Political: Its been a week or more and still no lawsuit....

[disney4us2002]

Merely for comparison purposes, what is the annual number that hit NYC for the NYE countdown with Dick Clark?

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by bsnyder
So we're relying on the estimate of ONE unnamed polite officer?

Who said it was a few people? Not I.

Ah, Bet...What AM I gonna do with you

No...we are NOT relying on "one unnamed police officer". The fact is that the initial estimate coming from the police was about 140,000. The initial estimate I heard from the organizers was like 400,000. Because the initial source tends to estimate under the actual total, and the organizers OBVIOUSLY INFLATED their estimate, I was using a number I heard numerous times on the news yesterday of around 250,000. I don't think it's a real stretch to look at just the two pics I posted above and say that 250,000 looks about right.

As to the "few people" comment...I was afraid that would be misunderstood when i put it in quotes....Sorry, no, you didn't say those words (though I'd argue that, by downplaying the number as much as possible (again, that's EASILY the lowest estimate I've seen anywhere) you ARE implying it).

 

[Fizban257]

Originally posted by wvrevy
I REALLY wish we could start focusing on the real issues. If the voting public ever gets away from the sensationalism and looks at Bush's job performance, there's not a doubt in my mind that Kerry will win in a landslide.

So do I, but it wasn't Bush's side of things who started picking apart the past. IMO, Kerrry and his folks are getting what they deserve after books, movies, speeches, etc. that claimed Bush was a deserter because of the way he fulfilled his National Guard Duty, etc. And he did fulfill his duty, or he'd not have been honorably discharged. You can't attack a man with ridiculous charges via outside shadow groups funded by unregulated dollars, and then be surprised when his supporters do the same to you. And, to date, Soros, and the other pro-Kerry 527s have grossly out-spent the pro-Bush groups.

 

[bsnyder]

Originally posted by wvrevy
Ah, Bet...What AM I gonna do with you

'

I'll concede to 250,000. Although how you can tell by looking at a picture is beyond me, but I'm not really good at that sort of estimating anyway!

I'd think your side would be better served if all of those 250,000 (see, I'm being very generous!) would go work in one of Kerry's local campaign offices. Seems like that would be a more effective and productive way of spending their time.

I've got to get offline to do just that. Not Kerry's campaign, of course, but the US Senate race here in Florida. My candidate is in a horserace in the Republican primary being held tomorrow, and if he wins, he'll be introduced in primetime at the convention on Wednesday night.

It's time to go work the phone banks!

 

[spearenb]

Originally posted by wvrevy
More hypocracy, and more evidence that people only listen to SOUND BYTES

...according to Dana Milbank in the Washington Post, "President Bush's nominee to be the director of central intelligence, Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), sponsored legislation that would have cut intelligence personnel by 20 percent in the late 1990s." What? Surely not! Milbank continues, "the cuts Goss supported are larger than those proposed by Kerry and specifically targeted the 'human intelligence' that has recently been found lacking..." So check it out - according to the Post, "Kerry, in September 1995, proposed a five-year, $1.5 billion cut in the intelligence budget, about 1 percent of the overall intelligence budget." And Goss? Well, he "was one of six original co-sponsors of legislation titled H.R. 1923, called the Restructuring a Limited Government Act. Among other things, the legislation, written by then-Rules Committee Chairman Gerald B.H. Solomon (R-N.Y.), directed that 'the president shall, for each of fiscal years 1996 through 2000, reduce the total number of military and civilian personnel employed by, or assigned or detailed to, elements of the Intelligence Community by not less than 4 percent of the baseline number' of employees on Sept. 30, 1995." How bizarre. Surely appointing someone like that proves without a shadow of a doubt that deriding John Kerry for proposing cuts in intelligence services is just mindbendingly hypocritical. And if Bush really believes that people who propose cutting intelligence funding are not only dangerous but possibly in league with the terrorists, why does he want to make one of them the head of the CIA? I'm scratching my head here...

Wasn't it a short time ago that the DIS's left wing ridiculed the DIS's right wing because the excuse was used that Bush's spending would be 90% (or some figure) less than what a liberal would be spending on the same program? And now, when it is pointed out that a candidate proposed something, ala cutting the intelligence budget or cutting DoD WS funding we now hear, "well, your candidate's nominee's sister of the cousin, twice removed, to the dog catcher made the same proposal" at some point in their life can be used without prejudice. Isn't that special? I know it is a false argument.

Any lawsuit filed today? Or any naked beatnicks have a sit down protest for more chocolate chips in their chips ahoys? Just checking....

 

[BedKnobbery2]

Originally posted by spearenb
Yeah, Kerry's response to the first WTC bombing in '93? Lets cut the Intelligence budget! That is addressing the issue isn't it?

Good Lord, it never ceases to amaze me how misinformed some people are.

You do realize, of course, that Kerry's proposal (which, incidentally was NOT a "response" to the '93 WTC attacks but instead was a response to a billion dollar slush fund that all of congress was up in arms about) was to cut intelligence agency funding incrementally to force intelligence agencies to use their billion dollar surplus? And that Kerry's proposal was defeated, while the REPUBLICAN proposal of an immediate billion dollar cut in the intelligence budget is the one that passed?

It really doesn't take long to do the homework on these things, I swear. Try it next time you're throwing around a tidy right-wing sound bite.

 

[wvrevy]

Originally posted by spearenb
Wasn't it a short time ago that the DIS's left wing ridiculed the DIS's right wing because the excuse was used that Bush's spending would be 90% (or some figure) less than what a liberal would be spending on the same program? And now, when it is pointed out that a candidate proposed something, ala cutting the intelligence budget or cutting DoD WS funding we now hear, "well, your candidate's nominee's sister of the cousin, twice removed, to the dog catcher made the same proposal" at some point in their life can be used without prejudice. Isn't that special? I know it is a false argument.

Any lawsuit filed today? Or any naked beatnicks have a sit down protest for more chocolate chips in their chips ahoys? Just checking....

Aww...What's the matter ? Is the Republican hypocrisy getting tough to defend ?

I have no idea to what you're referring about the left attacking the right. What I psted was SIMPLE FACT. Shrub, while berating Kerry in campaign commercials for attempting to cut the intelligence budget, just appointed a CIA director that wanted to cut it FAR deeper.

Live with it. It's called "truth"

 

[richiebaseball]

Originally posted by Saffron
So he's been in public office for at least 22 years. Why, if he is so God awful, hasn't he been voted out of office? Did he always run unopposed? Again, just asking, because I honestly don't know.

Well, I'm not going to comment on Massachusetts politics but to be honest sometimes it seems voters aren't too bright. How else would you explain former DC Mayor Marion Barry?

And should President Bush be re-elected, I'm fairly certain we're bound to see the words "How could those idiots re-elect that man?".

Richard

 

[richiebaseball]

Originally posted by BedKnobbery2
Good Lord, it never ceases to amaze me how misinformed some people are.

Yup. I estimate about a 50/50 split.
Amazing how many on both sides get it wrong.

Just one man's opinion.

Richard

 

[Saffron]

Originally posted by richiebaseball
Well, I'm not going to comment on Massachusetts politics but to be honest sometimes it seems voters aren't too bright. How else would you explain former DC Mayor Marion Barry?

And should President Bush be re-elected, I'm fairly certain we're bound to see the words "How could those idiots re-elect that man?".

Richard

ROTFLOL!

I can't and won't argue either of those points!

Thanks for answering everyone, because I really didn't know.

 

[manchurianbrownbear]

Thank you richiebaseball for two of the most intelligent posts of this election season!

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by Saffron
So he's been in public office for at least 22 years. Why, if he is so God awful, hasn't he been voted out of office? Did he always run unopposed? Again, just asking, because I honestly don't know.

The same can be said about a lot of Senators. On both sides.

We have Spector who's been in the Senate since before electricity.

I for one would love to see term limits for anyone that holds public office. Every public office that's up for election that is.