who's speech? I don't think anyone here thinks Kerry is perfect. you and others here though seem to think Bush is.
Kerry talked about hard facts tonight. Almost 2 million jobs lost during Bush's administration. 5 million people lost healthy care under Bush's administration. There were a lot of great lines from Kerry in this. I like when he talked about not letting someone with 5 deferments from duty claim somebody who served 2 tours of duty wasn't fit for the office. I liked when Kerry talked about Bush's promises from 4 years ago, and how all the Jobs that Bush's plan was going to create went backwards. How Bush's plan for healthy care went backwards. We don't have more jobs, the jobs we do have pay less, and health care costs more, college tuition costs more. I think he could have attacked even more, but at least when he did attack he kept on an issue basis for the most part.
Who? Bush's speech. You know? ...the one, where admitted he knows he has faults on live TV? btw- I don't see how me praising Bush for admitting he has faults equates to me thinking he's perfect? Bush has admitted to "miscalculations." Has admitted to placing too much emphasis on the wrong syllables... Where has Kerry admitted that He was wrong? Ever? I am merely suggesting, again read my words here... that Kerry seems to miss that Kerry has flaws. Kerry comes across as one who thinks his poop doesn't give off any malodorous fumes. He and his wife, and his trial lawyer veep candidate. I appreciate the humility of a man like Bush that can laugh at himself. That same kind of person is not full of himself. He doesn't feel entitled to be president, in my opinion. Yet I find Kerry exuding an elitest entitlement attitude. That's what I think. Bush is in no way perfect. And his acknowledgement of that makes him more genuine to me than anyone who acts as if they already know all the answers without even facing the questions and pressures of the office first. btw- FB, didn't 3000 (approx) people die in the WTC? Okay, take into consideration that ENTIRE companies were literally destroyed... this in turn had a ripple effect into other companies, and other companies suffered. Yet, somehow the market came back up, home building is up, first time home ownership is up... all the stats that Kerry can throw out NEVER take in to account the toll of 9/11 on the economy. The simple fact that Bush inherited a minor recession, and that we didn't go into full depression after the attacks on perhaps our strongest link to the world markets (WTC) is in itself IMPRESSIVE. I would suggest that a wimpy leader would have buckled under the pressure and caused major market panic instead of encouraging a vigorous resurgence. But that's just me living in this world. Not one on paper.
Almost 3000 people died on 9/11 yes. YEs companies were hurt by that attack. But I don't think you can point to almost 2 million jobs being lost as result. I don't think that made peoples wages go down by thousands of dollars. I don't think that the 9/11 attack caused college tuition and healthcare costs increase. 9/11 might give him some leeway, but not a free pass. 9/11 doesn't excuse not funding no child left behind. Actually no child left behind is horrible and places emphasis on the wrong thing.
FOAS: read the transcript of Kerry's hour long acceptance speech. (http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0729.html) There is approximately one paragraph which discusses Vietnam, arguably one and a half. There are 80-100 or so paragraphs in the entire speech. Learn the facts, or don't comment on them and expect people to take you seriously. If you continually display ignorance, people will treat you like a fool.
Oh man, get outta here, look up "Lesser of Two Evils" in any 2004 dictionary and you will see a picture of John Kerry's elongated mug. Previous editions had a picture of Gore. Kerry should start a band called Lesser Of Two Evils. Hits like "Flip Flop and Fly" and whatnot. Actually, I should start a band called Lesser of Two Evils that is actually is sort of a good name for band. Make up your own name, Kerry. Kerry was okay, kind of okay, when he got rolling tonight, but took too long. It was like I was watching the first 20 minutes of "Dodgeball" again, waiting so long for any payoff that I assumed it would never come. "Dodgeball" was better in the end. I like how Kerry finally hit back on Vietnam, though. It was weird, Edwards sort of flew through a decent intro -- which heated up towards the end -- and Kerry deflated the whole room. He shoulda just lodged some shiny, well placed bullets in Bush's rosey -- and very well-delivered -- sugar speech, and then he shoulda split. Was this really the time to thank the high school band and revisit the Millworker's Son story? My man has no feel for a room, it would appear. Anytime you feel like waking up, Senator Kerry, there's a handful of people waiting to get behind you. Snore. Not that it means he is not 50 times better suited to be president than Bush, but snore nonetheless.
So by the same ratio Kerry would be 3 years deep into his first term before he got anything done? I'll pass.
Oh man--compared to whom? Satan? A r****ded spaniel? Karl Malone? If Bush laughed at himself for every mistake he's made he'd have passed out from lack of oxygen years ago. IROC--you actually trust this assclown? What papers do you read? The Drudge report? And Fox News for your TV new? Bush: “We're working hard to make sure your job is easier, that the port is safer. The Customs Service is working with overseas ports and shippers to improve its knowledge of container shipments, assessing risk so that we have a better feel of who we ought to look at, what we ought to worry about.” – Bush, 6/24/02] The truth: The President’s 2003 and 2004 budget provides zero for port security grants. The GOP Congress has provided only $250 million for port security grants (35% less than authorized). Additionally, in August, the President vetoed all $39 million for the Container Security Initiative which he specifically touted. Bush: “I want to thank the good folks here at Rochester Community and Technical College for your hospitality…The most important issue -- the most important issue for any governor in any state is to make sure every single child in your state receives a quality education.” – Bush, [10/18/02] The Truth: Bush’s 2004 budget proposes to cut vocational and technical education grants by 24% ($307 million). His budget also proposes to freeze funding for pell grants for low income students Bush: “Within that budget I proposed last night is a substantial increase in Medicare funding of $400 billion on top of what we already spend, over the next 10 years. This is a commitment that America must make to our seniors. A reformed and strengthened Medicare system, plus a healthy dosage of Medicare spending in the budget, will make us say firmly, we fulfilled our promise to the seniors of America.” – Bush, 1/29/03 The Truth: Under Bush’s proposal, there should be a roughly $40 billion increase in Medicare each year for a decade. However, Bush’s 2004 budget proposes just $6 billion – 85% less than what would be needed to meet his goal. Additionally, his budget would leave 67% of the total $400 billion pledge to be spent after 2008. [Bush Budget, pg. 318] Bush: “Our workers are the most productive, the hardest working, the best craftsmen in the world. And I'm here to thank all those who work hard to make a living here in America.” – Bush, 9/2/02 Truth: Bush’s 2003 Budget proposed a 9% ($476 million) cut to job training programs and a 2% ($8 million) cut to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Similarly, his 2004 budget proposes a $60 million cut to adult job training programs and a total elimination of the Youth Opportunities Grants, which provide job training to younger workers I could go on--any questions? Bush lies lies lies. your Christian morals should take offense to that, at least. Or are you finding time to forgive him his sins on a daily basis? (Must be a full time job.) B
Wow, the fact that somebody just referred to the World Trade Center as " our strongest link to the world markets " is quite amusing. That's like referring to the Astrodome as "the cornerstone of our space exploration program"
Links, links, links, links? Or is it Spin, spin, spin, spin? Not taking into account the whole picture can be considered deceit, deceit, deceit, deceit. Besides, you've researched it all thouroughly enough from your favorite sources. All of which I'm sure have the slant that suits you the most, yet are definitely 100% truthful in all accounts and have no reason to hide a thing or include unwarranted edits.. I don't doubt that you understand that any proposed and authorized amounts can be significantly hampered in actual expenditure by opposite party political stonewalling and red tape. Or that some % decreases must be directly linked to war time expenditures... and may be redirected purposely to fund an issue that is at the time more pressing. I also know that numbers can be reported from all angles to benifit either side's points. I know you know as much. Furthermore, if he's lying, then it's God's job to forgive, not mine. And it would be his personal responsibilty to ask forgiveness from His Lord. And I know you know enough about Christianity to know as much.
Sam, I peeked.... and again you misquote and dodge the context. The word "perhaps" holds the key to my statement. Are you saying that the WTC did not house several international trading companies? Or that other countries that are key traders with us were occupants of space in the WTC? I find that it was "perhaps" a very, very strong, if not strongest link to the world markets, in that, a great deal of trade with the world was handled there. (World Trade Center? Hello?) If you find the evidence to the contrary make it known to the class. I fully understand that the WTC's destruction did not help our trading internationally at all, as much as it hindered it's smooth operation. The WTC's destruction hampered trade quite a bit.
What is a lie? You cite some "inconsistencies" which have occured over a time span (typically 1-2 years) in a rapidly-changing world. Isn't a lie defined by the fact that you know what you are stating to be untrue when you state it? Just because the outcome is different some time later, does not make the original statement a lie.
How true. A "lie" is something said to intentionally deceive someone else. I hardly find that the case here.
The end of the Clinton Administration was an economic slow-time. Then throw in 9/11 and the corporate scandals and the economy was in dire straits. Things are getting better, they're not perfect but they are gettign better.
Not the important ones: WMDs Osama Mission Accomplished "Coalition of the Willing" Jobs Health Care "No Child Left Funded" Social Security Reform Tax "Relief" ...and the lies and misrepresentations of John Kerry's record....
You of all people should know I could care less about how I am thought of. Keep me on ignore, will ya?
IROC it - Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. It is common knowledge here that the WTC's major tenants consisted of backoffices to various firms, a few smaller brokerage houses, an insurance broker, law firm, and a sizable bond trading firm, as well as several state and county offices. If you'd ever been inside, you'd realize why. It was pretty lousy, low quality office space. Needless to say, most of the sizable firms with offices there weere able to relocate and reopen with a few weeks. Even Cantor Fitzgerald was able to reopen its espeed bond trading operations within a few weeks despite tragically losing most of its people The global economy is big enough to absorb the loss of a small fraction of office space. As I said previously, thinking that the "WTC" is a pinnacle of world trade because of its name is like thinking the Astrodome is of critical to the space program.
