or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Kerry's speech: I'm now voting for him not against Bush.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kerry's speech: I'm now voting for him not against Bush.

post #1 of 37
Thread Starter 
I don't know, but I felt Kerry's speech was very good. I could see the passion there. I could feel how angry he was with Bush. I felt he wanted to improve the direction of the country. I know he used silly symbolism, but he also showed depth. He cunningly linked himself with John McCain, and Honest Abe. He took back the flag (Dean already did this I know) from the NeoCons (my new mortal enemies). He offered those in the military some relief at least troop wise. This relief has been a long time coming--I know first hand how hard military life is when a command is undermanned.

I don't know, I felt he meant what he said. I felt he meant it when he said he wanted to unite the country (the same promise Bush gave--we know how that's worked thus far).

I'm a voting for Kerry now, not just against Bush.

Wha da ya'll think?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #2 of 37
That says it for me too . . . I was just ABB, but I think Kerry has character and a forceful one at that.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #3 of 37
Count me in.

I think I was won over by the sense of resolve and willingness to take the fight to the chest-beating right.

After the meek fold of 2000, I truly relish the idea of a candidate who is prepared to put some teeth into the rhetoric of liberalism.

And who is doing it not just to "win the argument" but because he feels these ideas really are worth fighting for.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #4 of 37
While I agree with your sentiments (that Kerry is sincere), I still dislike Bush more than I like Kerry.

That said, I like Kerry more now than I did a month ago.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #5 of 37
speech's don't make presidents.

then again, he does know how to speak....which is something bush can not do. so who knows
post #6 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by applenut
speech's don't make presidents.

then again, he does know how to speak....which is something bush can not do. so who knows

Speeches don't make presidents.

Then again, he does know how to speak, which is something Bush cannot do, so who knows?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #7 of 37
Nope, not even close for me. Still voting against W.
post #8 of 37
How bad would Kerry have to be, to make you vote for Bush instead of him?
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #9 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
... He offered those in the military some relief at least troop wise. This relief has been a long time coming-

...

Is that way he was doing when he voted against funding them?
post #10 of 37
I thought that Kerry's speech was well crafted and delivered even though the media panned him on his timing, saying he didn't stop often enough, or allow enough time for the delegates to applaud. Contentwise, I got the impression that he does offer a different worldview to the Bush crew, but I am still pissed at him, as well as all those other led-by-the-nose senators and representatives who voted to support the insane idea to go to war in Iraq, seemingly without doing any research, when it was well-known that Iraq possessed no WMD. Kerry will have to do a whole lot more to convince me that he is a real peoples' person, and not just another corporate-owned career politician in a friendly costume. Until then, I will be voting against Bush, rather than for Kerry.

If he uses his skills as a prosecutor to go after the hordes of white collar corporate criminals and parasites who are leaching this country, he has my vote. If he promises to pass legislation that prevents those 65% of major US corporations from evading federal income taxes, which costs the nation hundreds of $billions annually, then he has my vote too. And if he honestly supports programs to wrest the US away from dependence on foreign oil, then he has my vote as well.

In the election, an issue that will strike a chord with Americans is the choice between Kerry the decorated war hero, and Bush the chickenhawk.

I would like to see him allocate $100 million, (about the same that Ken Starr spent in investigating Clinton's dallying) to fund a REAL NO HOLDS BARRED investigation into 9-11, rather than the $600k shoestring budget, pathetic, 411-day delayed whitewash we've just been insulted with. If Bush produces bin Laden however, forget the chance of a Kerry victory, forget everything, it's all over.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #11 of 37
I just can't figure out if Hope or Help is on the way.

[edit]Come to think of it, I'm also not sure how many Americas there are.
post #12 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
How bad would Kerry have to be, to make you vote for Bush instead of him?

how bad was Gore?

i'd say slightly worse than Gore then
post #13 of 37
I watched the speech and found it very nice in terms of rhetoric, but it was just so short on how to get it done. Here is a prime example.

Quote:
As President, I will fight a smarter, more effective war on terror. We will deploy every tool in our arsenal: our economic as well as our military might; our principles as well as our firepower.

In these dangerous days there is a right way and a wrong way to be strong. Strength is more than tough words. After decades of experience in national security, I know the reach of our power and I know the power of our ideals.

We need to make America once again a beacon in the world. We need to be looked up to and not just feared.

We need to lead a global effort against nuclear proliferation to keep the most dangerous weapons in the world out of the most dangerous hands in the world.

We need a strong military and we need to lead strong alliances. And then, with confidence and determination, we will be able to tell the terrorists: You will lose and we will win. The future doesn't belong to fear; it belongs to freedom.

And the front lines of this battle are not just far away they're right here on our shores, at our airports, and potentially in any town or city. Today, our national security begins with homeland security. The 9-11 Commission has given us a path to follow, endorsed by Democrats, Republicans, and the 9-11 families. As President, I will not evade or equivocate; I will immediately implement the recommendations of that commission. We shouldn't be letting ninety-five percent of container ships come into our ports without ever being physically inspected. We shouldn't be leaving our nuclear and chemical plants without enough protection. And we shouldn't be opening firehouses in Baghdad and closing them down in the United States of America.

Not a single even vague point about how to get anything done.

Now be honest. Go look at the Clinton 1992 speech and compare the two.

1992 Clinton

I mean Kerry didn't even mention the number of jobs lost or not grown in the last four years for example?

It is easy to see why people respect Clinton and why he so easily kicked the hell out of most people politically.

When you compared "And help is on the way" to the "New Covenant, it isn't even close. Clinton defined a philosophy. Kerry defines nothing but that life has some misery and he will fix all of it everywhere. That's not uplifting because we know it is impossible.

The Kerry speech was very mediocre in my view.

Compare this by Clinton..

Quote:
An America that says to entrepreneurs and businesspeople: We will give you more incentives and more opportunity than ever before to develop the skills of your workers and to create American jobs and American wealth in the new global economy. (Applause) But you must do your part, you must be responsible. American companies must act like American companies again, exporting products, not jobs. (Applause)

Thats what this New Covenant is all about.

An America in which the doors of colleges are thrown open once again to the sons and daughters of stenographers and steelworkers. (Applause) We will say: Everybody can borrow money to go to college. But you must do your part. You must pay it back, (Applause) from your paychecks or, better yet, by going back home and serving your communities. (Applause)

Just think of it. Think of it. Millions of energetic young men and women serving their country by policing the streets or teaching the children or caring for the sick. (Applause) Or working with the elderly and people with disabilities. Or helping young people to stay off drugs and out of gangs, giving us all a sense of new hope and limitless possibilities.

Thats what this New Covenant is all about. (Applause)

To this by Kerry...

Quote:
What does it mean in America today when Dave McCune, a steel worker I met in Canton, Ohio, saw his job sent overseas and the equipment in his factory literally unbolted, crated up, and shipped thousands of miles away along with that job? What does it mean when workers I've met had to train their foreign replacements?

America can do better. So tonight we say: help is on the way.

What does it mean when Mary Ann Knowles, a woman with breast cancer I met in New Hampshire, had to keep working day after day right through her chemotherapy, no matter how sick she felt, because she was terrified of losing her family's health insurance.

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when Deborah Kromins from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania works and saves all her life only to find out that her pension has disappeared into thin air and the executive who looted it has bailed out on a golden parachute?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when twenty five percent of the children in Harlem have asthma because of air pollution?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

What does it mean when people are huddled in blankets in the cold, sleeping in Lafayette Park on the doorstep of the White House itself and the number of families living in poverty has risen by three million in the last four years?

America can do better. And help is on the way.

Clinton had a plan. He, though vaguely becaue of the nature of the speech, defined that everyone had a role with a right and a responsibility. He even described the sense of community and uplifting that would occur. Kerry... generalized misery with "help on the way."

Kerry's speech didn't get it done in my view.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #14 of 37
Quote:
Is that way he was doing when he voted against funding them?

How is everything looking through those black and white glasses huh?

Duuuh?
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #15 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Is that way he was doing when he voted against funding them?

get your facts right:

John Kerry: "I voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it!!!"

he supports the troops...before he speaks out against what they are doing.

This guy is hopeless, he changes his mind on the war every other day, depending on whom he is speaking to, and he voted in the 90's to gut the intel. community that he says he will rebuild if elected.
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #16 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
John Kerry: "I voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it!!!"

That's true though. I don't know why he doesn't defend that, because it's very defensible. He voted for a version of that bill that would have postponed some of the tax cuts in order to pay for it. But the Republicans defeated that and wanted it to just increase the deficit. So he voted against that version of it. It makes perfect sense, and although I think he should have voted for the final version, I think he can defend voting against it.
post #17 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
That's true though. I don't know why he doesn't defend that, because it's very defensible. He voted for a version of that bill that would have postponed some of the tax cuts in order to pay for it. But the Republicans defeated that and wanted it to just increase the deficit. So he voted against that version of it. It makes perfect sense, and although I think he should have voted for the final version, I think he can defend voting against it.

BRussel, haven't you learned by now to not demand that one actually look underneath the slander campaign?! It doesn't matter that that quote was taken without its context and completely abused for Right-wing slander purposes, what matters is that it makes for good jabs . . .

and in the end, with this group of Repubs, it doesn't matter even if their position lacks any stance or principles as long as it makes good jabs its good enough.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #18 of 37
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
I watched the speech and found it very nice in terms of rhetoric, but it was just so short on how to get it done. Here is a prime example.



Not a single even vague point about how to get anything done.

Now be honest. Go look at the Clinton 1992 speech and compare the two.

1992 Clinton

I mean Kerry didn't even mention the number of jobs lost or not grown in the last four years for example?

It is easy to see why people respect Clinton and why he so easily kicked the hell out of most people politically.

When you compared "And help is on the way" to the "New Covenant, it isn't even close. Clinton defined a philosophy. Kerry defines nothing but that life has some misery and he will fix all of it everywhere. That's not uplifting because we know it is impossible.

The Kerry speech was very mediocre in my view.

Compare this by Clinton..



To this by Kerry...



Clinton had a plan. He, though vaguely becaue of the nature of the speech, defined that everyone had a role with a right and a responsibility. He even described the sense of community and uplifting that would occur. Kerry... generalized misery with "help on the way."

Kerry's speech didn't get it done in my view.

Nick

The purpose of an acceptance speech is not to go into detail about every program, but rather to introduce the programs. Kerry's ideas are available on his site, the DNC site, and will be laid out during the debates (you have to save some of the zingers for the head--to--head confrontation). I did a google news search using Kerry speech and came up with only a handful of naysayers and a lot of people (repubs included) praising the speech. It was a good speech.

PS. I don't think there's anything Kerry can say/do to draw you in trumptman.

[edit]Also, the Canton Ohio bit was directed at people from Ohio. Ohio is a battle ground state and the fiasco where Bush lauded one of his rangers who then sent a lot of jobs to China (I had a thread about this a few months back) is still remembered in Ohio. While the symbolism was lost on you in California, it was not lost in Ohio.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #19 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
PS. I don't think there's anything Kerry can say/do to draw you in trumptman.


Actually I've detailed here several times what Kerry could do to get my vote. It mostly involves immigration reform which is very much related to environmental, racial, union, and security issues. I've also said he could become a true fair trader which would earn my vote as well.

Neither of those positions are owned or addressed by conservatives and addressing them would not undermine Kerry being portrayed as middle of the road or liberal. If he committed to immigration/security reform and fair trade, he would have my vote.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #20 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
That's true though. I don't know why he doesn't defend that, because it's very defensible. He voted for a version of that bill that would have postponed some of the tax cuts in order to pay for it. But the Republicans defeated that and wanted it to just increase the deficit. So he voted against that version of it. It makes perfect sense, and although I think he should have voted for the final version, I think he can defend voting against it.

Well then why cant he say that? If he had said that and not just "I voted for (it) before I voted against it" that would have been at least a little reasonable.

What really frosts me is Kerry talking about the men and women in iraq not haveing body armor (which isnt all together true) when, for a reason that he hasn't publicly explained, he voted against the 87 billion dollars of wartime funding.
P.S.
Oh how rude, I forgot to say that he voted against it AFTER voteing for it.
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #21 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
Well then why cant he say that? If he had said that and not just "I voted for (it) before I voted against it" that would have been at least a little reasonable.

Are you sure he didn't explain it? The only thing we've heard is that 2-second clip. I heard Bush repeat those words again today. Obviously Kerry was speaking both before and after he said that particular phrase, maybe he did give the full explanation at the time. But I'm not quite sure why he doesn't defend it now. Maybe he just wants to avoid the whole issue.

But apparently this all started when Kerry criticized Bush for not sending body armor for all the troops. Apparently that is undisputed. Think about it: Why was there a bill before Congress to purchase body armor for troops, if they were already in Iraq?

I think it's a fair ad, and the best one they've got against Kerry. But I just think Kerry has at least a reasonable argument against it.

Here's some information on the issue.
post #22 of 37
It's difficult to "slander" someone when you site their actual voting record and actual quotes.

At the end of the day Kerry voted for the Iraq war and then voted against funding it.
post #23 of 37
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
It's difficult to "slander" someone when you site their actual voting record and actual quotes.

At the end of the day Kerry voted for the Iraq war and then voted against funding it.

C'mon you know this isn't true. If you don't know this isn't true then you've been truly blinded. Oh, what about those 13 programs Kerry voted against in 88'ish. Remember those. Remember the hullabaloo surrounding those programs? Remember the Cheney letter asking for the congress to cancel these programs? Remember how quickly that flap fell from the funny pages? Same thing here. Kerry didn't vote against the troops. He voted against a poor piece of legislation. A piece a legislation designed to sap $$$ from the treasury with no means of returning $$$, at least in some part, to the treasury.

I think you know the truth about this vote, yet you still cling to a false idea and espouse it when and where possible. I think you know why he voted for the bill the first time and against it the second. I think you like spreading FUD instead of addressing the issue of paying for the conflict. I thought you where a conservative Scott. Well maybe not because conservatives tend to believe in fiscal responsibility--like paying for spending. Weird...
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #24 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
C'mon you know this isn't true. If you don't know this isn't true then you've been truly blinded. Oh, what about those 13 programs Kerry voted against in 88'ish. Remember those. Remember the hullabaloo surrounding those programs? Remember the Cheney letter asking for the congress to cancel these programs? Remember how quickly that flap fell from the funny pages? Same thing here. Kerry didn't vote against the troops. He voted against a poor piece of legislation. A piece a legislation designed to sap $$$ from the treasury with no means of returning $$$, at least in some part, to the treasury.

I think you know the truth about this vote, yet you still cling to a false idea and espouse it when and where possible. I think you know why he voted for the bill the first time and against it the second. I think you like spreading FUD instead of addressing the issue of paying for the conflict. I thought you where a conservative Scott. Well maybe not because conservatives tend to believe in fiscal responsibility--like paying for spending. Weird...

This is going to be where it gets really ugly. Our conservative posters serve as a microcosm of the American right at this moment.

The people repeating these talking points-- that Kerry voted to "gut intel", that Kerry "voted against funding the troops"-- know full well that similar things could be narrowly defined as true about most of the members of the senate.

All it takes is one badly crafted piece of legislation that contains, at least in part, funding for something that sounds good, and you can play this game all day.

Hence: Republican Senator X votes against life saving measure for children! Senator Y votes to put seniors to death! And to put mercury in the water!
Hey, did you know that Bill Frist voted to destroy social security? Apparently he hates America!

I'm starting to wonder if the right has any substantive criticism whatsoever of Kerry. So far all we have is the phony "flip-flop" meme (how you liking that 9/11 commission now, Mr. Bush?), grotesquely distorted versions of Kerry's voting record, pathetic attacks on his tour of duty in Vietnam, spurious slander (He's having an affair! He uses Botox! He secretly restaged battles in 'nam! He and Edwards must be kinda gay!), and some vague hand waving about al Qaeda and "remaining resolute" and the old "liberals are pussies" line.

If Kerry is such a poor candidate, why not confront him on his actual failings? Why the distorted bullshit? I can only conclude that he must be pretty solid, if what we have seen so far is the best the right can do.

But hell, don't let me stop you. Ya'll just keep chanting "he's a flip-flopping, troop defunding, voted for the war before he voted against it, french looking, most lilberal ticket ever having Herman Munster looking guy".

And after all of that is easily refuted, the left and Kerry can continue their coherent critique of the actual for real damage that Bush has done to this country, while his positives just keep dropping and his negatives just keep growing.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #25 of 37
You forgot that he's "outside the mainstream." I swear, the attacks on him are just incredibly stupid.

He's outside the mainstream--and yet he's polling ahead of Bush in national polls? Even people like Ralph Reed admit that this race is going to be close. How can he be outside the mainstream if it's going to be a close race?

He's the #1 most liberal member of the Senate--Don't ask how this ranking was established.

He's a flip-flopper: How can he be both consistent enough to be "the #1 liberal" AND a flip-flopper? Those two things are mutually exclusive

I swear, the talking points coming out of the Bush campaign for the most part rely on Bush supporters either being stupid or not caring that chunks of them don't make any sense.

I'll say it again: if I were a Republican, I'd be very, very concerned that Kerry is appearing more than Bush in Bush's campaign materials/sites/TV spots.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #26 of 37
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
You forgot that he's "outside the mainstream." I swear, the attacks on him are just incredibly stupid.

He's outside the mainstream--and yet he's polling ahead of Bush in national polls? Even people like Ralph Reed admit that this race is going to be close. How can he be outside the mainstream if it's going to be a close race?

He's the #1 most liberal member of the Senate--Don't ask how this ranking was established.

He's a flip-flopper: How can he be both consistent enough to be "the #1 liberal" AND a flip-flopper? Those two things are mutually exclusive

I swear, the talking points coming out of the Bush campaign for the most part rely on Bush supporters either being stupid or not caring that chunks of them don't make any sense.

I'll say it again: if I were a Republican, I'd be very, very concerned that Kerry is appearing more than Bush in Bush's campaign materials/sites/TV spots.

The true measure of a candidate is how viscoulsy he/she is attacked by the opponent.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #27 of 37
Astonishingly, the theme of the Bush "August offensive" is "results matter".

So apparently the presumption is that likely Bush voters are not only stupid, but deaf, dumb and blind.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #28 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
The true measure of a candidate is how viscoulsy he/she is attacked by the opponent.

so that means Bush measures up well?
post #29 of 37
Quote:
Astonishingly, the theme of the Bush "August offensive" is "results matter".

So apparently the presumption is that likely Bush voters are not only stupid, but deaf, dumb and blind.

That would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.

Hey Scott READ MY LIPS!!!!! Duuuh?
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #30 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
At the end of the day Kerry voted for the Iraq war and then voted against funding it.

I hope for your sake as well as everyone here, one day you stop lying in your posts. They are distractions to an otherwise intelligent discussion.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #31 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
The true measure of a candidate is how viscoulsy he/she is attacked by the opponent.

I think we should ammend that to "The true measure of a candidate is how viscoulsy he/she is attacked by the Bush campaign" and call it the Bush Rule for Presidential Worthiness. It would put John McCain right up at the top, with Kerry not too far behind and rising fast.
post #32 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
I hope for your sake as well as everyone here, one day you stop lying in your posts. They are distractions to an otherwise intelligent discussion.

You add so much to the discussion yourself with name calling.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #33 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
You add so much to the discussion yourself with name calling.

Nick

When someone's wrong, you correct them. That's how to move a conversation forward.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #34 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
When someone's wrong, you correct them. That's how to move a conversation forward.

This is true. You correct them by providing information, links, articles, heck maybe even the actual voting record.

That then shows everyone the objective truth and allows them to move forward.

You did none of that. You just called him a liar. You did not correct, you simple called names.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #35 of 37
Quote:
John Kerry DID NOT Vote Against Our Men and Women in the Military; Kerry VOTED Against the FAILED Bush Policy in Iraq: Of course John Kerry supports our troopsit is ridiculous to suggest otherwise. John Kerry voted AGAINST the failed Bush policy in Iraq which is still putting US troops in harms way saying: "The best way to support our troops and take the target off their backs is with a real strategy to win the peace in Iraq - not by throwing $87 billion at George Bush's failed policies. I am voting 'no' on the Iraq resolution to hold the President accountable and force him finally to develop a real plan that secures the safety of our troops and stabilizes Iraq."

Kerry Was a Lead Sponsor of the Amendment to Fund Our Nations Troops in Iraq Through Rescinding the Bush Tax Cut for the Wealthy: "The people who ordered up this war are the ones who ought to finance its aftermath. Yet when the Senate had a chance to vote on Oct. 2 for an amendment that would pay the postwar costs by temporarily reducing the tax cut for the wealthiest slice of Americans -- the less than 1 percent who $400,000 a year -- it was rejected, 57-42." [Broder, 10/12/03; 108th Congress S.Amdt. 1796]
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #36 of 37
You know Kerry seems like a much more forceful, smart, and full of direction candidate than I gave him credit for.

It's not so much just to get rid of Bush anymore.

I want Kerry.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #37 of 37
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
You know Kerry seems like a much more forceful, smart, and full of direction candidate than I gave him credit for.

It's not so much just to get rid of Bush anymore.

I want Kerry.

I agree completely. An ardent liberal, I wasn't in the pro-Kerry camp until after I heard his speech and only his speech. Granted, I enjoyed and was impressed by other speeches given during the convention, but Kerry's was the one that mattered. I would likely have voted for him anyway, even if his speech floundered, but now I support him completely.

Now I can say that I agree with Kerry's ideals and that I think he would make an excellent president.

I want Kerry.


Ask and I'll tell you why.
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Kerry's speech: I'm now voting for him not against Bush.