Posted on 10/01/2004 1:22:20 PM PDT by Mia T
THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004 |
HEAR THE FIRST VEEP DEBATE NOW! (the whole ball of wax)
et's get real, people. Universal health care schemes or abortion-friendly justices have little utility if we're blown to bits.
There is a reason lifelong liberal Democrats like the former Mayor of New York, Ed Koch, and the Hollywood actor, Ron Silver, who agree with George Bush on absolutely nothing domestically, are not only voting this November for a Republican presidential candidate for the first time in their lives--they are, in fact, campaigning vigorously for his reelection.
Ed Koch and Ron Silver are supporting George Bush because they know what all rational, informed voters know--only one issue matters in this, the first post-9/11 presidential election: Who would better prosecute the War on Terror, George Bush or John Kerry?
The choice could not be more clear.
THE WHOLE BALL OF WAX
This difference is the whole ball of wax, people.
When terrorists declare war on you and commit acts of war against you, you are perforce at war.
Bush chose fight.
KERRY-EDWARDS TRIES TO SHUT DOWN THE DEBATE
In an effort to shut down debate on this issue -- clearly a losing one for Kerry-Edwards -- John Edwards labeled Cheney's warning "un-American."
I have news for the two Johns. Nothing is more American than acting to preserve, protect and defend America. And nothing is more un-American than thwarting that effort.
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004 |
The above exchange between Kerry and Sawyer, surreal on its face, depicts a candidate who is not simply confusing, (or as Kerry, himself prefers to characterize it, complex).
This is a candidate who is profoundly confused. He is tangled in a web of his own making, a web of arrogance, egomania, opportunism and deceit.
And, dare I say, a web of tangled neurons? If Kerry is not cognitively and psychologically impaired, he is doing a heck of a good imitation of someone who is.
BACK TO THE FUTURE
The most obvious problem with John Kerry's argument is that it is fallacious. Mr. Kerry engages in ex post facto reasoning when he argues, "We should not have gone to war, knowing the information we know today.... I would not have gone to war knowing there was no imminent threat, weapons of mass destruction, there was no connection with al Qaeda and to Saddam Hussein."
As if the commander-in-chief enjoys the luxury of retroactive decision-making....
In this post-9/11 world, a commander-in-chief has to make decisions of war and peace, life and death, based on imperfect information. We cannot afford in that position someone who requires certain knowledge of outcome before acting. We cannot afford in that position someone who views the War on Terror as not war but criminal enterprise. We cannot afford in that position a weak-kneed vacillator like John Kerry. Is there any doubt that John Kerry would never act preemptively to protect America?
How could John Kerry make an error in logic so obvious, so beyond surreal? He is an idiot? Or does he simply think we are?
TRUELIES
The second problem with John Kerry's statements is that they are false.
HAIRPIN 180
The third problem with John Kerry's comments is that they are self-contradictory; they are a self-contained flip-flop, if you will.
Kerry initially tells Sawyer that whether the Iraq War was worth it or not "depends on the outcome, ultimately, and that depends on the leadership." But when Sawyer repeats his comment, Kerry calculates that the statement weakens his position, does a quick 180 and denies that he said what he just said.
This little "interview" tells us everything we need to know about John Kerry.
|
|||
|
|||
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004 |
|
||
John Kerry
"I listened to what Senator Kerry had to say in Boston, and, with all due respect to the Senator, he views the world as if we had never been attacked on September 11th. The job of the Commander-in-Chief, as he sees it, is to use America's military strength to respond to attacks. But September 11th showed us, as surely as anything can, that we must act against gathering dangers - not wait for to be attacked. That awful day left some 3,000 of our fellow citizens dead, and everything we have learned since tells us the terrorists would do worse if they could, and that they will even use chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons against us if they can. In the world we live in now, responding to attacks is not enough. We must do everything in our power to prevent attacks -- and that includes using military force."
Dick Cheney
"While I don't agree with Bush on a single domestic issue, they are all trumped by the issue of terrorism, where he has enunciated the Bush Doctrine and proven his ability to fight this war.
The Democratic Party just doesn't have the stomach to go after terrorists."
Ed Koch, a Democrat
|
The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
Yesterday, at the "progressive," i.e., ultra-extremist left-wing liberal, "Take Back America" confab, Mr. Soros confirmed the obvious: 9/11 was dispositive for the Dems; that is, 9/11 accelerated what eight years of the clintons had set into motion, namely, the demise of a Democratic party that is increasingly irrelevant, unflinchingly corrupt, unwaveringly self-serving, chronically moribund and above all, lethally, seditiously dangerous.
"All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Apparently missing the irony, George Soros chastised America with these words even as he was trying his $25,000,000, 527-end-run damnedest to render himself "more equal than others" in order to foist his radical, paranoic, deadly dementia on an entire nation.
"Animal Farm" is George Orwell's satirical allegory of the Russian Revolution; but it could just as easily be the story of the Democratic Party of today, with the
its porcine manifestation.
GEORGE TSURIS
Soros' little speech reveals everything we need to know about the Left, to wit:
Soros is correct when he states that each of the two pillars of the Bush Doctine--the United States maintenance of absolute military superiority and the United States right of preemptive action--are "valid propositions" [in a post-9/11 world].
But when he proceeds from there to argue that the validity of each of these two [essential] pillars is somehow nullified by the resultant unequalled power that these two pillars, when taken together, vest in the United States, rational thought and national-security primacy give way to dogmatic Leftist neo-neoliberal ideology.
What is, in fact, "inviolate" here is the neo-neoliberal doctrine of U.S. sovereignty, which states simply that there must be none, that we must yield our sovereignty to the United Nations. Because this Leftist tenet is inviolate, and because it is the antithesis of the concept of U.S. sovereignty enunciated by the Bush Doctrine and the concept of U.S. sovereignty required by the War on Terror, rabid Leftists like Soros conclude that we must trash the latter two inconvenient concepts--even if critical to the survival of our country.
It is precisely here where Soros and the Left fail utterly to understand the War on Terror. They cannot see beyond their own ideology and lust for power. They have become a danger to this country no less lethal than the terrorists they aid and abet.
|
pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
|
THE DEMOCRATS-ARE-GONNA-GET-US-KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES1
![]() (viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE) johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004 |
Look, Larry... [W]e were... not at war in the 1990s... and young Americans were not deployed... under President Clinton. What American would not trade the movement in the right direction that we had under President Clinton?
John Kerry
![]() (viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE) johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com |
|
HOW CAN YOU PUT YOUR CHILDREN'S LIVES IN ITS HANDS? ![]()
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE) |
|
|
|
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President) ![]() (viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE) johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
|
|
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA ![]() (viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE) johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com |
|
![]() (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004 |
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004 |
election update!
JOHN KERRY IS UNFIT~THE SERIES
Diane Sawyer Nails Kerry Peril
PREEMPTION + KERRY'S EX POST FACTO REASONING
WINDSURFER WATERLOO
why the surfboard--not the snowboard--is (to mix war metaphors) Kerry's Achilles' heel
Windsurfing in the Persian Gulf
John "One Position on Iraq" Kerry's 1971 Replay
YOO-HOO DAN RATHER!
KERRY'S BELATED "HONORABLE" DISCHARGE:
Is a less-than-honorable discharge and clinton "pardon" behind Kerry's refusal to sign form 180 to release ALL of his records?
RATHERGATE IS ANOTHER WATERGATE: The Nexus
CARL BERNSTEIN: RATHERGATE MAY BE ANOTHER WATERGATE
CLUELESS: O'REILLY AND PODHORETZ ON RATHERGATE
THE KERRY-RATHER-BARNES FORGERIES DECONSTRUCTED
HEAR THE FIRST VEEP DEBATE NOW! (the whole ball of wax)
CHENEY WARNS AMERICA: THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT OUR SURVIVAL
KERRY-EDWARDS TRIES TO SHUT DOWN DEBATE
KERRY'S VIETNAM FIXATION
PART 1: advice from bill
Kerry's new W offensive
YOO-HOO! UNDECIDEDS + "PERSUADABLES"
HEAR THE SPEECH JOHN KERRY DOESN'T WANT YOU TO HEAR
(WHY INFORMED, RATIONAL DEMOCRATS WILL VOTE FOR BUSH)
DECONSTRUCTING ZELL MILLER
EXPLOITING MAX CLELAND
Kerry is UNFIT #21: THUMBSUCKER SERIES
BOARDHEAD TO THE RESCUE
The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)
Kerry is UNFIT #20: THUMBSUCKER SERIES
PREEMPTION-(the whole ball of wax)
CONTEMPLATING KERRY'S "GUT"
A PRESIDENT KERRY MAY BE ABHORRENT
...BUT IS IT EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL?
getting kerry's goat
john kerry lacks presidential temperament
Two Psychologists on Kerry: Dangerous on National Security
YOO-HOO! followthemoney.org. . .
OVER HERE!
"bombastic ass" is not the antidote to "boorish ass"
(or why Keith Olbermann Cannot Do Cleanup for Chris Matthews)
UNFIT #19:
JOHN KERRY'S "MORE SENSITIVE WAR ON TERROR"
THE COMPLEAT JOHN KERRY
WHY JOHN KERRY IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
Kerry, NOT Bush, paralyzed by 9/11 attacks
Hear Kerry admit he could not think
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES 3
UNFIT #10: 9/10 mindset
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES 2
KERRY-DEMOCRAT CONTEMPT FOR NATIONAL SECURITY[annotated]
THE DEMOCRATS-ARE-GONNA-GET-US-KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES1
dox in sox on lummox in box on fox
THE REAL "REAL DEAL"
(what Kerry's commanders and crewmates REALLY think of him--with transcripts)
Did John Kerry pick a running mate or hire a lawyer when he selected John Edwards?
THE MAN FROM HOPE: been there, done that
"Hope is on the way!" (the scoop)
THE TERRORISTS' USEFUL IDIOTS
all the usual suspects
A Vote for Kerry is a Vote for the Terrorists
ELECTION BOTTOM LINE:
TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER or TERRORIST ANNIHILATOR
JOHN KERRY IS UNFIT SERIES: 8/10/04 UPDATE!
taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
JOHN KERRY IS UNFIT SERIES:
taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
UNFIT #9-JOHN KERRY: DEADLY OPPORTUNIST
SELF-CONFESSED WAR CRIMlNAL MORPHS INTO SELF-PROMOTER WAR HERO
UNFIT #6: The Deadly Kerry-Hollywood Axis
HOW CAN YOU PUT YOUR CHILDREN'S LIVES IN ITS HANDS?
UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#1-making the tough choices in a post-9/11 world
UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#2-understanding the job description
UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#3-sang-froid and the "nuclear" button
UNFIT: taking the measure of a would-be commander-in-chief
#4 - Kerry champions tolerance for terrorists
sanitizing evil
Kerry Cabal Censors Nick Berg Decapitation
"Loose Cannon" Kerry's AWOL/PURPLE-HEART FRAUD
pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
USEFUL IDIOTS
MOORE IS LESS--THE MOVIE
The Cycle of Violence:
NOW WITH HYPERLINKED INSTRUCTION MANUAL
JOHN KERRY'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans
bill clinton, boy "genius," unwittingly bares all on BBC
deconstructing clinton "just because I could"
vetting missus clinton...
The Parallel Universe of Jamie Gorelick
nepotism + tokenism = a nancy pelosi
(or a hillary clinton)
Kerry's Belated Condemnation Focuses on Process
Kerry Lacks Moral Authority to Condemn Content
"CRY BUSH" + Iraqi-Prisoner "Abuse"
What are the Dems up to?
DON'T BELIEVE YOUR LYING EARS (The Perjurer Returns)
(Clinton: Claims I Turned Down Bin Laden are 'Bull')
The Mary Jo White Memo:
Documentation of clintons' and Gorelick's willful, seditious malfeasance
What is the REAL Reason for Gorelick's Wall?
giant sucking sound
KERRY MAKES DUKAKIS LOOK CONSERVATIVE, SMART + JUDICIOUS
- Q ERTY6 utter failureBUMP
- Lib Author Regrets Voting (TWICE!) for clinton
"Sickened" by clinton's Failure to Protect America from Terrorism
MUST-READ BOOK FOR DEMOCRATS:
How clintons' Failures Unleashed Global Terror
(Who in his right mind would ever want the clintons back in the Oval Office?)
The Man Who Warned America
(Why a Rapist is Not a Fit President)
UDAY: "The end is near this time I think the Americans are serious, Bush is not like Clinton."
You have six minutes to complete the test. Please use a number 2 pencil to mark each of your answers. Turn your sheet in at the Front Desk of the UN Building when you have completed the test. 1) Your country is engaged in an unpopular war in Southeast Asia, but one which is necessary to contain Communism. Should you: CBS Exclusive: Kerry's 'Global Test' located!
|
Hugh Hewitt mentioned you two or three times on his radio show yesterday.
Arent you all that? ;>) And more?
That's a handsome group of humans!
bump
REMARKS BY THE VICE PRESIDENT FOLLOWING A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE WATCHING PARTY
Denver Marriott City Center Denver, Colorado
7:57 P.M. MDT
AUDIENCE: Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Good evening.
AUDIENCE: Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, thank you. (Applause.) Well, we're delighted you were here tonight. I thought the President did a great job. (Applause.) I was fascinated to watch on the one hand John Kerry saying that he's committed to winning the war on terror, and to winning in Iraq, and then he turns around and is unrelentingly negative about the proposition, the decision.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Useless.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Useless was your comment. (Laughter.) But I thought it's -- the President made several very good points, especially saying how can you expect to get support from our allies when you consistently trash our allies' efforts? (Applause.)
And the real bottom-line decision in terms of what this election is all about is who is going to be Commander-in-Chief, who do we want to have in the Oval Office making those life decisions -- life-and-death decisions for the United States, for our people, and the man who makes the decisions about when we're going to send troops in harm's way. And I don't think you can look at that debate tonight and conclude anything other than on the one case we've got in George Bush a man who has done it, who has been there, done it four different -- for four different years now, and done a superb job, made the right decisions for America; is absolutely committed to taking offensive action whenever it's necessary in order to defend the United States of America, and the wanna-be Senator who says -- (laughter) -- says that in response to the question on preemptive action, he would support it as long as it passed some kind of global test.
AUDIENCE: Booo!
THE VICE PRESIDENT: What George Bush has made clear repeatedly is that we're perfectly prepared to seek international support for international efforts. We've got a great alliance -- we've got 30 countries fighting alongside of us in Iraq. And we're prepared to work to lead a coalition, but we will never submit to the objections of a few. We will never seek a permission slip to defend the United States of America. (Applause.)
So I want to thank all of you for being here tonight. I've got to go do some interviews. And of course, I would invite all of you to watch next Tuesday when we'll do it all over again from Cleveland. (Applause.) John Edwards and myself -- I'm very, very proud to have had the privilege of serving alongside this President. And I'm delighted that the American people are going to give him four more years to lead this nation. (Applause.)
AUDIENCE: Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!
WHO is John Edwards?
Perhaps 'countrymen' is an allusion to Mark Antony's funeral oration ('Friends, Romans, countrymen, etc.'), words that turned the Romans against Brutus....
(John "help is on the way" Kerry is never shy about lifting the effective words of others....)
Hi,
No problem on the data. Please dont worry about timely replies. I work nights and post some of my messages very late or very early and im used to it.
Sad but very true point you make regarding brain dead people. I was awakened to that reality when Clinton was elected then re-elected back in the 90's. (seems funny to say it aloud "the 90's" ) Where does all the time go??
What do you make of the newsweek poll? i say gallup is more accurate because of their method of polling.
Hi,
I know what you mean about the old media wanting those ratings...i got much the same feeling about that. Whats worse to me is i noticed fox news doing the same thing! Now i truly like fox news, but i was a little dismayed at the way lots of fox people acted right after the debate. All except Sean Hannity.
One of the more interesting parts of the Bush-Kerry debate in Coral Gables, Florida, was Senator Kerry's reference to Papa Bush's Persian Gulf War decision not to go into Baghdad thirteen years ago because there was no viable exit strategy. Undoubtedly, Kerry was intending to needle George W. Bush with this fatherly reference of caution, and perhaps Kerry is choosing to associate himself with Bush pere's foreign policy. But like most of Kerry's arguments, this too contains the flawed seeds of contradiction and equivocation.
Regrettably, President George W. Bush did not seize the moment to remind 55 million television viewers that on January 12, 1991, Sen. Kerry actually voted against S.J.RES.2, the congressional authorization that empowered President Bush 41 to liberate Kuwait after Saddam Hussein's cruel invasion. This little bit of history sheds much light on Kerry's past and casts a dark shadow over any of his new promises to successfully execute today's war in Iraq.
Time and again on the campaign trail Kerry argues for a grand international alliance to win the Iraq war. He repeated this in the debate. But in 1991 the U.S. headed a grand alliance of 36 nations that was fully backed by a United Nations resolution. And Kerry still opposed that war to liberate Kuwait. The U.N.-backed coalition included Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Qatar. All the pieces were there, including the cause of justice. Still he voted against it. How, knowing this, can anyone believe Kerry when he says he will show us a better way to defeat our terrorist enemies today?
If ever there was a military action that passed the "global test" -- which Kerry argued for in the debate -- the Persian Gulf War was it. It overwhelmingly met Kerry's dubious standard -- and still he opposed it. This reveals a credibility problem of the first order. Almost defining credulity, Kerry said in a brief statement on the Senate floor, in an accompaniment to his vote against the Persian Gulf War, that "The president made a mistake to unilaterally increase troops, set a date, and make war so probable."
Clearly, Kerry has a very strong aversion to the use of military power under virtually any circumstance. Of course, this raises serious questions about Kerry's ability to conduct any military operations against our fundamentalist radical-Islamist enemies. Can we really believe that the man who has called the war in Iraq a "grand diversion," a "colossal error," an "incredible mess," and the "wrong war" in the "wrong place" at the "wrong time" -- pessimistic and defeatist statements all -- is capable of waging a strong foreign policy and prosecuting a military action of any sort? What's really left here is the portrait of a politician steeped in ambiguity and equivocation who at bottom has a strong aversion to war of any kind, for any reason.
In one of his better moments in a somewhat energy-less debating performance, President Bush did in fact take Kerry to the woodshed for his notion of a "global test." So did Bush's vice president. In a campaign rally after the debate, Dick Cheney said, "We will never seek a permission slip to defend America."
It seems to me that the American electorate knows full well that what's at stake come November is not the next secretary general of the United Nations but the next president of the United States. In Bush's closing statement he said, "I'll never turn over America's national-security needs to leaders of other countries. . . . and will continue to spread freedom. I believe in the transformational power of liberty. And I believe both a free Afghanistan and a free Iraq will serve as a powerful example for millions who plead in silence for liberty in the broader Middle East." This excellent content will triumph over some stylistic mistakes. Kerry's poor content, however, may have dug him into a deeper electoral hole.
The latest Gallup Poll of 615 registered voters who watched the presidential debate contains some startling results: On debate performance Kerry wins 53 percent to 37 percent. However, as to who would better handle the situation in Iraq, Bush wins 54 to 43. Who do these voters trust more to handle the responsibilities of commander-in-chief? Bush 54, Kerry 44. Who's more believable? Bush 50, Kerry 45. More likable? Bush 48, Kerry 41. And the grand whopper -- Who is tough enough for the job? Bush 54, Kerry 37.
Surely this shows the good sense of the American voter. Debating points are one thing, but truly strong national-security content is a much more important matter.
Dang. I wish you'd post some facts to support your position.
JUST KIDDING!
BTW, are you really Ann Coulter? If you are, would you marry me?
'nite, Ann.
Well Mia, no-one will ever accuse you of not knowing how to post HTML images.
It's ... daunting.
If you don't mind me asking - what was the slogan of yours that H. Hewitt liked?
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.