Atlas Forum Primaries: Democratic NH Debate

[7,052,770]

Governor Mabus (MS):

"Governor. During your Iowa campaign, you endorsed an advertisment of two men discussing Mississippi (*replay ad*). In this ad, the gentlemen are discussing the former...'crumminess' of your home state. It was the undereducated, redneck high school dropouts who elected you-what do you think of the people of New Hampsire, are you in touch with real Americans, and if elected will you treat the people with the respect they deserve?"

OK, that question doesn't even make sense.  I've never said that Mississippi is "crummy" or called any Mississippis "undereducated, redneck high school dropouts" and I will not participate in this debate any further until you apologize for putting words in my mouth and insulting the people of my state.

Sure, it was paraphrasing, based on this ad:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK, saying that the nation as a whole once viewed Mississippi as undereducated and somewhat backwards is not the same thing as insulting them, as you seem to imply that I did.  Under my administration, the dropout rate decreased substantially.  I've never treated anyone with any disrespect, I applaud New Hampshire for their good record on education and the environment.
Previous governors of Mississippi did nothing to improve education in the state, so I would say that THEY were out of touch with the people, not me.  I was in touch with the problems and did what I could to fix them.

I hope that subsequent questions don't try to put words in mouth, and are less silly than that one.

[Speed of Sound]

Governor Mabus (MS):

"Governor. During your Iowa campaign, you endorsed an advertisment of two men discussing Mississippi (*replay ad*). In this ad, the gentlemen are discussing the former...'crumminess' of your home state. It was the undereducated, redneck high school dropouts who elected you-what do you think of the people of New Hampsire, are you in touch with real Americans, and if elected will you treat the people with the respect they deserve?"

OK, that question doesn't even make sense.  I've never said that Mississippi is "crummy" or called any Mississippis "undereducated, redneck high school dropouts" and I will not participate in this debate any further until you apologize for putting words in my mouth and insulting the people of my state.

Sure, it was paraphrasing, based on this ad:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK, saying that the nation as a whole once viewed Mississippi as undereducated and somewhat backwards is not the same thing as insulting them, as you seem to imply that I did.  Under my administration, the dropout rate decreased substantially.  I've never treated anyone with any disrespect, I applaud New Hampshire for their good record on education and the environment.
Previous governors of Mississippi did nothing to improve education in the state, so I would say that THEY were out of touch with the people, not me.  I was in touch with the problems and did what I could to fix them.

I hope that subsequent questions don't try to put words in mouth, and are less silly than that one.

You chose to run an ad that has one of your supporters and fellow Mississippians admitting to having "pretty dumb" kids, and tohaving a significant number of people "living like cavemen". Thats not putting words in your mouth. By running the ad, and giving the lines to your supporter, you might as well have said them yourself.



Note: I am not attempting to disrupt Hugh or Governor Mabus/his campaign, I am merely pointing out what it is Hugh is trying to say, as the Governor missed it the first time. Feel free to ignore me if either of you find it to be your best course of action.

[7,052,770]

Governor Mabus (MS):

"Governor. During your Iowa campaign, you endorsed an advertisment of two men discussing Mississippi (*replay ad*). In this ad, the gentlemen are discussing the former...'crumminess' of your home state. It was the undereducated, redneck high school dropouts who elected you-what do you think of the people of New Hampsire, are you in touch with real Americans, and if elected will you treat the people with the respect they deserve?"

OK, that question doesn't even make sense.  I've never said that Mississippi is "crummy" or called any Mississippis "undereducated, redneck high school dropouts" and I will not participate in this debate any further until you apologize for putting words in my mouth and insulting the people of my state.

Sure, it was paraphrasing, based on this ad:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK, saying that the nation as a whole once viewed Mississippi as undereducated and somewhat backwards is not the same thing as insulting them, as you seem to imply that I did.  Under my administration, the dropout rate decreased substantially.  I've never treated anyone with any disrespect, I applaud New Hampshire for their good record on education and the environment.
Previous governors of Mississippi did nothing to improve education in the state, so I would say that THEY were out of touch with the people, not me.  I was in touch with the problems and did what I could to fix them.

I hope that subsequent questions don't try to put words in mouth, and are less silly than that one.

You chose to run an ad that has one of your supporters and fellow Mississippians admitting to having "pretty dumb" kids, and tohaving a significant number of people "living like cavemen". Thats not putting words in your mouth. By running the ad, and giving the lines to your supporter, you might as well have said them yourself.



Note: I am not attempting to disrupt Hugh or Governor Mabus/his campaign, I am merely pointing out what it is Hugh is trying to say, as the Governor missed it the first time. Feel free to ignore me if either of you find it to be your best course of action.

The guys in the ad were Iowans.  The fact that people lived like cavemen was an unforunate truth and not an insult.  The fact that people think nationwide think of Mississippi as dumb as also an unforunate truth and not an insult, though my term as governor helped to change that distinction.

[Platypus]

Governor Mabus (MS):

"Governor. During your Iowa campaign, you endorsed an advertisment of two men discussing Mississippi (*replay ad*). In this ad, the gentlemen are discussing the former...'crumminess' of your home state. It was the undereducated, redneck high school dropouts who elected you-what do you think of the people of New Hampsire, are you in touch with real Americans, and if elected will you treat the people with the respect they deserve?"

OK, that question doesn't even make sense.  I've never said that Mississippi is "crummy" or called any Mississippis "undereducated, redneck high school dropouts" and I will not participate in this debate any further until you apologize for putting words in my mouth and insulting the people of my state.

Sure, it was paraphrasing, based on this ad:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK, saying that the nation as a whole once viewed Mississippi as undereducated and somewhat backwards is not the same thing as insulting them, as you seem to imply that I did.  Under my administration, the dropout rate decreased substantially.  I've never treated anyone with any disrespect, I applaud New Hampshire for their good record on education and the environment.
Previous governors of Mississippi did nothing to improve education in the state, so I would say that THEY were out of touch with the people, not me.  I was in touch with the problems and did what I could to fix them.

I hope that subsequent questions don't try to put words in mouth, and are less silly than that one.

You chose to run an ad that has one of your supporters and fellow Mississippians admitting to having "pretty dumb" kids, and tohaving a significant number of people "living like cavemen". Thats not putting words in your mouth. By running the ad, and giving the lines to your supporter, you might as well have said them yourself.



Note: I am not attempting to disrupt Hugh or Governor Mabus/his campaign, I am merely pointing out what it is Hugh is trying to say, as the Governor missed it the first time. Feel free to ignore me if either of you find it to be your best course of action.

The guys in the ad were Iowans.  The fact that people lived like cavemen was an unforunate truth and not an insult.  The fact that people think nationwide think of Mississippi as dumb as also an unforunate truth and not an insult, though my term as governor helped to change that distinction.

...which is all you needed to say in response to the question.

Due to the lack of ausience questuions, and time constraints, candidate's queries and final statements will begin shortly.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

General Questions:

Q1----"The United States is currently engaged in an occupation of Iraq. If elected President, would you change the way the nation is involved there? Would you withdraw troops from Iraq, increase their numbers, or stay the course? Do you believe we can effect positive change on Iraq and the region, and in your opinion is it legitimately our role to effect that change?"

To pull out of Iraq now would result in the, fairly, low level civil war going on there at present escalating into something that would make Bosnia and Rwanda in the '90's look like a tea party. To "stay the course" would be to continue with a failed policy for pride and pride alone, while to just throw thousands more troops in strikes me as somewhat insane.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the initial conflict, we now have a moral duty to try to make sure that things improve in Iraq. I don't know any more about the details of what is going on out there than you all at home.
Perhaps taking a pragmatic approach and turning things over to a genuine multi-national force might work. At the very least it's something we should consider if we want to both bring most of our boys home, and not see genocide committed in the cradle of civilization.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will veto any and all legislation that is harmful to the working and middle classes of this great nation of ours. Why should the White House be able to do that? Checks and balances, Earl, checks and balances.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There are more important things to be worried about than that. Sorry.

[Josh/Devilman88]

General Questions:

Q1----"The United States is currently engaged in an occupation of Iraq. If elected President, would you change the way the nation is involved there? Would you withdraw troops from Iraq, increase their numbers, or stay the course? Do you believe we can effect positive change on Iraq and the region, and in your opinion is it legitimately our role to effect that change?"

I would stay the course, pulling out right now would cause Iraq to go right back to the way they were before, or worst. However, what I would slowing wade out the troops and replacing them with Iraqi troops/cops.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will vote any bills that has to civil issues because I believe that most to all of civil issues should be up to the states. Also any bills that raise taxes on the lower to middle classes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No and yes, I believe we should cut down on the exposure to violence, sexual act and so on. On the other hand I also think it is up to the parent to pick and choose what there children to watch, not the media.

[Akno21]

Q2----"Would you follow the example of Former President Bush and rarely veto congressional legislation? What kind of bill, and on which issues, would lead to a Presidential veto in your eyes, and why should the White House be able to prevent congress from implementing it's will, as the primary elected body of the nation?"

There is no magic number that I would try to reach on the amount of vetoes I would use. To put it simply, I would use a veto whenever I deem it necessary. It is a function of the executive branch, and the proper reason not to veto something is because you agree with it, not out of some philosophical stand against the veto.

I would veto bills that infringe on workers rights, the civil liberties of Americans, or would hurt America globally. This does not mean that I will not be open to working with congress to reach a compromise on any issue, but there are lines I cannot cross. I have core principles and am willing to use the veto to stick to them.

It is absolutely crucial that the power of the veto be available to the White House. Without it, the system of checks and balances that we have in this country would be destroyed. Every branch has some level of control over the other; however, were the President not allowed to veto legislation passed by Congress, the executive branch would become too weak to have real influence. I am no proponent of far-flung executive power, but taking away the veto is swinging too far in the other direction.

Q3----"Many Americans believe standards of conduct in our media are slipping to unacceptable levels. Do you support federal intervention to change this progression, if you believe it is occuring? Do you believe cencorship is a solution, and what kind of exposure to violence, sexual acts and other 'indecencies' should our children be able to access?"

I will readily admit that some of the popular music and entertainment in this country is raunchy and not in good taste. However, the only way to change this progression is at home and in the community. Government regulation is  the wrong solution. The crap that you refer to will still be available, it will just be viewed through less mainstream sources. The problem will still be there. Censorship does not solve anything, it just creates an underground market for the same exact product. It is up to individual families to make decisions and teach their children.

Obviously I do not wish for our children to be accessing porn and indecencies, but I do not consider it to be a major issue. There are much worse traps for our nation's youth to fall into. We aren't doomed as a civilization if our children hear the f-word earlier then we'd like. I actually consider violence to be much more destructive than porn and sexual acts, and support video games, television shows, and movies being rated so that parents can make educated judgements on what they want their kids to see. However, this does not mean that I support large-scale restrictions of items with this type of behavior. If a parent doesn't have a problem with their kid playing a M rated game, that is their choice, and the child should not be denied because of the belief set of a different family.

[Speed of Sound]

Closing Statement


I would like to wrap up my time by thanking again all those who showed up today, the moderator, and everyone watching at home. All I can say is I did my best, and so did my opponents. As you vote today New Hampshire, remember what was said here, and send the right man to the Democratic Convention stage, whoever you feel it may be. On that note, Ill see you tonight at my campaign HQ!

[Akno21]

Closing statement:

I would like to thank everybody for coming out tonight. Debates are an important part of the electoral process, and of society in general. Unilteral decision making is not a good move when going to war, or in any case. No issue is too important for debate. Our country was founded on the right to have a debate, and I'm proud to be upholding our country's tradition on this stage tonight. Good night, and good luck.

[7,052,770]

Q1----"The United States is currently engaged in an occupation of Iraq. If elected President, would you change the way the nation is involved there? Would you withdraw troops from Iraq, increase their numbers, or stay the course? Do you believe we can effect positive change on Iraq and the region, and in your opinion is it legitimately our role to effect that change?"

The war in Iraq is a terrible mistake.  Instead of preventing terrorism, we're only making it worse by being there.  However, leaving immediately would only create more chaos, so I don't support an immediate withdrawal.  However, make no mistake, troops will be out as soon as the new Iraqi government is capable of maintaining order.  It can be our legitimately make changes in the region.  Afghanistan is better off thanks to us getting rid of the Taliban, but unless American interests are threatened, we have no business going to war.  Period.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Any bill that I do not support will be vetoed.  The Constitution gives the president the power of Veto, and I will excerise that power for the good of America.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Studies show that violence on TV is harmful to kids.  Yes, it's kinda lame that that's the case, but it is.  Should parents be responsible for what their kids watch?  Well I can remember loving it when my parents left me home alone for a while back when I was a kid so I could watch all the stuff they wouldn't let me watch, and I'm sure most of you do too.  Parents can only do so much.  I would support even stricter regulation on what can and can't be shown on TV,

[Joe Republic]

Alright, that'll do it guys.  Good work to all of you.

Thank you to Hugh for his great job hosting this; I owe you one, buddy.