so, when are the debate?

[Avatar4321]

you *are* kidding, right? try the war, for one. wrong war, wrong time. sure, kerry supported it initially- back when there was 'factual evidence' of a clear, nuclear threat.... and then the dollar esitmate went from that incredibly underestimated number to something ridiculous from like 10 bil to currently 130 bil!! and then the body armor crap?

Um Kerry cant criticize the war. He supported it initially. heck he supported it two weeks ago when he said he would vote the same way even knowing what he knows now. Saddam had to be taken out. its something that should have been done back in 92 and atleast back in 98. Besides Kerry cant be opposed the war in the debates. Most americans supported it. if he argues against it he will be opposing over half the country. So no im not kidding.

As for the nuclear threat, the whole point of taking out Saddam now was that he would never become a nuclear threat. What the heck do you think the whole point of Preemption is? If we waited till there was a threat, it would be too late and millions of Americans would already be dead.

And try as you must you cant ignore the fact that John Kerry voted to put the troops into a combat situation and then opposed supplying them. why? because we wouldnt raise taxes to pay for the supplies. So what John Kerry has just told us is raising taxes is more important to him then the lives of our soldiers.

So where the heck is Bush weak here? looks like the only one weak here is Kerry.

when actually Kerry cosponsored a bill that would have granted the body armor in question that also linked a reinstatement of tax responsibility for the wealthy so that the armor could be paid for. the republicans voted it down and instead pushed through the same request funded with additional federal debt. does that seem conservative or fiscally responsible to you? to me it reflects a clear lack of critical reasoning skills and a lack of economic common-sense.

Actually it seems very conservative. Conservatives oppose tax increases. John Kerry has demonstrated that raising taxes is more important to him than the lives of our troops. Unlike you i dont think thats an admirable quality to have.

for starters. after that, there is the job market. spin it all you want, but can you honestly tell me that it is just as easy to find a GOOD job these days as it was 5,6,7,8 years ago? and it's no coincidence that dubya tax cut's haven't worked. even responsible conservatives are up in arms hpw financially irresponsible this admin has been. the deficit speaks for itself.

Um the unemployment rate is lower than it was during the Clinton administration. When Clinton ran for reelection it was 5.6 today its 5.4 and dropping. Check the want ads there are plenty of good quality jobs out there.

now bush will blame everything wrong on someone else, because we all know he's perfect. too bad you'll find a different story when our new president calls him on it all.

There is nothing to blame on others. The problems you are whining about dont exist. Which is why Kerry's message isnt working. Like when he went into North Carolina too weeks ago and started attacking Bush on all the jobs lost in that state and then two hours later the unemployment rates come out and show North Carolina has an unemployment rate of 4.7 well below the nation average. You cant whine about a bad economy when it keeps getter better. You cant complain about a war your candidate advocates and then refuses to fund. the fact is your losing on both the issues which is why Kerry is getting his butt kicked in the polls lately.

 

[Avatar4321]

i'm VERY familiar with his platform.

if you really cared, you can check his site for all your answers:

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

but who are we fooling, you don't care! you just want to rant on and push more propaganda!

Translation: No i cant.

Ive read Kerrys platform. Its alot of rhetoric. No real plan.

His plan states he is going to put 75000 troops in Iraq. But he has been announcing he will pull out for weeks. and claims he is upset about the spreading of troops too thin. yet doesnt like the idea of moving our troops out of Europe. Where the heck does he intend to get 75000 troops? ill tell you where. He is planning to draft.

 

[Avatar4321]

i think this should read:

If I have a criticism of GW on spending it's that he's trying to pay for a war on the one hand while REDUCING OVERALL TAXES AND FAVORING THE RICH WITH THESE TAX CUTSon the other.

but, of course, this is all a LIBERAL MIRAGE, right? yeah, and here i am all hell bent over nothing!

true to bushie form, you evaded that job point with tai-chi like mastery. propers! you should run for office!

saying i really hate the 'economic numbers'? do you remember the bush admin estimate for how much the war would cost? and how much it actually wound up costing? here's a litte snippet:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bal-warcosts030303,0,1785509.story

oh, and you won't (coincidentally) find anything in bush's RNC speech about how long our GIs will be there if he remains in office. what a surprise!

There is no evasion of the job point because your "job point" is nothing but a bunch of BS as has already been pointed out. You whine about tax cuts for the rich but then neglect to mention that John Kerry thinks anyone who actually gets off his ass and works is rich. The tax system doesnt actually tax accumulated wealth. If it did John Kerry, John Edwards, and Ted Kennedy would be the first to oppose it. But since it taxes people actually living the American dream and makes their own fortune they support it because they already have their money. if the average joe can make money and live the American dream it threatens their power base. The ones with the money have the power. Which is why Democrats want to tax people who work for their money. To keep them from obtaining power and threatening to make the Democrats irrelevant.

Would be nice if you bothered to do some critical thinking...or any thinking at all. But i know youll just respond for the Democrat talking points for today.

 

[freeandfun1]

First off, YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

Okay, now to my rebuttal.

you *are* kidding, right? try the war, for one. wrong war, wrong time. sure, kerry supported it initially- back when there was 'factual evidence' of a clear, nuclear threat.... and then the dollar esitmate went from that incredibly underestimated number to something ridiculous from like 10 bil to currently 130 bil!! and then the body armor crap?

Back then? He recently said he still would have supported it knowing what WE ALL know now. He was a Senator. He had access to the evidence. If he didn't believe it, he should have questioned it. But he couldn't question it cuz he was too busy at the time to even look at it.

when actually Kerry cosponsored a bill that would have granted the body armor in question that also linked a reinstatement of tax responsibility for the wealthy so that the armor could be paid for. the republicans voted it down and instead pushed through the same request funded with additional federal debt. does that seem conservative or fiscally responsible to you? to me it reflects a clear lack of critical reasoning skills and a lack of economic common-sense.

Raising taxes would not have helped. So Kerry only wants to support our troops if HE can have HIS way? Sad.

for starters. after that, there is the job market. spin it all you want, but can you honestly tell me that it is just as easy to find a GOOD job these days as it was 5,6,7,8 years ago?

The jobs of 5, 6, 7, 8 years ago don't exist because of the corporate corruption that Clinton let run rampant. Those "jobs" were false jobs as neither the economy nor the corporations could truly support those jobs once the gig was up.

and it's no coincidence that dubya tax cut's haven't worked.

According to who? You? MOST economists will tell you that the TAX CUTS DID WORK and THEY are why the economy is doing as good as it is when all issues are taken into consideration (issues = 9-11, the corporate scandals of the 1990's, etc.)

the deficit speaks for itself.

Sure, the deficit is up, but WE ARE IN A WAR DIPSHIT. The deficit is less than 4% of the GDP which is lower than it was during the Democratic controlled houses of the early 1980s and during WWII.

now bush will blame everything wrong on someone else, because we all know he's perfect. too bad you'll find a different story when our new president calls him on it all.[/QUOTE]

 

[Gop guy]

I am also looking forward to seeing Kerry get totally reamed. No fallback Vietnam analogies to get him thru this one, and with his senate record (or lack thereof) Bush is gonna pound him.

Exactly, Bush ABUSED Al Roar Gore in the 2000 debates, Kerry has LOST on EVERY major issue already.

All our boy Dubya needs to do is keep John Scary from going off topic and he will OWN.

 

[insein]

Basically Bush has to be ready for anything. He even has to be ready for bold faced lies according to past candidates from senatorial elections. Some of the candidates said that they were thrown a back because Kerry would blatantly lie about a subject that it threw them off their game. Bush wont be that easily thrown. He is very skilled at debate. He's very personable and likeable. Bush will keep things on the issues and Kerry will be forced to give his answers. It will just be interesting to see if his answers change from debate to debate.

 

[theim]

just for fun, we should start a pool or something to bet how many times Kerry can say "when I was in Vietnam" in how short a timespan

 

[Annie]

just for fun, we should start a pool or something to bet how many times Kerry can say "when I was in Vietnam" in how short a timespan

But NOT a drinking game, cannot afford to drink THAT much! :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[5stringJeff]

But NOT a drinking game, cannot afford to drink THAT much! :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

We'd die of alcohol poisoning!

 

[spillmind]

Just as i thought. You can't name one. I'm not interested in reading a web site full of glittering generalities.

You're such a coward. You have failed this assignment.

glittering generalites? spare me the name calling and read the site. i can't give you anything more detailed than it provides, unless, you want me to to a freaking summary on each of his talking points.

you are so blinded by being partisan that you will dismiss everything, since it doesn't fit into your own little agenda. well, sorry buddy, i sure as hell ain't here to cater to the likes of you. cry all you want.

 

[spillmind]

There is no evasion of the job point because your "job point" is nothing but a bunch of BS as has already been pointed out. You whine about tax cuts for the rich but then neglect to mention that John Kerry thinks anyone who actually gets off his ass and works is rich. The tax system doesnt actually tax accumulated wealth. If it did John Kerry, John Edwards, and Ted Kennedy would be the first to oppose it. But since it taxes people actually living the American dream and makes their own fortune they support it because they already have their money. if the average joe can make money and live the American dream it threatens their power base. The ones with the money have the power. Which is why Democrats want to tax people who work for their money. To keep them from obtaining power and threatening to make the Democrats irrelevant.

Would be nice if you bothered to do some critical thinking...or any thinking at all. But i know youll just respond for the Democrat talking points for today.

1) just answer the question, and save the spin.

2) bullshit. kerry does not consider me rich, and he shouldn't. we are talking 100,000+ a year rich. and yes, that is rich. however, point out where he draws this line, or YOU are the one full of BS. no sh** that it doesn't tax accumulated wealth.

3) the rest of your post is your opinion with no factual basis. and as for the last sentence, spare me. really.

 

[spillmind]

presidents don't create or lose jobs unless you're talking about the civil service or count our military

you *know* what i'm talking about. name a president since bush where there were less jobs at the end of his term than there were at the beginning.

 

[spillmind]

Translation: No i cant.

Ive read Kerrys platform. Its alot of rhetoric. No real plan.

His plan states he is going to put 75000 troops in Iraq. But he has been announcing he will pull out for weeks. and claims he is upset about the spreading of troops too thin. yet doesnt like the idea of moving our troops out of Europe. Where the heck does he intend to get 75000 troops? ill tell you where. He is planning to draft.

hahaha. a draft. what lies!

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

glittering generalites? spare me the name calling and read the site. i can't give you anything more detailed than it provides, unless, you want me to to a freaking summary on each of his talking points.

you are so blinded by being partisan that you will dismiss everything, since it doesn't fit into your own little agenda. well, sorry buddy, i sure as hell ain't here to cater to the likes of you. cry all you want.

I think the only thing anyone is saying is point out one actually plan on that site. If it's all there, pick one, copy and paste, let us know where it is. If his plan is so obvious, it should be easy to find.

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

you *know* what i'm talking about. name a president since bush where there were less jobs at the end of his term than there were at the beginning.

Better yet, name one job that any president "creates". Are they factory jobs? Construction jobs? Carpenters? Kerry keeps telling the common man that he'll create jobs, so they must be jobs that the common man can get. Right? What job does a president create that isn't a government jobs which cost the government more money?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

One of Al Gore's problems in the debates was he came off as a different person everytime. Kerry comes off as a different person every five mins.

The Democrats are definitely SHIFTY politicians.

I'm going to have to bring nausea pills, a lie detector, a punching bag, a barf bag, and an air freshener to this debate.

 

[Avatar4321]

1) just answer the question, and save the spin.

2) bullshit. kerry does not consider me rich, and he shouldn't. we are talking 100,000+ a year rich. and yes, that is rich. however, point out where he draws this line, or YOU are the one full of BS. no sh** that it doesn't tax accumulated wealth.

3) the rest of your post is your opinion with no factual basis. and as for the last sentence, spare me. really.

I wasnt responding to a question. I was responding to your assinine statements. You are doing nothing but parrotting the democrat talking points and anytime anyone gives you reasons for not to accept your talking points or actually says anything that involves critical thought you try to ignore the respond and instead attack the messenger. I am so glad i can actually back up what i say.

 

[insein]

i'm VERY familiar with his platform.

if you really cared, you can check his site for all your answers:

http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

but who are we fooling, you don't care! you just want to rant on and push more propaganda!

Here's Kerry's plans.

National Security

Launch And Lead A New Era Of Alliances
The threat of terrorism demands alliances on a global scale - to utilize every available resource to get the terrorists before they can strike at us. As president, John Kerry will lead a coalition of the able - because no force on earth is more able than the United States and its allies.

How does he plan to do this? The site does not say.

Modernize The World's Most Powerful Military To Meet New Threats
John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to transform the world's most powerful military to better address the modern threats of terrorism and proliferation, while ensuring that we have enough properly trained and equipped troops to meet our enduring strategic and regional missions.

All well and good but how can we believe him when his voting record shows that he is very against new and improved military equipment and funding for research and production on said equipment?

Deploy All That Is In America's Arsenal
The war on terror cannot be won by military might alone. As president, John Kerry will deploy all the forces in America's arsenal - our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas - to make America more secure and prevent a new generation of terrorists from emerging.

Again, good talking points but "where's the beef" as they say?

Free America From Its Dangerous Dependence On Mideast Oil
To secure our full independence and freedom, we must free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil. By tapping American ingenuity, we can achieve that goal while growing our economy and protecting our environment.

Again, how do we free ourselves from this energy source. He offers generalized ideas but no specific plans or solutions to these problems. His National Security measures thus far to me are a joke basically because he has said nothing of substance.

Economy and Jobs

Create Good-Paying Jobs
As president, John Kerry will cut taxes for businesses that create jobs here in America instead of moving them overseas. John Kerry and John Edwards will also stand up for workers by enforcing our trade agreements.

Thats great but isnt Bush doing this already? In fact arent they villifying Bush for tax cuts and trade enforcement policies despite the fact that 2 million new jobs have been created this year alone? I like his ideas. I liked them when Bush implemented them already. Thats why the economy is on the verge of a boom state.

Cut Middle-Class Taxes To Raise Middle-Class Incomes
When John Kerry is president, middle-class taxes will go down. Ninety-eight percent of all Americans and 99 percent of American businesses will get a tax cut under the Kerry-Edwards plan.

Again already done under the Bush tax cuts. Good idea John. Why dont you try it in Massachusetts where you've voted for over 100 consecutive tax hikes since youve been senator.

Make Washington Live Within A Budget
John Kerry will cut the deficit in half during his first four years in office. He will end corporate welfare as we know it, roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and impose a real cap to keep spending in check. And when John Kerry puts forward a new idea, he'll tell you how he's going to pay for it.

So now he's telling us he's going to raise taxes in essence by rolling back the Bush tax cuts. What is his definition of the wealthiest Americans. According to his proposals on other sites, he considers any 1 household making $150,000 or more to be wealthy. A working husband and wife can easily pull in over $150k a year. How is that a tax break for them?

Also his ridiculous statement about cutting the deficit in half in 4 years, How does he propose to do so? He has alot more spending programs then Bush could ever dream up in mind according to his site. Where does he intend to get the money for them and lower the deficit?

Invest In The Jobs Of Tomorrow
Today, businesses are harnessing new technology to manufacture energy-efficient cars, high-grade steel, advanced plastics and other new products. And this requires a bigger, skilled labor force to make them. John Kerry and John Edwards believe we should invest in these jobs and invest in the people who will fill them.

All well and good. How?

John shows that his knowledge of the economy stems from 20 years as a rich aristocrat, Senator from New England. He has no idea what "Work" is. He has never had to "Work" as the majority of Americans do. Thats not saying Bush came from the steel mill, but i don't hear George telling us that he represents the working man everyday. So 2 strikes thus far on Kerry's great ideas. whats next.

Healthcare

Cut Your Premiums
John Kerry and John Edwards will cut family premiums by up to $1,000. That's $1,000 in real savings people can use to buy groceries, pay the bills, and save for their children's future. And that will mean more jobs and more competitive American businesses.

How?

Cover All Americans With Quality Care
The Kerry-Edwards plan will give every American access to the range of high-quality, affordable plans available to members of Congress and extend coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every American child. Their plan will also fight to erase the health disparities that persist along racial and economic lines, ensure that people with HIV and AIDS have the care they need, end discrimination against Americans with disabilities and mental illnesses, and ensure equal treatment for mental illness in our health system.

How?

Provide Affordable Prescriptions
The Kerry-Edwards plan will reduce prescription drug prices by allowing the re-importation of safe prescription drugs from Canada, overhauling the Medicare drug plan, ensuring low-cost drugs, and ending artificial barriers to generic drug competition.

How?

Cut Waste And Inefficiency
Today, approximately 25 percent of health care costs are wasted on paperwork and administrative processing. The Kerry-Edwards plan harnesses American ingenuity to cut waste, save billions, and take new steps to ensure patient privacy.

How?

I find any statements they make on Healthcare being too high disingenuous due to the fact that tort reform could save alot of money every year in Healthcare costs. High premiums usually stem from rising court costs against doctors. Why do i find Kerry and Edwards to be hypocritical to discuss this? You tell me.

The rest is more jibberish about how his plan will solve all the world's ailes. Yet he never goes into detail or give us any idea of HOW he plans on doing these incredible and miraculous things.

Perhaps you can decipher for us spilly as to what he actually PLANS on doing.

 

[spillmind]

First off, YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

how does it feel replying to an idiot? i bet your insults make you feel a LOT better about your posts, right?

Okay, now to my rebuttal.



Back then? He recently said he still would have supported it knowing what WE ALL know now. He was a Senator. He had access to the evidence. If he didn't believe it, he should have questioned it. But he couldn't question it cuz he was too busy at the time to even look at it.

based on new information, opinions change. what good is someone stubbornly staying the course if it leads us off a cliff? it's basically spartan versus athenian thinking. and you and i can agree to disagree without your insults

Raising taxes would not have helped. So Kerry only wants to support our troops if HE can have HIS way? Sad.

you seemed to miss WHY he opposed it, and it's more of a fiscally responsible reason, not a sad one.

The jobs of 5, 6, 7, 8 years ago don't exist because of the corporate corruption that Clinton let run rampant. Those "jobs" were false jobs as neither the economy nor the corporations could truly support those jobs once the gig was up.

funny, i got my 'false' job back then, but there's no way in hell i could get it now, because there are literally HUNDREDS of applicants these days. how do you explain that?

According to who? You? MOST economists will tell you that the TAX CUTS DID WORK and THEY are why the economy is doing as good as it is when all issues are taken into consideration (issues = 9-11, the corporate scandals of the 1990's, etc.)

there is a great article in the economist about this hype, and the REAL facts. i don't have a description, but in the process, anyhow, it starts like this.

the trouble with tax cuts
Aug 15th 2001
From The Economist Global Agenda



The International Monetary Fund has expressed serious doubts about the central plank in the Bush administration’s economic strategy, its $1.35 trillion ten-year tax cut. By the IMF’s reckoning, the tax cut will cost twice as much[/]



Sure, the deficit is up, but WE ARE IN A WAR DIPSHIT. The deficit is less than 4% of the GDP which is lower than it was during the Democratic controlled houses of the early 1980s and during WWII.

dipshit? ok. this debate is over.

 

[spillmind]

Here's Kerry's plans.

sorry, bro. i'm kinda busy today. i'll get to this tonight or tomorrow morning.