Who one the 1st president debate?

[limerickman]

Ah..very refreshing..now there is a call for us all to step back and think about what he actually meant, not what he said...Funny, Kerry made a lot of f%$% ups in the debate this one among them.. I just find it odd, if bush makes a mistake, his words are taken as face value and used against him but when kerry does the same...we need to step back and try to decipher what he really meant to say???? Very amusing

Pray tell us - what subliminal message do you think Kerry was making, ifhe did use the expression, Treblinka ?

 

[DOC69]

Ah..very refreshing..now there is a call for us all to step back and think about what he actually meant, not what he said...Funny, Kerry made a lot of f%$% ups in the debate this one among them.. I just find it odd, if bush makes a mistake, his words are taken as face value and used against him but when kerry does the same...we need to step back and try to decipher what he really meant to say???? Very amusing

There's a difference here. A reasonable person could accept mis-using Triblenka with Luyankaya as a mistake, a verbal flub. However, could you really call Dubya's claims that "SH was a collaborator with the 9/11 attackers and Iraq has WMD that can attack us in 45 minutes" a verbal flub? No! Those were flat-out LIES, propogated again and again by the Bush Administration. You say something like that and you better bet those words will be taken at face value.

Of course, this all hinges on someone being a "reasonable person," something idealogues around here are not prone to being!

 

[davidmc]

You have to be smart to be a good liar and - if proof were ever needed - Rumsfeld certainly isn't smart.

Rumsfeld comments about there being no evidence to link Al Qaeda to Iraq
typifies the double standard, lying, duplicitious, putrid, and incompetent
Bush administration.

Do the right thing on November 2nd - consign this useless, lying goverment to the bin of history.

True, caught w/ thier hand in the "cookie (oil)jar". The only thing is, the war is detracting from thier nonexistent domestic agenda. This will be covered in one of the next debates. I suspect it will be a K.O., as the last debate turned out to be. Makes me want to feel sorry for Shrub-not !!! I don't believe Dubya will have a chance, in this next one, because it's on substance; something this

lying, duplicitious, putrid, and incompetent

admin. is bereft of.

 

[zapper]

True, caught w/ thier hand in the "cookie (oil)jar". The only thing is, the war is detracting from thier nonexistent domestic agenda. This will be covered in one of the next debates. I suspect it will be a K.O., as the last debate turned out to be. Makes me want to feel sorry for Shrub-not !!! I don't believe Dubya will have a chance, in this next one, because it's on substance; something this admin. is bereft of.

Hey peabody can't come up with more than 2..3 sentence posts? Oh, for the last time..."thier" is spelled THEIR!!!

 

[limerickman]

Hey peabody can't come up with more than 2..3 sentence posts? Oh, for the last time..."thier" is spelled THEIR!!!

So what subliminal message do you think Kerry was allegedly trying to convey
when he used the expression Treblinka ?

 

[zapper]

So what subliminal message do you think Kerry was allegedly trying to convey
when he used the expression Treblinka ?

I think that Kerry was tellling one of his "been there done that" stories and screwed it up..Perhaps he couldn't read the fine print notes on the pen he pulled out of his jacket...

 

[lokstah]

I think that Kerry was tellling one of his "been there done that" stories and screwed it up..Perhaps he couldn't read the fine print notes on the pen he pulled out of his jacket...

It's a funny question, but if he's lying about the visit, there will be better evidence for that than his use of the word "Treblinka" in a debate. Who knows? Maybe it is a tall tale, which will be uncovered at some point. Maybe he didn't make it to the basement; he just hung out in the lobby.

As far as reading differently into mistakes made by each man -- well, of course we do that. We've each got preconceptions of these guys, and those naturally involve biases. In matters of astrophysics, I hold a bias towards the brains and credibility of Stephen Hawking over my Uncle Peter as well. If both Hawking and Peter made the same flubs in a series of chatty dinner parties, I'd be inclined to give Hawking the benefit of the doubt -- but my uncle would simply look stupid.

That's how it goes. I personally believe Kerry is a more articulate, more knowledgable, more thoughtful and altogether brighter man than Bush, so like anyone else, I'd read differently into Kerry referencing Treblinka than Bush commenting on "hard work" 12 times in 30 minutes. Human nature, my friend.

 

[limerickman]

I think that Kerry was tellling one of his "been there done that" stories and screwed it up..Perhaps he couldn't read the fine print notes on the pen he pulled out of his jacket...

Indeed.

I don't mean this as an insult to you but I find it incomphrehensible that someone would make a point about a mispronounciation of the name of a square in Moscow - and completely ignore the fact that a goverment lied and
lied utterly about the biggest foreign affairs decision for at least two generations.
If this subject wasn;t so serious, it would be comical.

The liar throughout Iraq - has been Bush.
The decision to go to war - was Bush's.
The fact of the matter is that neither Clinton, Kerry, Gore, Albright or Jack **** made the decision to go to war, Bush did.
And responsibility for the decision resides with Bush and Bush alone - as far as
this election goes.

As they say "you're rearranging the deckchairs, as the Titanic sinks".

 

[stephbc]

I think a lot of people will gravitate toward "their" candidate, but I have to say that a lot of the people who were "on the fence" before would agree that Kerry was better prepared, more professional and a heckuva lot better at stating what he came there to state. Bush fumbled around, got stuck and did a few too many blank stares to impress anyone but his die-hard followers.

Aside from that, I found Bush's demeanor and his facial expressions often to be condescending and arrogant.

 

[Bikerman2004]

and completely ignore the fact that a goverment lied and
lied utterly about the biggest foreign affairs decision for at least two generations.
If this subject wasn;t so serious, it would be comical.

The liar throughout Iraq - has been Bush.
The decision to go to war - was Bush's.
The fact of the matter is that neither Clinton, Kerry, Gore, Albright or Jack **** made the decision to go to war, Bush did.
And responsibility for the decision resides with Bush and Bush alone - as far as
this election goes.

Bush and everyone who voted for the resolution to go to war is responsible.
Politicians who didn't even have a vote, but supported the resolution are responsible. Anyone who helped push the war is responsible. Had the resolution not passed I doubt we would be in Iraq. Passage of the resolution gave Bush the political ammunition to proceed. The President and every senator and representative who voted for it are responsible. Or do you only hold those responsible with an (R) after their name?
And this wouldn't be the first time we've been lied to. The government lied about Vietnam. Maybe the Gulf of Tonkin incident means something to you. Vietnam had a bigger impact on the political and social landscape than Iraq will ever have.

 

[limerickman]

Bush and everyone who voted for the resolution to go to war is responsible.
Politicians who didn't even have a vote, but supported the resolution are responsible. Anyone who helped push the war is responsible. Had the resolution not passed I doubt we would be in Iraq. Passage of the resolution gave Bush the political ammunition to proceed. The President and every senator and representative who voted for it are responsible. Or do you only hold those responsible with an (R) after their name?
And this wouldn't be the first time we've been lied to. The government lied about Vietnam. Maybe the Gulf of Tonkin incident means something to you. Vietnam had a bigger impact on the political and social landscape than Iraq will ever have.

Vietnam is at least one generation - if not two generations ago (1960's !).
Vietnam is immaterial to this discussion, with respect.

Who signed the document to go to war ?
Congress ? No.
The speakers in the debate ? No.

Bush signed the order to go to war.
The people who voted to go to war in Congress - share some culpability in the decision to go to war.
But they didn't sign the order.

The book stops with Bush - he signed the order.
His cabinet endorsed, his decsion to go to war.

And unfortunately for Bush, the responsibility for signing that order rests with him.
Like your fellow Bushite, Zapper, he's the Commander in Chief as he constantly reminds us with his stories of "we're ready" and all that.

The luxury of evading responsibility for going to war, doesn't operate here,
Biker.
It's down to GWB.

 

[Bikerman2004]

Vietnam is at least one generation - if not two generations ago (1960's !).
Vietnam is immaterial to this discussion, with respect.

Who signed the document to go to war ?
Congress ? No.
The speakers in the debate ? No.

Bush signed the order to go to war.
The people who voted to go to war in Congress - share some culpability in the decision to go to war.
But they didn't sign the order.

The book stops with Bush - he signed the order.
His cabinet endorsed, his decsion to go to war.

And unfortunately for Bush, the responsibility for signing that order rests with him.
Like your fellow Bushite, Zapper, he's the Commander in Chief as he constantly reminds us with his stories of "we're ready" and all that.

The luxury of evading responsibility for going to war, doesn't operate here,
Biker.
It's down to GWB.

If Vietnam isn't pertinent then don't state false information.
Originally Posted by limerickman
and completely ignore the fact that a goverment lied and
lied utterly about the biggest foreign affairs decision for at least two generations.

Apparently, you don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying Bush isn't at fault. He pushed hard for this war. He carries more blame. But its interesting that you convieniently leave out all the others that approved of this course of action, regardless of their political affiliation. Where you will hold only one person accountable I'd prefer to all those who voted accountable.

 

[limerickman]

If Vietnam isn't pertinent then don't state false information.
Originally Posted by limerickman
and completely ignore the fact that a goverment lied and
lied utterly about the biggest foreign affairs decision for at least two generations.

You misunderstand me - I consider Iraq to be the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam.
Vietnam is immaterial to what happened in Iraq.

We can argue whether Vietnam is one generation or two generation ago.
But you must agree that Iraq has been the biggest blunder since Vietnam ?


Apparently, you don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying Bush isn't at fault. He pushed hard for this war. He carries more blame. But its interesting that you convieniently leave out all the others that approved of this course of action, regardless of their political affiliation. Where you will hold only one person accountable I'd prefer to all those who voted accountable.

You're attempting to dilute the Bush administrations cupability regarding the decision to go to war, Biker.

The book starts and stops with Bush : he signed the order.
It is essentially immaterial as to who voted and who didn't vote to go to war.
At all times, Bush had the option of not going to war.
But Bush chose to go to war because he believed (rather than knowing for certain) that Hussein was behind 9/11.
Or are you saying that Bush was somehow persuaded to go to war ?

 

[Bikerman2004]

You're attempting to dilute the Bush administrations cupability regarding the decision to go to war, Biker.

The book starts and stops with Bush : he signed the order.
It is essentially immaterial as to who voted and who didn't vote to go to war.
At all times, Bush had the option of not going to war.
But Bush chose to go to war because he believed (rather than knowing for certain) that Hussein was behind 9/11.
Or are you saying that Bush was somehow persuaded to go to war ?

You think I'm trying to dilute it. That is not my intention. I am saying that the resolution vote gave Bush the political capital to go to war. He could go before the American people and state that he had the Congress behind him. He had already made up his mind on Iraq. It is material who voted, otherwise why did they even bother to vote? It is only immaterial to you because Kerry voted for it.

 

[limerickman]

You think I'm trying to dilute it. That is not my intention. I am saying that the resolution vote gave Bush the political capital to go to war. He could go before the American people and state that he had the Congress behind him. He had already made up his mind on Iraq. It is material who voted, otherwise why did they even bother to vote? It is only immaterial to you because Kerry voted for it.

The information presented by the Bush gov, to persuade the Congress of it's case - was endorsed on the basis that the information, as championed by Bush - was factual.
The information wasn't factual.

I am not exonerating Kerry or anyone who voted to go to war.
I objected and do object to the war - because I believed that there was no
a religious regime like BinLadens could be aligned to Hussein.

As regards WMD - the fact that people voted yes on fake information, isn't the fault of the people who did vote yes.
It is the fault of the Bush gov. for presenting doctored information.

 

[pomod]

Oh really??Why don't you ask the POW's that were being tortured to his lies elrod...Additionally, how many lives has your boy Kerry put in danger after being absent for 76% of the Senate Intelligence Committee's public hearings during the time he served there. Whoops, wait a minute...he might have actually saved lives by not attending....

I would guess not as many as the number of kids Bush has marched into Iraq brainwashed that they are somehow defending America. Maybe you can answer this question Zapperman ( and you'll notice I offer you the courtesy of using your chosen screen name) If you can just briefly, step back from your ideologically entrenched "Republican=good; Democrat=bad stance" As an ex serviceman how can you excuse the loss of 1000+ comrades in an operation that is becoming more and more apparent was fabricated from the get go? He lied to you man, you and the entire nation.

 

[pomod]

Trying to justify one lie as less evil than another is pathetic. If neither can tell the truth then what's the point?

The point is maybe as Americans you should be pressing for a more transparent and accountable government. Bush's administration is the most secretive in history. Any attempt at holding them accountible, especially leading up to the war, was answered with this neo-McCarthy tactic of holding one's patriotism in question.

 

[davidmc]

The information presented by the Bush gov, to persuade the Congress of it's case - was endorsed on the basis that the information, as championed by Bush - was factual.
The information wasn't factual.

I am not exonerating Kerry or anyone who voted to go to war.
I objected and do object to the war - because I believed that there was no
a religious regime like BinLadens could be aligned to Hussein.

As regards WMD - the fact that people voted yes on fake information, isn't the fault of the people who did vote yes.
It is the fault of the Bush gov. for presenting doctored information.

Was'nt the whole purpose of the bill, as outlined by the administration, "Give us the authority to go to war so we can keep the peace"? meaning- if you give us this authority, we won't have to use it, which has turned out otherwise.

 

[davidmc]

Hey peabody can't come up with more than 2..3 sentence posts? Oh, for the last time..."thier" is spelled THEIR!!!

Them's fightin' werds !!!

 

[zapper]

Them's fightin' werds !!!

Hey while you are displaying the "mad face"...You and beastt should be pretty mad at edwards attacking Cheney for his failure to vote for those UNCONSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMS he mentioned...Meals on Wheels? C'mon, Head Start????

I mean since you two are of no particular party yet blast Bush and company for attacking the constitution, it should make you mad that Edwards just betrayed you...

Cheney spanked Edwards last night...hahahahahahaha