George Bush had a strong speech tonight..

[raildogg]

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.

Yeah free-thinking, French loving, UN sniffing person.

The GOP was just showing America how Bush is better than Kerry. A huge chunk of the Bush presidency deals with 9/11 so its only natural that they showcase it.

 

[digitalsm]

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.

Thats hilarious because even the liberal talking heads are saying Bush's speech had a good first half and a great second half. Most are rating his speech vastly more effective than Kerry's, same with the GOP Convention over DNC Convention. The pundits(even liberal ones) say Bush should recieve a bounce of 5-10%. Though as everyone is saying this year, stuff changes on a weekly and monthly basis.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: raildogg

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.

Yeah free-thinking, French loving, UN sniffing person.

The GOP was just showing America how Bush is better than Kerry. A huge chunk of the Bush presidency deals with 9/11 so its only natural that they showcase it.

Nice attack and generalization there. "French loving, UN sniffing person"? WTF is that supposed to mean?


But, I see you're another blind follower of the GOP. You support the politicizing of the 9/11 tragedy despite their promises not to do so.

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

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.

Thats hilarious because even the liberal talking heads are saying Bush's speech had a good first half and a great second half. Most are rating his speech vastly more effective than Kerry's, same with the GOP Convention over DNC Convention. The pundits(even liberal ones) say Bush should recieve a bounce of 5-10%. Though as everyone is saying this year, stuff changes on a weekly and monthly basis.

Dont argue with Conjur, he'll google something claim your wrong

 

[imported_hscorpio]

The delivery of the speech wasn't too bad considering his past speeches. The one part that stuck with me was where he said Kerry wants big government and wants to pay for it with increased taxes.

Bush says he's the man of limited government on one hand but then proposes all these programs and increased spending on the other. And then he says he wants to make to tax cuts permanent. How is he going to pay for all his proposals?

I just think Bush's advisors need to do a better job explaining what big government is and isn't to him

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: raildogg

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.

Yeah free-thinking, French loving, UN sniffing person.

The GOP was just showing America how Bush is better than Kerry. A huge chunk of the Bush presidency deals with 9/11 so its only natural that they showcase it.

Nice attack and generalization there. "French loving, UN sniffing person"? WTF is that supposed to mean?


But, I see you're another blind follower of the GOP. You support the politicizing of the 9/11 tragedy despite their promises not to do so.

You are just bitter because the GOP has pulled off very effective convention which is what liberal talking heads are saying. While the Democrats didnt pull off a very effective convention and have made some major miscalculations.

 

[bjc112]

I agree Digit.. Most of the talking heads i saw on several stations really did like it..


Conjur,

I know you fully disagree with Bush, but it really shows the hatred you have for him when you cannot even say it was a DECENT speech..

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: digitalsm
You are just bitter because the GOP has pulled off very effective convention which is what liberal talking heads are saying. While the Democrats didnt pull off a very effective convention and have made some major miscalculations.

I think he's bitter because the GOP now has more sheep than Kerry. <3

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: raildogg

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.

Yeah free-thinking, French loving, UN sniffing person.

The GOP was just showing America how Bush is better than Kerry. A huge chunk of the Bush presidency deals with 9/11 so its only natural that they showcase it.

Nice attack and generalization there. "French loving, UN sniffing person"? WTF is that supposed to mean?


But, I see you're another blind follower of the GOP. You support the politicizing of the 9/11 tragedy despite their promises not to do so.

Tell me on what should Bush run on??? A hugeee part of it dealt with 9/11 and other security issues such as Iraq and homeland defense. Dont forget the tax cuts.

 

[DealMonkey]

I watched the speech tonight and it made me reflect back on the Bush presidency thus far and what he has (or what he hasn't) accomplished. All rhetoric and empty promises for the future aside, I'm more interested in what makes him think he's done a good job thus far and deserves a second term.

Let's look back at some important issues and discuss how good of a job Bush has done:

Immigration: Nada. You can literally hear the taxpayer's money getting sucked out of my state (CA) as a result of ineffective immigration enforcement. In fact, Bush seems to be in favor of more illegal immigration not less. When are the freaking people running this country going to enforce our immigration laws? It's a joke.

:thumbsdown:

The Economy: That other sucking sound you hear is jobs being lost and a huge deficit being created by an explosion in domestic and in particular military/defense spending. Not to mention our new welfare state: Iraq. Couple that with massive tax cuts. Note: I really like Bush's tax cuts, however coupled with outrageous amounts of federal spending, I think they're highly inappropriate.

:thumbsdown:

Social Issues: Bush &amp; Co come down on the extreme right/ultra fundie side of just about every social issue I can think of: Gay marriage, abortion, faith-based initiatives, injecting religion into various aspects of our culture, etc. I'm sure Bush's conservo-fundie policies play well in the bible-belt, but what about the rest of the country?

:thumbsdown:

Terrorism/Homeland Security: This is really a mixed bag. Bush gets + pts for Afghanistan, but - pts for Iraq. On the domestic front, he gets plus and minus pts for tightening up some aspects of our security but ignoring others. Not to mention 9/11 happened on his watch. I find it appalling that 9/11 is the centerpiece of his campaign. That's a dangerous position to take just like Kerry and his Vietnam posturing. Overall, I find it difficult to be swayed by the "dangers" of terrorism. Fear mongering is the stupidest tactic ever. I'm much more likely to die on a California freeway than by a terrorist attack.

:thumbsup: :thumbsdown:

Environment: Geeze, what can I say there? It's all negative. Virtually every single action taken by the administration thus far regarding the environmental policies of this nation have weakened environmental protection in favor of industry/business. This is a no brainer.

:thumbsdown:

Health Care: Two-words: Medicare Expansion. Ugh. What a colossal waste of cash. Otherwise, what has Bush done beyond tacking on huge amounts of spending?

:thumbsdown:

Energy Independence: I hear a lot of rhetoric but see very little action. This should be a TOP priority given the kind of F'd up foreign idiots we have to deal with to get our oil.

:thumbsdown:

Education: The concept of "no child left behind" is a good one. Testing is important. Yet, this program was woefully underfunded. Mixed bag.

:thumbsup: :thumbsdown:

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: raildogg
Tell me on what should Bush run on???

He doesn't have much of a choice.

A hugeee part of it dealt with 9/11 and other security issues such as Iraq and homeland defense.

His success is mixed at best. Remember the guy that was able to bypass airport screeners with box cutters or does he not count?

Dont forget the tax cuts.

http://www.jobwatch.org/

More unfulfilled promises. But hey, as long as you still have your job, it doesn't matter to you.

 

[ntdz]

take a look around, the democrats are painting it like the country is in some domestic crisis, things arent that bad, in fact, I'd argue things are good right now. 5.5% unemployment is very good, better than the 30 year average and the same as Clinton in 1996.

 

[going5hole]

It's a popular myth that the No Child Left Behind Act is underfunded, DealMonkey

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: going5hole
It's a popular myth that the No Child Left Behind Act is underfunded, DealMonkey

The FY 2004 budget submitted by President Bush fell $9 billion short of the amount authorized for 2004 and his FY 2003 budget fell $7.2 billion short of approved funding.

In February 2003, the bipartisan National Governors Association voted unanimously to label Bush's No Child Left Behind Act an unfunded mandate, along with special education, homeland security and Medicaid. A November 2003 survey of nearly 2,000 superintendents and principals found that 9 in 10 viewed No Child Left Behind as an unfunded mandate. States and localities have struggled to keep up with the new requirements. Between fiscal years 2002 and 2004, education spending in 35 states was unable to keep pace with increases in inflation and enrollment.

 

[Painman]

Let's see...

1) Wrapped himself in 9/11 (predictable, exploitative nostalgia for the days of unity he squandered)
2) LIED about the leadup to the Iraq War, claiming Hussein didn't cooperate with inspectors as per UNSC resolution 1441. Inspections were underway and unfettered, but Georgie had a nut he needed to blow.
3) Presented a domestic "plan" for his next term. Sorry, he came off here sounding like someone running for his first term. Finally getting the hang of this "Prezdint" thing, George? Yay.
4) Not one mention of the word, "deficit". Oh yeah, those don't matter. :roll:
5) STILL no mention of Osama Bin Laden. I guess he's officially, "Osama Bin Forgotten".

Boy George is in hot water, and he did not pull himself out of it tonight. Don't expect those waters to cool much in the next 2 months.

 

[going5hole]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: going5hole
It's a popular myth that the No Child Left Behind Act is underfunded, DealMonkey

The FY 2004 budget submitted by President Bush fell $9 billion short of the amount authorized for 2004 and his FY 2003 budget fell $7.2 billion short of approved funding.

In February 2003, the bipartisan National Governors Association voted unanimously to label Bush's No Child Left Behind Act an unfunded mandate, along with special education, homeland security and Medicaid. A November 2003 survey of nearly 2,000 superintendents and principals found that 9 in 10 viewed No Child Left Behind as an unfunded mandate. States and localities have struggled to keep up with the new requirements. Between fiscal years 2002 and 2004, education spending in 35 states was unable to keep pace with increases in inflation and enrollment.

Okay, where's the source on that, because the one I've read says they've recieved a 60% or so increase in the funding they were recieving. Not getting the complete amount you were promised doesn't equal underfunding, if it's still a siginificant raise over what you were getting.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: ntdz
take a look around, the democrats are painting it like the country is in some domestic crisis, things arent that bad, in fact, I'd argue things are good right now. 5.5% unemployment is very good, better than the 30 year average and the same as Clinton in 1996.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat1.txt

Pay attention to the years 1992-current.

 

[cpumaster]

I pitty people who vote because of speeches made by candidates at the party convention, that's like suppose to be the easiest speech in their whole life, they're surrounded by their supporters and it's a formality speech.
Pls vote based on fact on the ground, or issues such as, is this country is safer? Is the war in Iraq good for us or if you think it's part of war against terrorism, is the war in Iraq helping us winning the bigger war? How about the nation economy, your daily job, health care, etc.
Just because GOP keep saying we're safer doesn't make it so, just because Dems says they will give everyone health care doesn't make it so. Which candidates can actually help this country more in the future than the other? Not just in war, but in economy, because having a strong economy is actually one of the fundamental requirement of winning this sort of war.
I think you can say that war on terrorism is sort of between Cold war and war on drugs.
In that in this war your principal enemy is one Al-Qaeda &amp; their philosophy. Yet they are a stateless enemy just like the war against drugs, from the producers to the smugglers, to the users....

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: ntdz
take a look around, the democrats are painting it like the country is in some domestic crisis, things arent that bad, in fact, I'd argue things are good right now. 5.5% unemployment is very good, better than the 30 year average and the same as Clinton in 1996.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat1.txt">ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat1.txt</a>

Pay attention to the years 1992-current.

k, and i was refering to 2004 and not 2003, unemployment has gone down significantly since then...Things ARE getting better, but democrats want to make everything think we are somehow in a great depression...All they have to run on is negativety...

 

[CWRMadcat]

Originally posted by: bjc112
I thought the start of the speech was good to clear out some of the domestic issues, and future policies.. But i thought the later half, and especially the last 10 minutes were excellent...

Solid performance, one of Bush's better speeches..

It was ok, I think he could have left out the spanish though...winced when I heard that segment.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: ntdz
k, and i was refering to 2004 and not 2003, unemployment has gone down significantly since then...Things ARE getting better, but democrats want to make everything think we are somehow in a great depression...

Take a look again at the AVERAGE for year 1996 again. Hardly the same as you claim to the current 5.5%. And since when is a monthly comparison equatable to a year average (which by the way is still lower)?

What I wanted to point out was, the years when Clinton was in office.

All they have to run on is negativety...

You must have missed the RNC then.

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: Painman
Boy George is in hot water, and he did not pull himself out of it tonight. Don't expect those waters to cool much in the next 2 months.

Actually, I think Bush won the presidential election tonight. In fact, I can even pinpoint it to the moment he welled up during his speech. Liberals will say it was empty sentiment, but it showed America he's passionate about America, and not someone who merely says whatever is popular at the moment. Expect Bush to pull away in the polls, and ride that lead till he wins on November 2nd.

Kerry is in deep trouble. Anyone can see it. He's on the defensive about the attacks on his military service. He's asking for weekly debates. Why would he want that, unless he was desperate to gain ground? Bush is ahead in the 4th quarter now, and just needs to run out the clock. Sorry Libs, looks like 4 more years.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Kerry is in deep trouble. Anyone can see it. He's on the defensive about the attacks on his military service. He's asking for weekly debates. Why would he want that, unless he was desperate to gain ground? Bush is ahead in the 4th quarter now, and just needs to run out the clock. Sorry Libs, looks like 4 more years.

If Bush was going to win for sure, then why not debate? What does Bush have to lose? Could it be that he doesn't have any real answers when it comes to domestic issues?

In regards to the attacks on Kerry's military service, its sad to see that the administration say they support our troops, and do a complete 360 to attempt to defile a man who actually served his country with distinction and honor. It was done in 2000 and its being done again in 2004. Its the only way they know how to win. Sad, very sad.

 

[Rob9874]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Rob9874
Kerry is in deep trouble. Anyone can see it. He's on the defensive about the attacks on his military service. He's asking for weekly debates. Why would he want that, unless he was desperate to gain ground? Bush is ahead in the 4th quarter now, and just needs to run out the clock. Sorry Libs, looks like 4 more years.

If Bush was going to win for sure, then why not debate? What does Bush have to lose? Could it be that he doesn't have any real answers when it comes to domestic issues?

I think everyone knows Bush sounds dumb in debates. The fewer the better for him. It could cost him votes from people so shallow to base their opinion of a leader on his debating skills.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Rob9874
I think everyone knows Bush sounds dumb in debates. The fewer the better for him. It could cost him votes from people so shallow to base their opinion of a leader on his debating skills.

No, its because he doesn't have his writing team to hold his hand.