Bush at 36%, how low can he go?

[2Xited4Disney]

I thought about that too. After thinking about that criteria for some time I can only come up with this explanation

Some students coast there way through college (Cs get degrees sort of thing). These students will not participate in any extracurricular activities nor will they work hard in any class. One HUGE essential in college is meeting with a professor. I have to meet with many of my professors at least once a week to stay up to date (as well as requirements for some classes). Originally I thought meeting with professors during "Office Hours" was not common place but after research I have learned that many of my friends (who attend schools such as BU, BC, Harvard, UNH, ETC) MUST meet with their professors.

 

[Sylvester McBean]

Something has always bugged me about the 2004 election

Why is it that of the top 10 "smartest" states
1. Vermont
2. Connecticut
3. Massachusetts
4. New Jersey
5. Maine
6. Minnesota
7. Virginia
8. Wisconsin
9. Montana
10. New York

Only two voted Republican in the last election.

Also the "dumbest" states.

31. Ohio
32. Illinois
33. Utah
34. West Virginia
35. Kentucky
36. Florida
37. Arkansas
38. Oregon
39. Oklahoma
40. Georgia

41. Tennessee
42. Hawaii
43. Alabama
44. Alaska
45. Louisiana
46. California
47. Nevada
48. New Mexico
49. Mississippi
50. Arizona

All but 3 voted Republican. I am about to start a project in my political science class between the direct correlation of education to voting results. Let me know what you think


SOURCES
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/electoral.college/
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/package.jsp?name=fte/smartstates/smartstates

Both CNN

whoo hoo, we're 36th. your project is going to be flawed. your sources are merely reflecting public school rankings. states like Florida have a high rate of relocation from other states. so a guy like me - 36, college graduate, voted Republican in '04, Florida transplant - is going to skew your results.

 

[TCPluto]

whoo hoo, we're 36th. your project is going to be flawed. your sources are merely reflecting public school rankings. states like Florida have a high rate of relocation from other states. so a guy like me - 36, college graduate, voted Republican in '04, Florida transplant - is going to skew your results.

That's exactly why the research is interesting but baseless for any meaningful conclusions to be able to be drawn from it.

 

[LakeAriel]

I thought about that too. After thinking about that criteria for some time I can only come up with this explanation

Some students coast there way through college (Cs get degrees sort of thing). These students will not participate in any extracurricular activities nor will they work hard in any class. One HUGE essential in college is meeting with a professor. I have to meet with many of my professors at least once a week to stay up to date (as well as requirements for some classes). Originally I thought meeting with professors during "Office Hours" was not common place but after research I have learned that many of my friends (who attend schools such as BU, BC, Harvard, UNH, ETC) MUST meet with their professors.

Go BC Eagles! Sweet 16!!!!!!!!!!!!!! sorry I digressed!

 

[LakeAriel]

To call people terrorists if they oppose this war is truly disgusting! Fortunately it is now only 28% of American's that support it, so that is a whole lot of terrorists in the USA! You are slipping into oblivion, enjoy the trip down.

 

[Mugg Mann]

Simply this: you and Joe and others act like you have a monopoly on patriotism. As if the only way we can be patriotic and love our country is if we swallow the lies and support this war that is nothing more than a drain on our resources when they could MUCH better be used elsewhere.

My point was simply that, although you claim to love this country so much, practically NONE of you have ever actually served this country. I have. I spent five years in one of the buildings that was attacked on 9-11, and I'm proud to have done so.

So for someone like you to call ME a "terrorists best friend" is a flat-out joke, and a sad one at that.

Joe certainly can't act like he has a monopoly on patriotism. I've asked him several times if he acknowledges that the Constitution of the United States takes precedence over the bible, and Joe can't even bring himself to acknowledge the question, let alone answer it.

I think everyone on these threads should keep asking Joe that question until he answers it one way or the other. That shouldn't be such a hard question for an American patriot like Joe, right?

 

[DawnCt1]

I'd venture to guess Al Queda cells have been alive and well on U.S. soil earlier than that.

But not conspiring with the government in power. So what is your point??

 

[DawnCt1]

Saddam was exactly the type of leader Al Queda hated. They would have toppled him from power before they crawled in bed with him by accepting financial support.

Given the revelations of the Saddam papers, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Remember the Arab saying; "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". They made good bed fellows.

 

[wvrevy]

Given the revelations of the Saddam papers, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Remember the Arab saying; "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". They made good bed fellows.

Assuming those papers are authentic. Sorry, but we're talking about religious fanatics, here. They aren't generally known for compromising on their beliefs.

 

[DawnCt1]

Assuming those papers are authentic. Sorry, but we're talking about religious fanatics, here. They aren't generally known for compromising on their beliefs.

They definately appear to be authentic. They were removed from Saddam's secure areas. It appears that the intelligence wasn't so "flawed" after all.
www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/3/18/91844.shtml?s=ic

 

[Sylvester McBean]

ahhh, newsmax. definately an unbiased website if there ever was one. at least they left in the disclaimer.

"The controversial claim that Osama bin Laden was cooperating with Saddam Hussein is an ongoing matter of intense debate. While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable -- i.e. an unnamed Afghan "informant" reporting on a conversation with another Afghan 'consul.' The date of the document -- four days after 9/11 -- is worth noting but without further corroboration, this document is of limited evidentiary value."

 

[Mugg Mann]

They definately appear to be authentic. They were removed from Saddam's secure areas. It appears that the intelligence wasn't so "flawed" after all.
www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/3/18/91844.shtml?s=ic

Got anything from a news source that's not financed by Richard Mellon Scaife?

 

[LuvDuke]

I have neither the time nor the inclination to research this thread or your posts.

Just when you thought things couldn't get any whackier, along comes this gem.

So you have neither the time nor the inclination to research, but somehow this gives you the credibility to come to a judgement and be taken seriously.



You can't make this stuff up.

 

[LuvDuke]

They definately appear to be authentic. They were removed from Saddam's secure areas. It appears that the intelligence wasn't so "flawed" after all.
www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/3/18/91844.shtml?s=ic

Oh, they "appear" to be authentic? Do they "appear" to be made out of green cheese too?

Btw, by any chance, was this "Afghani informant" Curveball or baseball or football or blue ball?

Here's a dose of reality. There is no way on God's green earth Bush is going to take it on the chin if he has definitive proof in his hot little hands that his reasons for going to war were not bogus.

Three years into this war, and there is nothing beyond the sketchiest insinuation put out there with the hope that people like you will carry the water one more time for the Nipper. And like Pavlov's dogs, you can set your watch by it.

And since you folks just love to compare Bush's folly with WWII, here's a little comparison. It took the Allies less than 4 years to defeat the Third Reich AND the Empire of Japan. We're now into the 4th year of the Iraq war, and the sack of crap in the WH still can't figure out who the enemy is and the definition of victory.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Joe certainly can't act like he has a monopoly on patriotism. I've asked him several times if he acknowledges that the Constitution of the United States takes precedence over the bible, and Joe can't even bring himself to acknowledge the question, let alone answer it.

I think everyone on these threads should keep asking Joe that question until he answers it one way or the other. That shouldn't be such a hard question for an American patriot like Joe, right?

As Jesus said, "Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and render unto God what is God's."

 

[LakeAriel]

Three years later and we still can't get it right. But we don't kill children!http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/2006/iraq_us_raid/

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Oh, they "appear" to be authentic? Do they "appear" to be made out of green cheese too?

Btw, by any chance, was this "Afghani informant" Curveball or baseball or football or blue ball?

Here's a dose of reality. There is no way on God's green earth Bush is going to take it on the chin if he has definitive proof in his hot little hands that his reasons for going to war were not bogus.

Three years into this war, and there is nothing beyond the sketchiest insinuation put out there with the hope that people like you will carry the water one more time for the Nipper. And like Pavlov's dogs, you can set your watch by it.

And since you folks just love to compare Bush's folly with WWII, here's a little comparison. It took the Allies less than 4 years to defeat the Third Reich AND the Empire of Japan. We're now into the 4th year of the Iraq war, and the sack of crap in the WH still can't figure out who the enemy is and the definition of victory.

The enemy is different. In WWII there were specific countries whose forces we were fighting. No so with the terrorists. To beat Japan we dropped nukes -- do you think we should do it again?

If you weren't so blinded by your hatred for our President, you would realize this.

 

[punkin]

Three years later and we still can't get it right. But we don't kill children!http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/2006/iraq_us_raid/

Nope, never happened and you are a terrorist supporter to even suggest it. God bless the idiot in the white house and his great war leader Rumsfeld as they continue to rise to new heights of incompetence with God's help.

 

[Mugg Mann]

As Jesus said, "Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and render unto God what is God's."

First of all, thank you for acknowledging the question.

Because your answer above wouldn't stand up in a court of law since American citizens are not required to live under someone else's beliefs, I'll ask you again, and I'll even reframe the question for your convenience.

For American citizens, does the Constitution of the United States take precedence over the bible? You either believe that it does, or it doesn't. Which one is it?

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

'liberation' is nothing more than a friendly spin on 'invasion'. and it wasn't our place to do either.

Ask the Iraqi's. The vast majority feel they were liberated from a terrorist supporting and brutal murdering dictator named Saddam.