Bush Rhetoric Becoming More Aggressive 10-11-04 Can't stand on own record so can only attack Kerry

[dmcowen674]

10-11-2004 Bush Rhetoric Becoming More Aggressive

"There's a lot more in (Kerry's) record that the American people are going to hear and know about by the time it's all over," said Karl Rove, Bush's chief political adviser.

Bush is devoting more time to talking about Kerry's record on taxes, health care and other domestic issues.

In the process, he is seeking to drive home two main characterizations of his rival: that Kerry is a die-hard liberal who lacks credibility because he tries to paint himself as otherwise. It's the domestic version of the weak, flip-flopping image the Bush team has tried to attach to Kerry on Iraq and the war on terror.

Bush then warns ? his audience often chanting along with him ? that Kerry "can run but he cannot hide" from a record that the president criticizes as both unimpressive and unabashedly liberal.

In chats with reporters, two Bush's closest advisers ? Rove and Karen Hughes ? together used the word "liberal" nearly a dozen times to describe Kerry.

 

[Train]

and this is a bad thing? It plays right into what a good amount of americans want to hear.

 

[tec699]

Bush is scared and worried because he knows that his time as president will hopefully be coming to an end. I hate to say it but we need more bad news from Iraq to boost Kerry's poll numbers. I truly belive that the undecided voters are going to vote for Kerry. I meet so many people that absolutely hate Bush.

And Bush has quite the nerve talking about Kerry's domestic record especially since he has blown billions on this war that is only going to damage this great country.

 

[conjur]

Kerry shot down that liberal labeling very well in Fri. night's debate.


Perhaps Rove/Hughes were watching the Dukakis/Bush debates on C-SPAN and brain-farted together.

 

[Genx87]

Bush is devoting more time to talking about Kerry's record on taxes, health care and other domestic issues.

yes, god forbid we move onto something a little more tangible than his vietnam war record.

This is what the election process is all about. The man has made Ted Kennedy look moderate with his voting record.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Bush is devoting more time to talking about Kerry's record on taxes, health care and other domestic issues.

yes, god forbid we move onto something a little more tangible than his vietnam war record.

This is what the election process is all about. The man has made Ted Kennedy look moderate with his voting record.

Any proof for that?

I won't be holding my breath.

 

[AntiEverything]

Would you really expect anything else? Outside of Afghanistan and Iraq, he hasn't really done anything. The only thing he can do is attack Kerry.

On the flip side, I still have yet to hear how Kerry is going to accomplish any of the things he's saying he'll do. He attacks Bush on Iraq, and then says that he's going to do better.

Neither of them has a platform.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: AntiEverything
Would you really expect anything else? Outside of Afghanistan and Iraq, he hasn't really done anything. The only thing he can do is attack Kerry.

On the flip side, I still have yet to hear how Kerry is going to accomplish any of the things he's saying he'll do. He attacks Bush on Iraq, and then says that he's going to do better.

Neither of them has a platform.

<ahem>

http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/our_plan_for_america.pdf

* Make the creation of a stable and secure environment
our immediate priority in Iraq in order to lay the foundation
for a sustainable democracy,

* Fully internationalize the non-Iraqi security and reconstruction
personnel in Iraq, to share the costs and
burdens, end the continuing perception of a U.S.
occupation, and help coordinate reconstruction efforts,
draft the constitution, and organize elections,

* Persuade NATO to deploy a significant portion of the
force that will be needed to secure and win the peace
in Iraq,

* Plan for Iraq's future by working with our allies to forgive
Iraq's multi-billion dollar debt and by supporting
the development of a new Iraqi constitution and the
political arrangements needed to protect minority rights.
We will also convene a regional conference with Iraq's
neighbors to secure a pledge to respect Iraq's borders
and not to interfere in its internal affairs,

 

[lordtyranus]

Originally posted by: AntiEverything
Would you really expect anything else? Outside of Afghanistan and Iraq, he hasn't really done anything. The only thing he can do is attack Kerry.

On the flip side, I still have yet to hear how Kerry is going to accomplish any of the things he's saying he'll do. He attacks Bush on Iraq, and then says that he's going to do better.

Neither of them has a platform.

Kerry is going to pass around a sign up sheet.

 

[AntiEverything]

Blah blah blah. I've read his site. Several times in fact. I thought I just missed something, but really there's no substance there.

* Make the creation of a stable and secure environment
our immediate priority in Iraq in order to lay the foundation
for a sustainable democracy,

How? He's going to pull out in six months. Is he going to wave the Kerry Wand of Security +1?

* Fully internationalize the non-Iraqi security and reconstruction
personnel in Iraq, to share the costs and
burdens, end the continuing perception of a U.S.
occupation, and help coordinate reconstruction efforts,
draft the constitution, and organize elections,

The other major players in the world have stated that they will not be sending troops. Kerry himself has said that we should never have attacked. How is going to round up international support?

* Persuade NATO to deploy a significant portion of the
force that will be needed to secure and win the peace
in Iraq,

See above.

* Plan for Iraq's future by working with our allies to forgive
Iraq's multi-billion dollar debt and by supporting
the development of a new Iraqi constitution and the
political arrangements needed to protect minority rights.
We will also convene a regional conference with Iraq's
neighbors to secure a pledge to respect Iraq's borders
and not to interfere in its internal affairs,

See above.

Kerry wants these things, yes. Hell, I think even Bush wants these things. Neither have a real plan to accomplish them. These are goals. Goals are not plans. Plans are the steps to accomplish goals.

 

[tallest1]

The most hilarious part of Bush's argument is the "You barely go to the meetings and barely vote for these things your stand for but..... you're the most liberal senator on earth!!!11"

Doesn't make any sense to me

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: AntiEverything

Kerry wants these things, yes. Hell, I think even Bush wants these things. Neither have a real plan to accomplish them. These are goals. Goals are not plans. Plans are the steps to accomplish goals.

You said Kerry didn't have a platform. That's a platform. Granted, Kerry has been slim in being forthcoming with more details but his platform at least offers hope that Iraq will succeed.

Bush is merely offering MOTS and the last four years were rather bad.

 

[AntiEverything]

I agree. And I won't be voting for Bush.

But I still see no reason to vote for Kerry. Anybody But Bush isn't good enough for me, and apparently a sizable portion of the US agrees or Kerry would be far ahead of Bush in the polls.

 

[Genx87]

Any proof for that?

I won't be holding my breath.

I may have been dramatizing a bit when I said it made Teddy look moderate. But I do have some proof on his record regarding spending.

You should know me a bit more by now. I dont talk the talk without walking the walk.

108th Congress first session
http://www.ntu.org/misc_items/rating/VS_2003.pdf

107th Congrss 2nd session
http://www.ntu.org/misc_items/rating/VS_2002.pdf

107th congress 1st session
http://www.ntu.org/misc_items/rating/VS_2001.pdf

The criteria for scoring can be found here.
http://www.ntu.org/main/components/ratescongress/

* Make the creation of a stable and secure environment
our immediate priority in Iraq in order to lay the foundation
for a sustainable democracy,

Bush is already doing this.

* Fully internationalize the non-Iraqi security and reconstruction
personnel in Iraq, to share the costs and
burdens, end the continuing perception of a U.S.
occupation, and help coordinate reconstruction efforts,
draft the constitution, and organize elections,

Ha, I am sure other countries will show up for the payday. But dont expect them to foot the bill.

* Persuade NATO to deploy a significant portion of the
force that will be needed to secure and win the peace
in Iraq,

Is this including Germany and France? Two nations who have already said they wont be sending in troops no matter who is elected? Ok...........

* Plan for Iraq's future by working with our allies to forgive
Iraq's multi-billion dollar debt and by supporting
the development of a new Iraqi constitution and the
political arrangements needed to protect minority rights.
We will also convene a regional conference with Iraq's
neighbors to secure a pledge to respect Iraq's borders
and not to interfere in its internal affairs,

Bush is already doing this but France and Russia wont be giving up those debts. More wishful thinking from Kerry.

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

I expect the next time Bush resorts to name calling in a debate Kerry will call him on it.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: AntiEverything

Kerry wants these things, yes. Hell, I think even Bush wants these things. Neither have a real plan to accomplish them. These are goals. Goals are not plans. Plans are the steps to accomplish goals.

Indeed. Neither candidate has offered much in the way of a step-by-step plan of attack for the situation in Iraq or domestic isues. Bush basically promises to do what he said he was going to do 4 years ago; Kerry says he'll just do things 'better' than Bush. Cute.

 

[GrGr]

So when will Bush start to run on the strength of his own record as President?

 

[burnedout]

Rove and Karen Hughes ? together used the word "liberal" nearly a dozen times to describe Kerry

And this is news? Kerry's own biographer, Douglas Brinkley, uses the word "liberal".

"Kerry decided to make Vietnam the centerpiece of his campaign for one clear reason: Imagine him without his military record -- he would just be another liberal from Taxachusetts,"

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
I expect the next time Bush resorts to name calling in a debate Kerry will call him on it.

Didn't he do just that last time? Bush has been rather effective in labeling Kerry from, the start. It's about time Kerry starting addressing this, but it may be too late.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Any proof for that?

I won't be holding my breath.

I may have been dramatizing a bit when I said it made Teddy look moderate. But I do have some proof on his record regarding spending.

You should know me a bit more by now. I dont talk the talk without walking the walk.

108th Congress first session
http://www.ntu.org/misc_items/rating/VS_2003.pdf

107th Congrss 2nd session
http://www.ntu.org/misc_items/rating/VS_2002.pdf

107th congress 1st session
http://www.ntu.org/misc_items/rating/VS_2001.pdf

The criteria for scoring can be found here.
http://www.ntu.org/main/components/ratescongress/

Kerry is more right than Kennedy:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepa...n/26mann_CA.ready.html

From this thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...2&amp;threadid=1360281

* Make the creation of a stable and secure environment
our immediate priority in Iraq in order to lay the foundation
for a sustainable democracy,

Bush is already doing this.

Uh, no he's not. Not even close! And now Bush is playing politics with Iraq's stability by holding off on assaults until AFTER the U.S. election.

* Fully internationalize the non-Iraqi security and reconstruction
personnel in Iraq, to share the costs and
burdens, end the continuing perception of a U.S.
occupation, and help coordinate reconstruction efforts,
draft the constitution, and organize elections,

Ha, I am sure other countries will show up for the payday. But dont expect them to foot the bill.

France was offering up to 15,000 troops before the invasion. I'm sure Kerry could do much better than Bush has in this regard.

* Persuade NATO to deploy a significant portion of the
force that will be needed to secure and win the peace
in Iraq,

Is this including Germany and France? Two nations who have already said they wont be sending in troops no matter who is elected? Ok...........

France was going to send 15,000 troops before. Mr. Diplomacy screwed that up.

http://www.newsnet5.com/news/3791993/detail.html

French President Jacques Chirac, who became the symbol of international opposition to the war in Iraq, was on board with the proposed invasion at first, a new book said.

The book, which has a title that translates into English as "Chirac Vs. Bush: The Other War," claims Chirac considered committing up to 15,000 troops and equipment to the war effort.

* Plan for Iraq's future by working with our allies to forgive
Iraq's multi-billion dollar debt and by supporting
the development of a new Iraqi constitution and the
political arrangements needed to protect minority rights.
We will also convene a regional conference with Iraq's
neighbors to secure a pledge to respect Iraq's borders
and not to interfere in its internal affairs,

Bush is already doing this but France and Russia wont be giving up those debts. More wishful thinking from Kerry.

More conjecture from you.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
I expect the next time Bush resorts to name calling in a debate Kerry will call him on it.

Didn't he do just that last time? Bush has been rather effective in labeling Kerry from, the start. It's about time Kerry starting addressing this, but it may be too late.

What should happen instead is that the American people should be educated by the media and by our free government education to be immune to the process of labeling. It is really mind control and brainwashing and it takes place on a grand scale. It is the fabric of American consumerism. Brand and sell and buy to keep the economy churning. Have a flashy news report all about hot button issues and poll results rather than issues. Thinking and learning how to deprogram the mind is hard work and bad for the economy, so we play the label game. What we get as a result is superficial-ism. I like cowboys better than statesmen etc. I heard that liberals are bad, I don't want to be bad, I'm gonna vote for Bush. I am the man with a plan, he has a wrong plan. Because we are morons they are too. But isn't it better that we are morons jobs than intelligent unemployed or should we change the system. And do you thing we can?

 

[Genx87]

Uh, no he's not. Not even close! And now Bush is playing politics with Iraq's stability by holding off on assaults until AFTER the U.S. election.

Not even close? Is that why elections are scheduled for January?

k

France was going to send 15,000 troops before. Mr. Diplomacy screwed that up.

omg you lose credibility with me each and everyday when you post something like this lol

Here is the title of your source.

Book Says France Considered 15,000 Troops For Iraq


Come on, get something a little more concrete than a book that is titled "Chirac vs Bush: The other war".

More conjecture from you.

This is from your article that apparently proves France was willing to send 15,000 troops for an invasion that Chirac didnt support.

claims Chirac
The book alleges
it claims

But the best was this

A Chirac spokesman could not be reached for comment.

Pot meet Kettle.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Uh, no he's not. Not even close! And now Bush is playing politics with Iraq's stability by holding off on assaults until AFTER the U.S. election.

Not even close? Is that why elections are scheduled for January?

k

"scheduled". Now, will they actually take place? Who knows? If they do take place, will there be attacks at polling places that disrupt the election? Will the results be seen as legitimate given the overwhelming presence of U.S. forces still in the country?

France was going to send 15,000 troops before. Mr. Diplomacy screwed that up.

omg you lose credibility with me each and everyday when you post something like this lol

Here is the title of your source.

Book Says France Considered 15,000 Troops For Iraq


Come on, get something a little more concrete than a book that is titled "Chirac vs Bush: The other war".

More conjecture from you.

This is from your article that apparently proves France was willing to send 15,000 troops for an invasion that Chirac didnt support.

claims Chirac
The book alleges
it claims

But the best was this

A Chirac spokesman could not be reached for comment.

Pot meet Kettle.

Granted, it's conjecture about that right now.

BTW, I see you failed to admit you were wrong about Kerry being the most liberal Senator. And you whine about credibility?

 

[AntiEverything]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
I expect the next time Bush resorts to name calling in a debate Kerry will call him on it.

Didn't he do just that last time? Bush has been rather effective in labeling Kerry from, the start. It's about time Kerry starting addressing this, but it may be too late.

What should happen instead is that the American people should be educated by the media and by our free government education to be immune to the process of labeling. It is really mind control and brainwashing and it takes place on a grand scale. It is the fabric of American consumerism. Brand and sell and buy to keep the economy churning. Have a flashy news report all about hot button issues and poll results rather than issues. Thinking and learning how to deprogram the mind is hard work and bad for the economy, so we play the label game. What we get as a result is superficial-ism. I like cowboys better than statesmen etc. I heard that liberals are bad, I don't want to be bad, I'm gonna vote for Bush. I am the man with a plan, he has a wrong plan. Because we are morons they are too. But isn't it better that we are morons jobs than intelligent unemployed or should we change the system. And do you thing we can?

The problem will get worse before it gets better. The signal to noise ratio is already dreadfully low, separating news from advertising/propaganda is getting harder by the day. There are precious few sources of factual information, everything is now manipulated one way or another, be it to the left or the right.

If only my Google toolbar had a Propaganda Squelch button. Unfortunately that same feature would filter out most of this site.

 

[Genx87]

"scheduled". Now, will they actually take place? Who knows? If they do take place, will there be attacks at polling places that disrupt the election? Will the results be seen as legitimate given the overwhelming presence of U.S. forces still in the country?

Ok so we are going to complain about elections and not acknowledge them until they happen? Where were the attacks in Afghanistan like they promised? I mean really, you speak about Conjecture from me, look at what you are doing now? Lots of questions you need answered before you can validate your position.

Granted, it's conjecture about that right now.

BTW, I see you failed to admit you were wrong about Kerry being the most liberal Senator. And you whine about credibility?

I dont believe I ever made the claim he was the "most liberal" only that he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy. Something I admitted was dramatized by me. My links show his voting record very clearly. The links you provided, have you even looked at how the score was derived? I have taken statistics before but these guys are very very indepth on how the arrive at a score. The simple political disagram the NY times made out of the the results doesnt do it justice. I would be interested in seeing how the creators of the rankings would put them on a political scale and if they truely represent a bell curve.

Kerry ranked 27th most liberal in the congress and Kennedy was 8th according to the results. But I would be interested just how liberal and consiervative they would rank on a political spectrum.