Kerry had all his "70's notes" transcribed into Microsoft Word recently. These notes were the basis for Kerry's entire debate plan. Which is displayed above.
Posted on 10/01/2004 7:20:26 AM PDT by PhiKapMom
Last night, President Bush spoke with passion and clarity about the war on terror and the road ahead – and John Kerry’s credibility gap grew larger. He called the war a “mistake” but said that our troops in Iraq aren’t dying for a “mistake.” How can he lead a war he doesn’t even believe in?
Also note the poll story in here: on the questions pertaining most closely to the voters’ choice in November – who voters agree with, who they trust as Commander-in-Chief, who they trust on the situation in Iraq, and who is tough enough for the job, President Bush came out ahead.
Last night, President Bush spoke from the heart, with clarity and conviction, about the remarkable challenges we have overcome in the last four years, and the road to peace and security in the next four. John Kerry failed to meet a critical test: to close the credibility gap he has created with his vacillation and contradiction on Iraq.
By embracing an anti-war position, Kerry now embodies the ultimate contradiction and raises a new and troubling question about his ability to protect us in the war on terror: How can he win a war he doesn't even believe in? Last night, he said the war in Iraq was a "mistake" -- but that the troops in Iraq are not dying for a "mistake." He called his vote against the $87 billion a "protest." He sends mixed signals to our allies -- and our troops -- by calling the war "a diversion" and "the wrong war at the wrong time." You can't be anti-war and a wartime leader at the same time.
In the Los Angeles Times, Ron Brownstein says the race offers a clear choice, and the President offered a clear vision:
President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry increased the odds that the voters' verdict on the war in Iraq will decide the November election, as they deepened their disagreement over the conflict during a sharp but civil debate Thursday night. ...
Continuing the tougher tone that he had unveiled in recent weeks, Kerry described the war as a "colossal error of judgment" that had weakened American security ...
Bush was often at his best in the encounter when he was most visionary. Many of his most effective moments came when he echoed his argument from his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention last month and portrayed the war in Iraq as a crucial first step in a generation-long effort to reduce the threat of terrorism by encouraging the spread of democracy in the Middle East.
"We have a duty to defeat this enemy," Bush said. "The best way to defeat them is to never waver, to be strong, to use every asset at our disposal, to constantly stay on the offensive and, at the same time, spread liberty."
The Washington Post also says that the debate highlighted the sharp contrast on the war on terror -- between pressing forward or changing course under pressure:
It was no surprise that Iraq dominated the first debate between President Bush and Democratic challenger John F. Kerry on Thursday night, but rarely have the differences between the two men -- and the choices for the country -- been stated so clearly and with such passion. ...
This was a debate shorn of gimmicks, gaffes, canned one-liners, gotcha moments or even many light-hearted asides. It was as serious as the times in which this campaign is being waged. Bush and Kerry gave as good as they got and laid out for the country a choice between Bush's determination to stay on the course he has been following in Iraq or what Kerry said would be a genuine change in the direction of policy there.
The New York Times covered the debate like this, noting Kerry's emphasis on withdrawing from Iraq:
Senator John Kerry argued last night that President Bush had made a "colossal error of judgment'' in invading Iraq, while Mr. Bush belittled Mr. Kerry as a weak leader who would embolden the United States' foes, as the two men offered starkly different views of the war that has dominated this campaign. ...
Mr. Kerry, while stopping short of making a promise, said that it might be possible to begin bringing troops home under his leadership in six months. ...
"I've made some tough decisions," Mr. Bush said in a refrain he repeated throughout the evening. "But people know where I stand. People out there listening know what I believe, and that's how best it is to keep the peace."
Boston Globe columnist H.D.S. Greenway supports Kerry on most issues, but says that the Senator didn't make the sale last night:
I believe Senator Kerry's position on all the issues -- Iran, Iraq, North Korea, and the Sudan -- were superior to President Bush's, but my guess is that Bush came across as the strong leader he meant to project, and that Kerry did not manage to seriously dent his armor.
A Gallup poll immediately following the debate shows some strong points for both candidates -- and the underlying dynamics of the race remain the same. Americans still trust President Bush as commander-in-chief and to handle the situation in Iraq by solid margins. More Americans agreed with the points President Bush made, and by 17 points, said President Bush is tough enough for the job.
The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) takes note of the campaign's state-of-the-art response operation:
The Bush campaign, meanwhile, took a more high-tech approach, urging conservative bloggers to incorporate some simple Web coding that placed a live "debate feed" on their Web sites. During the debate, the campaign used the feed to instantly rebut Sen. Kerry's statements. More than 5,000 Web sites subscribed to the feed, says Brian Jones, a spokesman for the campaign. ...
In order to post instantaneous rebuttals to Mr. Kerry online, the Bush campaign developed an "attack matrix," a computer document showing past attacks made by the Democratic candidate against Mr. Bush's record and possible rebuttals, Mr. Jones said. More than two dozens campaign staffers, including three dedicated to the live blog feed, were working at the debate site in Miami and in campaign headquarters in Arlington, Va., to choose responses to Sen. Kerry's statements. Campaign staffers also prepared links to video clips of Kerry speeches that could be used to contradict his positions in the debate.
Go to DebateFacts.com for full debate response, and log on Tuesday night to see live responses during the Vice Presidential debate.
Please pass this around to your lists.
Thanks!
So, you're saying we're not doomed?
Amen to that. Funny how the handwringers are often the last ones who would think about truly getting involved.
I've been doing volunteer work for the past 3 weeks and will continue to do so. We've had q uite a few women come in. One black lady show up on the first day I did and said she's tired of those idiotic dems, lol.
While I think the president could have done a better job of going after kerry, that hasn't changed my mind about the president.
PING
You have it right. Kerry gave the GOP many great sound bites to use.
Kerry had all his "70's notes" transcribed into Microsoft Word recently. These notes were the basis for Kerry's entire debate plan. Which is displayed above.
How is giving Iran tons of fissile material a superior position? Didn't Klintong do that in N. Korea? Look where we are now.
Well, I expect the Bush people to put this spin on the debate. According to every poll I've seen this morning, Ol' Horse teeth went from a "favorablity" rating of 38% to a rating of almost 70%.
We need to admit that we got our butt kicked last night. The Prez was tired and under prepared. Political junkies like us view this in a different light from the average Joe Six Pack and, sad to say, Joe Six Pack thinks sKerry won by a 2 to 1 margin. Let's roll up our sleeves and work harder than ever before. In 2000, Karl Rove underestimated the Sigh Young Award winnner, Al Gore, and it almost cost us the election. It did cost us the popular vote.
Now, let's go kick some butt.
PhiKap Mom, I was truely surprised at the hystronics here last night my goodness. I watched most of the debate and saw a President who had a vision and plan for this nation ,who spoke with clarity and purpose, then I listened to man who said he had a plan but did not tell us what that plan would be.except to withdraw our troops and go begging to the UN when we are again attacked.
we would have to pass some sort of test? and the topper was the plan of madness to give Iran nuclear fuel??? disarm our military even more??
next thing you know kerry will have a plan for all of us to learn the koran and learn arabic. maybe even give our country to the UN to run. I was alarmed by what kerry was saying to the country his vision is that of a wannbe dictator.
When all the gabbering class is done disecting the debates I think we are going to be hearing a lot of alarm at kerry's scary plan for the nation.
Exactly right....DON'T JUST SIT AT YOUr PC FRUSTRATED OVER THE MEDIA BIAS....get out there & win this one big time for Dubya.
We owe it to our grandchildren to keep GWB at the helm of our ship of state.
Bush is the best one to steer our nation through the stormy seas of global terrorism!
BTW this Philly columnist will give the 'Gloomy Gusses' a shot of optimism:
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/9806488.htm?1c
Conservatives are so funny. They seem to think that Bush has lost every debate he's ever participated in until proven otherwise.
People in the "punditrocacy" are giving the debate win to Kerry, and who knows, maybe by some official tally they could be right. But the real win, from where I sit, is that the President seemed resolute and sincere. I'm thinking a lot of people will have taken note of that difference--sincerity v. pomposity--and vote for the sincere candidate.
Amazingly, I'm hearing some say that the President was "smirking." I never saw that happen, but I did see Kerry SNEER a great deal. He just really thinks he's better than the President--not just the President, but all of us, too. I really think people notice that, and few will like it.
How is this for credibility....the French were doing deals with Saddam, our going into Iraq put a damper on their deals...now we have a presidential candidate who resents the fact that President Bush wouldn't allow the French to come and benefit after they refused to join us in the war. Kerry attacked Bush for using Halliburton (which were making sure our troops were well taken care of) and suggested he should have invited the French in instead. hunh? The French betrayed us by making deals with Saddam when the UN resolution forbid this....this is only one example of countries who do not have our best interest at heart, but Kerry wants to win a worldwide popularity contest so whatever will make foreign countries like him he will do. I don't understand how people can not see the fallacy in this thought process. I want a President for America. America has flaws but it is one of the best places to live in the world. I don't want someone from a dysfunctional country dictating how we should run our country. I am continually shocked at the UN's audacity in thinking that they should be the world court the world army etc. etc. Kerry has promised us that he will give welcome the UN and it's goals with open arms and even Bush stated he tries to work with them. So what is it, is our country self destructive?
bttt
No hand-wringing here. I started to, before I really "listened" to what kerry was saying. (He's a good debator...that's it. Works for a Senator...not a President.) I can't believe he is faulting the President for not bringing in "the world" to Iraq. (...as if he didn't attempt to gather the support.)
Then, in the next breath, he faults President Bush for not rushing into N. Korea.
Thank you for bringing clarity to the debates.
I think this owes, in part, to our fancy for someone who can "act". Hollywood has really done a number on us. We still perceive style as being more persuasive than substance, on some level.
There I was, sitting on the edge of my expensive leather chair with a large martini in my hand. Of course, going into this important debat I had been on the fence for weeks.
I don't know what it was that finally convinced me last night. God knows I wasn't thinking straight because usually during sporting events I need the frequent commercials to clear my mind. (Of course I forget the entire story line when it resumes.)
And then it happened. My President was looking me in the eye and talking about sending mixed messages. After about the fourth or fifth time he mentioned those mixed messages, I decided that I had to vote for him.
Senator Kerry looked very senatorial. His backbone had been starched. The traces of Man Tan had been expunged from his craggy countenance. He had taken three or four sleeping pills so that he would look refreshed. Botox had been injected under his deep-set eyes. He was, indeed, a new man; a presidential contender speaking in a well modulated voice. This guy would make an excellent anchor. (But then his boat(s) already have anchors.)
He droned on and one, punching and counterpunching our tired President's weak verbal thrusts.
Our president's eyes looked tired and bloodshot, his un-Botoxed bags sagged, his skin looked sallow, his tiredness caused him to hang on the podium, he looked purplexed as if wondering why he had to submit himself to this torture and pounding being administered by the strong, tall man whose lifetime ACU voting is zero. Even lower than Ted's.
In the end, the President breathed a sigh of relief. He shook hands with the tall, strong, Vietnam hero, and his expression brightened as he watched his wife and daughters mount the podium.
In his mind he knew this ordeal was over. He could get some sleep tonight and get back into harness early morning doing what he was elected to do: the people's business and fighting terror with a new vigor.
His worthly liberal opponent watched as his heiress wife waddled up the stairs to the podium leading his dysfunctional family to meet their father and step-father. It was then I detected the Boxtoxed eyes droop, the corners of his mouth sag. He knew he'd have to take more sleeping powders tonight and wished he hadn't used the last of his stash of smack.
A Gallup poll immediately following the debate shows some strong points for both candidates -- and the underlying dynamics of the race remain the same. Americans still trust President Bush as commander-in-chief and to handle the situation in Iraq by solid margins. More Americans agreed with the points President Bush made, and by 17 points, said President Bush is tough enough for the job.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
