Luke727's Journal: I don't get it.

I truly don't understand comments like this. While I agree with his 2nd point, I don't agree at all with the 1st or last points. I'm not quite sure about the 3rd. He is, apparnetly, attributing all of these to the current administration, but I don't follow that logic. Nobody is forcing people to be Christians, although there have been some incidents with Muslims being harassed. I agree that "reality" programming is fucking retarded (I pray it is just a fad), but I don't understand his opinion on sports. Is he saying that sports is an institution created by the Bush administration in order to brainwash people or something? Or was he picked on by a jock in high school? I really don't understand why sports are looked down upon around here. If he is complaining about people caring more about sports than politics, he should be attributing that to the people rather than the administration. I just don't understand what he is trying to say about sports.

I really can't wait till next election. I hope the Republicans put someone up who is WORSE than Bush and he gets elected by a good margin. That would be fucking awesome to see all the moaning and bitching here like there was last election. Or what would be even better is if a Democrat (or, God forbid, a third party nominee) is elected and does WORSE than Bush. LOLOL. These people here are so out of touch with reality that they actually thought Kerry had a good chance of winning, and were genuinely shocked when Bush won. It was fucking great, not that I care for Bush or anything.

Sometimes I do wonder how Gore would have handled the whole September 11th thing. Would we have hit Afghanistan? Would we have went for Saddam? I genuinely don't have a clue how he would have handled it. You can't really trust what he tells you, either, because he has the advantage of hindsight. Speaking of which, if Bush could go back in time would he still go for Iraq? These are the kinds of questions that really interest me. As for nominating that Bolton guy, if Libya can head the table of the Human Rights division (or whatever they call it), surely Bolton can be an ambassador (or whatever they call it). I do find it really bizarre that they would nominate somebody who has very publicly denounced the U.N., though. That seems like either a lack of judgement or a who-gives-a-fuck-he's-my-friend kind of attitude.

I really think Ralph Nader would be a good President. I get the impression that he would do "The Right Thing" (whatever that is) in most situations. Although he would probably try to do something "nutty" (again, this is subjective) and we'd never have a 3rd party elected again.

Pretzel: 1, Bush: 0

[the_mad_poster]

I sleep better are night knowing that I've never voted for a guy who distinguished himself in the first year of his presidency by getting pwned [gh-sts.com] by a pretzel.

As for the guy in the comment, did you ever consider that, possibly, he's an idiot?