the presidential debates [Archive]

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by christa
I have a hard time believing ANYTHING that Kerry says. Sorry. He's too slick. He sounds great, like a real leader, he's definitely got the "look" down . . . but as far as substance, there's nothing there for me.

Soledad, I can't believe that ANYONE would believe that Saddam would just give up or that we could just walk into Iraq & ask him to surrender. How would you suggest that we should have taken him? And he has a plan how to fix it? I never have really heard his plan . . . ??? Enlighten me?

I'm sorry, Christa, you're my buddy, but I have to say I disagree with your views on this one. If you don't know John Kerry's plan for Iraq, you should go to http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/plan_to_win_the_peace_in_iraq.pdf and read up about it. :) I for one, would never make a decision about who I was voting for without researching both candidates.

John Kerry said many times last night that Bush should have gone back to the UN and tried further negotiations with Saddam before he used force. Bush's war was pre-emptive. Saddam didn't surrender because he didn't have any WMDs. Did you read the 9/11 Commission report? We can't just start going into countries and taking them over. That's not what America stands for, to me at least.

Bush looked unprepared, weak and frustrated, whereas Kerry looked strong, charismatic and decisive. Bush did not outline one single specific plan. Bush has a record of failure after failure, and the American people are worse off than they were in 2000 because of it. Kerry laid out specific plans for his vision of America, and gave the American people hope that we can finally succeed in Iraq, and bring our troops home.

I don't know about you, but my tuition went up 22% while I was in college (from fall 1999 - fall 2003). I now owe $65,000 to the federal government. Minimum wage has not increased since 1997, when I was 16. It's still $5.15 an hour. No one can afford to live on $5.15 an hour. The Bush administration is the only administration since Herbert Hoover's in the 1930s in which total employment decreased. After I graduated, I couldn't find a job in the field I went to college for (arts organization management) so now I'm a secretary. It was the only halfway professional job I could find - and I'm still looking. Most of my friends had a hard time finding jobs after graduation, too. I have a friend who recently graduated with a double major in political science and sociology, and now works the Clinique counter at Dillard's. Why? Because there aren't as many good jobs out there as there used to be. Meanwhile, I have friends in Iraq, and my mother got laid off from her job at a non-profit community center because they couldn't afford to pay her. There are two pieces of legislation in front of the Senate and the House of Representatives right now that would reinstate the draft for EVERYONE between the ages of 18 and 26. Males and females. Bush will have to do it if he gets re-elected. Kerry won't have to, because he's going to bring other countries in (so we won't be 90% of the troops anymore) to help pull us out of Iraq completely.

I could go on and on about the issues on which I disagree with Bush - the environment, homeland security (or our lack of it right now), healthcare...

Do any of those things resonate with you?

Logan

10-01-2004, 08:18 AM

Bush has made a mess, Kerry has an actual plan for how to fix it.

I did find it humorous that he wouldn't say what his plan was last night, but instead pointed us to his website! Why not lay it all out? That's what we were waiting for!

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 08:46 AM

Originally posted by Logan
I did find it humorous that he wouldn't say what his plan was last night, but instead pointed us to his website! Why not lay it all out? That's what we were waiting for!

Because you can't lay out everything in two minutes. Bush didn't even mention a single plan. At least Kerry went over his as much as he could, and told us where to find more information about specific details.

Tell me again what Bush's plan to get out of Iraq is? Tell me again when my friends are coming home?

christa

10-01-2004, 09:13 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Do any of those things resonate with you?

Liz, I've heard this stuff until I can't see straight. I've avoided these political boards until now because they always seem to be one sided.

First of all, I HAVE researched both candidates . . . more so than just their own campaign websites. I vote based on my own convictions, my beliefs, my principles. I don’t vote thoughtlessly, as you imply.

I know that Bush was wrong about the WMD’s . . . but I also know that Saddam had the capabilities and I feel safer knowing that he is out of power and sitting in a prison cell. Besides, how can you say that we were wrong to free the people of Iraq? They have been living under the rule of a tyrant. A man that only knows violence. Rape rooms, torture chambers . . . how can you believe that what we did was a mistake? That’s basically what Kerry is saying? Am I wrong?

Things are much different than they were in 2000. We were attacked . . . but believe me when I say that things will be much worse if we start letting other countries dictate how we protect ourselves. (which is what Kerry says he will do)

And all this about Kerry bringing other countries in . . . OK, first of all, I’m sure that’s what he wants. Who’s to say that it will actually happen? We don’t know what the future holds. He may or may not get other countries to join our alliance. You don’t know that he will! You don’t know that he’ll do anything that he says because his record stinks!

Bush didn’t lay out his plan very well during the debate, I will admit. But he did state more than once, that he planned to do the only thing he could do . . . continue to train Iraqi troops & police until they’re ready to stand on their own.

About the draft: I’ve read countless articles about this . . . and from what I can see, it’s a scare tactic headed by two of the most liberal members of Congress. Rep. Charlie Rangel and Sen. Fritz Hollings.

"It's absolutely false that anyone in the administration is considering reinstating the draft" –Rumsfeld

Bush even stated last night that it would be a voluntary army.

I think that a lot of people would be surprised to hear that proposal is coming from democrats!

I think we’re total opposites on ANY political issues, Liz, but you’re still my bud.

Let’s not get too ugly about this.

christa

10-01-2004, 09:17 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Because you can't lay out everything in two minutes. Bush didn't even mention a single plan. At least Kerry went over his as much as he could, and told us where to find more information about specific details.

Tell me again what Bush's plan to get out of Iraq is? Tell me again when my friends are coming home?

Bush's Plan: Continue to train Iraqi troops & police . . . until they can stand on their own. It's the only thing we can do! If we left them in 6 months (as Kerry has stated that he will do), Iraq will fall and all will be lost.

We ALL have family and friends fighting in Iraq. Those people over there are adults. They went and signed up to protect their country and that's what they're doing. They are fighting for freedom.

So many people don't support the troops because they're not supporting the cause. It's sad really.

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by christa
I don’t vote thoughtlessly, as you imply.

Please don't think I am implying that! :) I know you wouldn't throw your vote away. What I am responding to is what you said here:

Originally posted by christa
And he has a plan how to fix it? I never have really heard his plan . . . ??? Enlighten me?

I was trying to enlighten you. :)

----

Originally posted by christa
So many people don't support the troops because they're not supporting the cause. It's sad really.

I hope that wasn't directed towards me, because if so that would hurt my feelings. I support our troops. I want them out of harm's way. We all do. That's not the issue. The issue is the best way to go about getting them out of Iraq. I don't know of anyone who would want a long-term occupation of Iraq. At some point, we have to stop being 90% of the troops over there. We cannot continue on that path for long - our country doesn't have the means.

What bothers me about the "support our troops" thing is that people just slap a yellow ribbon magnet on the back of their car and say "I support the troops," without actually volunteering/donating to anything that would help the troops. I volunteer on John Kerry's campaign because I believe under his leadership our troops will be safer. Like Kerry said last night, there are troops without body armor over there, and humvees without armor. It breaks my heart.

I think our main difference of opinion lies here: I believe that the Iraqis and the rest of the world want us out of Iraq. I do not think it is the right thing to occupy another country. I think if we follow John Kerry's plan to transfer power back to the Iraqis, the world will be a safer place.

----

Originally posted by christa
Besides, how can you say that we were wrong to free the people of Iraq? They have been living under the rule of a tyrant. A man that only knows violence. Rape rooms, torture chambers . . . how can you believe that what we did was a mistake? That’s basically what Kerry is saying? Am I wrong?
I believe you are. :) Kerry is not trying to say that stopping Saddam's torture was a mistake. He has never said that. But Bush told us Saddam was taken out of power because he wouldn't disarm........because he didn't have anything to disarm. As a result of our invasion, the people of Iraq were going to be freed, right? They are not free right now. They're living under our rule instead of Saddam's. Agreed, they are better off with him out of power, but they are not yet a free country. Sure, the Iraqis are better off without those things happening to them, but their people are still dying. Osama bin Laden is still out there. We are making more enemies every day in the Middle East. We're giving more and more terrorists a reason to hate us each moment we're in that country.

---

Agreed - let's not let this turn ugly between us. :) We see things differently, and what's so great about America is that that's OK. We can go to the election sites on Nov. 2nd and vote for who we support.....too bad for me there's no way Kerry's winning Kentucky, right? :p :D

christa

10-01-2004, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
I hope that wasn't directed towards me, because if so that would hurt my feelings. I support our troops. [B]

Liz, I didn't mean that towards you. But I have heard so many troops that have said how upset they are because Americans are not supporting them . . . THE TROOPS know what they're fighting for and you can't depend on CBS, NBC, or ABC to give you their true stories!

[b]Like Kerry said last night, there are troops without body armor over there, and humvees without armor. It breaks my heart.

Then why did he vote against the funding for supplimental armor?

We're giving more and more terrorists a reason to hate us each moment we're in that country.

Wow, are you hearing yourself? So we just just leave them alone and they'll go away? If you think that leaving terrorists alone will solve the world's problems, you are not living in reality.

.....too bad for me there's no way Kerry's winning Kentucky, right? :p :D

LOL . . . highly unlikely!

Have a great day Liz! ;)

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 10:49 AM

Originally posted by christa
If you think that leaving terrorists alone will solve the world's problems, you are not living in reality.

It's obvious someone here isn't living in reality, and it's not me.

I'm not going to justify your comments on anything else...the $87 billion...why it was wrong to invade Iraq...because John Kerry explained it all last night. The American public agreed with him.

It's time to find Bush a job that isn't such "hard work."

aly

10-01-2004, 10:54 AM

This Faces of Frusteration video is kinda funny

http://www.democrats.org/

dukedogsmom

10-01-2004, 11:08 AM

I have a question. If my support had been for Bush instead of Kerry, would I still have been asked to remove that political button or just asked to get rid of that one word?

RICHARD

10-01-2004, 11:09 AM

Originally posted by Soledad
No, what Kerry said was that Saddam was a threat and that he must be disarmed. This does not require war. It does require the threat of force, which is what he gave the President.
Kerry's position is the same it's always been. Bush has made a mess, Kerry has an actual plan for how to fix it.

Four more years of this crap.

I can't believe anyone would vote for that.

LOLOLOL,

Hi Mr Saddam,
My name is John Kerry.

Would you please give me all your arms and weapons so we can live in peace on the planet?
----------------------------

Four more years of this crap???

It's really not becoming of you making statements like that,
Just as I think you are becoming a kinder gentler Soledad, you
punk me like that....

I think I'll vote Bush "because he's not John Kerry."

:)

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by aly
This Faces of Frusteration video is kinda funny

http://www.democrats.org/

YES I saw that! :D

There's more funny videos on http://www.oliverwillis.com/node/view/844

I've seen a lot of funny stuff this morning...

"Bushboy blew it big time last night
His oft repeated slogans were a fright
Kerry had solutions
the prez had delusions
America wake up - dump the right!!!"

What was UP with the whole tangent Bush went on about his friend, the widow? "You know, it's hard work to try to love her as best as I can, knowing full well that the decision I made caused her loved one to be in harm's way." What?! That entire answer made NO SENSE. It was incoherent babbling.

Did you hear him say "Saddam Hussein" when he meant "Osama bin Laden?" He does that all the time!

A great quote from this morning's Boston Herald: "Note to George W: Next time, lose the blue tie, drop the folksy double talk and stand up straight."

Bush's face reminds me of Alfred E. Neuman ("What, me worry?"). And the blinking?? He looks like a meth addict!

http://www.gallup.com/poll/content/?ci=13237

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by RICHARD
Hi Mr Saddam,
My name is John Kerry.

Would you please give me all your arms and weapons so we can live in peace on the planet?

But Richard, he didn't have any WMDs in the first place, remember?

Anyway, I think Bush should have followed the suggestions of the UN and tried more negotiations, and should never have pre-emptively invaded Iraq. But, this thread is about last night's debate, right? So I'll stick to that.

Kerry looked more presidential last night. He was decisive, clear, strong and unwavering. Blinky McFrowny just kept repeating a bunch of lies.

"MEXED MISSAGES!"

DJFyrewolf36

10-01-2004, 11:38 AM

This election I believe I will be voting for a water cooler. The one in my office is quite qualified for the job ;)

christa

10-01-2004, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
LOLOLOL,

Hi Mr Saddam,
My name is John Kerry.

Would you please give me all your arms and weapons so we can live in peace on the planet?

You took the words out of my mouth! LOL

christa

10-01-2004, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Kerry looked more presidential last night. He was decisive, clear, strong and unwavering. Blinky McFrowny just kept repeating a bunch of lies.

Silly girl! At least Bush can make facial expressions! Kerry has that "Droopy Dog" look going on. His face is ALWAYS the same. Long and droopy! But if that's the "look" you want . . . because we all know that in order to be Presidential, you have to look the part!

At least no one rolled their eyes this time around! :rolleyes:

Ah, I'm just an naive country girl . . . what do I know?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Logan

10-01-2004, 12:59 PM

Ah, I'm just an naive country girl . . . what do I know?

A very well informed, open minded country girl, I might add! :D

christa

10-01-2004, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by Logan
A very well informed, open minded country girl, I might add! :D

Thank you!

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by christa
At least no one rolled their eyes this time around! :rolleyes:

Are you kidding? Did you not go watch that video Aly posted? All Bush did was roll his eyes! Bush looked irritated, bored, frustrated and tired the whole time. Even Faux News admits that.

RICHARD

10-01-2004, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
But Richard, he didn't have any WMDs in the first place, remember?

Anyway, I think Bush should have followed the suggestions of the UN and tried more negotiations, and should never have pre-emptively invaded Iraq. But, this thread is about last night's debate, right? So I'll stick to that.

I wonder what the dead Kurds/Iranians would think about that...

Ah, the UN.....

Suicide bombings/terrorist attacks everyday in Iraq - the silence from that office is pretty obvious.....

We spent 12 years sanctioning Iraq and that idiot Saddam KEPT shooting at planes, playing hide and seek with the inspectors....

It's very obvious that Saddam brought it all on himself, HAD he behaved like a real leader of his country he'd still be in charge and there would not have been this war to kick his arse out.

Anyone with half a mind would see that......

I do.

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 01:21 PM

Whatever, Richard.

My favorite exchange from last night:

Mr. Kerry: Jim, let me tell you exactly what I'll do. And there are a long list of things. First of all, what kind of mixed message does it send when you've got $500 million going over to Iraq to put police officers in the streets of Iraq and the president is cutting the cops program in America? What kind of message does it send to be sending money to open firehouses in Iraq but we're shutting firehouses, who are the first responders here in America? The president hasn't put one nickel - not one nickel - into the effort to fix some of our tunnels and bridges and most exposed subway systems. That's why they had to close down the subway in New York when the Republican convention was there. We haven't done the work that ought to be done.

The president - 95 percent of the containers that come into the ports, right here in Florida, are not inspected. Civilians get onto aircraft and their luggage is X-rayed, but the cargo hold is not X-rayed. Does that make you feel safer in America?

This president thought it was more important to give the wealthiest people in America a tax cut rather than invest in homeland security. Those aren't my values. I believe in protecting America first. And long before President Bush and I get a tax cut - and that's who gets it - long before we do, I'm going to invest in homeland security and I'm going to make sure we're not cutting cops programs in America and we're fully staffed in our firehouses and that we protect the nuclear and chemical plants.

The president, also unfortunately, gave in to the chemical industry, which didn't want to do some of the things necessary to strengthen our chemical plant exposure. And there's an enormous undone job to protect the loose nuclear materials in the world that are able to get to terrorists. That's a whole other subject.

But I see we still have a little bit more time. Let me just quickly say, at the current pace, the president will not secure the loose material in the Soviet Union, former Soviet Union, for 13 years. I'm going to do it in four years. And we're going to keep it out of the hands of terrorists.

Mr. Lehrer: Ninety-second response, Mr. President.

Mr. Bush: I don't think we want to get to how he's going to pay for all these promises. It's like a huge tax gap and - anyway, that's for another debate.

---

FLAME ON!!!! :D You guys can bring it on all day long. The fact is that Bushie looked like a pathetic loser last night. He's going to fall flat on his face in the next two debates, and he's going to be soundly defeated in November.

christa

10-01-2004, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Are you kidding? Did you not go watch that video Aly posted? All Bush did was roll his eyes! Bush looked irritated, bored, frustrated and tired the whole time. Even Faux News admits that.

OK Liz, Bush looked "annoyed" at Kerry. And with good reason.

I was referring to Gore's behavior during the last election . . . ah, why even bother.

RICHARD

10-01-2004, 01:42 PM

Liz,

Whatever???

Saddam used chemweps on the Kurds and Iranians in the 90's.
That and his jerking the UN inspectors around gave us a good reason to believe he had them.

Why 'flame' when you can use a grill?

It's far more fun to watch people shift from foot to foot while they think.

:confused: :eek:

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 02:00 PM

Richard,

I said whatever because this thread is about the debate, like I pointed out before. But, if you'd like to talk about the REALITY of the situation...

The question here is not about who shoulda done what in the 80s, 90s, etc. The real question is: why has Bush mismanaged the situation in Iraq so badly?

I guess it's because, like I just heard Rush Limbaugh say on the radio: "George W. Bush not a politican. He's the President."

:confused:

Personally, I'd like to have a politican dealing with leaders of countries around the world when it comes to dealing with the near-civil war in Iraq. Not some cowboy who can't pronounce half the words in the English language.

Iraq is FUBAR and Bushie done it. Period.

---

We're Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore

By Garrison Keillor

Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party.

Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships.
They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and Prohibitionists, the anti-papist anti-foreigner element. The genial Eisenhower was their man, a genuine American hero of D-Day, who made it OK for reasonable people to vote Republican. He brought the Korean War to a stalemate, produced the Interstate Highway System, declined to rescue the
French colonial army in Vietnam, and gave us a period of peace and prosperity, in which (oddly) American arts and letters flourished and higher education burgeoned--and there was a degree of plain decency in the country. Fifties Republicans were giants compared to today's. Richard Nixon was the last Republican leader to feel a Christian obligation toward the poor.

In the years between Nixon and Newt Gingrich, the party migrated southward down the Twisting Trail of Rhetoric and sneered at the idea of public service and became the Scourge of Liberalism, the Great Crusade Against the Sixties, the Death Star of Government, a gang of pirates that diverted and fascinated the media by their sheer chutzpah, such as the misty-eyed flag-waving of Ronald Reagan who, while George McGovern flew bombers in World War II, took a pass and made training films in Long Beach. The Nixon moderate vanished like the passenger pigeon, purged by a legion of angry white men who rose to power on pure punk politics.

"Bipartisanship is another term of date rape," says Grover Norquist, the Sid Vicious of the GOP.

"I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."

The boy has Oedipal problems and government is his daddy.

The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance
racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brown shirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini Libertarians, people who believe Neil Armstrong's moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, little honkers out to diminish the rest of us, Newt's evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man suspicious of the free flow of information and of secular institutions, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk.

Republicans: The No.1 reason the rest of the world thinks we're deaf, dumb and dangerous.

Rich ironies abound! Lies pop up like toadstools in the forest!

Wild swine crowd round the public trough! Outrageous gerrymandering!

Pocket lining on a massive scale! Paid lobbyists sit in committee rooms and write legislation to alleviate the suffering of billionaires!

Hypocrisies shine like cat turds in the moonlight!

O Mark Twain, where art thou at this hour?
Arise and behold the Gilded Age reincarnated gaudier than ever, upholding great wealth as the sure sign of Divine Grace.

Here in 2004, George W. Bush is running for reelection on a platform of tragedy--the single greatest failure of national defense in our history, the attacks of 9/11 in which 19 men with box cutters put this nation into a
tailspin, a failure the details of which the White House fought to keep secret even as it ran the country into hock up to the hubcaps, thanks to generous tax cuts for the well-fixed, hoping to lead us into a box canyon of debt that will render government impotent, even as we engage in a war against a small country that was undertaken for the president's personal satisfaction but sold to the American public on the basis of brazen misinformation, a war whose purpose is to distract us from an enormous transfer of wealth taking place in this country, flowing upward, and the deception is working beautifully.

The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few is the death knell of democracy. No republic in the history of humanity has survived this. The election of 2004 will say something about what happens to ours. The omens are not good.

Our be loved land has been fogged with fear--fear, the greatest political strategy ever. An ominous silence, distant sirens, a drumbeat of whispered warnings and alarms to keep the public uneasy and silence the
opposition. And in a time of vague fear, you can appoint bullet-brained judges, strip the bark off the Constitution, eviscerate federal regulatory agencies, bring public education to a standstill, stupefy the press, lavish gorgeous tax breaks on the rich.

There is a stink drifting through this election year. It isn't the Florida recount or the Supreme Court decision. No, it's 9/11 that we keep coming back to. It wasn't the "end of innocence," or a turning point in our history, or a cosmic occurrence, it was an event, a lapse of security. And
patriotism shouldn't prevent people from asking hard questions of the man who was purportedly in charge of national security at the time.

Whenever I think of those New Yorkers hurrying along Park Place or getting off the No.1 Broadway local, hustling toward their office on the 90th floor, the morning paper under their arms, I think of that non-reader George W. Bush and how he hopes to exploit those people with a little economic uptick, maybe the capture of Osama, cruise to victory in November and proceed to get some serious nation-changing done in his second term.

This year, as in the past, Republicans will portray us Democrats as embittered academics, desiccated Unitarians, whacked-out hippies and communards, people who talk to telephone poles, the party of the Deadheads.
They will wave enormous flags and wow over and over the footage of firemen in the wreckage of the World Trade Center and bodies being carried out and they will lie about their economic policies with astonishing enthusiasm.

The Union is what needs defending this year. Government of Enron and by Halliburton and for the Southern Baptists is not the same as what Lincoln spoke of. This gang of Pithecanthropus Republicanii has humbugged us to death on terrorism and tax cuts for the comfy and school prayer and flag burning and claimed the right to know what books we read and to dump their sewage upstream from the town and clear-cut the forests and gut the IRS and mark up the constitution on behalf of intolerance and promote the corporate takeover of the public airwaves and to hell with anybody who opposes them.

This is a great country, and it wasn't made so by angry people. We have a sacred duty to bequeath it to our grandchildren in better shape than however we found it. We have a long way to go and we're not getting any
younger.

Dante said that the hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who in time of crisis remain neutral, so I have spoken my piece, and thank you, dear reader. It's a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning.

:p

RICHARD

10-01-2004, 02:08 PM

I thought the topic was Iraq..

My half a brain got confused.

--------------------------------------

Garrison Keillor???

Hypocrisies shine like cat turds in the moonlight!

Leave it to him to examine cat scat under the lunar albedo.

;)

-----------------------------------

Logan

10-01-2004, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Are you kidding? Did you not go watch that video Aly posted? All Bush did was roll his eyes! Bush looked irritated, bored, frustrated and tired the whole time. Even Faux News admits that.

It didn't bother me (didn't need to watch the video because I was watching the whole time, LizzieLou). I was making the same faces Bush was!!!! :p

like I just heard Rush Limbaugh say on the radio

OMG!!!! :eek: You were listening to Rush Limbaugh? Did you REALLY, REALLY listen????? I hope so!!!!! :)

Best intentions, really, LizzieLou.

Logan

snappy

10-01-2004, 03:24 PM

So we all have our opinion on who won last night - who we want to win in November - who did what when....and we all should have our facts on each - or at least more factual than say Dan Rather ;)

That said - just remember to get out on November 2nd and vote for the person and ideas you want to go forward.

Lizzy and Christa - I have a really good friend and we are as far apart on this issue as it is obvious you two are....so when we start to debate and it gets heated and going to places where one or both will be defensive and/or hurt, we just use the phrase, "Nice Shoes." That lets each of us know that it is time to move to another subject. She isn't going to change her mind and I am not going to change mine. Period.......so PM each other and say Nice Shoes - K?:)

dukedogsmom

10-01-2004, 03:31 PM

For those of you that did like my button, you can go here and make your own :)
http://www.neilturner.me.uk/2003/Dec/04/the_bush_background_generator.html

christa

10-01-2004, 03:34 PM

Don't worry Snappy, Liz & I made it clear from the beginning, no hurt feelings. Right Liz?!? We obviously have COMPLETE opposite opinions when it comes to politics.

Like I said before, I usually don't get involved on these political boards because it does get so heated. But I guess I got in on it, so here I am . . .

christa

10-01-2004, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
[B]Leave it to him to examine cat scat under the lunar albedo.

LOLOLOL :D

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 04:05 PM

No hurt feelings with anyone. :) I think this stuff is not only interesting, but important. It's important for us to think critically. Too many people in this nation just don't.

Yes, I listen to Rush Limbaugh. I can't stand it sometimes ;), but I try to check in at least once a day. I listen to all kinds of stuff - from Sean Hannity to Joe Scarborough to Al Franken. I read all sorts of blogs too. :)

I also sent emails today to the following organizations, telling them exactly what I thought about last night's debate:

Rush's radio show
Hannity's radio show
Hannity & Colmes' TV show
FOX News in general
The Today Show
NBC Nightly News
CBS Evening News
ABC News
Nightline
CNN
Hardball
MSNBC in general
LA Times
NY Times
Wall Street Journal
USA Today
Washington Post
Louisville Courier Journal
Lexington Herald-Leader
Cincinnati Enquirer

I think it's very important for people my age (early 20s) to make their voices heard. :D :D :D

Logan

10-01-2004, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
No hurt feelings with anyone. :) I think this stuff is not only interesting, but important. It's important for us to think critically. Too many people in this nation just don't.

Yes, I listen to Rush Limbaugh. I can't stand it sometimes ;), but I try to check in at least once a day. I listen to all kinds of stuff - from Sean Hannity to Joe Scarborough to Al Franken. I read all sorts of blogs too. :)

I also sent emails today to the following organizations, telling them exactly what I thought about last night's debate:

Rush's radio show
Hannity's radio show
Hannity & Colmes' TV show
FOX News in general
The Today Show
NBC Nightly News
CBS Evening News
ABC News
Nightline
CNN
Hardball
MSNBC in general
LA Times
NY Times
Wall Street Journal
USA Today
Washington Post
Louisville Courier Journal
Lexington Herald-Leader
Cincinnati Enquirer

I think it's very important for people my age (early 20s) to make their voices heard. :D :D :D

Obviously, if you are working, you aren't busy! I admire the time and energy you have put into your efforts. Too bad, in my humble opinion, you are leaning the wrong way! ;)

christa

10-01-2004, 04:15 PM

For those of you who want a wrap up of Kerry's FLIP FLOPS from the debate, check it out!

http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=4775

How can anyone believe this guy?

edit: Watch the video too . . . very effective! ;)

caseysmom

10-01-2004, 04:25 PM

popcornbird

10-01-2004, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by Logan
Too bad, in my humble opinion, you are leaning the wrong way! ;)

I think she's leaning the right way dear Logan. ;)

I watched the debate yesterday, and I think Kerry did an awesome job compared to Bush. Bushie's expressions were hilarious. Tee hee hee. Kerry's getting my vote, for sure. I may not agree with him on a lot of things either, but anyone's better than Bush. Have to do my part in getting him out of office. If he wins again, I am sooooo going to cry.

The funniest thing was when Kerry named the few US allies, and Bush quickly said *YOU FORGOT POLAND!* Gosh the expression on his face when he said that was hilarious. I couldn't help but laugh. :o

caseysmom

10-01-2004, 04:31 PM

Popcornbird, If muffin or popcorn were running against bush I would vote for them!

popcornbird

10-01-2004, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by caseysmom
Popcornbird, If muffin or popcorn were running against bush I would vote for them!

LOL!!!!!!! Popcorn and Muffin feel honored. ;) Maybe they should run for president in the next elections. :p President Popcorn. He he he. I'm laughing so hard I have tears in my eyes!!! :o

Karen

10-01-2004, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by dukedogsmom
I have a question. If my support had been for Bush instead of Kerry, would I still have been asked to remove that political button or just asked to get rid of that one word?

You could have PM'd me this question, and gotten an answer quicker, but my answer is still the same.

Politics belong in the Dog House on Pet Talk. A signature graphic shows up on every post. Do not put politics stuff, regardless of its slant, in your signature file!

Also, do not make any assumptions about my politics because of me asking you to remove a graphic. I try hard to be a decent moderator, and non-partisan in my requests.

dukedogsmom

10-01-2004, 04:40 PM

I was asking the question in general and didn't intend for it to be taken hatefully.

DJFyrewolf36

10-01-2004, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by caseysmom
Popcornbird, If muffin or popcorn were running against bush I would vote for them!

Popcorn for prez and Muffin as VP...Id vote that ticket in a heartbeat. Gahh, I feel so icky this election. This is worse than Bush/Gore. IMO both canidates have demonstrated an incredible knack for looking like morons.

It is a sad state of affairs when one must choose between the lesser of two idiots instead of choosing the best person for the job.

popcornbird

10-01-2004, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by DJFyrewolf36
Popcorn for prez and Muffin as VP...Id vote that ticket in a heartbeat. Gahh, I feel so icky this election. This is worse than Bush/Gore. IMO both canidates have demonstrated an incredible knack for looking like morons.

It is a sad state of affairs when one must choose between the lesser of two idiots instead of choosing the best person for the job.

He he he! Exactly.......I think Kerry's an idiot too...honestly, but Bush was the greater idiot for sure. I wish we had better candidates, but I'm planning to vote for Kerry because as far as I can tell, he's the lesser of two idiots. :p

Goooooooooooooooo Popcorn and Muffin!!!

If only our pets could run for President. LOL!

DJFyrewolf36

10-01-2004, 05:30 PM

Remus would make a bad president. Cattiude in office wouldn't work well methinks, he would make a great advisior though. I could just see this conversation:

Popcorn: As usual, people in other countries are upset with us. What do we do?
Remus: Bat them around and scratch them, and maybe take a nap
Muffin: I think some treats are in order too, for us, not for them
Remus: Hey, great idea!
Popcorn: I say we get some treats, take a nap and deal with this later.

popcornbird

10-01-2004, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by DJFyrewolf36
Remus would make a bad president. Cattiude in office wouldn't work well methinks, he would make a great advisior though. I could just see this conversation:

Popcorn: As usual, people in other countries are upset with us. What do we do?
Remus: Bat them around and scratch them, and maybe take a nap
Muffin: I think some treats are in order too, for us, not for them
Remus: Hey, great idea!
Popcorn: I say we get some treats, take a nap and deal with this later.

Hey, if we can have a bush in office, I think birds and cats would do ok too. ;)

(Republicans.....don't take offense. I'm just joking. ;))

DJFyrewolf36

10-01-2004, 05:43 PM

Hey, I'll confess Im a registered republican and I think Bush has done/said some realy stupid things. Proof that not all of us are one sided and one eyed :)

caseysmom

10-01-2004, 06:06 PM

If remus is president we might invade japan for the sushi;)

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 06:15 PM

'You forgot Poland!' LOL! I loved the desperation Bush showed last night. That was a great example of it. Bush don't just miss the big picture, he ignores it.

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 06:50 PM

Originally posted by Logan
Obviously, if you are working, you aren't busy!

:p Yup, pretty much. LOL.

It's really not a good thing - I have nothing to do because our company isn't selling any products lately. Lack of sales means I'm probably getting laid off soon. Yet another reason to vote for Kerry! Maybe he can get some money back into the American economy (instead of spending it overseas), so people will start spending again, so they'll buy what my place of employment sells, so I can keep my job for now. Until I get a better one. Job creation! A novel idea for the Bush administration! They've had four years, and all they've done is waste the budget surplus that Clinton left, thrown us back into a deficit, and borrowed money from China that we'll have to pay back someday...

I don't understand what the Bush administration has done with the four years they had. I can't think of many positive things that they have done. No Child Left Behind? Didn't work. Healthcare? Costs rising. Minimum wage? It's pitifully low. Homeland security? Today it's a joke. The color-coded terror levels? Those are laughable. Captured Osama Bin Laden? Nope. Removed Saddam Hussein from power? Sure, and we plunged their country into a civil war! Now we're spending billions there, and soldiers are dying! And the reasons we gave these soldiers for going to war turned out to be wrong. And the Iraqi people are not yet free.

It makes me so sad to see what our country has become. I love America with all my heart, and I am ashamed knowing what the rest of the planet thinks of us right now. I can only hope Kerry gets elected, so he can bring our country back to a respected position in the world.

mugsy

10-01-2004, 08:07 PM

1. I'm glad that Saddam is out of there and he DID have WMDs but while Congress "debated" the whole thing, Saddam loaded them up into semis and hauled them into Syria....right under our noses.

2. I thought that Bush looked like a bumbling idiot last night and seemed very uncomfortable and defensive.

3. I thought Kerry put on airs like I haven't seen in a LONG time and appeared that he felt he was far superior to everyone in the room (and probably everywhere else).

4. I think both candidates are blow hards and should be taken with a grain of salt, like any other politician. I don't believe anything any of them say because they never do as they say.

5. I don't know that there's much choice this year...lesser of 2 evils and I haven't decided yet who it is especially since Kerry seems to support the piece of trash legislation "No Child Left Behind."

KYS

10-01-2004, 09:48 PM

posted by mugsy: I don't know that there's much choice this year...lesser of 2 evils and I haven't decided yet who>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I have to agree, this is the first time I find myself
having a problem on whom to vote for. :(

Soledad

10-01-2004, 09:49 PM

Kerry supported No Child Left Behind, as did many Democrats. But he supported it with a very different set of funding. The biggest problem with NCLB is the lack of funding. Bush wanted to look like he was fixing a typically Democratic issue without having to actually do the hard work and pay for it.

If you go to John Kerry's website on education (http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/education/) you'll see his detailed plan on education and NCLB.

BUSH’S BROKEN PROMISES TO AMERICAN SCHOOLS

Under-Funded No Child Left Behind by $27 Billion. Bush’s last four budgets have cumulatively provided $27 billion less than what was pledged under NCLB. [President’s FY 2005 Budget, www.ed.gov; historical data at www.ed.gov]
Cut Funding for the School District He Praises Today. In today’s radio address, George Bush praises a school district in Asheville, North Carolina. Yet George Bush cut Title I funding for that district by more than $100,000. North Carolina has been one of the nation’s leaders in education reform since the era of Jim Hunt, North Carolna’s “Education Governor.” [Center for American Progress, 04/06/04]
Proposed Cutting 500,000 Children from Afterschool Programs. In his 2004 budget, George Bush proposed cutting afterschool funding by 40%, cutting off afterschool opportunities for 500,000 children. [www.afterschoolalliance.org; ed.gov, FY 2004 Budget data]
BUSH’S FAILURE TO REFORM HIGH SCHOOLS IN TEXAS AND ACROSS AMERICA

Bush and Paige’s “Texas Miracle” Exposed As a “Tall Tale.” Bush modeled No Child Left Behind after the “Texas Miracle” over which Rod Paige presided as superintendent of Houston schools. Yet, a Texas Education Agency probe into 16 Houston schools found widespread fraud and misreporting. “Houston as a whole reported a 1.5 percent annual dropout rate, though education experts estimate that the true percentage of students who quit before graduation is nearer 40 percent.” Other experts placed Houston’s dropout rate as high as 50 percent. [Harvard Civil Rights Project, 2004; New York Times, 7/26/2003; New York Times, 7/11/2003; 60 Minutes, 1/7/04]
One-Third of American Students Allowed To Drop-Out. The national graduation rate “is not the widely broadcast 85 percent,” but closer to 68 percent. In fact, about half of African-American Latino, and American Indian youths do not finish high school. [Education Week, 7/28/04; Harvard Civil Rights Project, 2/04]
JOHN KERRY HAS A REAL PLAN FOR AMERICA’S HIGH SCHOOLS

In May 2004, John Kerry announced a detailed agenda to strengthen American high school education. Yet again, President Bush has chosen to follow John Kerry’s lead on an issue Bush has failed to address for more than three years. John Kerry will:

Honor the Provisions of NCLB Requiring Accountability for Graduation Rates. John Kerry will make sure that NCLB requires accountability for graduation rates. He will require uniform and accurate data on graduation rates from all schools and districts and require disaggregation of graduation data so we know that all groups are achieving. [The Kerry-Edwards Plan For One Million More Americans To Graduate High School, http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/education/graduation.html]
Support Development of a Rigorous High School Curriculum. John Kerry will fund a national initiative to align the academic standards (not specific content) in high school with the knowledge and skills required for college and work, and he will provide incentives for states to ensure that their curricula meet these broad standards.
Support Expanded Literacy Programs and Other Outreach to At-Risk Kids. For those students who struggle with basic skills, he will support expanded adolescent literacy programs and has also proposed an expansion in targeted college readiness programs like GEAR UP.
Break Up Troubled Large High Schools. John Kerry will support efforts to build smaller schools, break up troubled big high schools into component parts, and make schools places where students feel more at home.

lizzielou742

10-01-2004, 10:59 PM

Thanks for posting that, Soledad. You beat me to it. ;)

mugsy

10-02-2004, 12:20 AM

The biggest problem with NCLB is not the funding, it's the entire premise. It is unrealistic and takes all accountability away from the students and puts it squarely on the teachers. It also assumes that every child is going to be educated and will graduate from high school or the district loses federal money. I don't care WHO made it up, it stinks and it doesn't help anyone.

lizzielou742

10-02-2004, 10:02 AM

Interesting link. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-10-02-fox-kerry_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA)

Lady's Human

10-04-2004, 10:13 PM

School districts shouldn't be recieving federal money to begin with. It is yet another incursion by the federal government into local affairs. The main problem with EVERYTHING coming from the mouths of both candidates is that the president has absolutely NO constitutional authority over the issues, as they involve funding and taxation, which are under the control of congress, not the executive branch. Do I mind my local taxes going up because we're losing money from DC? Not at all, because I have more control over the money that goes to my local government than I do the money that goes to the federal government, through three (at least) layers of bureaucracy, filters down to the state, goes through another three layers of bureaucracy and finally goes to the local project which could have been funded locally without losing 50% of the original money to the administrative costs of government.

RICHARD

10-05-2004, 06:35 PM

I want to see Cheney say something racy to Edwards tonight.

I haven't seen a man cry in a while...

Just kidding.

I do know that Halliburton is gonna be a big word tonight....

I bet Edwards mentions it at least 16 times.

Pam

10-05-2004, 06:39 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
I want to see Cheney say something racy to Edwards tonight.

Well this isn't racy but I just heard on the news that they expect Cheney to clobber him on his frivolous lawsuits as a trial lawyer, driving up the malpractice insurance for doctors which is a hot topic. We shall see...

RICHARD

10-05-2004, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by Pam
Well this isn't racy but I just heard on the news that they expect Cheney to clobber him on his frivolous lawsuits as a trial lawyer, driving up the malpractice insurance for doctors which is a hot topic. We shall see...

I'll be watching....:D

mugsy

10-05-2004, 07:19 PM

Should prove to be interesting....

I wonder how many people will watch that and how many will watch the Yankees and Twins game??

dukedogsmom

10-05-2004, 08:08 PM

It's getting good, for those of you not watching.

mugsy

10-05-2004, 08:11 PM

I like Edwards, but, his voice is REALLY annoying!!

Cheney seems to be avoiding the answer that Edwards gave.

dukedogsmom

10-05-2004, 08:12 PM

Yeah, I was noticing that, too.

mugsy

10-05-2004, 08:27 PM

As much as I hate to admit it (because I can't STAND Cheney) that he is handling himself much better than Bush did last week.

Cheney can't, however, let go of Kerry's "waffling" and strength of military leadership.....GET OVER IT! I guess it's not good enough that sometimes when you get better information that you change your mind. For me, it really doesn't matter because I'm not voting for either man.

dukedogsmom

10-05-2004, 08:29 PM

You should vote for someone, I don't care who. As MTV says, you can't ^@#$& if you don't vote.

mugsy

10-05-2004, 08:36 PM

Oh I'm voting....make no mistake about that....I will be either voting for Nadar (if IN actually has the guts to put him on the ballot) or Gary Nolan who is a Libertarian.

OOOHHHH....Haliburtan.....

dukedogsmom

10-05-2004, 08:45 PM

Uh oh, Cheney got in some punches.
Edwards:"I don't think the country can take four more years of this" That was good.

mugsy

10-05-2004, 09:37 PM

Well, as much as I hate to admit it, Cheney was much more composed than Bush was the other night, but, he is SO pompous. ACK!

Edwards was a little less together than Kerry was the other night and too smart a$$y than he probably should have been, but, he did have some good answers, but, still seemed a little too defensive.

BCBlondie

10-06-2004, 01:06 AM

I heard that if Bush wins, he will probably sign a draft for Iraq. People 18+ (was it 18 - 26 or something?) will have to go to war, regardless of gender, if your name is picked from the lottery thing they do to choose people.

Is that true?

I really don't want Bush to win. :(

I think the only thing that Bush really cares about is "terrorism".. :rolleyes: He is too obsessed with war and trying to build a great and powerful military. There are bigger problems in the U.S. that need attention, like poverty and health care.

And the whole thing with banning gay marriages... :rolleyes: lol

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Kerry wins.

I can finally get a good night's sleep tonight.

That is all.

:D :D :D :D :D :D
Amen to that!!

christa

10-06-2004, 06:21 AM

Originally posted by dukedogsmom
Edwards:"I don't think the country can take four more years of this" That was good.

How original.

dukedogsmom

10-06-2004, 06:35 AM

I found it quite funny

Logan

10-06-2004, 07:02 AM

Is that true?

According to statements from President Bush, himself, this not true.

lizzielou742

10-06-2004, 07:04 AM

I thought it was interesting how Cheney said he and Edwards had never met before. Interesting, seeing as how they hosted a National Prayer Breakfast together on February 21, 2001. LIAR.

Attached is a picture of them together.

lizzielou742

10-06-2004, 07:05 AM

Originally posted by Logan
According to statements from President Bush, himself, this not true.

Er, right, because that's not a biased source. Neither is Rumsfeld, right?

christa

10-06-2004, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by BCBlondie
I heard that if Bush wins, he will probably sign a draft for Iraq. People 18+ (was it 18 - 26 or something?) will have to go to war, regardless of gender, if your name is picked from the lottery thing they do to choose people.

Is that true?

No, it's not true.

Please see my new thread in the Dog House.

http://www.petoftheday.com/talk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60503

And by the way, it was the DEMOCRATS that introduced this legislation, not the Bush Administration.

christa

10-06-2004, 07:21 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
I thought it was interesting how Cheney said he and Edwards had never met before. Interesting, seeing as how they hosted a National Prayer Breakfast together on February 21, 2001. LIAR.

Attached is a picture of them together.

It's funny that the only time they met was at breakfast & a swearing in function. Looks like they would have run into each other on the Senate floor at some point . . . oh yeah, I keep forgetting, Edwards hasn't been on the Senate floor in awhile. ;)

I think Cheney was trying to make a point . . . or at least that's how I saw it.

Logan

10-06-2004, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Er, right, because that's not a biased source. Neither is Rumsfeld, right?

I just answered her question, Lizzielou, I wasn't trying to get into a political argument with you.

I also think there is a lot of bias on both sides of this race and things get slanted the way that the politicians want them to, which isn't always accurate. Heck, we see the same slant from both sides, right here on Pet Talk!

mugsy

10-06-2004, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Er, right, because that's not a biased source. Neither is Rumsfeld, right?

And exactly what source ISN'T biased in this great country of ours?

RICHARD

10-07-2004, 01:06 PM

Reuters news is reporting that since Dick Cheney was spotted at the debates this week we are in for 11 more weeks of autumn.

Whether or not he saw his shadow is part of a Senate investigation.
:confused:

DJFyrewolf36

10-07-2004, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD
Reuters news is reporting that since Dick Cheney was spotted at the debates this week we are in for 11 more weeks of autumn.

Whether or not he saw his shadow is part of a Senate investigation.
:confused:

Hahaha lol!! :D

snappy

10-07-2004, 03:44 PM

Thank you Richard for keeping it lite! :D

K9soul

10-07-2004, 04:05 PM

I often get my news from the Daily Show. It is kind of like getting news from Richard :D. And while they are biased, at least they don't pretend not to be :p.

Disclaimer: This post was made in a lighthearted manner. I refuse to get involved in a serious political discussion without being face to face ;)

RICHARD

10-07-2004, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by K9soul

Disclaimer: This post was made in a lighthearted manner. I refuse to get involved in a serious political discussion without being face to face ;)

I think you meant to say,

My name is K9soul, And I approve of this message!

:D

aly

10-08-2004, 06:06 PM

Looking forward to the debates tonight :D Everyone watch!

dukedogsmom

10-08-2004, 06:12 PM

Thanks for letting me know! I didn't know when the next one was happening.

lizbud

10-08-2004, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by aly
Looking forward to the debates tonight :D Everyone watch!

I can't wait. Been looking forward to this all day today.:)

mugsy

10-08-2004, 07:55 PM

5 more minutes.....

mugsy

10-08-2004, 09:48 PM

Well, Bush was a little more together this one, but, still seemed very nervous and defensive. Kerry tried to be "one of the guys" and didn't do it very well. He's just not a "one of the guys" type guy! lol

I am SOOOOOO tired of hearing about Iraq and all they are doing is talking in circles about it. I just wish they would have told the people to stick to domestic issues.

Patocki says Bush won this one. I'm not sure. I think it was closer to a draw, if not leaning a little toward Kerry. Kerry is just a better speaker and knows what he needs to say.

KYS

10-08-2004, 09:59 PM

I actually watched the whole debate tonight.
I felt the questions from the audience made it
more interesting. It irratated me a little when
a couple of questions were not answered clearly.
(I could not sit through all of the first debate)

I do believe P. Bush did better this time around, but
I agree, Kerry is a much more comfortable speaker in my opinion.

Soledad

10-08-2004, 10:09 PM

Bush needs some serious anger management. I thought he was going to attack the moderator. If you watched CSPAN you could see his facial ticks.

Not a good look.

Kerry was clear, concise and countered Bush every time.

Pam

10-08-2004, 10:09 PM

The debates are good I guess for those who are undecided. Frankly I can't understand anyone who hasn't made up their mind at this point. I do hope that any undecided people are listening for content. These are two very different men with two very different agendas. A debate format at least gives them an opportunity to get their message across much more effectively than some of the commercials that we are subjected to day in and day out.

dukedogsmom

10-09-2004, 06:25 AM

I'm tired of all the debating, as well. My mind was made up long ago, as I'm sure many others were. Bush did seem angry and defensive. I'm so sick of hearing WMD!! All this has been done to death. I'll be so glad when the elections are done.

mugsy

10-09-2004, 08:40 AM

There's still one more debate to go too.

Karen

10-09-2004, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by Pam
A debate format at least gives them an opportunity to get their message across much more effectively than some of the commercials that we are subjected to day in and day out.

Move to a "non-battleground state" like Massachusetts. We rarely see any presidential race commercials at all!

We do watch CSPAN for debates. It's a great plain - no commentator babble - format. When the debate is over, you don't get spin doctors jumping in instantaneously, you see the people milling around, the candidates shaking hands, people posing for pictures with the candidates and/or their wives ... and if you WANT to be told what to think, you can change the channel.

christa

10-09-2004, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by Karen
Move to a "non-battleground state" like Massachusetts. We rarely see any presidential race commercials at all!

Wow, I guess I just figured it was this bad everywhere. I wish I had a dollar for every time I have heard "I'm *blah blah* and I approve this message" . . . it really wears me out!

mugsy

10-09-2004, 03:00 PM

I think I've seen maybe 5 presidential campaign ads. I have seen more of our gubanatorial (sp?) ads.

We, too, are in a nonbattleground state. IN hasn't sent its electoral vote to a Democrat in modern history! lol We're the 2nd most conservative state in the Union behind Kansas.

aly

10-09-2004, 05:17 PM

I really liked the last question in the debate about naming 3 mistakes. Too bad Bush danced around that answer though. That is one question I would have liked to heard a plain and simple, honest answer. I know that won't happen in politics but I'll keep dreaming.

I couldn't BELIEVE Bush's little outburst when he wouldn't listen to the moderator :o :o

KYS

10-09-2004, 05:27 PM

posted by aly: I really liked the last question in the debate about naming 3 mistakes. Too bad Bush danced around that answer though. >>>>>>>>>

That irratated me. Danced around?
He never answered it, or maybe
he thinks he never has made any mistakes just unpopular
decisions?

Mkitty

10-09-2004, 05:36 PM

i'm not the smartest person about politics, but i do know Kerry is a flip flop, and that he doesn't have any points. if Bush hadn't gone into war, we would be in bad shape, and we have no choice but to go into war. it was also Bush who has us safe from Saddam, and i trust Bush to keep us safe.

Tiah

10-09-2004, 06:43 PM

Next debate- don't watch the television. Listen to it on the radio. Are facial expressions really what we should be voting for?

If I were old enough- Bush would get my vote. I don't trust Kerry, plain and simple. It's my opinion, so blast me for it. Please.

aly

10-09-2004, 07:33 PM

I can assure you I am not voting on facial expressions. There are a few key issues that are extremely important to me personally and I am basing a lot of my decision on those issues. Kerry happens to support these issues while Bush does not. I am also basing my vote on the fact that I think Bush messed up time and time again and I think it is time to give someone else a try.

I was all for giving Bush more chances, but I'm tired of it now. I voted for him in the last election and regret it.

lizbud

10-09-2004, 07:45 PM

An interesting point..........and so true,

Face it: Every politician flip-flops

By Daniel Schorr

WASHINGTON – In leaving for my vacation, I left my flip-flop indicator behind. Truth to tell, I've become a little weary of the flip-flop accusation, which is the political form of "Gotcha." And just about as meaningful.

Sen. John Kerry, before he was a presidential candidate, voted with almost everybody in Congress to authorize President Bush's use of force in Iraq. One could hardly do otherwise when the president said he had information about an imminent threat.

I'm reminded of 1964, when only two Democratic senators - Ernest Gruening of Alaska and Wayne Morse of Oregon - voted against the Tonkin Gulf resolution, which took America into the Vietnam War. And they were called traitors by many at the time.

Mr. Bush accuses Senator Kerry of flip-flopping when he voted against the funding bill for the war that he voted to authorize. Sure, but how about Bush's nation-building in Afghanistan and Iraq, having campaigned against nation-building? Or praising the report of the 9/11 commission, whose formation he opposed? Or negotiating with North Korea, which he promised not to do?

Let's face it: Every politician at one time or another will have to change his announced position to meet a changed situation. My favorite flip-flopper was Franklin Roosevelt, who campaigned for a balanced budget, then launched a series of budget-busting New Deal programs, trying to spend his way out of the Great Depression. Full disclosure: I benefited from one program, the National Youth Administration, which helped me through college with 50 cents an hour for sorting library slips.

The answer to the flip-flop accusation: Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. Show me a politician who has stuck to his position through thick and thin, and I will show you a politician who cannot be trusted to represent our interests in a changing world.

• Daniel Schorr is the senior news analyst at National Public Radio

mugsy

10-09-2004, 09:17 PM

That's a good article Liz. I usually don't listen too much to what NPR has to say, any more than I do the Wall Street Journal or other WAY right publications or radio (like O'Reilly...contrary to what some seem to think) or TV, but, his points are valid. I don't care what political party you belong to or what leanings you have,if you use your mind and think, there will always be things on which you will change your mind.

I just know that I am WAY sick of hearing the term "flip flop" from both sides!!

Pam

10-09-2004, 09:28 PM

Originally posted by christa
Wow, I guess I just figured it was this bad everywhere. I wish I had a dollar for every time I have heard "I'm *blah blah* and I approve this message" . . . it really wears me out!

Oh my gosh. Me too! We have them back to back. Thank goodness for the MUTE button! :)

In regard to Bush's three mistakes, he did say he made some appointments that he shouldn't have but didn't want to divulge the names and embarrass anyone.

mugsy

10-09-2004, 09:31 PM

Do the names Rumsfeld and Ashcroft work for anyone? lol

But Pam, that was only 1 mistake!! hehehe (I'm just teasing you)

Pam

10-09-2004, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by mugsy
Do the names Rumsfeld and Ashcroft work for anyone? lol

But Pam, that was only 1 mistake!! hehehe (I'm just teasing you)

No problem Molly. You know I respect your opinions even though I may disagree with them sometimes. :) By the way, my brother is voting Libertarian, so there will be at least two for them to count. LOL!

mugsy

10-09-2004, 09:50 PM

Well, at least it's nice to know that there will be at least 2 of us!! lol

You know I respect your opinion as well....that's why I knew I could tease you a bit.

Karen

10-09-2004, 09:56 PM

When I heard that, I thought "Oh, how slick. He just decided to use an excuse no one would "call" him on." Slick Willie's got nothin' on him. I mean really - he couldn't think of one thing he could admit to?

Mkitty

10-09-2004, 10:08 PM

i understand all of your guys points, but i would never vote for Kerry. He doesn't have any good points, and he is a TOTAL flip flop. i feel safe with Bush as president. people say we shouldn't have the war. we have no choice. Terrorists aren't going to stop, and they aren't going to talk, like Kerry wanted. The war is the best bet for us. i trust Bush to help America and keep it safe.

aly

10-09-2004, 10:25 PM

Bush saying he appointed some of the wrong people was a cop out in my opinion. I wish he would have taken one ounce of blame for something instead of saying he appointed some people who were the ones who made the mistakes.

Just my opinion.

Mkitty

10-09-2004, 10:36 PM

he has blamed himself for many things, and yes, he has done some, wrong things, but he is a better president than Kerry ever will be, because Kerry will never balme himself, and I just can't trust what Kerry will do if he is president.

Lady's Human

10-09-2004, 11:28 PM

The question about mistakes should have never been allowed in the debate. No matter how the President answered, he would be wrong. It is a classic ambush question, to which there is no answer that would satisfy the other side. The moderator should have thrown that question out.

Soledad

10-10-2004, 05:20 AM

Are you kidding me? We're not allowed to ask this president if he made mistakes?

Can I ask what's so special about W that he commands all of these new presidential rules and people just blindly agree with them? I can't imagine anyone being horrified if Clinton had been asked that question.

mugsy

10-10-2004, 05:29 AM

I can imagine who would have been horrified if Clinton had been asked the same thing....the Democrats....just like the Republicans are horrified that the question was asked of Bush. It's a partisan thing.

As for the question, maybe it shouldn't have been allowed, but, it was, and the fact remains that he did not totally answer the question.

dukedogsmom

10-10-2004, 06:02 AM

Aly, I agree with you. I thought he would make a great president, too. I won't make that mistake again with him. Let's hope Shrub doesn't win.

Pam

10-10-2004, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by mugsy

As for the question, maybe it shouldn't have been allowed, but, it was, and the fact remains that he did not totally answer the question.

I don't have a problem with the question being asked, but why wasn't it asked of Kerry as well. After all he has spent years in the Senate and surely could have come up with at least three easily. I can think of several already.

moosmom

10-10-2004, 08:05 AM

From what I saw, Bush looked pretty worked up and pissed off. Kerry kept his cool through the whole thing. If I'm not mistaken, Bush, not long ago, PROMISED that he'd be bringing our guys home from Iraq. So, what happened there? We're still over there. Not to mention wasting all this money trying to rebuild some other country(as they laugh in our faces hating our guts) when we should be taking care of our own people and back yard.

Then there's the issue of jobs (a real sore subject with me). Thousands of people are out of jobs. Why? The economy sucks (thanks to Bush), and Bush is giving tax breaks to companies who move out of the U.S.

I can't wait to vote and get that money wasting Daddy's boy outta here. Send HIM to Iraq to fight.

Pam

10-10-2004, 08:27 AM

Originally posted by moosmom
If I'm not mistaken, Bush, not long ago, PROMISED that he'd be bringing our guys home from Iraq.

Bush has said that we will be there as long as it takes to get the job done. Kerry was the one setting 'pie in the sky' dates. In all honesty I don't think it much matters who wins when it comes to bringing our people home. I personally can't understand Kerry's logic that countries are going to want to join in now, especially in light of the fact that he is saying it was the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time, but *Oh, by the way, y'all come and join in now!* I would love to be wrong here but unfortunately I doubt it.

davidpizzica

10-10-2004, 08:31 AM

Bush in that debate looked like he didn't a leg to stand on. Kerry had everything under control during the debate. Bush basially pushed this war on the america people and is using money from our economy to finance it. No wonder everythng is going up in price,gasoline, food, while jobs are getting scarce. Bush is letting the economy go downhill. Kerry is the one I'm voting for. This country can't take four more years of Bush!

mugsy

10-10-2004, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by Pam
I don't have a problem with the question being asked, but why wasn't it asked of Kerry as well. After all he has spent years in the Senate and surely could have come up with at least three easily. I can think of several already.

Pam, the questions were from the audience and this particular woman chose Bush, so that's why it was only Bush. I'm surprised too that they allowed the question without someone else being allowed to ask the same question of Kerry. I do agree with LH that the question should never have been allowed. Charlie dropped the ball on that one.

I also agree with Kerry that Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time because we should be concentrating on Afghanistan, but, the fact remains that we are there and we need to finish the job. I started getting negative about Iraq and then started listening to people who are actually there instead of listening to the media that spins and twists everything to their satisfaction and I hear a totally different story....things ARE getting better, albeit slowly....Rome wasn't built in a day (OOOOHHH BAD cliche).
So, as much as I hate to admit it, I'm not going to slam Georgie boy on that one....oops....I flip flopped on that one...:)

I also think the economy sucks, but, again, as much as I hate to admit it, it's not ALL W's fault. We have a Republican majority Congress and THEY are the people who make the policy. The president can ask for a bill, but, can only sign it if it gets to his desk after going through both Houses of Congress. I wish we had more jobs too. I wish Mike could find a job in computers again and I wish if Kerry gets elected that those things would happen, but, sadly, I don't think it will....not yet.

Now, those defenses of Bush aside. His education policies (as I have said before) are absolutely WORTHLESS (I don't have any strong opinions about it)...and Kerry says NCLB is a good thing....NOT! His environmental policies are beyond horrific, which I am assuming (I know I shouldn't do that) will also translate to companion animals. Now, Bush, in the debates was talking about concentrating on alternative fuel, but, also is a big supporter of opening up drilling in the Arctic...hmmmmm.....

Ok, I'm done now....let the games begin....lol

Soledad

10-10-2004, 10:01 AM

Originally posted by Pam
I personally can't understand Kerry's logic that countries are going to want to join in now, especially in light of the fact that he is saying it was the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time, but *Oh, by the way, y'all come and join in now!* I would love to be wrong here but unfortunately I doubt it.

A new President, one who didn't spurn other countries and create the mess we're in, would have the credibility to reopen the issue of sending troops/aid to Iraq. All Kerry has to say is that, regardless of his or other countries position on Iraq the fact is we are there now and if we are not successful in Iraq the whole world is in very big trouble. It benefits the entire world that Iraq become a peaceful nation and not a vaccuum for terrorists. The middle east cannot afford that sort of instability, and Europe is much closer to them than we are and so they have even more to lose.

Kerry would also allow other countries' businesses to work in Iraq, rather than let HALLIBURTON be the only one allowed in like Bush and Cheney have done.

mugsy

10-10-2004, 10:22 AM

Soledad, I'm not disputing most of what you said, but, I do have to ask.....when exactly has the Middle East ever been stable? It's been a hotbed of fighting since Biblical times! (and before).

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 11:56 AM

I agree with Pam. Kerry has done many wrong things. he has way more than 3 mistakes.

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 11:58 AM

Kerry doesn't have anything under control. He just wants power, and he doesn't have any plans like he says.

jonza

10-10-2004, 12:18 PM

This election may be regarded as an "internal affair" by Americans, but due to the huge power that the country exerts in the world today, and not least the development of "globalization", it actually concerns everyone on the planet. So I think everyone has the right to comment on it. Here are some random thoughts.

The "debates":
I have followed the debates, and must admit that at first sight Kerry reminded me of a wooden puppet. But he seems intelligent and sane and to have Presidential qualifications. On the other hand, Bush comes across as being a very shifty and unbalanced person, neither mature nor open minded. Bush gets along fine hiding behind his massive propaganda and talking to people who already support him without question, but in open debate becomes unconvincing and shows no signs at all of being a competent and strong leader. I will never have faith in a man who has made thousands of important decisions, but refuses to admit ever having made a wrong one. He even very cleverly turned it round, implying that some people he had chosen were at fault. Very sneaky, no class at all. That sort of response must surely make it very difficult for anyone to have any respect for him.

Quote from Christa:
A LOT of people are voting for John Kerry for the mere fact that he's NOT George W. Bush. That makes me soooooo mad! They have no political opinions what so ever, they know no facts, they have no intelligent ideas of their own.
Well thank you very much! You really must excuse me, but I find that a very unintelligent comment. A totally narrow minded, arrogant, dogmatic Republican view in fact! I mentioned in an earlier post that, for the first time in my life (if I could vote in this election), I would be prepared to accept the devil I don't know over the one that I do. And by so doing, you are implying that I have no political opinions, know no facts and have no intelligent ideas of my own. Luckily I don't take your views seriously. Are you absolutely sure that you have the right "facts" yourself? This sort of attitude is precisely what is wrong in America at the moment, and the reason that the rest of the world has turned against a country that was previously regarded as a friend and a protector of freedom and democracy.

On trade:
Here are a couple of recent quotes from BBC's International News:

"History shows that countries that choose to fight against terrorism or oppression by non-democratic means never succeed".

"The widely-held view is that America has squandered the huge stockpile of international sympathy and support it had after the 11 September attacks by acting in defiance of international law".

It really does seem more and more obvious that the present American administration is no longer interested in the lessons of history and are too arrogant and self absorbed to heed the views of the rest of the world. And this from a country that brags about the great future of a global economy! No country, no matter how powerful, can ignore the rest of the world and live in a vacuum.
India is at the moment the fastest growing economy of all, China is awakening fast, Russia has signed the Kyoto treaty thereby getting itself more goodwill and trade, and the European Union is slowly becoming stronger. World trade depends on trust and friendship. Without either, a lot fewer will want to trade with the USA. And with such a HUGE national debt, the USA surely needs all the business it can get.

On democracy and free speech:
I was speculating recently that the present administration seems to be acting more and more like one of those classic "banana republics" (though I have only travelled in The Dominican Republic and Haiti). America doesn't even seem to be able to count votes fairly and democratically any more, and the stories of the Diebold machines and the "#80 pound white card stock paper" are most disconcerting and raise suspicion. Why should there be so many obstacles to something as basic as facilitating someone's right to vote? There are just too many indications of corruption, lies and hypocrisy in this administration.
Now I see there is a book out titled "Banana Republicans" (I haven't read it yet). A few years ago I would have considered that silly name calling, but it is beginning to look more and more as if there is some truth in it. The largest national newspaper in Denmark has now begun to call America the "Disunited States". Not something to be proud of. And it's not just "everybody else's fault" either. This is something that the Bush administration alone has created in four short years.

On religion:
I was brought up in a Christian home, and hope and believe that my morals are acceptable. I believe in tolerance and understanding, the right to freedom of speech and all those sort of things. And not least trying my best to accept and understand people who think and live very differently than I do. But I don't think that God or Jesus has picked me for any special task, or that my views or beliefs are the only right ones. That is a very arrogant and dangerously presumptuous attitude, and not becoming of the leader of the most powerful nation in the world. Personally, I don't even think it has anything to do with being a good Christian. The notion that God wrote one or another book has always been a source of dangerous divisions throughout history. There is a long list of current religious conflicts in the world today, Jews vs. Muslims in Palestine, Orthodox Serbs vs. Catholic Croatians in the Balkans, Catholics vs. Protestants in Ireland, Buddhists vs. Hindus in Sri Lanka, and so on and so on. Now it looks as if we have Muslims vs. the Western World as well. With the spread of modern weapons and other destructive technology, these divisions are rapidly becoming extremely dangerous to civilization itself.
I thought that one of the main criticisms of Islam was precisely that it mixes religion and politics, and that extremism and fundamentalism were what we're fighting against. The worst possible way to fight the terrorist threat is by making it a religious conflict. Talking of "crusades" for example is a very unintelligent way to tackle the situation. It seems that nowadays, even in America, religion has become a substitute for national identity and an excuse for violence. President Bush is shamelessly using this to his own ends.

… and to Richard:
I still haven't worked out exactly what it is you try to say in your posts. If you're trying to defend or support Republicans or the Bush administration, I suggest you forget it. You are almost a caricature of all that people detest in them, doing them much more harm than good. I can only judge from your posts in Pet Talk, but I have to say that you appear to be the most unpleasant person I have ever tried to discuss a serious issue with. You just close your mind, rant and rave incoherently and fire off insults and condescending jokes. I love humor, what I don't like is malicious humor and infantile jokes when discussing a serious subject. If you are typical of what Americans are becoming, then I certainly wouldn't give much for the future of a short sighted and narrow-minded America.
Why can't you just let people try to discuss complex issues in peace? Or try to state your case sanely without gross distortions and stupid jokes? Surely you would rather spend your time polishing your guns and thumping yourself on the chest, or threatening people who you mistakenly believe want to come and "rattle your cage"? It all seems rather pathetic and counter productive. You are just polarizing the situation even more and intensifying the dissension and misunderstandings. When you start doing that, people have a tendency to react in kind, and all sense and reason evaporates, the discussion becomes meaningless. So you have achieved nothing but generate even more hostility. Is there any significance in your posts - or aren't we supposed to take anything that you say seriously? If so, why do you bother?

Surely the intelligent way to face a common enemy is to rally together and fight united against them. That's what normally happens in an intelligent, civilized society. Nobody can deny that the Bush administration has done the precise opposite, polarizing the country and splitting it into two bitterly opposed factions. This problem has to be solved NOW if America is to continue to flourish. The Bush administration obviously can't achieve this.

It must be time for a change in leadership.

Soledad

10-10-2004, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by mugsy
Soledad, I'm not disputing most of what you said, but, I do have to ask.....when exactly has the Middle East ever been stable? It's been a hotbed of fighting since Biblical times! (and before).

No argument from me here. But the fact is, since the middle east is as unsteady as it is, failure in Iraq is just not something the world can afford. Thus it benefits every peace loving country to participate in the clean up of this mess.

mugsy

10-10-2004, 01:13 PM

Jonza,

I believe what Christa was saying was that if you are voting for Kerry ONLY because he is not Bush is not the way to vote. You should vote because you agree with more of the candidate's views. I think that's what she meant. I don't want to put words in her mouth, but, that is the way I interpreted what she said.

As for Richard, I think what he has to say is valid and his humor is there to help diffuse arguments. I personally think he's a very funny man that is highly intelligent, so I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I honestly think that Richard is like me--independent. Mike and I are proud to call Richard a friend. On the other hand, I thoroughly enjoy your insight as well. You are also highly intelligent and your command of the English language is amazing!!

As far as the debates. I too felt (and to some extent still feel) that Kerry is like a wooden puppet, but, he is obviously a better public speaker than Bush. I felt that Bush was on the ropes WAY too much during both debates.

christa

10-10-2004, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by mugsy
[B]Jonza,

I believe what Christa was saying was that if you are voting for Kerry ONLY because he is not Bush is not the way to vote. You should vote because you agree with more of the candidate's views. I think that's what she meant. I don't want to put words in her mouth, but, that is the way I interpreted what she said.

THANK YOU MUGSY!

(I'm gonna cool down, and then I'll respond to Jonza . . . )

mugsy

10-10-2004, 02:14 PM

No problem....I aim to please!! ;) :D

Don't let PT ruin your day. I did it for too long....trust me....there are bigger things to worry about!! lol

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 02:32 PM

I agree people shouldn't vote just because Kerry isn't Bush. That was a pretty rude comment said to Christa. I am trying my hardest not to get rude and so far i have done a good job i think. Don't feel bad Christa! it happens to all of us Republicans.:mad:

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 02:40 PM

I even get it at school. well, we do. my sister did and the teacher didn't do anything.:mad:

christa

10-10-2004, 02:42 PM

Mugsy: You're right . . . I'm going to take what Jonza says with a grain of salt . . . after all, he dissed RICHARD, and that's COMPLETELY "narrow minded and arrogant" . . . LOL.

Jonza: You took what I said and completely screwed it around. And then you basically went back and proved what I was saying? You'd vote for anyone else, so long as it's not Bush? Is that not what that statement means???

I mentioned in an earlier post that, for the first time in my life (if I could vote in this election), I would be prepared to accept the devil I don't know over the one that I do.

So you think that i'm a narrow minded, arrogant, unintelligent, dogmatic Republican? Oh no, you've gone and hurt my feelings! LOL . . . Please!!! Give me a break here! You are as arrogant and left leaning as they get!!!

I don't really care about your views of me. I am voting based on my morals and beliefs. I'm OK with that and I'm not looking for your approval.

I don't really care about your opinions of our administration, especially since you won't be voting.

I'm not scared of you.

I'm not intimidated by you.

And just for future reference, LEAVE RICHARD ALONE!

christa

10-10-2004, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Mkitty
I agree people shouldn't vote just because Kerry isn't Bush. That was a pretty rude comment said to Christa. I am trying my hardest not to get rude and so far i have done a good job i think. Don't feel bad Christa! it happens to all of us Republicans.:mad:

Thanks Mkitty! I know, I usually try to stay out of these political boards, but I've been drawn to them lately. I'm also trying to not be rude, although I've already been accused of doing so . . . trying to keep it light though. LOL . . . gotta laugh at these people though, so defensive!

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 02:49 PM

No problem, Christa! ya i know! i have tried to stay out of the dog house all together! but i couldn't because of these political stuf. im only 13 but i do know a couple of stuf tanx to my sis! she knows WAY more than i do! lol. i still can't believe my teacher didnt do anything. they started booing her when she said politics shouldn't be brought to school, and she said she would be neutral. Then this girl said to her "your a republican aren't you?" and she said back, in deffense, "your a liberal, aren't you?" and the teacher sat there, kinda qverwhelmed. he's going for Kerry, so what can i say. The kids in class before that were all booing my sis, and this girl said Bush was a big you no what! and the teacher smiled and didn't do anything until my sis stood up! unbelievable in my oppinion

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 03:16 PM

GO CHRISTA!!!!! :) :D :D :D :) :) ;) ;) in your face jonza!

Pam

10-10-2004, 03:26 PM

Mugsy once again thank you and thanks for coming back to PT! You expressed how I feel much better than I could. I agree with everything that you said. Should Howard Dean have been the Democratic nominee then I think a lot more Dems would have been voting FOR Dean instead of against Bush. Kerry is a wooden puppet. Good description and someone is pulling his strings. Hmm.... I don't like the war. Don't get me wrong. There are issues other than the war at stake in this country, though, and a lot of my concerns lie there as well. I wish we weren't involved in a war. I wish there weren't people in this world who hated us. Believe it or not, I am a registered Democrat. I was one of the few votes for George McGovern way back when. How's that for radical?? Remember Viet Nam? Come home Amerca! My husband was in the Air Force during Viet Nam. I just pray for peace and for God's will in this election. I can do no more.

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 03:39 PM

i agree with Pam, again, and i wish people didnt hate us and that there were peace, but there will never be complete world peace. I wish there could be, but it is impossible with alot of stuf hapening throughout the world.

I know Kerry is like a wooden puppet!!! actully he kinda looks like a dog to me

dukedogsmom

10-10-2004, 04:11 PM

Now see, looking like a dog, to me, would be a compliment!

mugsy

10-10-2004, 04:13 PM

I believe the "in your face Jonza" was a bit strong (actually A LOT too strong), Jonza is entitled to his opinion and entitled to post just as you are and he did so eloquently. You and I may not agree with everything that he said, but, that does not mean that he should be attacked.

Pam, My BIL was in the Air Force in 'Nam also. He was stationed in Thailand the last year of the war. He's very proud of what he did there. He later left the AF and joined the Marines as an officer and that's where he was when he was in Desert Storm. Funny thing....he and Mike figure that they probably talked to each other in DS because they were both in intelligence and Mike was on the front lines and Tony was in Riyhad (spelling...I'm tired and don't want to think) and one of Mike's jobs was to call Central Command and brief them of what was happening.

MKitty, just because someone is a "Wooden Puppet" does not mean that he can't do a good job as president. I am referring to the way he carries himself. I don't mean to be rude and presumptuous, but, are your opinions your own, or are they the opinions of your parents? If they are your own, why do you take the side that you do?

Christa, I don't think you should feel attacked. Jonza was only expressing how he felt. That's what I meant when I posted what I did. Sorry, I didn't express that very well.

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 04:17 PM

lol i didnt exactly mean it as an insult to people who want Kerry, i just think he does look like a dog.

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 04:22 PM

well, i didnt try to attack him at all, but i thought it was rude what he said. and yes, some of these are my oppinions, and some of these are my parents, but i agree with them. and christa was offended and insulted. please dont hate me though, mugsy.

mugsy

10-10-2004, 04:29 PM

I don't hate you MKitty....and I don't want to offend you, but, I don't hate you because I realize that you are VERY young. My students are older than you are!! lol I appeciate the fact that you are so young, but, yet, interested in politics.

christa

10-10-2004, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by mugsy
Christa, I don't think you should feel attacked. Jonza was only expressing how he felt. That's what I meant when I posted what I did. Sorry, I didn't express that very well.

I'm confused . . . I understand that Jonza is expressing how he felt, but he was attacking me personally in the process. I let him off easy, I am in no mood to get worked up over Jonza today.

mugsy

10-10-2004, 04:57 PM

That's kind of what I meant. I know it's hard not to feel attacked. That's why I left. I felt that I was being attacked. Then, I figured, what the heck. I've had a number of people ask me to come back, so I did and the heck with the others....they're truly not worth my time.

Karen

10-10-2004, 05:41 PM

No one has the right to be rude to anyone else. Comments like "in your face" are uncalled for, and not a decent response to someone who tried hard to post a well-thought-out response.

Just as Jonza may not realize that you are very young, you may not realize that English isn't even his native language, and so typing out a response that carefully took a fair amount of work.

In responding to him, mkitty, it would be more appropriate, for example, to quote a portion of what he typed, and then your response to it.

Please everyone refrain from trying to get personal, and respect that we have differences of opinion, and can do so in a civil manner, okay?

Mkitty

10-10-2004, 06:53 PM

im sorry everyone. i overreacted. i just didn't like what jonza wrote to christa, and it upset christa, so i defended back. ive had it happen to my sis at skool, so it upset me. im usually not like this everyone! i am a very nice person usually. again im sorry, but what jonza wrote would have been better not written, just like what i wrote, i guess.

jonza

10-11-2004, 12:11 PM

Oh dear! It looks as if I have stirred up controversy again. Just stating my opinions.

Christa, I'm sorry if you think that "I took what you said and completely screwed it around. And then basically went back and proved what I was saying."
I'm afraid that I can't see it that way myself. I just thought that the comment was totally over the top and replied in kind.

"You'd vote for anyone else, so long as it's not Bush? Is that not what that statement means???"
I suppose that's how it sounds, though I obviously didn't mean just anyone. I was basing it on the choice between Bush and Kerry (who I knew much less of then). I just couldn't imagine that the Democratic party would put forward a candidate who could do worse than Bush has. I'm sometimes not sure whether Americans are aware of just how much damage this administration has done to the reputation of their country. Not to mention their disastrous attitude to the global environment, to foreign policy, and the suspicious links to huge Corporations in the oil industry. And how about their actions against the health care bill which ensures that the pharmaceutical industry will earn an extra 139 billion dollars in the next 8 years, and that your medicine prices will continue to be much higher than neighboring countries? The medical industry, together with the White House used 900 million dollars and over a thousand lobbyists to ensure that.

You don't have to get so het up about it all, it's only my opinion. I'm sure you would consider me a pinkie liberal minded socialist if you ever met me. But it's not as simple as that, it's not just black and white.

I'm not scared of you.
I'm not intimidated by you.
And just for future reference, LEAVE RICHARD ALONE!

Please relax Christa, I must surely be one of the very last people in the whole world that you have to be scared of, and I am quite sure that Richard can look after himself, I doubt very much that he needs any help from you or anyone else. I don't even own a gun!
And I must admit that I can't for the life of me see how "dissing" Richard is narrow minded and arrogant.

Originally posted by Mkitty "i wish people didnt hate us and that there were peace"
Yes, it's so sad isn't it. Unfortunately, the main reason that so many people now hate America is a product of the actions of the Bush administration. It's as simple as that. America went to war against the wrong enemy on the wrong premise and lied about the facts. Saddam obviously had to go at some time or other, but it was a disastrous decision to go to war with such a large country without any plan for the aftermath. Especially when we are all facing a much greater threat from international terrorism. There were no terrorist organizations in Iraq before the war, now the place is crawling with them, and millions more Muslims hate America. All the money and resources and lives that have been spent in Iraq should have been spent on facing global terror. Not Saddam first and in a great hurry. That must surely be obvious to everybody now. I think that the Bush administration have let down their own armed forces shamelessly. How tragic for all the brave soldiers fighting for their lives against the wrong enemy.

From CNN I think:
Bush Rhetoric Becoming More Aggressive
In chats with reporters, two of Bush's closest advisers - Rove and Karen Hughes - together used the word "liberal'' nearly a dozen times to describe Kerry.
Bush then warns - his audience often chanting along with him - that Kerry "can run but he cannot hide" from a record that the president criticizes as both unimpressive and unabashedly liberal.

I really cannot understand why so many Republicans seem to hate the idea of someone being liberal. I checked it's meaning in the dictionary, and there isn't a negative definition to be found. Here are some examples:

Liberal: Not narrow or contracted in mind; not selfish; not bound by orthodox tenets or established forms in political or religious philosophy; independent in opinion; friendly to great freedom in the constitution or administration of government; having tendency toward democratic or republican, as distinguished from monarchical or aristocratic forms; independent; free; not servile or mean; humanitarian; impartial.
… or this:
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded; free from bigotry.

What on earth is wrong with being liberal???

"The poll found six percent of likely voters are still undecided about the race with barely more than three weeks to go until the Nov. 2 election, and 16 percent of the voters who identify themselves as independents are undecided."
I think it was Pam that mentioned this earlier, and I agree with her. How on earth can so many people still be undecided? But then again, there are so many conflicting reports in the media it's difficult to decide what's the truth and what's fictional propaganda.

Karen: Actually I am (or was) from England, I just haven't lived in an English speaking country since 1962. Since I left before I was 21 (the voting age), and postal votes weren't allowed then, I didn't have the right to vote in any national election until I was nearly 50. And that in England, a country I hadn't lived in for over 30 years! After all these years in Denmark, I still can't vote here, since I won't give up my British passport. But it does, as you say take a bit of work, and I constantly have to resort to the dictionary and spell checker!

Mugsy: Thanks for the compliment! I just try to do my best and think before I open my big mouth. Doesn't always seem to work though!

… and Christa: thank you for "letting me off easy", you had me worried there for a moment! ;)

DJFyrewolf36

10-11-2004, 12:49 PM

I think I am going to be the first (and only more than likely) person to actually agree with points on both sides of this little PT debate. I watched the second debate (as much as watching the two biggest bozos in America yap turned my stomach). Bush looked like the poster child for Anger Management classes and Kery didn't score many points on the intelegence pool. Quite frankly, I've read enough information on both canidates to give myself a brain cramp, and (sadly) compared to the media, I've learned more about both canidates by listening to people bicker here in the Dog house than I have reading the news. Thank you PT :) I do mean that sincerely. I have made the dicision that I cannot moraly vote for either canidate because both of them have expressed opinions that contradict my moral views. I am voiting, however. This country is headed for a major fall, Kerry will lead us down one rabbit hole and Bush will lead us down another. Both aren't good in my opinion.

I hope and pray that the great nation of America doesn't crumble into so much dust like the great civilizations before.

lizzielou742

10-11-2004, 01:04 PM

Let me first say that I did not watch the second debate - I was at a wedding rehearsal/dinner on Friday night.

Originally posted by jonza

What on earth is wrong with being liberal???

I think part of it has a lot to do with religion. Politics and religion are very intertwined here.

This weekend, I was in my home state of Ohio for a wedding. My mom's neighbor has this phrase written on the windows of his van, in huge letters with white shoe polish:

"Defeat The Enemy Within. Vote Down Liberalism."

Another sign I saw on my way back from Ohio was:

"Undecided? WWJD? Vote the Bible."

Has anyone else seen anything similar where they're from?

RICHARD

10-11-2004, 01:07 PM

Ladies,

Thanks for the kind words.

Pam,

Triple your feelings.

Jonza,

No comment.

Hot air makes me sleepy.

ramanth

10-11-2004, 02:19 PM

I haven't seen it personally around here Lizzie, but frankly, it scares me.

I'm Pagan, and the fact that Bush and his people want to push their religious views down my throat, really scares me.

And I have gay friends that can't marry because Bush wants to re-write the constitution.

I often wonder if there are Americans with a religious belief other than Bush's or if there are gay's that plan to vote for Bush. And why?

Why vote for someone that wants to strip away your beliefs and lifestyle?

My body, my choice.

So yes... on Nov. 2nd, I will vote for ANYONE but Bush.

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Let me first say that I did not watch the second debate - I was at a wedding rehearsal/dinner on Friday night.

I think part of it has a lot to do with religion. Politics and religion are very intertwined here.

This weekend, I was in my home state of Ohio for a wedding. My mom's neighbor has this phrase written on the windows of his van, in huge letters with white shoe polish:

"Defeat The Enemy Within. Vote Down Liberalism."

Another sign I saw on my way back from Ohio was:

"Undecided? WWJD? Vote the Bible."

Has anyone else seen anything similar where they're from?

Mkitty

10-11-2004, 02:21 PM

i think it is good that Bush has his religious beliefs involved with his presidency, but i don't think he's trying to push it down our throat.

aly

10-11-2004, 02:24 PM

I personally don't see the problem of voting for someone because they aren't Bush. I wouldn't get mad if someone said they were voting Bush simply because he's NOT Kerry. Nor would I assume they were uninformed or uneducated. In fact, I'd assume they probably were well-informed to be that much against a candidate.

As I said before, I'm basing my decision on some key issues, but also going with the lesser of two evils.

ramanth

10-11-2004, 02:31 PM

Well...I tend to think he is. Our Michigan Highways are decorated with billboards that say:

ONE NATION UNDER GOD

complete with the Bush/Cheney 04 logo.

I have no problem with someone having faith. It's good to have faith. I have faith in humanity. But I shouldn't be expected to believe what he believes.

Originally posted by Mkitty
i think it is good that Bush has his religious beliefs involved with his presidency, but i don't think he's trying to push it down our throat.

RICHARD

10-11-2004, 02:34 PM

RE-ELECT GORE.

:confused:

lizzielou742

10-11-2004, 02:35 PM

Ramanth - I LOVE your avatar!!! I just now noticed it. It's so cute!!! :D

I know I'm getting a bit off topic here....but what those signs, particularly the one written on the van, do is equate liberalism to evil, basically, don't you think? See also my thread on the "GOP: God's Official Party" bumper sticker here (http://petoftheday.com/talk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=58198). This kind of behavior is dividing us, and it really upsets me to see people take their religious views to such an extreme.

Can I not be a person of faith and lean to the left on some issues at the same time?

I'd like to point out that I do realize this behavior/way of thinking is not representative of all conservatives, just a certain group.

Kfamr

10-11-2004, 02:36 PM

I completely agree with what Kimmy has said in her most recent posts [I haven't bothered looking at the whole thread, just the last few replies]

Pam

10-11-2004, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
I'd like to point out that I do realize this behavior/way of thinking is not representative of all conservatives, just a certain group.

Thank you for that Lizzie. You may now pick yourself off the floor since I have actually agreed with you on something. :)

christa

10-11-2004, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Pam
Thank you for that Lizzie. You may now pick yourself off the floor since I have actually agreed with you on something. :)

I second that. ;)

lizzielou742

10-11-2004, 02:50 PM

;) Woohoo! :D

RICHARD

10-11-2004, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by aly

As I said before, I'm basing my decision on some key issues, but also going with the lesser of two evils.

And I suppose national security precludes us knowing what Kerry or Bush scored on the Evil Test????;) :eek: :confused: :D

ramanth

10-11-2004, 02:56 PM

Agreed. I'm liberal and don't believe in God (in the Christian sense of the word) so that means I'm evil. Right? :rolleyes: Kia! Run! I'm evvvviilll. *makes spooky noises* ;)

Pagan animal sacrifices....bah! About the only thing that gets sacrificed in my home is my wallet. I don't eat so my furkids can have even more toys. ;) :D :p

Anyho...sorry for that bit of rant. :o

Sadly religious differences will always divide the masses, and it will always upset me too when people take it to extremes.

And you are right. It is always a small group that ruins it for everyone. :)

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Ramanth - I LOVE your avatar!!! I just now noticed it. It's so cute!!! :D

I know I'm getting a bit off topic here....but what those signs, particularly the one written on the van, do is equate liberalism to evil, basically, don't you think? See also my thread on the "GOP: God's Official Party" bumper sticker here (http://petoftheday.com/talk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=58198). This kind of behavior is dividing us, and it really upsets me to see people take their religious views to such an extreme.

Can I not be a person of faith and lean to the left on some issues at the same time?

I'd like to point out that I do realize this behavior/way of thinking is not representative of all conservatives, just a certain group.

Mkitty

10-11-2004, 02:56 PM

i understand ramanth, we have different beliefs.

ramanth

10-11-2004, 03:00 PM

All in all... I don't think any candidate should use God or whatever diety they believe in to push their political agenda.

Mkitty

10-11-2004, 03:01 PM

i agree and i disagree. i don't think they should slap it in your face, but religion can and has helped .

DJFyrewolf36

10-11-2004, 03:13 PM

A reason for many conservitive's beliefs (Not all conservitives think this way I know)

Romans 13:1-6
1 Everyone must submit to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist are instituted by God. 2 So then, the one who resists the authority is opposing God's command, and those who oppose it will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do good and you will have its approval. 4 For government is God's servant to you for good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry the sword for no reason. For government is God's servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong. 5 Therefore, you must submit, not only because of wrath, but also because of your conscience. 6 And for this reason you pay taxes, since the authorities are God's public servants, continually attending to these tasks.

Now, this letter was written to the Romans. Think about the status of Christianity in the Roman empire at the time of this writing. Many Christians were going against the Roman government because the government was persicuting them. They really were causing quite a stir.

This passage I think is the mindset of GWB and most radical conservitives. However, I think that people are taking this to be Gods devine word when in fact it isnt. This happens to be a letter of personal opinion by a Godly man to his parishoners. Before you flame me, I am a Christian and I don't think Im being blasphemus here. Just pointing out where I think people are coming from and what errors in judgement I think they are making.

guster girl

10-11-2004, 06:30 PM

I'm going to post for the first time on a political thread. I'm not an unintelligent person. But, I'm self admitedly naive about politics. I have never watched the news or read the newspaper. I am 28 years old and this is the first year I've ever even thought about voting. Of course, ever since I can remember, I've overheard others speaking about current events and about the men running for president when it's time to elect. I am of the opinion that if you don't know the first thing about any of the candidates, you shouldn't vote. I'm also of the strong opinion that if you don't vote, you should keep your mouth closed about the candidates and/or the president. I may still be the one and only person on the poll for Kerry or Bush that chose "undecided." I have no idea who I'd like to vote for. My roommate is voting for Bush. I asked him why and he said "This country would be s*** if we hadn't gone to war with Iraq.", and, all I could say in response was "And, you're saying it hasn't?" (gone to s***, that is) I'm not even sure why I said that, because I don't know the true state of the country, to be honest with you. My gut feeling is that it's not in the best shape. I've been trying to watch some of the debates, I've been doing my own research online, I've been reading these threads. And, honestly, I'm still no closer to choosing who I'd like to see in the White House. They both seem like they're not the right one. I hate the idea of choosing the lesser of the two evils, but, it seems like that's what a lot of people are doing.

The thing that I hate the most about election time is that it seems people can't just stand on their own two good feet. And, what I mean by that is, that IF the candidate says something positive about themselves, it's usually followed by or preceded by something negative about the other candidate. I know it's a naive hope of mine, but, I still cling to it like a child to a blanket. I'm the same way in sports, too, I'm all for cheering for a team you love, but, don't boo the team you don't.

Like I said, I have been reading these threads trying to get a better idea of what the heck these two men stand for and it's so back and forth, it's hard to know what to believe. I also wish the debates between followers involved a little less bashing, but, that's just the nature of the beast.

Anyway, I don't even know if you'd call that "my two cents", but, it's what was on my mind. I'm hoping, when the time comes, I'll have someone in mind.

mugsy

10-11-2004, 07:11 PM

Originally posted by Mkitty
i think it is good that Bush has his religious beliefs involved with his presidency, but i don't think he's trying to push it down our throat.

No it's not good MKitty....we have something in this country called separation of church and state...

It's great he has his religious beliefs, but, keep it out of the White House and don't use it to make political decisions that affect all of us.

lizzielou742

10-11-2004, 07:28 PM

guster girl,

Good for you for jumping in here and being honest about your opinions and thoughts!! :D

My only advice - and I know you didn't ask for it ;) - to help you decide who to vote for is to find one issue that will affect your life in the next four years, or that means a lot to you. Education, health care, job creation, the environment, tax cuts, whatever. Something that will directly impact you, or already has directly impacted you. Then try to figure out which candidate best matches up with your opinion on that issue.

Here's a popularly used comparison tool, if you haven't seen it before - AOL's President Match:
http://www.presidentmatch.com/Compare.jsp2?idlist=5%7C10%7C

Or there's the question-and-answer section, where you plug in your beliefs and it matches you up with a candidate:
http://www.presidentmatch.com/Main.jsp2?cp=main

:)

---

DJFyrewolf36 -
I had never read that verse before!

dukedogsmom

10-11-2004, 07:34 PM

Hey Lizzie, I took the test and it confirmed what I already knew. 66% was for Kerry. That was pretty neat.

Kfamr

10-11-2004, 07:42 PM

I just took the test --
74% for Kerry
10% Bush

aly

10-11-2004, 07:45 PM

The quiz confirmed my standing too.

68% Kerry 10% Bush

mugsy

10-11-2004, 08:19 PM

74% Kerry
28% Bush

Molly's opinion....neither....vote Libertarian!! lol

Mkitty

10-11-2004, 08:49 PM

i haven't taken it, but i'm not gonna change my decision, that i want Bush.

And mugsy:

No it's not good Mkitty....we have something in this country called seperation of church and state...It's great he has his religious beliefs, but, keep it out of the White House and don't use it to make political decisions that affect us all.

the separation of the church and state have nothing to do with this. Keeping religious beliefs out of the White House and politics is not what it means at all. It is good to have your morals and beliefs with you, becaus it is what we originally lived by, and still do. I'm not trying to say that other beliefs and morals are wrong though.

Logan

10-11-2004, 09:07 PM

I just went through the AOL Presidential Match.

My results were:

Bush 65%
Kerry 25%

I was not surprised as I am not totally conservative in my views.

popcornbird

10-11-2004, 09:38 PM

My results...

Kerry 62%

Bush 35%

christa

10-11-2004, 10:11 PM

Wow . . . I just took that test and realized that I'm more liberal than I thought.

I think I'll vote for Kerry now!

Just kidding ;)

Bush 58%
Kerry 41%

BCBlondie

10-12-2004, 12:05 AM

Kerry - 84%
Bush - 15%

YAY KERRY!! :D Lol

guster girl

10-12-2004, 01:58 AM

I'll take the test and let you all know what my results are! :) Just have a couple minutes online right now and I'll probably take the test when I get home tonight or tomorrow when I wake up. :)

Pam

10-12-2004, 05:38 AM

Originally posted by christa
Wow . . . I just took that test and realized that I'm more liberal than I thought.

I think I'll vote for Kerry now!

Just kidding ;)

Bush 58%
Kerry 41%

Christa my score was similar. Scary huh? :p But I'm definitely not voting for Kerry. :p

christa

10-12-2004, 07:05 AM

I'm FINE with my score! It just goes to show that I'm not a fanatic conservative, like I've been accused of.

lizzielou742

10-12-2004, 07:05 AM

My results:

82% Kerry
6% Bush

Surprised? ;) :D

There's another test at http://www.selectsmart.com/president/ if anyone's interested. :)

christa

10-12-2004, 07:07 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Surprised? ;) :D

I'm surprised . . . 6% for Bush seems high for you. ;)

lizzielou742

10-12-2004, 07:16 AM

The only issue I agree with Bush on is the partial-birth abortion ban. I had to do an art piece on a social issue once in college, and I chose abortion, because I didn't know a lot about the issue. I researched it, particularly the dialation and extraction procedure. I'm still for a woman's right to choose, especially in cases of rape and cases where the mother could lose her life due to the pregnancy, but partial-birth abortion is just too much for me to handle. :(

Pam

10-12-2004, 07:33 AM

I will be glad when the debates are over. The same questions keep on coming up and both candidates are having to repeat themselves. Some new insight into Kerry's "plans" might be nice. I wish I had a dollar for every time he said "I have a plan" and then directs everyone to his website. Maybe he doesn't realize that not every home in the US has a computer. :rolleyes:

christa

10-12-2004, 08:16 AM

Originally posted by Pam
Some new insight into Kerry's "plans" might be nice.

Haven't you heard, Pam?!?! John Kerry's Plan (a.k.a. George W. Bush's Plan) . . . Only he's going to do it all in record time! :rolleyes:

christa

10-12-2004, 08:23 AM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
The only issue I agree with Bush on is the partial-birth abortion ban. I had to do an art piece on a social issue once in college, and I chose abortion, because I didn't know a lot about the issue. I researched it, particularly the dialation and extraction procedure. I'm still for a woman's right to choose, especially in cases of rape and cases where the mother could lose her life due to the pregnancy, but partial-birth abortion is just too much for me to handle. :(

I agree. ;)

I have also researched abortion . . . partial birth abortion is a horrible practice! It's disgusting and inhumane.

I am in favor of abortion in cases of rape and when the mother's life is at risk.

I cannnot, however, support abortions that are done out of convenience.

Mkitty

10-12-2004, 10:13 AM

i agree they are horrible! when rape or the mother's life is at risk, that's alrite, but otherwise, no WAY!!

guster girl

10-12-2004, 11:21 AM

I went online to read about partial abortion and about John Kerry's stand on it. And, as disgusting as the practice is, I have to admit, if it came down to the woman is going to die if she gives birth, I'd have to say I'd save the mother. And, if there's no other way to prevent the death of the mother, I think I'd have to agree with the partial abortion. I don't know, though, maybe some of your thoughts on this will help me see a different perspective. I would think all other options would have to be exhausted before the abortion is carried out. Like maybe if a c-section would save both the mother and baby, but, I'm not even claiming to know any of the reasons a mother's life would be endangered (other than the actual birthing being too strenuous). And, I'm also wondering if there's a restriction on how far along the woman can be. I'm kinda torn on this, because I just don't know if the baby's a couple of weeks away from being born, I'm not sure if I'd choose to save the mother. Ugh, I don't know. :( Knowing the mother will die if she has the baby, but, saving the baby instead of the mother, that sounds terrible too. So, my ears are open here if anyone wants to say anything about it. Or pm me if this is considered hijacking. I think the topic still goes along the lines of the presidential debates, but, I could be wrong. This is what I read, though.

Partial-birth abortion ban undermine women's right to choose

Question: Do you support the ban on partial-birth abortions recently signed into law?

John Kerry's Answer: I don't support the President's law because it doesn't allow the exception for situations where the health of the woman is at risk. I believe this is a dangerous effort to undermine a woman's right to choose, which is a constitutional amendment I will always fight to protect.

Source: Concord Monitor / WashingtonPost.com on-line Q&A Nov 7, 2003

RICHARD

10-12-2004, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Pam
I wish I had a dollar for every time he said "I have a plan" and then directs everyone to his website. Maybe he doesn't realize that not every home in the US has a computer. :rolleyes:

Well,

I had access to websites long before I got a computer.....I just pulled furniture away from the walls.....I found dust bunnies too!!!

If Kerry was 'smart' he's take some of the money I sent him ;) and produce a half hour infomercial outlining his ideas - instead of leading the masses on about the 'plan'...

I'd even read a flier of his that one of his cronies placed on my windshield wiper.

------------------------------------------------

I was watching a news program about how some computer game writers produced a Viet Nam era game where you can be "JK" and run around on a swift boat shooting up the Viet Cong....

You pay 10 bucks a month for the service.....

One of the programmers ran JK into the side of a moving boat and stated, "I just ran (JK) into a moving swift boat, not a smart move...."

I wonder if you can shoot a grenade into a rock, get the shrapnel on your elbow and get a purple heart too????
:confused:

http://kumawar.com/Kerry/screenshots.php?PHPSESSID=9cd1c4ae5b146ea7892ad021 7043d642

Includes broadband video news show, real-world intel, satellite images and the background you need to understand a key issue in this year's presidential election.

lololol

Yep, I NEED A VIDEO GAME to understand JK....

What game would we play to understand Tah raise ah??:confused:

RICHARD

10-12-2004, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by jonza

… and to Richard:
You are almost a caricature of all that people detest in them, doing them much more harm than good. I can only judge from your posts in Pet Talk, but I have to say that you appear to be the most unpleasant person I have ever tried to discuss a serious issue with. You just close your mind, rant and rave incoherently and fire off insults and condescending jokes. I love humor, what I don't like is malicious humor and infantile jokes when discussing a serious subject. If you are typical of what Americans are becoming, then I certainly wouldn't give much for the future of a short sighted and narrow-minded America.
Why can't you just let people try to discuss complex issues in peace? Or try to state your case sanely without gross distortions and stupid jokes? Surely you would rather spend your time polishing your guns and thumping yourself on the chest, or threatening people who you mistakenly believe want to come and "rattle your cage"? It all seems rather pathetic and counter productive. You are just polarizing the situation even more and intensifying the dissension and misunderstandings. When you start doing that, people have a tendency to react in kind, and all sense and reason evaporates, the discussion becomes meaningless. So you have achieved nothing but generate even more hostility. Is there any significance in your posts - or aren't we supposed to take anything that you say seriously? If so, why do you bother?

I was too busy trying to get psyched up about Houston and Atlanta, and the Packers game yesterday, so I passed on your commentary.

You are mean!!!!!!

Just kidding, I wouldn't know you on the street so I can't say anything about the person you are.....it wouldn't be sporting to comment on your personality based on your posts. I'll take the high road on this one.

---------------------------------------------------

A dear friend of mine emailed me this line..

Hmm...this person hates everything I treasure about you.

Talk about disturbed!!!!
--------------------------------------------------

One thing that really worries me about this paragraph..

Surely the intelligent way to face a common enemy is to rally together and fight united against them. That's what normally happens in an intelligent, civilized society. Nobody can deny that the Bush administration has done the precise opposite, polarizing the country and splitting it into two bitterly opposed factions.

Let me get this straight.....A peace mongerer like you wants the civilized society to rally and FIGHT against who???

Polarized country????? I didn't see the weather reports but I know it hasn't snowed here lately....:confused:

If you "take me" seriously can we stop for an ice cream first?

catland

10-12-2004, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by lizbud
I'm reminded of 1964, when only two Democratic senators - Ernest Gruening of Alaska and Wayne Morse of Oregon - voted against the Tonkin Gulf resolution, which took America into the Vietnam War. And they were called traitors by many at the time.

Here in Oregon we're very proud of Wayne Morse - he was one of the few politicians who wasn't afraid to speak his mind and stick by his convictions.

He finally lost his senate seat to a young ambitious Republican by the name of Bob Packwood.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Pam

10-12-2004, 06:29 PM

Jonza I have always enjoyed your Fister posts and stories. This post of yours is quite different. I think Richard is a breath of fresh air at times and often just what is needed in these hot threads to cool people off. It is just a message board. Please don't let it bother you so much. Richard is harmless and life is too short. :)

lizbud

10-12-2004, 07:12 PM

Jonza,

The ignore feature works great.:D Why bother reading certain
posts if they are just nonsense anyway.:confused:
Or you can just breeze on past them as I do. That really helps in
being able to follow the other posts. :D

RICHARD

10-12-2004, 07:18 PM

Originally posted by lizbud
Jonza,

The ignore feature works great.:D Why bother reading certain
posts if they are just nonsense anyway.:confused:
Or you can just breeze on past them as I do. That really helps in
being able to follow the other posts. :D

Got a thorn in your shoe?;)

lizbud

10-12-2004, 07:44 PM

No, had one in my side, but I got rid of it........:p

christa

10-12-2004, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by Pam
I think Richard is a breath of fresh air at times and often just what is needed in these hot threads to cool people off.

I agree with Pam ;) Richard is good for this board when things get heated.

It is just a message board.

I think I would have said it this way, Pam . . .

"It's just a PET message board"

LOL, Jonza, you want to have a serious political discussion, go to www.dnc.org . . . They'll agree with everything you say. ;)

RICHARD

10-13-2004, 01:37 PM

Pay close attention should the 'stem cell research' topic come up again...

I was looking at an article, and dang if I cannot find it again, about how some scientists found that embryonic stem cells are not the only way to find a way to 'create' other cells.

Basically,

A stem cell needs to be manipulated to attain the characteristics of the cell it is going to replace.

There is some research going on that does not mess with the genes in the cell, there is manipulation of the cell structure, but only to get that cell to multiply-not to get it change to another type of cell.

Here in Cah lee fuh nee ah, Ahrnold is looked to for putting money into companies for SCR...

My problem with that is the companies often take the research grants, make a break thru and 'sell' the research back to the public....If they are already paid for the research, by the public, shouldn't that belong to the people who paid for it?

Why pay for it twice?

------------------------------
I do not agree with the current administration's stance on SCR-
I'd like to see any kind of breakthough with Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and cancers.

But we can only hope.

lizzielou742

10-13-2004, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by jonza
This election may be regarded as an "internal affair" by Americans, but due to the huge power that the country exerts in the world today, and not least the development of "globalization", it actually concerns everyone on the planet. So I think everyone has the right to comment on it.

Originally posted by jonza
Surely the intelligent way to face a common enemy is to rally together and fight united against them. That's what normally happens in an intelligent, civilized society. Nobody can deny that the Bush administration has done the precise opposite, polarizing the country and splitting it into two bitterly opposed factions. This problem has to be solved NOW if America is to continue to flourish. The Bush administration obviously can't achieve this.

It must be time for a change in leadership.

Jonza, I agree with these statements 100%. :)

jonza

10-13-2004, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by Pam
Jonza I have always enjoyed your Fister posts and stories. This post of yours is quite different.

I'm sorry if I have annoyed so many of you, most of whom I like and respect, but I'm afraid I have to disagree. The way I see it, if you want entertainment or a good joke, don't come to the Dog House. I have nothing whatsoever against a good joke from Richard, but there is nothing funny about the way the Bush administration is ruining America and harming the global environment to facilitate big business interests. We don't make jokes on posts about horrific animal abuse now, do we?
This isn't a Hollywood film or a reality television show we're talking about, we're destroying our planet fast and getting our priorities wrong, and unfortunately the Bush administration is leading the way at the moment. I just happen to feel very strongly that something must be done about it.

Perhaps people outside America get a different perspective on this mess through their media. It does seem that most of the information in America comes from just a few, very often heavily biased outlets. Over here, in comparison, we have access to many in-depth documentaries, news and debate programs from Britain, France, Germany, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Canada etc etc as well as the American versions. (We can even get Arab and Turkish TV, but I must admit we don't watch them!) I would imagine that these together give if not a more balanced view, then at least a broader one. Sometimes one can get a more accurate, objective view from parties that are not personally involved, and who are at a distance.

From Richard:
"Let me get this straight.....A peace mongerer like you wants the civilized society to rally and FIGHT against who???"

I presume that you're purposely misconstruing what I meant. It's obvious that Al Quaida and other terrorist organizations are an international problem that have to be destroyed. I've never suggested that one should never fight. One just shouldn't fight in the wrong place on the basis of a lie. I praised the Americans for invading Afghanistan. But then it all went wrong, and the invasion of Iraq for the wrong reason at the wrong moment broke international law, split alliances and gave the terrorists a wonderful opportunity to expand their activities. I am absolutely 100% sure that Bush's invasion of Iraq has NOT made the world a safer place. And if the argument is that Saddam was a horrible dictator etc and had to be removed, and had devious plans for the future, then what about all the other ones? They're all over the place. But most of them don't have any oil of course.

"If you "take me" seriously can we stop for an ice cream first?"

No thanks, I honestly don't like ice cream, a decent beer would be fine, but I'll remember not to take you seriously, then we can all be friends!

From Christa:
"LOL, Jonza, you want to have a serious political discussion, go to www.dnc.org . . . They'll agree with everything you say."

Thanks for the link, partisan sites are not something I have time for, but I did take a peek, and found an interesting little article on Bush and Kerry's credibility in last Friday's debate (if you can be bothered):

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_10/004897.php

It's funny, I don't think that many people who know me consider me arrogant or narrow minded, but I suppose the Internet is really not a very good forum for debate, misunderstandings arise much too easily. But I have very definite ideas about what's right and what's wrong. Perhaps I'm just old-fashioned.

… and anyway the way I see it, a discussion is a bit pointless if everybody agrees with you! I don't feel the need to polish my ego, and I try to be open-minded.

RICHARD

10-13-2004, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by jonza

This isn't a Hollywood film or a reality television show we're talking about, we're destroying our planet fast and getting our priorities wrong, and unfortunately the Bush administration is leading the way at the moment. I just happen to feel very strongly that something must be done about it.

Perhaps people outside America get a different perspective on this mess through their media. It does seem that most of the information in America comes from just a few, very often heavily biased outlets.

DUDE,

It gets old to hear about Bush the Evil.

Move to America, become a citizen and vote.

I am not purposely misconstruing your comments about 'fighting'
evil.

We send people out to kick terrorist arse and the world get ticked off. You all get upset and the next post is about "battling evil"

Please make up your mind.

And about pollution.....

Everytime YOU fire up your grill, car, motorcycle, TV, computer, washing machine, fridge or turn on the light to see in the dark,

YOU ARE POLLUTING THE PLANET TOO!!

It's not just George Bush and the robot Americans with our
"few, very often heavily biased outlets".

Those are the kind of opinions that you post that are very misleading and dare I say, uneducated....

People who know you may not think you are arrogant and narrow minded, it's the people who don't know you, you have to convince them.

You don't want to have a serious discussion with me.

I get bored after I hear the same thing twice in five minutes.

If you like, you can apologize to the other misinformed Americans
who post on the board.

I don't need it.

aly

10-13-2004, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by jonza

It's funny, I don't think that many people who know me consider me arrogant or narrow minded, but I suppose the Internet is really not a very good forum for debate, misunderstandings arise much too easily. But I have very definite ideas about what's right and what's wrong. Perhaps I'm just old-fashioned.

… and anyway the way I see it, a discussion is a bit pointless if everybody agrees with you!

Jonza - Thank you so much for your posts. I thoroughly enjoy reading them and thank you for taking the time to type your thoughts so eloquently.

I don't think you come across as arrogant or narrow minded at all. If anything, you phrase your sentences so that they can hardly be considered offensive.

guster girl

10-13-2004, 06:17 PM

Originally posted by aly
Jonza - Thank you so much for your posts. I thoroughly enjoy reading them and thank you for taking the time to type your thoughts so eloquently.

I don't think you come across as arrogant or narrow minded at all.

I agree with you, aly. I'm still undecided on who I want to vote for, but, I really enjoy jonza's posts.

RICHARD

10-13-2004, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by jonza

If Richard is going to be constantly arrogant, sarcastic and insulting to people, why do others not have the right to retaliate in kind without getting mobbed by his fan club?

DUDE,

See what happens when you know how to work it??

:D ;)

dukedogsmom

10-13-2004, 06:50 PM

Too funny, Richard.

lizzielou742

10-13-2004, 07:10 PM

Who's watching tonight?

I can't wait!

RICHARD

10-13-2004, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Who's watching tonight?

I can't wait!

Gosh, Red Sox, Yankees or Houston, San Luis!!!

Decisions, decisions!!!

Soledad

10-13-2004, 08:52 PM

I love watching the blob of foam hang off of Bush's mouth as he lies and smirks his way through this debate. :D :eek:

popcornbird

10-13-2004, 09:13 PM

I'm watching right now.

Did anyone notice how Bush responded when he was asked about what he would say to someone who lost his job?

He changed the subject from jobs to education. LOL! He started talking about how every kid should get a good college education and blah blah blah. Sure.....that's what you say to a 40 year old who already has a good college education and lost his job. :rolleyes:

Bushie's making me laugh. He's funny. :p

Pam

10-13-2004, 09:23 PM

I love the way Kerry skirted around the abortion question. He flaunts his Catholicism (the pious altar boy of yesteryear) and then says that he rejects their teachings. Even here he flip flops. He is a Catholic when it is convenient and rejects the teachings of his church when it isn't politically popular. Such conviction! :rolleyes:

Bush is mopping up the floor with Kerry in tonight's debate.

Soledad

10-13-2004, 09:31 PM

I think you were hypnotized by his globule of foam, cause you're not watching the same debate I am.

My mother is a devout Catholic. She's whole heartedly against abortion, would never have one and would never counsel anyone to have one. But she knows her belief is founded on religion and because we have a separation of church and state, it's not her right to FORCE other people to believe as she believes.

But I guess we should be more like Iran, a theocracy that dictates to its people how they should live by forcing our religion on all of our citizens. :rolleyes: :mad:

aly

10-13-2004, 09:32 PM

Kerry stated that he is Catholic but isn't going to push his religious convictions on the country. I admire that and wish Bush would follow lead on that philosophy.

I think tonight's debate was pretty even. Bush did have his act together much more than the previous two debates. He did say a few very unprofessional things that he loves to slip in. I really hate it when he'll start out with "I can't believe Kerry can ........ ah nevermind!"

Pam

10-13-2004, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Soledad
I think you were hypnotized by his globule of foam, cause you're not watching the same debate I am.

My mother is a devout Catholic. She's whole heartedly against abortion, would never have one and would never counsel anyone to have one. But she knows her belief is founded on religion and because we have a separation of church and state, it's not her right to FORCE other people to believe as she believes.

But I guess we should be more like Iran, a theocracy that dictates to its people how they should live by forcing our religion on all of our citizens. :rolleyes: :mad:

Soledad if you would LISTEN to the content of the debates rather than fixating something so trite you might have a clue as to what is going on. Good for your mother. Obviously the apple fell very far from the tree.

I am not going to go around with you any more Soledad. You are a rude, angry woman and we have gone around before. I enjoy a debate but you are too rude to be able to do it properly. I don't want to waste my time.

Soledad

10-13-2004, 09:48 PM

Thanks, my mom is wonderful and you're right, I fall short of her fine example in many ways.

But you have no facts and when you're cornered in a debate you run. That's no fun.

lizzielou742

10-13-2004, 10:14 PM

Very happy Democrat over here! I thought tonight was a great night for Kerry, in style and on the issues. The Kerry campaign is full of energy and enthusiasm and excitement right now. :D

And the spit on the President's mouth was so gross!! I have a 52" HDTV and it like magnified it.....Ewwww...

christa

10-13-2004, 10:34 PM

Well, I've a VERY happy Republican! Definitely think that Bush swept the floor with Kerry tonight. Kerry was defensive and just wasn't on top of his game. Bush definitely won this one.

About the Bush spit thing . . . DON'T GET ME STARTED about seeing Kerry's tongue after every other sentence! He looks like he's trying to lick his nose! (cat like maybe? . . . Snake like if you ask me)

By the way, let me be the first to say that Kerry's comments about Cheney's daughter was a LOW BLOW!

Soledad

10-13-2004, 11:00 PM

Why is it a low blow? Cheney regularly talks about his daughter being gay! She's a member of the campaign, the VP's daughter and more importantly an adult who can personalize the issue of gay marriage. It brings the issue home. No Dems are saying it's wrong that she's gay, but that the policies the President has hurt the VPs daughter. Even Cheney disagrees with Bush on the issue of gay marriage.

Domestic issues are a no contest issue for Dems. The American people trust Democrats automatically with those issues. The only reasons Republicans are happy with Bush's performance tonight is because he didn't humiliate the party like he did the first two times. It's easy to be a success when you set the bar low enough!

I think the polls show who won the debate:

CBS News Poll

Kerry 39
Bush 25
CNN Focus Group

24 on the panel

Kerry 10
Bush 7
Undecided 7

ABC News

Kerry 42
Bush 41

38% GOP
30% Dem
28% Independent

christa

10-13-2004, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by aly
Kerry stated that he is Catholic but isn't going to push his religious convictions on the country. I admire that and wish Bush would follow lead on that philosophy.

This is on the transcript from the 3rd debate.

Bush: "But I'm mindful in a free society that people can worship if they want to or not. You're equally an American if you choose to worship an almighty and if you choose not to.

If you're a Christian, Jew or Muslim, you're equally an American. That's the great thing about America, is the right to worship the way you see fit.

Prayer and religion sustain me. I receive calmness in the storms of the presidency.

I love the fact that people pray for me and my family all around the country. Somebody asked me one time, "Well, how do you know?" I said, "I just feel it."

Religion is an important part. I never want to impose my religion on anybody else."

Just an observation . . .

Soledad

10-13-2004, 11:10 PM

Here's another observation...Bush doesn't follow through on half the dribble that comes out of his mouth. It's like they say, you have to walk the walk not just talk the talk...

P.S. Why would a man who's so devout and loves Jesus so much have a retarded man executed? Or, why would that same Christian then giggle and joke about an execution. I bet Jesus thought execution jokes were HILARIOUS while he was up on the cross!

Sounds real Christian like to me.

leslie

10-14-2004, 12:06 AM

We all do know, right (and this may have come up in an earlier post, I didn't read them all) that Bush is of the religion that believes he and his ilk are going to heaven and the rest of us will suffer on earth. I do forget the name of the religion... Anyone?? It's quite "popular" right now among college students so the hype says to promote the videos and books...!! We will be burning eternally on earth if we don't join them (not to offend anyone here who may be of his same faith).

aly

10-14-2004, 01:25 AM

Originally posted by christa
This is on the transcript from the 3rd debate.

Bush: "But I'm mindful in a free society that people can worship if they want to or not. You're equally an American if you choose to worship an almighty and if you choose not to.

If you're a Christian, Jew or Muslim, you're equally an American. That's the great thing about America, is the right to worship the way you see fit.

Prayer and religion sustain me. I receive calmness in the storms of the presidency.

I love the fact that people pray for me and my family all around the country. Somebody asked me one time, "Well, how do you know?" I said, "I just feel it."

Religion is an important part. I never want to impose my religion on anybody else."

Just an observation . . .

I know he said that but I think it was just psycho babble :) As Soledad pointed out, he talks the talk but definately doesn't walk the walk. I'm sure a lot of stuff is coming out of Kerry's mouth that is just psycho babble to win him the election too.

This is going to be such a CLOSE election. Everyone PLEASE VOTE and let your voice be heard, no matter who you are voting for!!

actually if you're voting for Bush, stay home on Nov 2nd :D
JK!!!!

BCBlondie

10-14-2004, 02:12 AM

Originally posted by Pam
I love the way Kerry skirted around the abortion question. He flaunts his Catholicism (the pious altar boy of yesteryear) and then says that he rejects their teachings. Even here he flip flops. He is a Catholic when it is convenient and rejects the teachings of his church when it isn't politically popular. Such conviction! :rolleyes:
I know lots of people that are Catholic but don't agree with some of the Catholic teachings. I went to a Catholic school for 11 years. No offense to any Catholics on this board, but some of the things they teach are just totally bizarre.
I have friends who actually follow the Catholic religion, go to church and all that, but still don't agree with some of the views of the Catholic church. It really depends on each person - everyone has his/her own view of things.

Pam

10-14-2004, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by BCBlondie
I went to a Catholic school for 11 years. No offense to any Catholics on this board, but some of the things they teach are just totally bizarre.

Then BCBlondie I would have to leave the church. How can you continue to consider yourself Catholic with the feelings you have. Perhaps you should look for another religion but I think you will have a hard time finding one that supports murdering babies. I think many people today are walking around making up their own religions - ones which support their own views. (i.e., the gospel according to Soledad).

There is much that I could write here. I could literally fill pages with arguments on this as well as point out the many inaccuracies and glimpses into some of the ridiculous "plans" that Kerry has. I think Bush did a good job of that last night, most importantly the health care "plan" of Kerry's. :rolleyes: To be honest I have less time these days to spend at the computer that I used to. To take away from reading posts about pets to coming here is not something I choose to do. There is definitely a malicious rude attitude if one is pro-Bush at PT. Everyone be my guest to read over these political threads and see for yourselves. I made a joke in one of the threads about Edwards' hair and Soledad read me the riot act, but it is OK for her to criticize Bush's appearance last night. This is what I mean about not debating properly.

Oh and Soledad you left out Fox, but of course you would never watch anything Fair and Balanced. It might prod you to think outside of your narrow-minded box. ABC this morning gave a one point lead to Kerry in last night's debate. I guess the proof of the pudding will be on November 2nd.

Lastly, for your Popcornbird, I know that you can't support Kerry's views on abortions. How about that lovely practice called Partial Birth Abortions which he voted against banning. There is more than one issue here. It is a package that you get. I personally don't care for Kerry's entire package. To you others, go right ahead. I can assure you in four years if, God forbid he should win, you will be typing anti-Kerry comments here in 2008. Go ahead and vote but vote wisely.

lizzielou742

10-14-2004, 06:58 AM

Originally posted by christa

By the way, let me be the first to say that Kerry's comments about Cheney's daughter was a LOW BLOW!

I think saying Mary Cheney is gay should be about as scandalous as saying Conan O'Brien has red hair. The stigma has to be lifted...homosexuality is not a choice and it is everywhere (in all animal kingdoms as well). That those who think it is a 'low blow' is more telling about them than about Kerry.

Soledad

10-14-2004, 07:27 AM

Originally posted by Pam
Then BCBlondie I would have to leave the church. How can you continue to consider yourself Catholic with the feelings you have. Perhaps you should look for another religion but I think you will have a hard time finding one that supports murdering babies. I think many people today are walking around making up their own religions - ones which support their own views. (i.e., the gospel according to Soledad).

I don't know how much you know about Catholicism, but there are many different beliefs in the church and they don't always agree with the Vatican. In fact, many believe there will be a break and there will be an American Catholicism formed in the next couple of years.

I made a joke in one of the threads about Edwards' hair and Soledad read me the riot act, but it is OK for her to criticize Bush's appearance last night. This is what I mean about not debating properly.

I'm sorry, but I COULD NOT STOP LOOKING AT THE FOAM FORMING AT THE PRESIDENT'S MOUTH. It was horrifying. It was also an event that happened during the debate. I was not talking about his frizzy hair, or his beady eyes. I was talking about something that formed in that moment. It's a bit like talking about Nixon sweating or forming a five o'clock shadow on tv.

Oh and Soledad you left out Fox, but of course you would never watch anything Fair and Balanced. It might prod you to think outside of your narrow-minded box. ABC this morning gave a one point lead to Kerry in last night's debate. I guess the proof of the pudding will be on November 2nd.

This would be funny if it wasn't so completely pathetic. That you honestly believe their slogan is just too hilarious. I watch FOX alright, if only to keep up on what sort of sludge and personal opinions that they're sloughing off as news. It's important to keep up with the slop people are being fed.

Lastly, for your Popcornbird, I know that you can't support Kerry's views on abortions. How about that lovely practice called Partial Birth Abortions which he voted against banning. There is more than one issue here. It is a package that you get. I personally don't care for Kerry's entire package. To you others, go right ahead. I can assure you in four years if, God forbid he should win, you will be typing anti-Kerry comments here in 2008. Go ahead and vote but vote wisely.

Pops and others, I would ask you why is it that the President is all about life while it's in the womb but seems to completely ignore life that is here and living. He REFUSED to make an exception in the case of the life of the mother. It is unconscionable that anyone could justify this. A woman is condemned TO DIE even if her doctors say that it's her life or a partial birth abortion under this law. It's why Kerry refused to vote for this.

It's not as if people are going and having partial birth abortions right and left in this country. The reasons for having one are not as a method of birth control, but are done when there are SERIOUS COMPLICATIONS.

But Bush, like most conservatives, has a problem thinking in shades of grey. I know he doesn't have the mental capacity for it, but what's everyone elses' excuse?

Pam

10-14-2004, 07:59 AM

Originally posted by Soledad

He REFUSED to make an exception in the case of the life of the mother. It is unconscionable that anyone could justify this. A woman is condemned TO DIE even if her doctors say that it's her life or a partial birth abortion under this law. It's why Kerry refused to vote for this.

- - - - - - - - -

You make a good Kerry supporter because you are full of mistruths. The truth about partial birth abortions is the bill on partial-birth abortion did indeed make explicit provision for the health of the mother. The bill said that the law would not apply to any abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. Senator Kerry is not willing to regard any abortion as wrong, even when it is carried out on babies at the point of birth.

Lastly Soledad you argue that Bush cannot think in terms of gray. I am afraid that gray is the only way that Kerry can think. He can't see in black and white because he cannot take a stand that even he feels comfortable with later on. :rolleyes: He has no convictions. I do not trust this man to lead!

Soledad your comments about Bush giggling at executions goes to new lows. I really believe your hatred is at rock bottom.

Enough of this. I am off today and don't plan to waste any more of my time. It just bothers me when mistruths are printed here on this forum because there are those that might believe them. I hope that everyone will do their homework and read exactly what the candidates have said from their own mouths and view their records.

CathyBogart

10-14-2004, 10:49 AM

This video clip speaks for itself, methinks. It even rendered the reporter speechless!! (Yes this is a bit of an old clip, just trying to lighten things a bit!)

lizzielou742

10-14-2004, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by WolfChan
This video clip speaks for itself, methinks. It even rendered the reporter speechless!! (Yes this is a bit of an old clip, just trying to lighten things a bit!)

BAHAHA!!! That just made my afternoon! :D

What is UP with that!!!????

By the way, if anyone's interested, there are new videos up at democrats.org. Click here (http://www.democrats.org/exaggeration/) and here (http://www.democrats.org/notfunny/) to see them. Or, if you prefer not to view them, then don't click. ;)

dukedogsmom

10-14-2004, 11:21 AM

While we're at it, lets just take away women's rights alltogether? You know, it's already happening. Pharmacists refusing to fill someone's prescription for the morning after pill(even in rape cases, mind you) Some refusing to even fill birth control pill prescriptions. It's against their religion. Well then, they shouldn't be a pharmacist and should be fired! I'll be :mad: if someone's going to take that right away from me. BC pills are used for other things, other than birth control. I don't approve of abortions being used as a form of birth control but I do agree that every woman should have that choice. What happened to separation of church and state? Just because it's what he believes doesn't mean that the whole U.S. should have to go by his views. I won't say any more because I know I've said more than some would like to acknowlege.

RICHARD

10-14-2004, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by Soledad
I love watching the blob of foam hang off of Bush's mouth as he lies and smirks his way through this debate. :D :eek:

LOLOLOL

Next time you have a hunk of spinach stuck you your pearly whites, or tuck your skirt in your panty hose remember,

The country ain't watching!;)

And if you noticed the polls NEVER add up to 100%
and that plus/minus sign.....that pisses me off because I can never type it when I quote statistics....;)

BC,

You should have saved your parents money and flunked out....;)
I'm not going to tell you what I DID TO THE PRIEST to make MY escape....

And Pam,

I want to let you know I WAS AN ALTAR boy, and look how poorly I turned out.

LIZ

CONAN HAS RED HAIR??

I can't tell on my 35 inch black and white television...One day I'll look at those new fangled color sets.

Christa,

I'm a disgruntle male, does that count in this election???

I leave for a few hours and a political discussion breaks out.

SHEESH!:confused:

guster girl

10-14-2004, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by Pam
- - - - - - - - -

You make a good Kerry supporter because you are full of mistruths. The truth about partial birth abortions is the bill on partial-birth abortion did indeed make explicit provision for the health of the mother. The bill said that the law would not apply to any abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. Senator Kerry is not willing to regard any abortion as wrong, even when it is carried out on babies at the point of birth.

I posted an entire paragraph about this a few days ago, hoping someone would respond, and, no one did. I did read that Kerry said that he didn't agree with partial birth abortions unless the life of the mother was at risk, which would make your last statement not exactly "right on", wouldn't it? (And, I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just making sure I understand this) But, then, another thing Kerry said was that the bill stated that it didn't agree with partial-birth abortions and didn't include a clause in the case of risk to the mother, which would make what Kerry said not exactly "right on", right? Ugh, this is all so confusing. Let me know if I'm misreading what you're saying. If the bill does make an exception for partial-birth abortions being performed if the mother's life is at risk, that changes my stand on that front anyway. Do you have something you can post where I can read that bill? That would be cool if you could.

lizzielou742

10-14-2004, 12:42 PM

guster girl -

OK here is what I found. It confuses me too, as it seems to state one thing and then another.

Read the full bill here:
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/s3.html

(O) For these reasons, Congress finds that partial-birth abortion is never medically indicated to preserve the health of the mother; is in fact unrecognized as a valid abortion procedure by the mainstream medical community; poses additional health risks to the mother; blurs the line between abortion and infanticide in the killing of a partially-born child just inches from birth; and confuses the role of the physician in childbirth and should, therefore, be banned.

Sec. 1531. Partial-birth abortions prohibited

(a) Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both. This subsection does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself. This subsection takes effect 1 day after the enactment.

:confused:

popcornbird

10-14-2004, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by Pam

Lastly, for your Popcornbird, I know that you can't support Kerry's views on abortions. How about that lovely practice called Partial Birth Abortions which he voted against banning. There is more than one issue here. It is a package that you get. I personally don't care for Kerry's entire package. To you others, go right ahead. I can assure you in four years if, God forbid he should win, you will be typing anti-Kerry comments here in 2008. Go ahead and vote but vote wisely.

You're right Pam, and I must say....even though I know everyone around here would kill me for saying this, I also agree with Bush's stand on the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman only. These are two things I agree with him on, and for me.....yes I have a religious basis to cause me to feel this way about these issues. These are my own beliefs about these issues and I'm not going to impose them on anyone.

That being said, I know its a package deal. There ARE things I definitely disagree with Kerry on, but if I'm going to look at religious/moral issues only, and ignore the things that are greatly impacting our nation and the world in a negative way, I don't think there's a point for me to vote. If my voting will have no affect on what I wish to see in the coming years, then why vote at all?

I'm voting for Kerry, NOT only because I'm against BUSH, but because I'm against the entire administration and would like to see the whole *package* out of office. I would like to say goodbye to Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Rice, Cheney, and all of those people, along with Bush. I don't only dislike Bush........I dislike his entire administration. I would like to see a change.......a positive change for our country. I would like to see Americans get their jobs back, for the economy to improve, for the troops to come back home, and for there to be peace (eventually), on this planet. I can't see any of this happening if Bush returns to office. I can only see things getting worse.

With Kerry, I do believe things will be better than with Bush. I may not agree with his abortion/etc. policies, but then, those issues don't affect ME as a person........nor do they affect anyone I know personally. People will live how they want to live whether you make laws against their actions or not. Abortions are WRONG, definitely, but I just have other priorities now, which I'm basing my vote on. While I do like Bush's beliefs on those issues, and those issues ONLY, those issues are not my priority right now. I think there are a lot of other problems that need to be dealt with first.

I just want to see things improve...really, things that I KNOW are not going to improve with Bush as a president. God knows I don't like Kerry either, but at least he's an intelligent/open-minded person who, as far as I can see, will hopefully be better for our nation than Bush has ever been.

This is the first time I am old enough to legally vote, and what a difficult choice ahead of me. :( I wish we had more candidates. Sadly, with these two, you can't get everything you'd like.