DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads - Forums: Thoughts For The Day: Argument from a bush fan...

Electric guitars, Classical guitars, Guitar amps and more.

zZounds.com offers recording equipment for starting and experienced musicians. Find the best prices on electric guitars, acoustic guitars, classical guitars and more.

Forums > The General Forum: Thoughts For The Day

Argument from a bush fan...

moam	Date: November 4, 2004 @ 10:12 PM I am kinda dumb when it comes to politics...I suck at arguing them. I only hear info mainly from one of my best friends who is very smart with politics and who is going into polotics in the future. I just had a "debate" with one of my friends and she is really on bush's side and some of this stuff I don't even know how to respond to it. I would like to hear what everyone here thinks of this and what stuff you agree/disagree with and what stuff is true/not true. (I am JohnMike497) "JohnMike497: so bush won the election... Stacy: yep, excellent JohnMike497: or not Stacy: I stayed up until 12:30 on tuesday watching the election Stacy: or yes Stacy: I take it that you voted for Kerry and wasted your vote JohnMike497: see my friend alex knows SOOO much about politics, he is going in to be something political when he moves out, the way he and a bunch of people he knows sees it, there will be a draft, bush says there wont be, but when bush needs more oil and without the support of other people, we will have to fight to get it, and we will need troops, also bush as well as all of the us is hated by like everybody now, alexs friend who left the usa had to lie and say he was from canada in order to NOT be hated, also bush is obsessed with oil, and kerry wants to build hydrogen battery things for cars instead because oil is harder to get AND we will run out eventually, bush also doesnt care about global warming JohnMike497: i dont think kerry is great, but to me he is the better of two evils, and if there is a draft like me and alex predict, we are going to protest at the white house, not even joking JohnMike497: plus i am democrat, i am hardly a republican at all, so i vote democrat JohnMike497: i also hate the fact that bush makes laws based on HIS religion, like with gay marriages, it bugs me that because the bible says that he's making them illegal, not everybody belives in that stuff and someone who doesnt believe shouldnt be forced to follows rules of religion, just my thoughts JohnMike497: same with the stem cell research Stacy: Ok this is what I say to this: One there won't be a draft and if there was going to be a draft it wouldn't matter who the president was, b/c we would still in in the war on terror and if they needed peeps there would still be a draft, also if they did draft you go and do your patritic duty not whine like little kids about it, 2nd the war in Iraq had nothing to do with oil some with the war on terrorism, we get like 70% of our oil from canada, 20% from here, and like 10% from the middle east- the war is abou Stacy: about civil rights and freedom, 3rd- there is no proof that global warming is caused by us, their is = information on stuff saying it is a normal cooling cycle of the planet JohnMike497: if i were drafted in a war life ww2, i would gladly go to fight, but if it were some crap like this, iraq qhich we had no reason to attack anyways and bomb, thats when I dont agree with it, I refuse to fight a battle that I dont agree on, what did bombing iraq solve anyways? What did invading iraq solve? I killed iraq people for what? Sure we're "helping" another country, but it was never our business, alex made a good point, the biggest thing that arabic countries like that hate the most about us is when we set foot in their territory and what do we do? invade iraq Stacy: 4th- stem cell research can still happen it just that the federal government isn't funding it with tax dollars, which is good b/c the majority of the time when the government is involved it slows down free trade so there isn't compation, that is what federalism is about Stacy: the whole bible thing and gay marriage we are a conservative nation on the topic now, look at the 11 states voting on whether to ban gay marriages or not, all of them votes in high percentages to ban gay marriage and there weren't all conservative states Stacy: ok for the last decade saddam has been threatening the U.S., killing innocent people, not listening or doing what the U.N told him to do and helping terrorism, and you say we had no reason to be in there? Also we have done a lot for Iraq that you don't hear on the news b/c it isn't sensationalized enough or interesting enough, we have imporved their water quality so they have clean water, we have made it possible for women to get an education and do stuff outside their homes, we have made people who were JohnMike497: well i dont think they should be banned, it should be up to you whether to follow guidelines of a bible and stuff, also what about this: all the money we spent on the war in terror could have been put into getting more police officers around the us or scanners for airports, i think it was all just a wasted sum of money, i mean dont get me wrong, i dont blame bush for going in iraq in search of weapons of mass destruction, but when he realized they had none i think he should have stopped it there and not bombed iraq... I think that most presidents would have gone in search of the mass destruction weapons there, but he shouldnt have gone the extreme like he did Stacy: killed b/c of their religion be able to practice their religion with out fear, people are a loud to think for themselfs with out being scared that they will be killed etc, there are many more things, and you care nothing for these poor people that is horrible JohnMike497: heres a question and im not challenging you or anything, if we are doing the right thing, why do so many countries hate us? And these countries havent always hated us, they hate bush more than anyone there, alex told me that some countries were looking at having peace with us if bush werent in office, why do people hate bush so much if he has done the right thing? Stacy: really where would this magic money come from for fighting terror and increasing the money paid for more police and airport secrurity, oh right out of our wallets in taxes that they are already taking of in such high qualities Stacy: ok there are around 90 countries with us JohnMike497: oh you know me...not caring for these people, i just think we are doing more harm than good especially after bombing iraq Stacy: and most of them like us, they just don't like bush, b/c he doesn't listen to their crap, we don't like france b/c they have oil contracts with terrorist and harbor terrorist sure they aren't going to agree with bush it hurts their economic interests to do so, they make money of terrorist, they are the ones corrupt, and people hate us anyway b/c they hate western culture or the fact that we are rich, they are petty Stacy: baumann we bomb terrorist strongholds, not civilan homes Stacy: we might miss and someone die but not on purpose, accidents happen, but in the long run we are helping them for the better, there are always bumps in political change Stacy: anyway I think I am going to go Stacy: ttyl JohnMike497: saddam also hates terrorists because they are a threat to him, so i dont think that baghdad was a terrorist stronghold Stacy: bye JohnMike497: bye Stacy: saddam like terrorist b/c they were a way he could hit the U.S. without being straightly involved Stacy: anyway bye"
moam	Date: November 4, 2004 @ 10:13 PM I just want to know what stuff I am wrong on and what she is wrong on...etc. I only know what my friend tells me
wet1	Date: November 4, 2004 @ 11:37 PM Geeze I am more used to posting at length on a single topic. So that is the approach I am going to take here. One thing, I will leave the rest for the other memebers of the forum to aid you in. "there is no proof that global warming (is happening)...) Many scientists warn of global warming. Makes sense on the surface of it, increased activity by us, including the generation of large amounts of carbon dioxide should make global warming a reality. But what if the figures are wrong? There is evidence that the global model used in the calculation of predictive temperatures in the future based on the past could be wrong. That assumptions made by the PCA (Principal Component Analysis) model based on the Monte Carlo method of analysis, does well with unknown variances in data. What it doesn't do well with are known figure bases and makes assumptions that aren't so. The model shows a mean average for the last thousand years, which has its ups and downs. The last couple of hundred years on the graph, shows a steep rise in the mean temperature, a sort of hockey stick figure. What you would expect if global warming was happening. The rise coincides with about the time we started burning coal and oil on this model. Trouble with this model is that we don't have real accurate figures for what the last 1000 years were. We believe we can guess, based on scientific study what it should be. From 1902-1980 isn't a guess as to what the temperature was. We have accurate records that state what they are, they aren't estimated. The procedure used, that was supposed to give a mean average falsely drops data that is meaningful. It gives a false graph of predictions and that false graph comes out to look like a hockey stick. You can read from the site supplied, how this comes about and what it means to the figures. You can also find that an attempt was made to rectify the false figures after the mistake was made. Simular to the RIAA the acadamies of knowledge are pretty steadfast in their stogginess. The study with the graph was accepted, the refuting of the evidence by the original researchers was not. Again we see what politics does with figures that could have meaningful impact on our lives and how that affects where the money goes. http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/04/10/wo_muller101504.asp?p=1
imemine	Date: November 4, 2004 @ 11:40 PM Well---- verbose comes to mind. We’ll talk later.
hueseph	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 12:21 AM How can anyone elieve that the over use of fossil fuels coesn't have any effect on the envirionment. Global warming or not it isn't good in the quantities we are using it. Have you thought to consider that research opposing the idea of Global Warming might be funded by the oil companies? Science is not necessarily the homestead of integrity. Cigarettes aren't cancer causing either but that didn't convince me to keep on smoking. (I smoked for 14 Years a pack and a half a day). Strangely enough, since I quite smoking I don't nearly hack up any black gunk from my lungs. I suppose acid rain was also a figment of our imagination as well. Take a drive though southern Ontario and you will still see forests of Dead blackened trees. I agree that one should measure what they hear but......
wet1	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 12:45 AM I never said gobal warming wasn't happening, what I said was the yardstick that scientists are using isn't right. The reason we have such a poor guess of the past 1000 years on temperature is that the way it is measured is by taking samples of what the air was then and calculating what it should be. The way they get those samples is from air bubbles trapped in ice. It is notoriously inaccurate to predict that way. If we have no accurate yardstick to measure against, we have no way to accurately tell if this is happening or not. The yardstick now in use is seriously flawed and the flaw was discovered by the same team that made the model in the first place. It looks as if we will just have to continue measuring what we do know and wait and see. Acid rain is not the same as global warming. Again, I am not saying acid rain is good. I am saying we don't have the necessary tools to find out what is really happening.
Woof	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 4:55 AM Since global warming's being covered, let's take Iraq first. Point 1: If Bush hadn't have been able to convince the American people that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, the people never would have supported a pre-emptive strike on Iraq. There was plenty of discussion on this, before we went in. That there weren't any WMD's there, well... let's say we buy Bush's explanation that he was given faulty intelligence. Let's say he's 100% truthful in disclosing that to us. There's still a problem. Denial. Point 2: Denial is the problem, because as soon as it looked as if we weren't going to find WMD's in Iraq, Bush changed the reason we were supposedly there: to free the Iraqi people from tyranny. Of course, EVERYBODY would like to be free from tyranny... that's a given. And freeing individuals from its' grasp is a noble thing to do. Nobody doubts that Saddam was a BAD MAN. HOWEVER... if Bush had approached the American people, before we ever went in, giving the reason for an unprecedented preemptive strike on another country, that we were liberating a people from an evil dictator, we simply would not have had justification enough, I believe, to make the historic move of invading a country that posed no direct threat to us. In other words, we would not have gone to war. What Bush did, was to deny that he, that is... the final guy in charge of making the decision... made an error. That's what the problem is. Not that we went in, not that removing Saddam was a bad thing... not even that the reason we were given for being over there was changed. Simply that he didn't accept ultimate responsibility for acting erroneously on faulty information. During the debates, Bush was asked what his biggest mistakes were, since he'd taken over the presidency. His response was that he couldn't think of anything, off the top of his head, but that he was sure he'd made some... Well, IMHO, this is a pretty big one. Glaring, even. Maybe there are other, bigger ones that we're not aware of... things that haven't yet come to light... maybe that's why he wouldn't accept accountability the way Tony Blair did. If that's the case, God help us all. As for civil unions between same-sex couples, a lot of folks missed this, I'm sure... because the clip didn't air on the news until a little less than a week before the election, but Bush IS on videotape, saying in no uncertain terms, that he now believes that civil unions between same-sex couples should be decided by state, not federal government. Hope This Helps...
Izekial	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 6:30 AM "Stacy: Ok this is what I say to this: One there won't be a draft and if there was going to be a draft it wouldn't matter who the president was, b/c we would still in in the war on terror and if they needed peeps there would still be a draft, also if they did draft you go and do your patritic duty not whine like little kids about it, 2nd the war in Iraq had nothing to do with oil some with the war on terrorism, we get like 70% of our oil from canada, 20% from here, and like 10% from the middle east- the war is abou Stacy: about civil rights and freedom, 3rd- there is no proof that global warming is caused by us, their is = information on stuff saying it is a normal cooling cycle of the planet" Yes, it wouldn't matter who our President was, but it'd fucking matter who got us INTO the war in the first place. It wasn't Dick. It was Bush, Susan, and you can sit there and tell everyone to grow up and go to war when you yourself aren't already? If you support Bush and the war, by all means, pick up your rifle and make your country proud. We're over there to save them? Shut the fuck up. Blowing children up is not liberating a country. Are there any other countries that are doing what we do? "Introducing" ideals and government practices to countries that need our help? I bet they wouldn't need our "help" if a terrorist organization from that area hadn't attacked New York. That's all this is really about. Bush wouldn't have had the balls or the "right" to start a war if it wasn't for 9/11, so don't feed me that bullshit. And who cares about global warming, right? We'll all be dead by the time the planet goes down the shitter. No need to start recycling at all. Mother Earth is automatically taking care of everything. Jesus Christ you're frightening. "Stacy: 4th- stem cell research can still happen it just that the federal government isn't funding it with tax dollars, which is good b/c the majority of the time when the government is involved it slows down free trade so there isn't compation, that is what federalism is about Stacy: the whole bible thing and gay marriage we are a conservative nation on the topic now, look at the 11 states voting on whether to ban gay marriages or not, all of them votes in high percentages to ban gay marriage and there weren't all conservative states Stacy: ok for the last decade saddam has been threatening the U.S., killing innocent people, not listening or doing what the U.N told him to do and helping terrorism, and you say we had no reason to be in there? Also we have done a lot for Iraq that you don't hear on the news b/c it isn't sensationalized enough or interesting enough, we have imporved their water quality so they have clean water, we have made it possible for women to get an education and do stuff outside their homes, we have made people who were" Are you against stem cell research? See, this is going to be a problem in the future, when people don't have fucking TUNNEL VISION. This is just a matter of opinion, though, and both our arguments on the topic are irrelevant. And you keep saying the word "conservative", as if that's some kind of valid argument or excuse to be an asshole. Please state WHY gay marriage is wrong, and please don't say "because of tradition" or "because God hates fags." I've already heard that one. I still can't believe you think dropping bombs on people and throwing innocent people in prison is boosting our global image. Last I heard, the world hates us, more than I hate rock bands from Canada (excluding Bon Jovi). "Stacy: killed b/c of their religion be able to practice their religion with out fear, people are a loud to think for themselfs with out being scared that they will be killed etc, there are many more things, and you care nothing for these poor people that is horrible" Do YOU care about them? I'm finding it hard to believe anyone who voted for someone who has turned our foreign policies into a fucking circus. And why is it our duty, or devine mission to set things straight. Maybe it's none of our God damn business. Ever think of that? You think they'd come over here and try to help us if we were suffering? Think about that one. "Stacy: and most of them like us, they just don't like bush, b/c he doesn't listen to their crap, we don't like france b/c they have oil contracts with terrorist and harbor terrorist sure they aren't going to agree with bush it hurts their economic interests to do so, they make money of terrorist, they are the ones corrupt, and people hate us anyway b/c they hate western culture or the fact that we are rich, they are petty Stacy: baumann we bomb terrorist strongholds, not civilan homes Stacy: we might miss and someone die but not on purpose, accidents happen, but in the long run we are helping them for the better, there are always bumps in political change" Don't listen to their crap? Do you know what that sounded like? That sounded like a redneck! I hope they draft your ignorant ass. We worked with terrorists in the past too, funded them and the whole nine yards, so don't talk like your shit doesn't stink... and so we make a few booboos, kill families or burn people's faces off. That's ok. We're helping. Accidents happen! Now, go over there and try telling that to them. Don't let them know you're an American, though. That's just a word of advice, a free pearl of wisdom. And in closing, remember to vote for me in 2015. People will be on tons of drugs, and there will be no more stupid, heated discussions like these. Trust me.
Distilled1	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 8:29 AM People will be on tons of drugs Can I have some
moam	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 11:20 AM Thanks for the great points from everyone here
imemine	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 11:29 AM Woof is the man!!! -------- Denial, that river in Egypt!
jess1561	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 1:46 PM I loathe Bush, kinda why I voted Kerry.
Thaspian	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 4:30 PM If I may add something to this.. I met a marine two weeks ago. He was nineteen and served in Iraq for six months. He said that if you had a classroom full of Iraqi people, twenty five of them would be for what we were doing, and five against since they'd be under the mistaken impression that we were attacking them. We're not. He says we're attacking the terrorists that live near there, the ones that live in the same towns as the people. He told me that there were two churches in the town he was in. One served the majority of the people, they are for what we're doing and tell people that they should maybe give us a chance to establish a new government there. The terrorists that lived in the towns with the normal people would do very sick things to the people who lived there. I don't want to describe all in detail, but there's one highlight. There were soda cans on the side of the road there. We don't think much of seeing a soda can on the side of a street. Yet over there, terrorists fill them with C4 and blow them up as people walk by. Some children walked near them and died as a result of the burning metal from the can cutting into them. The same happens with cars. Most blocks would be filled with people, then you'd see one that was completely empty and you'd see either a soda can or a car on the side of the road. They do this to the people who live there since they oppose the terrorist organizations as a government. Iraq is a sphere of influence for the middle east and harbored many who would attempt to do these kinds of things to us. Stabilize Iraq, give them a government like ours, and the people who'd do the things that I described above would stick out like sore thumbs and wouldn't last very long. The idea is to take the places that've been harboring the most terrorists, that have populations of people who want a new government and give them a new government, in which they're free and can prosecute and jail people as any other nation would if they found out terrorists live there. I think that even if there were not any WMDs, it would be worth doing what we did(albeit a bit differently and carefully) so that in the future, Iraq could no longer be a place that harbored a majority of the middle east's anti-US terrorists. Hope this made sense.. I closed the window halfway through so I typed it out again half ast.
Izekial	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 7:19 PM Ok, that was actually a good argument, something I can digest. What you're saying is humane and progressive, but I still gotta stick with my "let them be big boys and girls and do it themselves" mentality/policy. It sounds heartless, but really, we need to stop dipping our dicks into all that mess. We already fucked things up enough over there already. You've got a much bigger heart than I do if you believe in what you're saying, but frankly, I'm tired of war, no matter what we're fighting for.
hueseph	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 10:18 PM I beg to differ. I doubt those terrorists would be setting off bombs if their country wasn't occupied. Regardless of what is happening now. Iraq was wrongly accused of stockpiling WDM's and when everyone found out they just went on in anyway. Don't you realize that this pretty well breaks down that barrier now. The US no longer needs an excuse to invade a country. Really, who would be able to resist? They along with England are the most omnipotent power this world has seen. As far as anti-US terrorists, what about Ossama Bin-Laden? He was 9/11 wasn't he? Why is no one persuing him. Isn't it convenient tho that Ossama sent a video just before election to scare up the population so that they would feel they need a "war president" at the helm?
hueseph	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 10:20 PM Yes Ossama who's family was escorted out of the states promptly after 9/11. Do you think he's paying back a favor?
povertystricken	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 10:30 PM Iraq insurgents would have nothing to blow us up with if we didn't import 194.7 metric tons of HMX, or "high melting point explosive" and 141.2 metric tons of RDX, or "rapid detonation explosive". Then walk away and let them loot the whole stash.
Woof	Date: November 5, 2004 @ 10:49 PM Thasp, I agree with Izekial that you've made a very considerate argument. However it contains a critical flaw, and that's the phrase "Stabilize Iraq, give them a government like ours", which is key to making your point. There are two ways of accomplishing that goal. One is to make Iraq property of the US, and enforce our ideals upon its' people. I don't think we're going to want to do that. The other way is to install a democracy there, and hope that the Iraqi people elect a government with similar views to our own. That IS a wonderfully idealistic model, and the most likely scenario for a happy ending to out conflict there. However, earlier this year, when the seeds of Iraq's governing council met over here, it became apparent that they weren't very interested in installing the leadership over there that we (the US) had been hoping for, and suggesting. Analysts were speculating, at that point, that there was every indication that a democratic Iraq stood as much of a chance of becoming a radical Islamic state, as it did of becoming a mirror of American traditional values. At this point, no one is certain which direction it would head... and if it's the former example, that creates an atmosphere of an even greater threat, than it was before the invasion. So... we can hope things turn out well, but even given troop withdrawal, eventual peace, and a democratic government, there are no guarantees...
Maffmatix	Date: November 7, 2004 @ 9:38 PM Who's Bush?
wet1	Date: November 7, 2004 @ 10:13 PM Who's Bush? Depends on which one you are talking about. My personal favorite is shrub. You know, a little bush.
ryanwilliams	Date: November 9, 2004 @ 2:32 PM real bad.." " id="117462">"This is bad, Tommy, this is real bad.."
EmpireDay3	Date: November 9, 2004 @ 4:08 PM moam - your question - what you're right on and what she's right on: a lot of it subject to personal opinion and certainly a great deal of spin. I personally tend to side with her on the majority of stuff there since I, too, am a bush supporter, which is not very popular on this site. I admire the openness with which you asked your question on these topics and would also encourage you to see what else you can find elsewhere considering the posts you have seen already, you can probably guess that most of your replies will be heavily weighted the other direction. But, hey, the cool thing about this country is that we can all have these opinions and stand by them, believe in them and argue about them! Whatever your belief, that still makes this a pretty cool country! peace and hairgrease.
geetarman	Date: November 9, 2004 @ 7:38 PM Ashcroft parting shot: He is going after Oregon Right To Die policy before leaving. One one hand Republican's ask us to enjoy their victory. The "people have spoken" speech. But it seems that the people of Oregon have spoken and it's not good enough. Bush want's this law repealed to apease the Christian Right. You can't have it both ways. I guess Bush is spending his "Political Capital" but how much is costing taxpayers for this witchhunt. Next: Our California govenor just got caught on t.v. exhorting, "Why would I work with losers?"... There's an old say, "The more you stir the more it stinks..."
GTLive	Date: November 10, 2004 @ 10:44 AM I am a simple man with simple ideals. Not political at all, but I do remember those bygone days before Clinton got his infamous blow job when Americans could get a job. I once had a republican refer to me as "lazy" because I did not want to take my degrees and 16 years of IT experience to Starbucks and work for minimum wage! There's a mentality for you, lazy old me. Back in the 90s we were not invading other countries, and our economy was more stable than it is today. It is also coincidental that Iraq was a problem during the two Bush Admins, Father & Son. Sadaam apparently took an 8 year break so Clinton could cruise through two terms in office. It really had nothing to do with the terror that WE propegate with hawk policies in place. Just a coincidence. There's my
johnnygnote	Date: November 10, 2004 @ 4:25 PM I just got a call from a good friend of mine last night and he told me he heard on the news that there is a town in Ohio with the population of about 850 people. The news was that Bush recieved over 4,000 votes in that town .. Do I smell a hanging Chad?? Also in New Mexico the votes are still being counted and the numbers are not as overwhelming as reported the numbers are smaller than what we were told and it's not certain who really won there. I can guarantee that the same is occuring all over the country but we are not hearing about it. The man who created the new voting machine was quoted saying that he guaranteed Bush a win and it was reported that regardless of if you voted for Bush or Kerry the machines responded with "Thank you for voting for George Bush" the story was heard on this internet radio station, http://www.airamericaradio.com/. It's like I said, Bush stole (or bought) the first election and there was no way he was going to give it up the second time. Bush is an Asshole and he's not much of a man either. A real man would admit to his mistakes and he's a cocky son of a bitch that acts like he's God's Gift To the U.S. I realy don't care who runs the country any more because it's out of our hands. voting makes no difference and there's nothing left to do but sit back and watch the show, ALL HELLS GONNA BREAK LOSE and the SHIT IS GONNA HIT THE FAN don't forget to duck :duck:
DeltaF86	Date: November 10, 2004 @ 4:55 PM Lol... I happen to agree with Stacy on this one
boots2004	Date: November 10, 2004 @ 11:43 PM Hmmm is Bootsand Phantom Right? could bush be fuckin us? still or again
doomroot	Date: November 13, 2004 @ 5:02 AM Alls I have to say is if you think the government(democrat,republican) cares about your security you are in for a big surprise. Americans and our short-term memories will cost us.
sinai	Date: November 13, 2004 @ 6:21 PM i for one really love cornbread
koiulpoi	Date: November 15, 2004 @ 9:08 PM Bleh...I'm tired of politics. I realised, a bit too late, that both guys suck. Bush just sucks a bigger one. For anyone who thinks that the war is justified - yes, Saddam was an evil fucker. However, violence can not be solved by more violence. Anyone who can write off 100,000 dead Iraqi civillians in the name of regime change and WMDs that were never there is also a bit evil at heart. Yeah, and Kerry DID vote for the war. And the Us A Pat Riot Act. Stupid bastard. I'm running in 2024.
imemine	Date: November 16, 2004 @ 12:02 AM Congratulations! We shall see fellas.