TPS Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 Great stuff over the weekend! - McCain says Bush not being upfront on Iraq. - Chaffee says he might not vote for Bush. - Lugar agrees with Biden that the Administration has created a mess in Iraq (though biden called their efforts "a damn joke"). - George Will calls the Admin, with regard to Iraq, "the gang that couldn't shoot - straight." - Hagel says "we're in deep trouble in Iraq." - CIA nominee Goss says Cheney stretched Iraq intelligence. But all is well at PPP "Neverland...."
KD in CA Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 That post fits in perfectly with the Kerry campaign. Talk about anything other than Kerry's voting record and (lack of) vision for the country. Well done.
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 Well, to each his own. For every Kerry bash you post people, expect to get a Bush bash back. It's standard procedure in this election, from the candidates themselves, right down to this very board.
JimBob2232 Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 Newsflash! Every one of them is right! The problem is, what is kerry going to do about it? He has less than 2 months to formulate a legitimate plan, and sell it to the american people. He should have done this long ago. Those are all good reasons not to vote for bush...but why change course and vote for kerry?
TPS Posted September 21, 2004 Author Posted September 21, 2004 That post fits in perfectly with the Kerry campaign. Talk about anything other than Kerry's voting record and (lack of) vision for the country. Well done. 39726[/snapback] I think if you substituted Bush in place of kerry above, you'd describe this board to a tee. Can you find the last post here that tried to describe Bush's record or vision? As for me, I'm not voting for Kerry, so I don't feel the need to defend his policies. What I see most often on this board though is blind support for Bush, regardless of what he does. My hope, is that people from both sides of the spectrum will vote for alternative candidates and send a message to both parties.
JimBob2232 Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 My hope, is that people from both sides of the spectrum will vote for alternative candidates and send a message to both parties. I second this opinion, and I am planning on doing so myself.
GG Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 What I see most often on this board though is blind support for Bush, regardless of what he does. 40032[/snapback] I guess we should explore your definition of "most often." Is the defense of Bush a blind defense of Bush, or a defense of Bush knowing that the leading alternative is worse? I'd say that the blindness is an affliction of very few who post here.
stuckincincy Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 Well, to each his own. For every Kerry bash you post people, expect to get a Bush bash back. It's standard procedure in this election, from the candidates themselves, right down to this very board. 39961[/snapback] Yep.
spidey Posted September 21, 2004 Posted September 21, 2004 Great stuff over the weekend! - McCain says Bush not being upfront on Iraq. - Chaffee says he might not vote for Bush. - Lugar agrees with Biden that the Administration has created a mess in Iraq (though biden called their efforts "a damn joke"). - George Will calls the Admin, with regard to Iraq, "the gang that couldn't shoot - straight." - Hagel says "we're in deep trouble in Iraq." - CIA nominee Goss says Cheney stretched Iraq intelligence. But all is well at PPP "Neverland...." 39457[/snapback] What bothers me is none of these moderates in the party challenge W for reelection. Its about time that some of them are speaking up and the fact the Cheney and his hawks has lead Bush into this mess but W believes he is on track. along with other republicans I am now joining the republicans for Kerry group since we need a different approach to Iraq.
checkmate Posted September 22, 2004 Posted September 22, 2004 That post fits in perfectly with the Kerry campaign. Talk about anything other than Kerry's voting record and (lack of) vision for the country. Well done. 39726[/snapback] You know its impossible to talk about a voting record of any legislator. Every bill before Congress is so loaded with pork that there are any number of reasons why someone votes against it even when that legislator actually agrees with the graveman of the proposed legislation. You can pick any Republican legislator and do the same thing. Oddly, Kerry's vision is much in tune with Reagan's "City Upon a Hill" making our country a great example for other nations rather than force other nations to be like us. It fits into his economic plan where we ensure that everyone has minimum standards, including opportunity to work and healthcare. Where I think Kerry is lacking is in regards to healthcare. His plan really does not help those who work for small firms that cannot afford to have a self-insured plan. Nonetheless, Bush's idea that small firms should band together to buy group insurance misses the same point, small firms cannot absorb the risk of catastrophic medical costs.
TPS Posted September 22, 2004 Author Posted September 22, 2004 I guess we should explore your definition of "most often." Is the defense of Bush a blind defense of Bush, or a defense of Bush knowing that the leading alternative is worse? I'd say that the blindness is an affliction of very few who post here. 40529[/snapback] By your logic, no matter what this administration does (or does not do), one can support them because the alternative is worse. What a sad state of affairs it is in this country....
JimBob2232 Posted September 22, 2004 Posted September 22, 2004 along with other republicans I am now joining the republicans for Kerry group since we need a different approach to Iraq. You are entitled to your opinion and your vote, but before you jump completely onto the kerry bandwagon, ask yourself, what exactly will he do? Will he, as I suspect, sit by idlely, and let iraq melt into civil war, causign unrest in the entire middle east while he tries to gain the support of France and the rest of Europe. Or will he somehow magically find the kahones to go in there, remove al-sadr and the rest of the insurgents, and win the peace, and bring our boys home without another soldier leaving blood on the sand? Ironically, re-electing bush will likely be the medicine we need here, because after he is re-elected, he will not be subjected to re-election again, and can do what needs to be done, rather than the politically correct thing. That said, I would urge you to take a look at third party candidates this election. There are some good candidates out there, specifically in the libertarian party. We need to eliminate the 2 party system. Even if you conclude that kerry is the medicine we need in these times, he is not the cure. The cure is a more open and honest debate by all candidates from all parties and all walks of life. Democracy is not a monopoly.
spidey Posted September 22, 2004 Posted September 22, 2004 You are entitled to your opinion and your vote, but before you jump completely onto the kerry bandwagon, ask yourself, what exactly will he do? Will he, as I suspect, sit by idlely, and let iraq melt into civil war, causign unrest in the entire middle east while he tries to gain the support of France and the rest of Europe. Or will he somehow magically find the kahones to go in there, remove al-sadr and the rest of the insurgents, and win the peace, and bring our boys home without another soldier leaving blood on the sand? Ironically, re-electing bush will likely be the medicine we need here, because after he is re-elected, he will not be subjected to re-election again, and can do what needs to be done, rather than the politically correct thing. That said, I would urge you to take a look at third party candidates this election. There are some good candidates out there, specifically in the libertarian party. We need to eliminate the 2 party system. Even if you conclude that kerry is the medicine we need in these times, he is not the cure. The cure is a more open and honest debate by all candidates from all parties and all walks of life. Democracy is not a monopoly. 41215[/snapback] Will the libertarian candidate be invited to the debates? How about any of the other third part candidates. The system needs fixing fast since we have a polarized country and its only getting worse. Just look at how folks on this board attack over everything.
John F. Kerry Posted September 22, 2004 Posted September 22, 2004 Will the libertarian candidate be invited to the debates? How about any of the other third part candidates. 42010[/snapback] Nope. The last thing we need is to have third party candidates screwing up the system. We will keep things as just Democrat and Republican.
Alaska Darin Posted September 22, 2004 Posted September 22, 2004 Will the libertarian candidate be invited to the debates? How about any of the other third part candidates. The system needs fixing fast since we have a polarized country and its only getting worse. Just look at how folks on this board attack over everything. 42010[/snapback] No way will these 2 parties ever let a third party candidate get involved. Too much of a chance they'd lose their monopoly.
spidey Posted September 22, 2004 Posted September 22, 2004 No way will these 2 parties ever let a third party candidate get involved. Too much of a chance they'd lose their monopoly. 42021[/snapback] Actually afraid of being embarrassed is more like it. Cant remember the guys name but ran with Ross first time around humilated the snot out of Qayle. Plus wouldnt you love a debate were the damn questions arent canned, say an open forum so the questioner could reply " Hey dork ya didnt answer what I asked just pontificated on your position"
MichFan Posted September 22, 2004 Posted September 22, 2004 3rd party this, 3rd party that, blah, blah, blah... The 2 parties can't produce a candidate that even remotely interests you guys and somehow a 3rd party is going to offer your political savior who is not in the pockets of special interests, who is better aligned with you on the issues, and who stands by their promises once in office. Okay . All a third party is going to do is look at the polls and triangulate. As I mentioned a while back before the boards were reset, a significant third party would cause most elections to be decided by the House of Representatives. I personally don't think this would be an acceptable situation. Instead of focusing on a 3rd party, why not focus the conversation on something that actually can be addressed -- the roles of Federal, State, and local governments. These roles have gotten so confused by years of liberal big government agendas, activist judges, endless serving of special interests, and tons of pork. The spirit of capitalism should be restored to how our government operates. Right now we as taxpayers are getting the selection of Sams Club (one brand, one size) at boutique shop prices. I credit Bush for at least giving us education and faith-based charity initiatives that recognize State and local authorities do a better job reforming the system than the Federal government, and the Fed's role first and foremost is ensuring accountability on such issues.
Recommended Posts