John Kerry for President!

[Laura]

Originally posted by Pugdog007
I seriously thought this thread would be, "Wow he did not do well... what now?"

We must have been watching a different show. All of the speakers prior to him (that were televised) put him to shame.

Definately not a polished speaker.

I don't really like slick, polished speakers. Too forced, too unnatural. It's one of the few things I like about George W. Bush; he's not a polished speaker either. I think Kerry did just fine.


I know I'm voting for Kerry. I agree with him on more topics than I do with Bush. It's that simple.
I'm in Ohio; it's exciting to think that my vote can really make a difference in this election.

 

[jrydberg]

Well, of course he didn't vote for the mis-use of force. Who would? He did vote to give President Bush the authorization to use force if Saddam Hussein did not comply in a timely fashion. Unless you're going to make the argument that somehow Saddam was complying (not something John Kerry argues), it's hard to get away from the fact that he authorized the use of force.

To his credit, he reassessed that position given new facts. But let's be clear, he did, in fact, authorize war.

 

[BedKnobbery2]

Laura, I know how you feel. I live in a swing state as well. It is really a neat feeling to KNOW that your vote really, REALLY can make a difference. (Note: I'm not saying that every vote isn't important--every vote is!!)

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by septbride2002
Why is it that Bush is not held accountable for the misinformation from intelligence agencies in his decison to go to war - but Kerry is held accountable for his vote to give the President the ability to use force if necessary - based on the same information?

In other words - Republicans - get off it. Everyone had the same bad information.

~Amanda

You must have been sleeping while that was happening. It did, trust me.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by Laura
I'm in Ohio; it's exciting to think that my vote can really make a difference in this election.

I hope your voting machines and ballots are in order. We don't want to move Florida north of the Ohio River this year.

BTW, you all remember the butterfly ballot problem in Florida last time? Just read that there are some counties here in Indiana that are having ballot layout problems just like that. You would have thought that every election supervisor in the country would have been paying attention.

 

[Laura]

Originally posted by wvrevy
But the point is simply this...It is hypocritical in the extreme for the Repugnicans (read: those on the right who do nothing but attack the left...NOT all Republicans) to attack John Kerry for "flip-flopping" and for rhetorical skills not quite equal to Bill Clinton's, when their candidate has flip-flopped on everything from nation building to the 9-11 commission, and sounds like a high school junior speaking for the first time in front of a large crowd EVERY time he's on TV (which he ducks as often as possible).

I so agree with that!

 

[Laura]

Originally posted by Galahad
I hope your voting machines and ballots are in order. We don't want to move Florida north of the Ohio River this year.

They seem to be, thanks. We've been using the same machines in my county since I started voting ten years ago.

I was excited to see how many Ohioans spoke at the convention. Even my own mayor, Michael Coleman.

 

[septbride2002]

I think that's kinda the point Republicans make, but from the other side of it. Bush takes A LOT more heat about it than Kerry does (and rightfully so, he was in command). I think the point is not that Kerry was wrong to authorize the use of force, but that he came to the same conclusions Bush came to. Now obviously in the days since then Kerry has taken a different stance. But it's hard to berate Bush or Kerry on going to war initially without berating both of them.

I think my post is to vague since many people didn't get it. This quote above is what I am trying to say. From Republicans I hear He changed his mind! He changed his mind! He authorized war and then changed his mind! Well of course he authorized war - he was being given the same information that Bush had. If (as the Republican's state) we are not to hold Bush accountable since he had bad information - then why are we so upset that Kerry changed his mind?

~Amanda

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by Rutt and Tuke
I've only read as far as page 6 and one thing I do know is that Kerry, et al, have inspired me to do something I have never done before: I contributed $$ to a political campaign and it wasn't to Bush.

I contributed before Kerry's speech last night and his speech made me glad I had.

In a RT conversation I was just having, one of my coworkers put it pretty well: Until last night, I was a Kerry supporter and a Bush opponent. After that speech, I am a Kerry fan.

I've also heard more than one "undecided" voter say that they particularly enjoyed his speech, and that it helped them make up their mind.

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by Elwood Blues
You must have been sleeping while that was happening. It did, trust me.

Name one national newscaster who has challenged the president on this. Just one who has said Mr President we are still waiting for an answer.....and Jon Stewart does not count.

And yet there is barely a day that goes by that several newscasters do not use the term flip flop. Good grief...during the convention they did not even let the applause from the speeches die before they dragged out the republican experts to challenge the speeches.

And virtually the only ones who got away with challenging the challengers were the ones least expected to speak out so well. Afleck, Cusak, and that guy from MTV. And the reason they did so well is because they strayed from talking points. And left the opposition, like Tucker Carlson, dumb founded.

 

[shortbun]

Hey Laura-see you at the co-op?
Do you know about Columbus Moms 4 Kerry?
PM me and I'll send you the email.
This woman is organizing a moms group. First meeting is at
Easton fountain Aug 10th-11am. They also have a rally
Oct 2nd and 30th(I think). eMAIL her if you are interested.
pass the word!
mimi

 

[Saffron]

Originally posted by jrydberg
Well, of course he didn't vote for the mis-use of force. Who would?

LOL! That just cracked me up!

He did vote to give President Bush the authorization to use force if Saddam Hussein did not comply in a timely fashion. Unless you're going to make the argument that somehow Saddam was complying (not something John Kerry argues), it's hard to get away from the fact that he authorized the use of force.

To his credit, he reassessed that position given new facts. But let's be clear, he did, in fact, authorize war.

I agree. I don't think some Republicans see it that way (not saying you're a Republican ). Some Republicans don't seem to give him credit for reassessing his opinion after given new facts, they label that assessment and change of opinion as "flip flopping" or something else.

 

[jrydberg]

Originally posted by septbride2002
I think my post is to vague since many people didn't get it. This quote above is what I am trying to say. From Republicans I hear He changed his mind! He changed his mind! He authorized war and then changed his mind! Well of course he authorized war - he was being given the same information that Bush had. If (as the Republican's state) we are not to hold Bush accountable since he had bad information - then why are we so upset that Kerry changed his mind?

~Amanda

Ahh... then we agree. In that case... good point!

Edited to add: Saffron clear out your mailbox!

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by Samsara
Attempts to justify a misguided war...

Hindsight is a beautiful thing, isn't it.

Don't ya just love it!

"Well, well... It doesn't matter if they didn't have any connection to 9/11!!! It doesn't matter that they could in no way, shape or form harm us!!! WAR!!!!!!!

Really? No way harm us? If you really want to split hairs, they could. Did you not read the reports of some chemical/biological agents being found? I know, NO HUGE STOCKPILES!!!!. So what? You saw what a grip that anthrax scare caused didn't you? Ricin and sarin are MUCH more deadly. A drop the size of a pin head is enough to kill an adult. But that's ok, they couldn't ever get any of that over here. Or could they? Are we sure that none of whatever was not accounted for by SH isn't already here?

And for the last time, the war in Iraq is about terrorism in general and NOT a specific response to 9-11. Besides, the UN authorized force to go in if he didn't comply with R-1441 (and 22 other resolutions). But that doesn't matter. Bush is an idiotic war monger and the fact that 25 million Iraqi's are hopefully on their way to governing themselves is not a nobel effort regardless of the lack of SIGNIFICANT HUGE stockpiles of WMDs nor did they have anything DIRECTLY to do with 9-11.

 

[shortbun]

That Tucker Carlson guy is weird! He's like a caricature(-1sp) from
a movie. I don't watch enough TV to know where he came from
but I'm guessing Comcast/Clear Channel/FOX.

 

[Galahad]

Comcast/Clear Channel/FOX.

??

Are they the vast right-wing conspiracy?

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by shortbun
That Tucker Carlson guy is weird! He's like a caricature(-1sp) from
a movie. I don't watch enough TV to know where he came from
but I'm guessing Comcast/Clear Channel/FOX.

actually he is on CNN and now PBS

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

Actually he's from CNN. Communist (or Clinton) News Network.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
Name one national newscaster who has challenged the president on this. Just one who has said Mr President we are still waiting for an answer.....and Jon Stewart does not count.

And yet there is barely a day that goes by that several newscasters do not use the term flip flop. Good grief...during the convention they did not even let the applause from the speeches die before they dragged out the republican experts to challenge the speeches.

And virtually the only ones who got away with challenging the challengers were the ones least expected to speak out so well. Afleck, Cusak, and that guy from MTV. And the reason they did so well is because they strayed from talking points. And left the opposition, like Tucker Carlson, dumb founded.

You won't find one that I know of but why would it matter who said it? The drum beat "Bush lied, soldiers died" was loud and strong from across the country.

But no one ever said (at the time) anything about the other intel agencies being wrong. They got a pass. Bush didn't.

Face it, Bush is so hated by the extreme left that they are blinded by it. He is held to a different level of accountability than those that agreed with him. And yes, he's the CIC, but he based his decision (like all the other leaders) on similar intel.

 

[Laura]

Originally posted by castlegazer
I just want to respond to the debate about who the terrorists want as President. This has GOT to be the stupidest debate I have ever read or heard of - The extremists and terrorists don't want George Bush as President and they don't want John Kerry as President, as a matter of fact they don't want our country to exist at all! They want each and every one of us DEAD! Every American, whether they be Democratic or Republican or Seussian - DEAD!

How can you make this a debate? George Bush, if he remains President, and John Kerry, if he is elected President will both do everything in their power to fight the terrorists and strike at anyone who strikes at us. The debate is not who will fight for the protection of our country, it is how each one of these men will go about this fight. I believe that President Bush has a misguided design on how to fight the actual terrorists, there is evidence of a video provided to the 911 commission that he had Osama Bin Laden in his crosshairs and did not attack him, choosing instead to bring our troops into a country that did not perpetrate the terrorists acts we so desire as a nation to lash out against.

Yet another great post! I just thought it bore repeating.