The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Giuliani Says Only a Republican Can Stop Another 9/11

General Alfie - Nice to offer that one but im English and that threa dim guessing is for americans.

And i could just turn around say why dont you put your hate in just one thread?!?
 
"Rudy Giuliani's suggestion that there is some superior 'Republican' way to fight terrorism is both divisive and plain wrong. He knows better. That's not the kind of leadership he offered in the days immediately after 9/11, and it's not the kind of leadership any American should be offering now.

"As far as the facts are concerned, the current Republican administration led us into a war in Iraq that has made us less safe and undermined the fight against al Qaeda. If that's the 'Republican' way to fight terror, Giuliani should know that the American people are looking for a better plan. That's just one more reason why this election is so important; we need to elect a Democratic president who will end the disastrous diversion of the war in Iraq." -- John Edwards
 
I see. So, we cannot disagree with our president's policies because that would be "hate," is that about right? I think America beat the shit out of England over issues of freedom and self-determination, but thanks for your suggestions.

Oh, how's America's favorite Poodle Blair doing? A bit long in the tooth, isn't he? He's a good boy, house trained, too.

I just think that if you vote someone in you should give them respect. Thats all :D
 
Whats interesting to me is why Republicans seem to need someone to follow (the authoritarian complex). Segments of them will blindly follow Giuliani regardless of his obvious character flaws just as they have President Bush.

Just look at talk radio ..... the dittoheads hang on every word of Rush Limbaugh as if he were a god. On TV and radio, they have the authoritarians in Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck. The religious among them follow the likes of Pat Robertson, Falwell and Dobson.

You just don't see that with Democrats. They think for themselves and question their leaders. Everyone wonders why Air America was not as popular as Conservative Talk Radio ..... there is your answer. It takes followers to become an audience willing to swallow the kool-aid and blindly accept the partisan crap that's put out over the airwaves.
 
Here we go again the Republican Party is using the old fear tactic to win again in 2008. They used in 2004 to win but backfired in 2006. Here the is the party that can't get it fact straight and has lied to American public in regards to war in Iraq.
 
Well, I didn't vote for Bush.

This thread is about Giuliani's statement that voting for a Democrat for president will guarantee that America will be attacked by terrorists, so perhaps we can use his statement to explore your notion of respect. As such, let me ask you: how can I, a Democrat and a resident of the City of New York, respect someone like Giuliani when he makes such antagonistic, thuggish remarks?

Because you should be able to respect what the majority wants. And then when it comes round to vote you just vote against him! Easy as that. Like when i vote in May ill vote for the labour people but ill still respect the people who win because thats what you should do in my opinion. No point im hating all the time. Only one way to change is by voting aint it.

And it makes sence i mean democrats dont like war so then terrorists will know that Americas weak.

And its not a scare tactic. jeesh!
 
And it makes sence i mean democrats dont like war so then terrorists will know that Americas weak.

Democrats may not LIKE war but they have never been weak about entering war when necessary.

You live in England.

Ever heard of FDR and WWII? He was a Democrat.

And Democrats were fully supportive of Bush sending troops into Afghanistan to go after bin Laden and al Qaeda and the Taliban.

It's the completely unnecessary war Bush lied to start in Iraq that we're opposed to.

And its not a scare tactic. jeesh!

It is absolutely nothing less.
 
Argh my last post in this thread because ill just get annoyed lol.

Not sure what happened in each war (world war 1 and 2) but if im right then im pretty sure it was thanks to Russia and the fact that Germany was having to fight a war on both sides that caused them to loose?!? If that was world war 1 then ignore that :D <<see im willing to say when im wrong! If i am?!?!

And yeah what a mistake it was getting rid of Saddam he was such a nice guy. thats sarcasm btw.

And yeah were going to end up living in a world were all these countries who dont like the western way are going to be able to do anything, because the western goverments will be too scared to take action against them because of there afraid of loosing power. But yeah you probably think that view is crazy, because its not your own so it must be wrong.
 
And yeah what a mistake it was getting rid of Saddam he was such a nice guy. thats sarcasm btw.


Contrary to Bush & Co's claims and implications to manipulate America into an unnecessary war, Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 and he was not a threat to us.
 
When we were bombed on 9/11 this administration has taken the fight to the terrorists. Granted, it hasn't been perfect, but it has been offensive instead of the defensive posture the Democrats have, and have said they will take again.
Do you honestly think that any sitting President, Republican or Democrat would not have done the same thing! We went after the terrorists in Afghanistan, the country where they resided. Regardless of how you spin it ..... they were not in Iraq and Iraq is where we have become mired in a Vietnam-like swamp ..... not Afghanistan.

Thanks go to Bush and his cabal of Conservative Think Tankers (Feith, Perle, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Cheney et al) who to a man failed to answer the bell when this country called them to serve. Their pin-headed arrogance has cost our military thousands of lives and tens of thousands in need of lifetime medical care.

In addition we have alienated our allies and the price tag for the Iraq war is rapidly approaching a half trillion dollars ... a bill that will be passed on to future generations to pay. :mad:
 
Whats interesting to me is why Republicans seem to need someone to follow (the authoritarian complex). Segments of them will blindly follow Giuliani regardless of his obvious character flaws just as they have President Bush.

Just look at talk radio ..... the dittoheads hang on every word of Rush Limbaugh as if he were a god. On TV and radio, they have the authoritarians in Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck. The religious among them follow the likes of Pat Robertson, Falwell and Dobson.

You just don't see that with Democrats. They think for themselves and question their leaders. Everyone wonders why Air America was not as popular as Conservative Talk Radio ..... there is your answer. It takes followers to become an audience willing to swallow the kool-aid and blindly accept the partisan crap that's put out over the airwaves.

Did u read this before pressing the "submit reply"???

If u think that "thinking for themselves" is defined as crucifying anything and everything BushRepublican (kudos to NickCole for the creation of a new word) - well then ur right

but ur not right

that's not thinking for themselves

it's sad that the once great smelter has been brought into the "80 think"

Ironic really - that ur trying to make the reverse argument - when ur exhibiting the very quality u claim to deplore
 
Did u read this before pressing the "submit reply"???
Read it! son, I wrote it ...... every word strung together into sentences and separated into paragraphs. A form of writing you're not very familiar with, I realize. That might explain your inability to comprehend it.

If u think that "thinking for themselves" is defined as crucifying anything and everything BushRepublican (kudos to NickCole for the creation of a new word) - well then ur right

but ur not right

that's not thinking for themselves

it's sad that the once great smelter has been brought into the "80 think"
Chance, re-read what I wrote ..... I'm describing the mindless group think of "My President, right or wrong" that you refuse to acknowledge in yourself. The fact is that Bush is a puny man. He has proven to be unworthy of the great office he holds.

Ironic really - that ur trying to make the reverse argument - when ur exhibiting the very quality u claim to deplore
In a word .... Horseshit!
 
Read it! son, I wrote it ...... every word strung together into sentences and separated into paragraphs. A form of writing you're not very familiar with, I realize. That might explain your inability to comprehend it.

Chance, re-read what I wrote ..... I'm describing the mindless group think of "My President, right or wrong" that you refuse to acknowledge in yourself. The fact is that Bush is a puny man. He has proven to be unworthy of the great office he holds.

In a word .... Horseshit!

get nasty my man

be proud

go for it

u r a shadow of ur former self
 
A large portion of Republicans don't think for themselves, but just follow along.
The same is true of a large portion of Democrats.

Then there's the vast sea of citizens who prefer neither to think, nor follow (plus some who do think, and decided not to follow at all).

Some of the posts in this thread show following, and not much thinking.

I think Rudy is looking for that sort of thing, because if he was thinking, he'd realize that there's one Democrat out there who is so much more capable of handling the possibility of 9/11 than Mr. Giuliani is that the latter ought to clamp his mouth shut on the subject -- I refer, of course, to Bill Richardson, who actually has experience outside the borders of his own town.
 
get nasty my man

be proud

go for it

u r a shadow of ur former self
Obviously you haven't read anything I've written with an open mind, and I'm sure you feel the same about me. I don't like ad hominem attacks, especially when the subject matter is so important to the future of our country. Let's just agree to disagree and let it go at that.

offtopic:
 
I lost all the respect I had for Rudy when, post 9/11, he said he "breathed easier" knowing Butthead was president.....Somehow I don't think a cheerleader for the most incompetent/stupidity/devious/lying administration in the history of the US will be elected dogcatcher, let alone president........Who would be his VP, Kerrick?
 
Senator Clinton (D-NY) released the following statement on this:

There are people right now in the world, not just wishing us harm but actively planning and plotting to cause us harm. If the last six years of the Bush Administration have taught us anything, it's that political rhetoric won't do anything to quell those threats. And that America is ready for a change.

One of the great tragedies of this Administration is that the President failed to keep this country unified after 9/11. We have to protect our country from terrorism -- it shouldn't be a Democratic fight or a Republican fight. The plain truth is that this Administration has done too little to protect our ports, make our mass transit safer, and protect our cities. They have isolated us in the world and have let Al Qaeda regroup. The next President is going to be left with these problems and will have to do what it takes to make us safer and bring Democrats and Republicans together around this common mission of protecting our nation. That is exactly what has to be done and what I am ready to do.
 
Obviously you haven't read anything I've written with an open mind, and I'm sure you feel the same about me. I don't like ad hominem attacks, especially when the subject matter is so important to the future of our country. Let's just agree to disagree and let it go at that.

offtopic:

I read everything u write with an open mind

cause u wrote it

u have cred

but by resorting to nastiness, it makes me not wanna read it

that simple
 
Back
Top