Tonight's Debate

[SubaSteevo]

I think it was pretty much even

Discuss....

[Mr. Pockets]

I didn't see much of it because I was working late, but I'm not really concerned. I've made my decision.

[GreenMarine]

didn't watch it... :rolleyes: :D

[Shadow248]

Watched about 15 minutes of it, in that time John Kerry contradicted himself three times. Bush sounded quite angry. That's all.

[shelfy]

watched a little and it further supported my decision, so i turned it off to watched a long anticipated movie i've been wanting to see. :D i gotta be the last liberal to see "fahrenheit 9/11".

[Breck SVX]

'...my wife speaks english better than i do...'
-President of the United States of America

<throwing up smiley face>


-Alex

[Royal Tiger]

Shelfy, I hope you watched it with a certain ammount of skeptisism as much of the material in that trash was "adjusted" and has been proven to be factually incorrect. Just like all his other movies. Bowling for Columbine was so far off it could have been produced by HCI.

[RojoRocket]

Originally posted by PA_SVX
Shelfy, I hope you watched it with a certain ammount of skeptisism as much of the material in that trash was "adjusted" and has been proven to be factually incorrect. Just like all his other movies. Bowling for Columbine was so far off it could have been produced by HCI.

More generalities about "proof of fraud" but no specifics. Spell it out for us dummies please. This kind of statement is being made more and more often, not surprisingly by folks that wouldn't lower themselves to view the "trash" being denigrated. ;)

Glenn

[gsodonis]

Check out this website: http://www.fahrenhype911.com/
This is a counter documentary addressing Michael Moore's masterpiece of fiction.
One interesting excerpt is from a Iraqi war vet who lost both his arm in Iraq. In Moore's film, Moore cuts and pastes parts of his interview with the guy in a way that makes it seem the guy hates Bush and the war effort. In fahrenhype911, the same guy is interviewed and he says that his words were twisted and combined in a way that distorts his views (fraud on Moore's part). He goes on to say that the pain of watching his interview twisted and manipulated hurts him as much as losing both arms.
That is one example of the Moore's POS film. Watching his film without the other for balance is like watching a debate with one debator. You should watch both before you make up your mind.

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by gsodonis
Watching his film without the other for balance is like watching a debate with one debator. You should watch both before you make up your mind.

I haven't seen either one of them, but a film that attacks the first hardly creates a 'balance.' Let me ask you this: does it ever admit that Moore got anything right?

[shelfy]

i should have known better than to say anything. :(

[SubaSteevo]

"I may not agree with what you say but I will defend with my life your right to say it."

[shelfy]

besides i only said i was a liberal and that i was finally going to see the film. i never said i was going to buy into everything mr. moore had to say. :rolleyes:

[NapaBavarian]

I don't know who to vote for, they are both right. For instance each canidate says that the other will do a great deal of harm to the country, and they are both right on that point...:(

[gsodonis]

Even though I have a preference in this coming election, I don't particularly care who wins; I will cast my vote and that's all I can do. Both candidates are making promises that they cannot keep and ultimately there is no free lunch and someones going to have to pay for it and it will be us, the taxpayers. Will it spell the end of the world (or the American way of life, liberty and the pursuit of hapinees) to half of the US population the morning of November 3rd when their 'favorite' candidate doesn't win? Probably not.
I'm just glad that we can agree to disagree on this forum and stick to the one thing that binds us together, the SVX.

[Uncamitzi]

Originally posted by NapaBavarian
I don't know who to vote for, they are both right. For instance each canidate says that the other will do a great deal of harm to the country, and they are both right on that point...:(


You finally said something I agree with...

sad .... isn't it.....? :(

[Landshark]

can someone give me an example of a good piece of legislation that John Kerry had passed in the last 20 years?

[Uncamitzi]

Originally posted by Landshark
can someone give me an example of a good piece of legislation that John Kerry had passed in the last 20 years?

according to him.... 52 bills (that he didn't author)....???:confused:

[Landshark]

John Kerry: "i've got plans........" :rolleyes:

where have your "plans" been during your long career as a senator?

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by Landshark
can someone give me an example of a good piece of legislation that John Kerry had passed in the last 20 years?

Can anybody give an example of any piece of legislation that any senator has passed?

The truth of the matter is that the American public is grossly ill-informaed about domestic and world affairs - and especcially about what's going on in our own government. So when a question like the above is raised by, say, the Republican party, the first answer that comes to mind is, 'hey, you're right - I can't think of a single thing John Kerry has done in the past 20 years. Clearly he's done nothing.'

I try to use as many sources of information as possible, and I am absolutely appalled at some of the things Bush, Cheney and their campaign peopel say that their supporters just accept as fact without checking on their own.

Now, that's not to say that the other side hasn't misrepresented the facts occasionally or just plain made stuff up. But I see far more eggregious examples coming from the Bush camp and I just can't fathom how people just take their word for it without looking into things for themselves.

If we have Bush for another four years, then clearly he speaks for the people and so be it. We'll have it coming.

[Landshark]

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets
But I see far more eggregious examples coming from the Bush camp and I just can't fathom how people just take their word for it without looking into things for themselves.

examples?

[RojoRocket]

Originally posted by Mr. Pockets


Now, that's not to say that the other side hasn't misrepresented the facts occasionally or just plain made stuff up. But I see far more eggregious examples coming from the Bush camp and I just can't fathom how people just take their word for it without looking into things for themselves.



And if you don't look, accepting whatever is said or printed to reinforce what you already believe to be true, it's a shame.

Fact is folks, our "System" of Government is badly bent. Special interests are allowed to buy their way into the offices of our elected "representatives" in ways the little guy can't. TV time, print ads and other exposure, used in ways the average citizen can't fathom, to influence the voter in subtle ways, undermines the very bedrock the nation was founded on. Fact is we all have to take personal responsibility and the steps to dig for the truth, often hidden behind clever rhetoric by both "sides".

I would suggest that we post website links representing various groups and let those caring enough to get away from the boob-tube for a little "horizon widening" peel the onion for yourselves.

Here's a couple; http://www.pfaw.org/
http://pirg.org/calpirg/

Glenn

[Mr. Pockets]

Originally posted by Landshark


examples?

I feel bad enough for getting into this thread. First of all, I don't like public political arguments like this and second I never should have gotten myself into something I don't have time for.

You should see the ever-increasing pile of bugs I have to fix.

I apologize for not answering your question, Alan, but I'm going to cut myself off right here instead of trying to get just one more word in.

[lee]

Originally posted by RojoRocket
...snip...Fact is folks, our "System" of Government is badly bent. Special interests are allowed to buy their way into the offices of our elected "representatives" in ways the little guy can't. ...snip...I would suggest that we post website links representing various groups and let those caring enough to get away from the boob-tube for a little "horizon widening" peel the onion for yourselves.
...snip...

How true:(. Anybody that doesn't think a senator race at around $50million each (for a six year, $150,000 annual salary), or a presidential race approaching $1,000,000,000.00 won't result in skewed laws is something beyond naive. Republicans claim Kerry is in the pockets of trial lawyers, Democrats claim Bush is in the pockets of big oil....And I say....Duh. For once you're both telling the truth.

Now how about sites not favoring one side or the other, but that raise the BS flag on them both... www.factcheck.org

[RojoRocket]

Thanks lee! ;)

Glenn

[Shadow248]

There was an article in my local paper that I believe came from the Chicago Tribune...it had a PolySci professor's comments about the debate last night...he did research on it and found that of all the assertions made by either candidate about what they had done "good", about 7 were true. The rest were either completely not true, misrepresentations about fact, or just half-facts. Here's one example...

Claim: Kerry said that in the time bush has been president, employment rates have gone down more than during any other president's term.

Truth: Employment rates in the private sector have gone down during Bush's term, however government employment rates have grown drastically, meaning that the TOTAL employment rate fell only slightly, nowhere near the rates experienced towards the early part of the last century.

Yeah it's against Kerry, of course i'll remember the ones that make Kerry look dumb. There were examples for the other side too. Just wanted to make a point about these debates. They are really pointless.

[NapaBavarian]

Originally posted by Uncamitzi



You finally said something I agree with...

sad .... isn't it.....? :(


:p first time ever :confused: :(

;)

[lee]

Originally posted by Shadow248
...snip...

Claim: Kerry said that in the time bush has been president, employment rates have gone down more than during any other president's term.

Truth: Employment rates in the private sector have gone down during Bush's term, however government employment rates have grown drastically, meaning that the TOTAL employment rate fell only slightly, nowhere near the rates experienced towards the early part of the last century.

Yeah it's against Kerry, of course i'll remember the ones that make Kerry look dumb. There were examples for the other side too. Just wanted to make a point about these debates. They are really pointless.

there's no shortage of DUMB factor for either side. As you point out....the reason unemployment isn't so bad is because Bush grew the Government employee payroll over what Clinton had in place - then Bush turned around and said Dems will grow Government - you have to pay big bucks for this kind of comedy any other season - or at least have HBO;)

[Matthewmongan]

i dont like eather of them but karry seems to be a better orator than bush. their both rich guys so i dont know how well they can understand the average american. i like it how bush gets this fuuny look on his face after everything he says. its that 'i just made a funny' look. in terms of intelegence and use of vernacular kerry far excells bush and his tax reforms seem to be on the level it all depends on weather or not he implements them and weather the econimy is palitable for the change.

[NapaBavarian]

If I had kids I might like Kerrys tax reformes, but I don't so I'm scared. Bush cut everyones taxes, sure, the top 1% might have gotten a huge break while the bottom level incomes got a small numerically break, but he cut across the board, and the wealthy have an incentive to spend their money with lower taxes and low interest rates. Wealthey may pay upwards of $1,000,000 a year in taxes, so $30,000 or 50,000, a lot of money, won't be that different from someone paying $10,000 and geting $300 or 500 back. In one of the debates kerry was asked to look into the cammera and promise not to raise taxes on people earning less than $200,000 a year, but he refused. Instead he promised child tax credits and other breaks for FAMILIES, so if you don't have kids your taxes will probably go up. He is very careful about the wording "tax breaks for families" and I have never found him to promise anyone else a tax break. Love em or hate em, the wealthy spend a lot of money, and if they are taxed more then they will look more to tax shelters, that means less of that money will find its way to my pocket.






http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/9930604.htm?1c

[SHISVX]

i got one word for moore, slander. he cuts up pieces of interviews and asks the right questions and bam...he has a movie

i was so angry after watching bowling for columbine, and so was the rest of my class. we watched it as part of an introduction of a topic in my criminal justice class. the teacher's speaker, also her girlfriend;), is a top lawyer in the area, and she agreed with just about everything in the movie.

sitting behind me was a marine...he just got called back to duty, although he was allowed to maintain a class schedual, he was dressed in uniform, she had the gonaids to ask him if he would give his life for a flag...WTF do you think he is wearing that uniform for???? he had to leave the room. he was a real quiet, nice guy. i couldn't believe it. so i laid into her. i couldn't stop. i was so ticked

about the election. all politians lie, it is a fact of life. no matter who you vote for, most of what they say they are going to do, isn't going to happen...he might as well tell the country that he is going to pull a monkey out of his arse

Kelli

[NapaBavarian]

Originally posted by SHISVX
he was a real quiet, nice guy. i couldn't believe it. so i laid into her. i couldn't stop. i was so ticked

Kelli

Note to self, dont mess with Kelli:p

[Shadow248]

What I like about Michael Moore is that he put a face to liberals. I used to hate liberals...that's alot of hating. Now it's easier, I can just hate Moore instead. The guy is a complete waste of time in every aspect. Of course now the system he loves so much is coming down on him. He's being sued from every direction because of all the made up material in F 9/11. So i'm happy. Of course i'm sure he'll find someone to blaim his stupidity on...he always does.

[lee]

The hypocrisy of American politics is almost sad enough to be funny (well actually I do find it funny, but I've got a warped sense of humor).

Republicans complaining about Michael Moore and the (mis)accuracy of a movie, all the while sweeping under a rug the babble that spewed from Rush Limbaugh, et al (and Rush's drug defense by the ACLU - if that isn't a great joke, I don't know what is). Republicans putting down trial lawyers, but suing Michael Moore? I stand by an earlier comment that you would have to pay big bucks for this level of comedy if it wasn't an election year.

Where the heck are the conservatives and liberals? Anybody got some running in their district? Here's my (admittedly skewed) view of the current insanity vice traditional roles:

Traditional roles:
Democrats = liberals = spend dollars we don't have & make laws to have us all fall in line with the new order

Republicans = conservative = balanced budget, and keep Government laws out of our lives.

So what is the current babble?
Democrats - return to a balanced budget, and maintain or strengthen freedom values, a larger military.

Republicans - deficits are OK, patriot act, anti-abortion, adding to the Government employee size while maintaining/cutting military end strength.

Are the definitions about conservative & liberal doing a flip-flop (couldn't resist putting that in somehow).

Where's Goldwater when ya need him (I'd even like Ike)? :D

[Ron Mummert]

Are the definitions about conservative & liberal doing a flip-flop (couldn't resist putting that in somehow).

Where's Goldwater when ya need him (I'd even like Ike)? :D [/B][/QUOTE]


Actually, Lee, I think it's flip-flop-flip, as the original Republicans circa Honest Abe were more democrat leaning than the democrats of the era, but became more Republican (big bidness be good) when FDR guided the Dems in a more, "let's create jobs for everybody" frame of social change. Now both parties are gonna' give ilk like me free medical care, better Social Security, better jobs (to retire from), 24/7 protection from terrorists, & free green cards for 7-11 & Holiday Inn employees, whilst having only Teresa's close personal friends pay for all of it. What's not to like?
I'm going to Chicago & vote for both parties this year.

Ron (At least we KNEW when Nixon was lying).

[NapaBavarian]

How bout we throw out all the "conservatives" and "liberals" then look for a normal person:confused:

[lee]

Originally posted by NapaBavarian
How bout we throw out all the "conservatives" and "liberals" then look for a normal person:confused:

I thought we tried that - wasn't that Jimmy Carter ;)

Ron, thanks for reminding me the more things change the more they stay the same in politics....mostly, do & be whatever it takes to get elected.

Maybe ole Mr Jefferson was right...we should have a revolution every four years instead of an election.

[Shadow248]

Originally posted by lee
Republicans complaining about Michael Moore and the (mis)accuracy of a movie, all the while sweeping under a rug the babble that spewed from Rush Limbaugh, et al (and Rush's drug defense by the ACLU - if that isn't a great joke, I don't know what is). Republicans putting down trial lawyers, but suing Michael Moore? I stand by an earlier comment that you would have to pay big bucks for this level of comedy if it wasn't an election year.

Hey I made no supportive comments about Limbaugh (Hush! Limbaugh?). He's simply the future version of Moore, on the other side. Limbaugh started out high profile and controversial like Moore, now no one could give a rip what he says. Moore will be that same guy in a few years. Just takes the public some time to realize that they are all just big fat idiots that like to hear themselves talk.

[Shadow248]

Oh and actually, it's not just republicans sueing Moore, two of the papers involved are democratically aligned.

[lee]

I know you didn't, and if you thought I was saying something to you in particular I am sorry - I wasn't.

I was referring to a general hypocrisy between the parties. One tiny example: The Democrats had to pick on Bush's military record, or rather lack thereof, and the Republicans had to pick on Kerry's medals.

I find it demeaning that our next president (and it will be one of these two guys) willfully engaged in this sort of behavior. The American public is being insulted, but I guess we're just too stupid to notice. :(

[Landshark]

i'm going to run for president next time. my platform:

- kick the good-for-nothing U.N out of the U.S. (let France host those useless a$$holes for a while)

- tax breaks for performance car owners

- mandatory driving school for everyone, as well as extensive Road Etiquette training

- a $2 million cap on election campaign spending. TV ads, newspapers, however you want to spend it, but that's it. no outside advertising, only by the candidates themselves.

- no aid to illegal aliens, foreign students, etc. help out our own first.

i'm sure i could think of more.....:p :D

[Shadow248]

Originally posted by lee
I find it demeaning that our next president (and it will be one of these two guys) willfully engaged in this sort of behavior. The American public is being insulted, but I guess we're just too stupid to notice.

Ahh...but it's really the candidate's parties, and not the candidates themselves, that do the underhanded things. In fact, the candidates don't really do anything but look good, or bad. Even as president, most decisions are made by the cabinet and only conveyed through the president. So then does it really matter at all? I guess it does, because the president-elect picks his cabinet.