This is a good analysis of the differences between Bush & Kerry on several key issues:

http://bushfan.com/BushVsKerry.html

Originally posted by BushFan04
This is a good analysis of the differences between Bush & Kerry on several key issues:

http://bushfan.com/BushVsKerry.html

This analysis is neither good, nor ojective.

Looks pretty slanted to me.

For Bush they only talk what they see as fact and for Kerry they talk supposition, conjecture and assumptions. I hope that journalist didn't quit his day job.

ROTFLMAO

Welcome to allforums Bushfan04

Dop

That is pretty sad Bushfan.

Did you really mean it when you said it was good and objective....the page starts off with Bush enveloped in an American Flag background, and Kerry in his Oompa Lumpa suit...that wasnt a good start for your claim.

Then it gives all these lame facts, and a letter grade that doesnt make sense.

Not to mention the first half of the website is Bushfan....yeah that sounds objective..

God, Give Us A Break.

Agreed that the site leans to Bush.

However, the various differences in policies between the 2 men is fairly well illustrated. The ideologies are distinctly different in the areas noted. I especially liked the part under Economy.

AHAHAHAHAHA
On the environment, Bush got an A and Kerry got a D. That is the biggest load of BS I've ever read.

Kerry also complains about the nuclear stockpiles of former Soviet nations that are unaccounted for, and wants to spend up to $10 billion of American taxpayer’s money to buy those nuclear weapons so that they won’t “fall into the hands of terrorists”.

Is this right?? Surely not! This little flaw in logic would be a helluva way for someone outside of the US to make money off of us.

Agreed that the site leans to Bush.
Leans? That word seems too weak, I like "Worship".

Buy the nuclear stockpiles? The US needs no more nuclear weapons, Russia should just disable them all, just like we should do with ours. Besides, who wants outdated nukes?

Originally posted by Blibblob
[b]Besides, who wants outdated nukes?

The countries that dont have any new ones.

:cool:

welcome to our world liberals. now you know how consevatives feel when the "objective" media starts talking a bunch of crap

Amen, Trav.

I really don't see how the comparison is off by much. It looks pretty right on to me. The only person that has made a specific criticism is Idiot.

Trav and calling the media liberal! Oh what a lie the Republicans have thrown into the mainstream! It’s oh so cliché!

go look and see what percentage of media is democrats. if that much were republicans woould you say it was objective?

Originally posted by Overdose
Trav and calling the media liberal! Oh what a lie the Republicans have thrown into the mainstream! It’s oh so cliché!

Originally posted by Karankawa
Amen, Trav.

I really don't see how the comparison is off by much. It looks pretty right on to me. The only person that has made a specific criticism is Idiot.

ummm....am I the only one that knows that this site is SATIRE?

Vilepagan,

Do you mind pointing out exactly what the site said about John Kerry that was incorrect?

Originally posted by Karankawa
Vilepagan,

Do you mind pointing out exactly what the site said about John Kerry that was incorrect?

Under the Environment section:

Spineless John Kerry, will no doubt cave-in to the demands of tree-hugging wackos as he drafts his environmental policy. Kerry has gone on record saying that he will try to appease hysterical mothers who only care about quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink, with no concern to the financial health of America's most important energy companies.

LOL...think SATIRE

and if that isn't enough to convince you...

From Bush's Environment section...

President Bush realizes that trees do absolutely no good to no-body just standing there in the middle of the forest. In a clever strategy, Bush is working with the logging industry to recycle forest trees into our economy as newspapers, construction material, and furnitures, instead of just letting them waste oxygen as they wait for their next opportunity to burn in a spectacular forest fire.

Convinced?...definitely SATIRE

That it?

I think Idioteque may have already pointed that out that section.

It may not be wrong, but it is stupid.

Although John Kerry has never specifically said that he wants to appease our enemies or negotiate with terrorists, it is safe to assume that given the chance, Kerry will not even be able to capture Osama bin Laden.

Painfully wrong. George Bush hasn’t even been able to capture him!

Kerry voted YES. However, once the UN weapons inspectors team - headed by Hans Blix - could not find any evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Kerry flip-flopped again and suggested we wait a little bit longer and form a real coalition before invading Iraq.

The original thing Kerry agreed to was to work through the UN and go into Iraq as a last resort, something Bush didn’t do.

Kerry's educational policy is quite a mystery. Even though he voted for Bush's "no child left behind", he flip-flopped on the issue and turned against the program just because President Bush did not provide the necessary funding.

This is a bad thing…? I’m sorry, but Kerry is for the No Child Left Behind Act. He attacked Bush on not funding it, that’s all.

What Kerry fails to realize is that when middle class and lower class Americans have extra money in their pockets they just the waste it on trivial things such as clothes, school supplies, food, toys for their kids, etc., which serves no purpose in stimulating the economy.

Or making ends meet, and not having to work three jobs, and still have to struggle in making the right amount of money at the end of the month. Isn’t tax cuts a Republican thing?

Spineless John Kerry, will no doubt cave-in to the demands of tree-hugging wackos as he drafts his environmental policy.

Sorry John Kerry wants to save our Environment and make other ways to make fuel, etc.

Kerry, on the other hand, will do anything possible to appease the medical lobby and try to win favors with relatives of sick Americans by giving them false hope for a cure that may never come.

I think it’s safe to assume it will lead to cures…and you are not killing babies in order to do this research.

During the two tours he served in Vietnam, this "peace activist" hypocritically earned three Purple Heart, a Silver Star, and a Bronze Star. When he returned home, he tried to gain political fame by claiming that the Vietnam War should end just because it is failing.

As we know now the Vietnam war was wrong…so…? And he fought for it because he thought it was the right thing to do at the beginning, and when he came home he realized it was BS.

Originally posted by Karankawa
That it?

I think Idioteque may have already pointed that out that section.

Read the whole thing Karankawa, and if you think it's a serious site...then I can't help you. It's a joke...the whole thing, and you can even check out the parent site, that's a joke too.

This is off topic, but your signature is lovely overdose... lol... I love that song... I like the remix too but the verses in the remix are a bit dirty to put in my sig... Even for me *points to avatar* heh heh

The best example of tongue-in-cheek humor from the "objective comparison"...

From the "Homeland Security" section

President Bush’s solution is far more sophisticated. By not inspecting 95% of the cargo that arrives to our shores, and leaving our chemical & nuclear plants vulnerable, Bush is creating an atmosphere that will give terrorists the false impression that our country is unprotected. When they finally do attack us, their plan will be exposed, and we will be able to retaliate against the people that we suspect collaborated with them.

Still think this is serious?

I'm not sure I follow the debate here about humor & satire...

can anyone point out a fact that's not factually accurate?

Vile is right. I dont see how anyone could mistake this for real. However, satire usually does incorporate some element of truth. Look at the Simpsons as a social satire of America.
"It's funny because it's true."
-Homer Simpson

Originally posted by BushFan04
I'm not sure I follow the debate here about humor & satire...

can anyone point out a fact that's not factually accurate?

:rolleyes: If you think this site is serious, please tell me you're not voting...

I think it's fairly evident that some parts of the site are satirical, but I think it's also clear that a lot of if is factual.

To dismiss the whole site the way you are doing, Vilepagan, makes me think that you are embarrassed about the way Kerry stacks up against Bush.

Originally posted by Karankawa
I think it's fairly evident that some parts of the site are satirical, but I think it's also clear that a lot of if is factual.

To dismiss the whole site the way you are doing, Vilepagan, makes me think that you are embarrassed about the way Kerry stacks up against Bush.

You're kidding right?

As Evil Homer pointed out, satire is satire because it's based on the truth...is there something on the site that you think is particularly accurate?

I'm not embarrassed by the way Kerry stacks up against Bush...I am embarrassed that with the best political system in the world, we can't manage to put forward better candidates then either of those two jokers.

BTW, the parent site where this comparison list comes from is also quite funny.

http://www.bushfan.com/

From the front page:

In these critical times of global crisis and domestic sedition against our government by so-called Americans, it is more important than ever to support our courageous President in unity!

Some left-wing liberals have the audacity to suggest that our President is not doing a good job in his war on terror. Those America-hating cowards will even say that Bush’s actions have made us less safe. Well, they couldn’t be more wrong. In fact, as you can see in this Letter from Osama himself, Osama Bin Laden is quite fond of Bush and his policies. Now, think about it, would you prefer to have a president that is admired and liked by our enemies, or a president which is hated and feared by Osama?

Since Bush and Osama’s relatives have been friends and partners we can assume that if Osama attacks us again, he may go easy on us because of his personal friendship with Bush. Can you imagine how angry Osama will get if our President wasn’t a friend of the family?

That’s why we encourage all American voters to reelect our brave President! That’s what Osama would do!

Now that's funny....

I also encourage you to read the "Letter from Osama" that's posted on this site. It contains many "facts" that should be of use in deciding who to vote for in November. :D

thanks vilepagan!

here's the link to Osama's endorsment letter: http://osama.bushfan.com

Originally posted by BushFan04
thanks vilepagan!

here's the link to Osama's endorsment letter: http://osama.bushfan.com

No problem BF...btw to dispel any lingering doubts there may be regarding this website, I include this disclaimer which appears at the botton of the "Letter from Osama" page...

Disclaimer: this satirical web page was neither written by, nor endorsed by Osama Bin Laden or anyone else affiliated with anyone.