VP Debate 1 of 1

[Mibrew]

Cheney, Edwards debate wide-ranging issues
VP candidates' only scheduled meeting opens on Iraq war....

Tuesday, October 5, 2004 Posted: 10:32 PM EDT (0232 GMT)

Sen. John Edwards and Vice President Dick Cheney faced off in Cleveland on Tuesday night.

CLEVELAND, Ohio (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina sat down Tuesday night for their only scheduled debate, hitting each other on issues such as Iraq, Afghanistan, same-sex marriage and malpractice liability caps.

Moderator Gwen Ifill's first question -- to Cheney -- was about the war in Iraq. Cheney said the world is safer today because of the war and the arrest of Saddam Hussein. He said if he had it to do all over again, he would recommend that the U.S. invade Iraq and remove Saddam from power.

"It's important to look at all of our developments in Iraq within the broader context of the global war on terror," Cheney said.

Edwards' response was pointed.

"Mr. Vice President, you are still not being straight with the American people," he said.

"I mean, the reality you and George Bush continue to tell people, first, that things are going well in Iraq -- the American people don't need us to explain this to them, they see it on their television every single day."

Both candidates sat at a table with Ifill, senior correspondent for PBS's "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer." During the 90-minute event, no topic is off limits -- unlike last week's presidential debate, which was limited to foreign policy.

Edwards accused Cheney of falsely suggesting a link between Iraq and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Cheney denied doing so.

"The senator has got his facts wrong," Cheney said. "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11, but there's clearly an established Iraqi track record with terror."

When the debate turned to Afghanistan, Cheney said efforts to establish democracy there were progressing.

"We have President [Hamid] Karzai, who is in power," Cheney said. "They have done wonders writing their own constitution for the first time ever."

Edwards said someone "got it wrong" in Afghanistan.

"But it wasn't John Kerry and John Edwards. They got it wrong," Edwards said. "When we had Osama bin Laden cornered, they left the job to the Afghan warlords."

Some commanders believe bin Laden was in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan during intense fighting there in December 2001, but it isn't clear. Afghan forces did play a large role in the fighting.

Democratic campaigners are hoping Edwards can continue momentum fueled Thursday when Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry debated President Bush.

Kerry-Edwards supporters have given a prime seat in the audience to Sen. Patrick Leahy, at whom Cheney publicly directed an obscenity during an altercation in the Capitol in June, The Associated Press reported. Leahy had criticized the vice president, reportedly about his links to Halliburton Co., the largest operator of government-funded contracts in Iraq. Leahy's prominent seat in the debate audience allows Cheney a good look at the Democratic senator from Vermont, a dig at the vice president by the Kerry campaign.

Moderator Ifill brought up Edwards' career as a trial lawyer and the senator's opposition to caps on medical malpractice awards. Edwards won a record-setting $23 million verdict in 1997 in the case of a child who was brain-damaged at birth.

Cheney expressed support for liability caps but refused to characterize Edwards as "part of the problem," as stated in Ifill's question.

Edwards said, "John Kerry and I are always going to stand with the [victims] of this world and not with the insurance companies."

Cheney repeatedly accused Edwards of using factually inaccurate statements in his answers and responses.

Edwards got personal with Cheney when he said a Bush-proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages was wrong.

"I think the vice president and his wife love their daughter," Edwards said. "I think they love her very much and you can't have anything but respect for the fact that they're willing to talk about the fact that they have a gay daughter [and] they're willing to embrace her."

"But we should not use the constitution to divide this country."

The vice president touched on Edwards' relative political inexperience as a one-term senator.

"Your rhetoric, senator, would be a lot more credible if there was a record to back it up," Cheney said. "There isn't."

Edwards, in response, defended his short tenure in the Senate.

"One thing that's very clear is that a long resume does not equal good judgment," Edwards said. "I mean, we've seen over and over and over the misjudgments made by this administration."

With less than a month before Election Day, the race appears to be very close. A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Sunday indicated a dead heat -- 49 percent to 49 percent -- among likely voters. President Bush had led by 8 percentage points in a poll conducted a week earlier. (Poll puts Bush, Kerry about even)

The next presidential debate is Friday at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. Topics are unlimited, and the event will take place under a "town hall" format, with Bush and Kerry fielding questions from undecided voters. Undecided voters are expected to be more crucial to victory in this election because of the thin margin separating the candidates in the polls.

The final presidential debate is set for October 13 in Tempe, Arizona. That event will be limited to domestic issues, such as the economy.

Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards debated such issues as Iraq, Afghanistan and same-sex marriage Tuesday.

[concerned]

Do I feel safe since 9/11. Yes, but I have felt safe before 9/11. However, since Bush has roused more and more terrorists there are a lot more people unsafe today.

[MadScot]

Chaney said he never met Edwards before. He also encouraged people to goto www.factcheck.com (http://www.factcheck.com) what a blunder. I think he meant www.factcheck.org (http://www.factcheck.org)

[BigBadBear]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jimi:
well I guess that means if France wants us to .... there were/are 30 nations supporting us .... not in might because alot have none ... but in spirit ...

I guess we needed Iran, Lybia and France <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Just for you people that think that the "Coalition of the Willing"tm was a farce, these are the member nations:

Afghanistan - may allow coalition forces to use its airspace.

Albania - offered 70 soldiers for non-combat roles.

Australia - committed 2,000 troops, planes and ships.

Britain - committed 45,000 troops, planes, tanks and ships.

Czech Republic and Slovakia - offered 360 soldiers to help in case of chemical or biological attack.

Denmark - offered to send military personnel.

Hungary - hosts a U.S. base where Iraqi exiles are training for possible postwar administrative roles.

Italy - offered use of military bases.

Japan - offered assistance with postwar reconstruction and peacekeeping.

Latvia - waiting for parliamentary approval to deploy a few troops.

Poland - offered troops for non-combat roles.

Romania - offered use of its airspace and committed more than 200 non-combat experts.

Spain - allowed Washington to use two of its military bases and offered various combat jets.

Turkey - prepared to open its airspace for U.S. warplanes but will not allow them to access to air bases.

Other supporting countries

Azerbaijan, Colombia, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Iceland, Korea, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines and Uzbekistan.

Behind-the-scenes countries

Bahrain - sent a frigate and troops on Gulf Co-operation Council mission to defend Kuwait. Allowing use of bases for U.S. troop buildup.

Belgium - allowed movement of troops and materiel from U.S. bases in Germany to port of Antwerp en route to the Persian Gulf; will allow overflights.

Bulgaria - approved U.S. use of military airport and airspace, dispatching 150-member Bulgarian non-combat unit. Stationing of up to 18 coalition aircraft and 400 U.S. troops.

Canada - although Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said Canada would not back the U.S.-led attack on Iraq without UN backing, Canadian warships are stationed in the Persian Gulf with the purpose of protecting allies.

Croatia - allowing refuelling stops by U.S. transport aircraft.

Diego Garcia - hosts U.S. military bases. These bases have been massing army equipment for marine and army brigades designated for Kuwait.

Djibouti - prominent U.S. ally in the war on terrorism.

Egypt - keeping Suez Canal open to U.S. and allied warships en route to Gulf.

France - allowing use of its airspace under treaty obligations, but no direct participation.

Germany - ruled out any participation, but pledges unhindered use of airspace and access to U.S. and British bases in Germany.

Jordan - allowing U.S. troops to be stationed within its borders.

Kuwait - bulk of the U.S. ground contingent is based in the Kuwaiti desert.

Oman - more than 2,000 U.S. military personnel are stationed in Oman.

Qatar - approximately 3,500 U.S. military personnel, as well as 300 British troops stationed in Qatar. The mobile Central Command ("CentCom") used in "Internal Look" is located in the country.

United Arab Emirates - U.S. refuelling tanker aircraft operate from the country's Al Dhafra base.

As you can clearly see, the coalition really needed these contributions, and thats why most haven't fufilled their obligations. And don't forget that Morroco offered pigs to let loose on the minefields, and Nigeria offered monkeys to do the same work as the pigs.

[Coldwolf]

I read this on a Dem sited.

I liked it, and thought some of us might be interested. I could mail it, but there's a chance that some day, some how, a neocon might be swayed.

So I continue my mission....



The Whirling Dervishes of the RNC

October 5, 2004
By Steven Vincent

"Whirling Dervish" is not just a phrase, it is an actual religious practice. The Dervish spins around faster and faster to achieve a hypnotic state of being. The purpose of the ritual whirling is for the Dervish to empty himself of all distracting thoughts, achieving a trance-like state beyond reality.

Unfortunately for the Republicans, they have been forced to adopt this centuries-old technique to help them deal with the "catastophic success" of the first Presidential debate.

Watch them spin and spin. Aren't they mesmerizing? Gaze upon the mysterious powers of the Whirling Dervishes of the RNC and forget what you saw in the debates. Despite all evidence to the contrary, these mystical creatures of denial went into a transfixed spin mode to try to save the object of their worship, George W. Bush.

The Republicans need mass hypnosis to make America forget what happened in the first debate.

After Thursday night's pathetic performance by the president, there was a clear and obvious winner in the form of candidate John Kerry. Kerry was superior in every aspect in the debate. From poise and stature to a clear and consistent articulation of his message, John Kerry out-presidented the president.

Bush, on the other hand was petulent and pouty, confounded and confused, repetitive and routed. It was the most pathetic performance from a commander-in-chief since Bush's last open press conference.

There were some honest moments of clarity from some of the partisan witness to the slaughter:

Joe Scarborough: I've heard some people earlier this week act contentiously towards those of us who would ask that question after the debate, did they look presidential or not. I think it's an important question. I think it's an important question because I think that's what Americans are looking at, especially from a challenger. ... Who looked more presidential tonight? I'll answer the question first as a Republican. I think John Kerry looked more presidential.

Bill Kristol, Weekly Standard: I think Kerry did pretty well tonight, he was forceful and articulate.

Mort Kondracke: This is the President's turf, this is the place that the President is supposed to dominate, terror and the war in Iraq. I don't think he really dominated tonight. I think Kerry looked like a commander-in-chief.

But just two short days later, delusion settled over the partisan pundits like a morphine fog. The popular device I have heard used is; Kerry had more style but Bush's message was clearer and more consistent.

What?

If Bush had a message, it was lost in all his stammering, stuttering and angry stares. His floundering was painful to watch and an embarrasment to our country.

This man who stared like a possum caught in the harsh gleam of the high beam is supposedly steering our foreign policy with a steady hand and determined gait.

"Confident," "sure," and "decisive" are the buzzwords repeated ad nauseum by his fans. He did not portray any of these qualities Thursday night.

Even at Free Republic, the rabidly pro-Bush website, the meltdown of his supporters was abundantly evident by the panicked comments posted during and after the debate:

"I feel sick in my stomach. I think Kerry is winning hands down. I hate to say it, but its what I feel."

"I don't think I have ever seen such a lopsided debate. Bush has lost his footing if he ever had it."

"I don't like this. Bush is doing just about as poorly as he possibly could do."

"I agree. I had to shut it off for fear of rubbing my face in the floor in frustration. Bush used a 30 second rebuttal to say the same thing he said four times already. Word for word. And even stuttered and stumbled while saying it."

"THIS IS HORRIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!"

"We may have lost the election tonight."

Never ones to be distracted by blatant truth, the president's allies went to work almost immediately to spin the pig's ear of the president's failed performance into a silk purse.

The pursed smiles and tight faces of the RNC Dervishes as they came in to face the media reflected their failed hopes and dashed dreams for what the debates might have produced.

Reality did not affect their ability to lie with straight faces, however. Some of their comments:

Rudy Guilliani: I thought it went very, very well.

Ralph Reed: The president was clear and resolute tonight.

Dan Bartlett: Tonight was a strong showing for the President.

And the audacity increased as time began to smooth the edges of the sharp truth we all witnessed. Far from the lie that Bush tied Kerry, right wing editorialists and pundits across the country were spinning the pathetic performance of the President into a win. A WIN?

(Emphasis mine in the following excerpts.)

Dallas News: Crisp, authoritative and articulate, both George W. Bush and John Kerry were at the top of their respective games. We call it a draw. But because Mr. Kerry did not get the breakout performance that he needs to turn this race around heading into the homestretch, the president won by not losing.

Debra Saunders, San Francisco Chronicle: Bush won the debate with Kerry...he won on substance. You can count me in agreement with the 37 percent of Americans who told the CNN/Gallup poll that Bush got the better of John Kerry. (37% as compared to 53% who said Kerry won.)

Cal Thomas: The president was at his best when he mentioned time he spent with a particular war widow. Kerry was the most articulate and won on presentation and style. But on substance, experience, vision and conviction, it was President Bush's debate to lose. He didn't.

Cam Edwards, NRA Web Radio DJ: I think when those undecideds start parsing what he actually said, Bush wins on substance.

Spin my little Dervishes. Twirl until the unease you felt watching this president make a fool of himself, you, and America, fades into the comfortable numbness of self-induced mental fuzziness.

Now, repeat after me, "Bush won the debate." Spin that mantra until you believe it is true.

All of that whirling will be good practice for November 3rd. But the reality of that day will not be so easily spun.

[Mibrew]

CLEVELAND, Ohio (CNN) -- Early polls indicated differing reactions to Tuesday night's debate between Vice President Dick Cheney and Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. John Edwards.

An ABC News snap poll showed Cheney the winner

[Mibrew]

The Heinz channel poll showed edwards the winner

[Jimi]

you can tell who won the debate .... by the absolute silence on this board about it ....

[Raider]

Cool pictures Brew. I'm just finding all these debates to be real boring, for all the words being spoken nothing is really being said.

[Mibrew]

Is she really Dustin Hoffman???

[Mibrew]

Empty promises

[Raider]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mibrew:
Is she really Dustin Hoffman??? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/yes.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/dizzy.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/surprised.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/laugh3.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/laugh3.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/laugh3.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/laugh3.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/cry2.gif

[Jimi]

C'mon .... Dustin has a clear idea on things... and is nicer then either

[MadScot]

I thought Edwards won on both substance and style. He didn't stomp Cheney like Kerry did to Bush but I thought he won. Cheney got caught in a number of lies. That's one of the Democrats biggest issues is that the Bush team has constantly lied to America.
Cheney lied about meeting Edwards they sat next to each other for 3 hours on one ocassion. There were 2 other times where they were at the senate together.
Cheney lied about when he lied. In reference to Iraq 9-11 ties.
Cheney lied about being at the Senate on Tuesdays The truth is he was only there twice.
Edwards actually served as Cheneys fillin as acting President of the Senate on 2 ocassions.
Cheney lied about Edwards voting record.
Edwards has an 84.8% voting record during his first 4 years it was almost 100%.
Edwards Voting Record.
1999 Cast 371 out of 374 votes for a 99.2% voting record
2000 Cast 298 out of 298 votes for a 100% voting record
2001 Cast 377 out of 380 votes for a 99.2% voting record
2002 Cast 253 out of 253 votes for a 100% voting record
2003 Cast 281 out of 459 votes for a 61.2% voting record
2004 Cast 84 out of 198 votes for a 42.4% voting record

I'll give Cheney this he did much better than Bush. Of course there's a reason why some critics call Bush chimp. They believe Chaney is the one who really makes the decisions. This debate would appear to fuel that speculation.

[MadScot]

I just heard another Team Bush member spouting that yeah they met at the prayer breakfast but that wasn't the real Senate. Here's one I dug up just for Jimi it's got his favorite politician Elizabeth Dole in it.

[Mibrew]

To meet = meeting, to become acquainted with, to enter a conferance, argument, or person dealings with.

Dem & Demmer

[Mibrew]

They rant about the high cost of insurance, while their most important monetary support comes from trial lawyers like John Edwards whose irresponsibility and greed are the reasons that insurance costs have gone out of sight. Hypocrisy is not in their vernacular.

[MadScot]

Sorry Mibrew I don't get your point are you saying 2 people sitting 8 inchs away from each other for 3 hours having breakfast together doesn't qualify as meeting each other? http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/confused2.gif

[Mibrew]

Edwards implies Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton and is profiting from the company's contracts in Iraq.

The fact is, Cheney doesn't gain a penny from Halliburton's contracts, and almost certainly won't lose even if Halliburton goes bankrupt.

Edward claims Cheney got $2 million from Halliburton "as vice president,"

which is false. Actually, nearly $1.6 million of that was paid before Cheney took office. More importantly, all of it was earned before he was a candidate, when he was the company's chief executive.

[Jimi]

he didnt say .... I never passed you in the Hall.... he said I have never met you .... C'mon ...he got in on a few photo shop oppertunities.... thanks MiBrew for making that clear.....

Edwards Clearly did not win ... in fact he was chastized several times by the moderator .... and seldom answered the right question ... once she said he did not dicuss the right thing ... he got mad ..and pouted ...

[Mibrew]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MadScot:
Sorry Mibrew I don't get your point are you saying 2 people sitting 8 inchs away from each other for 3 hours having breakfast together doesn't qualify as meeting each other? http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/confused2.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you remember a few years back going to the Nantucket Too Pub & Grill and eating there, there were a few people sitting next to you at the table and we had a small conversation????

I think they had Karoake night or something?

[Jimi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MadScot:
Sorry Mibrew I don't get your point are you saying 2 people sitting 8 inchs away from each other for 3 hours having breakfast together doesn't qualify as meeting each other? http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/confused2.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you have to be kidding right ???? I mean as nitpicky as Edwards sounded that night(I listened again) .... he never tried to correct ... must be a reason why ... nice spin .... can you say hypocrite ??

[MadScot]

Jimi what the *#*# are you talking about?
Fact is he met him plain and simple not once not twice but 3 times. It was one of another long list of Team Bush lies. Team Bush can't talk for more than 30 minutes without telling a lie. Jimi you can call me all the names you want that won't change the fact Cheney lied many times.

[MadScot]

Here's Chaney's statement.

"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."

The only thing that isn't a lie in this statement is he is the President of the Senate. To say he is the presiding officer even is a joke. How long did Cheney spend in his undisclosed location after 9-11 there was even speculation at one point that he had a heart attack and might even be dead. Here is Cheney's attendance record taken from the Senate record. It list's who is the presiding President of the senate. For Cheney to say "most" is obviously just another Cheney lie. Edwards presided as President of the Senate twice the same number as Cheney did.
I can say hypocrite I can say it about Cheney refering to Edwards Senate Attendance.
2001
1/30 Enzi
2/6 Chafee
2/13 Chafee
2/27 Allen
3/6 Burns
3/13 Reid
3/20 DeWine
3/27 Chafee
4/3 Smith
4/24 Chafee
5/1 Chafee
5/8 Chafee
5/15 Frist
5/22 Chafee
5/29 Enzi
6/5 Byrd
6/19 Carper
6/26 Bayh
7/10 Nelson
7/17 Clinton
7/24 Byrd
7/31 Stabenaw
9/25 Wellstone
10/2 Clinton
10/9 Clinton
10/16 Edwards
10/23 Byrd
10/30 Bingaman
11/13 Murray
11/27 Jeffords
12/4 Stabenaw
12/11 Carnahan
12/18 Nelson

2002
1/29 Nelson
2/5 Kohl
2/12 Stabenow
2/26 Landrieu
3/5 Edwards
3/12 Landrieu
3/19 Miller
4/9 Cleland
4/16 Reed
4/23 Wellstone
4/30 Nelson
5/7 Miller
5/14 Cleland
5/21 Nelson
6/4 Durbin
6/11 Corzine
6/18 Dayton
6/25 Landrieu
7/9 Reed
7/16 Corzine
7/23 Reed
7/30 Clinton
9/3 Reed
9/10 Corzine
9/17 Reid
9/24 Stabenow
10/1 Miller
10/8 Miller
10/15 Reid
11/12 Cheney
11/19 Barkley (MN)

2003
1/7 Cheney
1/14 Stevens
1/22 Stevens
1/28 Stevens
2/4 Stevens
2/11 Stevens
2/25 Stevens
3/4 Stevens
3/11 Stevens
3/18 Stevens
3/25 Stevens
4/1 Stevens
4/8 Stevens
4/29 Stevens
5/6 Talent
5/13 Ensign
5/20 Alexander
6/3 Stevens
6/10 Stevens
6/18 Murkowski
6/24 Coleman
7/8 Stevens
7/15 Stevens
7/22 Chaffee
7/29 Stevens
9/2 Stevens
9/9 Stevens
9/16 Stevens
9/23 Stevens
9/30 Sununu
10/21 Stevens
10/28 Stevens
11/4 Stevens
11/11 Warner
11/18 Stevens
12/9 Stevens

2004
1/20 Stevens
1/27 Enzi
2/3 Stevens
2/10 Stevens
3/2 Stevens
3/9 Hagel
3/16 Sununu
3/23 Stevens
3/30 Ensign
4/6 Cornyn
4/20 Stevens
4/27 Chambliss
5/4 Stevens
5/11 Stevens
5/18 Stevens
6/1 Stevens
6/8 Hutchinson
6/15 Stevens
6/22 Allard
7/6 Burns
7/13 Stevens
7/20 Enzi
9/7 Stevens
9/14 Chafee
9/21 Enzi
9/28 Stevens
10/05 Stevens

[Newcomer]

HA HA Go to this link and read the transcript of the Bush & Kerry's debate converted into Jive talk.

http://www.rinkworks.com/dialect/dialectp.cgi?dialect=jive&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.debates.org%2Fpages%2Ftrans20 04a.html

Here is a sample

LEHRER: New quesshun, two minutes, Senato' Kerry. Slap mah fro!

"Colossal misjudgments." Whut colossal misjudgments, in yo' opinion, gots Super-dude Bush made in dese areas?

KERRY: Well, where do ya' wants' me t'begin?

Fust uh all, he made da damn misjudgment uh sayin' t'America dat he wuz goin' t'build some true alliance, dat he would 'eshaust da damn remedies uh de United Nashuns and go drough de inspecshuns.

In fact, he fust dun didn't even wanna do dat. Man! And it wuzn't until fo'ma' Secretary uh State Bo-Jangles Baka' and General Scowcroft and oders pushed publicly and said ya''ve gots'ta go t'de U.N., dat da damn super-dude finally changed his mind -- his campaign gots a wo'd fo' dat -- and went t'de United Nashuns.

Now, once dere, we could gots continued dose inspecshuns.

We had Saddam Hussein trapped.

He also promised America dat he would go t'war as some last reso't. Man!

Dose wo'ds mean sump'n t'me, as some fool who gots been in combat. Man! "Last reso't. Man!" You's've gots'ta be able t'look in de eyes uh families and say t'dose parents, "I tried t'do everydin' in mah' powa' to prevent da damn loss uh yo' son and daughter. Ah be baaad..."

I duzn't recon' de United States dun did dat. Man!

[Jimi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MadScot:
Jimi what the *#*# are you talking about?
Fact is he met him plain and simple not once not twice but 3 times. It was one of another long list of Team Bush lies. Team Bush can't talk for more than 30 minutes without telling a lie. Jimi you can call me all the names you want that won't change the fact Cheney lied many times. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

two of us debate your "facts" and you swear at me .... grow up little guy .....

you abd your polls you believe and the ones you do not ....


I did not call you a name .. so do not go whine to Matt ... this is your typical crap .... you are a hypocrite ... but I was calling Edwards one.... a large hypocrite ....

But then ... whatever..... you are so one sided it is pathatic..... I am not a registered Republican .... I dis like both candidates.... but you label ... and you lie ...

is all okay ...

[Jimi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MadScot:
Jimi what the *#*# are you talking about?
Fact is he met him plain and simple not once not twice but 3 times. It was one of another long list of Team Bush lies. Team Bush can't talk for more than 30 minutes without telling a lie. Jimi you can call me all the names you want that won't change the fact Cheney lied many times. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

two of us debate your "facts" and you swear at me .... grow up little guy .....

you abd your polls you believe and the ones you do not ....


I did not call you a name .. so do not go whine to Matt ... this is your typical crap .... you are a hypocrite ... but I was calling Edwards one.... a large hypocrite ....

But then ... whatever..... you are so one sided it is pathatic..... I am not a registered Republican .... I dis like both candidates.... but you label ... and you lie ...

is all okay ...

[Jimi]

I will ask you once again .... Edwards whined all night and often did not answer questions....

Why didnt he say a thing ??? because they did not truly meet .....

[Jimi]

Hey Brew,

I used to work almost daily in Sunnyvale ... I went to the Dennys there a lot ... and I went to most 7/11s..... I bet we met .... numerous times....

Geez ... I have customers I go to monthly ... and have never MET them....

[MadScot]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jimi:
you have to understand Raider ....wait there is no understaning Mr Hypocrite MadScot <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is on page 3 of this topic. I responded by rolling my eyes.

[MadScot]

Bush claimed to be the great uniter. I guess Cheney sat next to Edwards for 3 hours and didn't try and sway him on any issue. You would have us believe they sat side by side for 3 hours and didn't have any exchange at all. Welcome to Jimi's fantasy planet.

[Jimi]

well you are .....

however . .. I was suprized over this... I expected you to go to Matt again .... you NEVER look at both sides... I do ... you always say I spin ... but you do it way more.....

I say how I feel ... you call it spinning .. you say how you feel you call it the absolute truth ... that is one definition of Hypocracy ....

I have said time and time again I do not support either ... I am a conservative .... But a Jack Kennedy conservative... not this new Left wing crap Kerry spouts.... Kennedy would roll over in his grave ... but I hitnk he is still on a Greek Island ... JK ....

Taxing people who make more than 200,000 taxes most small business owners... you wanna see a reduction in jobs ?????

No one remembers back when luxury tax was hit real hard ..... the Yacht manifactures here in the US went out of business... you say ... well they are rich ... they laid off thousands...

You say tax the wealthy .... well we are doing that in California and seeing jobs leaving like crazy ...

You say ... the rich do not pay enough ... because they pay less a percent of the poor guys in Iraq.... but this is stupid and wrong .... 87% of our taxes are paid by the wealthiest .... they pay a less percentage but way more.... look at Bush's tax return .... He paid 100,000 in taxes.... have you ever earned that much ??? let alone paid that much taxes??? Kerry pays way more in taxes then you or I will ever think of .... yet a smaller percentage then most ....

This is Voodoo hype ... and you love it .. you buy into it .....

Then you say you look at both sides... and you dont .... I am a fiscal conservative and Liberal on most things.....

I do not think Bush is a fiscal conservative ... I do like his policies on that then Kerry ....

But Kerry is and has been dishonest .... in Nov of 2003 he criticized John Dean for being soft on Sadaam ... now he is quoting him ... he has no core values .... I will never suppotrt him....

And I believe he will make this place more unsafe if elected.....

But see... you never look at both sides..... So what else do I expect ... just crud

[Jimi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MadScot:
Bush claimed to be the great uniter. I guess Cheney sat next to Edwards for 3 hours and didn't try and sway him on any issue. You would have us believe they sat side by side for 3 hours and didn't have any exchange at all. Welcome to Jimi's fantasy planet. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So Mr Fair ??? LOL .... why not say the same thing to MiBrew????? I know why ... because more people here like him than me ... you can attack me and get away with it ... but not him .... is kewl ... you are obvious ... lol

Now you can go whine some more ... is normal too

See some of the old timers here ... who count more than me like Mibrew ... you will make them mad if you act this way towards him ... so you feel safe....

[MadScot]

You quoted me and responed to me so I responded to you Jimi. Had Mibrew called/infered me to be a hypocrite for the second time I would have responded to him. I did ask Mibrew to clarify his original statement I guess you somehow missed that. You jumped into it. You make me laugh. First you criticize me for not responding to Mibrew instead of you, then you criticize for not answering your question. Explain how I attacked you. By asking what the hel# you are talking about? That's some kind of attack all right. You get personal call me a little guy and a hypocrite for the 3rd time. You often talk in such small fragmented sentences it is sometimes hard to make sense of what you are saying.

[Jimi]

whine away

[MadScot]

People see through this tactic Jimi. You can't argue with facts so you get personal. I'll stick to the facts and let people make their own judgements.

[Jimi]

you mislead on your facts....

Besides ... I can show you fact after fact of truth ... you ignore it and go straight to the DNC rhetoric ....

and they lie ...

[concerned]

Just what is the truth Jimi?

[Mibrew]

The truth is that both parties use fibs or lies

On ABC news last night they showed that both parties were over exaggerating and stretching the truth...

So that means Edwards and Chaney are both guilty.

Not just Chaney (for the Democrates)
Not just Edwards (for the Repuplicans)

but Both

[Jimi]

amen ...look at both sides..... is all I say ....

[Sandman]

[Sandman]

I moved some topics from the 1st debate and created this new poll.

[Sandman]

I missed the VP debate, so I'm not gonna vote on this one, but I'll share the poll from the CNN web site with you...

<font size=+1>Who do you think won the vice presidential debate?
Dick Cheney 18% 8154 votes
John Edwards 74% 32835 votes
Evenly matched 7% 3191 votes
Total: 44180 votes </font>

[Mibrew]

Hey!! this is the 2nd debate??? and the only V.P. debate

http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/dizzy.gif http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/sick2.gif

[concerned]

I think that Cheney's attitude turned off a lot of people off.

[Mibrew]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by concerned:
I think that Cheney's attitude turned off a lot of people off. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

STOP IT!!!

Thats totaly not true, where in the heck did you hear that??? The heinz plant http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/wink2.gif

[Jimi]

Brew ..... this is what I mean ...

I talk daily to a guy here in the park ....he is agnostic,I atend church.... he is antiBush, I am not ....he is on the yloa board for heaven sake, the one I am trying to remove ... he is a hunter, I am not ... he is highly educated, I am a pool guy....he drinks wine, I never drink.... he loves golf, I think golf is missing a goalie .... he makes fun of my typing, I make fun of my typing... wait we agree on that.....

We used to be real political enemies... he hated me .... then we spoke... and he understood my views. he selodm agrees but understands them ...and respects them alot ..

He is REAL anti Bush .... he said Cheney so far is the only man who showed respect on the debates... and liked his style ....he is still voting for Kerry ....

My point is ... he has full view of things... he dislikes Bush for a few real reasons... Dislikes Kerry ... and looks at both sides.... we are friends.....and I respect him because he does see both sides and does not go off blindly blaming everything on a person .... that is foolish ....our system is what it is .... and to blame a person is wrong ... Clinton caved to special interests ... Bush does .... we lose for both ....

And ... he respects my attempt at a recall.... but doubts we can do it ...

[Mibrew]

Dont let it get to ya buddy, take it all in, everybody has different views, some more than others, its ok, keep the humor and never lose it, its like the sanity we all need.

If ya see a post that might bother you or you do not agree with, DO NOT RESPOND right away, think about it, try and respond with a positive attitude, ya dont have to change your views, but a good presentation of what your views are without irratating his or hers comments really helps, anyway thats what I try to do, but sometimes I know I go off the wall, but with your humor Jimi you have a gift...use the dam thing http://oakhurstforums.com/icon/yes.gif

[Jimi]

and if I like irratating him ????????

[concerned]

In my opinion nobody won, but Cheney lost it.

[Jimi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by concerned:
In my opinion nobody won, but Cheney lost it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

in alphabetical order ????????

[Jimi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by concerned:
In my opinion nobody won, but Cheney lost it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

in alphabetical order ????????

[Coldwolf]

Mr Nobody showed up?

Sorry I missed the debate.

[Mibrew]

Edwards invokes legacy of Christopher Reeve is "crass" and "shameful

Tuesday, October 12, 2004 Posted: 8:47 PM EDT (0047 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist attacked Sen. John Edwards on Tuesday over a comment the Democratic vice presidential candidate made regarding actor Christopher Reeve.

Edwards said Reeve, who died Sunday, "was a powerful voice for the need to do stem cell research and change the lives of people like him.

"If we do the work that we can do in this country, the work that we will do when John Kerry is president, people like Christopher Reeve will get up out of that wheelchair and walk again," Edwards said.

Frist, a Republican from Tennessee, called Edwards' remark "crass" and "shameful," and said it gave false hope that new treatments were imminent.

Edwards campaign spokesman Mark Kornblau hit back, "Yes, breakthrough research often takes time, but that's never been a reason to not even try -- until George Bush."

Edwards made the comment Monday while he was stumping in Newton, Iowa.

Frist, who was a heart surgeon before coming to the Senate, responded Tuesday in a conference call with reporters arranged by the Bush-Cheney campaign.

"I find it opportunistic to use the death of someone like Christopher Reeve -- I think it is shameful -- in order to mislead the American people," Frist said. "We should be offering people hope, but neither physicians, scientists, public servants or trial lawyers like John Edwards should be offering hype.

"It is cruel to people who have disabilities and chronic diseases, and, on top of that, it's dishonest. It's giving false hope to people, and I can tell you as a physician who's treated scores of thousands of patients that you don't give them false hope."

Kornblau, Edwards' spokesman, said, "What's crass is George Bush standing in the way of promising stem cell research."

Edwards and Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry have been critical of President Bush's decision to limit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

The candidates charge the federal limitation is hindering scientific progress on therapies that could offer hope to people suffering from maladies such as Parkinson's disease, juvenile diabetes and Alzheimer's disease.

Reeve, who was left paralyzed after a horseback-riding accident nine years ago, was an advocate for increased funding for new treatments for spinal cord injuries and stem cell research.

Kerry mentioned Reeve by name in Friday's presidential debate while criticizing Bush's stem cell policy.

Three years ago, citing moral and ethical considerations in destroying human embryos to extract stem cells, Bush limited federal research funding to embryonic stem cell lines already in existence.

Research using stem cells extracted from adult cells was not affected by the policy, nor was privately funded research using new embryonic stem cell lines.

The president and his supporters note that his administration is the first to offer any federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, accusing Democrats of trying to create the impression that Bush has banned the practice.

Criticizing Edwards' comment linking the lifting of Bush's policy to medical breakthroughs, Frist said research related to spinal cord injuries does not involve embryonic stem cells but rather adult stem cells, "where the president has absolutely no restrictions, no limitations and there are about 140 treatments."

Embryonic stem cells are believed to be able to develop into more kinds of cells than adult stem cells, and thus more useful in potentially treating diseases. Yet some research indicates that might not be the case, and the National Institutes of Health has called for further study of both adult and embryonic stem cells.

"Stem cell research is promising," Frist said. "The president vigorously promotes adult and embryonic stem cell research, but he does it with an ethical and moral framework."