03 Oct 04
1 edit
Originally posted by rapalla7I agree I like Edwards more than Kerry, but that could be because
Age before beauty I guess......
I don't know Edwards rather well. What I have seen of Kerry is scary
to me. I'm looking forward to the debate, I do believe it will be by
far the more interesting of the group. Since both of these guys are
suppose to know the direction of the country will go under someone
else's leadership. I only hope Edwards offers more than simply
talking points on bashing Bush, and give examples of what they want
to do, on where they want to take the country.
It seemed to me that Kerry never really offered anything new outside
of saying he would have done somethings different lyin the past.
Anyone can say that, what I'd like to know is what he plans on doing
diffferently in the future. Todate it seems like he is no different than
Bush on most points, so outside of he isn't Bush, there isn't much to
make me lean towards him at all. That isn't enough for me!
Kelly
03 Oct 04
Originally posted by KellyJayMy origional shot was at the secrecy of the bush administration and their refusal to release information that has nothing to do with the national security....one example Cheney's energy task force.........Just an example of how the American people have no business knowing what "they" don't think we need to know.
I agree I like Edwards more than Kerry, but that could be because
I don't know Edwards rather well. What I have seen of Kerry is scary
to me. I'm looking forward to the debate, I do believe it will be by
far the more interesting of the group. Since both of these guys are
suppose to know the direction of the country will go under someone
else's leade ...[text shortened]... t Bush, there isn't much to
make me lean towards him at all. That isn't enough for me!
Kelly
I don't like either candidates for president, but I do know that I cringe at the prospect of another four years of 'little hitler' and his advisers.
03 Oct 04
Originally posted by rapalla7Small wonder why as much as I dislike much of what Bush does
My origional shot was at the secrecy of the bush administration and their refusal to release information that has nothing to do with the national security....one example Cheney's energy task force.........Just an example of how the American people have no business knowing what "they" don't think we need to know.
I don't like either candidates for pr ...[text shortened]... know that I cringe at the prospect of another four years of 'little hitler' and his advisers.
and I find myself defending him; "little hitler" isn't a comparision I
like at all. It is common it seems for those that dislike him to go
to this extreme when they talk about Bush. Every leader has
advisers, every leader should be able to talk to whatever experts
they want on any topic to formulate policy; however, writing policy
should be done in the open. Getting a honest opinion should
mean that the advisors need to be given the freedom to speak
without fear of someone making political hay about anything. This
can only be done with closed door brainstorming. Every administration
has enjoyed this, they should all be allowed to keep it too in my
opinion.
Kelly
03 Oct 04
Originally posted by KellyJayI agree that they should be able to do things behind closed doors, at times. I am just trying to figure out why on the issue of cheneys energy commision, the names of the participants were withheld. It is irritating, and it makes me distrustfull of the administration. I, as just about anyone would agree that strategical 'war' type discussions should be kept under the hat, but when it is every small detail is treated as though it is not the business or 'joe American' it makes me mad. Everyone know's they have shady buddies and are pandering to them, and it is just another poke in the eye to us dumb Americans, when we know the truth but they not only deny it, but deny us the imformation to prove it a lie. Yes good policy for them, but bad news for us. I cannot back a president who I do not trust, I cannot back a president that takes the American people for fools, not to mention the rest of the world. They would not admit it if they stole the eifel tower and had it sticking out of their back pocket.
Small wonder why as much as I dislike much of what Bush does
and I find myself defending him; "little hitler" isn't a comparision I
like at all. It is common it seems for those that dislike him to go
to this extreme when they talk about Bush. Every leader has
advisers, every leader should be able to talk to whatever experts
they want on any topic to ...[text shortened]... ministration
has enjoyed this, they should all be allowed to keep it too in my
opinion.
Kelly
Mike
24 Dec 04
Originally posted by thecheat2HA HA! HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!
Why'd you dig this topic up?
the election is long over.
BUSH INVADED IRAQ "IN YOUR FACE!" AND THEN GOT RE-ELECTED AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT! HA HA !! HA HA HA!!!
WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU WANT TO RELIVE THIS ANGUISH?
HA HA!!! HA HA HA!!!
24 Dec 04
Originally posted by thecheat2The Edwards-Cheney debate deserves to be long remembered: it was a steller debate that reveals the central issues in American politics. Cheney's ability to propagate a big lie by telling small truths is the most instructive moment in American politics since Bush v. Gore.
Why'd you dig this topic up?
the election is long over.
Most of the discussions on these forums either reveal the large numbers of people who believe Cheney's big lies, or reveal Bush supporters to be at odds with Cheney on the matter of hos daughter.
Besides, I am a historian. digging is what i do