Bush-Kerry Debates

[© tweed]

In 2000, Bush ran as the islationist, Gore as the interventionist.  That didn't pan out.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

The courts have the right to make decisions on behalf of the state. Judges are experts on the law, and seldomly mess up, and gay marriage is not an issue in which they've messed up.

The Court does NOT speak for the legislature, it's a completely different branch of government.  As far as the court being "right", I guess that is why the Mass Leg passed a state constitutional amendment in order to override the courts decision.

---

I remember that Bush used the stock market excuse in Republican debates in 2000, and you should recall his recent statement on it.
 Here is what he said about abortion:
I would have said yes to abortion if only it was right. I mean, yeah it's right. Well no it's not right that's why I said no to it.
-- South Carolina, Feb. 14, 2000


Here's a good Bush quote.

I had no idea we had so many weapons. What do we need them for?
-- Demonstrating grasp of America's nuclear weapons system, May, 2001

Here's another

I think we need not only to eliminate the tollbooth to the middle class, I think we should knock down the tollbooth.
-- Nashua, New Hampshire, as quoted by Gail Collins in the New York Times, Feb. 1, 2000

These aren't contradictions, they're misspoken babblings from a person that is not very articulate.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Bush opposed campaign finance reform but signed it into law.

ok

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, Bush said that he would be willing to run decifits in the case of war or recession.  We had both at the same time.

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

ok

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Only because activist courts are threatening the seperation of powers so that the will of state legislatures (and the people) is not being upheld.

--

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The "road map" is a red-herring.  We're still basically taking a hands-off approach.

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

One question:  Is the funding higher now that before 9/11?  If so, he was kept his word.
---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'll have to take your word on this one.  But obviously bin Laden is not the end-all-be-all.

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do you have a link?

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, after it was revealed NKorea had nukes.  But Bush is taking an extremely hard-line in the talks and is demanding NKorea end its WMD program before any new deals are made.

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I need a quote on this.  I can't see how Bush would have won the GOP nom by endorsing CO2 limits.

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, I need a quote.

---

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Was the bill modified between this statement and him signing it?

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

The courts have the right to make decisions on behalf of the state.

The courts do not have the right to legislate from the bench.  And that is exactly what is going on in CA, OR, NJ, NY, and MA.  One Mass. justice, herself a Lesbian, objected to this, calling it judicial activism of the worst kind. (sorry I don't have the link, I heard this on NPR)

[Nation]

Regarding CO2 limits....


http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/14/bush.carbon.dioxide/



Didn't go over too well with enviornmentalists.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

In 2000, Bush ran as the islationist, Gore as the interventionist.  That didn't pan out.

As I posted earlier:  Yeah, and you probably think the Great Seal of the US is in contradiction by having one talon grasping an olive branch and the other grasping arrows....or the Declaration of Independence's statement of "Enemies in War, in Peace Friends".

[angus]

I welcome a Bush/Kerry debate.  I think most Americans will.  Democrats, Republicans, Declined-to-State, and others alike.  But Bush won't have it as easy as last time, I'm afraid.  The Gore people had foolishly denigrated Gov. Bush in the months leading up to the election, and all he had to do was pretty much show up and not trip in order to win.  Ann Richards made the same mistake in 1994, to her disadvantage.  I suspect Kerry's inside people are just a bit wiser than Gov. Richards and V. P. Gore, but who knows, the red-state people on this forum paradoxically take delight in lowering that bar for Bush.  But set your uninformed tackiness aside for the moment:  The expectations game will be tougher for the incumbent.  And it will give the President the opportunity to lay out his vision for the next four years (which he has not yet done!)  It will be an opportunity for Kerry to explain his contradictions and missteps (which he has not yet done!)  Free and open discussion are vital to the maintenance of our democratic republic.  (or, our republican democracy, if you prefer).  

On a slightly more interesting but unrelated note, who will win?   Find out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63776-2004Mar16.html

[Gustaf]

I welcome a Bush/Kerry debate.  I think most Americans will.  Democrats, Republicans, Declined-to-State, and others alike.  But Bush won't have it as easy as last time, I'm afraid.  The Gore people had foolishly denigrated Gov. Bush in the months leading up to the election, and all he had to do was pretty much show up and not trip in order to win.  Ann Richards made the same mistake in 1994, to her disadvantage.  I suspect Kerry's inside people are just a bit wiser than Gov. Richards and V. P. Gore, but who knows, the red-state people on this forum paradoxically take delight in lowering that bar for Bush.  But set your uninformed tackiness aside for the moment:  The expectations game will be tougher for the incumbent.  And it will give the President the opportunity to lay out his vision for the next four years (which he has not yet done!)  It will be an opportunity for Kerry to explain his contradictions and missteps (which he has not yet done!)  Free and open discussion are vital to the maintenance of our democratic republic.  (or, our republican democracy, if you prefer).  

On a slightly more interesting but unrelated note, who will win?   Find out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63776-2004Mar16.html

'Republican democracy'? Isn't that a contrdictio in adjecto?

I agree with you though, debates are good for democracy. Which is why we probably won't have a lot...

[Wakie]

JMFSCT, in response to your response to me .... on Bush flop-flops ....

We agree he's flipped on ...
*Campaign Finance
*Free Trade

*Big Budgets & Deficit Spending -- I'll conceed that he left a loophole wherein he said he would do it in cases of war or recession.  However, I think it is worth noting that government spending in areas besides Defense & Homeland Security has ballooned.  One can blame the GOP Congress, but Bush's nonuse of the veto should also be blamed.

*Gay Marriage -- You said he's going to the Constituitional Amendment because of "activist courts".  But isn't the correct response to said courts to elevate the case until it hits the Supreme Court?  And it would be hard for Bush to call the Supreme Court activists since the majority of the Justices were nominated by Republican Presidents.

*Israeli-Palestinean Conflict -- True, this administration has been more hands off than the Clinton administration.  But they have been there pushing the "road map to peace".  A red herring?  Perhaps ... but then why declare that you will be uninvolved AND throw out a red herring?

*First Responder Funding -- Bush made promises to deliver funding to these services and he has since failed to deliver on these promises.  If I tell you I will pay you $500 for painting my house and then only give you a $5 you would feel pretty ripped off, wouldn't you?

*Bin Laden Quotes -- Yes, Bin Laden isn't the end all be all in the "War on Terror".  However, realizing that George should not have said that catching him was the most important thing.

*TX HMO Bill of Rights -- Bush' veto of the bill is a matter of public record.  It is available on the Texas Legislature's website.  It happened in 1997 I believe.  Then in the Bush-Gore debates Bush took credit for the Bill.

*North Korea -- Yes, the situation has changed with the addition of North Korean nukes, but what would Bush have had Clinton do before that?  Invade North Korea?  As if China would have sat by and let that happen.  China, like Korea now, is a nuclear power.

*CO2 standards -- Someone else provided the link.

*Military base closings -- www.lakehurst.navy.mil/brac-news/brac-399-25a.htm has Gov Bush hiring consultants to argue against Base closings.  www.lakehurst.navy.mil/brac-news/brac-08-Dec-2001a.htm has President Bush closing bases.

*Bush on Wall St -- What changed was not the bill.  What changed was that a number of high profile corporate scandals came to light.  

[Ben.]

Wasn’t Gov Weld a folksy likeable guy much like Bush and tremendously popular yet he was defeated by Kerry...yeah it was Mass...but still it says something about Kerry that he managed to beat him...then again Kerry rising Lazarus like from the Dead just before Iowa was also a potential sign of just how tough a candidate this guy is...

[opebo]

What does everyone think of John Kerry's challenging Bush to monthly debates?  Should Bush accept the challenge?  Would you watch them?

Its silly, and Bush will not accept it.  I would probably not watch them - too painful to see important issues like who will be president decided by something as fleeting and unrepresentative as a debate.

[agcatter]

a Dem winning in Massachusetts isn't exactly a great accomplishment.

[angus]

What does everyone think of John Kerry's challenging Bush to monthly debates?  Should Bush accept the challenge?  Would you watch them?

Its silly, and Bush will not accept it.  I would probably not watch them - too painful to see important issues like who will be president decided by something as fleeting and unrepresentative as a debate.

Not silly, but time-consuming.  And a bad idea.  But an occassional debate is good for the system.  People like to think they have a choice.  It is like this in all systems, but among our culture in particular.  It's why game-shows are so popular here.