Bush campaign obsessed with Kerry
Find a Conversation
Bush campaign obsessed with Kerry
| Thu, 07-29-2004 - 7:08am |
Have a look at the two websites. The first thing you see on the Bush site is a big picture of Kerry and the lead story about Kerry’s “makeoverâ€, and links to lots of Kerry bashing. I get the feeling that Bush wants to distract from his lack of ideas.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Look at the Kerry website and there is not a word about Bush, only what Kerry plans to do for the country.
I may not like Kerry very much, and I may wish that the Dems had chosen a better candidate, but at least he's not directly engaging in smear tactics, and at least his website gives information on exactly what it is he aims to do.
http://www.johnkerry.com/index.html

Elaine
Pages
<<"There's a reason the world was completely behind us post 9/11 going into afghanistan and against us because of Iraq, but I'm too stubborn to know it. ">>....the world wasn't completely behind you post 9/11 and the world
Also, IF Hussein disposed of his chemical and biological weapons, did he do so under the watchful eye of the UN Inspectors? No. That is a violation.
Second, Hussein failed to produce any documentation to support that these agents had been destroyed, as required in the resolutions. That is a violation.
Hussein had scud missiles with a greater range than those allowed under the resolution. That is a violation.
I think you get the point.
--
Not if the point is: He's a danger to us and we must invade.
Let's make a deal: I'll stop trying to convince you it was a rush to war and unjust, if you stop trying to convince me the war was neccessary and just.
I like you, but we'll never agree on it :)
You're right, it wasnt ME like I said ME.
There must be a reason why THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES supported Bush in Afghanistan and not Iraq.
There must be a reason why 10's of millions who voiced no opposition to The Afghanistan effort, are screaming about Iraq.
Must be all that love for a two-bit P.O.S. dictator :)
I'm not one to even point out typo's, let alone correct them. My "you" was plural, as I assumed you meant the US.
<<"There must be a reason why THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES supported Bush in Afghanistan and not Iraq. ">>.... yes.
<<"Must be all that love for a two-bit P.O.S. dictator :)">>.....what is a P.O.S. dictator?
It's ok, it's a polarized issue.
What's more relevant, is how we're going to get out. I do not want PNAC's agenda being met in Iraq. I don't think the Iraqi's would allow it.
I'm interested in what Kerry defines as 'A heavy hand to play' when it comes to BROADENING the so-called coalition there.
Unlike a few months ago, he's well within his right to be meeting with other leaders and very correct not to lay out all those cards on the table at this time (Same with Bush).
"Schaitberger at DNC: “Fire Fighters Are for America and for John Kerry”
July 28, 2004 - Following a dramatic video showing fire fighters on the job, IAFF General President Harold A. Schaitberger, Kerry-Edwards Campaign Co-Chair and Convention Sergeant-at-Arms, addressed the Democratic delegation in Boston Wednesday, July 28..."
Then I saw this website. A worthwhile look for comparison: http://www.FirefightersforBush.com
"IAFF president Harold Schaitberger joined the attack, claiming that the President was trying to "capitalize on the image of great heroics and a great tragedy." But other firefighters, incensed at the IAFF's statements, rallied around the President. Many of them turned to the web as a way to express their outrage at Schaitberger's remarks."
There was a recommended reading of an article by Ben Stein. Wonderful!!!:
http://www.eonline.com/Gossip/Morton/Archive/2003/031220.html
Pages