US Domestic Debate thread

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
The Mad Hatter
Posts: 6322
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:36 am
Location: Funkytown

US Domestic Debate thread

Post by The Mad Hatter »

Bush is loud so far (25 minutes in), smirking too much. It's grating on my nerves.
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30126
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Post by YellowKing »

Bush did a good job, much better than I expected. And he FINALLY, FINALLY nailed Kerry on not voting for the Gulf War! w0000t! If only Bush had performed this well in the first debate.

I utterly can't BELIEVE Kerry brought up Cheney's gay daughter again. Below the belt. Kerry annoys me with the way he just drones on and on rattling off facts and figures and dropping names. He talks a good talk, don't get me wrong, but I find him wholly unbelievable. Reminds me of a salesman who rattles off every feature in the book trying to convince me of something.

I don't think this debate will ultimately change many minds. However at the very least I think Bush defended himself from a Kerry takeover in the polls.
Poleaxe
Posts: 7140
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm

Post by Poleaxe »

Kerry needs to stay away from the religion questions. He's completely unbelievable when he answers them.

The debate was generally a tie, but if Bush had performed this well in the first debate no one would be watching this one because the election would have been over.
User avatar
$iljanus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13676
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: New England...or under your bed

Post by $iljanus »

Poleaxe wrote:Kerry needs to stay away from the religion questions. He's completely unbelievable when he answers them.

The debate was generally a tie, but if Bush had performed this well in the first debate no one would be watching this one because the election would have been over.
Yup. And I'm not saying that Kerry isn't genuine in his faith but Bush is alot more comfortable talking about it which can be quite appealing to many people. Not even necessarily because they may be religious conservatives but because people respond to genuine emotional honesty.
User avatar
godhugh
Forum Admin
Posts: 10016
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:18 pm
Location: Plano, TX
Contact:

Post by godhugh »

I thought Bush was absolutely pitiful when it came to job outsourcing. He never even came close to answering the question or explaining his position. Completely shameful :evil: .
User avatar
flycatcher
Posts: 977
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:06 pm

Post by flycatcher »

I don't remeber there being a single question that specifically addressed the environment or stemcells in a so called debate on domestic issues. That is really sad(if my memory is right)
Poleaxe
Posts: 7140
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm

Post by Poleaxe »

godhugh wrote:I thought Bush was absolutely pitiful when it came to job outsourcing. He never even came close to answering the question or explaining his position. Completely shameful :evil: .
Maybe but Kerry is a free trade/nafta guy as well.
User avatar
godhugh
Forum Admin
Posts: 10016
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:18 pm
Location: Plano, TX
Contact:

Post by godhugh »

Yes, but Bush essentially told all of us who's job has been outsourced to go back to community college and learn a trade. That's just downright insulting.
User avatar
The Mad Hatter
Posts: 6322
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:36 am
Location: Funkytown

Post by The Mad Hatter »

I thought the moderator was the weakest of the bunch, too many softball questions.
User avatar
Mr. Fed
Posts: 15111
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Post by Mr. Fed »

Bush tonight:
Gosh, I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those ex-a-gger-ations.
Bush two years ago:
I don’t know where he is. Nor — you know, I just don’t spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you. I....I truly am not that concerned about him.
Source.

Maybe he isn't concerned, but he is worried?
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43690
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Post by Kraken »

So...who won? The Globe will undoubtedly annoint Kerry tomorrow morning; they probably had the story written before it even began, just plug in the quotes. The Bride of Ironrod, who is a Kerry supporter, says that Bush did really well, but that's because she expects so little of him. I didn't listen, myself. I just want to get this election over with.
Coskesh
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Post by Coskesh »

Man, I couldn't help but feel sorry for Bush (at times) during this debate and the previous one.

When I first moved to Texas (1st or 2nd grade) I had this music teacher that stopped class one day to single me out and yelled at me to stop making faces and grimacing at her. I had no idea what she was talking about and it was really embarrasing and upsetting for me. She even called my mom in and told her I kept making faces at her. After that day, I would sit in that room quiet and paranoid, struggling to keep a strait face and to show no emotion. I was even afraid to blink.

Anyway, it seemed like Bush was struggling to do the same at times while listening to Kerry speak since he took a lot of heat after the first debate. I really did feel bad for him.

Damn bitch.

I feel better now, carry on.
Kratz
Posts: 2348
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:36 pm

Post by Kratz »

godhugh wrote:Yes, but Bush essentially told all of us who's job has been outsourced to go back to community college and learn a trade. That's just downright insulting.
Man, I always wanted a career in waste management... I guess I've got my chance now! Thanks Mr. President!
User avatar
RunningMn9
Posts: 24461
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:55 pm
Location: The Sword Coast
Contact:

Post by RunningMn9 »

Of course, I had more important things to do than watch this nonsense (Ironrod will be happy to note that I was going through the CotN tutorials again - as directed). But my survey of talking heads is telling me that Bush outright won this debate (easily even).

Mr.Fed - on that issue - the talking heads are covering for Bush in the sense that they are alleging that the context of that quote was basically that "I'm not worried about bin Laden - bin Laden should be worrying about us."

But I'm too lazy to care. :)

I did just see the repeat of Kerry invoking Cheney's daughter. If I was Dick Cheney, I would have attacked him on the spot. The way he did that was even more vulgar than when Edwards did it.

I need more people to tell me how to think though.
And in banks across the world
Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Jews
And every other race, creed, colour, tint or hue
Get down on their knees and pray
The raccoon and the groundhog neatly
Make up bags of change
But the monkey in the corner
Well he's slowly drifting out of range
Tareeq
Posts: 10374
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:07 pm

Post by Tareeq »

RunningMn9 wrote:I need more people to tell me how to think though.
You came to the right place.
Poleaxe
Posts: 7140
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm

Post by Poleaxe »

godhugh wrote:Yes, but Bush essentially told all of us who's job has been outsourced to go back to community college and learn a trade. That's just downright insulting.
But Kerry just told you what you wanted to hear. The truth is that AC repair can provide a decent living, and some of those jobs are gone for good as the economy evolves into a truly global marketplace.
User avatar
Ralph-Wiggum
Posts: 17449
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:51 am

Post by Ralph-Wiggum »

I thought that Kerry easily won the debate. For once, he actually said gave specifics on some of his plans. Bush, while better than the first debate, completely ignored some questions (it seems like his answer to everything was education).
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Post by Defiant »

.
Last edited by Defiant on Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
rrmorton
Posts: 8760
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:06 pm
Location: Pleasantville NY

Post by rrmorton »

I might give the edge to Bush in this third debate. His secret (and only) weapon is his sensitive, helluva-guy personality and he turned it on big time while answering those two giant softballs: "What does religion mean to you?" and "What have your three women taught you?."

His comments about praying for wisdom and for his little girls and meeting Laura at a backyard barbecue at Timmy Bradshaw's house... all that goes over huge with voters. Heck, it wins me over considerably and I'm very anti-Bush. When he talks that way, even though I don't pray and don't get it, at least I can tell he's capable of being honest.

That appeal is what got him elected and might get him elected again, because frankly, Kerry lacks it. Well, maybe not lacks it, but he ain't got enough of it to go around. He's not as stiff as Gore but not as much of a hail-fellow-well-met as Bush. And a lot of proud Christian American voters pick their man based on that gut instinct, emotional stuff instead of delving into the issues and trying to decipher the spin.

Bush ad-libs jokes a lot and even though they're dreadfully dumb more than half the time, at least he gets sympathy laughs and people appreciate the effort in the middle of a dry 90 minutes of statistical spin. And for his efforts, Bush occasionally scores the not-to-be-underestimated big laugh such as tonight when he said "I've learned to listen to them" or "She speaks better English than I do." Kerry can't win if he doesn't play that game. I wish he had more of that (or sex appeal, that would work too.) The rolling laugh Kerry got for the "married up" line was the biggest laugh he scored, but that had an element of ickiness to it. Villifying the ultra rich all night but also trying to score laughs off his membership in that club? Unh-uh.

The other reason I give it to Bush was because Kerry owned the most cringe-inducing moment of the night by a wide margin. Bringing up Cheney's daughter. I'm an ardent Kerry man but even to me that comes off as slimey, disingenuous, have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too, I-might-as-well-just-call-her-a-carpet-muncher-and-be-done-with-it bullshit.

All that aside, I still have confidence in Kerry, but I'd prefer to have tremendous confidence. He didn't continue dominating after the first debate, and I really wish he had. Anybody's ball game, and it might be close or it might be a (relative) blowout in either direction. Hard tellin' not knowin'.
User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Post by Enough »

I see how you all are... sure start a poll thread to divert Mitma and I while the grownups get to steal all our points in here, sure. :D

The world is an echo chamber tonight. The debate was mostly rehash, the polls are similar to the last debate and three of us posted the same exchange from the WH press conference in 2002 (but I posted it first in the other thread . 8) ).

All in all a very sucky domestic debate and I think the moderator gets a big chunk of the fault. Where were the environment questions? Jobs questions? It seemed like to me half the questions were more suited for a foreign policy context instead of at a debate supposedly focusing on domestic issues. Bah.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
User avatar
Meghan
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:27 pm
Location: The Group W Bench

Meary Cheney

Post by Meghan »

Rob - do you read James Wolcott? I'm crazy about his style. Anyway, I like what he had to say on the subject of Kerry's reference to Mary Cheney -
http://jameswolcott.com/
If I ventured in the slipstream / between the viaducts of your dream

aka merneith, aka kylhwch
User avatar
godhugh
Forum Admin
Posts: 10016
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:18 pm
Location: Plano, TX
Contact:

Post by godhugh »

Poleaxe wrote:
godhugh wrote:Yes, but Bush essentially told all of us who's job has been outsourced to go back to community college and learn a trade. That's just downright insulting.
But Kerry just told you what you wanted to hear. The truth is that AC repair can provide a decent living, and some of those jobs are gone for good as the economy evolves into a truly global marketplace.
True, some of them are gone for good. However, we can stem the tide so to speak. The tax incentives for offshoring really need to go bye bye. Will that stop all of it, of course not, but it at least makes me more competitive with an Indian worker who's not only cheaper (and typically less skilled), but gives them a tax break as well.

Bush doesn't even do that. He just shoves a Pell grant down my throat and says go back to school. How does that help those folks with Master's Degrees who's jobs get outsourced?
User avatar
RunningMn9
Posts: 24461
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:55 pm
Location: The Sword Coast
Contact:

Post by RunningMn9 »

You guys are going to make me watch this debate now (I tape them in the event that someone implodes and I want to see it).

You're all either lamenting how awful it was, or declaring it a tie (or Kerry win). That is so polar opposite to what the talking heads say, that it makes me wonder.

Part of my problem with these debates is that they are totally useless beyond the mental masturbation factor of wanting to believe that one of these boobs has teh plan to fix our problems.

In 2000, we had lockboxs and fuzzy math hammered into our brains. It was all crap. We had no idea that the President we elected wasn't going to be dealing with lockboxes or performing shifty calculus. He was going to have to respond to the murder of 3,000 Americans one September morning.

To me, that reinforces the old adage. You vote for the man, not the plan. I have more confidence in my left testicle to deal with the unforeseen than I do in Kerry. Maybe you think that Take-it-too-far George went a little overboard in responding to 3,000 Americans being murdered, maybe not.

But I would be surprised if anyone could look at Kerry at think "Yeah, *that's* the guy I want at the helm for when the next unforeseen crisis arises."
And in banks across the world
Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Jews
And every other race, creed, colour, tint or hue
Get down on their knees and pray
The raccoon and the groundhog neatly
Make up bags of change
But the monkey in the corner
Well he's slowly drifting out of range
Poleaxe
Posts: 7140
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:54 pm

Post by Poleaxe »

godhugh wrote:However, we can stem the tide so to speak. The tax incentives for offshoring really need to go bye bye.
I agree. At one time they made sense, but that time is 4 years gone. Now it's just corporate welfare at the expense of the middle and lower-middle class.
Padre
Posts: 4326
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 9:34 am
Location: England

Post by Padre »

RunningMn9 wrote: But I would be surprised if anyone could look at Kerry at think "Yeah, *that's* the guy I want at the helm for when the next unforeseen crisis arises."
I'm continually suprised that so many people appear to look at Bush and think the same thing. I wouldn't trust that guy to drive my bus, let alone my country.

What exactly abut the handling of 9/11 gives you so much confidence in Bush as someone who can handle a crisis? What is it that he did that Kerry or Gore wouldn't have done that was so great?

I think it's pretty much a given that a Kerry administration responding to Sept. 11th or something similar would have done exactly what Bush did: work out who was responsible and bomb the crap out of them. They may not have then gone on to bomb the crap out of an almost entriely unrelated country, true....

I don't think Democrats historically have shown much reticence about bombing the crap out of people as a retaliatory move.
User avatar
Debris
Posts: 4455
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:13 am
Location: Over Dresden at Angels one five

Post by Debris »

After watching the debate last night...well, to be honest, while flipping back and forth between it and the ball games, I just couldn't shake the particular feeling or mental image I got from John Kerry; He's all plans and promises without the

One lady I heard this morning said that he reminds her of the guy in middle school who was running for class president. Promises of Hamburgers and Pizza everyday for lunch. Sock-hops every Friday and detention would be abolished forever.

With Kerry, I see a man who has a plan for EVERYTHING. I hear promises of reform in healthcare, middle class taxes, stem cell research, etc. yet how can anyone believe that all of this, or any of this will ever come to fruition?

Bill Clinton had 8 years to work his healthcare reform plan and he failed miserably. Honestly, how can John Kerry expect to make all of these sweeping changes if he gets in office?

Oh, and the Mary Cheney crack, who is a lesbian BTW :P , snipe was juvenile and uncalled for by Kerry.
User avatar
Ralph-Wiggum
Posts: 17449
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:51 am

Post by Ralph-Wiggum »

[quote="Debris"]After watching the debate last night...well, to be honest, while flipping back and forth between it and the ball games, I just couldn't shake the particular feeling or mental image I got from John Kerry; He's all plans and promises without the
quote]

Is it not better to have many plans and promises (even if all of them can't be kept) than to have no plans other than continuing on the same track? At least with Kerry one can hope that things might change.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Post by LordMortis »

However, we can stem the tide so to speak. The tax incentives for offshoring really need to go bye bye. Will that stop all of it, of course not, but it at least makes me more competitive with an Indian worker who's not only cheaper (and typically less skilled), but gives them a tax break as well.
No shit. I know Bush didn't put these incentives in place, but the problem has been happening under his watch he should be patching the dam. His solution is to look me right in the eye and tell me that it's a good thing that we essentially pay corporation to ship jobs overseas to countries whom we give free money, who in turn subsidize their companies to continue to be able to undercut us. This is a good thing. And he smiles and he laughs, and he goes to the plants and tells the workers that they are strength of America. And he looks them right in the eye, almost intentionally with drool dripping out of the side of his mouth. He stammers. He laughs. "Hey look. But I am giving you $750 this year" And he kicks you in the nuts. Everytime I think of that man and any issue, I totally foget how much I dislike Kerry. That's what the Kerry campaign needs to do. Just smother us with good ole' genuine, slack jawed GWB. Don't put words in his mouth. Just give us moments about him discussing the oil flowing, about the great things he has done for education, the economy, the deficit, consumer confidence, the war on terror, social security, the enviornement, the health care industry, industry, commerce and just about every other thing. :x [/i]
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Post by Defiant »

.
Last edited by Defiant on Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
RunningMn9
Posts: 24461
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:55 pm
Location: The Sword Coast
Contact:

Post by RunningMn9 »

I'm continually suprised that so many people appear to look at Bush and think the same thing. I wouldn't trust that guy to drive my bus, let alone my country.

What exactly abut the handling of 9/11 gives you so much confidence in Bush as someone who can handle a crisis? What is it that he did that Kerry or Gore wouldn't have done that was so great?
Let me put it this way. I trust that Bush will react. I don't trust Kerry to react.

The problem with Al Kerry is that I'm still convinced that their response would have had something to do with cruise missiles. Neither of those two has demonstrated an understanding that we are fighting a war (whether we like it or not, our enemy has been waging war against us), and that this isn't a matter for the local PD.

If you believe that Kerry is a hardass that would have ripped the Taliban to pieces - then I can understand you believing in Kerry.

I don't believe that any more than I believe his mom told him "integrity, integrity, integrity" or that Superman called him on Saturday.

I don't know how there can be any doubt that Bush will respond with the thunder. He's already done it.

I don't think Democrats historically have shown much reticence about bombing the crap out of people as a retaliatory move.
Traditional Democrats (ie. your Harry Truman's), no. The neo-liberals running the party now? They don't appear to have many problems using cruise missiles (the bravery of being out of range and all that), but I would say that have some strong aversions to doing anything that would qualify as earning "the crap out of" after it.

Of course, this is just my opinion. Hopefully I won't have to find out whether I'm right or wrong.
And in banks across the world
Christians, Moslems, Hindus, Jews
And every other race, creed, colour, tint or hue
Get down on their knees and pray
The raccoon and the groundhog neatly
Make up bags of change
But the monkey in the corner
Well he's slowly drifting out of range
User avatar
jblank
Posts: 4811
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:55 pm
Location: Bristol, Tennessee
Contact:

Post by jblank »

My thoughts?

- Bush and his administration are completely clueless and out of touch when it comes to health care costs. They have no idea, that I have been able to perceive, on how to deal with it.

- Bush was inept and knew he was beat on minimum wage.

- Bush spends too much time blaming Education for our problems, while at the same time trying to pimp his joke of an Education plan. The No Child Left Behind program is sad. Its underfunded, full of mandates, and teaches for a test, rather than teaching what students need to know in life.

- Bush still seems more approachable, and is a very affable fella.

- Kerry still much more coherent, much easier to understand.

- Kerry at least had the balls to address some of the hotter topics (minimum wage, glass ceiling, homosexual issues) while Bush just tried to dance around them.

- While it may not be perfect, Kerry's plan to help Americans needing health care, is a bold idea.

- Kerry could still be a bit clearer on how his tax plan will help the middle class. Will he cut middle class tax rates, or simply provide rebate checks?

Overall, Kerry gets my nod, but only slightly. Bush had his best debate, Kerry probably his 2nd best. Still gonna go down to the wire, anyones game at this point.
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30126
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Post by YellowKing »

I think Bush danced around issues that were far too complex for a 90 second reply, rather than pander like Kerry was doing.

I think Kerry talks a GREAT talk. I don't believe for a second that he can walk the walk.
User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7551
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Post by geezer »

That rationale is fine if you see the "war on terror" as the main, overriding concern facing us today. I don't. Furthermore, even if I did, I disagree with the current administration's overriding desire to MAKE it the center of our world when there are problems just as pressing and just as immediate that face us as a nation.

I disagree with the idea that turning this into a "War" with guns and bombs is the way to solve what is, in essence, a cultural and policy war - a conflict between eastern and western ideologies that needs to be resolved, not "defeated" because as much as that may seem hopelessly idealistic to some, the simple fact is that it's just not possible to bomb an ideology and a *tactic* (which is what terrorism is) into nonexistance.

Administration after administration has failed to solve the problems in the Middle East that seem to be the root cause of this current "war"-- and I'm not just talking about the Israel situation, but rather the all-encompassing issues of Energy production, holdovers from strategic positioning during the cold war and human rights problems in a theocratically-ruled society that often seems to be violently anti-progress. I have no faith that the Bush folks have any mind for subtleties like these and therfore when someone says, "hey - at least Bush reacted" I say sure - but he reacted in a manner that addressed the symptoms but not the disease and by inflaming the underlying causes he has ultimately made the disease itself much more powerful by giving it a chance to become drug-resistant (to carry out the analogy).

And finally, as evidenced by these debates, Bush simply seems to think that he has all the answers already. He is sneeringly dismissive of ideas contrary to his own, and to me that displays a dangerous arrogance at best, and at worst a complete disregard for reality. Is Kerry too far to the other extreme? Will he suffer "paralysis by analysis?" It's possible, but I'm still not sure that inaction is worse than the wrong action. Like you, I hope most fervently that we don't have to find out.



RunningMn9 wrote:
I'm continually suprised that so many people appear to look at Bush and think the same thing. I wouldn't trust that guy to drive my bus, let alone my country.

What exactly abut the handling of 9/11 gives you so much confidence in Bush as someone who can handle a crisis? What is it that he did that Kerry or Gore wouldn't have done that was so great?
Let me put it this way. I trust that Bush will react. I don't trust Kerry to react.

The problem with Al Kerry is that I'm still convinced that their response would have had something to do with cruise missiles. Neither of those two has demonstrated an understanding that we are fighting a war (whether we like it or not, our enemy has been waging war against us), and that this isn't a matter for the local PD.

If you believe that Kerry is a hardass that would have ripped the Taliban to pieces - then I can understand you believing in Kerry.

I don't believe that any more than I believe his mom told him "integrity, integrity, integrity" or that Superman called him on Saturday.

I don't know how there can be any doubt that Bush will respond with the thunder. He's already done it.

I don't think Democrats historically have shown much reticence about bombing the crap out of people as a retaliatory move.
Traditional Democrats (ie. your Harry Truman's), no. The neo-liberals running the party now? They don't appear to have many problems using cruise missiles (the bravery of being out of range and all that), but I would say that have some strong aversions to doing anything that would qualify as earning "the crap out of" after it.

Of course, this is just my opinion. Hopefully I won't have to find out whether I'm right or wrong.
User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7551
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Post by geezer »

YellowKing wrote:
I think Kerry talks a GREAT talk. I don't believe for a second that he can walk the walk.
Why?

Nice to see you here, BTW :)
User avatar
Mr. Sparkle
Posts: 12022
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA

Post by Mr. Sparkle »

RM9 wrote:Traditional Democrats (ie. your Harry Truman's), no. The neo-liberals running the party now? They don't appear to have many problems using cruise missiles (the bravery of being out of range and all that), but I would say that have some strong aversions to doing anything that would qualify as earning "the crap out of" after it.
The thing is, what options will either man have to respond to a threat at this point?

Basically, all of our manpower is tied down in Iraq. We're not invading anybody for quite some time.

That leaves: airstrikes, missile strikes, and covert special forces actions. We've established that democrats luuuuv the airpower and cruise missiles... and I think it should be pretty obvious that Kerry digs the special forces guys.

I honestly don't get why anybody thinks that Bush has some secret trick up his sleeve that Kerry won't.

Our response options are extremely limited right now.

Which brings us to the main issue I have with Bush: WE NEED MORE TROOPS. Not in Iraq, but prepared so that we can swiftly respond to any threat... and so the National Guard can be brought back to defend the Homeland.

Bush will not/cannot admit this. He is making us more vulnerable, because saying we need more troops is tantamount to saying "Uh, I fucked up", which he will NEVER EVER do.

I can't believe that people equate his bull-headed idiocy with "leadership". Learn from your f-in mistakes! Why is that so hard?
User avatar
SuperHiro
Posts: 6877
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:00 pm
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by SuperHiro »

I think mentioning Mary Cheney is totally fair game. Her life and her partner are affected by Bush's gay marriage policies.

Andrew Sullivan, what do you think?
keep getting emails asserting that Kerry's mentioning of Mary Cheney is somehow offensive or gratuitous or a "low blow". Huh? Mary Cheney is out of the closet and a member, with her partner, of the vice-president's family. That's a public fact. No one's privacy is being invaded by mentioning this. When Kerry cites Bush's wife or daughters, no one says it's a "low blow." The double standards are entirely a function of people's lingering prejudice against gay people. And by mentioning it, Kerry showed something important. This issue is not an abstract one. It's a concrete, human and real one. It affects many families, and Bush has decided to use this cynically as a divisive weapon in an election campaign. He deserves to be held to account for this - and how much more effective than showing a real person whose relationship and dignity he has attacked and minimized? Does this makes Bush's base uncomfortable? Well, good. It's about time they were made uncomfortable in their acquiescence to discrimination. Does it make Bush uncomfortable? Even better. His decision to bar gay couples from having any protections for their relationships in the constitution is not just a direct attack on the family member of the vice-president. It's an attack on all families with gay members - and on the family as an institution. That's a central issue in this campaign, a key indictment of Bush's record and more than relevant to any debate. For four years, this president has tried to make gay people invisible, to avoid any mention of us, to pretend we don't exist. Well, we do. Right in front of him.
Word.

I thought Bush had to really blow Kerry out of the water, which he didn't, so I'm saying it's a win for Kerry (note: I'm speaking in political strategist mode, not flaming anti-Bush bias mode). Sullivan also had an interesting note. Gore was critized heavily for his changing personalities in the debates. Bush has done basically the same thing here.

The most important facet of these debates is that Kerry looked Presidential. And most importantly, HE LOOKED MORE PRESIDENTIAL THAN BUSH. SNL torched Bush pretty good in their debate skits.

It's still a nail biter, but IMHO Kerry's got the ball and he's approaching the 50.
User avatar
Exodor
Posts: 17196
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:10 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by Exodor »

SuperHiro wrote:The most important facet of these debates is that Kerry looked Presidential. And most importantly, HE LOOKED MORE PRESIDENTIAL THAN BUSH. SNL torched Bush pretty good in their debate skits.
I only saw a snippet of the SNL skits on GMA, but I thought the guy playing Kerry had a great line - something like:

"And I WILL...keep talking. Even though many don't want me to - people like General Shinseki..."

I dunno - I thought it was funny... :oops:


FYI - nice to see you found our little corner of the intraweb, SuperHiro!
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Post by Defiant »

SuperHiro wrote:I think mentioning Mary Cheney is totally fair game. Her life and her partner are affected by Bush's gay marriage policies.
Fair game, perhaps - certainly, Cheney's used his daughter as a political chip too.

Now, back in the democratic convention, Obama said "We coach Little League in the Blue States and yes, we’ve got some gay friends in the Red States. ". I could have understood if Kerry was pointing out that everyone knows someone gay (whether they're out or not), and that they're americans just like everyone else, and they deserve the same rights as everyone else.

But he didn't, he was pretty much saying something along the lines of "Cheney lesbian is lesbian a lesbian great lesbian father lesbian", so Kerry was using Cheney's daughter to paint the administration as "gay", and turn off conservative voters. Now certainly, the bush campaign has tried to paint Kerry as "gay", too, and they've also used similar tactics "Kerry Liberal and Liberal I Liberal have Liberal difference liberal of Liberal opinion.". Both of them are wrong or doing it. Given his record, though, I would have hoped that Kerry would have avoided using a gay person as a political tool. But then I remember, he's a politician.

At least none of them did something like this:
Mary Cherry: Let me just say, on the record, that I love the Gays.

[silence]

Gay man: We love you too, Mary Cherry.

Popular
:lol:
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30126
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Post by YellowKing »

YellowKing wrote:


I think Kerry talks a GREAT talk. I don't believe for a second that he can walk the walk.


Why?
I think it all comes down to his record. He says he would wisely use the US military and consult with allies, yet he wouldn't even vote to authorize the Gulf War which had about as strong a coalition as we've seen post-WW2. He's seemingly got a solution to every domestic issue in the world today, yet he's going to pay for all this by only rolling back tax cuts on the wealthiest 2%. Umm, sorry, but it's not going to happen. Period.

He REALLY reminds me of Gore the way he tells people what they want to hear. I know, I know, all politicians do that. But at least Bush has shown that he will do what HE thinks is necessary, regardless if it pisses people off. I can't help but think if the shit hit the fan and we were attacked gain, Kerry would be holding a summit to get China and Russia's perspective on the matter before making a couple of bombing runs and calling it a day.

I know that answer is blatantly partisan, but I've never pretended to be neutral on the subject matter (though I did pretend to be a flaming liberal for a week).
Dirt
Posts: 11025
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:17 am

Post by Dirt »

Mr. Fed wrote:Bush tonight:
Gosh, I just don't think I ever said I'm not worried about Osama bin Laden. It's kind of one of those ex-a-gger-ations.
Bush two years ago:
I don’t know where he is. Nor — you know, I just don’t spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you. I....I truly am not that concerned about him.
Source.

Maybe he isn't concerned, but he is worried?
Flip-flop.
Post Reply