Bush versus Kerry: The First Debate

[AGBF]

I am surprised that I had to start this topic myself. Where are all the people who contributed to the thread about voting (in the US Presidential election)?

What did you think of the debate?

 

[fuffi]

I thought Bush was hilarious- continually stating what "hard work" his job has been. This from a president who's missed no opportunity to take a vacation. And then there was his referring to foreign heads of state as "these people" and terrorists as "folks" with that endearing sneer of his.

Thanks for some great laughs Mr. President. You never disappoint!

 

[lmurden]

Kerry won! There is no doubt about it. I heard that the Kerry camp was cheer and jumping for joy behind the scenes and that the Bush camp had their heads in their hands. Of course the Bush camp came out and said that Bush was all substance and Kerry was all style. Spin! What a joke! I can't wait to vote for Kerry on the 2nd! Go Kerry!

 

[AGBF]

I am looking forward to watching tonight's debate. I think that seeing Vice President Cheney, who has no people skills, but has a great deal of knowledge-against Senator Edwards, who is a crowd-pleaser, should be interesting. I suspect that unless Mr. Cheney simply does the No. 2 Man Role (hatchet man) that this debate will be more intellectually interesting.

I guess another way to word that is that I think Mr. Cheney is intelligent enough to contribute to an interesting debate if he chooses to engage Mr. Edwards rather than just to repeat the same message again and again and again. I guess it depends what his coaches have been telling him he must do .

 

[lmurden]

I agree. I waiting for a Bush supporter to give their opinion on the debate.

 

[Rank Amateur]

I am a Bush supporter but I didn't watch the "debate". I can't stand to listen to either of them spin their spin. What new is there to learn from a debate where the candidates cannot ask questions of one another?

I have, however, heard Kerry's ads talking about his ideas and specific plans. Too bad he needed polling results to tell him that the people demand ideas and some specific plans rather than the nebulous and painfully thought out "stronger America" credo. What's next, "Help for middle class America" "Create good jobs" "Reduce dependancy on foreign oil" ?

Oh wait, that's his platform - mostly statements to lure the weakminded!

 

[Todd07]

I'm a fence sitter that sways on the issues.




I thought Kerry won the debate but I laughed at what he said. He said bush was offering more of the same in Iraq while his plan was to get things done faster in terms of training locals and handing over the country! Why is this funny??




Becuase whoever is owning the Iraq situation has to use the same career people to execute the plans in place. I talking state dept, military, USAID, etc. etc. The same people that thought up the current plan will continue to execute for Kerry or Bush next year. Changing a few political appointees at the top won't have an impact.




I do believe the current admin has been doing their best to train a local army and police. It hasn't been working well and won't improve with Kerry at the helm.

 

[Jennifer5973]

AGBF, I thought about it but was *afraid.*

Such a volitile subject. I feel we're in a "lesser of two evils" scenario again.

The debate didn't make me feel any better.

 

[AGBF]

Jennifer, don't be afraid .

I was bitterly disappointed that the vice-presidential debates will not be until *tomorrow* night. (My 12 year-old told me, too. How humiliating!)

I do not think that Senator Kerry would be an "evil", but I agree that some of the claims he makes about how he would handle Iraq are easier said than done: building a coalition to help, for instance. No one wants to be occupying Iraq with us! That's why they didn't INVADE Iraq with us!

On the other hand, if he were President and made it clear to our allies that we meant to leave Iraq and only wanted a TRULY peaceful exit strategy, perhaps Senator Kerry COULD build a coalition to do that. Perhaps he could even enlist UN aid for that purpose. I see a great difference between him and Mr. Bush in that Mr. Kerry *wishes* a true coalition, not just a unilateral invasion.

Deborah

 

[Jennifer5973]

I just don't know what to believe... I am a registered Republican (gasp!

) but I just don't know if I buy it anymore. It's kind of like a lot of this "super Ideal" cut stuff...I wanted to believe it was all true, that it all made a huge difference...but in the end, I'm just not sure.

On the surface, there is no plausible reason why we invaded Iraq. Sometimes, I think we did do it for the good of this country but not for the reasons they drummed up. I think Hussein (and worse, his sons) were a threat--to our oil supply. Almost everything we touch is made with petroleum.... By taking out Hussein, a volitile regime, and preventing his sons from taking over the legacy, we have removed our greatest threat and secured that the region--and its oil-- will remain open to us for many years to come.

Now, if they came out and just told us the truth, I'd be much happier. Is it worth it that Americans are dying to protect oil? We'll never know. It's possible--without Arab oil, our society would shut down, wouldn't it? Heck, even the IdealScope is made out of plastic!

I don't portend to know anything--I am no expert on foreign policy and the history of the Middle east and our policies there is a deep and seemingly endless enigma, but these are some of the thoughts swirling in my head.

What if President Bush, as goofy as he is, is right? Kerry strikes me as a good man but is he tough enough to stand up for us in the world theater?

I agree that it looks like Bush really screwed up our relationships with the world... But if you believe we went in there to secure the next 100 years of oil production for our interests, then the rest of the world be d*mned, right?

I am just so confused.

 

[KBerly]

***editted

AGBF, i thought they were tonight too. tomorrow night will be very interesting

 

[chris-uk04]

----------------
On 10/1/2004 10:49:17 AM AGBF wrote:

I am surprised that I had to start this topic myself. Where are all the people who contributed to the thread about voting (in the US Presidential election)?

What did you think of the debate?

----------------

I think you've started most of the political debates here. Besides some of us novice pundits are weary about getting into the ring for another round.

Since I am still across the pond, I wasn't able to watch it, but I read the transcript online. So I probably missed Bush's tired look and his sighing.

Kerry seemed to turn it up a notch, which he needed to. I think he is still stuck in the rut of trying to be anti-war enough get the votes of the angry left, while being strong enough to get the vote of swing voter in Missouri.

I think from reading, Bush had a clearer message, but apparently even Reps say that Kerry presented himself better.

I'm not sure what Kerry means by "passing a global test"...(permission of France?) Nonetheless, there's not a chance that France or Germany will send even a meter maid to Iraq if Kerry is elected. Kerry's plan for Iraq seems to be exactly what Bush is already doing, trying to train the Iraqis to do the job themselves.

I actually think Bush will get the job done and get out of Iraq quicker. There'll be a lot of pressure on him to do so, while a President Kerry would have free license to muck about for years, whilst blaming all problems on the prior administration.

We have two more debates to look forward to.

 

[AGBF]

----------------
On 10/4/2004 9:58:07 PM Jennifer5973 wrote:




On the surface, there is no plausible reason why we invaded Iraq. Sometimes, I think we did do it for the good of this country but not for the reasons they drummed up. I think Hussein (and worse, his sons) were a threat--to our oil supply.

----------------

I am not sure where you got the idea that our oil supply was threatened. Can you tell me where you read or heard this? What the rationale was for thinking it was threatened? The Iraqis *need* to sell their oil. They NEED us to buy it. Only the Saudis have so much that they sometimes deliberately hold back their oil sales.

I am genuinely interested since this doesn't make sense to me. I am not trying to set you up for a fall!

Deborah

 

[lindsal]

I watched the debates last week, will watch again tonight for the VP's and on Friday for Round II and will go to the polls on the 2nd of November. HOWEVER, I still believe firmly in my heart that while it matters on the whole WHO is actually SITTING in the White House it's really a secondary issue.

The REAL issue is CONGRESS. Having previously worked as an aide on the Hill for several years, I have seen first hand the daily grinding of axes and slow moving plodding of legisalation that is creating an America in which nothing can get done without some group of opponents limiting the beneficial aspects of the legislation in question. THIS is where the change for our political system has to start if we really want to race back toward a fully functioning knock their socks off democracy.

So, I implore all of you, KNOW who you are voting for in your district for the House and Senate races. Be famililar with them, their ideas, their interests, and more particularly their specical interest affilitions. Send them a message that they represent YOU, and you want your voice to be heard after your vote is counted.

Just my $0.02.

Edited for spelling and grammer errors.

 

[Jennifer5973]

AGBF, I just want to reiterate that I wasn't saying I believed in the oil theory or endorsed it. I just have heard others talking about it and I did read some tidbits (can't remember sources) and was "thinking aloud" about some possible "secret" scenarios that might have prompted the war andmade it easier to understand.

One source I do recall that clearly intimated the the war in iraq is about oil and power over that oil (and its wealth) is "Farenheit 9/11," which we did go and see. I feel it is important to be exposed to all points of view, whether you are a Republican or Democrat. So in that spirit we paid Michael Moore our $9.50 and went.

Could it be as simple as this? Maybe they all did believe the intelligence that showed WMD and thought they were doing the right thing? Maybe by taking out the volitile regime in Iraq, we are safer in ways we'll never know about/are impossible to prove?

I'm not saying I believe this theory is true either but it's more comforting to think about than a small bunch of greedy politicians and Texas oil men plotting for riches.

Did anyone read the Vanity Fair article about some of the more "out there" conspiracy theories? I think it was June's issue, but I am not sure... It was very interesting. Illuminati, anyone?

Edited: lindsal, I just saw your post--I agree. I also tend to look at the cabinet or potential cabinet of the presidential candidate I vote for. In 2000, I did vote for Bush (

I hope no one is fainting

) but largely becasue I liked the team he had lined up (Powell, Rice).

 

[lmurden]

No, I didn't read the Vanity Fair article, but on CSPAN Book Notes there was an author who basically said that the Royal Saudi Family/Government was on its way out of power and that Saudi Arabia could possible be controlled by the Islamic fanatics and that they would hold the oil hostage. Also that Iran was in political turmoil and the same could happen to them.

He went on to say that the United States and Great Britain had to make sure that there would be oil available to all nations in the future without blackmail and since Iraq has the second largest oil reserves they had to get in there before all hell breaks loose in the Middle East in order to control the oil. That is why Russia went into Afghanistan 20 years ago to get control their oil and why the US supported the Afghanistan people against them.

Last thing, he said that France and Germany were against the war because they had a secret deal with Sadamn to get their oil from him directly and for a great price. In a nut shell the problem is that the Islamic fanatics ultimately want to control the oil in order to make nations all over the world beholden to them and the US and Britain could not have this. I hope this makes sense.

 

[Jennifer5973]

lmurden, thanks for that information.

If this is indeed true or even partially true, then I tend to think we did do the right thing.

Sadly, I think no one will ever know for sure because the politicians are not honest with us.

 

[lmurden]

Exactly! I would have no problem if this were in fact the reason we went there in the first place.

 

[AGBF]

Thanks for the information. I have *not* seen "Fahrenheit 9/11" so have not yet been exposed to *that* as a source of information. Although I have studied history and the Middle East, I have not kept up with it in depth. I get most of my information from newspapers rather than treatises written by governmental officials and historians. I am sure there is a great deal going on behind the scenes, but the major theories always seem to be articulated somewhere in the mainstream press!

Deborah

 

[Todd07]

----------------
On 10/5/2004 6:09:44 PM AGBF wrote:





Thanks for the information. I have *not* seen 'Fahrenheit 9/11' so have not yet been exposed to *that* as a source of information
Deborah
----------------

IMHO, Fahrenheit 9/11 was interesting but highly misleading. It is satire presented as documentary (M Moore admits it's satire). This means the individual facts he presents are true but taken out of context with conclusions that are not fact. Unfortunately, most viewers thought it to be true and thus believe impeachment justified.

If 1/10 of what Moore insinuated was true, the 9/11 commission report would have backed it up and justified a Bush resignation/impeachment. I think the 9/11 report was an accurate assessment of what happened, who dropped the ball and why.

 

[Jennifer5973]

I know no one is saying this, but I feel I need to clarify that I don't think the Moore 9/11 movie was "gospel" or scholarship of any sort...but satire or not, he really implied there might have been some sort of "secret deals" going on. As a possibility, I think it's relevant to consider.

 

[Todd07]

----------------
On 10/5/2004 9:26:16 PM Jennifer5973 wrote:





I know no one is saying this, but I feel I need to clarify that I don't think the Moore 9/11 movie was 'gospel' or scholarship of any sort...but satire or not, he really implied there might have been some sort of 'secret deals' going on. As a possibility, I think it's relevant to consider.

----------------

I agree it's relevant to consider and investigate. However, I find it amost criminal to make false insinuations knowing they are false. Take a look at the below slate article for another perspective. http://www.slate.com/id/2102723

I'm tempted to read the 9/11 commission report. I've heard it was exhaustive and did not hold back. I also heard it did not support Moore's insinuations

 

[fire&ice]

AGBF - you can read my read of the VP debate in the VP debate thread which cheerleads Edwards. Living in NC, I am closer to Edwards. Unfortunately, we can't vote there because our primary res. is in another state. I never could understand that. Being a homeowener is NC, I am affected by local & state government. But, I have no voice/vote. I think that frustration has led me to be quite passionate about voting in general.

Call me crazy, but I do take the office of VP seriously. I am leaning towards Bush in a strong way b/c of the VP debate - bringing forth exactly why I always thought Edwards is an Idiot. An articulate one - but none the less - and Idiot. And, you know I don't usually use words like this. It's reserved for this very thought.

As far as the Kerry/W debate, I have to say Kerry appeared more "Stateman" like. That said, I didn't think either had much to say. All that kept running through my head was "Infomercial".

 

[Jennifer5973]

----------------
On 10/7/2004 12:43:56 PM fire&ice wrote:

As far as the Kerry/W debate, I have to say Kerry appeared more 'Stateman' like. That said, I didn't think either had much to say. All that kept running through my head was 'Infomercial'.----------------

Yup.