Bush vs Kerry debate

[dutchie]

Yes, even in the dark outback of Holland we received moving pictures of this conversation...

I thought (and even the conservative network Fox agrees) that Kerry did a good job, and remained standing through the entire thing. Bush was not bad, but I thought he was riding a one trick pony by repeating he was the #1 man and he was decisive and not changing positions all of the time..

IMO Kerry was sharp, but did not make much of an effort to build credibility by giving sound arguments for his stance.

All in all, I thought the debate lacked agressiveness from both sides.

Thoughts anyone?!?

[MetalMilitia]

I kept thinking to myself during the whole debate about how Bush could best justify his actions on Iraq - especially since JUST YESTERDAY the US started a new massive operation, the biggest since the seige of Fallujah several months ago.

http://www.armageddononline.org/iraq.php

that also coming with news of "September Among Deadliest Months for U.S. in Iraq". Both stories found on our main page news ;)

He didn't answer it. He still seems to think Iraq is going well.

I did like one fact from Kerry - He pointed out to Bush that Iraq - and more specifically Saddam - had NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11...and wasn't a major player in the war on terror. He also pointed out the hypocrisy of invading Iraq while allowing N.Korea and Iran to openly talk about nukes. Ooooh Burn.

Watching C-SPAN (which doesn't have lame reporters) cover it was the way to go. They used a split screen format (the whole time), so you could watch both candidates reactions to each other... CNN wouldn't do that... nor would FOX. Bush looked baffled most of time, and I swear to god if I could reach onto the TV I would wipe smack that damn smirk off his face.

Kerry had downfalls - He admitted changing stances and being wrong on a few of the Iraq issues. But hey... is it better to admit you were wrong, and explain why, or do what Bush does... and pretend he doesnt see the big god damn turd floating in the puch bowl?

BTW : Check out CNN's Poll about the speech. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/debate.main/index.html

Right now,

Who do you think won the first U.S. presidential debate?

President George W. Bush - 18% 41723 votes
Sen. John Kerry - 78% - 179219 votes
Evenly matched - 4% - 9985 votes

Total: 230927 votes

Pretty lopsided.

-MM- :crs:

[dutchie]

You have put it a bit crude here and there, but overall I agree with ya, Matt. :smokin:

[MetalMilitia]

By the way - shit I noticed that was not factual

Bush said - "Libya has disarmed. The AQ Khan network has been brought to justice." He was referring to a nuclear smuggling ring based in Pakistan.

Uhm, I would give credit to Clinton for this one... and all his patience. Khan, a national hero in Pakistan, was pardoned by President Pervez Musharraf, and not a single person involved in his network has been prosecuted anywhere.

Bush said "Saddam Hussein had no intention of disarming." Yet Iraq asserted in its filing with the United Nations in December 2002 that it had no such weapons, and none has been found. GEE - whattya know 2 years later? We had inspectors there, where did all the hyped up intel come from I wonder? (*cough*israel*cough) The Bush administration invaded Iraq because it believed Hussein was concealing stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Period. As long as he remained under U.N. sanctions and inspection, he was 'contained' as reported in 2001. Period.

Kerry said we've spent $200 billion in Iraq when actually its closer to $120... and no one brought up the missing $8 billion.

Kudos to Bush for pointing out Kerry forgot Poland was our ally in the war in Iraq - although the US has done 90% of the dying and paid 90% of the expenses. Oh yeah... Polish troops were not part of the original ground invasion either. Bush also said there were some 30 countries with us in the invasion, what he forgot to point out was the fact that A HALF DOZEN OF THEM HAVE RECENTLY REMOVED TROOPS.

...and of course, as I mentioned already Bush said "the enemy attacked us ... and I have a solemn duty to protect the American people." - Referring to Iraq & Saddam.

Saddam Hussein did not attack the United States. Saddam Hussein did not attack the United States. Saddam Hussein did not attack the United States. Saddam Hussein did not attack the United States. Saddam Hussein did not attack the United States. Saddam Hussein did not attack the United States.

:P

His father, former President GHW Bush, had stopped troops from advancing on Baghdad after they had liberated Kuwait during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Now, he said, the son "ordered an invasion of Iraq anyway, without an exit strategy, and under conditions that mean the United States has incurred "90 percent of the casualties and 90 percent of the cost."

Ya just know he had to be brewing underneath that shittly little grin :burnin:


Bush inner circle suggests Bush visit with Hurricane victims earlier in day was emotionally draining, contributed to "tired" appearance in debate...

That's because no one is stating the obvious. When Bush is out on his own (scripted or not) he isn't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. He can't articulate his thoughts very well, and he seems to have trouble forming WHOLE sentences. Why doesn't somone just come out and say it - The man isn't smart. Everyone knows it, but no one says it.

-MM- :crs:

[CELL]

- "invading Iraq for September 11 is like invading Mexico for Pearl Harbor."

best qoute of the night. you know Bushy felt that one. :flamer:

[Donsun]

I believe Kerry won. He said alot of good things and Bush cant talk for shit anyhow. It will be interesting to watch the next debate. I think this is going to be a very exciting election. I am stoked. :toast:

[Emerald_Dragon]

>Why doesn't somone just come out and say it - The man isn't smart.
>Everyone knows it, but no one says it.

IMO, its because most people aren't "smart". Most people identify with W, because they "think" like he does and dislike others who make them feel stupid. We are in America, after all. #30, internationally, for education?

How many people went to college from your high school? How many could not afford it? Of those who went, how many graduated with Liberal Arts or some other lame degree, compared to degrees that required critical thinking/problem solving. I'm not saying that the social sciences like History don't require brains, just less so, not the same utility of brain juice. A 4.0 for a Psych major is not the same as a 4.0 for an Engineering major.

Its one thing to re-gurgitate info, its another to apply it relative to other variables.

Not everyone is a rocket scientist.

[bbbv3.5]

One thiing that i thought no one evr taled about during the debate was when Kerry said he was against the war and then he said that he ws going to improve the Iraq qar and better plans for the war. Well then bush said how can the troops trust you in a war if your against the whole thing anyway.....

[Emerald_Dragon]

...and when "foreigners" can read and write English better than those who were taught English in America, what does that tell you?

:btchn:

...that foreigners just don't know what it means to be "American"?

[Marajadex]

One thiing that i thought no one evr taled about during the debate was when Kerry said he was against the war and then he said that he ws going to improve the Iraq qar and better plans for the war.
Remember bbb... Kerry restated that he was against the way we went into the war. Now that we are there he plans to, like the Pottery Barn examble he used, fix the problem.

Any one see the Daily Show last night? Jon Stewart had several good comments on the debate.



I thought (and even the conservative network Fox agrees) that Kerry did a good job, and remained standing through the entire thing. Bush was not bad, but I thought he was riding a one trick pony by repeating he was the #1 man and he was decisive and not changing positions all of the time..I'm glad you got the opportunity to watch the debate. Your opinon is similar to thoes I have heard here. More then one person has mentioned Bush came off as a "One Trick Pony".


Bush looked baffled most of time, and I swear to god if I could reach onto the TV I would wipe smack that damn smirk off his face.I SO agree with you! Bush looked like he was fidigity and uncomfortable. The sour smirky looks didn't help either. Kerry seemed attentive, looked at Bush when he was talking, took lots of notes, all in all he seemed to be the better debater.

[MetalMilitia]

Any one see the Daily Show last night? Jon Stewart had several good comments on the debate.


Never miss it. If you compare the way the way the daily show covers events compared to CNN or FOX it makes them look ludicrous. He has the ability to write / say whatever he wants... whereas most big media hosts stick with their parties agenda (bill oreilly) or read whatevers put in front of them.

side story

NEW YORK - The folks at Comedy Central were annoyed when Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly kept referring to “The Daily Show” audience as “stoned slackers.”

So they did a little research. And guess whose audience is more educated?

Viewers of Jon Stewart’s show are more likely to have completed four years of college than people who watch “The O’Reilly Factor,” according to Nielsen Media Research.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6117542/

No Shit.

[bbbv3.5]

the Daily show and the simpsons are too ver biased shows....i happen to love both of them but you can tell that the producers definatly slant one way in [olitics.


the simpson- republican
daily show- democratic

and plus you can tell that the simpsons never once made fun of bsh and only complent hima nd the daily show they have been picking on bush more lately..(but i still think it is funny as hell).

[DontBeAfraid]

The Simpsons isnt slanted either way..... They make jokes about all, but not mean spirited jokes.

[bbbv3.5]

yes they do but i havent once seen them make fun of Bush....

[Zach]

they did make fun of his father however. Last night or 2 nights ago.

[MetalMilitia]

So where are the Bush supporters that once flocked on the boards :devsmoke:

As of Thursday, Sept. 30, 2004, 1,052 members of the U.S. military have died since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003, according to the Defense Department. Of those, 798 died as a result of hostile action and 254 died of non-hostile causes. The figures include three military civilians.

The British military has reported 67 deaths; Italy, 19; Poland, 13; Spain, 11; Bulgaria, six; Ukraine, eight; Slovakia, three; Thailand, two; the Netherlands, two; and Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Hungary and Latvia have reported one death each.

Since May 1, 2003, when President Bush declared that major combat operations in Iraq had ended, 914 U.S. military members have died - 689 as a result of hostile action and 225 of non-hostile causes, according to the military's numbers as of Thursday.

The coalition countries ALL combined account for around 12%... how lopsided is that. The news media now reports that the numbers KIA have increased each month beginning in June. In short, the insurgents are escalating the intensity, frequency and effectiveness of their attacks on coalition forces.

Bush still seems rather upbeat about it though...

None of it will matter one bit if there is an attack on American soil, or if OBL is captured / killed. Either of those two will guarentee 4 more years for Bush.

[prezhorusin04]

Most of you have had some very good points and stats. i watched the debates and it was clear to see that Kerry crushed Bush for the most part.

Bush said the same things a dozen times each..One of the stupidest things he kept repeating was that "This war is hard. It's hard work.It's so hard." Boo-Hoo, maybe you'll think again next time you try to steal elections if it's so hard for you.

Don't get me wrong, i'm no fan of Kerry by any meansbut compared to Bush, Kerry did a nice job. He said what he was supposed to say. There is a reason they are both members of Skull and Bones. Reasons why they are both related to the royal family, and so supportive of Israel and Zionism.

Perhaps if elected, Kerry will actually be the more dangerous of the two. (Atleast equally as dangerous). Just for the fact that Kerry is a better speaker and has less "dirt" to pull up on him. The corruption and influence from the Bush family goes back 100 years or more, and is nearing "legendary" proportions. While less is known of Kerry and Heinz in many ways. Theresa Kerry's father, John Heinz, was also a Skull and Bones member.

i think most of us reading this know that there is really no difference between Bush or Kerry in any significant way.Many of the same scenerios will come into place either way..The Draft, More War, The Patriot Acts, New National ID Cards, RFID tagging, more surveillance, Monitering of internet and phone, massive Internet viruses and attacks, More Brainwashing and Propaganda by the tv and media,, and another attack on U.S. soil. With the worst case scenerio in the U.S. being the usage of Marshal Law and Concentration Camps after a massive attack by "terrorists".

Plagues and epidemics, "terrorist" attacks worldwide, more sleight of hand misdirection taking attention away from the real issues. Such as the connection to Israel and Zionism, International Banking monopolies and secret society ties.

All i'm saying is don't forget to keep asking questions and scrutinizing the powers that be, no matter who wins the coming election.

And your right Matt..We've still got another month. A Bin Laden capture, or another U.S. attack, and things could change drastically.

[dutchie]

...and when "foreigners" can read and write English better than those who were taught English in America, what does that tell you?

:btchn:

...that foreigners just don't know what it means to be "American"?
:grin: Did you notice spelling improving after you posted that?!?

[Bushnell]

Originally Posted by Prez, While less is known of Kerry and Heinz in many ways. Theresa Kerry's father, John Heinz, was also a Skull and Bones member. Treresa Heinz Kerry was married to John Heinz, He was not her father! I think Kerry Did a good job. And Bush looked lost! Kerry won the frist round,

[prezhorusin04]

Whoops Bushnell..Consider that a mental Typo on my part..He liked her to call him "Daddy" though..

[Gizmo]

The heart of a fool is in his mouth, but the mouth of a wise man is in his heart.
Benjamin Franklin

[MetalMilitia]

It's a damn shame the weapons report and the new info of Poland pulling out in 2005 didn't come up before the foreign poliicy debate... otherwise Bush would have had nothing to say. Bush is on 'tilt' - he needs to get his act together tonight in the townhall domestic debate or he's in for a world of hurt. I know all the "polls" show Bush and Kerry nearly neck and neck, but if he craps out on tonights debate I don't think he can make a comeback. ('Less Osama pops up :P)

"Bush went on to attack the Democrats' policies. (Bush says) 'Their agenda is to increase federal taxes, to build a wall around this country and to isolate America from the rest of the world.' ...Hmm. ...So you're concerned the Democrats might do something that would damage America's standing in the world. Interesting...that you would think that's still possible."

All the news since that first debate last week has been NEGATIVE for Bush - I don't think he's had one positive thing to talk about - he's been ducking the WMD (or lack thereof) the job report comes out today, it looks to be hurtful in his direction, and he's just been attacking Kerry.

...And with good cause. Putting a mad-lib like Kerry in the Whitehouse is just as bad. Especially since he can't seem to make up his mind on anything. Last week, Senator Kerry was eight points behind President Bush, today he is twopoints ahead. Is this the kind of indecision we want in a president? Kerry scored many points with voters and pundits by finally putting to rest criticism that he's a flip-flopper. Kerry said, 'I have one position on Iraq: I'm forgainst it

So it all comes down to the undecided voters, and of course the will of the people...

...but you have to remember one thing about the will of the people: it wasn't that long ago that we were swept away by the Macarena.

:jamn:

[MetalMilitia]

Unemployment rate remains at 5.4%...
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041008/D85J8SF00.html

'585,000 jobs have been lost since President Bush took office'...
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20041008/2004-10-08T131607Z_01_N08517776_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-ECONOMY-JOBS-DC.html

There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There were no parts to weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There were no programs to build weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There was no link between Saddam Hussein and 9-11. There was no link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. - Is ANYONE here supporting Bush? ( I need some serious logic from Bush's Supporters)

Brushing the UN inspectors aside in order to go to war on false intelligence was a colossal blunder... even if the report showed Saddam Hussein had been "getting round UN sanctions" (as Blair said) that had nothing to do with an imminent threat to America,

What the hell is Bush gonna fall back on tonight? Another ramble about "the world is safer without Saddam" speech - All the while Iran and N Korea go nuts over nukes?

I don't see how they can push all this off and focus on "the economy" - dontcha think it's a little too big to IGNORE?

[Emerald_Dragon]

I'll try to play "Devil's Advocate"...[now that is punny]

The war in Iraq is making it safer for Americans, we are bringing the fight to them. Instead of terrorists here in America, we've given them a focus point, the ME. We're not alone in doing this, England, Australia, and 18 other countries are with us. Israel has supplied military advisers on urban combat and interrogation techniques, they've got decades of experience. France and Germany were against the war because they had backdoor business deals with SH, worth millions/billions. Now, they're working with us forgiving Iraq of debts it owed them, from these deals. Its a good thing we didn't allow them to help rebuild Iraq, they were against blowing it up anyway. The UN is anti-semitic and didn't want to help us anyway, so we had to protect ourselves. Their inspectors were incompetent and couldn't find any WMDs so we needed to use our own. And if our own inspectors can't find any, well, we'll find a better inspector to do the job. Pre-war, our generals who painted a bleak picture of what was to unfold if we were to attack, were replaced with better qualified generals who could do the job. After "Mission Accomplished", any appointed dict..Presiding Official who could not do the job was replaced. Bremer looks like he may need replacing, he's making political gaffes by saying things that are just not true.

So for Iraq, it is a war on a terrorist-supporting state, after all, we have a war on terrorism.

Cuts in Education and Environment were needed in order to fund the War on Terror. A war we cannot afford to lose. Terrorists are everywhere and we need to bring the fight to them, wherever they are.



I've run out of things to say. So here's a clip that's going around...


Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:

Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with
China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches
while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care
to all Americans is socialism.

HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at
heart.

Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but
creationism should be taught in schools.

A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable
offense.
A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is
solid defense policy.

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution,
which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George
Bush's cocaine conviction is none of our business.

Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a
conservative radio host. Then it's an illness, and you need our prayers
for your recovery.

You support states' rights, which means Attorney General John Ashcroft can
tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.

What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what
Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.

Feel free to pass this on. If you don't send it to at least 10 other people, we're likely to be stuck with Bush for 4 more years.

Friends don't let friends vote Republican.

[lazserus]

I'm too far behind in this thread to try and jump in, but I'm going to go for the throat on the opening statement.

I thought (and even the conservative network Fox agrees) that Kerry did a good job, and remained standing through the entire thing.
Are you absolutely nuts? I've never seen a more poor attempt to debate in my entire life. Bush walked over Kerry like he was spilled milk. Kerry had absolutely NO stategy, no consistency, and no brains. All he did was repeat himself over and over again and he changed his stance on things like 6 times. Let's not mention that the man blatantly lied in public. His debate tactics consisted of just completely saying the opposite of what he said 2 years ago.

Kerry didn't debate that day, he bumbled and foamed at the mouth like a man who was hit in the head too many times. God, if any of you think that was a debate on his end then this country is in SERIOUS trouble.

[Donsun]

I'm too far behind in this thread to try and jump in, but I'm going to go for the throat on the opening statement.

Are you absolutely nuts? I've never seen a more poor attempt to debate in my entire life. Bush walked over Kerry like he was spilled milk. Kerry had absolutely NO stategy, no consistency, and no brains. All he did was repeat himself over and over again and he changed his stance on things like 6 times. Let's not mention that the man blatantly lied in public. His debate tactics consisted of just completely saying the opposite of what he said 2 years ago.

Kerry didn't debate that day, he bumbled and foamed at the mouth like a man who was hit in the head too many times. God, if any of you think that was a debate on his end then this country is in SERIOUS trouble.
Bravo thats the best opinion i've heard yet. Most of the people i know are not even watching the debates they are already voting for Bush. :headbang:

[Emerald_Dragon]

uh, i think i agree with you there, "this country is in serious trouble."

[Donsun]

uh, i think i agree with you there, "this country is in serious trouble."
Only if you vote for Kerry! :headbang:

[prezhorusin04]

Anybody watching..?
So far Bush is actually coming out ahead..Atleast he's doing better then the piss-poor blather he was spouting in the last debate.

But don't forget these guys are cousins and Skull and Boners.

[WoOp_De_DoO]

Hmmm Skull And boners? That must be real secrative I have never heard of it before.

[Marajadex]

Looks like Bush's people didn't give him any new material. He is repeating everything he said in the first debate.

Ok Finally he has to answer some new questions.....

[prezhorusin04]

Like my play on words Woop? :indec:

Yeah Maraj..They are both repeating alot of the same from the 1st debate. It's all surface issues that cover up the real agenda.

So far, it seems like this will end up a tie..They must have shoved a cattle prod to Bush's ass to wake him up tonight..

Either way, we're talking more war. The Patriot Acts, and very likely drafts should this war expand, or another terrorist attack happens on American soil.

Bush keeps winking at people and making sideways smirks,that's pissing me off too.

[Marajadex]

So far, it seems like this will end up a tie..They must have shoved a cattle prod to Bush's ass :52: to wake him up tonight..
Maybe they made him drink a can or 2 of Woop-Ass or Red Bull!!! :2early:

Oh and the new jobs Bush says were created... I don't think he should count the military!

[Marajadex]

Round Two!

According to MSNBC's poll of who won this round:
Total votes cast: 155157
Bush: 21%
Kerry: 79%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/


CNN Poll:
Total votes cast: 135877
Bush: 16%
Kerry: 82%

http://www.cnn.com/


Fox News Poll:
Total votes cast: 14,712
Bush: 30%
Kerry: 70%

http://www.foxnews.com/

[Emerald_Dragon]

>Only if you vote for Kerry!

:grin are you paying attention? do you think we're not in serious trouble now? i think you should show your support for the war by enlisting. that would prove your point, without a doubt. :2thumbs:

[prezhorusin04]

I didn't watch that televised charade the media lapdogs were calling a debate, but I did read the transcript. What Orwellian fantasyland do Bush and Kerry inhabit? I thought I was going to choke on my breakfast. That debate must have been one long and pointless infomercial. Just reading the transcript, it is clear this encounter featured lots of cheap, empty rhetoric, a litany of lies, falsehoods, and obvious bullshit, and the obligatory macho dick-waving. In other words, you got the standard America uber alles fist-pumping threats and some thinly-disguised imperialist claptrap from these two Yale graduate war criminals.

I know the brain-disengaged talking heads on TV will focus almost entirely on style over substance and the multitudes of clueless and superficial SUV-driving middle-class suburban Americans with their arrogant, narcissistic sense of self-entitlement and self-absorption will gush at the in-depth analysis offered up by spinning-in-circles spinmeisters and propaganda flacks.

But when it is all said and done, there were no fundamental differences between the two candidates on any issue with regards to foreign policy. Both are pro-war, pro-mass murder, and pro-screw the troops. Kerry's differences with Bush were largely tactical.

In fact, Kerry practically boasted he can carry out the Imperial project of slaughter, resource theft, rape and plunder around the world more effectively than Bush. Guess who will be taking orders and doing the dying to carry out these imperial ventures?

Both candidates professed their determination to hunt down and kill terrorists, wherever they are. Of course, they’re talking about non-US sponsored and directed terrorism. There’s a surreal quality regarding the bizarre rhetoric coming from two representatives of the biggest terrorist outfit on the planet. Fascinating too, since America loves terrorists if they happen to be anti-Castro or support US foreign policy objectives.

One interesting thing about this so-called debate on foreign policy is Israel was almost completely absent. Israel got mentioned twice. Bush claimed that “a free Iraq will help secure Israel,” while Kerry stated he was “going to get it right for those soldiers, because it's important to Israel, it's important to America, it's important to the world, it's important to the fight on terror.” Interesting that Israel was mentioned first in that list of important matters. That’s the most important thing American soldiers are fighting for – Israel?

Kerry criticized Bush for not being more ruthless in the slaughter in Iraq. Kerry expressed his desire to “change the dynamics on the ground” and he charged that backing off in Fallujah and elsewhere will “send the wrong message to the terrorists.” Kerry favors a bloody campaign against Iraqi insurgents in these urban no-go zones. To put it in terms the rest of the world understands, a large contingent of foreign terrorists (the US military) will brutally attack residential areas in cities whose crime was to engage in legitimate self-defense from foreign terrorists (mostly US troops and US-run mercenaries) who have been murdering, kidnapping, bombing, brutalizing, torturing, looting, and occupying their land. So, how is Kerry any different from an international terrorist like George Bush?

Kerry also hinted he has no problem starting conflicts elsewhere on the planet. With regard to preemptive war, Kerry responded: “The president always has the right, and always has had the right, for preemptive strike. That was a great doctrine throughout the Cold War... No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.” Like Bush, Kerry also feels we can invade, bomb, mass murder, rape, loot and plunder whenever we goddamned well feel like it. I think it perfectly appropriate to consider Mr. John Kerry a vile fascist prick.

Although this debate was about foreign policy, that didn't stop both candidates from vowing to expand and intensify “homeland security” -- in plain English, this means shredding what little is left of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution that supposedly protects our freedoms, our liberties, and our civil rights. Both get a Stalin award for the sheer Orwellian double-talk about protecting freedom.

Pro-war Kerry expressed his willingness to proudly being the big bad American boot that will repeatedly stomp on the face of humanity all over the planet. This aspiring terrorist leader had this to say with regards to the murderous occupation of Iraq. “I have a plan for Iraq,” he said. “I believe we can be successful. I’m not talking about leaving. I’m talking about winning.” And we know what "winning" will entail.

The debate clearly showed the extraordinarily narrow, fascistic tilt of the ruling class as represented by Bush and Kerry in One-Party State America. In the final analysis, both candidates are ardent defenders of the same strategic interests of the business elites in this country backed by its terrorist army with its massive arsenal of weapons of mass destruction that it has used and continues to use around the world on a daily basis. Both Bush and Kerry are vying to become the commander-in-chief of the biggest, most violent, most brutal terrorist outfit on the planet for the next four years. Isn’t it great to be in America where you have a choice?
http://beyondthemainstream.blogspot.com/2004/10/charade-in-florida.html

[MetalMilitia]

Bush

Bush did better than the first time, but he repeats himeself way too much. He has nothing positive to talk about with all the BAD NEWS coming for him in the last week, so he resorted to raising his voice and attackin.

Bush declared in the debate: "Saddam Hussein was a threat because he could have given weapons of mass destruction to terrorist enemies."

Well yeah you jackass - but how many other countries fall under those terms? 20? 50?

Bush also states we've eliminated like 75% of known Al qaeda - which is BS.

Al Qaeda has 18,000 potential operatives, but there is no official data on the size of al Qaeda's total membership, in part because it is difficult to track the number of new recruits since the Iraq war began.... Iraq, however, wasn't tied to 9/11, Al qaeda, or in posession of the WMD's - the real threats.

Kerry

The War has cost $120 billion, not $200 billion, but for what it's worth, see my other post regarding what the US could have used that money for. It is however going to cost our kids, and kids kids at this rate...

"The president has presided over an economy where we've lost 1.6 million jobs."

Right and wrong. Overall, with employment gains in the public sector, the economy has lost 821,000 jobs in Bush's time, according to the last employment report to be released before the election. STILL NOT GOOD NEWS FOR BUSH HUH? Kerry was however right to say he would be the first president in 72 years to have job LOSS.

As for what Kerry meant by a "global test," he described it as a test "where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

Meaning, the opposite of starting a war with one belief - changing the reason behind launching the war (liberation) - then finding out that the real reason (wmd's) aren't there.

Bush said Kerry voted for higher taxes 98 times.

TRUE! But it does count ALL the votes, including procedure measures, and vots to move the process along - NONETHELESS - The cock smoker RAISES TAXES. Period.

One thing that really gets to me is the fact that they say "I have a plan, and its better than his plan" - but they never go into detail.

I planned to share my plan with you, but my plans got messed up - so I made some new plans.

Geh - two morons :D

:jamn:

[Chrome Ninja]

I would just like to state for the record that any one who supports Bush should have a scalding hot glass poker shoved down their D*** HOLE AND SNAPED because any one who thinks bush is a good leader is SOOOOOOOOO STUPID they should not be allowed to have children and spread their incestous genes.


Thank you that will be all. :2fu: :2fu:

[Emerald_Dragon]

wow, Chrome,

i agree with that assessment. not so extreme, but you get my meaning. our country is taking a turn for the worst. I hope Kerry would turn it around, but I'm not so sure about that. Just a different leader to acknowledge mistakes were made and to keep making them, or the same leader with carte blanche to do it all over again with fervor.

we the people, lose.

[Chrome Ninja]

HERE HERE

I will drink to that..........

[lazserus]

i agree with that assessment. not so extreme, but you get my meaning. our country is taking a turn for the worst. I hope Kerry would turn it around, but I'm not so sure about that.
How could Kerry turn it around when Kerry himself doesn't even know what he believes in? In the past 2 years he's changed his stance on his foreign policy over 5+ times. John F'in Kerry has NO FOREIGN policy. How does he plan to convince the nation he's capable of running the country when he isn't even capable of making a decision even WITH advisors. Kerry and his entire administration have as much use as a baseball bat in girl's volleyball.

Backing Kerry for president would be like backing a retarded 6 year old French girl for president.

[Defiant Noquisi]

How could Kerry turn it around when Kerry himself doesn't even know what he believes in? Cause hes a UN sissy and he won 3 purple hearts gawdammit! :crtmn: :bondage:

www.jibjab.com

[Chrome Ninja]

well i would rather have a president that doesnt make decisions than a president that makes all the wrong decisions :flamer:

NO MORE BLOOD FOR OIL................ :headbang:

[lazserus]

I'm not going to regurgitate what's been said in other threads, but going into Iraq wasn't a wrong decision. And how do you expect a man to run the country if he can't make a decision and stand by it? You'd rather have an indecisive, lying coward in office?

Maybe you should move to France. :french:

[Chrome Ninja]

I WOULD LIKE A PRESIDENT THAT WOULD NOT MAKE AMERIKKA LOOK LIKE THE NEXT NEO-NAZI NATION, since bush has been in power more and more nations begin to hate us for our sneaky little foreign laws our corrupt government and the way we think just because we are the united states of AmeriKKA we can treat and do what ever we want to do to other nations but even if we get bush out of office nothing is going to change, we all know bush is just a puppet(but an extremely retarded one at that) and ameriKKKA is not going to get any better it is only going to get worse here and don't even try to say that we are not hated by the rest of the world cause you would just be lying to yourself

[Donsun]

>Only if you vote for Kerry!

:grin are you paying attention? do you think we're not in serious trouble now? i think you should show your support for the war by enlisting. that would prove your point, without a doubt. :2thumbs:
I never said i supported the war. I just think Bush is a better choice. Kerry is way to flip floppy. I would not enlist voluntarily because i have my own very successfull business. However if i were drafted i would go and be proud to serve. :2thumbs:

[DarkAce]

The world has hated America long before this adminstration took office for the same reasons you've just listed. It's not an easy nor honourable path getting to the top and staying there. Denying that simple fact would be truly lying to yourselves.

[lazserus]

The world has hated America long before this adminstration took office for the same reasons you've just listed. It's not an easy nor honourable path getting to the top and staying there. Denying that simple fact would be truly lying to yourselves.
Thank you for answering for me. I was going to say the exact same thing. I like how people say other countries hate the US now because of Bush, when it's the same countries that hated us 60 years ago.

BUT SINCE BUSH HAS SO MUCH MONEY HE PROBABLY HAD DADDY BUSH BUY TIME TRAVEL AND HE WENT BACK AND MADE THEM HATE US THEN AND THAT'S WHY THEY HATE US NOW!

:gtfo:

[dutchie]

Are you guys never even a little bit curious as to what the reasons could be behind this supposed hatred? I know I would be...

And is this so called hatred REAL?!? Or is it something you mainly have between the ears?!? I know I am AMAZED by a lot the Americans think they must or should do, but so far this never resulted in hatred, but more in amazement and (mild) shock.

"It's not an easy nor honourable path getting to the top and staying there."

The top of WHAT exactly?!? I could a name lot of things America is nr 1 in, but a whole lot of thoses are quite painful to mention, and you guys would not thank me for mentioning them.
So please define TOP for me, and do it in an earnest way. Spare me the megalomanics, please.

[Donsun]

Are you guys never even a little bit curious as to what the reasons could be behind this supposed hatred? I know I would be...

And is this so called hatred REAL?!? Or is it something you mainly have between the ears?!? I know I am AMAZED by a lot the Americans think they must or should do, but so far this never resulted in hatred, but more in amazement and (mild) shock.

"It's not an easy nor honourable path getting to the top and staying there."

The top of WHAT exactly?!? I could a name lot of things America is nr 1 in, but a whole lot of thoses are quite painful to mention, and you guys would not thank me for mentioning them.
So please define TOP for me, and do it in an earnest way. Spare me the megalomanics, please.
Its simple to me. The top to me meens the top of democracy. We are not perfect by far but if your an imigrant with a dollar in your pocket you can come here work hard and make it big. This is the land of opportunity. I don't think thats being a megalomanic. :2thumbs:

[Emerald_Dragon]

i think a Euro is worth more than a dollar at this point.
that should tell you something, but of course, it doesn't.

Bush lied. True of False?
How you answer the question will tell what filters you're looking at life through.

Was it due to faulty intelligence or selective? The CIA via OSP?

The POTUS was given the power to go to war if he could prove that SH had WMDs. Its in the articles that Kerry signed. Are there WMDs? Henry Blix? David Kay? Charles Duefler? Which inspector am i forgetting?

Are we subservient to the U.N.?
They passed a resolution that we used to invade Iraq?


> when it's the same countries that hated us 60 years ago.

the French hated us? circa 1944? Iraq? Russia? Japan? China? Korea?


IMO, they don't hate us. they don't approve of the pre-empting and false claims. when JFK blockaded Cuba, he had pictures. When W attacked Iraq, we had propaganda. Distrust is more in line with what i think, they think.


>The top to me meens the top of democracy.

i thought the U.S. was a Republic?

[DarkAce]

I didn't throw the word out there for affect, I'm not a fool though to not realize why the hatred exists.
The way we've manipulated people, countries, whatever for our own gain, etc, etc for years. There also exists high levels of animosity and resent for getting away with all these things, when people/countries get burned, they don't easily forget and let go. This also isn't about individual hatred. I don't hate America, I'm sure you don't also, but we're not the ones in power of our countries are we? Those are the ones that have to look out for the collective.

The top is quite easy, the dominating superpower. Military, wealth, power, order, etc. America is currently at the top whether you want to admit it or not. I alredy stated that it's a very shady business getting and staying at that level.

It's a whole lot of gray ED. It's not as clear cut as that when you see the stakes. And don't try pulling any philosophical mumbo jumbo, you lack the intellectual integrity to do so:bott: We know regime change was pre-planned before this adminstration even took office. The intelligence was faulty to begin with and was no way enough to be used for war. Bush wanted anything he could use and he got it. I've already stated time and time again that WMD was the easiest forerunner to gain support for. I and others have listed the other major reasons before so I won't do so here, but think about the long road ahead.

Just because one doesn't publicize said hatred doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You do realize the sheer stupidity it would have to do so when you're largely connected with one another. To spell it out, Business wouldn't be so good.

[Emerald_Dragon]

>It's a whole lot of gray ED.
>It's not as clear cut as that when you see the stakes.

i agree. its not clear. its a matter of our civilations survival, or decline, and the justifications created, in order to maintain it, right or wrong. i've wrestled with it...


>And don't try pulling any philosophical mumbo jumbo,
>you lack the intellectual integrity

:grin i'm not so stubborn and narrow in mindset, as to believe that the means justify the ends. if i were to benefit from this war, i'd prolly cheerlead for it also. but i don't, i'm not part of the ruling class. thinkers are a minority, and well, majority rules.


are we not, all human?


>but think about the long road ahead.

a road we would not be on, had other choices been made.

[bbbv3.5]

I WOULD LIKE A PRESIDENT THAT WOULD NOT MAKE AMERIKKA LOOK LIKE THE NEXT NEO-NAZI NATION, since bush has been in power more and more nations begin to hate us for our sneaky little foreign laws our corrupt government and the way we think just because we are the united states of AmeriKKA we can treat and do what ever we want to do to other nations but even if we get bush out of office nothing is going to change, we all know bush is just a puppet(but an extremely retarded one at that) and ameriKKKA is not going to get any better it is only going to get worse here and don't even try to say that we are not hated by the rest of the world cause you would just be lying to yourself

I thought i had bad grammar...this is indeed the longest run on senetence on AO ever. And the and then and then and blah blah. Ever ehard of periods????

The allied countries that hate us (france, germany, Canada) are like two yera old best friends. They get mad at us just to make us mad and then they know thye cant live without the USA.

[MetalMilitia]

http://www.pixunlimited.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/steve_bell/2004/10/11/bshbllbb.jpg

"Nookular!"

"Misunderestimate"

[Defiant Noquisi]

Hahaha!! Its that "This Land" thing all over again...."You cant say nuclear, that really scares me. Sometimes a brain can, come in quite handy". :Llol:

[Marajadex]

Y'all ready for round 3 tonight?

I hear tell there are several drinking games developed for the debates. :alcoholic

[AngelTV]

Two things to add to this thread.
First, I don’t understand why a presidential debate does not have Nader involved. Ok so he won’t win the office but hell he would definitely give a more independent view to the whole fiasco. Prompt card replies and obvious pre arranged questions takes a lot of the edge away from this debate. Nader is a Presidential runner. He has as much right to be there and I would even say more right to be there.
Secondly, Cuba showed us that Countries lie publicly. The Soviets denied missiles and if it wasn’t for the photos things could have been decidedly worst for the US. Learn from that. Don’t think for a second that honest appraisals are ever given in the UN.

[prezhorusin04]

You're right Angel, and Michael Bandarik should have been invited too..But he was arrested at the 2nd debate for not complying with the police to leave..

These debates were a charade. Skull and Bones definately means something BIG to those people who are members of it.

Two Skull X Bones candidates who are actually cousins? Why don't they talk about that in the debates??Or the manipulation and roll of ISRAEL in all this sick mess?

Instead they talk about moral issues that were not meant to be solved. Such as abortion, gay rights, Health care, ect, ect..

All important issues, but all are used as moral diversionary tactics to keep our eyes off of the alterior motive of these mens New World Order Schemes....

Don't trust them friends! No one person should be the figure head for a country as large as America...There is a purpose and motive behind the 911 event, and a Masonic "Great Work" that they are eagerly seeking to implement on the world populace..

BUSH AND KERRY ARE TALKING HEADS. Slaves to money and higher forces of wealth and power.



Anyway, the debates tonight were the weakest so far. And, even though i don't like the guy at all, Kerry won all three debates in my mind.

First Debate
Kerry75%
Bush15%
Undecided10%

Second Debate
Kerry50%
Bush30%
Undecided20%

Third Debate
Kerry50%
Bush40%
Undecided10%


Kerry SHOULD win, if there isn't another terrorist attack in America.:)
Or unless Bush Riggs ANOTHER election..

If the American people have ANY voice at all, Kerry should win.....

But, don't forget, Kerry is equally as dangerous as Bush. He MIGHT not have all the Big Oil and Corporate ties, but he's a communicator and can serve as a better SHILL for seeking to unite the populace for WORLD WAR..

[dutchie]

Two things to add to this thread.
First, I don’t understand why a presidential debate does not have Nader involved. Ok so he won’t win the office but hell he would definitely give a more independent view to the whole fiasco. Prompt card replies and obvious pre arranged questions takes a lot of the edge away from this debate. Nader is a Presidential runner. He has as much right to be there and I would even say more right to be there.
Secondly, Cuba showed us that Countries lie publicly. The Soviets denied missiles and if it wasn’t for the photos things could have been decidedly worst for the US. Learn from that. Don’t think for a second that honest appraisals are ever given in the UN.
That is an absolutely valid statement! Every presidential runner should have a chance to get his or her share of TV time to present their POV. That is what democracy is all about. Limiting the options seems to be the policy in the USA, and this is NOT a good thing - people do not get their fair chance of forming a balanced opinion on whom they should place their vote in this way.
In my country every political party gets its fair share of TV time.