9:37 Home from bowling. Heard some of the debate on the radio. Nothing was being said that was substantially different from what I’ve heard before.
9:39 Kerry is looking right into camera. Is it that someone told him to do so, is the moderator just sitting in front of the camera?
9:40 My God, I’ve never seen Bush’s smirk more pronounced.
9:42 Any Canadians out there with opinions on whether government controlled health care results in poor quality?
9:46 Wait…is that what Bush said? The way that Kerry put it? Did Bush actually say that young people should be able to take money out of SS and put it into accounts? I thought he was just talking about putting money into savings.
9:48 I find that a bit hard to believe, that that tax cut alone would have kept SS going until 2075.
9:52 Okay, seriously. Did Bush have, y’know, a minor stroke on the left hand side of his face? I mean, the sneer is starting to distract me.
9:53 This is the first question to Bush that he hasn’t used to attack Kerry.
9:53: Whoops. Spoke too soon. Got in a shot under the wire.
9:57 That’s an interesting promise, that Kerry will bring the minimum wage up to over $7 an hour. Kerry’s also using the opportunity to target women.
9:58 AW, COME ON. Bush veered jobs over into education, and now he’s veering minimum wage into education? Jesus.
10:00 Holy crap. Two boldly dodged questions by Bush.
10:02 I mean, I hope American women were paying attention to that. Bush’s out and out dodging of the question was not only pathetic, but it really made clear that, hëll yeah, he would want to see Roe v. Wade overturned.
10:04 What the hëll is Bush blinking so much for?
10:07 No, Kerry did NOT talk about a global test in respect to getting permission from other countries to defend himself. Does Bush NEVEr get tired of exaggerating it? Thank God Kerry is meeting that one head on.
10:09 Oh, come on. Bush heard that there wasn’t support for the Assault weapons ban (which I doubt) and therefore decided not to bother to push for it? As if he hasn’t failed to put the full court press to those things that he really DOES believe in.
10:14 I’m not sure if Bush met with the Black Congressional Caucus or not, but he sure as heck didn’t meet with the other organizations Kerry mentioned.
10:17 Jeez, I wish Kerry would find another word to use other than “respect” when it comes to matters of religion.
10:18 Now KERRY swings a question over to education? Oooookay.
10:22 The point isn’t that the country was divided in 2000. The point is that the country was united in 2001 and now is split once again, even worse than before.
10:24 what a powder puff question for the last question in the debate.
10:26 Idear? IDEAR? Kerry can say “nuclear,” but he can’t say “idea?”
10:29 I like the notion that Bush is optimistic. Unfortunately, it doesn’t jibe with many of his speeches that hit again and again sentiments of fear and terror.
I thought Bush’s closing speech was better, but overall Kerry just flat out performed better. I think Bush really hurt himself when he dodged several questions in a row. And I’ll tell you, I was dubious about the whole Bush-listening device thing, but there were moments when it really did look like Bush was listening to someone else talking…Ah well. I dunno.
• 
The one thing I wanted Kerry to talk about whenever Bush said “How is he going to pay for that?” is that Bush has no call to talk about fiscal responsibility. Bush keeps saying Kerry will be tax and spend, but Bush is just spending like there’s no tomorrow without worrying about paying the tab. At least Kerry talks about being responsible with the deficit. And exactly what plan does Bush have to reduce the deficit he created? Where does he think he’ll get the money? More tax cuts? He’s promising the same stuff he promised 4 years ago, with the addition of promises to fix the things he’s broken. Many of the things he talked about in his campaign against Gore he is recycling for this campaign, but he hasn’t lifted a finger to enact most of these promises. Why does anyone believe that this time is any different?
This was by far Bush’s best performance, but neither man scored a knockout. As for the diminishing undecideds, who knows? The key is, not who won this debate, but what voters will think is more important, issues like Social Security or Iraq/War On Terror. If it’s the former, Kerry wins, unless this debate and the following helps close the gap enough on domestic issues for Bush. If it’s the latter, Bush will win, unless some huge event causes people to change their view on Bush’s Iraq/War On Terror decisions.
It’s really that simple.
Posted by JamesLynch at October 13, 2004 11:35 PM
However, does anyone see a contradiction between Bush’s “culture of life” (opposing abortion) and supporting capital punishment?
No. A baby, and innocent of the utmost degree, has no choice or freewill in the matter. Someone that committed a crime that warranted the death penalty, and was assigned such penalty by jury, made a choice and has to live (or die) with the consequences.
I don’t support abortion, I think that it is wrong as a course of action, but think that it can be used in matters of mother’s health and the very, very low occurance of rape/incest type pregnancies.
This is all, of course, just my opinion on the subject. You are free to have your own, encouraged even, but it doesn’t mean I expect you to agree with me, or I with you.
“Absolutely, Spyderqueen. Let’s go with the tried and true of paying people as little as we can get away with. That’s always done wonders for the economy, hasn’t it? Well, OK, maybe not the PERSONAL economies of those involved, but, hey, since when did they count?”
Okay, I work at Wal-Mart, so believe me, I know what its like to deal with low wages. That being said, I DO NOT want the minimum wage raised. Why? Where do you think companies are going to get the extra revenue to pay for it? Are they just going to pay the extra money and not worry about it? No, they’re going to raise the prices of their merchandise. And that helps people a lot…right?
I will take that question as meant to be somewhat in jest since it is highly bigoted towards us who are Christians.
No, just another example of how Bush lets religion get in the way of his inability to run this country.
This was by far Bush’s best performance, but neither man scored a knockout. As for the diminishing undecideds, who knows? The key is, not who won this debate, but what voters will think is more important, issues like Social Security or Iraq/War On Terror. If it’s the former, Kerry wins, unless this debate and the following helps close the gap enough on domestic issues for Bush. If it’s the latter, Bush will win, unless some huge event causes people to change their view on Bush’s Iraq/War On Terror decisions.
It’s really that simple.
What about those of us who think the war on terror is important but are upset with how much Bush has bungled it?
My thoughts about the debate:
I thought John Kerry did an outstanding job. I think he is wrong and misleading on some issues and dodged questions, but some of you would say the same about Bush (or worse!). But what none of you mentioned was Kerry’s smirk. Bush’s smirk did look more like something was wrong with his face. Kerry’s was just arrogant (in my opinion). But it was not so bad with either of them that it moved me much.
I also think Bush did very well. This was by far his best debate. It was close enough I would call it a tie where your prior feelings about the candidates could push you one way or the other.
Hands down, the best answer Bush gave is the one on faith. If you can replay it, I suggest you do so but with the sound turned down. This was the “real” George Bush. He was animated. He was passionate. He was excited. He did not have to search for words like he does on other issues. His faith is real. And it makes a difference.
Kerry’s answer was no where near as passionate. I do think he was sincere and that he gave a decent answer. It just lacked the passion Bush had. And that is a major difference between the two candidates.
Kerry repeated his stump speech line from the book of James about faith and works at another point in the debate. I about gagged. Kerry was trying to imply Bush does not act on his faith. The reality is, when it comes to “stated” core beliefs, Bush wins hands down. You may not like Bush’s core beliefs about abortion, but his faith does work — he opposes it. You may not like Bush’s core beliefs about gay marriage, but his faith does make a difference — he opposes it. Kerry claims to have beliefs, but they do not influence his actions. Faith/beliefs without works/actions is dead, and Kerry demonstrates that very thing.
I do believe Kerry is a man of faith. I am not judging the motives of his heart or his standing before God. What I comment on is that his actions do not match his “stated” beliefs. Abortion is the prime example. He says it is wrong, but he said he would oppose overturning Roe V. Wade. His actions demonstrate his true beliefs.
To put it differently, Bush’s faith is in something beyond himself. Kerry’s faith appears to be in himself and what he and others together can do. That difference was clear tonight.
In regards to Iraq, I do think Bush implied he has an agenda when it comes to freedom. I don’t think it is a “crusade” where Bush will look for the next country to overthrow. Rather, I think his agenda is similar to Reagan’s, to do what he can to see people gain their freedom. I agree with the belief that ultimately a people have to want to be free, you can’t force it on them. But I also believe tyranny and a lack of basic freedom is always a bad thing. Another government does not have to be set up identical to ours. But it is always wrong, and ultimately evil, when basic human rights are refused.
Jim in Iowa
No, just another example of how Bush lets religion get in the way of his inability to run this country.
And you do not see yourself as bigoted? Bush’s faith is what guides him, and he had not tried to hide it. You can go back to the 2000 debates. Ignore the rhetoric against right wing Christians and listen to what he says. You will find foundational core beliefs. When people voted for him, they clearly knew where he stood and what he believed. He did not sneak into office by hiding his beliefs from anyone.
In regards to the question, I would suggest some of you are out of step with America in general. Well over 70% of the general population have no problem with spoken prayer being returned to the public school or with prayers being offered at football games. If these issues came up for a vote, they would win by a landslide. Instead, they are outlawed by activist liberal judges.
Do you consider 70% of the population delusional or ignorant or just plain stupid because they believe in prayer? Bush clearly was not pandering tonight. He deeply believed what he was saying about prayer. And what he said will connect well with the overwhelming majority of Americans.
Jim in Iowa
Den,
Well, that’s what I mean, Den. If Kerry can close the gap with people like you on the War on Terror, then that negates Bush’s biggest advantages. He is still ahead on traditional Democratic issues, so he would win.
Likewise, if Bush’s margin in the War on Terror/strong leader/Iraq stays the way it is, and he can at least reduce the gap with the soccer moms and other trditional Democrats, then he wins.
PAD expressed some doubts over Bush throwing Kerry’s “global test” comment back in his face. Here’s Kerry’s quote from the first debate:
No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.
But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you’re doing what you’re doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.
PAD, your debate analysis has been pretty fair overall, but I think you’ve got this one wrong. Kerry is effectively defining the legitimacy of American military action by a global standard of legitimacy (i.e. if you can’t take military action for legitimate reasons, then it doesn’t pass the global test, and you shouldn’t do it.) That, to me, sounds like a global veto.
And unfortunately, the legitimacy bar in Europe seems to be set very high (in a low sort of way). Consider this recent BBC story (skip to the end for the relevant European liberal squeamishness):
US-led investigators have located nine trenches in Hatra containing hundreds of bodies believed to be Kurds killed during the repression of the 1980s.
The skeletons of unborn babies and toddlers clutching toys are being unearthed, the investigators said.
They are seeking evidence to try Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity.
“It is my personal opinion that this is a killing field,” Greg Kehoe, an American working with the IST, told reporters in Hatra, south of the city of Mosul.
“Someone used this field on significant occasions over time to take bodies up there, and to take people up there and execute them.”
The victims are believed to be Kurds killed in 1987-88, their bodies bulldozed into the graves after being summarily shot dead.
Iraq’s Kurds are hoping for justice at last
Mr Kehoe said that work to uncover graves around Iraq, where about 300,000 people are thought to have been killed during Saddam Hussein’s regime, was slow as experienced European investigators were not taking part.
The Europeans, he said, were staying away as the evidence might be used eventually to put Saddam Hussein to death.
Do we really want to pass these kinds of global tests? By this measure, we can forget going after guys who kill scores of children and put them in mass graves because an evil dictator might get killed. I know one EU membership requirement is to not have a death penalty, but hello, we’re not talking about a democracy with Iraq. Such niceties don’t apply. Take a stand. Grow a spine.
Really, if Kerry wasn’t serious about this “global test=global veto” nonsense, he would never have brought it up in the first place. You don’t go within a mile of that stuff unless you really want a “one happy world” U.S./EUtopia. Kerry screwed up with that comment and Bush is correct to beat him senseless with it.
-Dave O’Connell
jumpthecup.blogspot.com
Canadian Health Care.
5 hour waits in Emergency with my screaming 3 year old.
3 months to get an MRI for my bad knee.
Peter, this is really of the subject, but I just read the Synopsis for your upcoming New Frontier Book, and I’m left with just one question. Did I miss something between “Stone and Anvil”, and “After the Fall”??
I have a question: How many bills does the average Senator sponsor? Even giving Kerry full credit that he is not exaggerating, saying he sponsored and/or wrote 55 bills in 20 years seems rather pathetic. It is better than the 5 the Republicans claim, but that was one area where Kerry was really grasping for a lifeline.
If Kerry is elected, I have seen nothing of the true leadership he claims he has. Bush accomplished quite a bit in his 4 years, including the 2 years when Republicans did not control the Senate. I still fear his judicial appointments, but I doubt his ability to bring the Republicans over for his full agenda. Kerry lacks the charisma of Bill Clinton. It would be four years and out.
I think a lot of Kerry’s “bounce” is somewhat inflated by the media coverage of the debates. It would not surprise me if Bush won by a decent margin come November 2 (assuming there are no big last minute surprises).
One more comment: I thought tonight’s moderator did a great job, better than the two before him. He seemed to better follow up both sides of the issues with both candidates. I agree the last question was an easy one, but I think it was a good one. It made both candidates human. I think Bush’s love for his wife was more evident, but Kerry’s response was also sincere. I don’t doubt Kerry loves his wife, but Bush was clearly more passionate about it.
Looking back at all 3 debates together, it is clear that Kerry won in the way he needed to: He redefined himself as more human and moderate. The fact that he needed to says a lot, but the fact he pulled if off says even more about both candidates.
Jim in Iowa
adam schwartz: of note: bush said he does not recall his statement that he was not concerned about osama bin laden, and claimed it was one of those “exagerrations.”
also of note: Bush, on CNN from 2002:
“I’ll repeat what I said: I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.
Luigi Novi: What he said was that he never said he wasn
Canadian health care: I think overall we think it’s great. I think it’s great. Yes, not perfect, but I did a comparison with a friend of mine from San Diego and for what I get for about $120 CDN a month he has to pay $220 US. That being said, if I earned $16,000 or less, I wouldn’t have to pay anything to get basic coverage.
Minimum wage: well, here in British Columbia it’s $8.00 an hour and last I checked our economy was doing fine.
“activist” judges: funny how I’m sure that when judges in the US (or Canada for that matter) uphold archconservative values, they don’t get deemed to be “activists.” I mean, the whole notion of “activist” being a dirty word is a nasty creation of the mainstream media, (over)run as it is by conservative corporations. Judges who issue decisions which are labelled “liberal” are no more “activists” than those who pass judgments labelled “conservative.” It’s up to judges to interpret the law… just because some people don’t like those interpretations doesn’t mean the judiciary is overstepping its bounds. You want to talk “activist” judges? Who effectively decided the last US election… and which wing, right or left, of which court was it that did?
Well over 70% of the general population have no problem with spoken prayer being returned to the public school or with prayers being offered at football games. If these issues came up for a vote, they would win by a landslide. Instead, they are outlawed by activist liberal judges.
Which makes me very glad that there’s that First Amendment to the Constitution forbidding government-sponsored prayer and other religious actions. As someone once put it, as long as there are exams, there will be prayer in schools. But it has to come from individuals, not the governmental system. And that’s not a “activist liberal judges” thing. That’s a stated very clearly part of the Constitution thing. And strict, literal, meaning of the Constitution is usually considered a “conservative judge” thing.
And, btw, as it happens, I personally came very close to being ordered to say a prayer at my (public) high school graduation. Worse, it wouldn’t even have been a group prayer, but me, solo, on stage (yes, this was illegal as all get out, but I also didn’t have the resources to do a legal challenge), due to my class rank. I managed to get out of it, but it wasn’t easy. How would you feel if you were ordered at a school ceremony to, say, say a prayer to Allah? Or to a Hindu god? Or any god other than your particular one?
This sort of desire is very common in theocracies. If you’re in one, you better hope your particular god lines up with the official one.
His faith is real. And it makes a difference.
And that frightens me a lot. Consider this; you like that Bush has a faith that you share. OK, now, imagine that Bush has just as strong a faith in something you don’t share. Overly strong “faith” (in the general sense, not specific to Bush’s religion) amounts to zealotism. I prefer someone who’ll at least consider if facts get in the way of their faith. And Bush is exhibiting, to me, an overreliance on general faith. His whole take on Iraq at the moment amounts to “Have faith in me and my advisors, and it’ll work out. I have faith in my people.”
It’s all anyone can do to send you to the following link, updated every Wednesday:
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=17850
PAD wrote:
“And I’ll tell you, I was dubious about the whole Bush-listening device thing, but there were moments when it really did look like Bush was listening to someone else talking…Ah well. I dunno.”
That ‘thing’ showing on the back of Bush is called a spine. Something Kerry is lacking. 😉
I thought this was the most even of the three debates – and Bush’s best.
Lost was really on? It wasn’t pre-empted by the debate? Is this a west coast/east coast thing?
Canadian health care
Hasn’t the complaint about it been that you don’t pay in money but in time, that beyond certain basic health services you have a long wait?
Global test
In speeches or interviews since Kerry used the phrase, has he said a) what happens if a national leader fails such a test b) who does the judging of such a test or standard c) why he voted against Iraq War 1 aka Desert Storm, which presumably passed such a test d) why he voted for the Iraq War 2 which presumably he feels failed such a test and e) why he said just last August he would have still voted to authorize the Bush to go to war in hingsight know all the failure and hardships that would ensue?
Factcheck.org
Hasn’t the website shown that not only do both Bush and Kerry cite distorted or misleading “facts” but do so repeatedly after they have been … factchecked?
— Ken from Chicago
The White House has said that the President was not wearing any protective gear at the first debate.
And PAD, idear is a fine ole Massasuchusetts tradition. It is like our secret handshake to recognize other people from the state.
I have no problem understanding what Kerry means by Global Test.
He means that when and if the US were to go into a preemptive action that we would have all the evidence to support that decision, we would have exhausted all other avenues and we would be beyond reproach when it came to the facts of the matter. Unlike what we have had with the mess in Iraq.
His global test isn’t about getting international permission its about being able to go before the international community as well as the citizens of the US and not get caught stretching the truth or manipulating facts.
Re: Canadian healthcare
As a Canadian who has lived in the U.S. five out of the last ten years, I have to say that I vastly prefer our medical system.
I’ve never been in line for anything major in the U.S., but for everything up to and including broken bones, the wait times have been roughly equivalent.
Furthermore, I found the quality of the service in the U.S. to be much lower, and much more oriented on what they could sell you — e.g. drugs, expensive physiotherapy, etc.
For things like mental healthcare, U.S. doctors are no better than drug pushers. I was amazed at the amount of people I know in the U.S. who are on a steady diet of antidepressants, as compared to Canada, drugs that are often prescribed after no more than a single meeting. It’s positively freakish.
In my experience, Canadians who complain about our healthcare system do so from a place of ignorance. They believe the media rhetoric that the U.S. system is so much better.
It isn’t.
“The White House has said that the President was not wearing any protective gear at the first debate.”
I’m pretty sure they lied. If either Kerry or Bush is walking around without protective gear they should be immediately disqualified on the basis of reckless stupidity.
“I’m pretty sure they lied. If either Kerry or Bush is walking around without protective gear they should be immediately disqualified on the basis of reckless stupidity”
I agree, in this day and age almost every public figure should wear a vest and even more so as far as the President is concerned.
Do you think that maybe they are denying the body armor theory because they feel that it would diminish Bush’s “macho cowboy” image?
Canadian Health care in a nut shell:
Long waits, absolutely no debt.
Personal experience:
2 Years ago when my wife and I had our son, she was booked in the hospital for 3.5 day weekend to have a C-section. She was supposed to have a semi-private (re: shared) room, but because of her allergy to latex she/we were bumped up to a completely private room at no cost.
How much does 3.5 days, plus a surgical procedure cost is an American hospital? Doesn’t it seem wrong to have to worry about that?
There was no cost to us and we never saw a bill or were told of the costs. Even if we had both been unemployed, we would have had the same experience and would not have had to worry about the cost.
Somethings should not be about profit in my opinion.
Fred Chamberlain: Bush “feels” people praying for him? I need to take another look at the DSM-IV and other criteria for schizophrenia.
Luigi Novi: I need to take another look at the criteria for bigotry.
While you may want to do this, I’ll point out, since Jim brought it up as well, that it was said tonue-in-cheek.
No bigotry here. See my responses to “Hey, What’d I Miss” thread if you have any real interest.
Oops, sent before finished….
I have no issue with any man’s beliefs unless they negatively affect others. Bush’s statement seemed out of place and alarming to me as a positiver reinforcer and affirmation of his choices. I wonder if he feels the millions of people who pray in opposition to the administration’s actions.
I watched part of the debate last night- fist and last time… I can’t stand Bush’
s voice or that smirk. By 10 pm, I was ready to throw a brick at the TV. BTW, on the litmus test – Bush claims that abortion isn’t one thing he’d claim he use to appoint a judge and says that Kerry would use it as a litmus test. Kerry, however did not say tha the would appoint judges only that supported abortion rights – just that he would not appoint a judge who thought that his or her right to make someon else do something according to his/her personal beliefs.
All that being said, I like Kerry’s speaking manner better – he speaks without a noticable accent, pronounces words correctly and uses proper grammar – that should be a litmus test for president (and why is that phrase one that the president beat to death? Does anyone use litmus paper anymore?)
To put it differently, Bush’s faith is in something beyond himself. Kerry’s faith appears to be in himself and what he and others together can do. That difference was clear tonight.
And that’s part of the reason I dislike Bush – all his faith is in something else. So when he fails, he has something/somebody else to blame.
And as others have said, it disturbs me greatly when he wants to run this country based on his faith, not in himself, but on the belief in a higher being that I don’t necessary believe in.
Yes, the difference is clear, and it reaffirms my reasons to vote for Kerry.
[B]”Well over 70% of the general population have no problem with spoken prayer being returned to the public school or with prayers being offered at football games”[/B]
This whole issue of legalized prayer in school have always baffled me.
Over 20 years ago I attended a [B]public[/B] school. After morning announcements we would have
“A Moment of Silent Medatation”.
Simple enough.
If you wanted to pray, in whatever religion, GREAT. If not, FINE. So what’s the big deal? Why should there be
special spoken prayer? Isn’t religion, the faith in your god PRIVATE??? Isn’t a belief a PERSONAL thing?
Organized spoken prayer in the school is a NON issue.
It’s another one of those non issues that’s used to steer us away from pressing problems in our school that need to be dealt with.
“Jim in Iowa: Well over 70% of the general population have no problem with spoken prayer being returned to the public school or with prayers being offered at football games.
Luigi Novi: Then well over 70% of the general population should be overjoyed to know that spoken prayer in public schools and prayers at school football games are perfectly legal.”
Actually, spoken prayers ate school football games are illegal. If a player, on his own, decided to pick up a mike and say “excuse me, I’d like to say a quick prayer before the game”, the school could get sued. How do I know? It’s happened. Here. In OKLAHOMA of all places.
I mean God forbid someone get offended. Are we an entire country of 3 year olds? I would not be offended by a Muslim or Catholic or Jewish prayer before a game. Especially one motivated by students, not the school.
Atheism is becoming a religion unto itself to many people, and the courts have began to enforce it. Fireman can’t hang crosses over their beds, Policement can’t celebrate Christmas at their work. People are no longer as free to express their religion as they used to be. It’s as bad as any other freedom of speech being trampled on. And it’s amazing. People and groups get up in arms to protect a comic book store in Oklahoma who sells child Snuff Comics and leaves them laying around where kids can get them, yet don’t say a word when children who gather at the flagpole before school for a prayer get told they have to leave school grounds.
“I just wanted to add that my roommate thinks that bulge on Bush’s back is an armoured vest. He has military experience, so I trust his judgement on this.”
I think its part of the control collar Chaney is useing to keep Bush in line. Every time he’s about to say something that would throw the election, Chaney gives him a shock. Those wern’t smirks during the debate, they were grimiaces
Here’s what I got out of the debate on Bush’s “domestic agenda.”
Moderator: Mr President, what do you think about raising the minimum wage?
Bush: Well, my No Child Left Behind plan is a jobs program when you think about it.
Mod: What do you say the 45 million uninsured Americans?
Bush: Well, my No Child Left Behind plan is a health care program when you think about it.
Mod: What do you think about affirmative action?
Bush: My No Child Left Behind plan is a social justice program when you think about it.
Mod: What about workers who are being outsourced?
Bush: No Child Left Behind.
Mod: Do you like candy?
Bush: No Child Left Behind.
Mod: Your closing statement, please.
Bush: When I met Laura at a barbecue in Midland, TX, I remember saying to her that if I could just get Congress to pass my No Child Left Behind plan, we wouldn’t have any domestic problems at all.
“Do you think that maybe they are denying the body armor theory because they feel that it would diminish Bush’s “macho cowboy” image?’
Perhaps, though it would also be an invitation for any would-be assassin to take only headshots.
“There was no cost to us and we never saw a bill or were told of the costs. Even if we had both been unemployed, we would have had the same experience and would not have had to worry about the cost.
Somethings should not be about profit in my opinion.”
Nice thought but where will we get advances in medicine or for that matter, future doctors? If drug companies are told they will not be allowed to make profits they will go into something more lucrative–advertising breakfast cereal or video games, whatever.
My ex-wife is a doctor and while she makes a good living compared to most, she is hardly rolling in dough. In fact, considering the amount of education, stress and time it took to get to where she is, her income is way too small.
“he speaks without a noticable accent, pronounces words correctly and uses proper grammar – that should be a litmus test for president”
One could come up with an impressive list of former presidents who would fall short of that lofty standard.
I think both the best and worst moments of the debate came from Kerry. When he thanked Bush for his leadership on 9/11 and Bush silently mouthed a “thank you”, that was great. very classy. Then he goes and bizarely brings up Mary Cheney, apparently the only gay person that he and John Edwards knows. What a tool.
on a serious note:
“Canadian health care
Hasn’t the complaint about it been that you don’t pay in money but in time, that beyond certain basic health services you have a long wait?”
I have a 4 and a half month old son. The pediatrician we tired to use for his regual check ups had our first check up a week late, and could only schedule the 4 month check up t 6 months, and the 6 mo check up at close to 10 months of age. We ended up just useing our regular doctor because her schedule is only about a 2 week wait. However her average waiting room wait is an hour to an hour and a half after your scheduled time. After all that we also pay more. hmmmm yea the canadian helth care system is soooooo worng. Right. No wait with the birth of my son, I’ll end up paying over 3000.00 in cash this year that was not cover by my insurance because I …. uh went to the doctor…. my wife had the baby in a hospital, rather than the more insurance friendly economical back seat of a taxi…. huh thats funny isn’t it.
Special question from yer daughter:
If Kerry is sooooooooo liberal, like, the most liberal dude in the Senate as my favorite Good Ole Boy keeps telling me, how can he be such a flip flopper? If he were waffling or canoodling or whatever you want to call it, wouldn’t his track record be all over the place and make it, therefore, impossible to pin him as a liberal? Huh? I don’t get it.
RE: Prayer in school
A couple of you read into my post something I never said. I personally have no agenda to restore prayer in school or at football games. I don’t think it is the crisis either side thinks it is.
My point was if 70% of Americans are in favor of prayer in school, they are not going to think the President is scary or weird for saying he “feels” it when people pray for him.
Jim in Iowa
My only thought about prayer at football games is that every time I hear about the it, I picture God going over his “to do” list:
1) Bring about peace in the Middle East.
2) Cure Timmy Johnson’s cancer.
3) End world hunger.
4) Make sure the Midland, TX Pitbulls win the state championship.
Actually, spoken prayers ate school football games are illegal. If a player, on his own, decided to pick up a mike and say “excuse me, I’d like to say a quick prayer before the game”, the school could get sued. How do I know? It’s happened. Here. In OKLAHOMA of all places.
I can see both sides of this issue. I would be uncomfortable if a Buddhist or Muslim got up and said a prayer. But I would not feel threatened. I would not feel the government was sponsoring a religion. It is sad to me that many of the liberals who preach “tolerance” are the most intolerant of any religious expression. There is no excuse for someone to be sued simply because a student wanted to offer a prayer at a school football game. Funny how those who don’t like Christianity have no problem imposing their morality on others.
Jim in Iowa
4) Make sure the Midland, TX Pitbulls win the state championship.
Well, the Bible does say that if even a sparrow falls to the ground, God knows and cares. So since at least one play is sure to be pounded pretty hard into the turf, and a person is of at least as much value as a sparrow to God, then I would say he is paying attention to the game.
Most football game prayers do not consist of, “God, help us kick the, umm, rear ends of our opponents.” They are generally asking for safety and fair play and good sportsmanship, etc.
Now the prayers of the parents and coaches on the sidelines during the game . . .
Jim in Iowa
Obviously, the previous post should have said:
So since at least one player
Sort of like your tolerance for those who repeatedly explain and present proof that the bible is fiction while you insist it’s purely trutful and historic?
Am I alone in thinking Bush’s smirk was kinda unnessasary and a bit creepy? Now, I dont want an emotionless Vulcan being President, but dámņ, your a President, try to be a bit more serious in presenting things. The constant “s**t eating grin” got on my nerves after a bit, maybe because im not sure he understands when he says certain things with a smile (like saying he’s protecting the borders, or anything about education) he doesn’t seem very modest.
Kerry really dissapointed me at times though, because he let alot of things pass to easy. I dont understand why he doesn’t get more agressive on cetain topics, but maybe he’s got a cooler head than Bush does when he’s directly challenged.
Jerry wrote:
**Here. In OKLAHOMA of all places.**
Really? Where and when? I’m not being facetious. I’m in Oklahoma, and I want to know, so I can look it up.
Travis
I know why Bush was blinking so much…
He felt bad that the Red Sox weren’t in Fenway Park to attempt to steal signs so he was trying to give them pitch location!
🙂
Mike
Most football game prayers do not consist of, “God, help us kick the, umm, rear ends of our opponents.” They are generally asking for safety and fair play and good sportsmanship, etc.
If you want to pray for safety and good sportsmanship, that’s fine, but I have seen prayers before football games that were about “God, help us win this game.” I’ve also seen players thank the Lord for making a spectacular catch. It bothers me because it implies that God plays favorites in something as trivial in the cosmic scheme of things as a football game. If God favors the Midland Pitbulls, does that mean that East Midland Sharks are in league with the devil?
Granted, I happen to believe that is the case with the Dallas Cowboys and the NY Yankees, but we can save that discussion for another thread.
“Really? Where and when? I’m not being facetious. I’m in Oklahoma, and I want to know, so I can look it up. “
It happened with the Edmond High School football games in the late 90’s. Not long after the whole city seal debacle.
Granted, I happen to believe that is the case with the Dallas Cowboys and the NY Yankees, but we can save that discussion for another thread.
With the Cowboys building a new stadium (they hope) in Arlington, we will see if they leave the hole in the stadium for God to watch. 🙂 Go Cowboys!
Jim in Iowa (formerly known as Jim in Dallas)
Sort of like your tolerance for those who repeatedly explain and present proof that the bible is fiction while you insist it’s purely trutful and historic?
Sorry, I did not know trying to defend my position on an issue was being intollerant.
Jim in Iowa