Anyone remember those Bush campaign promises?

[spillmind]

I can't find the post where she explained this-- linky?

See this is what I'm talking about. Its a position I can't understand to be able to label every single one of Bush's broken promises or reversals of opinion as 'changes in opinion of approach'. Can every single one of the reversals outlined in Spillmind's initital approach be characterized in this way? I think its a vast generalization to use this blanket explanation.

To me, it just screams partisan politics to say that whenever Kerry changes his opinion its a 'flip flop' and whenever George Bush changes his position its 'a change of opinion'. Its a semantic whitewash which makes you seem incapable of viewing democrats and republicans through the same critical eye.

how very true!

 

[Annie]

ok, you don't agree with my premise, but you didn't say much about it, so what am i to assume?

That I don't agree.

What's to 'let go'? it's a totally relevant issue, and i always thought that the constitution GAURANTEED us all freedom of religion?! do you disagree with the constitution, or do you think pushing your religion on people because you think it's the right way to go, limiting research is the better option?

I think the debate on the constitution and embryonic stem cell research is still out.

if you are waiting for god to cure all of our diseases and shun the possibilities of stem cell research, you are going to be waiting a long time.

Maybe that is what is meant to be.

and thank you for the decent rebuttal, and i respect that you think it isn't a fair snapshot of the education dilemma in our country.

You are welcome. Happens to be my feelings on this issue.

you guys are going to flame me for the source on this, but it is nicely collected with ACCURATE REFERENCES TO GOVERNMENT SITES AND OFFICIALS THAT ARE NOT PARTISAN:

http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/nclb/

Had to kinda edit the quotes myself.

 

[spillmind]

Well you pretty much no the scoop Spilly, just the battle of the board!

Gotta love your persistence brother, you are true warrior to the liberal world.
Have'nt seen ya in months and then here you are right back in the thick of it!!

But listen man, you are gonna want Bush to win to take out NK, from what I understand NK have a few missles capable of nailing Cali! You would have to come over here to Jersey and surf, and believe me that's not good!

i know, can you believe it. work has been damn busy and now i am training to run a relay from bodega bay to monterey (not by myself, of course), my company is sponsoring this to help families that can't afford organ donations.

IMHO, i really don't think NK is going to work with the Bush admin. in fact, i think they are hoping Kerry will be elected, so maybe they can sit down and be reasonable. and they *are* the true threat of a nuke. unless , of course you worry about the danger of a suitcase bomb.

 

[spillmind]

Largest surplus? You realize that was a projected surplus over a 10 year period dont you? You realize that it never really existed to begin with dont you? on paper they expected to take in so much money over a 10 year period. only problem the Clinton economy tanked. The surplus never existed. And even if it had, Surpluses are supposed to go away! Surpluses are either spent or given back to the people. If the government took all that money without doing either of those two things the economy would lag into recession which would make the surplus disappear anyway.

To say Bush failed by losing the surplus when it never existed to begin with is not only stupid but a complete lie. Considering the opposition the President has had, the corporate corruption exposed, 911, the necessity to rebuild the military and inteligence communities the fact that the deficit is so small. and the economy is booming is a freakin miracle.

i'll concede that a large part of the boon of the 90's was a bubble. but to spend as irresponsibly as the bush admin has, and cut taxes TWICE, have not helped matters. it is not a lie, and the fact that bushco has not been managing money very well, is in fact TRUTH.

besides, if his past ventures are any marker, there isn't much arguement there.

 

[spillmind]

Yes, I do remember the Bush campaign promises, primarily because most of them have been enacted into law!

Also, I had to almost laugh out loud when reading your post about the President "comissioning death". Lest we forget it was Sen. Kerry who led anti-war efforts after spending 4 months in Vietnam and as pointed out by a former North Vietnamese general those efforts helped them to keep the war going resulting in more U.S. deaths. It was Kerry who met secretly with the North Vietnamese in Paris for more reason than to exchange pleasantries. Therefore, I contend there names on a granite wall in Washington, D.C. because of his actions. He has blood on his hands that will never be washed away!

Bear with me here as I muse a bit about Kerry saying he is fit to be Commander-in-Chief becase he spent 4 months in Vietnam. A conversation with him about this could go along these lines. Kerry says he is qualified to be Commander-in-Chief because of his Vietnam service. I ask, "Four months in Vietnam qualifies you for that?" He responds, "Well, maybe not. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night."

i'm glad you find cluster bombs HILARIOUS if you want to make vietnam an issue, let's move it to another thread.

please post those campaign promises that have been enacted into law.... just for grins? i'm curious.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

i'm glad you find cluster bombs HILARIOUS if you want to make vietnam an issue, let's move it to another thread.

please post those campaign promises that have been enacted into law.... just for grins? i'm curious.

I think you misunderstood spilly, it's your idiocy that's hilarious.