JaMarcus wrote:

Psichotic Supa' Deuce wrote:

Da Kool© 1 wrote:

* $ MiLa $ * wrote:

Da Kool© 1 wrote:

I finally went to go see it last nite. Michael Moore showed a LOT of bias, but he backed it up with documented facts. I still don't think that his movie will change all of Bush's voters mind about their pick for the 2004 election, tho. Dummies will be dummies.

Why they gotta be dummies??? :? Contrary to how it seems..EVERYONE isnt against Bush, and many people agree with the decisions he makes cause they feel he does whats right. That was just a rude comment to make. :roll: Its comments like that, that I always keep who I am voting for to myself...cause people tend to make ignorant remarks when they find out someone is going against what seems to be the majority when it comes to elections. Its like the new fad is " DONT VOTE FOR BUSH, and IF YOU ARE YOUR AN IDIOT JUST LIKE HIM "...smh :roll: :arrow:

They are dummies because they follow a man who is too incompetent to get things done the RIGHT WAY. He has done things in a such an aggressive and "war-like" fashion that has gotten thousands of American's hurt and ****. War may be the answer sometimes, but make sure you KNOW what you're getting us into before you do it.

^^cosign However, they are not dummies. they are jackasses. if anyone on this board is offended, then you are one too in my eyes. what has bush done for our community? Matter of fact what has he done that merits reward such as re-election? I'll be damned if I ever support an evil **** such as him.

Why does it have to be our community. (Keep thinking like that.)He's the president of the United States, not the president of the BLACK COMMUNITY. :roll: The fact of the matter is something should have been done in Iraq long before this as Saddam had bee in violation of the Genova Treaty requiring his allowing the weapons inspectors to do their jobs. The fact that no weapons were found does not mean that he did not have any. He had years to hide, remove and do what he wanted without the least bit of supervision. If Bush had not gone against the UN, something that Clinton also did during his term, who knows what might have happened in the meantime. Aside from that, he removed a dictator from office. Someone who butchered and **** his own people. (Sending men and women in to harms way for an unworty cause is just the same thing isn't it?) Well actually I mean the 90 or so % of the population who was not of his people. He catered only to that small 10 or so% that proscribed to his same form of Islam. (Ya know Bush doens't give a damn about anyone else outside his rich, corporate inner circle and network, right?) As far as I'm concerned, he should be re-elected (Wow). I mean what has the democratic ticket said other about the war other then... "Bush is not handling the situation right, we need the support of the blah blah blah" Their ticket might as well be anti-bush because that's all they're saying and what's sickening is that people are falling for it without looking at the real histroy of Iraq, Saddam and the issues at front. Next thing you know someones gonna say we invaded Iraq for the **** (Last, I hear the a US corporation had an **** contract over there.....hmmmm...). :roll: Give me a break :arrow: