Vice Presidential Debate - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-05-2004, 10:51 PM   #151
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,457
Local Time: 12:12 AM
since i left for the bar, i've since come back... and have gotten through 2 pages since the last time i posted and have become just so completely disgusted that i can't even read anymore and i need to respond.

george bush clearly lost the debate to john kerry... it's not that his ideas or reasoning was any better, it's just that kerry was better at debating.

john edwards CLEARLY lost the debate to dick cheney... it's not that his ideas or reasoning was any better, it's just that cheney was better at debating.



I... as a fucking republican... can clearly admit that my guy got creamed the other night. now it's time for joe democrat to step up to the plate and admit that their guy, joe boy band john edwards.... clearly LOST this debate, just as GW clearly LOST the first presidential debate.



and as for no al qaeda in iraq... what in the bluest of all blue fucking hells do you call al zaqarwi? a fucking welcoming comittee?

Was there WMD in iraq? as of now, no. do we know if it was taken out of the country durring the debate over wether we should or shouldn't go to war? no... we don't. but until we have any proof that that didn't happen, then attack all the hell you want on that issue. the only defense on that issue is based on suspicion... not fact.

however... al zaqarwi IS in iraq. he WAS in iraq before the invasion. he IS al qaeda. there is no dispute on that issue. dispute the WMD claim all you want... you WIN that argument. it was a stupid argument by the bush admin to begin with. but do NOT argue that there's no al qaeda in iraq.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 10-05-2004, 11:25 PM   #152
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 11:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Chris Matthews is a liberal [my emphasis]
[Rant]
You know what? I've had it with this shit. Stop using liberal as if it's an insult. It's not. Using it as one only shows how utterly close-minded you are. The same goes for liberals using conservative as an insult (though you don't really see it nearly as much). Liberals are not your enemies. Conservatives are not your enemies. If you have disagreements with someone's political opinions, deal with them specifically and don't label an entire group as bad. It's childish. Kinda like turning "French" into an insult. You should be above this petty crap.
[/Rant]
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 10-05-2004, 11:29 PM   #153
War Child
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: houston,tx,usa
Posts: 645
Local Time: 12:12 AM
Headache,

Like Edwards accurately pointed out, there are al-Qaida in many nations worldwide. We're not going to connect that terrorist ring to every nation in which it is present, are we?

Also, I truthfully don't think Edwards lost at all. I only can concede that Edwards might have been too eager to "win". He wanted to get Cheney badly, I could tell. But if you're telling us that Edwards had lost this debate as badly as Bush had lost the first round, you're absolutely wrong. Edwards got his points across effectively. He was articulate, forceful, and intelligent. So was Cheney. It was a good debate.
__________________
GibsonExplorer is offline  
Old 10-05-2004, 11:44 PM   #154
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
since i left for the bar, i've since come back... and have gotten through 2 pages since the last time i posted and have become just so completely disgusted that i can't even read anymore and i need to respond.

george bush clearly lost the debate to john kerry... it's not that his ideas or reasoning was any better, it's just that kerry was better at debating.

john edwards CLEARLY lost the debate to dick cheney... it's not that his ideas or reasoning was any better, it's just that cheney was better at debating.

It sounds like you are equating the outcome of the debates evenly.


It was a format that Cheney excells in.

He has done hundreds? of Sunday shows over his career sitting down with an interviewer.

For people that expected the smooth lawyer to whip Dick's ass it is a big win for team Bush.

The fact that Cheney rarely mentioned Bush is odd.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 01:22 AM   #155
Refugee
 
Danospano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 1,415
Local Time: 12:12 AM
That debate was soooo utterly boring I could only watch about 15 minutes before I started pulling out my teeth.

I expect the deadpan performance from Dick Cheney, but John Edwards was just as dull and predictable as always. Thank goodness we have John Kerry running for president. Oh wait...doooh!
__________________
Danospano is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 03:02 AM   #156
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:12 PM
I would love to see a Democrat candidate in the mould of Harry Truman.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 04:46 AM   #157
The Fly
 
Spooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 48
Local Time: 01:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase


...

and as for no al qaeda in iraq... what in the bluest of all blue fucking hells do you call al zaqarwi? a fucking welcoming comittee?

I laughed out loud on this one. headache...you're the man. I feel the same as you man being a republican.
__________________
Spooner is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 05:09 AM   #158
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:12 PM
Zarquari is not Al Qaeda, he represents the same ideology and modus operandi as Al Qaeda but is more like a rival - it is very easy to say the WoT is just about Al Qaeda, but news flash; it is bigger than that, you have hundreds of organizations with the intent of killing innocents in a holy war - we must defeat this persistent menace and it will never be done with pure millitary might, political, economic and social reform throughout the Islamic world is key to this - all human beings deserve liberty and dignity, that is the only way to defeat the ideology of hatred that is Islamofascism. Lets make no mistakes here, Saddam may well have had links to Islamist terror organizations, he certainly supported terrorism against Israel. Now I doubt that any information pertaining to Al Qaeda/Iraq linkage that has been presented shows anything solid. There were certainly offers and meetings but nothing conclusive. I implore everybody to consider that since the collapse of the regime the Islamofascists have entered the country to reshape it as Afghanistan Redux - only this time it would control massive quantities of oil and could wield power in toppling Gulf States. The investment of toppling the New Iraq is draining on the finances of terror - expertise, weapons and support are being spent for this. Success in Iraq would be delivering a crushing defeat to the Islamofascist cause, Iraq may not have been a hotbed of terrorism before the war - but it is a key front today, we created a second front and it is doing its job well, a brilliant piece of realpoltik, crushing a dictatorship, removing troops from Saudi Arabia (we solved the "root cause" of Al Qaeda's existence and yet it still exists, this is because they will not stop until they deliver victory over all enemies - namely everyone who does not subscribe to their - shall we say - hardline Islamic values, liberty in the Islamic World starting with a Shiite/Sunni nation.

**Note regarding use of the term Islamofascist**
I was scolded for saying Islamist because some fail to understand context, hence I am forced to go all out and use a term which I feel is too charged.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 05:24 AM   #159
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 06:12 AM

While we're on the subject of al-Zarqawi:

CIA Report Finds No Conclusive Zarqawi-Saddam Link

Quote:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A CIA report has found no conclusive evidence that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein harbored Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, which the Bush administration asserted before the invasion of Iraq.
Quote:
"The official says there is no clear cut evidence that Saddam Hussein even knew Zarqawi was in Baghdad," ABC reported.
__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 05:44 AM   #160
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 03:12 PM
This business about the harboring of Zarqawi - there is no conclusive evidence, however there is no evidence to the contrary. What we know is that the man was going to Baghdad and operating, it is a definite posibility that the mukhabarat knew of his presence. It was very irresponsible of the administration to use conjecture as fact - it does nobody any good and when credibility is required again people will be less inclined to trust.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 05:50 AM   #161
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 01:12 AM
Let's try and keep things cordial here, kids.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 05:52 AM   #162
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 12:12 AM
I don't think Cheney won at all, and not just because I'm supporting Kerry/Edwards. I think Edwards at least held his own, and I think he's quite articulate and informed. Cheney seemed to me to be all about same old same old. I wonder if he will EVER admit the lack of connection btwn Saddam and Al Qaida...

"Oh yeah"

Meeting Was Not First for Cheney, Edwards

By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

CLEVELAND - Vice President Dick Cheney said Tuesday night that the debate with Democratic Sen. John Edwards marked the first time they had met. In fact, the two had met at least three times previously.

Cheney made the remark while accusing Edwards of frequent absences from Senate votes.

"Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight," Cheney told Edwards during the debate.

On Feb. 1, 2001, the vice president thanked Edwards by name at a Senate prayer breakfast and sat beside him during the event.

On April 8, 2001, Cheney and Edwards shook hands when they met off-camera during a taping of NBC's "Meet the Press," moderator Tim Russert said Wednesday on "Today."

On Jan. 8, 2003, the two met when the first-term North Carolina senator accompanied Elizabeth Dole to her swearing-in by Cheney as a North Carolina senator, Edwards aides also said.

Edwards didn't forget their prayer-breakfast meeting. The Democratic vice presidential candidate noted the discrepancy at a post-debate rally in a Cleveland park, calling it an example of Cheney "still not being straight with the American people."

"The vice president said that the first time I met Senator Edwards was tonight when we walked on the stage. I guess he forgot the time we sat next to each other for a couple hours about three years ago. I guess he forgot the time we met at the swearing in of another senator. So, my wife Elizabeth reminded him on the stage," Edwards said as the crowd roared.

According to Edwards' staff, Cheney replied, "Oh, yeah."

"She reminded him about the truth," Edwards told the crowd, "and come November, we're going to remind him that the American people do not want four more years of George W. Bush."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 06:02 AM   #163
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 05:12 AM
i thought it was a tie, and i'm leaving it at that.



though 90 minutes of john edwards wasn't too shabby either.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 06:10 AM   #164
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 05:12 AM
Personally, I found it incredibly offensive that Cheney didn't thank Edwards in his closing remarks, while Edwards thanked him.

He also didn't even get up from his chair at the end to shake his hand.

I don't need some bitter old man who doesn't even have common decency and whose capaign slogan is "You're all gonna die if you don't vote for us" to be 2nd in line to run the U.S. of A.

And, I'm not going to admit that Edwards lost, because according to numerous polls, he didn't lose; and according to me, he didn't lose either.
__________________
JOFO is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 06:12 AM   #165
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 05:12 AM
I thought the debate was a draw. Both made good points, and it was very much a counter-punch affair, not at all like the veep debate four years ago, which the press called a "courtly meeting" and "a meeting of gentlemen".
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com