Hey everyone. The last debate is tonight! Lets all wait and see what happens...

We can only hope Kerry does well ;)
Oh, and Bush too....:rolleyes:

For those of you who are going to watch...take notes, Note good and bad about both candidates. It will be interesting to post them and see what the immediate responses are to it.

I think Bush destroyed Kerry! Oh wait, maybe I should wait until after the debate . . .

1. Bush did say this...

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

2. Another issue I had with Bush, was that he said if you lose your job, we are going to get you the skills to get jobs for the 20th century. But then I thought, if everyone was to get a high-end, high-paying job, who would do the quote "not as good jobs"? We have to have all jobs in this Government, good and or bad.

3. Bush says he has secured our boarders? Yet, most of our containers are not checked. Also, the 2003 Terror Report said terrorism has increased. John Ashcroft said we had a “90% chance of an attack”, yet, we are safer here at home?

ABC News, reported by Ted Kopple, just declared Kerry the winner of all three.

I do think this was the worst of the three debates, and I think there was a bit of fatigue in both men, that sort of shortlegged their huge chance to really slide into a comfortable lead on the home stretch of this election.

I can't believe the misstatements by so many pundits just within the first hour after the debate about Kerry mentioning Dick Cheney's daughter. I've heard people on Fox call it an "attack", "rude" and other similar negative things and one guy even said he "outed" her...what? She's already out, we all know she is a lesbian, and he did not say ANYTHING negative...when asked if homosexuality is a choice he mentioned her by saying "if you ask Marry she would probably tell you its not a choice".

The only think I can conclude from people's reaction to this is that they associate homosexuality as something negative and therefore the mention of someone who is "openly" gay is an "attack".

i watched the yankees-redsox game

ABC News, reported by Ted Kopple, just declared Kerry the winner of all three.

LOL, does that really surprise you? Now you can understand why so many believe the big 3 are biased.

My favorite part of the debate was when John Kerry said that we could stop people from entering the country illegally by doing retina scans.

And we're not doing what we ought to do in terms of the technology. We have iris-identification technology. We have thumbprint, fingerprint technology today. We can know who the people are, that they're really the people they say they are when the cross the border.



Sorry John, that is THE STUPIDEST idea I have ever heard. I can just see the Mexicans swimming across the Rio Grande now, stopping to get their eyes checked. Yeah....right..... I think what happened there is that Kerry got surprised by a question that he had no clue about. Because that answer SUCKED BAD.

OD, you misquoted when you said Bush said he has secured the borders. He said the borders are improved, not secure. Just FYI.

I also liked how Bush sounded on the healthcare plan issue. I thought both sucked balls on the affirmative action question. I liked that Bush said he didn't know if homosex was a choice or not, while Kerry acted like he knew it wasn't.

While I do think that Kerry looked better, I liked Bush's answers better. But that didn't surprise me.

EDIT: I got bored a couple of times and flipped to the Astros/Cards, but the debate was actually more interesting to me. Domestic issues, mmmmm.

Originally posted by Karankawa
OD, you misquoted when you said Bush said he has secured the borders. He said the borders are improved, not secure. Just FYI.
Wow, sound the alarms! Even if he said they were quote “improved”...they aren’t. Less containers are checked, terrorism has increased, Ashcroft said we had a 90% chance of an attack on our soil in America. So regardless of the way I presented what Bush said, the issues I brought up still stand.

Originally posted by Karankawa
I also liked how Bush sounded on the healthcare plan issue.
Yes, his plan sure worked like a charm when he promised health care for Americans in 2000! Millions more Americans have lost health care, because of the raised costs. Don’t think Bush will change it his second term.

OH YEAH, one more thing I noticed again tonight, and this has caught my attention a few times now. I hear Bush's concern for small business. He doesn't apologize for the tax cut for "the rich" because he points out that this is the same tax cut that small businesses are able to take advantage of. He has pointed out that 7 out of 10 new jobs are being created by small business right now. He noted some other concerns that he had about small businesses during the debate.

Kerry never mentioned small businesses once. I detect a weakness there. Either Kerry has no clue what GW is talking about or he doesn't care. Either way, I don't think it's a good thing. He should have at least had some kind of rebuttal, and he made none, in the case for small business.

If I were the owner of a small business, I would be scared shitless.

Wow, sound the alarms! Even if he said they were quote “improved”...they aren’t. Less containers are checked, terrorism has increased, Ashcroft said we had a 90% chance of an attack on our soil in America. So regardless of the way I presented what Bush said, the issues I brought up still stand.

Um, are we both talking about the Mexian border? I guess you're not aware of this, being from Oregon and all, but the big problem is that people sneak across the border EVERYDAY. Forget the packages, we can't even stop people from getting in!!!

And I'm going to say this the nicest possible way, but your partisanship is getting in the way of your sight once again. You don't know SHIT about what the borders are like. And you have absolutely no clue and no basis to claim that they are better or worse. So stfu about it. For real.

Originally posted by Karankawa
Um, are we both talking about the Mexian border? I guess you're not aware of this, being from Oregon and all, but the big problem is that people sneak across the border EVERYDAY. Forget the packages, we can't even stop people from getting in!!!
Well, I think we are confused. When I made my first post, I was talking about keeping them secure from terrorism. The points I brought up are still valid, and are a concern because Bush is not protecting our boarders sufficiently.

To get onto your little rampage... packages? They could contain explosives, and materials that could be obtained by terrorists. I believe you should be more concerned then you are.

Originally posted by Karankawa
And I'm going to say this the nicest possible way, but your partisanship is getting in the way of your sight once again. You don't know SHIT about what the borders are like. And you have absolutely no clue and no basis to claim that they are better or worse. So stfu about it. For real.
First of all…I’m a liberal. I am bias. What’s your point? So are you…(just on the other side) and so is almost everyone on this board. Stop bringing it up like it’s this huge shocker.

Anyway, I do know SHIT about the borders. Maybe not as much as you, but I do know a lot. My mother grew up in California, my cousin who recently moved up here, lived in California and has told me stories about immigration, my Uncle currently lives in California, and my Aunt was born in Texas. Immigration is a problem, I understand that. But that wasn’t what I was referring to in my original reply. Thanks though.

Oh hey, to be fair, I would like to criticize Bush for over-hyping education. Bush used that "better education" answer for the cure to minimum wage, affirmative action and for out-sourcing jobs. I don't think that is the answer to everything. He should have at least mentioned another idea, even though education does help. It was just too redundant.

Oh yeah, I didn't realize it, but Kerry has admitted that the out-sourcing of jobs is going to happen. I did like his answer at that portion. I think it was a genuine, honest answer, and I liked his solution to (level the playing field, et al).

;) good points

My favorite part of the debate was when John Kerry said that we could stop people from entering the country illegally by doing retina scans. Sorry John, that is THE STUPIDEST idea I have ever heard. I can just see the Mexicans swimming across the Rio Grande now, stopping to get their eyes checked.

Like Bush's answer was any better? Something about giving all the immigrants a "card" to carry around.

Neither one of them is willing to solve the illegal immigration problem.

This is so predictable. You liberals will never admit Bush won a single debate. You won't even admit was close.

"I’m tired of politicians who talk about family values and don’t value families." Senator John Kerry


Another win for Kerry!....................HAT TRICK - three - zero

Alan Keyes did much worse to Cheney's daughter -- he publicly called her every name in the book and no one had any problem with that. Oh yeah, that's right -- Keyes is a republican. ROTF.

Close the borders? Obviously you're joking and don't spend a lot of time in the southwest.

Most of the metro areas near the border are now safe havens for Mexicans. If they safely reach Tucson, Phoenix, San Diego, Los Angeles, Albuquerque ... it's pretty much hands off. No one is going to bother them or deport them short of the individual comitting a crime and then it's unlikely they will be sent home. You can be xenophobic as you please but you'll have to come up with a better suggestion than closing the borders. In my best 'Gold Hat' voice and with Dobbs, Curtin and Howard starring wide-eyed I offer ... "I don't need no stinking retina scans' ... ROTF

So we had 3 debates just to find out that Kerry is pretty much on top of all the issues and has real solutions and all we find out about Bush is that his wife speaks better english and he has a unexplained hump in his suit jacket. Sheeesh ...

ROTFLMAO

Dop

I don't believe it was in good form to mention chenneys daughter. Though it didn't do any harm in that she has been out for years and has spoken about it publicly. Talking about someone else's sexual orientation on national TV is crass and Kerry should not have done it.

Hoever, only people who see homosexuality as a bad thing would consider it as negative and he did not "out" her.

Bad ettiquette - yes.
Mean spirited - no

Maybe he wanted to remind americans that this isn't a slam dunk issue with the current administartion, in other words that not everyone in the administration holds bush's hatefull attitudes. Bt I doubt he would want to do that. It helps the republicans.

wow, ted "lets honor only the troops to die after the carrier speech" Koppel delcared kerry the winner of all three, and so did overdose and echo! I am truly shocked.

and dop, I am still waiting for the solutions kerry proposes to all these problems, it all sounds like campaign rhetoric and empty promises to me, oh, and that he has a "plan" he never lays out for us. it seems his plan is to simply occupy the oval office and all things will be well again, and convince a bunch of countries with no desire to help us to help us. thats not a plan, its wishful thinking, and thats not going to get it done, sorry.

Apparantly the people who love bush have the same dogmatic ideas he does. They wont admit he made a mistake, they wont concede he lost any of the debates and they refuse to hear Kerry's solutions being offered to fix bush's mistakes.

Stay the course my republican friends. It is important that you don't recognize past mistakes and continue to be resolute!

bush lost the first debate, spends to much f**ing money, wont do crap about the pourous borders and is a poor public speaker, you happy now? that being said, he is a hell of a lot better then that flaky, debate champion, gold digger kerry and his say anything to get elected ambulance chaser sidekick.

Originally posted by Travh20
bush lost the first debate, spends to much f**ing money, wont do crap about the pourous borders and is a poor public speaker, you happy now? that being said, he is a hell of a lot better then that flaky, debate champion, gold digger kerry and his say anything to get elected ambulance chaser sidekick.

Jeeze trav, are you having a bad day? You forgot to mention Kerry's out of control wife, party animal daughters and inability to explain how he is going to pay for all his programs with just a tax cut to the rich.

Trav -- agree Kerry's plans are sketchy too. Seems to be a disease suffered by all politicians.

Echo -- After what the republican party did to John McCain in the '00 S. Carolina primaries, nothing, absolutely nothing is personally or morally out of bounds IMHO.

That was a beautiful stratigic move by Kerry -- bringing to the front burner the fact that the very party that hates all gays is run by a person who has a gay daughter. The fundies are probably pulling out their hair today trying to resolve this one and I wouldn't be surprised if it costs Bush a few votes. ROTF.

Dop

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Echo -- After what the republican party did to John McCain in the '00 S. Carolina primaries, nothing, absolutely nothing is personally or morally out of bounds IMHO.

That was a beautiful stratigic move by Kerry -- bringing to the front burner the fact that the very party that hates all gays is run by a person who has a gay daughter. The fundies are probably pulling out their hair today trying to resolve this one and I wouldn't be surprised if it costs Bush a few votes. ROTF.

Dop

I do not believe that a candidates children are fair game. Remember the republicans calling chelsey clinton the white house dog?

Chenneys daughter wasn't attacked, she has spoken publicly about her sexuality. But as far as I'm concerned, talking about a third persons sex life is not appropriate for national TV and especially a presidential debate. The candidates and their wifes are fair game, but leave the kids alone. It was bad form and someone with Kerry's upbringing should know better. Edwards did it too and though it wasn't meant as a nasty comment either time. I just don't think it was very good ettiquette. Maybe that's just the old lady creaping out in me but that's how I feel.

Echo -- good points all if we had a level playing field which we don't so IMHO, given what happened to McCain ('00) and Cleland ('02) the republican party moral high ground jumped the shark and anything/anybody is now fair game.

I would bet my next 10 paychecks that if the situation was reversed, Rush, Sean, Bill and Ann would be on the dems backs like waterproof on a frog.

Dop

they wont concede he lost any of the debates

I haven't heard any conservatives refusing to concede that Bush won the first debate. You lefties on the other hand won't even concede that one of the debates was CLOSE. Kerry won 'em all!! give me a break. I think Bush took both of the last two.

Anyone else think it's ironic that Echo and Dop are complaining about Republican name-calling after insisting that all Republicans were knuckle-dragging racist rednecks? "Oh the hypocracy."

Id say bush lost the first (duh). Draw the second, and bush won the third but it was close.

I don't think that kerry should have talked about Dick Cheney's daughter. While he didn't attack her, he was using her for a political purpose, if only to make the point which dop made that the party that hates gays has one very close to the president and vice president.

Oh and btw, the whole republican party does not hate gays, or blacks, or women, or hispanics for that matter. Typical stereotype.
The only ones who hate gays would be the off the deep end, out of this galaxy right wingers. But i wouldn't say that Bush or Cheney would be one of them.

On the gay issue, i think it is less about the title of marriage, but more about state courts and judges making contradictory decisions. By making the ammendment, it puts everyone on the same page. Also, i dont think Bush hates gays, he just wants the term marriage to be for a man and a woman. I believe that he is all for a civil union and all of the rights that that entails. Frankly, i really dont give a damn.

If they don't hate gays and blacks and hispanics and women why do they treat them so bad? Pass legislation to discriminate against them or block legislation that will help them?

Republicans blocked the Equal Rights amendment from passing. They didn't want women to have equal rights. Back in 2000 when bush was first running for pres he stated that he felt that gay marrsige should be left up to the states. Then when the states started doing something about it and it wasn't what he wanted, he flip-flopped to wanting to pass an amendment.

So lets look at this....they refused to give women equal rights in a constitutional amendment and now want to deny equal rights to gays with a constituional amendment. And they want us to believe that they don't hate gays and women? In addition, Bush has snubbed just about every African American caucus in this country.

Judge a man by his deeds not his words.

Chenneys daughter wasn't attacked, she has spoken publicly about her sexuality. But as far as I'm concerned, talking about a third persons sex life is not appropriate for national TV and especially a presidential debate. The candidates and their wifes are fair game, but leave the kids alone.

The subject was sexuality and whether it was a choice, so what is wrong with saying that if you ask the homosexual person who is closest to either one of the 4 political families whether she thinks its a choice. If the topic was not homosexuality, or if he said something bad about her, or if her sexuality was not publically know, then I would have a problem with it. And why are "their wifes fair game" but not the kids (assuming the "kids" are adults)??? Plus, conservatives never had a problem mentioning homosexuals such as Rosie.

You lefties on the other hand won't even concede that one of the debates was CLOSE. Kerry won 'em all!! give me a break. I think Bush took both of the last two.

Your last sentence shot your whole arguement in the foot since you also can't even concede that Kerry might have won either of the last 2 debates. The last 2 debates were basically a draw...oops, that shot down your first sentence too since I'm a "leftie" and I just conceded that the debates were close. Both of them made some good points against the other and a few minor blunders, but neither one was the clear winner in the last 2 debates. I'll also admit that Bush won some of the debates against Gore.

Now you can understand why so many believe the big 3 are biased.

What is this "big 3" crap? Do you know it is not the 1960's? Almost everyone gets more than 3 channels. With the 24 hour news channels, the main stream news media is not just ABC, CBS, and NBC anymore.

I thought the debate was a draw, but I was shocked immediatly after when Fox was falling all over themselves do declare Bush the clear winner. Brit Hume's first words were to say Bush won because he looked so much better than he did in the 1st debate. Then when he went to the panel of 3 news analysts, the first one said Bush was the winner, the 2nd one could do nothing but trash Kerry for "outing" and taking a "cheap shot" at Cheney's daughter (who is already "out") and the 3rd guy said "if this was a fight, then Bush just delivered an 8th round knock-out...and out of the 20 questions, 6 were a tie and Bush won all the other 14".

I don't have a problem with some people having a different opinion on the debate than I did, but it was what they said at the end of their analysis that has me pissed. One of the 4 guys said "we'll wait and see who the public thought won the debate"...and then Brit Hume said "well, the 3 of you say that Bush clearly won, but the public's decision will be based on how the news media interprets this debate". It was as if they KNOW that Bush won, and any "news media" who thinks otherwise, is part of the influencial biased media (which they don't consider themselves a part of for some reason).

Originally posted by dnamertz
I don't have a problem with some people having a different opinion on the debate than I did, but it was what they said at the end of their analysis that has me pissed. One of the 4 guys said "we'll wait and see who the public thought won the debate"...and then Brit Hume said "well, the 3 of you say that Bush clearly won, but the public's decision will be based on how the news media interprets this debate". It was as if they KNOW that Bush won, and any "news media" who thinks otherwise, is part of the influencial biased media (which they don't consider themselves a part of for some reason).

Neocons will never admit that they could be bias or that any news station could be bias in their favor. In their small little minds it's all about being "resolute" and "staying the course" in the face of logic, truth and popular oppinion. They don't care that they are wrong. They don't care who they hurt, they don't give a damn about anything or anyone but getting their fascist faux leader re-appointed to the presidency. To them, "anyone who isn't with them is against them". To them, it's not about what is best for the country or Americans, it's about keeping two separate classes in this country. The haves, and the have nots. One of these days the imbecile white middle class neocons are going to wake up and not be middle class anymore and they will have no one to blame but themselves.

I think Bush took both of the last two.

Again, I don't think Bush lost last night, but how can you say he won based on the following:

1. A few different times he was asked one question and instead of talking about that issue, he talked about education. When asked what he would say to someone who lost their job because a company moved overseas, he said the govt would help them go to community college, then he went on to talk about education. That community college answer would be a slap in the face if I was one of those people, many of whom already have a college degree and many of whom, now that they are unemployed can't afford to pay their mortgage much less the new expense of tuition.

How does education solve the problem of companies moving overseas? They are not moving because the American workers are stupid, they do it because the labor is cheaper. A better educated American workforce is good, but it won't make the overseas labor more expensive. If anything, it would make American workers more skilled and they would demand even higher wages, which makes that overseas labor look even cheaper.

2. There was one point when he came off as either rude or stupid after Kerry quoted 2 major news organizations and then Bush started to say "you can't rely on the new organizations....never mind". Bush was starting to take a jab at the media but then he remebered the moderator works for CBS news.

3. He claimed he never said the line about Bin Laden, but he did.

4. He kept calling Kerry's health plan a "government plan" even after Kerry explained that it wasn't...then he said "under Kerry's plan, the goverment will be making the decision, not the doctors and patients". Doesn't he understand that under the current system, under Bush's plan, and under Kerry's plan, the INSURANCE companies make the ultimate decisions.

5. Its really annoying and kind of disrespectful that he can't address Kerry as "Senator or Mr Kerry"...he always calls him "my opponent".

They both refer to each other as 'my opponent' all the time. I agree that the education line was weak, but Kerry had some ramblings too. And Kerry wants to give everyone health insurance, but he doesnt want social security or anything like that privatized. Thus, only the government could provide these things.

Second, all i could find on most news organizations was that Kerry was the clear winner. This was also said by many international news organizations. So i dont see why you r so pissed off at FOX.

Echo. Well i dont know about the Equal Rights movement. I'm sure some republicans blocked it, but i doubt that it was just them. This gay marriage thing doesnt show that he hates gays, just that he wants a clear definition of marriage. If there is no defining line, then the floodgates open up. Why not polygamy? Why shouldn't you be able to marry a horse? Why shouldn't you be able to marry your cousin?
Bush has the most black people in positions of power of any president. I dont see how he wants them suppressed. Oh, and in the florida debocle, the black areas where many votes weren't counted, everything was run by democrats. Hell, they even designed the ballot.
Again i state that this is a mean spirited stereotype that should be discontinued.

At least one of the Republicans' most recognizable senators isn't Robert "KKK" Byrd.

Originally posted by Echo2
Judge a man by his deeds not his words.

Why is it that liberals who spend all of their time living in white neighborhoods and hanging out with white friends consider themselves to be the world's most tolerant and inclusive human beings because they roll their R's when ordering a "burrrrrrrrito" and are always sure to let that black guy at the office know that they're "down with" him?" It's especially interesting in light of the fact that the DNC has lawyers in front of every state supreme court in the country arguing that special considerations need to be made because blacks are too dumb to vote correctly. I have no idea why African-Americans stay with the democrats.

Second, all i could find on most news organizations was that Kerry was the clear winner. This was also said by many international news organizations. So i dont see why you r so pissed off at FOX.

After that segment I saw on Fox, I turned to MSNBC and most were saying either Bush was a slight winner or a tie (exepct Ron Reagan). Like I said, I was not pissed at all 4 of the men on Fox for thinking Bush won...I was pissed at their attitude that they can give their opinion about who won (and they can) but then they acted as if any other news outlet who might have the opposite opinion is going to be changing the public's opinion as to who the "real winner" was. My point is that Fox, and these other cable news channels, are just as much of a main stream news source these days as CBS, NBC, & ABC, but they act like they are not.

Why is it that liberals who spend all of their time living in white neighborhoods and hanging out with white friends consider themselves to be the world's most tolerant and inclusive human beings because they roll their R's when ordering a "burrrrrrrrito" and are always sure to let that black guy at the office know that they're "down with" him?"

You hang out with some unusual liberals.

but Kerry had some ramblings too.

Yes he did, thats why I wouldn't call him the winner either.

And Kerry wants to give everyone health insurance, but he doesnt want social security or anything like that privatized. Thus, only the government could provide these things.

The way I understood it, Kerry's plan would have the government help pay for health insurance, not provide health care. The insurance companies would still PROVIDE the insurance and private doctors would still PROVIDE the care. Bush seems to think we will have government doctors under this plan.

Here's a good example of what I mean when I say "everyone and everything is fair game now" ... read this article about how the anti-bush crowd was treated by the police and the pro-bush crowd was left alone ... this is exactly how Hitler did it 70 years ago.

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-8/1097821147133260.xml&storylist=orlocal

A statement about cheney's daughter is nothing compared to this behaviour.

As was so aptly said in the movie 'Mad Max beyond Thunderdome' -- "There are no rules" and so aptply said in the movie 'Shawshaknk Redemption" -- "get busy living or get busy dying".

It's time for the dems and other true americans to re-watch a few movies.

Dop

dop, its funny how you seem to ignore al the vandalism, break ins and intimidation perpetrated by the kerry side of the coin. in california we have what equates to a pack of brown shirts running around destroying bush signs, vandalizing homes with bush placards in front, in washington people break into bush campaign headquarters, DNC plans for pre emptive false accusations of voter intimidation "even if noe exists", how can you ignore all that?

In regard to what was said about Dick Cheney's daughter, I believe it is a case of what goes around comes around. Anyone remember the South Carolina primary in 2000. I am referring of course to the last second ad proclaiming that John McCain had a biracial child. The implication was that there had been infidelity in that marriage. Of course the truth was that they had adopted a child.
Those who play dirty have little right to complain when others do it to them. By the way, Dick Cheney's daughter is an active worker in the Republican campaign. This, in my opinion, makes her fair game. If she were not managing the campaign, but merely living her life uninvolved in politics, she ought to have never been mentioned.
For those conservatives out there, would you object to revelations about the sex life of Edward's campaign manager?

Here's another example of Bush's brown shirts in action ... this time they want to arrest some teachers that are wearing t-shirts that Bush doesn't like. ROTF

http://www.bend.com/news/ar_view%5E3Far_id%5E3D18712.htm

And Trav ... You must have some ballsey dems in SAC -- I've always heard that's big time GOP land. Maybe it's time to move down to Stockton. Just kidding.

But you should consider moving to Phoenix cause I guarantee you if someone is spotted grabbing a sign off a lawn in that town, it's probably lights out ... er make that lights in ... in through the newly placed hole in their head about the size of a 38.

ROTFLMAO

On a serious note -- no one has the right to destroy a sign on someone elses property regardless of party affiliation but isn't it funny how CNN and FOX is claining it's only the dems that are doing it just like it's only the dems that are falsely registering people and it's only the dems that are doing anything wrong. Give me a f'n break.

One more thing ... Rush once called Chelsea Clinton some horrible names including "dog". Bush was on his show just a couple of days ago.

Now tell me ... what's fair and what isn't?

Dop

dop, it is you who trys to claim it is one side and one side only doing this stuff. why dint you mention the case of the teacher who got fired for having a picture of george bush on her wall in her class room?

I was backing the Bush teacher all the way. Believe it or not.

Dop

This, in my opinion, makes her fair game.

"Fair game" would imply that someone took a shot at her. All Kerry did was mention what is already publically known, and it was not something bad, and it was relevant to the topic.

Since the end of the debate, I've heard at least 20 different people on national TV and radio complaining about Kerry mentioning her sexuality, but in the process of this complaining, these people are also mentioning her and her sexuality.

I've heard many people say it was wrong to mention it, but not one has said what was wrong about it. And the one person I have not heard complain is Marry Cheney herself...she had "no comment".

I don't think there's anything wrong with it, although Kerry should've known it would look bad. The fake outrage and righteous indignation from the Bush/Cheney camp is annoying though.

Everyone knows the bush plan was to play the gay marriage card the week before the election hoping to polarize the voters just enough to pull off a win.

That play is now off the table. Kerry took it away -- a genius move and it may even cost team bush some votes with the hard right fundies. They hate gays of all kinds and here's the admin protecting one as family member.

BWAhahahahahahahaha ... well done President Kerry.

Dop

I still havent gotten over the fact that the media is even making a small bit of noise over such a stupid thing.

That's easy Jere -- they use the lisbian noise to cover the fact that bush lied about not caring about OBL and that 73,000 jobs per month are going to India and 5 million have lost health care in 3 years and gas is 2.00 (2.40 in my hood) and Rove has testified to a grand jury about the Plame case and and and ...

The media can't let the american people think about the real issues .... keep them thinking about sex, sex, sex, sex ..... and whatever you do -- don't look over there at those 5 new flag-covered coffins from today. I'm sure Kerry's remark about Mary Cheney is to blame for those new deaths or was it Clinton? Geeesh this gop ideological spin philosophy is just so confusing at times ... ROTFLMAO

Dop

I still havent gotten over the fact that the media is even making a small bit of noise over such a stupid thing.

This is exactly what Bill Mahr talked about before the last debate...the media always focuses on one little sound bite from the debate and replays it and make sure its the main part of the debate that the public remembers. Whether it be Gore sighing, or the "you're no Jack Kennedy" line, the media MAKES it the issue by only talking about that.

Just last night on FOX they were saying that the "insta-polls" immediatly after the 3rd debate were wrong because they didn't take into account the way people feel about Kerry's lesbian comment. I'll admit that the "insta-polls" aren't scietific, but that was not FOX's argument...they were saying, arrogantly, that the public couldn't have formed a correct opinion on there own, they needed the media to tell them what the most important issue of the debate was by talking about it and playing over and over. Of course its the main point of the debate, now that you (the media) has made it so.

Senator Kerry after coming back home from serving our country in Vietnam, began protesting our being there. The thought of most protestors was that we should leave Vietnam. Unfortunately, we didn't do that and tens of thousands more U.S. soldiers were killed as a result of the continuation of that tragic war.

I believe that what John Kerry did was right and honorable. He was doing his patriotic duty by trying to prevent the deaths of more American's from a war that was seen as unwinnable. But Dick Nixon didn't want to be the first U.S. President to lose a war. Ironically he became the first President in U.S. history to lose a war, when we lost in Vietnam.

I haven't heard yet that G W Bush has any plan. Whatever the plan, all he says it is not like Kerry's. Instead of talking about his plan he chose to spout more 'mumbo-jumbo' rhetoric to attack Kerry by calling him a lifelong liberal, etc.

Maybe Bush's plan is similar to his failed policies of the past four years. I'm fairly certain it will be 'more of same' from Bush, if unfortunately for our country he is re-elected. Do you really expect anything new from him?

Quote:
"He regrettably rushed us into war in Iraq and pushed alliances away and as a result America ... is not as safe as we ought to be." ~ Sen. John Kerry (0ct-13-2004)

QUOTE:
"No war is glorious, it's a tragedy. It's even more of a tragedy especially when people are being killed unnecessarily, as a result of the greedy, power-hungry agenda of their governments" ~ MOPEDER

Originally posted by dnamertz
This is exactly what Bill Mahr talked about before the last debate...the media always focuses on one little sound bite from the debate and replays it and make sure its the main part of the debate that the public remembers. Whether it be Gore sighing, or the "you're no Jack Kennedy" line, the media MAKES it the issue by only talking about that.

Just last night on FOX they were saying that the "insta-polls" immediatly after the 3rd debate were wrong because they didn't take into account the way people feel about Kerry's lesbian comment. I'll admit that the "insta-polls" aren't scietific, but that was not FOX's argument...they were saying, arrogantly, that the public couldn't have formed a correct opinion on there own, they needed the media to tell them what the most important issue of the debate was by talking about it and playing over and over. Of course its the main point of the debate, now that you (the media) has made it so.

FOX News is the most bias station I have ever seen. They practically gave the election to Bush in 2000.

If you were to compare and contrast the severe right wingness of FOX News with the liberalness of, say, The LA Times....Fox makes LA Times read like Rush or O'Rielly.

ARRRR, That James Ellis:mad:

Fox is only biased by comparison.

Just like how Ted Kennedy is conservative compared to John Kerry. Or how Liberman is far right wing next to Kennedy. Everything is about perspective.

This is an example. ONLY an example, i don't want to debate the meaning behind this or anything.

And as i recall, didn't bush win in 2000?

"If you are listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you are a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons." - Alice Cooper
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You said it yourself that you're a moron if you get your information on who to vote for from a rock star. I like some of Alice Cooper's music but I do think he's a moron. I decide who i'm voting for myself. :lolhit:

:woohoo: Vote for Kerry, for a Better America!! :woohoo:

You're right about Fox news being biased. They do quite honestly suck!!

I guess you prefer to get your news from the sources taht tell you what you like to hear

Originally posted by Mopeder04
"If you are listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you are a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons." - Alice Cooper
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You said it yourself that you're a moron if you get your information on who to vote for from a rock star. I like some of Alice Cooper's music but I do think he's a moron. I decide who i'm voting for myself. :lolhit:

What is this regarding exactly? Or are you saying that Alice Cooper's comment itself is contradictory? Either way, you'll note that he's not advocating any candidate, so I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

P.S. If people should decide for themselves who to vote for, why are you telling people to vote for Kerry?

You're right about Fox news being biased. They do quite honestly suck!!

I don't see why liberals keep crying about Fox. The libs get CBS, NBC, ABC and CNN while conservs get FOX. I just feel sorry for the guys in the middle that don't get squat. They are forced to swallow their news with one spin or another.

On the Cheney's daughter is a dyke thing - It was probably bad judgement for Kerry to mention that - more to lose than to gain, but lets be honest - Dick Cheney pimps out his daughters sexuality day after day on the campaign trail to prove how in touch he is. Edwards mentioned it in the VP debate & Cheney thanked him! Once Cheney talks about her then its fair game.

The best bit if crafted politico was Mrs Cheneys carefully scripted sound bite "He's a bad man" - funny. Kerry said that the Cheney's love their daughter and Kerry is a bad man. I wonder what she thinks of the republican senators that practically likened gay people to the children of Satan when debating gay issues. She was curiously silent then.

At the end of the day it's all Bullshit - Kerry's comment was a bullshit comment & the response from the Bush camp was Bullshit x 10

The thing about Kerry was that it was carefully planned. Edwards, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that it just popped into his head. Kerry however, since he mentioned it a second time, leads me to believe that it was planned. Not only that, just the way he said it; rushed, and uncomfortable. I think all he was doing was name dropping.

Second. If someone brings it up in their campaign then it's fair game? So, how come everyone was so outraged about this swiftboat thing? Albeit these are different situations with different arguments, but the same conditions apply.

Here's how i think it went down.
Dems: John Kerry is a war hero.
Reps: John Kerry is a fraud.

Reps: Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter.
Dems: Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter.

I think its everyone getting theirs.

Edwards mentioned it in the VP debate & Cheney thanked him! Once Cheney talks about her then its fair game.

Exactly....the same way that Theresa Hienz becoming part of the Kerry campaign has made her fair game for people to talk about. I don't see conservatives saying "you can't mention John Kerry's wife".

If someone brings it up in their campaign then it's fair game? So, how come everyone was so outraged about this swiftboat thing?

No one is complaining that the SBVFT are talking about an issue that Kerry brought up in their campaign, they are complaining that their accusations are untrue.

And how come no one is complaining about the dozens of times people on TV and radio have mentioned Cheney's daughter is a lesbian since the debate? I thought it was "bad" to mention the VP's daughter's sexual preference publically.

The conservatives aren't talking about how Theresa Heinz-Kerry is puerto rican, they are talking about the stupid things she's been saying.

And i remember hearing this a lot in regards to the SBVFT thing:
"How dare anyone question John Kerry's war record! He is a decorated hero. These people have no right to criticize him!"

Finally, the people on radio and tv are commentators. They analyze all of these things. They have nothing to gain or lose by mentioning and discussing Cheney's daughter. It's their job to talk about things like that. It is not however, Kerry's job nor place to bring that sort of thing up.

the people on radio and tv are commentators. They analyze all of these things. They have nothing to gain or lose by mentioning and discussing Cheney's daughter. It's their job to talk about things like that.

They don't have anything to lose by mentioning it but isn't it wrong none-the-less? The main complaint I've been hearing is how wrong it is to mention something so private about someone in public...how is that OK when its the commentators doing it?

The answer is that it's not really ok for the commentators to be doing it either. But you can expect sleazy behavior from the media. A presidential candidate is another story. He is supposed to be a leader, and example....not another sleazy reporter trying to get attention.

The answer is that it's not really ok for the commentators to be doing it either. But you can expect sleazy behavior from the media. A presidential candidate is another story. He is supposed to be a leader, and example....not another sleazy reporter trying to get attention.

Now thats an honest answer...thank you.