How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Presidential Debates   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Presidential Debates

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


25 posted 10-03-2004 07:34 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

No, I wasn't there Ron, but I know people who were. None of them witnessed the so-called atrocities that Kerry and his group claims was so all-pervasive. And I didn't live in a vacuum back here in the States.

The fact that people protested the war is not the issue. And the issue is not between protestors and those who blindly follow anyone waving a flag. The issue is in how some decided to protest.

Yes, we need dissent. I never said that peaceful dissent was an act of treason. But dissent can be done without crossing the line and back-door dealing with the enemy and funding and participating in an organization that spread the vicious lies and propaganda of the enemy to achieve its goals.

And of course it's relevant today whether they told the truth or not. The intervening thirty years doesn't change that. And we didn't lose because their truth was more convincing. We lost because they persuaded people that the lies that they were parading as truth was truth.

But even if you believed that I knew what I was talking about, and even if you believed I was right, you'd still believe I was wrong. I wish I could say I was surprised, but I'm not.

Raph, how many swift boaters were there during Kerry's 4 months? I'm sure your figure of 3,500 encompasses a greater time frame than 4 months. Most of the 254 were there during that time frame with a few arriving shortly after he left.

I believe in truth and the preservation of life too. What I don't believe in is consorting with the enemy.

And no, I don't buy into the leftist claims of profiteering as a motive and having been "lied" into or "misled" into Iraq. And I don't believe that the Bush family ties to Saudi Arabia have anything to do with Iraq.

Someone in the Bush Administration is suspected of leaking her name. You may recall that there is an ongoing investigation.
Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


26 posted 10-03-2004 08:33 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

http://www.veteransforpeace.org/
one more source for input from veterans
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


27 posted 10-03-2004 08:58 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

However many swift boat crews were out there during Kerry's command does not change the fact that only ONE of 254 served under Kerry and are therefor unfit to comment on the accuracy or legitimacy of his service and the medals he was awarded. The SBVT campaign calls into question not only Kerry but the crews that served under his command. I'd rather take the word of people who were there, people who aren't linked to pro-republican interests thanks.

Claims? There is irrefutable evidence that Bush has profited from the war. You're missing the point and ignoring the facts. Whether that was his motive for going to war is not the issue. The issue is that he HAS profited from the war and that his administration has contracted to companies with Bush/Republican interest. At the very least, it's called a conflict of interest.

I'm not equating his links to the Saudis with Iraq. What should concern you is that Saudi Arabia, a known breeding ground and haven for Al Queda(you remember them, the enemy before Saddam?) cells, was not deemed a threat or included in the dreaded 'Axis of Evil' If Bush is intent on American safety why are the Saudis not even mentioned or terrorist camps rooted out and destroyed? Why were Saudis flown out of the US after 9/11? Conspiracies aside these are legitimate that raise eyebrows and should be addressed.

Sorry suspected of leaking. Well Kerry was suspected of treason and found not guilty.
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


28 posted 10-03-2004 09:12 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

Back to the debate, Bush tried without success to drive home the Kerry flip-flop issue before and during the debate. I think Kerry is doing well to finally pull himself away from that ridiculous label and just to drive the point home let's take a look at at Bush's record of flip flops during the last 4 years or so brought to you by Veterans united for Kerry. I particularly like the issue I've placed in bold, considering Osama attacked US soil which Kerry reminded Bush during the debate.

1. Department of Homeland Security

BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT  OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]

2. Weapons of Mass Destruction

BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories…for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]

...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons. And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]

3. Free Trade

BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]

4. Osama Bin Laden

BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]

...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA "I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important." [President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]


5. The Environment

BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to…establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]

...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]

6. WMD Commission

BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]

...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE  "Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]

7. Creation of the 9/11 Commission

BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]

8. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission

BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]

...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]

9. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony

BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday."  [NY Times, 2/26/04]

...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]

10. Gay Marriage

BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]

...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]

11. Nation Building

BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]

...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]

12. Saddam/al Qaeda Link

BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM... "You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." [President Bush, 9/25/02]

...BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11." [President Bush, 9/17/03]

13. U.N. Resolution

BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]

...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]

14. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict

BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS... "Well, we've tried summits in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all that long ago where a summit was called and nothing happened, and as a result we had significant intifada in the area." [President Bush, 04/05/02]

...BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS "If a meeting advances progress toward two states living side by side in peace, I will strongly consider such a meeting.  I'm committed to working toward peace in the Middle East." [President Bush, 5/23/03]

15. Campaign Finance

BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]

...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW  "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold singing ceremony, 03/27/02]
Goldenrose
Member Elite
since 05-30-2003
Posts 3637


29 posted 10-04-2004 07:44 AM       View Profile for Goldenrose   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Goldenrose

Denise do you know why Bush wasnt in Vietnam? He wasnt there because his daddy (like everything else in his life) made sure he wasnt there. He was off dancing with the devil, taking good long snorts of his dandruff, so even if if was SUPPOSED to be in the air national guard, he would have been totally useless anyway. That is not a nice recomendation for anyone, let alone a PRESIDENT.  At least kerry was there, and took wounds for his country, the only wounds Bush took during that war was to his septum.

Peace..get the troops from ALL countries back home...

Goldenrose.

The supreme happiness in life is the conviction that we are loved. Victor Hugo.

jbouder
Member Elite
since 09-18-99
Posts 2641
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash


30 posted 10-04-2004 09:10 AM       View Profile for jbouder   Email jbouder   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for jbouder

quote:
What someone says is only a fraction of communication though Kacey -- that's why reaction shots ARE important.  Body language, tone, gestures, all are important cues to revealing the entire communication -- which is why television is great -- 90% of all information comes in through the eyes.  If you only have the audio or the text - you only have half of the story.


I would agree, as long as we are not fooled into praising arrangement over substance.  Kerry did a fine job in presenting, but some of his assertions raised red flags.  The only way of conceiving of Kerry as the clear victor in the debate is if you place arrangement on equal footing with substance.

For example, Kerry seems to place too great a stake in alliance-building, and his criticism of Bush for acting without the tacit support of the UN, France, Russia, and Germany (all with a venal interest in Saddam's continued rule over Iraq) runs the risk of placing unanimity over our national interests.  Kerry's articulation of his position was perhaps more clear, but the substance is problematic.

After the debate, I'm not convinced that Kerry has what it takes to prevent another 9/11.  In a post-9/11 war, I'm glad we have a Texan as Commander-in-Chief.

I'll be watching with great interest Kerry's treatment of domestic issues.  He has been an outspoken critic (and supporter) of No Child Left Behind, but I hope he addresses some of the revelations that Bush's first Act have offerred regarding substantive failings of our educational systems to provide the most vulnerable children with a meaningful education.  Will he address the real problems, or placate the teacher's unions and school administrator assocations by scrapping the accountability standards his historically friendly special interests oppose?

quote:
Peace..get the troops from ALL countries back home...


So their time is freed to sift through the rubble of the Sears Tower or Empire State Building after Al Quaida has an opportunity to rebuild itself and attack us again?  So Iraq can become another Fundamentalist Islamic state?  So terrorists can mow down innocent students in another school?  War sucks, but pie-in-the-sky pacifism is not only insane, it also makes the pacifist an accessory to future attacks ... in my opinion.

Jim
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


31 posted 10-04-2004 10:46 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
So their time is freed to sift through the rubble of the Sears Tower or Empire State Building after Al Quaida has an opportunity to rebuild itself and attack us again?  So Iraq can become another Fundamentalist Islamic state?  So terrorists can mow down innocent students in another school?  War sucks, but pie-in-the-sky pacifism is not only insane, it also makes the pacifist an accessory to future attacks ... in my opinion.

Your unspoken assumption, Jim, is that killing people will necessarily stop all those things from happening.

While I agree pie-in-the-sky pacifism is a poor answer, I've seen no reason to believe willy-nilly attacks are any more effective. The need to "do something, even if it's wrong" is a common emotion, but one that doesn’t always translate well to international affairs. History, and perhaps none more so than our own, would suggest killing an idealist is easy enough, but bullets seem to have little effect on ideals.
jbouder
Member Elite
since 09-18-99
Posts 2641
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash


32 posted 10-04-2004 11:04 AM       View Profile for jbouder   Email jbouder   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for jbouder

But the unspoken assumption that the attacks are "willy-nilly" is debatable.  The destruction of Al Qaida training camps in northern Iraq, for example, is by no means "willy-nilly" and the families of suicide bombers in Israel are no longer receiving checks from Saddam.  Kerry even supported once that the removal of Saddam from power was in the public interest of the United States. As for idealists vs. ideals, for ideals to change, the terrain must be prepared to allow for the change.  By suppressing the influence of the fanaticist, you open doors to diplomacy and positive change.  The glossed-over achievements in Afganistan and the upcoming elections in Iraq are evidence that military and diplomatic efforts operating on parallel tracks can be effective. For freedom to reign and for individual liberties to thrive, you first must remove the tyrant.

On second thought, perhaps we ought to invite Osama over to the states to drink beer, eat wings, and watch an Eagles game so he can see that all this fighting has arisen from nothing more than a big misunderstanding.  I'm sure if we gave him the chance, he'd see that the peaceable road is the better and enlightened view, and we can all proceed from there as friends.  Osama's a bright guy ... I'm sure he would be amenable to reason.

Jim
Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


33 posted 10-04-2004 11:47 AM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

quote:
90% of all information comes in through the eyes.  If you only have the audio or the text - you only have half of the story.
Reb quote

quote:

I would agree, as long as we are not fooled into praising arrangement over substance.  Kerry did a fine job in presenting, but some of his assertions raised red flags.  The only way of conceiving of Kerry as the clear victor in the debate is if you place arrangement on equal footing with substance
jbouder quote
*
Reb, and Jim, regarding these comments: communication between blind, deaf, or the deaf-blind...this sounds as if you think they only process 10%-50% of the message? That they somehow absorb less than sighted/hearing of the truth' that is out there, that sighted people have some inherently greater ability to 'see the truth' or heaven forbid, that they 'see' with an open mind or open eyes?  In real life, I've found those assumptions to be completely false.
While I enjoy the visuals, it really doesn't tell me more than I already surmised. I do believe that for some, SHOWMANSHIP can and often does win the day, and appearances can be a detraction from 'seeing' the real issues. I'm not voting for a beauty contestant, nor am I overly concerned that someone appeared to be tired. OF COURSE the man is tired. LOL, I don't support his actions, but don't stress over his looks. And if Kerry had a giant wart on his nose he would still 'look better' to me as the Presidential choice.
Sorry, but I absolutely had to zero in on this one aspect of the televised 'debates.'


[This message has been edited by Midnitesun (10-05-2004 11:38 AM).]

Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


34 posted 10-05-2004 01:12 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

One interesting tidbit which Kerry neglected to mention during the debate was when he was discussing the lack of translators for terrorists related interceptions: this was brought up initially during the Senate hearings after the World Trade Center attack in 2000.  You know, on Clinton's watch.  By pure bad luck, I reckon, those were the same files Sandy Berger had 'accidentally' stuffed into his socks at the National Archives when he was still with the Kerry campaign in July.

I'm sure there is no correlation between Kerry's omission and Berger's 'accident'.  Absolutely none.  Pure coincedence.
Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


35 posted 10-05-2004 01:41 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

It's unacceptable behavior, no matter which 'side' does this, and you'd think after all the previous times people have been caught removing/destroying documents, they'd learn this is NOT the way to win public support. Unfortunately, the list of the cast of characters who've done this kind of thing straddles all party lines as far back as I can remember. I don't think any voter should condone this kind of behavior from ANY public servants or even from the multitude of private consultants/advisors.
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


36 posted 10-05-2004 02:56 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

Can't argue Alicat, indefensible action on Berger's part and a black eye to Democrats. Sadly, all too common in politics. For god's sakes Berger, if you're going to destroy records, a little subtlety please! grin
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


37 posted 10-05-2004 05:17 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

quote:
Well Kerry was suspected of treason and found not guilty.


Really, Raph? When did that happen?

Here is a story from a Vietnam Veteran's daughter that might give some insight into the stand that they have taken against Kerry:

quote:
By CAROL CROWLEY Published on: 09/20/04

Many of you believe dirty politics is the motivation of Vietnam veterans speaking out in opposition to John Kerry. Let me tell you the real motivation.

In the movie "We Were Soldiers," the story about the battle of the la Drang Valley in Vietnam in 1965, a young sergeant, Jack Gell, cried as he died, "Tell my wife I love
her . . ." and my family relived the death of my dad. He told my mother in letters that he and those he served with believed they were doing the right thing, fighting to help a sovereign nation defend its freedom.

Before the movie was filmed, I heard my father's dying words from retired Lt. Gen. Hal Moore and journalist Joe Galloway, who were with him in the Valley of Death. I met Mel Gibson, who played Col. Moore in the movie, showing him family pictures and letters to help him learn the essence of these young men serving their country in a difficult time. Gibson said my father was a true hero.

I remember when the movie was released witnessing the healing of men and family members who clung to this story with a new pride after decades of being vilified. Finally, they talked about it. Finally, many were proud to be Vietnam veterans.

And then Kerry was nominated as a presidential candidate.

I don't blame Kerry for my father's death, and I don't much care if he shamelessly chased after medals. But I do care that when he returned from Vietnam he gave aid and comfort to the enemy while our soldiers were still dying. I care that he smeared my father and a generation of our armed forces with false charges of war crimes while posing himself as a hero. I care that Kerry's false charges encouraged our enemy who was pressuring our POWs in inhumane ways to confess to imaginary war crimes. I care that he went to Paris to meet with the Viet Cong in 1970 while still an officer in the Navy Reserve, returning to publicly advocate for their position and against America's position.

This isn't about politics. It's about honor and betrayal and protecting our country. And for me it is deeply personal, as it is for countless vets. Thirty-nine years later, my mother still cries on Nov 14. Thirty-nine years later, we miss my father every day. Thirty-nine years later, Kerry poses as a hero. As children of Vietnam veterans, many of us feel an unwelcome emotional strain as the arguments about what really happened in Vietnam are tugged back and forth, often by people who were not there. We deeply resent the suggestion that our fathers were war criminals as that theme inevitably seeps into the argument.

We are educated and grown. We have children of our own, some in the service. We know in our heart and soul the scars of war that will never go away. But we are not weak, and we will not be silent. I will stand with the Vietnam veterans who speak out, and the voice of my father will be heard through me.

As long as I have breath and Kerry seeks the office of president, I will speak out against him. Others like me are too many to count.

While we are dismissed as dirty politics, the truth is we would be doing the very same things if Kerry were a Republican. President Bush has never had anything to do with our opposition to Kerry, and if the president makes a personal appeal to us to stop, we cannot and will not do so, because there are some things that can never be forgiven, can never be forgotten. John Kerry is one of those things.

Carol Crowley lives in Charlotte, N.C.

http://www.operationstreetcorner.com/carolcrowley.htm

Goldenrose, all leftist assumptions and nothing more.

By the way, Kerry as well as Bush was a child of privilege. Kerry and Edwards are  wealthier than Bush, as much as they'd like to portray themselves as the common man's candidates.

And did you know Kerry tried twice for a deferment during Vietnam and didn't get them? The Reserve unit he joined just so happened to get called up for service in Vietnam. He didn't volunteer for it. The Reserve unit Bush joined didn't get called up. If it had been, he would have gone too. I don't see praise or blame due either one for their respective situations regarding their presence or absence in Vietnam.

I thought this article brought clearly into focus Kerry's victory at the debate: No matter one's position on Iraq, Kerry was the candidate for them due to his masterful doublespeak! They each heard what they wanted to hear from the smorgasbord presented by Kerry.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40764
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


38 posted 10-05-2004 07:38 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

quote:
Well Kerry was suspected of treason and found not guilty.


A poor choice of words on my part, what I mean is he hasn't been found guilty. There's a difference in meeting(being introduced to) and negotiating with and aiding the enemy.

As for Kerry attempting to get out of serving, I wouldn't doubt it, he obviously didn't have the connections the Bush family does. Regardless, in the end he did serve and did earn medals in battle while Bush went AWOL.

And regarding the doublespeak comment, try sifting through the current administration's spin-doctoring over Iraq. Orwell couldn't have written better.
Jaime Fradera
Senior Member
since 11-25-2000
Posts 582
Where no tyranny is tolerable


39 posted 10-05-2004 08:06 PM       View Profile for Jaime Fradera   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Jaime Fradera

Security or freedom,
Tyranny or liberty;
Principals or platitudes;
An amateur populist Demagog
Or a tried and tested leader.
Those are the choices.

SC


Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


40 posted 10-05-2004 08:20 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

YAY! Jaime, glad you were successful in accessing this forum. LOL, and even though you know I have a Kerry sign out in my yard, we will ALWAYS be good friends, able to exchange our reality conversations as well as our fantasies. happy to have you join the political foray
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


41 posted 10-05-2004 08:25 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

You spelled principles wrong.

But perhaps that's the point.

Our tried and tested leader has failed.

Kaoru
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 06-07-2003
Posts 3888
where the wild flowers grow


42 posted 10-06-2004 03:14 PM       View Profile for Kaoru   Email Kaoru   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Kaoru

I'm saddened because I missed the debates because the weather messes up my sat. signal. I managed to catch a glimpse of some of it, but not enough to give any REAL opinion on it.

I know that the way they present themselves seems to be important. Many of you say Bush needs a vacation, I would disagree. I think he's taken enough vacation time....

Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


43 posted 10-06-2004 03:51 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

And seeing how Kerry has the distinction of one of the worst Senate attendance records of all time, I'd say they're about even then.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


44 posted 10-06-2004 05:29 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

There are certainly enough things in this campaign to make one smile but the draft vote ranks right up there on top. Several weeks ago Kerry insinuated, without being specific, that if Bush were elected there would be an excellent chance the draft would be re-instated. The purpose of this was, of course, to create further anti-Bush sentiment. He failed to mention, of course, that there WAS a bill in the House calling for re-enactment of the draft - and it was introduced by a Democratic senator. Speaker Dennis Hastert, after Kerry's comment, decided to bring it up for a vote. This placed the democrats in an imposible situation. If they voted for the bill, it would become obvious to the public that it was their idea. The vote was yesterday. The bill was defeated 402-2. The two who voted for it were democrats. Even the congressman who introduced it voted against it! Try something else, John...

Ya gotta smile....
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


45 posted 10-06-2004 06:27 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel



(giggles) I don't know if anyone else picked this up in last night's VP debate, but there were a few bloopers, and one major blooper made by Cheney.

When defending the accusation Edwards made on Cheney and his involvement with Halliburton, Cheney attempted to dodge going into the argument by ordering viewers to go to http://www.factcheck.com/  and to see the facts of Cheney and Halliburton and judge for themselves.

What's downright hilarious here is the fact that the very address he specified, with the .com specifically poured from his lips, leads to an anti-Bush web-site, http://www.georgesoros.com/  which actually is hosted by a billionaire investor and philosophist, George Soros, who has been promoting heavily there and on his tour how the war on Iraq and Bush has made the world less safer. LOL!

The address Cheney was meaning to give was http://www.factcheck.org/  .  

And if you read the new article regarding last night's debate on the correct address, even there the Annenberg Political Fact Check admitted that Cheney wrongly implied that they had rebutted allegations Edwards made to him about what Cheney had done as chief executive officer of Halliburton. Though they say that a Kerry ad that accuses Cheney of profiteering off the Iraq contract is false, they say Edwards was talking otherwise about his responsibility in earlier years with the company, which they believe Edwards is particularly correct on.

Anyway, I believe the VP debate was virtually a locking of horns. No runaway winner, though I was disappointed by Edwards' overall performance and Cheney did a fairly impressive job, so you have to give Cheney credit for last night especially when, unlike Edwards, he lacks the public speaking abilities and likeability rating.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"You'll find something that's enough to keep you
But if the bright lights don't receive you
You should turn yourself around and come back home" MB20
Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


46 posted 10-06-2004 06:42 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

Balladeer, that draft topic was more fully explained here: http://piptalk.com/pip/Forum3/HTML/003291-2.html#42 in MA's Portland Protest Thread, and debunked by me in the subsequent posts.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


47 posted 10-06-2004 06:49 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

How was it debunked?

I clearly stated the last names of the two Democrats (Rangel/Conyers) though failing to add the abbreviated party letter next to them, in the original mentioning of the draft in the thread. I also specifically went into detail about this particular bill, House Resolution 163, and said it was not to be confused with the Internet rumor from http://www.theBlatantTruth.org/  of the Bush Administration's own writing of a draft proposal, which I never even mentioned in the PPRC thread.

The point is to protest ANY draft proposal, period. We knew it was two Democrats who were trying to launch HR 163. It was a mistake on my part not to specify the (D) next to their names, but I was meaning to do so. I am critical of both corporate parties and though I find the Democrats better than the Republicans overall, they still are corrupted in many ways and quite adversarial.

Anyway, I am happy to see this resolution crushed unanimously...except by the exceptional two Democrats.

We'll continue to see how the other rumor evolves, and if something is startling or suspicious, we may run an occasional false alarm just to be prepared to protest this possible other draft proposal.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"You'll find something that's enough to keep you
But if the bright lights don't receive you
You should turn yourself around and come back home" MB20
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


48 posted 10-06-2004 06:54 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You're so right, Noah...that was certainly an OOPS! on Cheney's part...nice to see even politicians are human

The one thing that stuck out for me last night was the question that wasn't answered. When the moderator asked Edwards how they were going to form Kerry's proclaimed world coalition to deal with Iraq when France and Germany have just declared that, no matter what, they will play no part in Iraq, Edwards completely ignored the question and went off on another tangent. I would have liked to have heard that answer. So far Kerry has alienated Poland (I'm sure many of you have seen the scathing letter the Polish leader sent yesterday), he has alienated the allies who did join in with troops and support in Iraq, he has alienated the Iraqi new leaders and soldiers, first by insulting the newly-placed Iraqi leader when he spoke in Washington and then by completely disregarding the Iraqi police and army's comtributions and effort in the war. Cheney had to remind him several times that Iraquis were also fighting and dying to bring democracy to their country. Edwards preferred to ignore that so his figures would look more like the way he wants them to look. Now, add France and Germany declaring that they will join no coalition that demands any cooperation on their part and I'd like to know who is left to form this magical coalition Kerry is going to create. I knew as soon as the question was asked that Edwards would not be able to answer it but I was hoping the moderator would press him for an answer....ah, well. You can't have it all...
Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


49 posted 10-06-2004 07:03 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

That entire internet hoax on the draft was started by a 'concerned mother' in Pennsylvania who just happens to be the local head of an Anti-Draft PAC.  But, as the old saying goes, a lie can run around the world three times before the truth even has its pants on.

Also, MA, if you look closely at my comment on your Draft protest inclusion, you would see clearly my statement on the verbatim email inclusion.  And if it wasn't verbatim, then there's a whole smorgasborg of identical minded anti-Draft people out there putting the exact same thing in emails and on websites, all at the same time.  Group think, or herd mentality? *grin*
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Presidential Debates   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors