I think Kerry serverely hurt his campaign when he came out with his "wrong war at the wrong time" line, and in the next breath explained how he would get a coalition of other countries to help out with "the wrong war at the wrong time." How can he say the war was a mistake and expect other countries to join him in this mistake? He then went on to disrespect the contributions of the nations that are helping out with Iraq. That was as weak as it gets.
American,
Obviously we ned to try to rebuild a coalition, bring countries along and salvage whatever win out of this we can. But are you saying that because of that, that precludes anyone from arguing that the war was unwise in the first instance. That's crazy. They are not mutually exclusive ideas. Is Bush (and you) just trying to spin things or can you really not keep two thoughts in your head at once?
Obviously we ned to try to rebuild a coalition, bring countries along and salvage whatever win out of this we can. But are you saying that because of that, that precludes anyone from arguing that the war was unwise in the first instance. That's crazy. They are not mutually exclusive ideas. Is Bush (and you) just trying to spin things or can you really not keep two thoughts in your head at once?
Hey don't forget our "partner" in this, Pakistan. They are doing a wonderful job of making sure Al Qaeda isn't made too uncomfortable getting kicked out of Afghanistan. The guys that pay lip service to us face assasination attempts a couple times a year. Eventually the powerful in the country will get their final desire, a fundamental Islamic state that has nuclear weapons and is more than willing to share recipes with others. That ought to be fun. All thanks to the fact that we twisted the dictator's arm and told him you are either with us or against us, and if you are against us we just might invade you. Yep, that is a great Bush textbook strategy of how you build a good coalition.
Were the hell is Saudi Arabia, why aren't these assclown friends of W throwin' in to the "coalition of the shilling". You know the large mojority of the 9/11 highjackers were from S. Arabia. and they (if you believe the bush hype) had as much as anyone in the ME to lose from Saddam. Not to mention that one of Osamas biggest complaints was the U.S. troops in his country. So I really don't think it's to much to ask that bush lean on them and get some help. But NOOOO what we get is $2 a gallon frickin' oil. Any one that votes bush is as detached from reality as he is.
Bush is gonna win 50 to zero states. He will have 99% of the popular vote while Kerry will have .6% and Nadar .4%. All of this nonsense about the race being close is just the way left, bias liberal media.
Bush is the greatest human being to ever walk the face of the earth, including Jesus Christ, Moses, Master Yoda, JJ Gold, 2 Pac, Ray Lewis, Shrink, Scott Peterson, and Bill Buckner.
Gameface I will be at your place to celebrate
Bush is the greatest human being to ever walk the face of the earth, including Jesus Christ, Moses, Master Yoda, JJ Gold, 2 Pac, Ray Lewis, Shrink, Scott Peterson, and Bill Buckner.
Gameface I will be at your place to celebrate
Kerry Has Not Stopped Hurting His Own Campaign From The Beginning. Saying We Must Pass A "global Test" Was Bad. Saying "wrong War At The Wrong Time" Was Horrendous. Criticizing The Interim Leader Of Afghanistan Was Just Plain Dumb. Calling Our Allies "bribed And Coerced" Was Fukking Dumb. His Stances On Social And Moral Issues Are Atrocious. Kerry Is Nothing More Than A Cowardly Liberal. Bush Delivered The Best Line Last Night When He Said That Ted Kennedy Is The Conservative Senator From Massachusetts! Truth Be Told, A Punk Like Kerry Doesnt Even Deserve To Live In America, Much Less Be Its Leader.
"Bush crushed him tonight on Kerrys global test."
Bush didn't "crush" him on anything, as a matter of fact he barely kept his head above water it was the most embarrassing performance of the three. Well that makes sense though they showed several camera shots of his back this time, he didn't have the device on this time.
Bush didn't "crush" him on anything, as a matter of fact he barely kept his head above water it was the most embarrassing performance of the three. Well that makes sense though they showed several camera shots of his back this time, he didn't have the device on this time.
Kaya,
we agree on something - WOW. Bush had his worse debate last night but with that being said, HE WON ALL THREE ON SUBSTANCE. Bush was appealling to the WOMEN voters during the three debates - AND IT WORKED! He has the male vote wrapped upped. Bush wins easily. Almost as easy of a pick as Arnold was for governor. I called Arnold a lock weeks before the California election and got ridiculed BADLY. I almost cried because I was laughing so hard. Same thing goes here.
"KEEP THE COWBOY 2004"
F-16
we agree on something - WOW. Bush had his worse debate last night but with that being said, HE WON ALL THREE ON SUBSTANCE. Bush was appealling to the WOMEN voters during the three debates - AND IT WORKED! He has the male vote wrapped upped. Bush wins easily. Almost as easy of a pick as Arnold was for governor. I called Arnold a lock weeks before the California election and got ridiculed BADLY. I almost cried because I was laughing so hard. Same thing goes here.
"KEEP THE COWBOY 2004"
F-16
The media reaction: Ho-hum, just a Kerry sweep
<!-- Deck -->[font=times new roman, times, serif]If Bush had won all three debates, would the pundits have been so reserved?[/font]
[font=times new roman, times, serif][size=-1]- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -[/size][/font]
<!-- Byline -->[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]By Eric Boehlert[/font]
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Oct. 13, 2004 | [/font]
[font=times new roman, times, serif]It's hard to imagine that if an array of instant poll results spread over three debates and two weeks showed that John Kerry had failed to win a single survey, let alone a single debate, that Wednesday night's media spin would have been as hum-drum as it was, when polls once again revealed Kerry had bested president Bush for the third time in as many tries. And Kerry did so with relative ease. According to the CNN/Gallup survey, 52 percent of voters thought Kerry won the third and final debate, compared to 39 percent who gave it to president Bush. CBS's turn-around poll also gave it to Kerry, 39-25. ABC's instant poll was much closer -- 42-41 for Kerry -- but its pool of respondents was weighted more heavily towards Republicans.
For Kerry, it's a rather startling and completely unforeseen achievement, considering Bush entered the final stretch season with an unblemished career debate record and had been given high marks by the press for his debate message discipline and ability to connect with voters. Yet he went oh-for-three. Despite the consistent polling results, most of the assembled television pundits last night considered the debate to be a draw and suggested it would, in the end, have little impact on Election Day. Again, it's hard to imagine that the media response would have been so reserved if it were Bush completing a debate sweep. Either the pundits are right to discount the importance of the debates and that the last two presidential face-offs really were draws, or voters have been sending a clear message over the last two weeks, one that's been falling on deaf ears inside the media's Beltway. We'll know the answer to that question in 17 days.
[/font]
<!-- Deck -->[font=times new roman, times, serif]If Bush had won all three debates, would the pundits have been so reserved?[/font]
[font=times new roman, times, serif][size=-1]- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -[/size][/font]
<!-- Byline -->[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]By Eric Boehlert[/font]
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Oct. 13, 2004 | [/font]
[font=times new roman, times, serif]It's hard to imagine that if an array of instant poll results spread over three debates and two weeks showed that John Kerry had failed to win a single survey, let alone a single debate, that Wednesday night's media spin would have been as hum-drum as it was, when polls once again revealed Kerry had bested president Bush for the third time in as many tries. And Kerry did so with relative ease. According to the CNN/Gallup survey, 52 percent of voters thought Kerry won the third and final debate, compared to 39 percent who gave it to president Bush. CBS's turn-around poll also gave it to Kerry, 39-25. ABC's instant poll was much closer -- 42-41 for Kerry -- but its pool of respondents was weighted more heavily towards Republicans.
For Kerry, it's a rather startling and completely unforeseen achievement, considering Bush entered the final stretch season with an unblemished career debate record and had been given high marks by the press for his debate message discipline and ability to connect with voters. Yet he went oh-for-three. Despite the consistent polling results, most of the assembled television pundits last night considered the debate to be a draw and suggested it would, in the end, have little impact on Election Day. Again, it's hard to imagine that the media response would have been so reserved if it were Bush completing a debate sweep. Either the pundits are right to discount the importance of the debates and that the last two presidential face-offs really were draws, or voters have been sending a clear message over the last two weeks, one that's been falling on deaf ears inside the media's Beltway. We'll know the answer to that question in 17 days.
[/font]
