Originally posted by: conjur
Strong if you're a sheep.
A weak and disgusting speech that politicized the 9/11 tragedy if you're a free-thinking person.
Originally posted by: conjur
Strong if you're a sheep.
A weak and disgusting speech that politicized the 9/11 tragedy if you're a free-thinking person.
Originally posted by: DonVito
I must say, without picking on President Bush specifically, the RNC has been awfully heavy on the "compassionate conservative" message, considering the actual administration has been anything but. Sen Clinton has called it a "bait and switch," and I can see where she's coming from.
Originally posted by: bjc112
What did you think of his speech Don?
Originally posted by: bjc112
Originally posted by: conjur
Strong if you're a sheep.
A weak and disgusting speech that politicized the 9/11 tragedy if you're a free-thinking person.
Weak and disgusting?
I don't see how, and i agree with Alchemize, the president should campaign on it.
Seems most people thought it was a great speech.
Raising $4 million for his campaign just miles from Ground Zero, Bush did not explicitly mention the terror attacks - events that aides have insisted he will not politicize in his reelection drive.
But other speakers repeatedly invoked Sept. 11, 2001, leaving little doubt that Republicans plan to weave the events of that day and the war on terror into the campaign.
Republican officials insist their convention will not politicize the attacks, though they have wrestled internally over what, if anything, to do or say about ground zero. But former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, the chairman of the convention host committee, said at a gathering of party
leaders last month that discussion of Sept. 11 and the president's actions should not be off limits.
There is also wrangling over the Republican Party's decision to hold its presidential convention in New York next summer. GOP officials insist they will not politicize Sept. 11 during the festivities, which are scheduled just before the third anniversary, but activists who oppose the president contend that the party will exploit the backdrop of ground zero to boost Bush's reelection campaign.
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: bjc112
Originally posted by: conjur
Strong if you're a sheep.
A weak and disgusting speech that politicized the 9/11 tragedy if you're a free-thinking person.
Weak and disgusting?
I don't see how, and i agree with Alchemize, the president should campaign on it.
Seems most people thought it was a great speech.
[ahem]
http://www.nydailynews.com/fro...ory/95180p-86246c.html
Raising $4 million for his campaign just miles from Ground Zero, Bush did not explicitly mention the terror attacks - events that aides have insisted he will not politicize in his reelection drive.
But other speakers repeatedly invoked Sept. 11, 2001, leaving little doubt that Republicans plan to weave the events of that day and the war on terror into the campaign.
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/...hp?id=1913&print=1
Republican officials insist their convention will not politicize the attacks, though they have wrestled internally over what, if anything, to do or say about ground zero. But former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, the chairman of the convention host committee, said at a gathering of party
leaders last month that discussion of Sept. 11 and the president's actions should not be off limits.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...l=bal-attack-headlines
There is also wrangling over the Republican Party's decision to hold its presidential convention in New York next summer. GOP officials insist they will not politicize Sept. 11 during the festivities, which are scheduled just before the third anniversary, but activists who oppose the president contend that the party will exploit the backdrop of ground zero to boost Bush's reelection campaign.
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Perhaps it would be better if they acted as if 9/11 never happened. :roll: Then they'd be insensitive bastards.
Originally posted by: bjc112
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: bjc112
Originally posted by: conjur
Strong if you're a sheep.
A weak and disgusting speech that politicized the 9/11 tragedy if you're a free-thinking person.
Weak and disgusting?
I don't see how, and i agree with Alchemize, the president should campaign on it.
Seems most people thought it was a great speech.
[ahem]
http://www.nydailynews.com/fro...ory/95180p-86246c.html
Raising $4 million for his campaign just miles from Ground Zero, Bush did not explicitly mention the terror attacks - events that aides have insisted he will not politicize in his reelection drive.
But other speakers repeatedly invoked Sept. 11, 2001, leaving little doubt that Republicans plan to weave the events of that day and the war on terror into the campaign.
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/...hp?id=1913&print=1
Republican officials insist their convention will not politicize the attacks, though they have wrestled internally over what, if anything, to do or say about ground zero. But former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, the chairman of the convention host committee, said at a gathering of party
leaders last month that discussion of Sept. 11 and the president's actions should not be off limits.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...l=bal-attack-headlines
There is also wrangling over the Republican Party's decision to hold its presidential convention in New York next summer. GOP officials insist they will not politicize Sept. 11 during the festivities, which are scheduled just before the third anniversary, but activists who oppose the president contend that the party will exploit the backdrop of ground zero to boost Bush's reelection campaign.
And?
I think he should campaign on that issue, and the speech was stronger because of it.
Originally posted by: DonVito
I must say, without picking on President Bush specifically, the RNC has been awfully heavy on the "compassionate conservative" message, considering the actual administration has been anything but. Sen Clinton has called it a "bait and switch," and I can see where she's coming from.
Do you question the comments attributed to the GOP?Originally posted by: alchemize
LOL - LATimes and united for peace. You've become a cartoon Conjur.
Did he, or did he not mention every single one of those topics in his speech? Yes or No, ConjurBush completely avoided the issues facing the average American out there:
Energy costs
Quality jobs
Education costs
Healthcare costs
Running on the same platform as the 2002 Congressional elections is utterly sad.
Originally posted by: csf
Originally posted by: DonVito
I must say, without picking on President Bush specifically, the RNC has been awfully heavy on the "compassionate conservative" message, considering the actual administration has been anything but. Sen Clinton has called it a "bait and switch," and I can see where she's coming from.
Well, in fairness I think the Republican party as a whole is getting to the point where it's more accomodating for a wider range of viewpoints than the Democratic party, which has been moving further and further towards the radical left as of late. Pataki, Schwarzenegger, Giuliani, etc (I'm not counting Zell here) may not be considered "traditional" Republicans, but their major roles in the convention certainly indicated that they are respected and prominent figures in the party regardless of their differences from the stereotypical conservative Republican. I don't agree with all the tenets of the Republican party, but despite popular impressions, they really do seem to be moving closer to the center.
The impression I get with most leftists/Democrats is that they really seem to be more hostile towards deviations from their party lines, and with the growing leftist shift, it's hard for a moderate to sympathize with them. The moderates who will vote for Kerry are more interested in removing Bush than they are in supporting Kerry's (not especially clear) agenda or that of the party as a whole.
Originally posted by: conjur
I guess flip-flopping is ok as long as it's your guy. You do realize this marks the 2nd time Bush has flip-flopped between War President and Peace President?
Originally posted by: wirelessenabled
Originally posted by: csf
Originally posted by: DonVito
I must say, without picking on President Bush specifically, the RNC has been awfully heavy on the "compassionate conservative" message, considering the actual administration has been anything but. Sen Clinton has called it a "bait and switch," and I can see where she's coming from.
Well, in fairness I think the Republican party as a whole is getting to the point where it's more accomodating for a wider range of viewpoints than the Democratic party, which has been moving further and further towards the radical left as of late. Pataki, Schwarzenegger, Giuliani, etc (I'm not counting Zell here) may not be considered "traditional" Republicans, but their major roles in the convention certainly indicated that they are respected and prominent figures in the party regardless of their differences from the stereotypical conservative Republican. I don't agree with all the tenets of the Republican party, but despite popular impressions, they really do seem to be moving closer to the center.
The impression I get with most leftists/Democrats is that they really seem to be more hostile towards deviations from their party lines, and with the growing leftist shift, it's hard for a moderate to sympathize with them. The moderates who will vote for Kerry are more interested in removing Bush than they are in supporting Kerry's (not especially clear) agenda or that of the party as a whole.
Bush Rebublicans moving toward the center. Come on Rip, you have had a long sleep.
Look at what they are DOING not what they are talking.
Originally posted by: alchemize
Did he, or did he not mention every single one of those topics in his speech? Yes or No, Conjur
Certainly a matter for debate...but that wasn't Conjur's original assertion now, was it?Originally posted by: DonVito
Originally posted by: alchemize
Did he, or did he not mention every single one of those topics in his speech? Yes or No, Conjur
He did, but in ways that their respective subject-matter specialists would regard as misleading. Things have gotten demonstrably worse in all these areas over the last 3 1/2 years.