I was content with just posting that I agreed with the points in the article and I got sucked in when some newbie moron decided to pick a fight. Of course I was more than willing to oblige. :^)
Posted on 09/30/2004 10:35:23 PM PDT by Pokey78
if this yankoff wants W reelected so bad as he claims then he should eat his whiney diatribe and cowboy up to support the president.
It's just like when McCainiac or Lugar open their traps, the media and DNC use it over and over.
"Oh my, the National Review thinks Kerry cleaned W's clock so therefore he must have"
so why doesn't Rich Lowry reel this schmo in?
"Migjagger" is a subversive, desperate, and scummy the liberals troll that has managed to stay under the radar for since 98'. He's like an AlQaeda sleeper only coming out of the closet now. Just look at his past post history and it's a dead giveawy full of left wing talking points and subversive tactics.
I don't understand Bush not doing a better job of defending his position. God knows that Kerry gave him plenty of opportunities to blow him out of the water. He should have responded to Kerry when he said the first thing he would do was axe the bunker busting nuclear bombs. I thought Bush did lousy but after seeing the debate again I think Kerry did himself no favors. No matter how slick Kerry was and how badly he beat Bush with words, in truth they were just fancy words.
Nobody is capable of agreeing 100% on 100% of everything. :-)
Exactly and maybe Lowry will.If he doesn't,I'l return the book by Lowry,that I just bought and drop him a note explaining what I've done and why.
No problem....we've all been there,done that. LOL
Undecided's always go overwhelmingly for the President in wartime.
Kerry failed to show that he should replace a sitting President in wartime.
Kerry will be remembered for his 'global test' statement and that will make people uneasy with his ability to respond to terrorist threats.
Dear Admin, if this clown isn't a blatent sleeper troll form his post history I don't know what is. Can we Zot this loser please.
What else do you think?
About abortion, RKBA, smaller government, one man/one woman marriage, abolishing the IRS, the War in Response to Islamic Jihad on America and Universal Government Healthcare?
All three of your responses beg the original question: Do undecided voters look at substantive issues? You seem to think they do. I'm not so sure.
In a wartime situation they certainly do, as noted by the fact that they vote for the incumbent.
Moreover, they will remember what was said not what they saw.
Yes, undecideds want to pick the right man, but they are more afraid of picking the wrong one and will be more conservative in their vote, choosing the leader they know over the one they do not.
Kerry had to convince them that he was the one to lead the nation, and he did not do that.
He won debating points, but lost the campaign.
Silly or not,it WAS agreed to,by ALL sides...and then ignored by by some.
You know this and I know this, but I worry about the multitudes of morons who don't know it and they VOTE!
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.