• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 2/8/18)
See more
See less

A VERY unscientific poll, Bush or Kerry?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LaurieP - I listened to the debates, I heard Kerry's whole bit about 'pass the global test'. No we have no idea how Kerry will try to protect the U.S. because all he says is he 'has a plan'. What the heck is his 'Plan'? I must have heard him say he 'has a plan' 15 times in that debate but have no clue what he would do.

    Also, we are not in Iraq alone. Don't forget there is an Alliance in Iraq. Yes, the U.S. is the predominant country but only because we are the largest country there.

    Comment


    • horseless, you simply have to stop getting your info from soundbytes - like LaurieP said, that isn't what Kerry said, no matter how badly the spin machine wants you to think so.

      And really, just becuase you know exactly what Kerry said doesn't mean you have to vote for him, it just means you sound a bit more credible when you vote for Bush, ya know?

      Try these on for size:

      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> John Kerry Will Never Give Another Country A Veto Over American Security. John Kerry said that when it comes to America’s national security, he'll never give a veto to any other country. And he vowed to take any action necessary to protect the United States from immediate danger. But unlike Bush, Kerry will be honest with the American people and the world about what he is doing and why - the global test is not asking for a permission slip, but making sure that the decisions you make stand up to scrutiny and are backed by facts. John Kerry said that “no president through all of American history has ever ceded and nor would I the right to pre-empt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do it in a way that passes the test. That passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing. And you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.” [First Presidential Debate (Miami, FL), 9/30/04] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Bush Take Kerry’s Statement “Out Of Context” And “Pushed The Limits Of Subjective Interpretation”. The Associated Press wrote that “Cheney took Kerry out of context in quoting him as saying that he favored a global test before he would deploy U.S. troops to pre-empt an attack on the United States. Kerry said in his debate that he would not cede to anyone the right to move pre-emptively against a threat but that he would do so in a way that proved to Americans and the world that he had taken the action for a legitimate reason.” Cox News also reported that “Cheney's comments, though, excluded the gist of Kerry's remarks.” And the New York Times wrote that “Mr. Bush pushed the limits of subjective interpretation … Mr. Kerry has repeatedly said that he would not give up the right to act pre-emptively ‘in any way necessary to protect the United States,’ but has suggested that any president would need to demonstrate legitimate reasons for such an action.” [Associated Press, 10/6/04; Cox News, 10/6/04; New York Times, 10/8/04] <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
      Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

      Comment


      • DMK - As I already said, I LISTENED to the debate!!!! I know what he said.

        Comment


        • Also, read this and gag
          http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mh...041101&s=klein

          What amazes me is it's so in our face that we can't see it!
          On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog

          Comment


          • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Bush supporters is they don't realize WHAT they are really supporting. They are just supporting the Rep, be he good, bag or ugly!
            <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
            Well, let me say first of all that this is certainly the opposite of true. I do not support Bush because he is a republican. I could care less that he was a republican, because that really means squat to me. I support Bush because he is a Christian, because his economic policies have put the economy on a upward slope despite 9/11 and the inherited recession from Clinton, and though I do not agree with everything he has done, he has gotten twice as much done in 4 years as Clinton ever did in 8, and without dragging the good name of our country in the mud. Granted, Clinton did not have his party in the majority in the house and senate, which hindered him.

            Now, I did type this long-o thing about a Democrat friend I have who does exactly what you are accusing Bush supporters of doing, but it doesn't matter. What does matter is not putting words in someone's mouth and judging them before you even know them.
            Incredible Invisible Bookworm Clique!
            Proud Closet Canterer!
            "Understanding is the first step to acceptance, and only with acceptance can there be recovery."
            The Goblet of Fire

            Comment


            • Puhleeze, it is an alliance that consists of, mainly, small countries that we were able to strongarm. Not our usual array of allies who can actually contribute troops/money to the cause...

              So, what is it about the statement John Kerry said that “no president through all of American history has ever ceded and nor would I the right to pre-empt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do it in a way that passes the test. That passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing. And you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.” that makes you think Kerry cannot protect you equally as well as Bush, if not better?
              Laurie

              Comment


              • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Summershyne7:
                I support Bush because he is a Christian <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                So is Kerry.

                Difference being, he won't legislate his faith.

                Comment


                • Summer, are you kidding?
                  In 2000, Bush inherited the "stronget U.S. economy in history." And where is it now??

                  And you honestly think that he has not been dragging "the good name of our country in the mud"??? Seriously?!?!
                  Amwrider: May the fleas of a thousand camels infest their genitalia and may their arms be too short to scratch.

                  Comment


                  • That is exactly the "global test" statement that was being referred to. Kerry won't do anything without the permission of the world. He thinks that our stand in the eyes of other nations is more important than attemting to oust known terrorists before they attack. And you forget that Kerry also voted numerous times to slash defense funds and against sending money to our troops. Kerry would throw america into the terrorists hands and leave the Iraqi people to rot.
                    Incredible Invisible Bookworm Clique!
                    Proud Closet Canterer!
                    "Understanding is the first step to acceptance, and only with acceptance can there be recovery."
                    The Goblet of Fire

                    Comment


                    • That's bull, the recession started just as clinton was going out of office.
                      I also think it's even bigger bull for Kerry to be up there quoting James about faith and works. If his faith is so great, then his votes and policies would support it. So, his faith has no works, b/c he doesn't activate it in his life and work, therefore it is dead.
                      Incredible Invisible Bookworm Clique!
                      Proud Closet Canterer!
                      "Understanding is the first step to acceptance, and only with acceptance can there be recovery."
                      The Goblet of Fire

                      Comment


                      • And yet Bush has sunk BILLIONS of dollars into a missile defense shield which not only has yet to be fielded, but it doesn't even work (I wrote my Master's thesis on this very topic).
                        You don't just throw $$ at defense, you have to be smart about it.
                        Amwrider: May the fleas of a thousand camels infest their genitalia and may their arms be too short to scratch.

                        Comment


                        • *sigh*... Summershyne, Kerry has SAID that he would do WHATEVER necessary to protect America against terrorists, and would NOT cede that authority to other nations. He's said it a million times.

                          How hard did Bush really try to put together a coalition? Not very. He gave it a half-hearted effort.

                          What Kerry is saying is that the president needs to put together a case that will LEGITIMIZE our decision to go to war, and in all honesty, that should not be difficult. If Bush hadn't been in such a godawful hurry, he probably could have done it himself. But it was obvious from the get-go that he was never really very interested in that.

                          Kerry thinks our stand in the eyes of other nations is IMPORTANT. Not the MOST important thing, but still important. Our international standing is something that deserves more attention than Bush has given it, but that doesn't mean it's the be-all/end-all.

                          Comment


                          • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Horseless In Georgia:
                            I'm not saying there will not be another 9/11 type of attack in the States, but the way I look at it I want a commander in chief that wants to protect the U.S. I don't want someone who will give in to the United Nations and pass the 'global test' which John Kerry talks of. Fighting terrosim and not in our country helps to ensure the Unites State's freedom and security. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            This is one of the areas I've looked at long and hard when deciding whether or not to vote for Bush again.

                            After 9/11, there was a HUGE outpouring of international support for America, just as there was a large surge in patriotism at home. The leader of our country could have skillfully parlayed that broad support into a meaningful strike against both terrorism and--more importantly--the factors that create and nurture terrorism.

                            Bush had support for going after Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Most reasonable people understand and support the right of a soveriegn nation to hunt down the people who attack it. I AM irritated that Bush was so stupidly obnoxious to people who could have (and probably would have, with better handling) made the job easier. He and his policies quickly threw away most of the international and a lot of the domestic goodwill that came as a silver lining to 9/11.

                            Iraq probably was supposed to be a "short, victorious war" to rebuild support and pump up the economy with wartime productivity and spending. The reasons for the invasion were extremely flimsy, even at the time (I worked in the oil industry at the time, and everyone representing the 'majors' *knew* we invaded Iraq in order to secure oil. Heck, they were all maneuvering for the exploitation contracts.). Why didn't we invade, oh, one of the places we KNEW had or was developing nukes, was practicing mass genocide, and/or was sponsoring terrorism? Oh, yeah. 'Cause they 1. don't have anything we want or 2. are already supplying us with things we need. Saudi oil, anyone?

                            This could go on and on, and list all the programs he has very quietly gutted: from cutting funding to any program that even provides information on birth control or family planning, here or abroad, to rolling back environmental laws across the board and practically giving our natural resources on national land to large corporations (Heck, if we're gonna let someone permenantly destroy our natural parks, I think that we the taxpayers ought to get more than a buck or two an acre.), to the deplorable state of the pay, housing, and equipment of the men and women we're asking to go into harm's way.

                            The short version is: I am okay with arrogance. I fully support the right of a sovereign nation to take whatever measures it feels necessary to protect itself and its citizens. HOWEVER. I absolutely do not forgive willful ignorance and stupidity, particularly in a leader, and deeply resent how he has used the confusion and uncertainly of the past few years to advance his own, private agenda.

                            Bush as made many questionable decisions, mishandled a lot of situations, and failed to capitalize on numerous opportunities. That alone is not enough to make me vote against him, since I don't think we can expect our leaders to be super-human.

                            That said, I will not vote for him again because: He steadfastly refuses to admit to making any mistakes, let alone learning something from them. He fires experienced advisors who do not agree with what he has already decided, and instead surrounds himself with "Yes" men who'll tell him what he wants to hear. He brags that he doesn't listen to new information, because then issues become "confusing" (and might not be what he wants to hear). He limits public access to his administration to an unsettling degree, with the so-called 'loyalty oath' being just one example of, again, only allowing access to furvent supporters. And, last but not least, during these uncertain times, Bush has taken more vacation days from his job than any U.S. president in history (which might be a good thing if you don't like him, but personally I'd rather have a president who does his friggin' job and doesn't whine about how hard it is).

                            This pattern scares me. It scares me to the point that I will, unhappily, go against my Republican/NRA roots and vote for a <shudder> Democrat.
                            ---------------------------

                            Comment


                            • Well, the missile defense shield may not work now, but who says it won't?
                              Hydrogen technologies, also getting lots of research money, don't work now, but who says they won't?
                              Just because you don't see an immediate result, doesn't mean that it won't eventually work. At least Bush is trying to do something. I haven't seen Kerry give any alternatives.
                              Incredible Invisible Bookworm Clique!
                              Proud Closet Canterer!
                              "Understanding is the first step to acceptance, and only with acceptance can there be recovery."
                              The Goblet of Fire

                              Comment


                              • Summer, that's bull?

                                Here's a QUOTE from the CIA's World Factbook:
                                "The years 1994-2000 witnessed solid increases in real output, low inflation rates, and a drop in unemployment to below 5%. The year 2001 saw the end of boom psychology and performance, with output increasing only 0.3% and unemployment and business failures rising substantially."

                                Where did you get YOUR information?
                                Amwrider: May the fleas of a thousand camels infest their genitalia and may their arms be too short to scratch.

                                Comment


                                • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Summershyne7:
                                  That's bull, the recession started just as clinton was going out of office.
                                  I also think it's even bigger bull for Kerry to be up there quoting James about faith and works. If his faith is so great, then his votes and policies would support it. So, his faith has no works, b/c he doesn't activate it in his life and work, therefore it is dead. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                  Why must a politician legislate his faith? What on earth is wrong with recognizing that not EVERYONE in this country is a Catholic and believes abortion is wrong?

                                  I'm honestly curious... how do you reconcile Bush's devout faith and his assertion that all life is sacred with the fact that as governor of Texas, he executed more prisoners than anyone in history? Including the mentally retarded? How is that policy reflective of his faith?

                                  Thanks, btw, for whoever quoted that stuff from the Vatican earlier. It's interesting to know that even among the most devout, there's a little bit of dissent about exactly what one's faith should dictate.

                                  Comment


                                  • If you're going to quote info from 2001, you have to factor in 9/11. the economy went completely bust after 9/11, which was not the fault of Bush, nor could he have done anything about it or the loss of business b/c of it.
                                    Incredible Invisible Bookworm Clique!
                                    Proud Closet Canterer!
                                    "Understanding is the first step to acceptance, and only with acceptance can there be recovery."
                                    The Goblet of Fire

                                    Comment


                                    • There have been years and years of research on missile defense (and billions of $$ already spent)--Bush is just in too deep now to ADMIT A MISTAKE and let the program go. At least Reagan recognized it wouldn't work and stopped sinking money into it.
                                      I'm not asking for an immediate result--I'm asking to be shown SOMETHING that has come out of all that research.
                                      You watch--even if Bush gets re-elected, I bet that the missile defense issue will slowly, and quietly, go away.
                                      Amwrider: May the fleas of a thousand camels infest their genitalia and may their arms be too short to scratch.

                                      Comment


                                      • Bush inherited the recession, but I can't blame Clinton for it. I can only blame my own occupation - the computer industry. Hate to say it, but the whole Dot-Com boom to bust was orchestrated and propelled by the computer nerds in the world for their own gain. What was so bad is that the foundation of the economy suddenly got based on anything related to the internet.

                                        I support the tax cuts that Bush pushed for because they spur growth of small businesses, which make up for over 75% of our economy. To repeal those cuts, which IS an increase in taxes, will halt growth and push this country back into a deep recession.

                                        I don't like Bush's spending policies however.

                                        Invested - until you have top secret clearance and access to inside information - your analysis of any weapons system under development is a guess at best.
                                        Love my Northampton CANTER Cutie - Cessna

                                        Comment


                                        • invested - PATRIOT MISSILES
                                          Love my Northampton CANTER Cutie - Cessna

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X