« Quiet | Main | Weekend Update »



I agree that Bush continued Clinton's policy re:trrorism and was not aggressive enough prior to 9/11 just as Clinton obviously was not. So that is a good reason to turnout a President who has been extremely aggressive since 9/11 in order to replace him with a Senator who is a liberal pacifist motivated by political opportunism during the Vietnam War, the Cold War, and the present instead of by any conviction to win any war? [I will list a 10 page set of facts if you would like but it would bore the other folks who are well aware of them}No I certainly don't wish to turn over the security of my children and grandchildren to Messrs. Kerry and Edwards's "global test." There were several Democratic primary candidates that I could have voted for in this election but John Kerry certainly was not one of them and that is why I will vote for a Republican for the third time in my 62 years.I repeat, Kerry/Edwards will abandon Isreal and Iraq so quickly to appease their European and Middle Eastern constituents it will make our heads spins.


If you don't want to list your supporting facts I will narrow your response down to one point.


To me this complaint about Kerry is a perfect example of distortion and misrepresentation of the facts that lead you to believe something other then the reality of what was said.

Kerry said
"... you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people, understand fully why you're doing what you're doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons."

Where is the weakness in that statement? Why would a President resist having to prove to the people of this country and to the world the reason for the United States going to war?


I listened to someone that analyzed the "global test" statement that the Senator made in that first debate.

This is how he put it.

If the Senator had said,"I think it should pass the global test BUT I will never relinquish the decision to act unilaterally", it would have put the emphasis on acting unilaterally not on the global test.

This is not how the Senator constructed the sentence. He instead put acting unilaterally as dependent on the "global test".

Now, as a very accomplished and polished debater, does anyone think that he did not intend this statement to be in the way that it was presented?

I doubt it.

He did slip on this one. I would bet anyone that his handlers did not want him to ramble on when he made his point on that particular question. That being the case, it is something that he probably truly believes.

Libs and dems can try to spin this one any way that they can, ignoring they way he said it; ignoring his past statements on the same subject and pretending that sentence construction doesn't apply in this case.

Nonethe less the facts are the facts, and are indisputable.


jaybo - your take has me a bit confused as to what "fact" you are trying to present. Instead of taking what Kerry actually said, you use the analyses of some nameless source to prove a point in what he probably REALLY meant?


It's amazing to see so many single professional women turning Republican this time. And justifiably so. Most of them live in urban areas and are self protective. They don't want to be hurt or killed one fine day.Senator Kerry is not assuring at all. He gives the impression of being someone who would have a debate after an attack rather than take strong action.
While I agree that Bush is a bit overkill I would rather have a man who is an overkill on protecting us. This is our lives at stake and George W has the right mindset of being a fierce aggressor and protector.


Deb - while I respect your gut opinion, I have to disagree. Bush has a shoot first and ask questions later view on protection. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place. Al Qaeda has increased it's forces. Bin Laden is still alive and well. Iraq has become a new training ground for terrorists. We have lost many allies with a "with us or against us" mindset and our standing in the world is diminished. More weapons have been placed in the hands of the enemy. Trouble areas in the world have increased their Nuclear activities. Ashcroft has yet to prosecute a single terrorist since 9/11. Funding for security at home has been cut ... there truly is very little to point at as a success for this President.


Deb - I might also add that there is a danger in having a President who doesn't seem to be able to focus on domestic issues while at war. Graphs can often paint a straight forward picture. Take a look at how Bush has held up against past Presidents in regards to jobs and the deficit.




If my life is any example, I am doing much better than I used to when Clinton was President. You see, I don't live off the system, bitch about outsourcing, get fat or watch Jerry Springer. I have the entrepreneurial spirit, I am not afraid of improving myself, being competetive. As a result Bush economy is good for me in furthering myself. I don't think I deserve everything on a platter just because I am American.That entitlement attitude went out of vogue with the Democrats.
Besides, one has to take things into context. we were not attacked before 9/11/2001. Many of my friends went into shock and couldn't work for a year. Is Bush to blame for that ? No.

Jeffraham Prestonian

Deb: "They don't want to be hurt or killed one fine day."

In other words, they're cowards, voting their fears. The don't belong in the Home of the Brave, IMO.


Deb - no one is suggesting that we should have things given to us on a platter. I am a small business owner doing well because I have pushed myself to do well. But, as a good citizen, I can't ignore the struggles of those around me. I know some people much smarter then myself working 2 low paying jobs to support themselves. The facts show that they are not alone in their struggles. If you want to vote only for yourself, that is fine. But some of us like to look at the big picture and vote to help others as well. I want every child to have health care. The number of uninsured children went up several million under Bush. I want a clean environment for future generations. Bush is considered the biggest threat to our environment in history. I want a President that doesn't think 100,000 Iraqis and 1,200 Americans in Iraq is a "brilliant success story". I want a President who listens to the military so the mistakes that happened in Iraq don't happen again. I suggest watching a PBS documentary about Donald Rumsfeld. It is a good view into the Pentagon and how things have changed since Bush took office. If you think it is all because of 9/11 you might be surprised.



Jeffraham, You are the COWARD hiding behind a computer. I was in 9/11 in downtown manhattan and many of my friends died in the towers. Our fears are justified and realistic. The attackers are maniacs and ruthless. If you are such a big brave guy, why don't you pick up a F-ing gun and go to the middle east to find bin laden.
The cowards are the ones that sit on their armchair and debate and debate and intellectualize and blame all day. I feel nothing but contempt for someone like you or John Kerry.

Jeffraham Prestonian

Deb: "If you are such a big brave guy, why don't you pick up a F-ing gun and go to the middle east to find bin laden."

I did, in fact, walk across the street from where I used to work, right into the Marines recruitment office, and ask what I could do. At 38, and no previous military experience, they weren't interested. They suggested going to the Red Cross, which I did. I gave blood, and helped them clean up a huge donor database over the next month.

I'm not voting MY fears, or yours. I'm not afraid of terrorists, foreign or domestic. If you are, well, I feel sorry for you.


The fears and concerns aired by you are realistic.We live in a dangerous world today.Anyone who does not think so is in denial.Many of my friends who work in highrise office buildings worried about their safety for months after the Sept 11 attack.Many people were worried about transportation.We needed to send a strong unambiguous message to the terrorists and our president has done so.THIS IS WHY WHY HAVENT HAD ANOTHER ATTACK HERE.To the question: Who makes us feel safer? the answer is unquestionably our president Bush.This is why he is getting our vote.

Jeffraham Prestonian


Unless, of course, you count the anthrax mailings and the D.C. and Columbus snipers.


If I have a friend watch my pets while I am on vacation and one of my pets runs outside and gets hit by a car because he is was not paying attention - I don't let him watch my pets again.

9/11 isn't Bush's biggest strength. It is his biggest weakness hidden behind a public relations assualt on the public.

Is anyone else waiting for the 9/11 CIA report to come out after the election?

Phoenician in a time of Romans

Lewis: "I agree that Bush continued Clinton's policy re:trrorism and was not aggressive enough prior to 9/11 just as Clinton obviously was not."

Yeah, Lewis! I believe Lewis, rather than people like Richard Clarke who say otherwise. What would Richard Clarke know?


>Clarke says the last time the CIA had picked
>up a similar level of chatter was in December,
>1999, when Clarke was the terrorism czar in
>the Clinton White House.

>Clarke says Mr. Clinton ordered his Cabinet
>to go to battle stations-- meaning, they
>went on high alert, holding meetings
>nearly every day.

>That, Clarke says, helped thwart a major
>attack on Los Angeles International Airport,
>when an al Qaeda operative was stopped at
>the border with Canada, driving a car full
>of explosives.

Lewis, my man! Uninformed opinion on the Internet is always more reliable than the facts!

Bill Evans

Rocket - I haven't forgotten about you but I have a life.

Colorado Democrat voter fraud - http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041018-124856-1311r.htm

New Mexico Democrat voter fraud - http://www.newswithviews.com/Ryter/jon67.htm

I have run out of patience and time on this one. There is no doubt which party has the first prize on voter fraud.

Jeffraham Prestonian

Bill Evans: "There is no doubt which party has the first prize on voter fraud."

Which is probably why the URLs posted here outlining GOP fraud and tricks outnumber URLs outlining Dem voter fraud by 5:1?

Bill Evans

darn those liberal search engines. no, really, you must be joking. The dems are better at it so they don't get caught as much. They have willing accomplices in the mainstream (lying and dying) press. Their indiscretions are not reported with anywhere near the verve of those allegedly committed by the Republicans.

BTW, the Ohio Republican Party just went to court in Marion, Ohio, seeking an emergency order agains the Ohio Dems, Kerry Campaign, and ACT, who are calling elderly voters and telling them that their polling places changed, giving out false information about voting times, and they must bring 3 forms of ID.

A press conference is planned sometime in the next two hours. But, it's only the Republicans who commit voter suppression and fraud. Yeah, right.

Jeffraham Prestonian

Bill Evans: "But, it's only the Republicans who commit voter suppression and fraud."

Who said that? Take off your Rove-colored glasses, Bill.

Bill Evans

Ok. The reason the ratio is 5:1 is because repubs don't feel the need to defend ourselves on an issue which dems feel self conscious about.

Jeffraham Prestonian

Bill Evans: "Ok. The reason the ratio is 5:1 is because repubs don't feel the need to defend ourselves on an issue which dems feel self conscious about."

Yeah, I've noticed the phrase "appearance of impropriety" has ceased to be of ANY concern to a lot of Republicans these last four years.

The comments to this entry are closed.