MadridMan,

Who says I have to be gracious and humble in victory? But you're right, I'm not.

I'm not bragging about a Republican victory, there barely was one, and I think we will be trounced in the next election. And I have nothing against any voter who feels they're voting in what their opinion is the best candidate.

I'm bragging and lording over, the victory over a dirty, rotten propagandist who slandered an honorable man. And the victory is that all the dirty tricks tried by the Democratic party, such as Mr. Moore's film, Dan Rather's frauds, and the other frauds, misinformation and unfairness, didn't amount to a hill of beans. Even so, I can't even imagine how filthy ugly the Democrats will be in the next election. The media is what has split this country in two. And if the libs want reconciliation, they're going to have to come to us this time.

WHO says you have to be gracious in victory? I thought this was one of the earliest lessons taught to us by our parents.

(insert sarcastic tone of voice here)
But back to Fahrenheit 9/11 - since this is the topic - I'm sure that within another year or two the US will have exercised its God-given right to pre-emptively attack another helpless/hapless/non-threatening country for reason number 37 of the "1001 Semi-Believable Excuses for Pre-Emptive Attacks" handbook. When this happens, Michael Moore will likely have another blockbuster documentary film. And if not Michael Moore, there'll probably be another, whole new breed of exposer-filmmakers ready to take his place because, afterall, there's SO DARN MUCH MATERIAL with which to work.
(end sarcastic tone here)

Wearily, MadridMan

P.S. If John Kerry would've won, do you think ANY of his supporters here on the message board would shove that result in the face of the Bush Supporters? I suspect not. Well, I'd HOPE they wouldn't. That wouldn't be right, in my opinion. I certainly wouldn't do it. That would be shameful. A little humility would do you some good, gazpacho.

gazpacho wrote: "...the victory over a dirty, rotten propagandist who slandered an honorable man..."

gazpacho--haven't you heard? Bush actually WON.

By the way, MadridMan, we may be lucky. Do you really think this Congress would have let Kerry accomplish anything at all? And Kerry would have been blamed for the mistakes Bush has already made. Let's see if Bush can clean up the messes he has made. And since he probably won't, gazpacho has given us a big vote of confidence ("I think we will be trounced in the next election"). Thank you, I feel better already.

For our country's sake, I hope Bush turns out to be right. But if rallying behind our president involves sending my now 16 year old son off to fight in Iraq or Iran, Syria, N. Korea..., it won't be happening. And you're right, MM, there should be some fascinating documentaries coming up in the next few years.

Should be interesting how the Europeans respond to us Americans when we visit next. Who's gonna design our new T-shirts? "It's not my fault, I never voted for him!"

I have seen "Roger and Me" and would probably enjoy more of Mikey Moore's films if he would just finally admit that he really is a CAPITALIST.
It is a system he says he despises, yet he has made a ton of money not only for the Weinstein brothers at Miramax, but for himself as well.

Dig if you will the picture:
On the morning of 9-11 Mikey is in his posh upper westside condo in Manhattan. While sloshing down his Starbucks coffee and finishing his seventh Krispy Kreme doughnut, he witnesses the second plane strike the tower..."Dude! If I do this right, I can make lot's of money!"

Imagine you have lost a military son or daughter in Iraq. Would YOU want some fat smug gasbag with a camara in your living room to film YOUR grief and sorrow?

Aidance,
The U.S. Armed Forces is made up of volunteers and has been longer than your son has been alive. No matter what you may have heard, even a lameduck president like Bush will never reinstate the draft - it would be political suicide.

Cogito cogito ergo sum cogito

Bush probably won't establish a new draft for the military, but Congress might. If the number of people available for duty falls below a specific level, what choice is there? They certainly can't allow fewer troops to do the job for the sake of expedient politics.

If it does happen, it will be a problem for the Republicans, but they'll find a way to put a portion of the blame on the Democrats as well, because they'll have no choice but vote for the same measures to protect those who are already serving.

But there's one thing that Republicans had better learn quickly. It was a smug attitude on the part of Democrats, that they "couldn't lose," and that they were "always right," that brought them down. If the Republicans don't get off that same kick, they'll meet the same fate.

Wolf

MM, please, DON'T write more like this! Although I know it's not of much or any importance for you (or you might even dislike it), if you go on doing so, and after your (IMO) big improvement in your board administration policy, I may end up changing my mind and liking you (not in a romantic way ), after all our history in the board. :p

I suppose there would be some less-humble democrats around here, had Kerry won. People is people any party.

Wolf: I didn't find the right moment to write it, but your partially changing positions on GWB, after findind and being open to other info sources, and voting consequently honours you. It's not because it was GWB, if democrats (to you in the USA) or PSOE (to me in Spain) had done the same, had lied its own people for such awful purposes, they would deserve a punishment vote regardless of political affinity to their party.

It's brave to face it and react, and even braver to acknowledge it here, where you could (and have been) be critisized for doing so by those who have monolitic neverchanging postures or resented debate opposers. Hats off!

MadridMan -

Thank you for voicing my thought & writing my sentiments so well!!! They couldn't have been phrased better. Plus your saying it exempts me from having to - and that keeps me from getting upset once again -

Audience, I truly believe your comments are in the backs of a large percent of 48-49% voters who voted as we did ...

This board, among many other things in our lives, exists because freedom of speech still exists in our constitution - lets all hope that freedom doesn't get any more trod on in the next few years ....

Madridman,

Of this I am certain, that the media and Hollywood will attack conservatism until the end of time. But, for now, it was unsuccessful and that is the only thing I'm crowing about.

I can't be gracious to the people that voted for Mr. Heinz, because I don't even believe they voted for him, just against President Bush. If the media would have been fair, they would have challenged and criticized both candidates and exposed a lot of the information about Mr. Heinz' past.

I can see someone not liking President Bush's policies and not voting for him, like Wolf, but anyone who would vote for (okay) Kerry, just doesn't know about his past.

Wolf,
If I hadn't seen so many cases of inconsistancies in mankind during my life, you being a Veit Nam Veteran and voting for Kerry would certainly surprise me. Did you ever get the chance to read "Unfit for Command"? I wouldn't vote for him for dog catcher after I read this book.

Gazpacho,

When I was in Nam, I had close contact with swift boats on several occasions. They took my team up river to drop points, and picked us up again when our mission was completed. Having spent enough time in country with them, in just that phase of operations, I believe strongly that there were some of these crews who actually did perform at unbelievably high levels of risk. Kerry may well have been one of them.

No, I haven't read the book, but I intend to do so. In fact I ordered it from B&N two days ago, and it should arrive today or tomorrow. I'm rather interested in reading why they actually feel he is unfit.

On the final decision to vote for Kerry. Two things. John McCain's stance in support of Kerry on issues relating to his war record, and his integrity. McCain's views mean a lot to me.

Secondly, the conspicuous absence of Colin Powell on the major campaign trail for Bush over the last two months. I believe he plans on stepping down, and since I believe Powell is a truely honest man, believe he is doing so because he no longer believes in the man he serves.

Though that might seem like minor issues to some people, they were of major importance to me, because I believe in Powell and McCain, and would not only support them in a run for the White House, but would hit the campaign trail in any way I could to help them attain that goal.

I guess you might say that two Republicans whom I respect and admire, helped sway my vote.

But still, it wasn't an easy decision to make to be honest. I cannot forget the names on the wall. I visit there as often as I can. I had to answer to them when I made this decision, and that was the toughest part of making the call.

Wolf

John McCain and Colin Powell are both men who are well respected across the political spectrum. Both have many year track records of integrity.
And, so importantly, neither man has ever resorted to the use of gimmicks (or falsehoods) to convince people (of any nationality and/or of any US political party) of that basic human integrity.

And those are words out of the mouth of a long time liberal ....

I comlpetely agree with the statement that Colin Powell very possibly will step down - his move into the background spoke louder than words - and by not coming out and disagreeing w/ policy in public was his way of maintaining his integrity.