George Bush had a strong speech tonight..

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: csf

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.

I agree with you to a point, but it's important not to lose sight of the fact that this White House has been the most secretive, most inclined toward unilateral, offensive military action, and among the most fiscally profligate and inclined to intrude on individual freedoms and states' rights in history.

If this is what it means to be a Republican (and it clearly is, at the highest levels), then the Republican party has drifted far, far away from its traditional concepts of fiscal responsibility and a small federal government.

 

[csf]

Originally posted by: alchemize

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.

Certainly a matter for debate...but that wasn't Conjur's original assertion now, was it?

I re-quote: "Bush completely avoided the issues facing the average American out there"

I thought his original assertion was "DURRR BLEEEAT BLEEAT U R A SHEEP LOLOLOLOLOL," which it seems to be in his 3947239438247239 posts per day.

 

[glenn1]

I stand by my earlier statement. It was a so-so speech, but good enough. Kerry is toast and Bush is going to win.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: bjc112
Don what did you think of the speech?

I said no comment, and I meant it. If you can't say anything nice (and it's illegal for you to say anything not-so-nice) . . .

 

[alchemize]

It didn't break any new ground, and that disappointed me. What happened to "ousting the IRS"?

Kerry's new "Mr. Aggressive" strategy is going to backfire, big-time. People from either side don't want to hear accusations of activities from 35 years ago. Kerry was dumb to take on the swifties head on, dumb to try and blame it on bush, and will be even dumber to keep on this "I'm a war hero and you aren't" stint.

A month or so I thought Bush was in serious trouble. Now I think short of a major scandal, he's in.

 

[glenn1]

It didn't break any new ground, and that disappointed me. What happened to "ousting the IRS"?

I thought the same thing... I was sitting there expecting him to announce he was going to ask for a flat tax, which would have nailed the door shut. He had a few more opportunities to break things open and for some reason kept on backing off. I kept expecting the money shot line and it never came (sorry about the pun). All in all a pretty mediocre speech which is probably most notable for the chances he didn't take, but should have.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

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?

Hey, everyone flip flops,



Including you.

Again, as with Kerry, that's not a flip-flop. That's changing an opinion as things change. If Franks had not tried to assert that Iraq was related to the 9/11 attacks, my opinion of him would not have changed.

Get it?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Bush 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.

Did he, or did he not mention every single one of those topics in his speech? Yes or No, Conjur

He mentioned them but offered nothing to correct the problems.

Mentioning a topic is not addressing the issue.


Get it?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: alchemize

Bush 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.

Did he, or did he not mention every single one of those topics in his speech? Yes or No, Conjur

He mentioned them but offered nothing to correct the problems.

Mentioning a topic is not addressing the issue.


Get it?

You didn't say addressing the issue. You said "completely avoided". Better work on the "nuance" game. But let's try again.

"but offered nothing to correct the problems" - again another spin/half-truth. He offerred things, you just didn't like them. So let's summarize then

1) Conjur is against pooling of small businesses for lower cost premiums
2) Conjur is against HSA's
3) Conjur is against increasing Pell Grants
4) Conjur is against increasing funding for community colleges and training programs
5) Conjur is against reforming and simplifying the federal tax code
6) Conjur is against development zones in poor communities
7) Conjur is against tort reform
8) Conjur is against any privatizing social security

I think that about sums it up? I'm sure I missed a few. I agree with you, he didn't say anything specific on Energy, other than becoming less dependent.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Ozoned

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?

Hey, everyone flip flops,



Including you.

Again, as with Kerry, that's not a flip-flop. That's changing an opinion as things change. If Franks had not tried to assert that Iraq was related to the 9/11 attacks, my opinion of him would not have changed.

Get it?

Ayup, if General Franks had not stated his position on the link between Iraq and Al Queda, you would not have flip flopped. BS..... IIRC General Franks never asserted in any way, shape, or form what you just posted.



Also, General Franks and what he thinks weighs about a 100 times anything that you could possibly hope to articulate to discredit him.

 

[conjur]

Yes...completely avoided the issue.

Mentioning a word is not addressing an issue.

Get it yet?


1) Wrong
2) Wrong
3) Yes and No. Grants should be tied to academic performance.
4) As long as it's from the States, and not at the Federal level
5) Wrong
6) Wrong
7) Wrong
8) Wrong


Wow...you're about as wrong as Bush!

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: conjur
Yes...completely avoided the issue.

Mentioning a word is not addressing an issue.

Get it yet?


1) Wrong
2) Wrong
3) Yes and No. Grants should be tied to academic performance.
4) As long as it's from the States, and not at the Federal level
5) Wrong
6) Wrong
7) Wrong
8) Wrong


Wow...you're about as wrong as Bush!

First you said this: "Bush completely avoided the issues"

Then you said this:

"offered nothing to correct the problems. "

Then I listed 8 solutions he presented. You said you aren't against at least 6 of the 8. So which is it? Did he offer nothing or are you against those solutions?

Did he completely avoid them? Did he offer nothing? You are giving Kerry a run for his money! Are you sure politics aren't in your future? Perhaps journalism?

 

[CellarDoor]

sheesh guys. It doesn't matter what somebody SAYS, it matters what they DO. Instead of thinking about what he said tonight and what he promised he'd do, recall what he said 4 years ago and what he did about it. Who gives a crap about the rhetoric of his speech tonight. It doesn't matter.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Ozoned

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?

Hey, everyone flip flops,



Including you.

Again, as with Kerry, that's not a flip-flop. That's changing an opinion as things change. If Franks had not tried to assert that Iraq was related to the 9/11 attacks, my opinion of him would not have changed.

Get it?

Ayup, if General Franks had not stated his position on the link between Iraq and Al Queda, you would not have flip flopped. BS..... IIRC General Franks never asserted in any way, shape, or form what you just posted.

Originally posted by: UltraQuiet

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I haven't read the entire thread, but Retired General Franks formally announced his endorsement of "W" on the Sean Hannity show today.

He also said he believed, and continues to believe, that Iraq had ties to Al Queda.

I guess if UltraQuiet is lying then I am wrong to believe him.

Frank has also admitted that he was wrong re:WMDs.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: mribnik1
sheesh guys. It doesn't matter what somebody SAYS, it matters what they DO. Instead of thinking about what he said tonight and what he promised he'd do, recall what he said 4 years ago and what he did about it. Who gives a crap about the rhetoric of his speech tonight. It doesn't matter.

Bush's speech from the 2000 convention is on C-SPAN right now.

 

[CellarDoor]

thanks, just turned to it.

 

[conjur]

heh...it's about at the point he promised to make social security solvent.

Too bad he blew that chance in his first few months in office.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Ozoned

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?

Hey, everyone flip flops,



Including you.

Again, as with Kerry, that's not a flip-flop. That's changing an opinion as things change. If Franks had not tried to assert that Iraq was related to the 9/11 attacks, my opinion of him would not have changed.

Get it?

Ayup, if General Franks had not stated his position on the link between Iraq and Al Queda, you would not have flip flopped. BS..... IIRC General Franks never asserted in any way, shape, or form what you just posted.

Originally posted by: UltraQuiet

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I haven't read the entire thread, but Retired General Franks formally announced his endorsement of "W" on the Sean Hannity show today.

He also said he believed, and continues to believe, that Iraq had ties to Al Queda.

I guess if UltraQuiet is lying then I am wrong to believe him.

Frank has also admitted that he was wrong re:WMDs.

Not what you posted

Originally posted by: conjur

Again, as with Kerry, that's not a flip-flop. That's changing an opinion as things change. If Franks had not tried to assert that Iraq was related to the 9/11 attacks, my opinion of him would not have changed.

Get it?

Okay, I get it Conjur, the great obfusticator....

 

[Perknose]

If George Bush gave a strong speech tonight, he must have shot his load in the effort, because his convention spiel was lame plain vanilla, even if he did pronounce most of the words successfully.

 

[conjur]

And Al Qaeda was not responsible for 9/11? 😕


BTW, it's "obfuscator".

 

[CycloWizard]

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.

You are simply ridiculous. Anyone that disagrees with you is automatically a sheep, while anyone who agrees is a free-thinker? I guess it is following in the footsteps of the founding fathers to think we have a right to form our own opinions. We should stop being such sheep and realize that yours is the only correct opinion. :disgust:

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur
And Al Qaeda was not responsible for 9/11? 😕


BTW, it's "obfuscator".

Got it. Conjur the great "obfuscator"

 

[ntdz]

was a good speech, the part where he almost broke down was powerful. I think hell get a decent bump outta this, time will tell if itll be enough to carry him to victory

 

[raildogg]

Great speed, Pataki was good too

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

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.

You are simply ridiculous. Anyone that disagrees with you is automatically a sheep, while anyone who agrees is a free-thinker? I guess it is following in the footsteps of the founding fathers to think we have a right to form our own opinions. We should stop being such sheep and realize that yours is the only correct opinion. :disgust:

So, you support politicizing the 9/11 tragedy?

You support Bush and the GOP flip-flopping on promises NOT to do so?


Sad.