![]() |
|
|
|||
|
It's a simple question, and I'll probably get blasted for it. But I'm interested to see if many people - men or women - think that this is true. To me there seems to be a trend that women - perhaps out of instinct to protect their families - will get behind the candidate whom they feel, ABOVE ALL ELSE, will provide the best protection against terrorism for themselves, their children, and their families. Even to the exclusion of other issues traditionally important to women - integrity, right to choose, etc...
__________________
"The basic problems facing the world today are not susceptible to a military solution." - JFK |
| Sponsored Links |
| Red Cross - Donate Today Save the Rainforest |
|
|||
|
And an AWOL insider-trader with a criminal record represents YOUR definition of integrity?
__________________
"The basic problems facing the world today are not susceptible to a military solution." - JFK |
|
|||
|
A Bush hater are you? Comments like that make you transparent. My cousins are fighting in Iraq right now...does that mean they are qualified on becoming Presidents because of that? No...if they went Awol does that necessarily mean they couldn't be the best President in the future because of it? No again...next...
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"The basic problems facing the world today are not susceptible to a military solution." - JFK |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|