Bush vs. Kerry Debate

[dwf137]

there was things shot at me personaly, so i got defensive. Those quotes showed that kerry is not the solution to this war, like many people seem believe. If your reasoning for voting for kerry is something else, then i dont care.

[dwf137]

Originally posted by Fearit22
Because Bush chose how things were handled. You are responsible for your actions. War isn't pretty... everyone knows that. Bush made a lot of stupid mistakes that Kerry wouldn't have is the point.

so kerry's going to go lead the troops? Bush is a politician, not a war leader.

[dwf137]

Originally posted by usc
I couldn't give a flying rat's ass about Kerry. As I stated before, politics is evil. There are no honest politicians. If there is one, he/she'd never make it to the presidency.

Of course there is absolutely no good way to back out of Iraq. What's done is done. This isn't hindsight bias as you so quickly assumed the first time around.

So now one should just focus on backing out, PERIOD. There is no "face" left to be saved. The world knows Bush/America screwed up. (If it was Gore in the hot-seat and he lead us into war with Saddam, then it'd be Gore/America screwing up.) Just ask anyone in the Middle East and you'll get a resounding majority answer of, "GET THE F- OUT."

Give them what they want. You can't stop the killing by leaving them alone. And you can't stop the killing by being there. So what's your better solution, besides calling us "fuckers" and quoting Kerry?

In politics these days, you vote for the lesser of two evils. We already know Bush f'd up. If he had gotten Al Qaeda and Osama completely, then I'd say he has a fighting chance of working things out in Iraq. But his actions thus far only shows he's good at starting crap. He's not too good at wiping it clean.

I thaught you were supporting Kerry in this fact, saying that he was against the war, and that we wouldnt be in war if it wernt for him.

If you wernt for the war before it started, then it's not hindsight bias, but most of the people I talk to supported it before and now say how we should never have invaded.

No politician is honest, no politician is perfect. Bush has flaws yes. So does Kerry. I just think that kerry will screw up our situation more then Bush would. Personally I'm democratic, but I have to go with Bush because of his stance on Iraq.

[wed3k]

was wondering why our oil prices are continuely rising? thought we had the control in the oil market?

another good quote is, "so say bush was in the car and he fucked up on some directions and lead the vehicle into a ditch, would you want that same person to get you back out of that ditch?"

[dwf137]

Originally posted by wed3k
was wondering why our oil prices are continuely rising? thought we had the control in the oil market?

another good quote is, "so say bush was in the car and he fucked up on some directions and lead the vehicle into a ditch, would you want that same person to get you back out of that ditch?"

But you forget that the person you want to get the car back out, agreed that bush should turn where he did..


Oil prices, they're going to rise right now simply because of economics.. once iraq gets its feet back on the ground, they'll lower prices, and cause all of the other oil producing nations to lower thier prices too. just be patient..

[Nycxeracer]

I'm going to be the first Italian-American president. Who will vote for me?

Here are my stances on things:

1. All cb7's be declared as the ultimate honda, as in when you refer to honda in conversation, honda=cb7. i.e. Honda kicks ass, translation=cb7, wow thats a hottie.

2. The word rice or ricer gets changed to, "wow, that's a weird fucking car, what was he thinkin with a green spoiler on an neon orange maaco paint job."

3. H22a swaps become second nature, jiffy lube will do them for the same price as an oil change, $29.99. That includes free air filter as well.

4. All companies who now make parts for civics, tegs, or any other import, focus all their attention on the best honda ever made, cb7. side note=any cb7tuner.com member receives free internals w/a purchase of 1 cb7tuner.com decal.

5. For every senator, there will be 4 tracks in each state, also, if you own a cb7, yah, it's free.

6. Lastly, my car becomes an American Icon of beauty, everyone will call it "purply", and the word "purply" will become the new "cool" word.

Thank you, my fellow americans.

-purply

[dwf137]

i'd vote for you..

lol..

[usc]

If Bush was on the Apprentice show, he would have been so fired already.

This is the beauty of Democracy that *we* get to enjoy. We can vote someone off the island and vote in another village idiot. Chances are good that Kerry is equally retarded, but that is yet to be determined. However, one thing is for certain, Bush demonstrated that he's not fit for the job. And I don't mean any disrespect to the troops that have been out there, and who are still out there today fighting someone else's war. Our war with Iraq was declared "over" more than a year ago. Let's bring those boys and girls home where they belong.

If our troops are going to die, let them die defending our country and our freedom. Don't let them die senselessly out in some desert not knowing who their enemies are.

[BB6-SH]

Originally posted by Nycxeracer
I'm going to be the first Italian-American president. Who will vote for me?

Here are my stances on things:

1. All cb7's be declared as the ultimate honda, as in when you refer to honda in conversation, honda=cb7. i.e. Honda kicks ass, translation=cb7, wow thats a hottie.

2. The word rice or ricer gets changed to, "wow, that's a weird fucking car, what was he thinkin with a green spoiler on an neon orange maaco paint job."

3. H22a swaps become second nature, jiffy lube will do them for the same price as an oil change, $29.99. That includes free air filter as well.

4. All companies who now make parts for civics, tegs, or any other import, focus all their attention on the best honda ever made, cb7. side note=any cb7tuner.com member receives free internals w/a purchase of 1 cb7tuner.com decal.

5. For every senator, there will be 4 tracks in each state, also, if you own a cb7, yah, it's free.

6. Lastly, my car becomes an American Icon of beauty, everyone will call it "purply", and the word "purply" will become the new "cool" word.

Thank you, my fellow americans.

-purply

You have my vote

[uncle_el]

usc, i pretty much agree with you on everything you've written.

the point missed by dfw137, and many others, on the vote for use of force and the 87 billion towards armor etc. etc. is the timeline in which they occurred:

bush comes to congress, says we need to get the terrorists, er... saddam and iraq.
in any event, what was presented was a short sighted plan. so short sighted in fact, that after the troops were sent, his administration realized that the troops weren't as prepared as they had planned... except the planning wasn't good, so should say anticipated.

so bush comes back and says "can i get an additional 87 billion to fund the war that you already gave 200 billion for?" of course, there are also the tax cuts, which of course take away the very revenue that would help fund the war.
democrats wanted to roll back the tax cuts, and then perhaps ok the 87 billion, but that was shut down by the republican majority.


as a senator, could you truly in good faith to the american people put up an addiontal 87 billion without having any source to pay for that 87 billion? true, the federal income tax itself wouldn't pay for it wholly, but it's a start.

regardless of whether i agree or disagree with going to war in iraq (if i haven't made it obvious, i disagree, and like usc disagreed from the start), we're there now. but how can a president continue to push for tax cuts, regardless of who they benefit primarily, thus reducing the income of the nation while pushing for continued and so far un-ending campaign in iraq and afgahinstan, thus increasing the expenditures of the nation?

besides the fact that bush is stuck on the reason for going to iraq, will not admit that things aren't going well there (saying "of course it's hard work"), will not admit a single mistake by his administration on a single issue involving the war (he stated the only miscalculation on the war was they thought there would be a bigger fight in the beginning, and there wasn't), and apparently doesn't have a true plan of action in iraq (he stated that we're going to bring liberty and freedom...) he also has a horrible economic plan to fund this war.

if you want to be for bush, that's fine. but the man needs some help with simple economics. if you're gonna spend, you've gotta get the revenue from somewhere. since that somewhere's not taxes, where is that somewhere?

i assume we'll hear the answer in the next presidential debate.

[uncle_el]

and as far as research goes :

Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. In 2003, after America's conquest of Iraq, the United States sent in a 1400 person team (the Iraq Survey Group, or ISG) led by David Kay, a scientist with a long history of working in weapons inspection. Kay's team found no significant quantities of weapons of mass destruction (this information has been widely published in the news media, but generally ignored by the Bush administration). They did find some small quantities of banned substances (chemical) but none was available in large quantities or ready to be used as weapons. They found an Iraqi regime interested in maintaining the capacity to build weapons, but ill-equipped and poorly organized to do so. They also found an ongoing but limited missile program. They found no nuclear weapons or capacity to build nuclear weapons. This is why President Bush toned down his earlier statements that there definitely weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, instead saying, in the 2004 State of the Union Address, that there were "weapons of mass destruction program-related activities" (the same phrase is used in Kay's report).

In July 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee issued a lengthy report which also denied the existence of weapons of mass destruction, blaming the CIA for issuing bad intelligence analyses. Republican Senator Pat Roberts, the chair of the committee, said that "In the end, what the President and the Congress used to send the country to war was information provided by the intelligence community, and that information was flawed."

to check the facts-
http://intelligence.senate.gov/ - senate intelligence committees' report

http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affair..._10022003.html - david kay's interim report on the cia website

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030128-19.html - bush's 2003 state of the union address

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040120-7.html - bush's 2004 state of the union address

[93accord2dr]

Lol, and didn't he major in Econ. at Yale?

It was his daddy who got him in, since obviously he's not smart enough to even go to Harvard, or Yale.

Oh, and last night he couldn't even pronounce "peninsula."

Don't elect an illiterate fool. And fuck Nader for fucking with the 2000 election.


ANYONE BUT BUSH 2004

[uncle_el]

Originally posted by 93accord2dr
Lol, and didn't he major in Econ. at Yale?

It was his daddy who got him in, since obviously he's not smart enough to even go to Harvard, or Yale.

idk what he majored in.

i have always found it interesting that a c undergraduate student was able to get into graduate school anywhere in the country, let alone business school at harvard.

but let's keep it on topic, about the debate, lol.

[Fearit22]

Originally posted by 93accord2dr
Lol, and didn't he major in Econ. at Yale?

It was his daddy who got him in, since obviously he's not smart enough to even go to Harvard, or Yale.

Oh, and last night he couldn't even pronounce "peninsula."

Don't elect an illiterate fool. And fuck Nader for fucking with the 2000 election.


ANYONE BUT BUSH 2004

Agreed, I'm not necessary super supportive of Kerry, but I just feel he is the most viable candidate to get Bush out of office. I would be willing to give anyone a chance before Bush.

FYI, he was a history major who graduated with like a 2.6 gpa. How the fuck do you get a 2.6 in history ?!?!? My gpa is higher and I'm a physics major

[93accord2dr]

OK then I will talk about the debate. It is clear to me that John Kerry won. He clearly stated his views, contradictory to what the Rep's say.

Dubya was all hunched over on his podium, and gave the dirties looks to Kerry while he was speaking, but Kerry actually nodded in response to what Dubya would have to say, and stood straight up like any normal person.

Both canidates were lacking content in their answers, but I believe John Kerry presented the answers better than Bush.

And by the looks of the CNN.com poll, it seems as though more than 70% of the 800,000 people who voted believe that Kerry won the debate. While around 18% believe Bush won.