|
Kerry or Bush? (pg. 18)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Miss Bliss |
| quote: | Originally posted by Stassi
if pvd and tiesto fought, it would probably be histerical.
The only thing funnier is to see Bush and kerry throw down like gangstas. |
They do so much fighting in TV ads and so much harsh criticizing of each other wherever they go that it wouldn't be too far off if they DID throw it down WWF style!! :stongue: |
|
|
| verndogs |
| quote: | Originally posted by Miss Bliss
They do so much fighting in TV ads and so much harsh criticizing of each other wherever they go that it wouldn't be too far off if they DID throw it down WWF style!! :stongue: |
it's nothing compared to the NY senate races in 92 and 98...where everyone pretty much voted on who was less of an than on the platforms |
|
|
| verndogs |
92 NY senate race:
Democratic Challenger Bob Abrahams called Incumbemnt Alfonse D'Amato a "Fascist" during a rally in Sept. D'Amato gets re-elected
98:
D'Amato called Schumer a "Putzhead" (Yiddish for literaly a Penis Head) during a speech a few days before the election
There were also the numerous -slinging commercials I saw back when I was a wee little kid |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vlad
One other thing. This flu 'epidemic' that is going around is not Bush's fault. If anything it stems from the Clinton term. When Clinton took office there were 7 flu vaccine making companies out there. By the time Clinton left office there was only 1 left. Quite ironically, Kerry never showed up to vote to out source it from other countries - obviously not an important issue. |
I was under the impression that conservatives believed in personal responsibility, but I can't even begin to count the number of times the bush admin has blamed the Clenis for its many failings. |
|
|
| mcb001982 |
| voted for bush once and will do it again |
|
|
| trunks1022 |
| let's be honest... anything we opine here on the boards, it won't change anyone's opinion or vote... what a waste of keystrokes :p |
|
|
| vtwin |
Well-Balanced Critique
Bush:
Hide the plants! Political partisans are sucking much of the air out
of the environment with insane rants, and it's tough to get oxygen. So
I am going to try something new by attempting to evaluate the Bush
presidency using simple logic and stone cold facts. Please don't hate
me.
The President's biggest problem is bad foreign intelligence. The CIA
bungled the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction scenario and failed to
predict the toxic problems that have occurred in Iraq after Saddam's
fall. Also, the Central Intelligence Agency and the FBI both failed to
detect the 9/11 plot. All of this happened on Bush's watch.
In response to those catastrophic intelligence failures, the President
has said little. It took him forever to remove CIA chief George Tenet
and Mr. Bush is reluctant to address the WMD and Iraqi controversies,
preferring to paint an optimistic picture of the future.
But millions of Americans are deeply troubled by the chaos in Iraq and
the President's hopeful outlook is not soothing that apprehension.
Thus, Mr. Bush is fighting for his political life.
On the homefront, things are better. Despite democratic hysteria, the
economic sky is not falling. Unemployment is less than it was when
Bill Clinton won reelection in 1996, and most Americans are living
comfortable lives. The situation does vary from state to state,
however. Florida, for example, is booming, while Ohio is struggling.
That situation makes the electoral vote outlook a tossup.
Gas prices are way up, but Americans seem to be taking that in stride.
Once again, the President has not said much about rising fuel prices,
concentrating on the big picture, which is that the U.S. economy is
much better than that in most other developed countries.
On social issues, Mr. Bush has played it smart. He and his
conservative base are compatible and the President sincerely believes
that gay marriage, partial birth abortion and faith based initiatives
are subjects worth taking a strong stand on. Bush's support is much
more fervent than Kerry's, according to all the polls, and that's
because of his social outlook.
The presidency of George W. Bush is hard to evaluate because of the
war on terror, which has consumed much of his time. The No Child Left
Behind Act is a vast improvement over the directionless academic chaos
that had been plaguing many American school districts. The funding
issue is largely bogus: many states simply can't spend all the money
that is available because of poor administration.
Homeland Security is debatable, but what is undeniable is that we have
not been hit again by Al Qaeda. That's a big win for Mr. Bush.
So summing up, the President's big downside is the intelligence
debacle and his failure to adequately explain it. His big plus is that
most Americans like him, and his conservative base reveres him. If he
defeats John Kerry, he will do it on who he is, rather than what he's
done.
Kerry:
If John Kerry wins the presidential election, he can thank Donald
Rumsfeld. The Secretary of Defense truly believed the Iraqi people
would rise up and help the United States pacify their country, and
therefore did not plan adequately for the guerrilla war that began
after Saddam was toppled.
That war has put President Bush on the defensive and is, perhaps, the
defining issue in the campaign.
Senator Kerry has done an effective job pointing out the mistakes of
the Bush administration and a sympathetic media has aided him every
step of the way. That's a potent one-two punch; the Kerry challenge
echoed by network news broadcasts and major urban papers like the LA
and New York Times. Together they are pounding home a simple message:
Iraq is screwed up, Kerry can do better.
But the Kerry challenge stalls after leaving the Iraq issue, because
the senator has not defined himself to the American people. Many of us
simply do not know how he will handle complicated problems, and how he
has arrived at this belief system.
Washington Post assistant managing editor Bob Woodward, the Watergate
guy, recently appeared on my TV program saying that John Kerry would
not give him an interview even though he submitted his questions to
Kerry in advance! Woodward and I agreed that we have no idea where
Kerry stands on the following:
* How would he pay for the massive government medical insurance he
says he will provide? Taxing the rich cannot cover the trillions of
dollars that will be needed.
* How many new troops will he will send to Iraq and where will
they come from?
* What will he do to prevent more than three million illegal
immigrants from crossing the border from Mexico each year?
* And why does he oppose gay marriage when he voted against The
Defense of Marriage Act signed by President Clinton?
In addition, I would like to know why, in 1991, Kerry voted against
removing Saddam's army from Iraq by force, in light of the fact that
at least five thousand Kuwaiti women were raped by Saddam's
brutalizers, according to the European Journal of International Law.
I'd also like to know what he would say to General Tommy Franks about
Osama Bin Laden. Franks has said Kerry is flat out wrong to accuse the
Bush administration of "outsourcing" the job of catching Bin Laden in
Tora Bora to "warlords." According to Franks, U.S. Special Forces were
embedded with Afghan locals in the hunt for Bin Laden. Who's right,
Franks or Kerry?
Also, Senator Kerry has also been a staunch supporter of legalized
partial birth abortion. Why does he think 64 senators voted to ban the
procedure?
All of these questions remain unanswered by the junior senator from
Massachusetts, thus his challenge is really built on the chaos in
Iraq, not a publicly stated clear and present vision.
I've known John Kerry for 25 years and he's always been a hard man to
read. If he becomes President of the United States, there's no reason
to believe he will not remain that way. |
|
|
| Yan |
| quote: | Originally posted by vtwin
Well-Balanced Critique
Bush:
Hide the plants! Political partisans are sucking much of the air out
of the environment with insane rants, and it's tough to get oxygen. So
I am going to try something new by attempting to evaluate the Bush
presidency using simple logic and stone cold facts. Please don't hate
me.
The President's biggest problem is bad foreign intelligence. The CIA
bungled the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction scenario and failed to
predict the toxic problems that have occurred in Iraq after Saddam's
fall. Also, the Central Intelligence Agency and the FBI both failed to
detect the 9/11 plot. All of this happened on Bush's watch.
In response to those catastrophic intelligence failures, the President
has said little. It took him forever to remove CIA chief George Tenet
and Mr. Bush is reluctant to address the WMD and Iraqi controversies,
preferring to paint an optimistic picture of the future.
But millions of Americans are deeply troubled by the chaos in Iraq and
the President's hopeful outlook is not soothing that apprehension.
Thus, Mr. Bush is fighting for his political life.
On the homefront, things are better. Despite democratic hysteria, the
economic sky is not falling. Unemployment is less than it was when
Bill Clinton won reelection in 1996, and most Americans are living
comfortable lives. The situation does vary from state to state,
however. Florida, for example, is booming, while Ohio is struggling.
That situation makes the electoral vote outlook a tossup.
Gas prices are way up, but Americans seem to be taking that in stride.
Once again, the President has not said much about rising fuel prices,
concentrating on the big picture, which is that the U.S. economy is
much better than that in most other developed countries.
On social issues, Mr. Bush has played it smart. He and his
conservative base are compatible and the President sincerely believes
that gay marriage, partial birth abortion and faith based initiatives
are subjects worth taking a strong stand on. Bush's support is much
more fervent than Kerry's, according to all the polls, and that's
because of his social outlook.
The presidency of George W. Bush is hard to evaluate because of the
war on terror, which has consumed much of his time. The No Child Left
Behind Act is a vast improvement over the directionless academic chaos
that had been plaguing many American school districts. The funding
issue is largely bogus: many states simply can't spend all the money
that is available because of poor administration.
Homeland Security is debatable, but what is undeniable is that we have
not been hit again by Al Qaeda. That's a big win for Mr. Bush.
So summing up, the President's big downside is the intelligence
debacle and his failure to adequately explain it. His big plus is that
most Americans like him, and his conservative base reveres him. If he
defeats John Kerry, he will do it on who he is, rather than what he's
done.
Kerry:
If John Kerry wins the presidential election, he can thank Donald
Rumsfeld. The Secretary of Defense truly believed the Iraqi people
would rise up and help the United States pacify their country, and
therefore did not plan adequately for the guerrilla war that began
after Saddam was toppled.
That war has put President Bush on the defensive and is, perhaps, the
defining issue in the campaign.
Senator Kerry has done an effective job pointing out the mistakes of
the Bush administration and a sympathetic media has aided him every
step of the way. That's a potent one-two punch; the Kerry challenge
echoed by network news broadcasts and major urban papers like the LA
and New York Times. Together they are pounding home a simple message:
Iraq is screwed up, Kerry can do better.
But the Kerry challenge stalls after leaving the Iraq issue, because
the senator has not defined himself to the American people. Many of us
simply do not know how he will handle complicated problems, and how he
has arrived at this belief system.
Washington Post assistant managing editor Bob Woodward, the Watergate
guy, recently appeared on my TV program saying that John Kerry would
not give him an interview even though he submitted his questions to
Kerry in advance! Woodward and I agreed that we have no idea where
Kerry stands on the following:
* How would he pay for the massive government medical insurance he
says he will provide? Taxing the rich cannot cover the trillions of
dollars that will be needed.
* How many new troops will he will send to Iraq and where will
they come from?
* What will he do to prevent more than three million illegal
immigrants from crossing the border from Mexico each year?
* And why does he oppose gay marriage when he voted against The
Defense of Marriage Act signed by President Clinton?
In addition, I would like to know why, in 1991, Kerry voted against
removing Saddam's army from Iraq by force, in light of the fact that
at least five thousand Kuwaiti women were raped by Saddam's
brutalizers, according to the European Journal of International Law.
I'd also like to know what he would say to General Tommy Franks about
Osama Bin Laden. Franks has said Kerry is flat out wrong to accuse the
Bush administration of "outsourcing" the job of catching Bin Laden in
Tora Bora to "warlords." According to Franks, U.S. Special Forces were
embedded with Afghan locals in the hunt for Bin Laden. Who's right,
Franks or Kerry?
Also, Senator Kerry has also been a staunch supporter of legalized
partial birth abortion. Why does he think 64 senators voted to ban the
procedure?
All of these questions remain unanswered by the junior senator from
Massachusetts, thus his challenge is really built on the chaos in
Iraq, not a publicly stated clear and present vision.
I've known John Kerry for 25 years and he's always been a hard man to
read. If he becomes President of the United States, there's no reason
to believe he will not remain that way. |
Beautifully put. Really sums everything up for us.
Thanks a bundle. |
|
|
| verndogs |
I voted for the race I cared about the most
Schumer over Mills!
then I had fun with the rest of my votes :-)
Edit: - the Race for Seante in NY
PS: I Voted for Dubya all in the name of the superme court |
|
|
|
|
