The Republican Convention

[rimbaud]

No, I am not just bashing Republicans, I will do this for the Democrats as well.
Just some observations:

1. Laura Bush's speech was horrible! I can forgive her for being a really poor public speaker - she has no experience and is not supposed to be. But whoever wrote that speech needs to be hung by their toenails. With lines such as, "I sat with George through many losing baseball seasons, but he always knew where home plate was," I had to refrain from regurgitating. Also, the little story about a small town graduation where one student was not there because he died - that is what "America" is all about. Huh?

The fake classroom in the back did not help, either. Then she went back and stood with them. Wow, what a powerful message.

2. I am not saying this is true, but when Bush was on the monitor introducing Colin Powell, it sure did look like he was not really in that classroom. The media does stuff like that all the time - putting people in front of fake backdrops. The lighting was all strange, and he just looked artificial. Again, I do not know, but it still was strange.

3. Colin Powell said about three things in a decent lenghted speech. A lot of rep[etition. He did have a lot of energy and was a pretty good deliverer. The crowd was much more sedated than befoe. Maybe there were applause signs or drugs passed out before hand, because you know all of those delegates did not agree with him. They did cut to Gingrich and he was not clapping and sitting in the dark - looked scary.

I loved the cameras during Powell's speech, they kept showing just the black peole in the audience. That woman with the cowboy hat (ugh, why do they always do that?) from Texas got as much screen time as Powell did.

4. How is Bush, as Powell said, "going to give the strenght (morally and emotionally) for all of our children to say no to drugs," when he did not have that as an adult? No, I am not making a big deal about this because I could not care less. Why not just say that we will try to help our children understand more about drugs, knowing that they will always be there, and try to prevent addicition?

5. The Republican party sure is trying to be different this year. They really seem to be moving themselves away from the Contract with America congressmen. This is good for general public perception, but what does it do with the more die hards and religious right, etc?

6. Save the children (tears streaming down my face)!

------------------
Play the Piano Drunk Like a Percussion Instrument Until the Fingers Begin to Bleed a Bit

[Smokey]

Daddy Bush is giving President Clinton 30 days to stop personal attacks against his son or he is going public about the way he feels about Clinton as a human being.

Why wait so long? Let the mudslinging begin. Drop your gloves and come out swinging. Oh yeah!

"Nearest I can tell, the message of the Bush campaign is just that, 'How bad could I be? I've been governor of Texas, my daddy was president, I own a baseball team. ...' "
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/08/01/bush.wrap/index.html

------------------
Bernard Sumner & Johnny Marr are Electronic

[This message has been edited by Smokey (edited August 01, 2000).]

[Achebe]

Yeah, that is what the Republicans want to do... keep focusing on Clinton.

*yawn*

Nice post, rimmy. I'm amazed at how the Bush campaign has convinced Pat Robertson, et. al. to shut up this whole time period. I think it's obvious that they gave a "you're not helping us" and a "your platform will be heard if you're quiet now" back when the Bob Jones thing blew up.

------------------
Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning? - Dubyah in Florence, SC. 01/11/2000

[insideout]

i'm so sick of these personal issues.. about the whole "bush got to where he was today because of the elder bush".. well..

the same people are calling bush an idiot while at the same time bashing him for growing up in a priveleged setting??? does something NOT make sense here? if i had family like the bush with their money and positions.. i would take advantage of it too if i was SMART! you'd be dumb not to take advantage of the opportunities that are present.. look how stupid it would be..

"no dad, i'm not going to yale because you're paying for it.. i wanna struggle like everyone else... dad.. i wanna buy this baseball team on my own... dad.. i wanna change my name so people won't recognize me during the campaign ". blah blah blah. ridiculous.

so either call bush stupid or call him a freeloader. not both. or even better.. let's talk about his policies... and maybe we'll have a better informed public when november comes.

------------------
i need a vacation

[JayZ750]

I tried to advocate for that in the other thread too, showing how the people who normally liked Clinton, who is also an idiot, usually hate Bush cause he is an idiot, but to no avail.

Im not planning on voting for Bush or anything, but I think Gore is just a dumb and twice as boring yet he is getting no negative run.

I say either

a)make fun of both equally
b)make fun of neither
c)make fun if you want to, but CONCENTRATE on the actual policies at hand here.

Or, if it makes you feel better, you can just make fun of me http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/biggrin.gif I can take it, Im not in the public spotlight.

------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women!

[This message has been edited by JayZ750 (edited August 01, 2000).]

[Achebe]

insideout, JayZ:

I reread rimmy's, smokey's and my own post... what exactly do you take offense at?

I'm not trying to be adversarial. I'm just curious... rimmy made it clear that he was going to take the same approach towards the Democratic convention.

------------------
Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning? - Dubyah in Florence, SC. 01/11/2000

[sirhangover]

you know what jayZ..i agree.. they both suck..and not one of you guys can convince me of anything of substance to prove otherwise...

these guys plain suck..look at them..they suck....it is sad to have the right to vote and consider not voting...

------------------
i am rather like a mosquito in a nudist camp..i know what i ought to do but i don't know where to begin...

[insideout]

rimbaud. achebe.

it's not directed at your posts.. just what your post says about the whole campaign. the clinton people are mudslinging bush.. i don't see any reason to stop the elder bush from taking a stand for his son.. i would do the same thing.. and the bush people are talking bout gore...

and it goes back and forth.. american politics/voters are so much more focused on the candidates faults (hell.. now they even focus on whether their WIVES are good public speakers???) and not the issues that it really dissappoints me.

but i do find bush's personality/intelligence/background questions somewhat aggravating because they are so much more focused on than Gore's. i'm just saying that if you're gonna talk about somebody.. be consistent. just like on the basketball court.. if you're gonna trash talk.. then don't be stupid doing it.

as for the convention itself... yeah it's a show.. and it's pushing all the REAL issues under the rug.. i mean, is the republican party that is shown to the public really the republican party that will show up if elected to the white house? that's what i'm questioning. or will the far right contigents (a powerful one) in Congress be the representative? and because of how the convention is structured.. without any real debate, i can't really tell.

------------------
i need a vacation

[RocketMan Tex]

I will now try to settle this for all of you...

Both Bush and Gore grew up in privileged households. Bush's dad held many political posts, including CIA Director, VP and President, and Gore's dad was a Senator for several terms. Both Bush and Gore grew up in "elite" families with lots of money. And, IMHO, both Bush and Gore are brainless, spineless, and will say anything to get elected.

------------------
Bring It!!

[Achebe]

insideout,

great points. I was just trying to figure out what was going on at the convention by watching alot of the cable news channels. I really have no idea what any of the republicans stances are... but all of a sudden I feel like a Baptist. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/biggrin.gif

Unfortunately, the politics of 'personal destruction' will never go away. We make alot of our decisions based on a candidate's demeanor (hell, McCain didn't win the primaries b/c he was considered too 'mean'). Will this ever change? Would Forbes be electable if he were more attractive? Would Gore be doing better if he had pizazz? It seems as if the biggest complaint about Gore is that he's dull, not that he's incompetent.

It is in this environment that I have to get past the following, admitted biases against Dubyah:

Because of my mother's 'single parent' status, I have worked since the age of 14 for everything that I have ever wanted. To me, it seems ridiculous to elect someone that had no idea what they wanted to do when they 'grew up' until they were 40... that's a bias, and for that, I apologize.

Al. Gore had all of the same benefits that George Bush had (perhaps not all), but it is hard to argue that he wasn't a hard worker too. Al Gore went to Vietnam. Al Gore worked his way through both buildings in Congress for 2 decades. Al Gore didn't find himself in a lucky buying position b/c of his father's prestige, and then jump straight into the governor's mansion. It's in that light that Clinton's quote is funny.

Is this 'mudslinging'? I'm not sure. It seems as if you have to evaluate someone's past to figure out who they are. Also, everyone wants to be able to identify with the candidate in some role (which makes Powell interesting... everyone in NC keeps saying they're going to vote for Harvey but when they get to the polls they vote for the racist Helms, hmmmm...).

Hypothetical situation: If the best possible candidate had a 'child molestation' charge against them, and they were completely reformed (whatever that means), would it be 'mudslinging' to bring it up? Of course not.

------------------
Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning? - Dubyah in Florence, SC. 01/11/2000

[mrpaige]

I would maintain that VP Gore probably wouldn't have gotten where he is without his father (once a powerful Senator himself). Does that mean that he's not qualified to be president? I don't think so. I guess it is more of an issue because 1) George W. Bush is a newcomer to politics, whereas VP Gore has been in politics a long time (we say we like the outsiders, but then we often don't like to vote for folks who haven't been in government for a while), and 2) more people remember George W's father than even know that Gore's father was a powerful Senator.

Personally, I just can't believe that these two are the best we could come up with for our candidates for president. I have nothing against either one of them, but I don't think either is the best man for the job of President.

I haven't watched any of the Repubican Convention so I cannot comment on that, but it has been my understanding that the attacks on Clinton have been toned down significantly over the past few months. While I am sure that a few snide remarks make it in here and there, I haven't seen it at the level that it has been. (Besides, it isn't as if Gore and Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton and others aren't attacking Gov. Bush. So, I don't think we can blame one side for all the attack-style campaigning.)

------------------
www.houstonsportsboard.com (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)

[JayZ750]

It certainly would be 'mudslinging' to bring it up if in the same interview/discussion you fail to bringup the fact that they are now reformed and talk about both sides of the subject.

George Bush didnt know what he wanted to do until he was 40. But he eventually figured it out, and since then he has worked very hard.

------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women!

[This message has been edited by JayZ750 (edited August 01, 2000).]

[mc mark]

Okay Insideout, lets look at the some of the issues...

On abortion…

Supreme Court is wrong: leave abortion to the states. (Jun 28)
Supports GOP abortion plank but disagrees on exceptions. (Feb 15)
No Republican will allow partial-birth abortion. (Feb 15)
States should decide abortion issue; not Roe v. Wade. (Jan 22)
No pro-life pledge(Jan 10)
Would support a pro-life Amendment. (Jun 1999)
Reduce abortions by means within current law. (Jun 1999)
Ban partial-birth; ban taxpayer funding. (Mar 1999)
Encourage fewer abortions via adoption & abstinence. (Jul 1998)

On Gun Control…

No child-safety locks on guns; concealed carrying ok. (Jun 1999)
Government should pay for voluntary trigger locks. (May 13)
Project Sentry: juvenile gun laws & school accountability. (Apr 20)
Best gun control is more prosecution & certain jail. (Dec 1999)
Supports gun ownership for protection and hunting. (Dec 1999)
No city lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jun 1999)
Assault weapon OK; waiting period not OK. (Apr 1999)

On Civil Rights

No gay adoptions (Apr 24)
Against gay marriage (Feb 15)
Ten Commandments OK in schools for "inherent values". (Jan 16)
No gays in Boy Scouts. (Aug 1999)
Hate-crime rules don't apply to gays. (Jul 1999)

Not someone who will get my vote, period.


------------------

[Achebe]

I know this argument is taking the role of 'persuasion' and that I'm not being objective (I guess, if pushed, I could make the argument that someone that wastes 40 years of their life isn't fit to be president)...

but doesn't it seem silly to respect someone that partied until they were 40? What does this say to the U.S.?

(damn I'm too old fashioned)

George W. Bush enforces laws that he routinely broke as an adult, laws that many of his party would want to enforce at the age of 14!

The Republicans have upped the ante. Two years ago, the quandry was 'mom, why are you voting for someone that lied under oath'; now, the question is 'why are you voting for this lazy cocaine user that would be in jail if he were underpriviledged?'.

Damn, they won. I'm going back to Tony Hawk on the Sega.

http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning? - Dubyah in Florence, SC. 01/11/2000

[JayZ750]

Hes not getting my vote either, although Im sure you could find analgous facts about both the Gore and the Clinton campaigns. Just wondering who is getting your vote. You dont have to say or you can say what party. I relly dont know who to vote for, but definitely dont want to vote for either Bush or Gore

------------------
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women!

[This message has been edited by JayZ750 (edited August 01, 2000).]

[insideout]

And, IMHO, both Bush and Gore are brainless, spineless, and will say anything to get elected

that's just what i'm getting at.. it just these accusations are thrown out, repeatedly, so that the public buys into it when in fact both candidates are very smart and ambitious men who would not be where they are if they didn't have some guts. why is Bush brainless again?

you can say that Bush is not prepared.. that he wasn't ready to answer questions about foreing policy.. but brainless?

why is Gore spineless again?

i didn't want to focus on a single quote, but you know what i mean. it's the whole spirit of the campaign.. there has always been personal issues since the beginning id American politics.. jefferson attacking adams' character, andrew jackson's background coming into question.. but it doesn't make it any less nauseating.

------------------
i need a vacation

[rimbaud]

insideout:

Reread my post.

You are taking things too far (at least on my points). No where did I attack Bush. Idid not attack him for having a wife who is not a good public speaker. I said that that was to be excused, as she is not supposed to be and is irrelevant. It is still, howvere, an observation I had for last night. The real problem I had was with the speech writer.

How do you turn that into mudslinging towards Bush?

Nowhere do you offer up your inmpressions of last night.

YOU are the one who brought up Bush Sr, Bush as priveledged, Bush as idiot, Bush as freeloader.

You did say to talk about policies. Fine, bring them up. Have you? This was a thread about the first night (and first night only) of the Republican Convention. Bush has not given his speech yet. I will only comment on him once he has given it.

Otherwise, it just doesn't make sense.

Proceed to aisle 5.

------------------
Play the Piano Drunk Like a Percussion Instrument Until the Fingers Begin to Bleed a Bit

[Smokey]

I just posted what Bill "Can I get an Altoid?" Clinton said about George "Light it Up" W. Bush. If you click on the link you can read about it from CNN.COM

The quote is from President Clinton not me. Maybe I should have made that clear.

I look forward to seeing former President Bush (sorry if its offensive to call him Daddy Bush) on Larry King tonight.

Too bad I have to vote for either Bush or Gore. Id rather vote for JOHN MCCAIN. I can't wait to see him tonight. Can't say one bad thing about the guy.

The mudslinging is tradition in American politics. I may be one of the few who enjoy it.

------------------
Bernard Sumner & Johnny Marr are Electronic

[This message has been edited by Smokey (edited August 01, 2000).]

[Achebe]

Chris Matthews interviewed Pat Robertson on MSNBC earlier. Pat admitted to feeling isolated and hidden away.

He was angry over the gay Republican that will speak tonight yet yielded to Bush's attempts to appear inclusive. He essentially said that he would stay quiet for the time being b/c it was in the party's best interest.

------------------
In related news, the RNC has gathered every politician that Bill Clinton ever defeated to speak on behalf of George W. Bush.

[Achebe]

This past spring, I admired the charisma of John McCain. I thought that he was just crazy enough to actually make a change in politics. Regardless of his being a conservative http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif, he had my vote. He had challenged the political parties including his party's Christian Conservative backing.

Unfortunately, John McCain is the politician that George W. Bush accused him of being in Feb. and March. Tonight he took center stage and he did not say a single word about campaign finance reform. The single issue that gave him a voice outside of Az. this year was ignored.

For what reason? Well, I'm sure that Bush would have looked like a dork being praised for campaign finance reform promises given his war chest. More than likely, McCain knew he would have further distanced himself from the Republican backing that he will need in 2004 (should Gore win).

But... it was a missed opportunity. General Colin Powell knew what forces he was dealing with last night when he chose to challenge the Republican party to be inclusive, including a dialogue on affirmative action, and he did not back down.

John McCain pales in comparison to Gen. Powell. It is unfortunate that Colin Powell did not recognize his responsibility to run for the office.

------------------
In related news, the RNC has gathered every politician that Bill Clinton ever defeated to speak on behalf of George W. Bush.

[This message has been edited by Achebe (edited August 01, 2000).]

[Smokey]

I liked that delegate from Rhode Island who said "McCain 2004". McCain was the best choice for president from any party.

I don't believe McCain when he said vote for Bush. I think he was just saying that so that he would not be an outcast should he run in 2004. I don't like to say 100% I would vote for a candidate, but McCain and Powell would have my vote. I'm not a Republican either.

------------------
Bernard Sumner & Johnny Marr are Electronic

[Almu]

I don't mean to be cynical. But I can't help it.

Notice that the TRUE candidates who have the bolas to change the way things are never get voted in?

I would of voted for McCain. I would of voted for Bradley. But they didn't even get nominated.

Why? Because its all about control. The Republicans want Bush and his dorky vice-president because they will be able to run him. Same with Gore and the Democrats. The Republicans couldn't control Clinton and they made his life miserable on most everything. Does it look like to anyone here that Bush or Gore have strenghth as one of their attributes? Nope.

In the beginning, the founding fathers created all this to help us little people. Now, its all about power and control. If you can't be controlled and have the bolas to change things, you don't get in or they make your life miserable when you do get in. Poor McCain and Bradley. They never had a shot.

Oh, and it helps to have special interest giving you a ton of money also.

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan

[insideout]

rims:

reread the post. my bad. i hope that my thread didn't convey a direct target at your post.. i basically went off on the tanget as i saw the issues being pushed to the background in favor of "character debate". http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif as for issues, i'll bring em up soon enough.

didn't get a chance to see the convention tonight.. hafta read the news clips.

------------------
i need a vacation

[Jeff]

mcmark: couldn't agree more.

One that I would add to the list:

The unwillingness of the party to recognize and pass a women's sufferage bill. It is just amazing to me that women still do not have equal rights under the law.

I think that what bothers me most about many of the Republican stances on things is their inability to be in touch with reality. I don't really mind many of their fiscal policies (although, I do disagree with some), but the whole idea that we can somehow dictate how the country lives its private lives just blows me away.

If they think that those many government regulations on business costs alot and keeps the government too big, try regulating the way people live their day to day lives. Now, THAT is expensive.

------------------
Save Our Rockets and Comets
SaveOurRockets.com (http://www.saveourrockets.com)

[RocketMan Tex]

Originally posted by insideout:
that's just what i'm getting at.. it just these accusations are thrown out, repeatedly, so that the public buys into it when in fact both candidates are very smart and ambitious men who would not be where they are if they didn't have some guts. why is Bush brainless again?

you can say that Bush is not prepared.. that he wasn't ready to answer questions about foreing policy.. but brainless?

why is Gore spineless again?

i didn't want to focus on a single quote, but you know what i mean. it's the whole spirit of the campaign.. there has always been personal issues since the beginning id American politics.. jefferson attacking adams' character, andrew jackson's background coming into question.. but it doesn't make it any less nauseating.



Brother, it's a mean old world out there. And politics is probably the meanest world of all. You can have your opinions, and I can have mine as well. That's what makes this country so great. It certainly isn't our politics that make it great. So here's my opinion: Neither Bush or Gore has anything new to say, both have been permanently contaminated by the political system, both are spouting lies, both listen to no one but their largest campaign contributers, both are pre-programmed robots, and neither will get my vote.



------------------
Bring It!!

[mc mark]

WOW!!!

Very strange. I was watching last night and they kept showing shots of Gerald Ford and I was saying to myself, "self, he sure don't look so good". And next I hear, he's at the hospital with a slight stroke.


------------------

[Almu]

I am watching Bush try and to sound and look intelligent and he continues to prove why I am so irked with all this garbage. By the way, Republican or Democrat, this guy has to be one of the worse speakers I have ever seen at any convention. Anyways what irks me about all this.

He says:

"We need a leader who is going to take advantage of the new economy. A leader who will drive the advancement of technology, foster ideas and move America to even more promise."

Now, don't the Republicans say that the PEOPLE is the reason why we are enjoying these good times? So, why if he thinks he is the leader to do this, Clinton didn't lead for 8 years to get us to this point?

Another one:

"We lead Texas to the biggest improvements in education. Not only that, but we balanced the budget to the point where we now have a surplus." Later on he says "The present government thinks that the current surplus should be spent on something. I say, the surplus doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the people."

Again, have any of you living in Texas seen any money from the Texas surplus reach you? Have you gotten a check from the State yet? Or does he mean that the way we get to see the money is with that $250 dollar tax cut for having a new baby that will cost you $200,000 dollars to raise?

Also, I must of counted the word character, inclusion and integrity 20 times in 15 minutes of his speech. Goes to show you who this is really all about. Bubba. The same tactic used in 1992 on them the repeat right back.

One last point, I know that this is not ALL he said during his speech. But just those hypocritical excerpts just show me that politicians will do anything to get elected. No wonder I am so cynical.

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan



[This message has been edited by Almu (edited August 03, 2000).]

[Achebe]

America

1.) Do you guys really talk like that?

HAHAHHAHAHAAA

2.) I'm not sure what I just saw.

was it:

a.) the 1996 Democratic Convention and talk of getting across the 2000 bridge

b.) alot of promises, I think alluding to the biggest spending increase in the history of the U.S.

c.) both of the above.


3.) George sure appeals to the military and heroism considering his track record of the 70s. Kerry is looking more and more like the logical candidate to take Gore's side.

4.) Does the government count or doesn't it? Why should someone vote for Bush/Cheney to accomplish the very things he gives no credit to Clinton/Gore for accomplishing?

5.) I think the highlight of the night was when Gov. Ventura asked Tom Brokaw who was governing Texas for the past 18 mos. Tom's response was that the Ltn. Governor actually had most of the power in Texas... to which the natural question is: why the hell isn't the Ltn. Governor running for the presidency then?

6.) I cannot wait until issues are actually discussed. All of these ideas that George throws out (we'll figure out specifics later, ehhhh?) have about a billion reasons against them in general. If he actually has specific details to get past many of their inherent problems (i.e. vouchers) then there'll be something to talk about... anything else is just political rhetoric and asking stupid people whether or not they believe in "freedom"...

hmmm... how many people believe in "freedom".

What a waste of a night. This was supposed to be the biggest speech of his life?

------------------
"At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived."
--Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush.

(Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00)
Dubyah Speaks (http://www.georgewbushspeaks.com/default.htm)

[Almu]

Don't worry, Achebe. The Democrats will do the same promises and same type of speeches...just backwards ideas from what the Republicans said. Spending my damn tax money and taking money from all those corporations for what? Conventions? Its all for show. What a waste.

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan

[mc mark]

Aahh...

The eyes are finally opening.

------------------

[mc mark]

By the way, two years ago Texas' surplus was six billion dollars. Now its one.



------------------

[rimbaud]

Almu,

You are very right,
GWB = bad, bad speaker. Presentation horrible, pace horrible, enunciation horrible. And did he have to yell his speech? He should learn a few things from his running mate.

------------------
Play the Piano Drunk Like a Percussion Instrument Until the Fingers Begin to Bleed a Bit

[Almu]

I just heard on CNN that there will only be 1 presidential debate and 1 vice presidential debate? What?

That is when you leave all the glamour and glitz behind!!! America only gets to hear 1 debate to determine the issues and ideas from each candidate but politicians get 4 party days to show how much money they can spend on confetti?

And you are right about the speech, Rim.

Damn, its starting to look bad. Where is Ross Perot when you need him? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan

[Achebe]

Can I guess why there will only be one presidential debate?

What a f@cking coward. Al Gore asked George Bush to have weekly or bi-weekly debates after Super Tuesday up until the election and Bush refused. What a wus... but I guess it fits his style... no need to get involved with silly details. Better to hide behind one line slogans, ehhhh?

Typical.

------------------
"At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived."
--Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush.

(Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00)
Dubyah Speaks (http://www.georgewbushspeaks.com/default.htm)

[BrianKagy]

By the way, two years ago Texas' surplus was six billion dollars. Now its one.

Yeah! How dare Governor Bush give the taxpayers back the money that the government didn't need!??!

May I remind you that the purpose of government is not to turn a profit? When the government takes in more money than it spends, it's entirely reasonable for it to refund that money cheerfully and promptly.

Why in God's name would you WANT the government to run a surplus? Do you really think a group of politicians will figure out better ways to spend that money than the people they took it from in the first place...?

Now, Achebe, let me ask you a question. Do you really think that the presidential debates are any more valuable a method for evaluating the candidates than their convention speeches?



------------------
I didn't use the cocaine to get high, I just liked the way it smelled.

[mc mark]

Brian,

He did not "give it back". It was spent to save his ass because of programs that the Texas government overextended itself on. Mainly tax breaks for the rich while ignoring education and social programs needed for the sick and seniors.

Here is just one example
http://advocate4texas.4mg.com/index.html


------------------

[Achebe]

Brian:

The debates are incredibly useful. The candidates actually get called on their hair brain schemes. Remember 1992... when the little short guy w/ the charts brought 'balancing the budget' to the forefront of the political debate? Many economists attribute Perot and the 'Balanced Budget Act of 1993' of being the most influential factors in the strength of the economy.

There are three reasons why George Bush refuses to make himself available to Al Gore (I'm willing to bet that you know each of these, and your conservatism keeps you concerned about the aftermath) and attempts to keep this campaign focused on 'one-liners' and 'good-looks'.

1992: His debates (http://www.debates.org/pages/trans92d.html) against Ret. Adm. James Stockdale and Quayle made evidence of his own political prowess (in relation to Clinton). Quayle, admittedly, needed noone to show his inability to debate a topic. Stockdale seemed lost... perhaps b/c he was about to fall asleep http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif (different get together, actually), perhaps b/c he was meshing words w/ politicians.

1996: He dismantled Jack Kemp. (http://www.debates.org/pages/trans96c.html) (I'm not sure that the transcript is correct, b/c oftentimes it has even Lehrer making inane statements)

2000:
After falling behind Bill Bradley by 15-20 points, Al Gore quickly makes up ground by disproving the efficacy of his (Bradley's) health care plan using Bradley campaign literature. The ensuing Super Tuesday is a slaughter (I did not find a transcript).

Considering that Bush is running on BS and slogans on all of the greatest issues, including:

a) His surplus... watch that tax cut!, he had to reappropriate for emergency spending. Hmmm.... nice budgeting. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/tongue.gif

b) Educational Success... the Baltimore Sun (as Jeff pointed out) showed that Bush's success rate was due to Texan schools' aggressive 'test-taking' lessons. Pathetic.

c) Vouchers for school 'choice'... there's no way that these would ever be Constitutional.

d) Appeals to heroism notwithstanding, Dubyah will be unable to persuade the American republic that he is 'in touch' w/ defense needs considering his 'either Canada or the Guard' quote. I am not arguing that this is logical... just that it is a weakness of Bush's.

I think that the debates would be enlightening.

------------------
"At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived."
--Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush.

(Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00)
Dubyah Speaks (http://www.georgewbushspeaks.com/default.htm)

[RocketMan Tex]

I am confused about something, and I hope all of you can join in and straighten me out.

Texas has (or had) a $6 billion surplus. Bush cut taxes to "give it back to the people". But the fact is that we have no state income tax in Texas. Also, property taxes are at an all-time high.

My question: where the hell was I when the checks were being handed out? Did I miss something? I sure could use a little extra beer money this weekend.

Hey Dubya! Over here! I want mine!!!!!! http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
Bring It!!

[Groogrux]

Originally posted by Almu:
"We need a leader who is going to take advantage of the new economy. A leader who will drive the advancement of technology, foster ideas and move America to even more promise."



Isn't this the same guy who thinks there should be limits to freedom, especially when it comes to the internet, and especially when they're talking trash about him?

http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Going for the Rolls Royce!

visit www.swirve.com (http://www.swirve.com)

[mc mark]

Wonder why this isn't getting more coverage in the news?

Visit www.r2kphilly.org (http://www.r2kphilly.org) for details.

INHUMANITY CONTINUES AGAINST JAILED PROTESTERS


Demonstrators continue to demand medical treatment, access to lawyers, access to phones, and timely release as constitutional violations persist in Philadelphia jails.

Outside, solidarity actions are happening, with rallies planned at Franklin Park at 12 noon and 7 p.m. Activists also plan to collect signatures for a petition demanding the release of jailed demonstrators.

Arrestees have now been held for over 60 hours without arraignment, some without phone calls or contact with their lawyers. Detainees report missing paperwork, and arraignments with incomplete or slipshod records.

Philadephia continues to restrict R2K lawyers, allowing only a total of three access to all six detention sites.

R2K Legal has documented 381 confirmed arrests, not including members of the Int'l Action Center and School of Americas Watch (15 more). Additionally, there are people we have not heard from (we estimate up to 30), but due to restrictions on protester's access to telephones, there is really no way to tell. Of these people, approximately 60 have accepted "Release on Own Recognizance" or "Signed On
Bail". Solidarity remains strong, with protesters coming to consensus on and communicating their demands. While not everyone still imprisoned is participating, most are.

Guards, police, and administrators continue to attack protestors in jail, seeking to demoralize and divide. There has been one sexual assault, by a female officer who pulled and twisted a prisoner's *****. One released activist reports men have been dragged face down through a 'trash trough' containing refuse, spittle, and urine. Arrestees have been verbally abused, punched, kicked, thrown against walls,
bloodied, dragged naked across floors.

Outside pressure on the Philadelphia Health Commission has been effective at improving medical conditions. Diabetics, epileptics, and asthmatics continue to be denied medication. Trauma and psychological stress are evident.

Released prisoners consistently report beatings during arrest and beatings in jail, with highest charges pressed on those most damaged. Supporters are asked to phone Mayor John Street at 215.686.2181 and demand release of these political prisoners.

Prosecuters have set unreasonably high bail for demonstrators: from $15,000 to $30,000 for most. Two individuals have bail of $1,000,000, an amount typically reserved for serial killers, not puppet makers. "I consider this a civil rights catastrophe of the first order," R2K legal counsel Ron McGuire stated.

Solidarity tactics include singing, chanting, story telling, puppet making, along with a 150-person-strong hunger strike. Some have been on hunger strike for as long as 56 hours. Three men have fasted without water for 28 hours.

R2K Legal is currently seeking legal redress, including a writ of habeus corpus and a possible temporary restraining order against particularly violent officers.


------------------

[Almu]

True Rocketman.

The Democratic Convention will reveal alot of interesting things. Yea, they will harp on how good things are now, but will they explain to me how they plan to stop all the corporate money coming into Washington and how that doesn't influence legislature? That will be something to see.

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan

[Almu]

Just thought you guys would find this interesting:


Army Counterstrike
Military Officials Tell Bush They’re Ready for Battle



W A S H I N G T O N, Aug. 4 — The Army today fired back at GOP presidential nominee George W. Bush, denying claims he made during his nomination acceptance speech that the military was unprepared for active combat.
At the Republican National Convention on Thursday night, Bush said military readiness and morale had plunged during President Clinton’s administration. Thrusting the Army into the middle of his political battle with Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, he suggested the Clinton-Gore administration had compromised national security by stretching the Army’s resources with various peacekeeping missions around the world at the expense of readiness.
“If called on by the commander in chief, two entire divisions of the Army would have to report, ‘Not ready for duty, sir!’” Bush said in his speech.
A Problem Late Last Year
Today, the Army refuted Bush’s allegations and insisted that all 10 of its divisions would be ready for duty if called into action. Bush’s statements, the Army admitted, were true seven months ago, but not today.
“Seven months ago, two Army divisions experienced short-term readiness problems associated with the deployment of parts of each division to the Balkans,” the Army said in statement. “Today, all active Army divisions are reporting that they are fully prepared to conduct their wartime mission assignments as established.”
Last November and December, both the 10th Mountain Division and the 1st Infantry Division had between 4,000 and 6,000 troops committed to peacekeeping duties in Bosnia and Kosovo. Because of this, Army commanders believed their divisions would not be able to deploy the forces needed for wartime missions.
Army officials also pointed out that troops from two army divisions remain in the Balkans but are considered available if needed. Army media relations officer Maj. Thomas Collins said the military reordered the sequence that Army divisions would be deployed in wartime situations.
The 1st Infantry Division and 10th Mountain Division were high on the deployment lists.
In an e-mail to ABCNEWS, Collins said units involved in the Balkans such as the 1st Infantry Division and 10th Mountain Division have been moved further down in the deployment sequence, enabling them to have the time necessary to extract themselves from Bosnia and Kosovo.

The lies have already started. Or should I say the "half truths"?





------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan

[MadMax]

I remember reading about this story back a few months ago, and I have to say it seemed then that what Gov. Bush said is correct. The way the Pentagon framed it then was that the military was in horrible shape and that two divisions in partiucular were no where near being combat-ready. They didn't give a time table, but the article insinuated that since the current administration had been making military cuts that things weren't going to get better.

------------------

[Almu]

Wait a minute. I don't know if Bush doesn't want to debate. I am pissed that they BOTH must of agree on having just one.

And debates is where you see two candidates try and expose each others strength and weaknesses. Conventions are just parties where Bush or Gore can yap for an hour and talk garbage about garbage that has nothing to do with anything. And Achebe is right. The Ross Perot charts are the main reason Bush and Clinton moved away from talking about each other and talking about America.

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan

[Achebe]

Wait a minute. I don't know if Bush doesn't want to debate. I am pissed that they BOTH must of agree on having just one.

I was guessing that this is the reason for the current scenario. I was calling Bush a 'wus' because of his refusal to debate at regular intervals from 'Super Tuesday' to the election.

In his defense, what the hell was their to debate? He didn't have any ideas to pick apart. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
"At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived."
--Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush.

(Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00)
Dubyah Speaks (http://www.georgewbushspeaks.com/default.htm)

[Achebe]

MadMax,

I think you're memory is being selective. The article(s) that I read specified exactly what Almu's Pentagon Press Release did... that the issue of readiness was availability, not combat readiness. Bush just drew negative attention to himself from a traditionally Republican ally. I saw more than one interview by Pentagon spokespersons that were tiffed & amused.

------------------
"At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived."
--Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush.

(Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00)
Dubyah Speaks (http://www.georgewbushspeaks.com/default.htm)

[Achebe]

I found another article (http://www.msnbc.com/news/442078.asp) about the untruths/lies that Cheney and Bush spread during the convention.

It leaves off w/ a great sentence in anticipation of the Democrats' Convention (and Rimbaud's upcoming thread) next week. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/tongue.gif

------------------
"At one of these governors' conferences, George [W. Bush] turns to me and says: 'What are they talking about?' I said: 'I don't know.' He said: 'You don't know anything, do you?' And I said: 'Not one thing.' [Bush] said: 'Neither do I.' And we kind of high-fived."
--Republican Gov. Gary Johnson of New Mexico shares a verbal exchange that took place between he and George W. Bush.

(Quote is from the Los Angeles Times, 5/31/00)
Dubyah Speaks (http://www.georgewbushspeaks.com/default.htm)

[Almu]

That article hit the nail right on the head. But lets not forget the last sentence. Its is after all these parties that the truth has to and will be seen. But, with such limited one on one debates, how are we going to see them make their case for president? Through televison ads?

------------------
I Want To Thank God For Making Me A Rocketfan