Opinions or facts? Bush & Kerry

[Harmanie]

I was just curiouse because I have seen and heard so MANY different sides of opinions and facts of this election. I mean, There is one party that says that Kerry is a man that doesn't really care about life its self. What I mean by this is that is his abortion policy. Now That I know to be true as a fact. He does support abortions. But to hold it against him is all in your opinion. Now what I know to be true as an opinion is that some people believe that He lies about a lot of things. Things such as not being truthful about being the soldier that he was put out to be. The lying part is up to you to believe or not to believe in. There are other things they say about kerry but I'm not sure if they are facts or if they are opinions. FACTS! Thats what I want. NOT opinions. I want to know what is really going on. But am I going to really get the strait up answeres from politicians? I mean come on. No one really is what they say they are.


Then there is Bush. Okay, The opinion that I know of is that they say that he isn't afraid of anything eather. like the war for instance. Is he afraid that we are loosing more of our men than that of the enemies? Or is he still trying to finish what his father could not? Or is it that some people agree that because we fight the enemy, destroy thier land and then rebuild what we did. Is that punishing them or is that telling them that each and everytime they do somthing wrong we will allways do somthing about it and then make it better for them to do it again. But maybe worse the next time so that we, Amaricans may live in fear each and every holiday?
I don't really know any true facts of Bush because people feel so strongly of this man and how he helped America. I want to know what really is going on.

So who do you think is most Ligit? and what facts do you know?
Who would you vote for to save this country before another terrerist attack. Or to save us from another threat. Can you continue to live every day wakeing up thinking that today might be the day that something bad can happend.

Well here is my opinion. I don't want another 9-11. I don't want to have to constantly hear that the terrorest threat level has gone up some more. Well, do you?

[heinz57_79]

I'm going to say very little, because political "discussions" get very heated on occasion. I will say, though, that I will be voting for Kerry. I don't care for Bush's agenda, or his views on certain groups, or the way he has been using 9/11 as part of his campain. 9/11 was bad enough without Bush using it as a political tool. I believe Kerry will do what he can to fix the economy, and when it comes to war, I think i would be more inclined to trust someone with our troops who has actually BEEN to war, BEEN in the military, instead of someone who made excuses and went AWOL. But that's just me. :)

[the gryphon]

A post that begins with an inflamatory abortion statement really belongs in the dog house.

[Harmanie]

Right. I see your point. But do you know any facts what so ever that really support ether one of them. What I mean is, do you know anything what so ever that can help me understand each of the candidates a little bit better. I really only hear other peoples opinions. I'm not sure that I want just that. Opinions are great, but your right, they ofton do lead into arguements. But facts are facts right? Thats what I am looking for.
Its cool that you already know who you are voting for. It shows that you know what you want. "choose or loose" lol!:p

[the gryphon]

I have lots of opinions, and some facts. I won't post them while this is in general. If it gets moved (karen can move it). I'll be more than happy to reply with my opinion. Though I guarantee you won't appreciate what I have to say.

[Harmanie]

Well I was going to post this into the dog house but then I thought that it would be okay to post it in general. Was that a bad judgment call on my part? I didn't mean to affend any one. I just wanted some questions answered and was wondering who were people voting for. if you wish it to stay in the dog house please pm me and I will delete the one in general.

[the gryphon]

Okay, it's been moved.


I was just curiouse because I have seen and heard so MANY different sides of opinions and facts of this election. I mean, There is one party that says that Kerry is a man that doesn't really care about life its self. What I mean by this is that is his abortion policy. Now That I know to be true as a fact. He does support abortions.
I've read nothing to suggest he "supports abortions". I understand him to be pro-choice. He believes that the woman, and her God decide what is best for her body. He has never said he supports abortion. I am pro choice. I could NEVER have an abortion. EVER. I also don't believe it's my right to limit other women's reproductive rights, to make those difficult decisions for them.


But to hold it against him is all in your opinion. Now what I know to be true as an opinion is that some people believe that He lies about a lot of things. Things such as not being truthful about being the soldier that he was put out to be. The lying part is up to you to believe or not to believe in. There are other things they say about kerry but I'm not sure if they are facts or if they are opinions. FACTS! Thats what I want. NOT opinions. I want to know what is really going on. But am I going to really get the strait up answeres from politicians? I mean come on. No one really is what they say they are.
This is hard. We will really never know what is in his heart. The best we can hope for is a discussion of the issues. That's been avoided by both sides. We've been given "Swift boat vets", legacy deferrals and other silly things, but we've not been given issues. Perhaps in the debates.


Then there is Bush. Okay, The opinion that I know of is that they say that he isn't afraid of anything eather. like the war for instance. Is he afraid that we are loosing more of our men than that of the enemies? Or is he still trying to finish what his father could not? Or is it that some people agree that because we fight the enemy, destroy thier land and then rebuild what we did. Is that punishing them or is that telling them that each and everytime they do somthing wrong we will allways do somthing about it and then make it better for them to do it again. But maybe worse the next time so that we, Amaricans may live in fear each and every holiday?
I don't really know any true facts of Bush because people feel so strongly of this man and how he helped America. I want to know what really is going on.
This is so insanely complicated. We have thousands of years of history (jewish/muslim/ arab/israeli), 50 years of UN policy, oil, Bush Sr., the gulf war.... so much.
I'd say the best we can hope for is to understand how Bush handles each crisis that our nation faces, and try to extrapolate how Kerry would respond. I know what I believe, and can offer that if it's desired.


So who do you think is most Ligit? and what facts do you know?
Who would you vote for to save this country before another terrerist attack. Or to save us from another threat. Can you continue to live every day wakeing up thinking that today might be the day that something bad can happend.
Both are politicians. We see only a tiny portion of what's going on, and by and large we're told what to think of what we see.


Well here is my opinion. I don't want another 9-11. I don't want to have to constantly hear that the terrorest threat level has gone up some more. Well, do you?
I also don't want another 9/11. I also don't want my beau returning to Iraq. How this will all play out we will see after the elections. Both candidates are treading lightly on the Iraq issue, and both are putting on a tough front on terror. Both are campaigning. We should be asking each to tell us EXACTLY what they intend to do. with iraq, with the long forgotten afganistan, with the Jihad that appears to be becoming global.
Instead we talk about some boats in Vietnam for months on end.:(

[buckner]

If you are pro-choice, you are for abortion. If you are pro-life, you are not. That's what it is. If you are pro-choice, you are for murder and condoning it to it's fullest extent.

I've heard a lot from Kerry's stand - it's all BS to me. He believes in nothing, he stands for nothing. His opinion changes everytime he gets on the stand. What he tries to do is please the people in what he says. Kerry stated something along the lines of "I served my country through fighting in the Vietnam for 4 months, and I'm ready to serve my country by being president". Excuse me? He should be elected because he served for four months? Sounds like someone doesn't know why else he should be president.

Bush, on the other hand, has served this country well for the past four years. Economy never does stay the same - it fluxuates. Right now, Bush is bringing it through recession. Economy dropped because of 9-11, an unplanned event. Do you honestly think that if Bush knew what was going to happen, he wouldn't have done anything? I think not. In Iraq, there was a leader who showed he had weapons of mass destruction. There was no freedom for the civilians in Iraq - so Bush did what he thought was best. You can't come back now and say "oh, he should have done this". That, my friend, is called Monday Morning Quarterbacking.

If I was 18, I defintely know who I'd be voting for. Bush and Cheney all the way, I say.

I will leave you with this question. If you were a terrorist , who would you want as president? Someone who's going to do something about it, or someone who's going to run away with their tail stuck between their legs? Exactly.

[Soledad]

If I were a terrorist, what would I want? A president whose actions will spur millions more to my cause or a president who will negotiate and take the wind out of my recruiting sales. Hmm...tough one.

And as for your views on abortion, Buckner, I don't think it's quite so black and white. My mother, like John Kerry, is a very devout Catholic and yet she calls herself pro-choice. You know why? Because although the thought her or anyone close to her having an abortion saddens her deeply, she believes that it is not her choice to make for others and other people's bodies.

I fully believe in the right to life, a woman's life, and I refuse to let the government interfere in my medical choices and options. That sort of thinking will not stop abortion, it will only force desperate women into dirty hovels with unsafe practices that risk the woman's life.

You can argue until you're blue in the face about whether a zygote is a human being, but there's no doubt that a real, live adult woman is a human being and I am definitely pro-life in her honor.

[the gryphon]

Originally posted by buckner
If you are pro-choice, you are for abortion. If you are pro-life, you are not. That's what it is. If you are pro-choice, you are for murder and condoning it to it's fullest extent.

You have now said that I (and millions of others) am pro-murder, and condone murder.
The world seems very black and white to you. It wont, some day.

edited to add:
Economy dropped because of 9-11, an unplanned event.
The economy was heading toward recession before 9/11. In fact there were signs of recession before the election. (During the Clinton administration...yes, I can say that, even as a democrat). Again, the world is not so black and white as you'd have it be. I could link some analyses of Kerry's voting record (in reality) and how it's been portrayed by the GOP, but you've made up your mind. So I wont bother.

[Harmanie]

umm, did i do somthing wrong?

I was really just wondering what was really going on here. Like not opinions, just facts with the candidates. Its always good to hear opinions, but somtimes its also really good to hear the facts as well.

Now I'm curiouse, Should I just delete this thread that way no one is mad at me, or even yet, mad at each other?

[Soledad]

You asked a very controversial question, so there are going to be heated responses. I don't think you need to delete the thread, though. We can handle it.

There are lot of facts out there, but to be honest, facts can easily be misused for one side or the other. I don't know that what you're asking for (facts without opinions) is possible.

Probably a better method would be to ask yourself what role you think government should play in people's lives. Perhaps there is an online quiz that will help you decide what your leanings are, and you can look up the candidates' positions and decide from there.

[buckner]

It is a very contraversial subject, yes, but I don't see the point in deleting the thread. As long as people can accept other people's opinions for what they're worth.



Originally posted by the gryphon
You have now said that I (and millions of others) am pro-murder, and condone murder.
The world seems very black and white to you. It wont, some day.
I doubt it will. Black and white is something that is learned early, and usually no one ever changes. My father has lived in a black and white world for nearly 54 years, for example. He's a very intelligent man who is very open minded towards these kinds of topics. He listens and hears the person out. What he chooses to take from that opinion is own business. Just like my business is mine. How my world is should not affect you. Just like yours should not affect me.




Originally posted by Soledad
You can argue until you're blue in the face about whether a zygote is a human being, but there's no doubt that a real, live adult woman is a human being and I am definitely pro-life in her honor.
I think you've misunderstood me. I, personally, am pro-life. Does that mean that I'm going to say no to every abortion reason? No. There's three cases where I say it's up to the mother - rape, incest, or severe danger to her. Does this mean I condone it? No. It means I'll respect her decision and support her, if she decided to have an abortion for one of those three cases. However, only about 5% of the abortions are from rape, incest, and danger. What sickens me are the women using abortion as birth control. That's where I disagree. No matter your reason, it still is murder. But I cannot justify someone having an abortion because they're fooling around without protection. Does that make more sense? I didn't explain myself before.

Let me ask you both, what's your stand on the death penalty?

[the gryphon]

I think you've misunderstood me. I, personally, am pro-life. Does that mean that I'm going to say no to every abortion reason? No. There's three cases where I say it's up to the mother - rape, incest, or severe danger to her. Does this mean I condone it? No. It means I'll respect her decision and support her, if she decided to have an abortion for one of those three cases.
So in the case of rape it's okay to (in your words) murder? You condone murder then? See that gets real grey doesn't it. And, being pro-life means wanting abortion to be illegal, so now the woman who's been raped has to commit a crime, along with murder.

Death penalty? I believe it is necessary to have on the books. And in some cases it's the punishment that suits the crime.

Now, as a liberal I must lament the over-representation of minorities on death row, and the over-representation of minorities among those who've been cleared through DNA, so I can admit it's certainly not well managed.

[the gryphon]

Originally posted by Soledad

Probably a better method would be to ask yourself what role you think government should play in people's lives. Perhaps there is an online quiz that will help you decide what your leanings are, and you can look up the candidates' positions and decide from there.
Yes, that's a great idea. I've learned much from actually assessing what I believe.

And no, don't delete. It's in the dog house, we can handle it.

[heinz57_79]

There is a HUGE difference between abortion and the death penalty. The death penalty is applied to criminals who knowingly, willingly take the lives of others, for no reason other than they could. (On a side note, I don't buy the "I was abused as a child" defense.. every adult choices regarding how abuse etc affects them in life) Abortion, if done "right", is to benefit all involved. The mother, being unable to care for a child; the child, not being born into a bad situation; etc. It should NOT be used as a form of birth control, and neither should the morning after pill. But until YOU have been in the position where YOU need to make the choice to terminate YOUR pregnancy, to 'get rid of' a child that is a part of you, you really cannot pass judgement. It is one of the hardest decisions a woman would have to make.

I think it's sad that a person's views of today's world can be so black and white, especially with the world being in so many shades of grey. My father is also very black and white, and because of this there is a good chance he will never see any grandkids that come along.

Kay has a quote in her sig (or she did, i'm not sure if it's still there) from Kerry, about equal rights for EVERYONE regardless of religion, race, creed, sexual preference, etc. THAT is what this country needs. Not someone who is pushing to change the constitution to exclude a HUGE number of American citizens. Personally, I would be very wary of anyone wanting to do something so drastic. What Bush does not realise is that there is a large conservative GLBT community, who's votes he will now lose because he fails to recognise them.

I am registered as an independent. I couldn't care less whether a candidate is Democratic or Republican. It's all about what they stand for. Bush is all about throwing us into war, which is has no experience in. Kerry has been there, been in combat. Who would you choose to run your computer company? A chef, or Bill Gates?

Harmanie, like everyone else said, it's not a bad thread. And when you ask for facts, it's a good thing. The only thing is, fact is often shaded by opinion. :) It's just life. If you check out a website or news channel that is conservative, you'll see a lot of Kerry-bashing. The opposite will be true if you check out the liberal sites, news channels. Just remember to take everything with a grain of salt. ;)

[Soledad]

I don't support the death penalty because I think it's a flawed system that actually spends more of the tax payers' money, does nothing to prevent crime and is primarily used on minorities. I might also add that the sheer number of people on death row who have been freed because of DNA evidence is evidence enough for even the staunchest death penalty proponents to call loudly for major systematic changes.

I also find it barbaric and not worthy of a highly civilized country.

But more importantly I don't believe the government should have a right to take a life. Just like I don't believe the government has a right to tell me what to do with my body.

[buckner]

Originally posted by the gryphon
So in the case of rape it's okay to (in your words) murder?
No, I never said that. If you reread my post you would see what I said. I stated that I would not condone it anymore than I would for using it as birth control. However, I did state that I would respect her decision even more. Why? Because that woman did not choose to take the risk of getting pregnant. If I could make the choice for a woman who got raped, I would choose to not have an abortion. Someone outside of rape or incest chose to have sex. If you're old enough to have sex, you're old enough to take the consequences.

If I got raped, I certainly would not get an abortion. Why? I disagree with abortion. Simple as that. It IS murder.

Soledad: So you can honestly justify murdering an innocent baby, along with not being able to justify someone proven guilty of a crime? When I say proven, I don't mean found - I mean proven. Proven either genetically through DNA or publically. If so, that's just plain unethical.

[Uabassoon]

Does that mean that I'm going to say no to every abortion reason? No. There's three cases where I say it's up to the mother - rape, incest, or severe danger to her. Does this mean I condone it? No. It means I'll respect her decision and support her, if she decided to have an abortion for one of those three cases.

You say that you would respect the decision of a woman who was raped to have an abortion. She didn't choose to be raped, so even though you don't agree with it you would still respect her choice to have it aborted.

That thought is a pro-choice thought. You think that it's acceptable for a woman to choose an abortion if it's under one of those three circumstances.

However if you are pro-life you are choosing to make abortions illegal, meaning that a woman who was raped would not be able to chose to abort the child.

That is why people are saying abortion is not black and white. Pro choice isn't saying "I think abortions are great and everyone should have one" Being pro choice means that you think a woman should have the right to choose if she wants to abort the child, it's not about you personally. It's totally possible to be stuck in the middle of both pro life and pro choice because of the situations you stated. That's why abortion isn't just a black and white situation.

[CathyBogart]

Oh look, an abortion debate....maybe that should be taken to another thread to get beaten to death yet again by a bunch of people who are never going to agree (and many of you know what my EXTREMELY strong opinion on this is) and let this thread go back to its original topic.

[the gryphon]

Originally posted by heinz57_79
Kay has a quote in her sig (or she did, i'm not sure if it's still there) from Kerry, about equal rights for EVERYONE regardless of religion, race, creed, sexual preference, etc. THAT is what this country needs. Not someone who is pushing to change the constitution to exclude a HUGE number of American citizens. Personally, I would be very wary of anyone wanting to do something so drastic. What Bush does not realise is that there is a large conservative GLBT community, who's votes he will now lose because he fails to recognise them.

You know, this is interesting. It's not so much that I believe everyone should believe as I do, but I FEAR a president who would use the constitution to limit a civil right. There are virtually NO cases where I'd support using the constitution to limit rights. We have a very short list of where that's been done. Nifty things like prohibition.
For me, THAT along with his other neo-conservative policies, and proposals scare me. As does his apparent equation of Al Qaeda with Iraq. My fear, once he equates it with one country, he'll equate it with others. Where does that end? And does that actually eradicate Al Qaeda? It hasn't so far. Not even in Afganistan. (where I supported the President's decision)

[Soledad]

Originally posted by buckner
Soledad: So you can honestly justify murdering an innocent baby, along with not being able to justify someone proven guilty of a crime? When I say proven, I don't mean found - I mean proven. Proven either genetically through DNA or publically. If so, that's just plain unethical.

I could easily do the same thing to you...so you could honestly justify holding a living, innocent woman's body hostage for nine months and force her to carry and give birth to a child she does not want?

My point was I do not wish for the government to interfere in a woman's medical issue. There are many, many reasons for having an abortion and very few of them are done as a method of birth control. It is never a nice or happy thing to do, but that's life, and sometimes you have to make tough decisions.

But making a decision about your own body and what will or will not happen to it is not analagous to the government killing criminals, no matter how hard you try to make that case.

[RICHARD]

Originally posted by Soledad
I could easily do the same thing to you...so you could honestly justify holding a living, innocent woman's body hostage for nine months and force her to carry and give birth to a child she does not want?



I am going to put a frigging knife in my forehead.

I agree.

[Harmanie]

Well I have a lot of family members out on duty right now and it really does scare me so much every time I hear the death counts on the radio etc. etc. Like what would I do if I heard one of my cousins names or one of my unkles names? I don't know how I could handle it. So in a way I am sooo glad that I am not old enough to vote because quite frankly, I'm not sure if I would really vote this year.

If I had to, does my families fate rest on my vote? That would be pretty darn freeky ya know. My opinion is that this election is probably by far one of the most hardest elections in history. Because Bush has supported our troops but I think that it is time for them to come home. I mean, My cousin was supposed to come home a while ago but they told him that he couldn't because all of the visits and stuff were canceled. They were orders from someone. I forgot who. I miss him. So, ya I think that this war has been carried out enough. Its not that I don't support the troops or nothing cause I do with all my heart but enough is enough ya know?

[lizzielou742]

Harmanie:

I think it's great that even though you aren't old enough to vote, you're educating yourself on the issues. The hard part is that "facts" to one side are lies to the other, and vice versa. You can't even believe what you hear on the news half the time (or more) anymore. It takes a lot of independent research, gathering as much information as I can on my own, and making informed decisions from there for me to feel confident in my vote. Because, you're right, the livelihood of future generations does depend on citizens utilizing their right to vote, and making sure their votes are counted (read up on electronic voting machines, it's scary) and making their voices heard. Especially this election. The country is pretty evenly divided, and what will make the difference, what will change our future for better or worse, is how many people actually show up to vote on Nov. 2nd.

Here's some links you might enjoy, if you haven't checked them out already.

http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm
http://www.vote-smart.org/index.htm
http://www.dinnerforamerica.com/

PS. Sorry your thread got moved to the Dog House and turned into a bit of a fight. :)

[Harmanie]

Thanks lizzie, Sense I found out that my family has been going to war, I wanted to learn the "reall deal" to make sure I knew what I really wanted to know. I wanted to form my own opinion and not base mine off of some one elses you know what I mean? Cause then I'm not really stating how I feel, I am stating how some one elso feels and then I am just basically wasting my breath and then every one elses time. Now whats the sense in that?:) Thanks for the info. I definetly know that you'll never really get the reall info because one web station will always be bashing the other to make themselvs look better. Well....what can you do? hehe

[lizzielou742]

Harmanie- Exactly how I feel. It's probably just about impossible to get news and/or facts in a completely unbiased way, unless you witness it yourself. For news, I check out the BBC Channel or http://news.bbc.co.uk/ . It's a pretty good way to see how we look from the outside. :)

I hope your family members all return home safe and sound, as soon as possible. I had a dream last night that two of my best friends were fighting in Iraq, and it scared the heck out of me. I did have one friend who went there and came back once already, and is now serving his second tour of duty there, but I can't imagine how it must feel to have family there. {{{hugs}}}

[lizzielou742]

Oh, here's the link to the "Americas" new page on BBC.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/default.stm

[the gryphon]

I often visit BBC to see the outside perspective...I also visit al jazeera, though my beau says the English and arabic versions don't have much similarity. Harmanie, I hope your family is all safe. My beau returned in May. It's soooo good to have him back....though we both expect him to have to return. He's officially been stop lossed now.:(

[Edwina's Secretary]

In Iraq, there was a leader who showed he had weapons of mass destruction.

This is a good example of opinion or fact. This is NOT a fact. No weapons of mass destruction have been found. Some people are of the opinion there were/are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq but none have been found.

[heinz57_79]

The whole "weapons of mass destruction" thing was an excuse for Bush to carry out his personal vendetta against Hussein. In my opinion. ;) No weapons have been found, even tho they've dug up practically the entire country.

Harmanie, pretty much any decision regarding troops coming home is passed down from the Commander in Chief and his peons. There are so many families here in Tucson, who live on base, who have been expecting their loved ones home for quite sometime, but there is always some excuse as to why they can't come home. My cousin just enlisted in the Army a few months ago, and I'm terrified that he'll get called off to the Middle East at any time. He's only 20. In my opinion, that's still too young to be shipped off to war. But that's a whole 'nother can of worms. ;)

And I don't think this has turned into a fight. I think it's turned into a debate, which is fine, if the people involved are mature enough to take it as it is. :)