Bush's Lost Opportunity

[denisenh]

I stand corrected. More Americans voted for Gore than Bush.



RESULTS 2000

 

[denisenh]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
As another poster said yesterday, I too am sick and tired of Bush supporters spreading this absolutely wicked LIE that only they remember 9/11. Seriously folks, do you honestly believe you feel things deeper or take them more seriously just because you support Bush? And if you do, you need to do some soul searching and figure out why you are willing to look down your nose and assume a mantle of moral superiority over half your fellow Americans. What led you to think that way? Just because people see the problem differently that you do, you assume the right to say they do not remember 9/11. DO NOT REMEMBER 9/11???? Are you listening to yourselves. What could be more ridiculous that to accuse anyone of not remembering 9/11/ Shame on you !!!!!!!! Shame on you for every time you try to use this ridiculous argument against anyone who disagrees with you.

THANK YOU!!!!

 

[DisMN]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
As another poster said yesterday, I too am sick and tired of Bush supporters spreading this absolutely wicked LIE that only they remember 9/11. Seriously folks, do you honestly believe you feel things deeper or take them more seriously just because you support Bush? And if you do, you need to do some soul searching and figure out why you are willing to look down your nose and assume a mantle of moral superiority over half your fellow Americans. What led you to think that way? Just because people see the problem differently that you do, you assume the right to say they do not remember 9/11. DO NOT REMEMBER 9/11???? Are you listening to yourselves. What could be more ridiculous that to accuse anyone of not remembering 9/11/ Shame on you !!!!!!!! Shame on you for every time you try to use this ridiculous argument against anyone who disagrees with you.

Thankyou faithinkarma.....I couldn't have said it better myself. It's such an insult not to mention a very divisive way to look at our fellow Americans.

 

[Teejay32]

Originally posted by chadfromdallas
You forgot to add this:

Start an unnecessary war against a country that had no involvment in terrorism against us and wasn't a threat to us at all.

Can't forget that.

I see it differently. More like a long-overdue forced regime change in a country that had adopted terrorism and "Death to America" as official state policy, along with a huge reconstruction effort on behalf of the Iraqi people, to restore things we (America) consistently helped destroy for 13 years or so.

Just had to get that out there. Kerry's "Wrong War, Wrong Time" shtick is still a matter of opinion - he doesn't, and never will, speak for me.

 

[Paradise]

Rokkitsci
"The debates are all about the "undecided" voters - who by definition are not too bright. Anyone who is undecided at this point is really too dumb to vote anyway, but sadly they have the power to decide the election.

You cannot rely on these "undecided" idiots to see past the stagecraft involved. They are going to believe whoever "appears" to be in command of the issues. Whether that person is blowing smoke are dealing in verifiable facts is lost on this group of intellectual hermits."


On the other hand, what do you think of the people who are voting for the IDIOT that is in the White House? What's their label?

 

[Madi100]

I watched the debate, and I was a bit disappointed with Bush's responses. I think that Bush has heart. I don't see that with Kerry. I've seen a man who will continually flip sides to make people happy. I don't think his wife will make a good First Lady, and I think that is important. But, what disappointed me about Bush was when he hesitated when he answered. I thought he looked old and tired. I think he is working very hard.

I'm not impressed by Kerry, and I still wasn't after the debate. I don't enjoy hearing from someone about all of the things that they are going to do. Politicians are famous for saying stuff like that. President Bush made statements about what he plans to continue to do. I think it would be hard to actually be in the shoes of President and have someone come in and say, "I can do this better." How in the world would John Kerry have any clue what it is like to be president? He has absolutely no idea. Before I had children I knew I was going to be the perfect parent and I'd watch people and see how I'd do it better. Now I have children My thought have definitely changed.

Personally, I don't think that John Kerry should be saying what he would do about this or that, because he won't know that until he's doing it. I think he needs to concentrate on what he believes in, and he can't make up his mind on that. That is why I am opposed to John Kerry.

 

[denisenh]

Originally posted by Madi100
I watched the debate, and I was a bit disappointed with Bush's responses. I think that Bush has heart. I don't see that with Kerry. I've seen a man who will continually flip sides to make people happy. I don't think his wife will make a good First Lady, and I think that is important. But, what disappointed me about Bush was when he hesitated when he answered. I thought he looked old and tired. I think he is working very hard.

I'm not impressed by Kerry, and I still wasn't after the debate. I don't enjoy hearing from someone about all of the things that they are going to do. Politicians are famous for saying stuff like that. President Bush made statements about what he plans to continue to do. I think it would be hard to actually be in the shoes of President and have someone come in and say, "I can do this better." How in the world would John Kerry have any clue what it is like to be president? He has absolutely no idea. Before I had children I knew I was going to be the perfect parent and I'd watch people and see how I'd do it better. Now I have children My thought have definitely changed.

Personally, I don't think that John Kerry should be saying what he would do about this or that, because he won't know that until he's doing it. I think he needs to concentrate on what he believes in, and he can't make up his mind on that. That is why I am opposed to John Kerry.

I think that you need to re watch the debate.
Kerry was finally able to make it clear to ALL, including Bush, what he "believes in" as you put it. The Kerry flip flop label is perpetuated by those who have run out of defenses for Bush's behavior.
BTW, How would Bush have any clue what it's like to be President, before he was selected to be one? What about his pre presidential promises?

 

[LoraJ]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
As another poster said yesterday, I too am sick and tired of Bush supporters spreading this absolutely wicked LIE that only they remember 9/11. Seriously folks, do you honestly believe you feel things deeper or take them more seriously just because you support Bush? And if you do, you need to do some soul searching and figure out why you are willing to look down your nose and assume a mantle of moral superiority over half your fellow Americans. What led you to think that way? Just because people see the problem differently that you do, you assume the right to say they do not remember 9/11. DO NOT REMEMBER 9/11???? Are you listening to yourselves. What could be more ridiculous that to accuse anyone of not remembering 9/11/ Shame on you !!!!!!!! Shame on you for every time you try to use this ridiculous argument against anyone who disagrees with you.

Thank you faithinkarma!

That pic in my sig was taken from my deck. I have a daily reminder of 9/11. I can't stand it when people accuse me of forgetting just because I don't back Bush. How dare they!

 

[Madi100]

Originally posted by denisenh
I think that you need to re watch the debate.
Kerry was finally able to make it clear to ALL, including Bush, what he "believes in" as you put it. The Kerry flip flop label is perpetuated by those who have run out of defenses for Bush's behavior.
BTW, How would Bush have any clue what it's like to be President, before he was selected to be one? What about his pre presidential promises?

I don't like to hear any politician talk about what they are going to do. I think it's very easy to look from the outside and say how easy it would be to fix thing. President Bush and Al Gore were in the same position that neither one had been president before. I'm sure that President Bush did use the words "this is what I will do"

And, I probably could benefit from re-watching the debate because I missed the beginning of it. My husband told me, and correct me if I'm wrong (Hmm, suppose that will be a problem?) but DH told me that Bush addressed the issue of flip flopping. Kerry said that he changes his mind because he gets new information. So, he changes what he stands behind. Bush replied that he can change his mind, but not about what he believes in and that is what he is doing. I don't know what Kerry believes in. I do know that I heard him talk about being a Vietnam Vet, and that garbage. But, wasn't he the one who demonstrated against the war? He didn't support his country in war because of choice, I'm sure. Most men weren't given the chance. So, I know that Kerry follows the events, but I don't know what he believes in.

 

[Teejay32]

Originally posted by denisenh
I think that you need to re watch the debate.
Kerry was finally able to make it clear to ALL, including Bush, what he "believes in" as you put it. The Kerry flip flop label is perpetuated by those who have run out of defenses for Bush's behavior.

I see that differently too. Bush-bashing is perpetuated by those who find it easier than defending Kerry's changing positions. Whenever he talks about needing "allies", "international cooperation" and the like, he's either ignoring the allies and the cooperation that we do have - or he's hoping that by saying it enough people will come to believe we don't have any. He didn't say which, so unfortunately many are still guessing what he believes.

A present for you Rokkitsci, even though you're cranky. This is from Democrats.org:

Take Action
We all know what happened in 2000. Al Gore won the first debate on the issues, but Republicans stole the post-debate spin. We are not going to let that happen again -- but we need your help.

1. Vote
National and local news organizations will be conducting online polls during and after the debate asking for readers opinions. Look for online polls at these national news websites, and make sure to vote in every one of them:

ABC News: http://www.abcnews.com/
CBS News: http://www.cbsnews.com/
CNN: http://www.cnn.com/
MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.com/
Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/
USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/
And be sure to check the websites of your local newspapers and TV stations for online polls.

2. Write
Immediately after the debate, go online and write a letter to the editor of your local paper. Click here to write your letter.

3. Call
Do you listen to national or local call in shows on the radio? How about on TV? Call them and let them know what you thought of John Kerry's plan to keep America secure and George Bush's continuing refusal to admit the truth about his record.

Here are some national shows to get you started. (All times are Eastern.)

Air America (all day): 866-303-2270
Ed Schultz (3 p.m. to 6 p.m.): 877-934-6833
Bev Smith (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.): 412-325-4197
Doug Stephen (5 a.m. 10 a.m.): 800-510-8255
Find shows in your area on our media website.

Your actions immediately after the debate tonight can make the difference to help John Kerry win on November 2. Make your voice heard!

And this is their sample letter given:

In the first presidential debate, I was hoping to hear two things.

First, I wanted to hear John Kerry lay out his plans for Iraq and for winning the war on terror. I wasn't disappointed. Kerry staked out a strong plan to bring peace to Iraq and to refocus our efforts to fight terrorists around the world.

Second, I wanted to hear President Bush tell the truth about Iraq, but he refused. While his own intelligence services, military advisers, Republican colleagues, and even his Secretary of State have said that Iraq is in chaos, Bush still presents a version of Iraq seen through rose-colored glasses.

This debate made it clear: John Kerry is a leader we can trust to tell us the truth when it comes to our nation's security. George Bush has had his chance; I'm ready for a new direction.

And here's a small item from the Washington Post the next day:

Not many readers responded so enthusiastically to Mr. McAuliffe as to give us their reviews before the debate took place, but many began weighing in during and after the debate; certain phrases began cropping up again and again.

Now, we love to hear from readers, and we admire the sincerity and passion of anyone who wants to get involved in the political process. But our goal is to present a sampling of genuine reader opinion, not to become one more battlefield in the spin wars raging all around. And we especially like to hear from readers who can think and write for themselves.

 

[MinnieM21]

Originally posted by Nancy
Yes, I am undecided.....but far from being an idiot or stupid. I'm undecided because I really don't think either man will be good for the country. We all know what Bush can/can't do. The unknown of Kerry scares me. He says he will do the war better....he wants 40 thousand more active duty troops, he wants to double the special ops...all good, but where will he get these extra bodies from? Everyone complains about our troops being over in Iraq, yet he wants to have more....will he institute the draft to get these extra bodies. Will he raise taxes to pay for all this beefing up national security, will he raise taxes to help the budget gap? I can't afford to pay anymore in taxes then I already do.

Some people talk about Kerry like he the second coming of Christ...they think once he is in office all the problems we now face will be over. Kerry is just a man...he can only do so much.

There's nothing wrong at all with being undecided. I also was looking at both sides and finally decided on who I'm voting for. Took me a while. But I still can't believe the OP would call anyone who is undecided an idiot. Good luck on deciding who you want to vote for!

 

[disney4us2002]

Madi, no need to wonder about any of it as memory usually stinks for us all, lol. Here is the script:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/debatereferee/debate_0930.html


While I won't go as far as Rokkisci does in claiming the undecideds are ignorant and shouldn't be allowed to vote, I do wonder just how much time they've given to trying to figure it out. There is stuff everywhere, every news channel, newspaper, plenty of magazines, and tons of online info to research anything desired.

I think Bush did look annoyed and I can say I looked annoyed too. Annoyed that Kerry was being, well, Kerry and Bush wasn't jumping on him. The two biggest missed opportunities, imho, was Kerry's statement about the global test (Bush caught it but should've come on stronger) and when Kerry was asked the single greatest threat he replied nuclear prolifferation and I believe it is the war on terror. Bush definitely needed to bring up Kerry's senate voting record on weapons as well. I don't believe Bush did horribly but there were moments he could have ended the competition.

 

[Christine]

Originally posted by Madi100
I don't like to hear any politician talk about what they are going to do. I think it's very easy to look from the outside and say how easy it would be to fix thing.

If you didn't like Kerry saying what "he would do if he were President" and, for that matter, you don't like any politician talking about what they would do, how on earth do you expect the person running agains the President to participate in a debate???

I definitely want to hear what the both candidates would do. Of course, it is all hypothetical because no one can know what decision they would make at a specific time and place--they can only suppose what they would do and what seems rational to them. I mean what do you want Kerry to talk about if he can't tell us what he might do?

 

[LoraJ]

Originally posted by disney4us2002


I think Bush did look annoyed and I can say I looked annoyed too. Annoyed that Kerry was being, well, Kerry and Bush wasn't jumping on him. The two biggest missed opportunities, imho, was Kerry's statement about the global test (Bush caught it but should've come on stronger) and when Kerry was asked the single greatest threat he replied nuclear prolifferation and I believe it is the war on terror. Bush definitely needed to bring up Kerry's senate voting record on weapons as well. I don't believe Bush did horribly but there were moments he could have ended the competition.

Bringing up Kerry's record on weapons is a silly as calling him a flip-flopper:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2096127/

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=177

 

[Rokkitsci]

Here is my point.

This election is the most important election since the Civil War.

What is at stake here is our national identity, if not our very liberty.

The issues are crystal clear.

Anyone who has not made up their minds by now must not have been paying any attention for the past three years.

This election should not be about who can "sound" or "look" better in the few weeks before the election. This election should be about very baisic ideas that have played out on the public stage for the past three years.

For anyone to be "undecided" about which candidate is better for the future of the country at this point is shameful.

I apologize for the use of the word "stupid" - I should have stuck with just "ignorant." or perhaps "recklessly uninformed."

Either way, I do not like having the future of our nation in the hands of people who are so insulated from the real world that they are "undecided" about our very survival.

Anyone who has to wait until the last minute to make up their minds in THIS election should not - in my humble opinion - be allowed to vote. They have demonstrated that they don't have the interest to understand the situation. They are as likely to wake up the morning after the election with a totally different view of who is right.

Some things are larger than political spin - this is one of them.

I repeat - if you are undecided at this point - you have just not been paying attention.

 

[Rokkitsci]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
..... I too am sick and tired of Bush supporters spreading this absolutely wicked LIE that only they remember 9/11.....

If you will permit me to re-iterate - I have never claimed you don't 'remember' 9-11.

What I DO assert is that you have not CHANGED YOUR WORLD VIEW after 9-11.

Of course we all know that it happened. But the Democrats seem to think that it had no effect on anything. They discount its effect on the economy - and they still want to treat foreign policy as it had been treated on Sept. 10. They want to continue the same failed policies that resulted in our being so vulnerable on 9-11.

The point is that the world changed on 9-11. It appears that the Democrats do not recognize that salient fact. It is if they insist on continuing to make buggy-whips - long after the automobile had forever changed the world of personal transportation.

I am sorry if you do not recognize the different world we live in. I am glad president Bush does.

I am glad that we are not relying on more "summits" to defend our liberty. I am glad we have a president who will make the bold decisions that are required - without regard to the pollsters - or the French.

I am sorry that the once-great Democrat party puts political power over cooperation in the war on terror.

JFK would be ashamed of you - as would all his predecessors.

 

[LoraJ]

Originally posted by Rokkitsci
If you will permit me to re-iterate - I have never claimed you don't 'remember' 9-11.

What I DO assert is that you have not CHANGED YOUR WORLD VIEW after 9-11.

Of course we all know that it happened. But the Democrats seem to think that it had no effect on anything. They discount its effect on the economy - and they still want to treat foreign policy as it had been treated on Sept. 10. They want to continue the same failed policies that resulted in our being so vulnerable on 9-11.

The point is that the world changed on 9-11. It appears that the Democrats do not recognize that salient fact. It is if they insist on continuing to make buggy-whips - long after the automobile had forever changed the world of personal transportation.

I am sorry if you do not recognize the different world we live in. I am glad president Bush does.

I am glad that we are not relying on more "summits" to defend our liberty. I am glad we have a president who will make the bold decisions that are required - without regard to the pollsters - or the French.

I am sorry that the once-great Democrat party puts political power over cooperation in the war on terror.

JFK would be ashamed of you - as would all his predecessors.

You could not BE more wrong.

Speaking for myself, I am all for a war on terror. Going into Iraq does not help the war on terror. Saddam was not a threat to us. He was not behind 9/11.

We need to crack down on the terror networks. This is done with intelligence more than with force. Redirecting our war on terror efforts and placing those resources was a distraction.

 

[Laurajean1014]

I watched the debates and thought neither did a great job, however, thought the President had tougher questions and best answered them.

After reading and analyzing the transcripts for the past few days, I realized that Bush won that debate big time.

Read the answers thoroughly - Kerry had to back peddle on mostly all issues, whereas the President reiterated his position and decisions, decisively and with conviction.

Two things I have yet to see Kerry accomplish.

 

[Laurajean1014]

Also, many of these posts are wrong.

Iraq had training camps for terrorist on how to fly planes and make bombs. It was a huge manifestation that welcomed anti-American sentaments. If we were not there now, we would have a much bigger problem on our hands.

Sanctions do not work with Terrorists. This was proven with Carter and Clinton.

We should have stopped Hitler at Munich and no one did and look what happened.

 

[Rokkitsci]

Originally posted by LoraJ
Going into Iraq does not help the war on terror. Saddam was not a threat to us. He was not behind 9/11.

I will repeat only a short version of what I have presented at length before in other threads.

There is no effective strategy for fighting terror in that part of the world if Saddam retains control of Iraq. Every move would have to be predicated on what we would do to protect our troops if Saddam attacked them - with the WMDs that everyone at the time thought he had.

The only effective way to fight terror in that part of the world was to eliminate Saddam.

Those who repeat the mantra "saddam was not behind 9-11" are using it as a substitute for thinking. Nobody has ever said that Saddam was behind 9-11. It is a false arguement to even assert it.

I repeat - NOBODY has ever said "Saddam was behind 9-11." I just don't understand why anyone can use that as an arguement for or against anything.

Saddam did, however, exist as a maniacal dictator in the region where we had to commit troops. He did have - as was accepted fact at the time by everyone, Kerry included - weapons of mass distruction.

Please submit a single strategy, if you can, for fighting terror in that part of the world with Saddam sitting there in the middle of it with the WMDs that everyone thought he had.

It is intellectually dishonest to make the arguement NOW that "he didn't have WMD" - that is a situation not known at the time and that nobody asserted as fact - at the time.

If you put forward that kind of arguement - it is like saying that the firemen are at fault if a child is killed by running in front of their firetruck while they are responding to a false alarm. After all - there was no fire - right?? so they should not have been racing through the street with with their big ol' firetruck - right?

This is an inane arguement - but the Democrats seem intent on pursuing it. And so many of them repeat it. Madness is in bloom.