bush and the Iraq war, if for no other reason than the terrorists are flooding into Iraq. There the US military is far more capable of handeling them than an aircrew aboard a commercial flight. Does that make any sense? <br /><br />Be good to yourself