Vice presidential debate

[Lance]

I’m sure people have to submit a political essay before they are aloud to vote in those polls. Wouldn’t want any of those republicans voting.

 

“Vote early, vote often.”

 

Besides those polls don’t represent the population as a whole.

[budullewraagh]

i wish people would be forced to take a political aptitude test before voting, their score being the x variable in logarithmic regression where the y axis represents their vote and the range is between 0 and 1

[drz]

About his claim that he never suggested a tie between 911 and Iraq:

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6188565/

 

On Sept. 8, 2002, Cheney, again on "Meet the Press," said that Atta "did apparently travel to Prague. ... We have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer a few months before the attacks on the World Trade Center." And a year ago, also on "Meet the Press," Cheney described Iraq as part of "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

 

He lied about factcheck.org, not .com as he misinformed us, claiming they rebut claims of Cheneys corruption whilst he led the company:

http://www.factcheck.org

 

Cheney got our domain name wrong -- calling us "FactCheck.com" -- and wrongly implied that we had rebutted allegations Edwards was making about what Cheney had done as chief executive officer of Halliburton. In fact, we did post an article pointing out that Cheney hasn't profited personally while in office from Halliburton's Iraq contracts, as falsely implied by a Kerry TV ad. But Edwards was talking about Cheney's responsibility for earlier Halliburton troubles. And in fact, Edwards was mostly right.

 

Cheney was also going on about being the president of the senate, and being their most tuesdays, when in reality he was only there for 2 tuesdays.

 

Someone said you liked watching Edwards struggle to concede the point about the 90% coalition casualties. He did not concede, you must have missed it:

 

Cheney's only attempt to refute that challenge:

CHENEY: Well, Gwen, the 90 percent figure is just dead wrong. When you include the Iraqi security forces that have suffered casualties, as well as the allies, they've taken almost 50 percent of the casualties in operations in Iraq, which leaves the U.S. with 50 percent, not 90 percent.

 

and Edwards response shortly there after:

And regardless of what the vice president says, we're at $200 billion and counting. Not only that, 90 percent of the coalition casualties, Mr. Vice President, the coalition casualties, are American casualties.

 

Cheney merely attempted to sidestep the issue by claiming Kerry/Edwards was not giving credit to the Iraqi people fighting, etc. Well, it may be true that Iraqi's are fighting and dieing for their freedom, as they should, but the simple fact remains, as edwards pointed out, that we have taken 90% of the coalition casualities.

 

When did Edwards concede that point?

 

excerpts of the debate taken from http://www.foxnews.com

 

oh ya, almost forgot.

 

He lied about Edwards hometown paper calling him "Senator Gone". The News and Observer (http://www.newsobserver.com/) has never made such a comment, or atleast it can't be found.

 

Infact, the only story a google search provides when looking for "Senator Gone" that matches this claim comes from a seemingly biased source.

[budullewraagh]

Because some suicide bombers were hindered by the fact that their family would not be taken care of. Saddam put the fears to rest.

they would be killed if they didnt fulfill their obligations, you know. they either die and have their families shunned/executed or they die and keep their families alive.

perhaps hussein did encourage suicide bombings. at the same time, at least he stood up for the palestinians. it is terrible what israel and america are doing to palestine. most of the hatred of us in the middle east stems from the atrocities israel commits that we support.

 

No no, people want elections, thats why they're lining up amidst the bombing of signup centers.

don't jump the gun; nobody's lined up yet.

 

You're comparing the US funding of Israel to Saddam funding suicide bombers.

well, now that you brought this up...

http://www.timelines.ws/countries/ISRAEL2000.HTML

 

"The death rate on both sides has continued to climb. Since 29 September 2000, 723 Israelis have been killed in suicide attacks. The toll of Palestinians killed by Israeli military action was 2,334 by October 2003."

source: http://www.un.org/depts/ocha/cap/opt.html

 

"Israeli forces raided four Palestinian bank branches Wednesday, seizing millions of dollars during a hunt for militant groups' money. "

http://www.bakutoday.net/view.php?d=8121

this was also done 4 years ago near the beginning of the second uprising. i remember reading an article about it in my local newspaper. the article was released by the associated press and mentioned anti-tank guns breaking into the bank vault, money being taken, destroyed, and computers being destroyed, thus leaving the palestinian economy in turmoil and countless penniless.

 

israel continuously destroys palestinian homes for little to no reason at all. it's either an "oops" or a "well, their distant cousin blew himself up yesterday so i think they shouldnt have a home!" israel continues to build that wall which has far too gates and thus makes it impossible for many people to move to market places, places of worship and/or the place they are employed at.

 

the fact of the matter is that the israeli government is guilty of terrible crimes against the palestinians just as hamas, the al-asqa martyrs' brigade and hezbollah are guilty of terrible crimes against the israelis. both sides make military their targets as well as civilians, food stockpiles, refugee camps, hospitals and many other places. we have a terrible situation, but nobody intervenes. unfortunately, israel flaunts its power over the palestinians, which ends up coming full circle as some of their own get blown up. the united states continues to give weapons to israel, but not weapons, nor food, nor money to the palestinians, and refuses to take action in preventing israel as well as hamas, hezbollah and the al-aqsa martyrs' brigade from committing atrocities. when a palestinian home is destroyed, it pisses the inhabitants off, especially if someone they knew was in the home. they have no money or a home and live for a day or so on the streets or in a refugee camp. then, broken, they are approached by a member of hamas and offered a proposition. the patriarch fights for hamas, and potentially dies, but his family is fed, given shelter, and his children an education. compared to them all dying on the street, this isn't such a bad idea. the man's children learn to hate israel, and grow up to become martyrs. if the united states were to intervene, surely this would not be a problem. unfortuantely, the united states does nothing and the cycle continues.

[LucidDreamer]

but Kerry did great for having no real position on anything.

Yes, that’s true to some degree. But that's mainly because history has shown that's how to win elections. If you avoid some of the controversial issues the undecided will be less likely to turn against you. Bush does the same. The Republicans avoid environmental, health care, and stem cell research issues like the plague. They also avoid the influences of big business on government. Liberals avoid talking about taxes, religion, and the influence of both business and special interest parties. If they have to talk about it then they use diversionary tactics and practice their equanimity. You also won’t find either side wants to talk about abortion or gay rights because the country is so firmly divided.

[drz]

actually I thought both Edwards and Kerry have firmly made their position clear in regards to gay rights:

 

from the debate, again, http://www.foxnews.com

 

We both believe that — and this goes onto the end of what I just talked about — we both believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

But we also believe that gay and lesbians and gay and lesbian couples, those who have been in long-term relationships, deserve to be treated respectfully, they deserve to have benefits.

For example, a gay couple now has a very difficult time, one, visiting the other when they're in the hospital, or, for example, if, heaven forbid, one of them were to pass away, they have trouble even arranging the funeral.

 

and Kerry's position on gay rights from the MTV interview:

 

http://www.mtv.com/chooseorlose/features/john_kerry_033004/index5.jhtml

 

Well, Mark, I'm very sensitive to that argument and to that feeling, and I've got a lot of friends that I have talked to about this at great length, like Barney Frank for instance, who is an openly gay congressman from Massachusetts, and I think that there are strong feelings on many different sides about it. My feeling is that what is important is equal protection under the law. An equal protection clause, I think, pertains to the rights you give to people, not to the name you give to something, so I'm for civil unions. That gives people the rights: the rights of partnership, the rights of inheritance of property, the rights of taxation and so forth, those kinds of treatment that are equal. But I think there is a distinction between what we have traditionally called "marriage" between a man and a women and those rights. Now, it's just a belief that I have. I fight hard for employment-nondiscrimination legislation. I fight hard for hate-crimes legislation. I've stood up [for gay rights]. I was the original sponsor of the [Civil Rights Amendments Act] in the Senate in 1985. I believe very strongly that we can advance the cause of equality by moving toward civil unions. But that's where my position is at this point in time.

 

 

edit: Something I just realized, Bush never made his appearance on Choose Or Lose. 92 had record voter turnout if memory serves, and, ironically is the same year Choose or Lose started.

 

Perhaps the youth of the nation will get the ole warmonger out of office after all.

[budullewraagh]

but Kerry did great for having no real position on anything.

you really didnt listen to him, did you? seriously. since you obviously missed the his plain and clear views, read the transcript a few times and see if you can't just figure out his stances on the issues. if you really cant figure them out then, just go to his website and find out just what he believes. come on, you can do it (thumbs up)

[john5746]

I have to admit I didn't watch the debate. From what I have seen, Cheney got the better of him. But, seems Edwards did enough to legitimize himself to would be Kerry voters.

 

Oh, this just in...

 

CNN found out why Bush lost the Debate. They told him to practice hard being a "MASTER DEBATOR", but he didn't understand them correctly!

 

No wonder he looked like his pants were on fire!

[drz]

lol, so are you saying bush heard practice hard being DE MASTER BATOR?

and here I thought that was a job for first time Fishin boat mates.

 

I just can't agree that Cheney won this thing. He sounded like a better spoken version of Bush, IMO, but kept rambling the same things. Consistancy, bleh, if this thing were about consistancy, they would have been impeached long ago.

[atinymonkey]

What debate were they watching? If the BBC really said that I think it's quite revealing as to how far left they lean. Cheney clearly dominated Edwards' date=' and I'm not saying that because I'm a republican.

[/quote']

 

Well, the sound bite was from the Radio, which tends to be flippant about political events. I'd be confident enough to say the BBC is not biased and has no political agenda, it is owned by the general public and not by the government or a corporate group. I know most US media sources are biased in some way, but in the UK the BBC are not allowed to show bias of any kind (unlike the newspapers). It's possible you the BBC are a bunch of communist lefties, but it's honestly very doubtful that they actually are. When it comes right down to it American politics and the presidential race do not hold any more interest in the UK than a entertaining show, so there isn't any real reason to 'swing' a news report in any direction.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3716852.stm

 

As for the actual debate, I'll have to watch it if I want to make any other comments. It seems, like most things surrounding Bush, there are two camps that have opposite opinions about the events. It's all getting very odd.

[LucidDreamer]

there are two camps that have opposite opinions about the events. It's all getting very odd.

What's truly odd is that both camps are so firmly entrenched. Both sides have their share of intelligent individuals and parrots, yet neither side acknowledges the validity of the other sides reasoning. It's only through the adversarial relationship that we are able to establish a workable plan somewhere in the middle. It's like the U.S. is full of lawyers.

 

You would think that with the wide range of issues that most people would be unable to agree with the majority of either party’s stances on those issues. The fact that so many people can so fully agree with their chosen parties platform is just evidence to the fact that we never really make up our own minds and we rely so much on other people to make it up for us.

[Pangloss]

In a sense Americans have always been that way. It's our strength as well as our weakness. The founding fathers knew its value, as did the leaders of both sides of divided America during the Civil War. Those Americans also knew that the reason their country was divided was that they had forgotten that inherent in the value of divisiveness, and its power to reach valuable conclusions, is the need for compromise.

 

Compromise is power, not weakness. But it will ever be the purpose of the ideologue to convince us that the opposite is true.

[Luminol]

I watched the debates. I thought Cheney won...but the whole debate was boring...I almost fell aspleep a few times.

 

 

I find the idea that the US and Israel are comitting attrocities against Palistine one of the funniest things I've heard so far. The palistinians teach their children hatred of Jews from the begining, they teach their children that killing Jews is the duty of every Muslim, they teach their children that dying for Allah (Shahid) is the greatest thing for a Muslim to do. Everything from TV, Music Videos, Art, Movies, Religious studies, Social Studies is about Jew Hatred. I don't see anything wrong with what Israel is doing...they are protecting themselves from extermination.

 

http://www.pmw.org.il/

 

http://www.memri.org/index.html

 

http://www.shoebat.com/media/palestinians_journey_small.mov

 

Read listen and be educated.

 

I also suggest finding a copy of Jihad in America. It's a PBS documentary about terrorism in the US...produced after the first world trade center attack and shows the depth of the problem.

[budullewraagh]

I find the idea that the US and Israel are comitting attrocities against Palistine one of the funniest things I've heard so far.

did you read what i wrote of? how narrow-minded can you possibly be? every argument you gave supporting your statement i already proved to be invalid in my above post. read it and learn of the terrible atrocities the victors of wars commit against the have-nots.

[Luminol]

Your post proves nothing. If I have to agree with you to be open minded then I guess I'm not. The Palistinians teach their children to kill and to hate the Jews, they teach violence. The evidnece is right in plain sight. If that means that there are more palistinians that die than Jews then so be it. The palistinians will reap what they sow...when they glorify death and violence they get death in return. Israel has tried many times to give land to the Palistinians...what happens? They are hit even harder by terrorists. Every time there is a ceasefire the terrorists attack and then say it was the Jews who started fighting again.

 

We give billions to Egypt who sends some of the money to Palistine through underground tunnels...and they use it to fund terrorist operations. You get no aid food or money unless you support terrorists.

[Pangloss]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Luminol]

What I'm saying is that the Palistinians don't want to live in peace. How can Israel and the Jews live with people who believe that they are dogs, the lowest form of life on the planet. What would you do? Just let them kill your family and friends? If you are an Israeli soldier being attacked by an angry mob of Palistinians who want to kill you and rip your body apart...what would you do? Hold your fire? If there are teenage kids blowing themselves up on buses to kill you just because of who you are are you just going to sit back? Israel has tried many times for peace. I just don't see any way to stop the violence when Palistinian children are taught hate and that killing is a great honor. The Jews are willing to give the land back that they took when they were attacked by just about every country in the Middle East. What are the Palistinians going to do with that land? Are they going to live in peace and embrace the Jews? What are the children (who are being exposed to all of this violence and hate) going to do...have a sudden change of heart? How can you wage peace with people who hate you more than they love life? How do you show love to someone who will just see it as a way to get an advantage over you and then stab you in the back?

 

I'd be really happy if Palistinians had a state and could better their lives and live in peace with the Jews and help eachother out. I don't believe they want that. They want all of the Jews to die.

[Douglas]

budullewraagh..............

He lied about factcheck.org, not .com

drz............

He lied about factcheck.org, not .com

The left wing liberal mindset is............

Almost everything a republican (or Bush) says is a LIE...........

Anyone who can construe the above quotes as a lie, needs to be blessed.

 

Responsible repubicans don't call Kerry a liar. They call him a flip flopper. Even a flip flopper is not a liar, it's just a person who changes his tune as a function of which way the political winds are blowing.

[Luminol]

I just think that Kerry can't say what he really believes or he would lose big time...so he is trying to find what he thinks will give him the best chance to win.

[budullewraagh]

Your post proves nothing.

then you're blind.

 

The Palistinians teach their children to kill and to hate the Jews, they teach violence.

did you not read the very reasons why this occurs? READ AGAIN.

 

Israel has tried many times to give land to the Palistinians

the formation of israel was an encroachment on palestinian land. you say israel attempts to give land to the palestinians? no, they make "settlements" (in other words they annex) (in) palestinian land. they build walls THROUGH palestinian communities.

 

They are hit even harder by terrorists.

and you ignore israel's state terrorism

We give billions to Egypt who sends some of the money to Palistine through underground tunnels...and they use it to fund terrorist operations. You get no aid food or money unless you support terrorists.

ya know, we could just give the palestinians money directly, rather than leave it up to egypt to decide who the money goes to

[budullewraagh]

What I'm saying is that the Palistinians don't want to live in peace.

STOP STEREOTYPING. BOTH SIDES WANT PEACE.

 

you continue to ignore state-sponsored israeli terrorism. please address this issue

[drz]

The left wing liberal mindset is............

Almost everything a republican (or Bush) says is a LIE...........

Anyone who can construe the above quotes as a lie, needs to be blessed.

 

dude, I'm not making this stuff up. FactCheck.org even refutes Cheney's claim that they dismissed edwards accusations. Read it yourself.

 

Cheney lied about meeting edwards. He said their debate was the first time, but they had met atleast 3 times prior to this.

 

Is this, or is this not a lie?

 

Flip-Flopping is a stupid way of saying changing your mind. I change my mind all the damned time. You have too. A person who stays locked into one position, never grows.

[drz]

and http://www.factcheck.org will even tell you of edwards exaggerations and misinformation, but atleast none of what he said was an outright lie.

[Luminol]

There is no Israeli terrorism sponsored by the state. There are Jewish terrorist groups...and there are some Jews who do not want to give land to the Palestinians and will go build settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. I don't agree with the socialist imperialism theory that you seem to hold as truth. That always seems to be the source of every problem to you socialists. Every problem in the world is because of money or imperialism. It’s a one size fits all view that you always try to shove everything into. Secondly I don't believe one thing a government run by a terrorist group says. They over inflate the numbers and always say that children we killed. One Palestinian music video shows Jewish soldiers sniping kids for the heck of it...I don't believe it for a second. Anther favorite of mine is the belief that Jews kidnap Arab children and kill them for their blood to be used in their religious practices. How about that Jews are descendants of pigs and apes? How about the belief that the holocaust was faked by the Jews to get the western world behind them to form the state of Israel? How about the idea that all Jews have type AB blood and all Arabs have type O therefore the Jews are takers and the Arabs are givers. I could go on for paragraphs.

 

Israel began basically by Jews who started immigrating there in the 1880s. They bought the land from wealthy Arab land owners who sold them the land highly overpriced and didn't really care about it because it was a wasteland. There were few people living in the area when the Jews started coming back if I remember correctly it was somewhere around 150,000 . The Jews made the land fertile again and many Arabs started immigrating there for jobs and to live with the Jews in the prosperity they just created...and partly because they didn't want the Jews there.

 

Great Britain helped the Arabs fight against turkey to get their land out of the hands of the Ottoman Empire. In return Britain was allowed to have a say in what happened to the land. They decided to create two states...trans Jordan (Arab) and Jewish Palestine (Jewish). When it came time to do this the British put an anti-Semite in charge that basically screwed over the Jews. There were also the beginnings of terrorist attacks against the Jews and Islamic anti-Semitism was beginning to spread partly due to the leaders of the Islamic countries surrounding the area like the Prince of Iraq at the time. During WWII the grand Mufti of Jerusalem allied himself with Hitler because they both wanted the same thing and there were if I remember some where around 8 or 10 muslim SS divisions in the Nazi armies. Eventually after WWII the UN decided to take away more of the land promised to Jews by Britain giving the "Palestinians" Gaza and the West Bank and making Jerusalem international. Eventually Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, ect. Started massing their armies on the borders of Israel and began to make threats. Eventually Israel attacked to get the upper hand. The Arab leaders told those Arabs in Gaza and the West bank to leave for their safety and that the Jews would be destroyed in a short time and they would then be allowed to go back. Israel won the war in a short time taking the Sinai pen. from Egypt ect...which they gave back. The Jews are willing to give back Gaza and the West Bank and most support a Palestinian state.

 

I believe that there are many that want peace on both sides...and there are those who do not. I don't believe that HAMAS, Hezbollah, or the PLO want peace. They are the ones controlling the minds of the children there. They control the media, they control the money, and they control just about everything They are the ones who put their children in front of Israeli soldiers and incite violence so the children will die and they can say that 20 children were killed by the Jews. Have you ever heard an 8 year old screaming about how much he hates the Jews and that he prays to Allah that he will bring him death killing the Jews?

 

I just don't see anything in the Jews like this at all (accept for the small minority that I mentioned before...and these terrorist groups are illegal and they are dealt with by the Jews). I don't see them wishing to exterminate the Arabs off the face of the earth. I don't see anything terroristic about defending themselves from the hate and violence that is thrown at them evey day.

 

I think it's safe to say that our opinions about this are very much the opposite!!!

[Douglas]

and www.factcheck.org[/url'] will even tell you of edwards exaggerations and misinformation, but atleast none of what he said was an outright lie.

Lemme see if I got this straight..............

Edwards' exaggerations and misinformation *is not* a lie.

But

Chaney saying .com instead of .org *is* a lie.

Yikes!!!!!!!!!