Kerry-Edwards

[Ickabod]

The current administration has done it's best to dry up the money sources to terrorist organizations and deprived them of some safe havens from which to operate and to kill, capture or disrupt their leaders from carrying out further mayhem

Yeah, AFTER 3200 people got killed.

Why would you support a candidate the terrorists are hoping will win?

Your source for this information?

Is there a reason to vote for these guys other than you don't like Bush?

Abu Ghraib, Iraqi quagmire, Valerie Plame, Ahmad Chalabi, letting Iran know we broke their communication codes, exposing an Al Qaida double agent who was working on our side, wars based on lies, Halliburton robbing us blind, Bin Laden still on the loose, lying about the medicare bill, overseeing the 2 worst intelligence disasters/failures in our history, anemic job numbers, sputtering economy, record oil prices, choking on pretzels, falling off bikes, record levels of opium coming out of Afghanistan, AWOL, Harken Energy, $50,000 gifts from the Saudi Royal Family, making our friends hate us, making our enemies hate us even more, go out and buy duct tape, tax cuts because the economy is so great turning on a dime into tax cuts because the economy is so poor, increasing the burden on the middle class, firing the only 2 people who actually said anything RIGHT prior to the war, General Zinni, Richard Clarke, blind man in a room full of deaf people, doesn't read the papers, but does read My Pet Goat, doesn't go to church, suing to stop the vote count, voter purges, forcing a loyalty oath in order to enter one of his campaign events, people being arrested and losing their jobs for wearing Anti Bush T-Shirts, having no clue what Tribal Sovereignty is when answering a question about it, stem cell research, mercury levels, arsenic levels, "voluntary adherence" to environmental laws, the deficit.....

And i'm just getting started.

 

[strange1]

What chance do these two guys have of becoming President.The U.S. would be in sad shape with these geniuses running the Country.They may go right ahead and pull us out of Iraq and lose all we have gained.

I thought he was being sarcastic. Silly me

 

[onthebottom]

In other words, no.

Notice not a single Kerry policy in those reasons - but hey no one knows what he's going to do.

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

Bbking,

Stop trying to defend Clinton's honor - there's nothing to defend. You can blame it on a "vast right wing conspiracy" like the wife did before she found out about the hummer but in the he's a sleezebag, always has been always will be.

OTB

 

[happygrump]

Well, let's look at the Clinton presidency for a minute. Yes, he had trouble keeping his wick dry. No argument there. He lied about it. No argument there. So, since we're obviously in agreement on those, tell me which of the following is not true:

• Longest economic US economic expansion in history, with over 20 million new jobs created and the lowest unemployment rate in 3 decades;
• Lowest crime rate in a quarter of a century;
• Higher income in real terms at all levels of the economy, including the lowest welfare rates in 3 decades;
• Largest surplus in US history, which emerged out of the Reagan deficit, which was the largest (until Dubya's half-a-trillion deficit this year alone) in US history;
• Crime bill in 1994 put 100,000 new cops on the streets.

Was he perfect? No, of course not. He vacillated horribly on Medicare. He lost a chance to catch Bin Laden (though, granted, at the time BL was not the sole focus of US intelligence efforts). He would hardly be described as a visionary.

But to say his presidency was inconsequential is, in short, partisan flummery.

 

[onthebottom]

I've never said he wasn't an effective president, just that he was a sh*tty person.

You can't really give any POTUS the full credit for the economy - especially one driven by a tech bubble - but then you already know that.

OTB

 

[happygrump]

You can't really give any POTUS the full credit for the economy - especially one driven by a tech bubble - but then you already know that.

OTB

Agreed. And that works for Presidents of both parties. The best that the Executive Branch can do is, to use a farming metaphor, create a fertile ground where the economy can grow. And, yes, sometimes it takes a lot of sh*t.

 

[Ickabod]

In other words, no.

Notice not a single Kerry policy in those reasons - but hey no one knows what he's going to do.

OTB

The best Kerry policy is that he ain't George Bush. And given that George Bush is George Bush that should be enough. Frankly, i don't give a damn about policy per se. These people make so many decisions that if you get wrapped up in supporting one guy over the other on 4 or 5 policies you can find yourself getting raped on 2000 others. A friend of mine voted for George Bush only because of abortion. She's kicking herself in the ass right about now.

I vote for the guy who, first of all, has a brain. Edge, Kerry. The guy who analyzes an issue and makes a decision rather than make a decision then figure out how to rationalize it to the American people. Edge, Kerry. A guy who actually spent his life serving the country, whether it be through REAL military service, or serving as a prosecutor, lieutenant governor or senator as opposed to the guy who spent his life getting drunk and living off his fathers coat-tails. Edge, Kerry. I vote for the guy who, while not always truthful is no worse nor no better than any other politician vs the guy who can't tell the truth to save his life. Edge, Kerry. I vote for the guy who seems to think the country is made up of 280 million extremely diverse people, and not just rich people and evangelical christians. Edge, Kerry.

Truthfully, Bush would probably benefit me more on a personal level than Kerry would. I fully expect my taxes to go up under Kerry in spite of his rhetoric. Being allowed to gut the environment would benefit the company i work for, and therefore, probably me. I expect i'll be dead long before global warming is a catastrophic issue, so what the hell do i care? And the deficit? My nieces and nephews can pay for it. Piss on 'em. I don't expect one guy or the other will have any effect on whether i lose the job that i happen to have. I'm actually pro life. But i think Bush is an absolute disaster for the country as a whole. The guy's a petulent spoiled drunk little fraud, and he runs the country just like you'd expect any petulent spoiled drunk little fraud to run the country.

 

[Ickabod]

IAs I recall Bush promised to bring bipartisanship to
Washington. All he's created is a divisive atmosphere.

When will the Republicans reclaim their party from
the neo-Conservatives. Do any Rs out there know
anything about this group? I doubt it.

Don

George Bush is to the true Republican cause what Jayson Blair would be to Affirmative Action. And the sooner the wise Republicans wake up to this fact, the better off they'll be.

 

[anon1]

Re: Re: Kerry-Edwards

Mc donalds jobs now being counted as manafacturing jobs so the numbers look better

This is very interesting.
Do you have a link to somewhere to validate this statement?

 

[happygrump]

According to (Wall Street economist Maria Fiorini) Ramirez, many companies are combating the increasing costs of running a business by hiring part-time instead of full-time workers...

from PBS Newshour
How employment rates are calculated is here.
There are a boatload of tables and charts available here.

In unpublished data, the BLS* found that among all workers displaced from 2001 through 2003 -- a total of 11.4 million people -- 52 percent of those who lost full-time work and regained it by this year were earning less than they used to.

From CNN Money.

*BLS=Bureau of Labor Statistics

I don't imagine you'll hear the Bush junta crowing about this anytime soon.

 

[Ickabod]

Now as for MacDonalds being Manufacturing (no flame intended) I find that hard to believe since it so clearly part of the Service Industry sector of the economy.

bbk

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/20/politics/main601336.shtml

It's a February article that mentions the possibility of amending the rules to include fast food jobs as manufacturing jobs. Doesn't say it's been enacted - though since the article is 6 months old, who knows? I don't recall having heard as such however.

 

[Peace4u]

The good thing about Bush i like is he is a commpassionate conservative.

 

[blitz]

The good thing about Bush i like is he is a commpassionate conservative.

Is that grape or cherry kool-aid they're handing out to you?

 

[blitz]

I think he belives what he is saying to be true. Sad, a mind is a terrible thing to waste.

 

[Ickabod]

You can drop the compassionate conservative thing now. Your manual's a little outdated.

Actually, what he truly meant when he called himself a compassionate conservative, that we didn't realize at the time, was that he is in reality conservatively compassionate. So to that extent, he was technically accurate.

 

[happygrump]

Re: Kerry's war record.

The following are excerpts from a Reuters report:
"An American journalist who commanded a boat alongside Kerry in 'Nam broke a 35-year silence on Saturday and defended Kerry against Republican critics of his military service integrity.

Weighing in on the bitterly divisive issue, William Rood of the Chicago Tribune said the tales told by Kerry's detractors are simply untrue.

'There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam more than 35 years ago - 3 officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened on 02/28/1969,' he wrote in a story on the newspaper's web site.

'One is John Kerry.... I am the other.'

'It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there.'"

The Rs did the same thing to Senator John McCain in the 2000 primary. The alleged he was emotionally unstable and had a black child out of wedlock.

Their modus operendi of attacking 'Nam vets saddens me.I was personally denigrated 35 years ago. My brothers are still fighting the war that may have ended in 'Nam but continues at home to this day.

The 'Nam war may never end.

Sad, so sad.

Don

It seems the R's have no honour left. Lying, cheating, vote-rigging... is there nothing they won't do for power?

What has happened to the once-proud GOP?

 

[happygrump]

Help me out here... what's a 527?

 

[happygrump]

So that's what the "soft money" argument was about? Do I have that right?

 

[Ickabod]

Re: Re: Re: Kerry's war record.

You know what I don't get - Bush and his cronies will not condem this ad but call for the elimination of 527's. Why can't Bush and buddies call this ad discusting and show it as an example as to why 527's should be eliminated? Could it be as the NY Times reported recently that the people that funded and produced this ad are either friends of Bush or Rove and that the people that did this discusting ad are the same asshats that claimed McCain fathered a black client in the South Carolina Primary in 2000.
Funny how a discusting ad about Bush was slamed by Kerry and Kerry demanded that the producers withdraw the ad is not being met with the same respect by the Bushites.
Does American really want these kind of lying creeps leading them. I hope not.


bbk

Fingerprints of the Bush campaign are all over this. Even down to a Bush campaign member actually being one of the Vets who appeared in the latest ad, until they were notified of this little fact to which he appropriately resigned.

Moreso than what Bush is or isn't doing in condemning these ads, what i wanna know is what is up with these veterans? How anyone, especially a veteran, can look at Kerry's history, and Bush's history, and then come to the conclusion that they need to come out and attack Kerry's record is absolutely mind boggling.

They attacked McCain's service, and now they're attacking Kerry. Apparently they seem to believe the only war record worthy of being President is going AWOL from the National Guard.

The Weekly Standard (Run by Neo-con Bill Kristol) has a surprisingly frank article on the matter.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/493kldgc.asp?pg=1

Republicans have no such luck this time, and so they scramble to reassure themselves that they nevertheless are doing the right thing, voting against a war hero. The simplest way to do this is to convince themselves that the war hero isn't really a war hero. If sufficient doubt about Kerry's record can be raised, we can vote for Bush without remorse. But the calculations are transparently desperate. Reading some of the anti-Kerry attacks over the last several weeks, you might conclude that this is the new conservative position: A veteran who volunteered for combat duty, spent four months under fire in Vietnam, and then exaggerated a bit so he could go home early is the inferior, morally and otherwise, of a man who had his father pull strings so he wouldn't have to go to Vietnam in the first place.

Needless to say, the proposition will be a hard sell in those dim and tiny reaches of the electorate where voters have yet to make up their minds. Indeed, it's far more likely that moderates and fence-sitters will be disgusted by the lengths to which partisans will go to discredit a rival. But this anti-Kerry campaign is not designed to win undecided votes. It's designed to reassure uneasy minds.