Being that I’m not a democrat, I hope you’d include me in the list of those who deserve better.
Heck, I include almost all republicans.
Although it does disturb me, greatly, to see the pattern repeated… Bill is a perfect example. Starts out by saying that it’s a lie that Bush lied, is corrupt, etc… and then goes on to totally change his tune and say “Well, Kerry did it too!”
That kind of thinking scares me.
Hell… I mean… if you can accept that your candiate is a liar then how do you know they were telling you the truth?
How can you even support them, knowing that any promise they make, any statement, is suspect?
I couldn’t live like that, and I certainly couldn’t get behind a politician like that.
I don’t see how this is a valid point. It upset me just as much over the last four years when people told me not to discuss bush becuase the election wasn’t uppon us yet. Bush has the job for the next four years, and I indend, as a citizen, to be ruthless in my apraisal of him.
Another plane of existence?
Is that anything like the Fantom Zone? Cuz I don’t know where Supergirl is…
Seriously though, what on earth is so bad about having a factual discussion about the president?
Are we all supposed to suspend our critical judgement because an election is over?
Not that I don’t respect your desire to bow out.
I just wonder why you don’t respect my desire to not bow out.
I’m sorry, would it help to mend some fences if I used an ice cream scoop to remove some excess grey matter I have too?
We have already proven in this thread, several times, that a large portion of republican voters voted out of ignorance and didn’t know what their own candidate stood for.
For god’s sake…did you read the whole thread? Did you read the data from PIPA??? WHO WERE THOSE PEOPLE?
Jesus christ.
Tell me, how does ignoring the fact twisting and outright lying and the reality that millions of people swallow it help anything? What fence do you hope to mend by coddling ignorance, hmm?
I said that Kerry lied. He claimed Bush had a secret plan to privitize Social Security and cut benefits by 30-45%, and I said the plan to privatize was NOT secret, that Bush was open about it, and that he had pleged NOT to cut benefits.
You say Kerry told the truth about that.
Let’s see how how prove this.
What relevance does this have to any fact under dispute? He did not reject the panel’s findings. He did not approve the panel’s findings. He took no action whatsoever on the panel’s findings.
Yes, he did, thus proving, as I said, that the plan was not secret. John Kerry said the plan was secret. I said it wasn’t secret, and now you’ve just said it wasn’t secret either. So if John Kerry said it was secret, he lied.
But that study did not address the point you made above: that this could be paid for without cutting benefits by raising the deficit. Bush’s plan was not to cut benefits, and John Kerry knew this. The study did not address how Bush actually planned to pay for it; it assumed, falsely, that he’d pay for it within Social Security.
No. That never happened. Bush’s spokesman dismissed the benefits-cutting claim as false and baseless, because it was. The privatization was not dismissed, because it was true, and not secret.
So Bush now is endorsing the findings of the commission he earlier had no comment on. But that’s not a lie, and in any event, this discussion is about what Kerry said. Kerry said nothing about the commission.
No. Last week, if you had described Bush as advocating the commission’s plans, he would have said he intends to privatize, but not cut benefits. This week, he intends to privatize, but not cut benefits.
OK. Given your evident shock and disgust at the revelation that both Kery and Bush lied in this campaign, please advise me: who should I have voted for?
Well… strictly speaking, that isn’t uninformed.
Kerry certaintly was not Bush ~laughter~
If their decision was based on such skimpy support, then yes, they too were stupid.
I would, however, submit that voting for Kerry because you don’t like Bush is nowhere near as stupid and uninformed as voting for Bush because you think that he holds positions which he clearly does not.
spooje: Thank you very much, I didn’t intend to start a fight and I appreciate your level-headed approach.
Truth be told, I don’t know what exactly I plan on accomplishing. I’m nowhere near as pragmatic as gobear
To me truth, honor, integrity are their own values and their own rewards.
If I can convince even one person through the exercise of reason and fact, I’d consider that a good day. But for right now, I’m just ranting under the stars.
bricker way to totally avoid your own contradictions.
In this thread you’ve both admitted that Bush lied (saying it was okay, since Kerry did too) and then tried to argue that Bush didn’t lie.
Doesn’t that kind of dishonesty, I don’t know… make it hard to sleep at night?
Why is it so hard to keep to a position? (why do you keep flip-flopping?)
Why not just say “Yes, my candidate is a liar and a deciever, but I support that, becuase it’s how we won.” You essentially said as much in a post, why are you backing away from your own stance?
I see it now, as through a glass, darkly. I remember now, why this all feels like deja vu. Its going to be Nixon, all over again. A fiercely divided nation, a stupid and unjustifiable war. The fierce patriots, blinded by pain, insisting, demanding, that any dissent is treason, that all must march in step. And we who dissent, unable to gaze upon our own flag without mixed feelings. And like Nixon, the lies hidden away till after the election will surface, like the poisoned mud at the bottom of a polluted pond. The defenders will deny the truth, even as it stares them in the face like a betrayed lover. the dissenters will flinch every time another one surfaces, to the shame of our beloved country.
Yeah, wow. What’s the death count due to Kerry’s lies, LA? How many of our best and brightest are going to die today because of Kerry’s lies?
He’s a politician, ergo he lies. We don’t get the option of electing secular saints, no virgin gets elected Queen of the Whores. We only get to pick the slattern with the lesser number of open, running sores and apparent STD’s.
But hey, you got your way! Congratulations. Go to the news pages, bask in your triumph. Count the flag draped boxes coming back. How many, do you think, before this sympony of horrors is over? 2,000? 5,000? 10,000? More?
Do you feel the first inklings of doubt creeping in yet?
elucidator: I am shocked, just shocked! The Glorious Leader tells us that Iraq is part of the War On Terror™ and that it had WMD and was a threat to us and that Sadaam was a very not-nice-person (although Rumsfeld seemed to like him just fine at their little tea party…) and that there were connections to Al Queda and that if you don’t support him, you’re obviously French.
I mean, honestly… do you not trust the Glorious Leader?
What do I have to say, Bricker? I have to say: are you going to say here and now that you will apologize and admit error when Bush supports a benefit-cutting plan? Hmmm?
Cuz I see it one way now, and you see it another, and the final reality has yet to be shown. But I feel pretty damn sure its going to come down the way I see it. Let us remember this thread when that day comes.
“Those who vote decide nothing, those who COUNT the votes decide everything.” - Stalin