« Weekend Update | Main | Wake Up, America »



I find it very funny that you can put on the blame for everything on bush. He cant do anything on his own, I believe Congress has to be involved. I have one question before I vote tomorrow in the twenty years Kerry was a senator please tell me one thing he believed in enough to stand up for and risk his reelection for. "I am against abortion, but for a woman's right to choose. I believe a marriage is between a woman and man but I support gay marriages. Is there ONE issue he stands firm on. Something that excites him. I cannot understand how any truly believes he will fight for the middle class. He has no idea what middle class life is like. Five mansions all which taxpayers are going to have to shell out protection for year around for the rest of his life. Even when he is not there all five houses will have to have 24 hour 7 day a week protection. Yea thats middle class.


You are right JBreaux. John Kerry is a fraud and a phony.He has NO idea what middle class is like. He just lies and says whatever is good for him on that particular day, according to the polls. He has NO principle, no conviction, no belief and no morals.
John Kerry travels light.


jbreaux0302 - I agree 100% that many things in the past few years aren't directly the fault of Bush. I could hammer on Rumsfeld for the rest of the election. I could spend a lifetime studying Ashcroft. Cheney ... well ... the bottom line is, it all falls on the President.

As for Kerry, I don't believe you have your facts straight. Though I wish he did, Kerry has never said he supports Gay Marriages. Many Democrats are personally against abortion but don't believe a woman should be stripped of her right to choose. These aren't crazy out of the ordinary issues. These are points of view held by many Democrats AND Republicans.

I would assume you never looked up Kerry's Senate record on your own? He has a strong record on law enforcment, national defense, civil rights and programs for the middle class. He worked together with McCain to try to close the book on Vietnam. John Kerry was the man who uncovered Iran-Contra. His qualifications far excede Bush's before and after his term as President.

jus' sayin'

jbreaux - That's what John Edwards is all about. Together, they're a dream team!


jbreaux0302 - and I might add you will notice a difference between people like RH and myself. I support all my attacks on Bush with facts. It's so very easy to say someone is a phony. It's lazy politics. It is another thing to be informed on the issues and be able to support your ideas with facts over meaningless words.

Curious, why would anyone be under the impression that somehow Bush is an average guy with deep middle class roots. The Bush family is one of the most, some argue THE most, powerful families in the world. How many of you middle class people get bailed out by powerful Saudi Arabian families when you bankrupt your oil businesses? I don't prefer to use those things against Bush. There is enough in the present day to talk about. But it is completely hypocritical to suggest that Kerry is out of touch because he is rich. It is also shallow to assume you know the measure of a man because of his bank account.

Olin Lacy

Too late for an economics lesson. The so-called Clinton economy was great because of the technology boom, the Internet(dot coms) and stock prices that were so overvalued that they could not possibly survive. When companies were overly in debt because of borrowing against false and even fraudulent stock values, they were bound to fall when dot coms and the stock market went tits up. This was all because of lack of oversight during the previous administration. Why do we have such a large deficit? A reduction in government spending would have put more people out of work because of loss of government jobs, primarily minority jobs. Get the picture? Recovery is not instsnt gratification.


Is a person without children incapable of fighting to feed the hungry? Is a man unable to fight for women's rights if he isn't a woman? Can we pretend to know how to improve the people in the middle east? We aren't middle eastern.

Again, it is a ridiculous argument to say Kerry can't help the middle class because he is rich. Most all Presidents enter office as very rich men. I believe Clinton was one of the few exceptions and most of you guys hate him. He was as close to middle class as any President I can remember.



Go out and vote tomorrow and don't let the bastards get you down.
Here in middle PA,we will be working hard at the polling sites to deliver this state for our president with honest votes. Wish I could say the same for severly corrupted philly and pitts.


Fly - have fun and good luck tomorrow. Make sure you do your best to keep things fair for all Americans both REPS and DEMS.

May the best man win in a fair and clean election and, if Kerry wins, I hope you all give him a chance to see what he can do. If he screws things up, I'll be right in here bitching about it with you! I think we all want the same thing in the end. A country we can all be proud of.

Happy voting!


Well rocket at least we agree on something. What is important is that the President does a great job no matter which one it is. I do hope rep give Kerry the chance if he wins, Lord forbid lol,
that the dems that called bush a theif and prayed for his failure never gave him. I did look at his record nothing i am impressed with. He voted to cut national defense over over again. Even with "global passing" he voted agaisnt the gulf war. I dont know if there will ever be a time he feels it necessary to protect this country. But thats just my humble unimportant homemakers opinion. Either way if Kerry does win I will pray for him and pray that he is the best presdent this country has ever had. Strong President Strong Country.. guess thats why binladen wants kerry to win.. God Bless all of you and lets all pray that at the end of tom night we have a president regardless of who it is.


And I forgot...................Vote Bush!


Rocket - if Kerry wins he will be hog-tied by the Republican Congress (and with all the filibuster-ing the left has done with Bush, paybacks would be a real bit@$).

I not only want a country that we can be proud of, but one that will actually still be a republic. The following was written by a professor in my state:

At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in the year 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history professor at The University of Edinburgh) had this to say about "The Fall of The Athenian Republic" some 2,000 years prior.

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."



jbreaux0302 - And if Bush wins I can only hope that he is defined in a positive way by his second term ... but I admit that will be hard.

Before I retire, I would be really be greatful if you read something I put together a few days ago regarding Kerry's defense record. You can't listen to Bush on the issue as all sources admit he is distorting Kerry's record. I know it is long but I hope you will look it over.

Here is a quote for you.

"After completing 20 planes for which we have begun procurement, we will shut down further production of the B-2 bomber. We will cancel the small ICBM program. We will cease production of new warheads for our sea-based ballistic missiles. We will stop all new production of the Peacekeeper [MX] missile. And we will not purchase any more advanced cruise missiles. . The reductions I have approved will save us an additional $50 billion over the next five years. By 1997 we will have cut defense by 30 percent since I took office."

Who said this? The speaker was President George H.W. Bush, the current president's father, in his State of the Union address on Jan. 28, 1992.

Here is another.

"Overall, since I've been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That's the peace dividend. . And now we're adding to that another $50 billion of so-called peace dividend."

This is testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee from Dick Cheney, the first President Bush's secretary of defense. Cheney proceeded to lay into the then-Democratically controlled Congress for refusing to cut more weapons systems.

"Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you've squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don't fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. . You've directed me to buy more M-1s, F-14s, and F-16s-all great systems . but we have enough of them. The Army, as I indicated in my earlier testimony, recommended to me that we keep a robust Apache helicopter program going forward, AH-64; . . . I forced the Army to make choices. I said, "You can't have all three. We don't have the money for all three." So I recommended that we cancel the AH-64 program two years out. That would save $1.6 billion in procurement and $200 million in spares over the next five years."

You might also want to take notice to Gen. Colin Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at the same hearings, testifying about plans to cut Army divisions by one-third, Navy aircraft carriers by one-fifth, and active armed forces by half a million men and women, to say noting of "major reductions" in fighter wings and strategic bombers.

Granted, these reductions were made in the wake of the Soviet Union's dissolution and the Cold War's demise. But that's just the point: Proposed cuts must be examined in context. The Bush administration are betting people WON'T look further into their talking points. Sadly, most people don't bother. A vote against a particular weapons system doesn't necessarily indicate indifference toward national defense.

Looking at the weapons that the RNC says Kerry voted to cut, a good case could be made, certainly at the time, that some of them (the B-2 bomber and President Reagan's "Star Wars" missile-defense program) should have been cut. As for the others (the M-1 tank and the F-14, F-15, and F-16 fighter planes, among others), Kerry didn't really vote to cut them.

The claim about these votes was made in the Republican National Committee "Research Briefing" of Feb. 22. The report lists 13 weapons systems that Kerry voted to cut-the ones cited above, as well as Patriot air-defense missiles, Tomahawk cruise missiles, and AH64 Apache helicopters, among others.It is instructive, however, to look at the footnotes. Almost all of them cite Kerry's vote on Senate bill S. 3189 (CQ Vote No. 273) on Oct. 15, 1990. Do a Google search, and you will learn that S. 3189 was the Fiscal Year 1991 Defense Appropriations Act, and CQ Vote No. 273 was a vote on the entire bill. There was no vote on those weapons systems specifically.

On a couple of the weapons, the RNC report cites H.R. 5803 and H.R. 2126. Look those up. They turn out to be votes on the House-Senate conference committee reports for the defense appropriations bills in October 1990 (the same year as S. 3189) and September 1995. In other words, Kerry was one of 16 senators (including five Republicans) to vote against a defense appropriations bill 14 years ago. He was also one of an unspecified number of senators to vote against a conference report on a defense bill nine years ago. The RNC takes these facts and extrapolates from them that he voted against a dozen weapons systems that were in those bills.

Another bit of dishonesty is RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie's claim that in 1995, Kerry voted to cut $1.5 billion from the intelligence budget. John Pike, who runs the globalsecurity.org Web site, said that the cut was about: The Air Force's National Reconnaissance Office had appropriated that much money to operate a spy satellite that, as things turned out, it never launched. So the Senate passed an amendment rescinding the money-not to cancel a program, but to get a refund on a program that the NRO had canceled. Kerry voted for the amendment, as did a majority of the senate.

An examination of Kerry's real voting record during his 20 years in the Senate indicates that he did vote to restrict or cut certain weapons systems. From 1989-92, he supported amendments to halt production of the B-2 stealth bomber. (In 1992, George H.W. Bush halted it himself.) It is true that the B-2 came in handy during the recent war in Iraq-but for reasons having nothing to do with its original rationale. The B-2 came into being as an airplane that would drop nuclear bombs on the Soviet Union. The program was very controversial at the time. It was extremely expensive. Its stealth technology had serious technical bugs. More to the point, a grand debate was raging in defense circles at the time over whether, in an age of intercontinental ballistic missiles and long-range cruise missiles, the United States needed any new bomber that would fly into the Soviet Union's heavily defended airspace. The debate was not just between hawks and doves; advocates and critics could be found among both. In the latest war, B-2s-modified to carry conventional munitions-were among the planes that dropped smart bombs on Iraq. But that was like hopping in the Lincoln stretch limo to drop Grandma off at church. As for the other stealth plane used in both Iraq wars-the F-117, which was designed for non-nuclear missions-there is no indication that Kerry ever opposed it.

The RNC doesn't mention it, but Kerry also supported amendments to limit (but not kill) funding for President Reagan's fanciful (and eventually much-altered) "Star Wars" missile-defense system. Kerry sponsored amendments to ban tests of anti-satellite weapons, as long as the Soviet Union also refrained from testing. In retrospect, trying to limit the vulnerability of satellites was a very good idea since many of our smart bombs are guided to their targets by signals from satellites.

Kerry also voted for amendments to restrict the deployment of the MX missile (Reagan changed its deployment plan several times, and Bush finally stopped the program altogether) and to ban the production of nerve-gas weapons.

At the same time, in 1991, Kerry opposed an amendment to impose an arbitrary 2 percent cut in the military budget. In 1992, he opposed an amendment to cut Pentagon intelligence programs by $1 billion. In 1994, he voted against a motion to cut $30.5 billion from the defense budget over the next five years and to redistribute the money to programs for education and the disabled. That same year, he opposed an amendment to postpone construction of a new aircraft carrier. In 1996, he opposed a motion to cut six F-18 jet fighters from the budget. In 1999, he voted against a motion to terminate the Trident II missile. (Interestingly, the F-18 and Trident II are among the weapons systems that the RNC claims Kerry opposed.)


Kerry voted for Pentagon authorization bills in 16 of the 19 years he's been in the Senate. So even by the Bush campaign's twisted logic, Kerry should -- on balance -- be called a supporter of the "vital" weapons, more so than an opponent.

My point here being, I don't see many problems in Kerry's voting record when it comes to defense. The facts show that the distortions about his record simply aren't accurate.

And I'm off! Goodnight All!


The DemocRATs are now circulating a forged video of our President in a desparate effort to supress the Christian vote:


Whose behind this? McAulife? Moore? sKerry himself?

The levels to which they will sink knows no bounds my friends. Tucker, you should get this cheap and sinical ploy on the media ASAP!!!!

Jeffraham Prestonian

angry: "The DemocRATs are now circulating a forged video of our President in a desparate effort to supress the Christian vote"

Sure, that would be the straw to break the camel's back, even after Bush's announced support for civil unions for gays last week.

I hear Michael Moore got Timothy Bottoms to play Bush.



I don't think the video of President Bush giving you the finger is forged.


I thought Bush was a pussy, needing Cheney at his testimony at the 9/11 commission. And what kind of sissy do we have that would run away during our crisis on 9/11? I lost all respect for George that day.


Good Morning Everyone! It is election morning here in Florida. I got dozens of email today from friends of mine from all over the world, U.K., Spain, France, Tokyo ... they are all sharing with me their newspaper headlines today and they are all very much the same.


And that is a reminder. You aren't just voting for your pocket or your safety. This can't just be about gays or abortion. You are voting for the middle east. You are voting for Japan. You are voting for Europe. You are voting on an economy that effects the world. You are voting to bring our planet together.

Bush can't heal our problems. He has openly offered more of the same and his policies have divided this country and separated us from the world. We can't stay the course when that course has been division. I ask you all, please, look at the reality of our surroundings. Acknowledge we have major problems and think about those problems when you vote today. We need a change here at home and across the globe.

Good Luck today!

God Bless America ... and the world!! :)


Anybody but Kerry:



Rocket thanks so much you have really changes my mind........... not! May the better man win today and let's just agree to disagree.



joe mcgee

It really does look like a Kerry landslide. You Bush people don't realize it, but you'll be winners, too.

Bush has done his best to turn America into a loser. That's all over now.




oh really?
Kerry 45 48 42 60 52 51 51 50 58 52 49 57
Bush 55 51 57 40 48 48 47 48 40 43 49 41



The comments to this entry are closed.