 |
|  |
 |
|
Ted Striker
|
 |
United States of America
Jan 1970 time: 21:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by dv8ed
I'm just relieved that Bush is against a pro-slavery court. 
Bush seemed rather confused at times...I'm not sure he understood some of the questions. I really can't believe his answer on the PATRIOT Act question. He's lost touch with reality. |
I thought that he was going to lose it at times.
The guy is seriously wack.
He ends every sentence on a defensive squealy high pitch, it's like when your mom asked who broke the lamp i thought i told you boys to stop throwing the football in the house, no mom we didn't do it, kinda tone.
War on terror, 9/11, freedom, liberty, my opponent flip flops 
Come up with some new material for once.
Honestly I thought there were two PWNAGES in the first 45 minutes of the debate:
1) Kerry PWNING Bush
2) Bush PWNING himself
He cut off the moderator a couple of times and often started talking before being asked to. It just adds to his character as a man who is impatient and used to getting whatever he wants. Not in command of his own emotions, out of touch with the common man, and living in his own reality where only his opinion matters.
Only Ted Striker is correct 100% of the time, not President Bush. 
Last edited by Ted Striker on 09-10-2004 at 08:52
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dissident
poll read on CNN:
Kerry 47%
Bush 45% |
Hmm? The website is saying:
President Bush
18%
35081 votes
John Kerry
80%
158281 votes
Evenly matched
2%
3671 votes
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002 time: 05:21
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Hmm? The website is saying:
President Bush
18%
35081 votes
John Kerry
80%
158281 votes
Evenly matched
2%
3671 votes |
The poll was a phone poll with random sampling being utilized. The reality is online polls don't mean much.
Last edited by Mordoch on 09-10-2004 at 09:07
|
|
|  |
 |
|
sprucemoose3311
|
 |
san jose, ca
Jun 2002 time: 21:21
|
|
funny, no one noticed this from ABC:
Halperin Memo Dated Friday October 8, 2004
It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave
I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.
The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.
Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.
We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.
I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.
It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right.
___________________________________
also
did anyone else hear Kerry say he would raise taxes on corporations to pay for increased govt spending after he said he would lower corporate taxes as incentive for them to stay in the us.
there are more contradictions, which bush pointed out...
however few seem capable of of looking at the logic of what each candidate says.
I guess Kerry cant remember what side to argue when he doesnt have a cheat sheet in front of him to remind him (look at the nbc or foxnews 1st debate film when kerry enters and goes to the podium)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:21
|
|
I disagree. Bush answered that question better as he provided for both sides of the issue... saying no new stem cell lines would be created/killed, only established ones. that helps both the scientific community and religious people.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:21
|
|
at least they got those 21 stem lines... they could very easily have nothing. Bush is balancing both interests.
and am i the only apolytoner who will be voting for Bush? Are Slowwwhand and Lincoln still going to vote Bush?
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21. Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|