|
|
|
|
satans_mom
Skeptic Friend
USA
148 Posts |
 Posted - 10/08/2004 : 20:14:39
|
I had just witnessed this third presidential debate on October 8th, 2004, and having had several opinions for each question posed by the audience and the responses that the candidates gave, I'd like to post a few of them to the Skeptic Times community because we share similar opinions in most cases and could evaluate the occurences and the events of tonight in the most thorough manner.
Bush did a decent job for debating, not especially in the circumstances he was in, however I did notice the President Bush vigorously worked on his presentation and response time. It was apparent that President Bush did a "better job" in presentation yet as usual the content failed to produce any reasonable results. I noticed that he avoided answering certain questions and seemingly "danced" around his response, so that an answer was certainly given but not necessarily the answer I or millions of others were looking for. The answers he did give I did not like, mostly because of my perspective viewpoints. I felt Bush would continue to lead the country in a more severe conservative direction and as Kerry mentioned, we do not need good conservatives or good liberals in the government, we just need those that make good decisions. Bush stated he would not elect judges for the Senate that would allow their personal opinions to get in the way of the literal intepretation of the Constitution however what Bush views as the Constitution certainly isn't what I view, furthermore, if Bush allows his own personal opinion to override that of the literal interpretations of the Constitution (e.g Patriot Act II) I believe he would fail miserably in choosing judges who would not do the same. President Bush once again blurred numbers and figures. He said that the administration has created 7 million jobs (that figure may be inaccurate yet the point is still valid) however that is a far less figure than what was originally stated. 1/3 of those jobs were government jobs, another 1/3 of those jobs were temporary, so in reality the private sector of new jobs is far less than what this Administration allows us to know.
Kerry did a more professional job and I have less to counteract with Kerry, yet in any case I still conclude that for President Americans ought to have better candidates. Kerry notoriously took a long lenght of time to answer a question and when he did so, the answer was not made quite clear. This is why people are confused on his foreign policy plans and healthcare plans. Unfortunately, many Americans will not take the time to go to www.johnkerry.com and actually download the candidates agenda, so relying on what is being portrayed is much more important in this race if Kerry wishes to be elected. Even I became a bit confused at times, yet it was only in the way responses were being presented. He may be too careful with his wording, which is a better asset than blurting out idiotic statements like his running mate just to get a few more words in this short amount of time given for responses and rebuttals. None the less, it will be what the candidate does with his Presidential position that is of most importance this election. I also take the sides that Kerry claims to also take such as the pro-choice argument, the healthcare plans, the lower-income bracket tax cuts, yet he does not give enough information in this debate as to how he plans on acheiving this while lowering this monstrous deficit our country now has, possibly because of the limited amount of time, yet this information still needs to be given to the American people if Bush is to be let out of office.
All in all, the presidential debate tonight was a "healthy" debate, so to speak, but the same mannerisms existed and unfortunately, they played a bigger part than each candidate's agenda, as many post-debate commentators prove. I felt that Bush could have probed deeper into Kerry's actual plans, to reveal what he would like to do if he became President, but in doing so the Bush Administration may have felt that this could do more damage to their chances at reelection if Kerry obviously has a better plan to carry out. Yet if he does, I believe Kerry would state it very openly without any probing questions. Instead, Bush attacked Kerry's past votes, attacked Kerry's reputation, and continued to state that his administration has done good for the country when in actuality the numbers and figures are altered and customized to be presented the way the majority of Americans want. Kerry had many, many chances to counteract Bush, to openly state that Bush is deceptful and actually give reasons why this opinion is valid. Instead, Kerry also accused Bush of "great deception" yet never gave examples of the Americans being fooled. I believe this would have helped his argument. Kerry could have stated many more of Bush's downfalls which Kerry must be aware of, to give more reason for the American's to vote for Kerry. He may not be doing so because Americans may think he's being undiplomatic and using Bush's tactics, yet the Bush Administration is a horrible one and if I were the other candidate I would focus on why the Bush Administration must be replaced, not so much as why I, myself, would be a better President. It is known that Kerry did vote to raise taxes, yet times are always changing and the taxes that he voted to raise were never made quite clear. He could have voted to raise taxes for the higher income bracket, yet I will have to do more research to find out exactly what these propositions were. If Kerry will lower taxes for those in my income bracket, keep abortion legal, allow embryonic stem cell research, and create global coalitions and again make allies with other powerful countries, such as France, Germany, Russia, etc, then he has my vote.
I would like to know what others have thought of this Presidential debate. In this forum I highly value other's opinions because I believe they are educated and well-thought out. During the debate, my father and his girlfriend talked about how Kerry looked. "He looked crooked!" she said, "I am not even going to listen to him, he's obviously crooked," and in dignified response I stated, "I believe we ought to listen to both candidates. It's our country's future at stake and appearance has little to do with the overall well being of the United States," yet of course they'd have none of it. Kerry spoke that Bush rushed into war without allies, and my father said, "That's because all our allies said no! Dumbass!" so I responded with, "Why do you think the majority of the countries and the majority of the Houses said no?" He muttered, "Well, I don't know," so that should have been a red flag for him. It is there I proceeded to go no further for they would not have heeded a word I may have said. It would have been a waste of my time, and I wanted to focus on more ridiculous American politics.
edited for content
|
Yo mama's so fat, she's on both sides of the family.
|
Edited by - satans_mom on 10/08/2004 20:28:57
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2004 : 20:35:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I'd like to post a few of them to the Skeptic Times community
I'm pretty sure you meant to say SFN? As in, Skeptic Friends Network...?
Because the "Skeptic Times" is a den of YECdom and retardidity. (yes, I'm now making up words....) |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
satans_mom
Skeptic Friend
USA
148 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2004 : 20:37:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
I'd like to post a few of them to the Skeptic Times community
I'm pretty sure you meant to say SFN? As in, Skeptic Friends Network...?
Because the "Skeptic Times" is a den of YECdom and retardidity. (yes, I'm now making up words....)
Oh, yes, of course, Dude. The Skeptic Friends Network. |
Yo mama's so fat, she's on both sides of the family.
|
|
|
|
satans_mom
Skeptic Friend
USA
148 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2004 : 20:53:40 [Permalink]
|
I realized I could have posted this in the Presidential Debate folder, but....... looks like I didn't. Pardon.
You could move it I guess, moderators, although my permission is useless. It would clear up the folders I assume. Maybe I just want to be set aside from all else. Heh, there should be a Satan's Mom folder, except that I can't get online as much anymore and when I do I rarely post, though I do continue to read. Hell, I'll just start up a website. www.satansmom.com...................
|
Yo mama's so fat, she's on both sides of the family.
|
| Edited by - satans_mom on 10/08/2004 21:18:50 |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
Posted - 10/08/2004 : 23:14:00 [Permalink]
|
Welp, me own impression of tonight's exchange; sadly thought Kerry lost it. Shrub didn't win it, mind yas, Shrub gave Kerry several openings, that Kerry should have wiped up the floor with him. No forceful follow-up seen however. This wasn't the lopsided event as their last meeting. Shrub compared to their last showing, handled himself a thousand percent better. Thought Kerry kind'a boxed himself in with that "I will not raise middle class taxes," remark. The Bush debt, plus health care reform, and adding 40k more troops to the standing army with their bennies and equipment...? Comon... The "quick polls" I've seem, show Kerry winning easily, thou, so the Demo's have got their own 'Storm-Spinners' working this time around, or, crosses me eyes with high hopes, the public has decided to vote Shrub off the island, and this exercise is only for justifying that decision...
 Anyone/thing but Bush!!! |
 |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2004 : 00:09:25 [Permalink]
|
With this one Kerry definitely moved from "a guy I'd vote for to vote against Bush" to "a guy I'd vote for on his own merits," (because I basically liked what he said.)
Also, Bush's reference to Dred Scott with regard to Supreme Court justices he wouldn't want was a new low. Yeah Mr. President, its good that you won't pick someone who thinks people should be considered property. Are there any potential nominees still around from 1846? |
Diversity, independence, innovation and imagination are progressive concepts ultimately alien to the conservative mind.
"TAX AND SPEND" IS GOOD! (TAX: Wealthy corporations who won't go poor even after taxes. SPEND: On public works programs, education, the environment, improvements.) |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2004 : 03:12:27 [Permalink]
|
No knockout. I gave it to Kerry on points.
Bush was very interesting to watch. This version of him was so radically different from the Bush of the last debate that I wonder if one or the other was using chemical assistance.
I agree that Kerry missed some openings. But Bush provided little more than the same, old noise about Saddam and taxes that I, for one, am tired of hearing.
I wonder why nobody wants to talk about the price of gasoline and heating oil that is already hurting my, little community and will take a large toll on the whole country if it stays so high. Perhaps we'll hear about that next time.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2004 : 03:48:58 [Permalink]
|
Just scanned a few polls. All but a couple of them have Kerry winning by margines that are a little hard to believe. Some only gave Bush a raised middle finger: single digit. Of course, these will level off a bit as the day goes on.
But to read the current numbers, it was Kerry in a massacree. I will read the transcript later to see what I missed.
Edited to add link:
http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/000516.php
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
| Edited by - filthy on 10/09/2004 03:56:12 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2004 : 05:12:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by satans_mom
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
I'd like to post a few of them to the Skeptic Times community
I'm pretty sure you meant to say SFN? As in, Skeptic Friends Network...?
Because the "Skeptic Times" is a den of YECdom and retardidity. (yes, I'm now making up words....)
Oh, yes, of course, Dude. The Skeptic Friends Network.
I get the sense that you've been following the Skeptic Times debate issue closely...  |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2004 : 18:35:42 [Permalink]
|
NubiWan wrote:quote:
Shrub didn't win it, mind yas, Shrub gave Kerry several openings, that Kerry should have wiped up the floor with him. No forceful follow-up seen however.
'Specially that last question. Instead of talking about Iraq - again - Kerry should have said something like, "President Bush's biggest, most tragic mistake was in not answering your question, ma'am, directly and honestly..." And then he could have described many ways in which Bush could have done so.
Had I been Bush, I certainly would have mentioned that I should have ridden in the streets, just to try to get a real laugh, instead of the nervous twitter that arose when he announced that he made some mistakes with appointments, but wasn't going to mention any names. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2004 : 19:07:43 [Permalink]
|
| Oh, and satans_mom, don't worry about this new debate thread. You weren't the first to start an "extra" thread, and I wasn't expecting people to march in lockstep with my wishes, anyway. And merging two threads is not something which can be done just yet, so this thread will be staying. Thanks for your concern, though. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2004 : 22:41:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chippewa
With this one Kerry definitely moved from "a guy I'd vote for to vote against Bush" to "a guy I'd vote for on his own merits," (because I basically liked what he said.)
Also, Bush's reference to Dred Scott with regard to Supreme Court justices he wouldn't want was a new low. Yeah Mr. President, its good that you won't pick someone who thinks people should be considered property. Are there any potential nominees still around from 1846?
 I was thinking something similar when Bush said that. It was as if some memory flash from his high school history class popped in is head so he used it. No one seemed to notice. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 10/09/2004 22:41:52 |
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2004 : 11:27:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Chippewa
With this one Kerry definitely moved from "a guy I'd vote for to vote against Bush" to "a guy I'd vote for on his own merits," (because I basically liked what he said.)
Also, Bush's reference to Dred Scott with regard to Supreme Court justices he wouldn't want was a new low. Yeah Mr. President, its good that you won't pick someone who thinks people should be considered property. Are there any potential nominees still around from 1846?
I was thinking something similar when Bush said that. It was as if some memory flash from his high school history class popped in is head so he used it. No one seemed to notice.
Actually, if Dred Scott Explained on Daily Kos and Strict Construction from David Niewert are correct, militant anti-choicers routinely liken Roe vs. Wade to the Dred Scott decision.
Thus, we could describe W's mention of Dred Scott as a code-worded throwing of a bone to the wingnut part of his base.
OTOH, it could be that if he cited a recent court decision as an example of the "judicial activism" he claims to oppose he risked alienating some demographic or another, and so fell back on a decison which pretty much everyone remembers from high school history, pretty much everyone regards as a Bad Move and is now thoroughly moot, IOW, perfectly devoid of any "third rail" hazards.
Incidentally, the Niewert site has an interesting analysis of how "strict constructionism" and its related legal philosophies have historically served as the basis and smokescreen for a jurisprudence of class bias.  |
"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2004 : 14:49:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
it could be that if he cited a recent court decision as an example of the "judicial activism" he claims to oppose
The jackass doesn't oppose judicial activism. He opposes only left-leaning or liberal judges.
You'll never hear the right complaining about the right-wing activist judges. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2004 : 16:20:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
it could be that if he cited a recent court decision as an example of the "judicial activism" he claims to oppose
The jackass doesn't oppose judicial activism. He opposes only left-leaning or liberal judges.
You'll never hear the right complaining about the right-wing activist judges.
If there is any justice in the universe (open to question), the point will be moot, soon.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2004 : 01:23:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
it could be that if he cited a recent court decision as an example of the "judicial activism" he claims to oppose
The jackass doesn't oppose judicial activism. He opposes only left-leaning or liberal judges.
You'll never hear the right complaining about the right-wing activist judges.
Ditto. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
