Bush Kerry 2

My predictions.

Bush will be more forcefull...his head will be shaking so much he may need treatment for concussion..... I don't imagine he will get though the entire debate without mentioning the war on terror (assuming no question is asked about it) if one is asked i will allow the term :lol:

If Kerry is as smart as he is supposed to be he should be ready for a cheney like attack of disrespect and he needs to use stronger language to convey his message.
Kerry needs to know the real facts so he can rebut any spin/inacuracies/lies/misleading statements.
Kerry doesn't need to spin anything here as he has an advantage of Bush's economic record as ammunition... I predict he will press that home.
I don't imagine Kerry being able to stay off this weeks Iraq report.(unless a direct question is raised)

Your talking about a second debate right? When will it be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rip The Jacker

Your talking about a second debate right? When will it be?

---

Friday.

I will watch.

Though i think i'll have a hard time watching/hearing Bush's

breathingtechnique.

Don't they have someone on his team to teach him that???



Yogi

Even with this weeks news about Iraq and it being very bad for Bush i am hoping the topics will be more about domestic issues.
I have long complained that this seems to be a one issue government in office and the election seems to be focused purely on that issue...while things have been falling apart domestically under cover.

In the US, it's on at 9. I hope this focuses on domestic issues. Just got interrupted by a call for donation to the Democratic Party. Had an interesting conversation about bush...excuse me while I vomit.
Tonight is an open forum, audience asking questions. Let's hope Kerry wipes the floor with Bush, although Kerry leaves a bit to be desired too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

In the US, it's on at 9. .

---

you must be on the eastern coast :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

In the US, it's on at 9. I hope this focuses on domestic issues. Just got interrupted by a call for donation to the Democratic Party. Had an interesting conversation about bush...excuse me while I vomit.
Tonight is an open forum, audience asking questions. Let's hope Kerry wipes the floor with Bush, although Kerry leaves a bit to be desired too.

---

I wholeheartedly agree. I wish I was a Kerry advisor. Bush would be cornered so badly he'd probably have a nervous breakdown in front of America.

Kerry needs a home run these so-called "swing voters".

I used to wonder how could there be swing voters with the differing stances of the two candidates.

Now it seems that swing voters are folks that feel virtually unaffected by the current administration and/or don't have really overwelming feelings for or against some mainstream issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

I wholeheartedly agree. I wish I was a Kerry advisor. Bush would be cornered so badly he'd probably have a nervous breakdown in front of America.

Kerry needs a home run these so-called "swing voters".

I used to wonder how could there be swing voters with the differing stances of the two candidates.

Now it seems that swing voters are folks that feel virtually unaffected by the current administration and/or don't have really overwelming feelings for or against some mainstream issues.

---

I wish I were an advisor too. Swing voters, at this point, absolutely confound me...must be a true life case of not knowing your ass from your elbow.
Yes, I'm from the East Coast. Gonna order chinese and hope I don't choke watching that nitwit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

Swing voters, at this point, absolutely confound me...must be a true life case of not knowing your ass from your elbow.

---

My opinion about the swing voters is they need to have ALL of the facts before making a decision. They just are going to use their elbows to jet through all of the asses:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

I wish I were an advisor too. Swing voters, at this point, absolutely confound me...must be a true life case of not knowing your ass from your elbow.
Yes, I'm from the East Coast. Gonna order chinese and hope I don't choke watching that nitwit

---

I don't think it has to do with "not knowing", it has to do with one leader appearing to be able to make a difference.

Everyone has an opinion, but very few seem to think that theirs will make any difference at all.

The "swing vote" comes from a candidate that can inspire the apathetic. He is a person who threatens to break the status quo to effect real change.

So far Bush is the status quo and Kerry looks like Herman Munster.

I want to hear about health care, that is a real issue. This Middle East crap and Vietnam crap, is exactly that.

It really doesn't matter to me who wins, it will have no impact on my life. It is like voting for one Weeble over another. Weebles wobble but they don't fall down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hobbes

I don't think it has to do with "not knowing", it has to do with one leader appearing to be able to make a difference.

Everyone has an opinion, but very few seem to think that theirs will make any difference at all.

The "swing vote" comes from a candidate that can inspire the apathetic. He is a person who threatens to break the status quo to effect real change.

So far Bush is the status quo and Kerry looks like Herman Munster.

---

Status quo = the current shit we are in

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Status quo = the current shit we are in

---

I'm doing fine. Sorry about your shit.

I must use shit to grow roses. Just the kind of resourceful bastard I am.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hobbes

I'm doing fine. Sorry about your shit.

I must use shit to grow roses. Just the kind of resourceful bastard I am.

---

Agreed...you are a bastard. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Agreed...you are a bastard. :lol: :lol: :lol:

---

:o :blink: :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hobbes

:o :blink: :lol:

---

:o

Was the big debate this frank?

:lol:

According the radio it was a fairly good humoured draw, so the apathetic can go back to sleep.

Bush did a lot better this time...but i feel he overcompenstaed for the last debate by shouting instead of talking firmly. He showed a lack of control when he interrupted the moderator, but overall he did a much better job
I think Kerry got the upper hand purely on content detail.

Are you kidding me? What detail did he lie out? All of his answers are I have a plan or go to John Kerry.com to see my plan.

So many more missed opportunities by Bush again.

I wish that I could have been in the studio audience to ask Mr. Kerry a question. This would have been it: “Mr. Kerry you say that you are going to be as strong on defense as Bush but yet when Saddam Hussein had invaded another country you voted against going to war, but yet you authorized the use of force to remove him from power this time which you now say was the wrong war at the wrong time.”

Lets see him answer that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank

Are you kidding me? What detail did he lie out? All of his answers are I have a plan or go to John Kerry.com to see my plan.

So many more missed opportunities by Bush again.

I wish that I could have been in the studio audience to ask Mr. Kerry a question. This would have been it: “Mr. Kerry you say that you are going to be as strong on defense as Bush but yet when Saddam Hussein had invaded another country you voted against going to war, but yet you authorized the use of force to remove him from power this time which you now say was the wrong war at the wrong time.”

Lets see him answer that.

---

That is not a question, but a statement.

You are so bias, it is unbelievable.



@vidcc: couldn.t have said it better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SensualBarfing

That is not a question, but a statement.

You are so bias, it is unbelievable.



@vidcc: couldn.t have said it better.

---

Do the words pot, kettle and black mean anything to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank

Do the words pot, kettle and black mean anything to you?

---

How am i bias?

I can remember plenty of threads before the big delete 2 where you’ve shown your political stripe. I would love to point some of them out to you but for reasons beyond my control I can’t :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank

Are you kidding me? What detail did he lie out? .

---

he gave outlines of his plans...by details he said what those plans were....what time would he have to give the complete thing? if you want to find out do as he suggested...go to his site and read..

Quote:

---

All of his answers are I have a plan or go to John Kerry.com to see my plan.

---

Did you have your hands over your ears again shouting "I'M NOT LISTENING, I'M NOT LISTENING LA LA LA LA!!!!!!" :lol:

The weird thing with these debates is that they both contradict each other and in the end your not quit sure who is correct.

One weird thing i noticed - i wonder if it was a coincidence, or im way off
In the Public almost 2 seats behind Kerry there was a Really "big" woman sitting there - wearing really White bright clothes - she stuck out of the crowd like a neon light. Whenever the camera focused on Kerry from the most obvious focus direction she was there. Now i dont know what the unconciouns effect of seeing a thin kerry with big chic in background - on Bushes side it was Generally standard type of humans......
Just a thought

Last night's debate was quite a spectacle..at least Bush was. He showed a total lack of self-discilpine and self-control. He interrupted Kerry quite often, and started yelling over moderator Charles Gibson.

This does not show a strong and capable leader, but rather a level of immaturity and a distinct lack of tolerance for rules and laws that might otherwise impede his personal desires.

Bush seemed to draw conclusions that were diametrically opposed to what is actually happening...not only in Iraq, but on the domestic front as well.

This is not a "leader". This is Bush Gone Wild...much like the leader of the hunters on "Lord of the Flies. -ruthie

The Scary Little Man
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Friday 08 October 2004

"He had a feeling that the answer was quite different and that he ought to know it, but he could not think of it. He began to get frightened, and that is bad for thinking."
- J.R.R. Tolkien

George W. Bush, still smarting from his embarrassing performance in the Florida debate, decided on Friday night in St. Louis that volume was a good substitute for strength, that yelling would be mistaken for gravitas. The result was an ugly, disturbing, genuinely frightening show. In my report on the first debate, I described Bush as, "Shrill. Defensive. Muddled. Angry, very angry. Repetitive. Uninformed. Outmatched. Unprepared. Hesitant." As bad as that display was, it honestly paled in comparison to the frenzied hectoring Bush sprayed at 140 Missouri citizens who had the ill fortune of watching the man come unglued before their eyes.

John Kerry, by comparison, was every inch the controlled prosecutor pressing his case to the jury. It was, perhaps, that calm delineation of Bush's myriad errors which caused the Republican candidate to blow his stack. Exactly 30 minutes into the debate, Bush became so agitated by Kerry's description of the "back-door draft," which is literally bleeding the life out of our National Guard and Reserve forces, that he lunged out of his chair and shrieked over moderator Charles Gibson, who was trying to maintain some semblance of decorum.

"You tell Tony Blair we're going alone," Bush roared. "Tell Tony Blair we're going alone!" The disturbed murmur from the crowd was audible. Bush, simply, frightened them.

More unsettling than Bush's demonstrable agitation was his almost uncanny disconnect from reality. The voluminous report released by Charles Duelfer and the Iraq Survey Group, compiled by 1,625 U.N. and U.S. weapons inspectors after two years of searching some 1,700 sites in Iraq at a cost of more than $1 billion, stated flatly that no weapons of mass destruction exist in that nation, that no weapons of mass destruction have existed in that nation for years, and that any capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction within that nation has been crumbling for the same amount of years.

"My opponent said that America must pass a global test before we used force to protect ourselves," said Bush during the Iraq phase of the debate. "That's the kind of mindset that says sanctions were working. That's the kind of mindset that said, 'Let's keep it at the United Nations and hope things go well.' Saddam Hussein was a threat because he could have given weapons of mass destruction to terrorist enemies. Sanctions were not working."

What? First of all, the Duelfer Report proves beyond any question that sanctions had worked incredibly well. The stuff wasn't there, because Scott Ritter and the UNSCOM inspectors destroyed it all during the 1990s, along with any and all equipment and facilities to make it. The stuff wasn't there because the sanctions put into place against Hussein prevented him from getting any material to develop weapons. The stuff wasn't there because Hussein stopped making it years ago, because the sanctions were breaking his back. The sanctions worked.

When Bush made the statement about Hussein giving weapons of mass destruction to "terrorist enemies," the needle edged over from 'Dumb' to 'Deranged.' How many different ways must one say "The stuff wasn't there" before George picks up the clue phone? How does someone give away something he doesn't have?

Bush continued in this appalling vein when he said, "He keeps talking about, 'Let the inspectors do their job.' It's naive and dangerous to say that. That's what the Duelfer report showed." Welcome to Bush World, where everything is upside down and two plus two equals a bag of hammers. It is naive and dangerous to point out that the inspectors got the job done in the 1990s, that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction whatsoever? No, George. It is simply the truth. The mental disconnect reared its shouting head repeatedly throughout the evening. Bush somehow lost track of where he was at one point and called his opponent, "Senator Kennedy." He told one questioner that he would control the deficit by stopping Congress from spending, only a few minutes after defending the fact that he had never, not once, vetoed a spending bill from Congress.

He made an accountant crack about "Battling green eyeshades," a statement that immediately became a first-ballot nominee for the Gibberish Hall of Fame. When asked what kind of Supreme Court Justice he would nominate if given an opportunity, he wandered off along a free-association rant about Dred Scott. Clearly, this President will make sure to nominate people to the bench who are opposed to chattel slavery.

Perhaps the most telling moment came when questioner Linda Grabel asked Bush, "Please give three instances in which you came to realize you had made a wrong decision, and what you did to correct it."

As with his April prime time press conference, in which he was asked a very similar question, Bush absolutely refused to admit to any errors in judgment, beyond a cryptic quip about mistakes in personnel appointments which he would not elaborate upon. He opened himself up to the judgment of history, a sad straddle given the simple fact that no President can avoid such a judgment. That was all he was willing to offer. Ms. Grabel did not hear about three mistakes. She did not even hear about one.

Bush was every inch the angry man on Friday night, which is dangerous enough. But to witness anger combined with belligerent ignorance, with a willful denial of basic facts, to witness a man utterly incapable of admitting to any mistakes while his clear errors in judgment are costing his country in blood, to see that combination roiling within the man who is in charge of the most awesome military arsenal in the history of the planet, is more than dangerous.

It is flatly terrifying.

from truthout via AWW

I nearly posted that an hour ago ruthie... from your site ;)

However, I contained myself incase you or Scroff came in :P

awww. you are welcome to post anything from our site you wuld like. Speaking of which, what happened to the thingy from the old board where you could put your site address?
Did you get to see any of the debates? It was real trip watching Bush jumping up and down like a yo-yo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

I nearly posted that an hour ago ruthie... from your site ;)

However, I contained myself incase you or Scroff came in :P

---

Read it and thought Hmmm..a post that is about to launch Post Armageddon from Hank and Manny. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

awww. you are welcome to post anything from our site you wuld like. Speaking of which, what happened to the thingy from the old board where you could put your site address?
Did you get to see any of the debates? It was real trip watching Bush jumping up and down like a yo-yo.

---

I added your site to your sig ruthie ;)

Why, thank you, RF. Now, let the real debate begin. This oughta be good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank

I can remember plenty of threads before the big delete 2 where you’ve shown your political stripe. I would love to point some of them out to you but for reasons beyond my control I can’t :(

---

So you say my political stripe is bias????:blink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Kerry needs a home run these so-called "swing voters".

I used to wonder how could there be swing voters with the differing stances of the two candidates.

Now it seems that swing voters are folks that feel virtually unaffected by the current administration and/or don't have really overwelming feelings for or against some mainstream issues.

---

I know of quite a few people who say they can't really see much difference between Bush and Kerry (policy-wise). There are also some who hate Bush, but also think that putting Kerry into the White House would not be that big of an improvement (if any).


As for me, I will be voting for a third party candidate this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigy Girl

I know of quite a few people who say they can't really see much difference between Bush and Kerry (policy-wise). There are also some who hate Bush, but also think that putting Kerry into the White House would not be that big of an improvement (if any).

---

I hear a lot of that, Prodigy Girl. I think people in the United States want a lot of the same things. They are just terribly, bitterly divided over how to get there, and who to lead us there.

I hope the next debate will delve more in depth into domestic issues, goals, plans, and how they will pay for what they propose. I plan to go to both of the candidate's websites and examine closely.

One thing I am tiring of, whether it is in a forum, and I have been on a few, or an actual presidential debate. We all have different opinions, different perspectives, different takes on even a debate. But everyone should have a right to express their opinions without being ridiculed or judged personally for their opinions. It subtracts from the debate itself to be ridiculing a debater on how quickly he jumps up from a chair. I mean, get real. Is that what this election has come to? Judging a candidate's ability to be president on his facial expressions, or comparing him to a yo yo? Or a flip flop for that matter?

When I go to a forum (and this one isn't near as bad at this as a lot of other ones out there are) and see extremely bright young men and women getting slam dunked and personally ridiculed for opinions they have formed, for their views, it makes me ashamed. What are we teaching them. (don't you dare express a viewpoint that varies from mine or I will teach you to never express them again by whatever means it takes) Debating and flaming with personal putdowns are two entirely different things in my opinion.

I am having to search darn hard just to get unbiased, non ridiculing reports on the debate. I finally came up with something. A transcript of the actual debate itself. ;)

Thank you for posting in here, Prodigy Girl. I really appreciated getting your viewpoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Everose

One thing I am tiring of, whether it is in a forum, and I have been on a few, or an actual presidential debate. We all have different opinions, different perspectives, different takes on even a debate. But everyone should have a right to express their opinions without being ridiculed or judged personally for their opinions. It subtracts from the debate itself to be ridiculing a debater on how quickly he jumps up from a chair. I mean, get real. Is that what this election has come to? Judging a candidate's ability to be president on his facial expressions, or comparing him to a yo yo? Or a flip flop for that matter?

When I go to a forum (and this one isn't near as bad at this as a lot of other ones out there are) and see extremely bright young men and women getting slam dunked and personally ridiculed for opinions they have formed, for their views, it makes me ashamed. What are we teaching them. (don't you dare express a viewpoint that varies from mine or I will teach you to never express them again by whatever means it takes) Debating and flaming with personal putdowns are two entirely different things in my opinion.

---

Everyone is entitled to their opinion...I agree. As for my comment on Bush looking like a yo-yo...I have no regrets. One can look at it as ridicule if they so desire. I do not have to respect Bush's opinion...especially when he stands before the American people and LIES. Facial expressions and body language communicate all sorts of things. bush tends to smirk, sneer, and interrupt...that is what I saw when I watched both debates, and I watched them both more then once. this should not be mistaken for my defending Kerry. I think Kerry has also exhibited undesirable qualities.
Judgement on a candidate's ability to hold a position of ultimate power is essential, and using whatever tools are available to help form one's opinion/judgement of said candidate is of equal importance.
I think the bush administration has put forth to the American people the attitude of "don't you dare express a viewpoint that varies from mine or I will teach you to never express them again by whatever means it takes".
Take a look at what has happened to people expressing opposing viewpoints, be it other gov't. officials (Sibel Edmonds) being silenced by bullshit gag orders, be it protesters who have had home visits by the FBI, no-fly lists (which even had Kennedy's name on it...oops), decorated Marine Corps General Zinni, called a traitor, etc.
For a long time, most Democrats and liberals have tried to take the high ground by not resorting to personal attacks and mud-slinging. However, when the Right is embodied in the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Joe Scarborough, Mike Savage, and others, we end up trampled and left bloody by their vitriolic rhetoric. Regardless, the left has not been as vitriolic as the right, and I don't feel that I am expressing myself that way either.
Bush did jump up and down like a yo-yo. I'm calling it like i see it, and I saw it for an hour and a half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigy Girl

I know of quite a few people who say they can't really see much difference between Bush and Kerry (policy-wise). There are also some who hate Bush, but also think that putting Kerry into the White House would not be that big of an improvement (if any).

---

I'm not a Kerry supporter per se either, but voting for Bush is like voting for a piece of particle board instead of a monkey and.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prodigy Girl

As for me, I will be voting for a third party candidate this year.

---

........in this election, voting for a third party candidate is like voting for chicken grease and putting the particle board in office.

Voting one's conscience is great. This time I must vote my agenda .

Having missed the first debate, I was desperate to catch the second, but still only managed the last 35 minutes or so.
I was interested to hear Bush's response to the potential of reinstating the draft...apparently that question is being raised all over the "internets".

Currently searching for the rest of the nets...so far I've seen but one.
Anyone have a URL?


Humorously, the talking heads all agreed that Bush did better this second time around.
He must have been absolutely abysmal in the first debate if what I saw was a great improvement.

Text of Bush Kerry Debate II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clocker

I was interested to hear Bush's response to the potential of reinstating the draft...apparently that question is being raised all over the "internets".
.

---

I believe Bush when he says he won't bring back the draft..after all if anyone knows how to dodge it.......