First blog post...here it goes:
I watched the debate between Cheney and Edwards last night I thought it was interesting that the John-John ticket's battle cry is starting to sound like a small child whining. "We'd do it beeeettteeerrrrr!" over and over. When pressed for details they explain that they will do Iraq better and faster, they will do the economy better, healthcare better, etc. No details. At least none that make any sense. Take for example Iraq. After hearing the last two debates, I feel strongly that with John John in the white house, we are going to see a pull out of Iraq every bit as graceful as our pullout of Vietnam. Does anyone recall with great pride the way we stabbed South Vietnam in the back in the 70's? of course this was after Kerry got the air time telling his lies about the soldiers he served with, and after Hanoi Jane provided support to the enemy government. After all of the hippies and anti-war soldiers posed for the cameras and scared Congress into thinking they might get voted out of office if they didn't do something drastic. That little media inspired coup directly cause the massacre of millions of our "allies" after we pulled out. No wonder most country's distrust us.
So I'm reading the "news item" on
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6173358/:
I can tell the article is against Bush Cheney, and I notice the author is hiding it relatively well. But like most "journalists" lately he can't maintain the lie of objectivity through the entire article. I get down to where he states:
"
Continuing to address Edwards directly in violation of the ground rules, Cheney said: You've got one of the worst attendance records in the United States Senate...."
I knew most of the rules of the debate going in, so while I was watching it I was thinking, on and off, there's a violation of the rules, there's one etc. My opinion on these types of rules is that once one party breaks them the rules are off. You certainly couldn't depend on Miss PBS to enforce them or be objective (one question, "Today, a senior member of Islamic Jihad was killed in Gaza. There have been suicide bombings, targeted assassinations, mortar attacks, all of this continuing
at a time when the United States seems absent in the peace-making process. " That's objective? Anyway...back to my point about the article I was reading...its very obvious that Edwards started "directly violating" the ground rules of the debate in his first statement:
From :
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6187803/First comment by Edwards : "Mr. Vice President, you are still not being straight with the American people...." The rest of his comment was similar...
I'm not trying to pick nits here but this is one example that caught my eye so far...
I'm also amazed at the people I talk to that say they'll vote for Kerry. Every time I talk to one of them I see an opportunity to save someone's soul. The problem is they have no argument. Every reason they have for voting for Kerry starts out with: "Bush shouldn't have done xxx, or Bush said xxx..." They can NEVER frame their comments in terms of why Kerry will be better. All they have to do is do some research and they will see that the opposite is true. With Kerry president our country will be weaker, higher taxed (get a Democrat to tell you the range of income for the middle class, you will NEVER get an answer), and more socialist.
Don't get me wrong, there are things the Bush administration has done I don't agree with. I don't agree with his handling of homeland security, specifically the security at our borders and the influx of illegal aliens. Democrats will be worse, embracing the influx of non tax payers and criminals into this country more so than the Bush administration. I don't agree with his Healthcare plan (it isn't the governments place to be involved in healthcare, check out the constitution). The Democrats would be worse, trying to have their idea of socialized medicine rammed down our throats so we can enjoy the stellar healthcare that Canada and England enjoy.
I don't agree with the way they have handled North Korea or Iran, but really its a no win situation. If we use military force the Dems will raise 40 hells and if we don't they will as well. Remember, we have the problem in North Korea because of Jimmy Carter's administration. The Dems will do worse in that area of the world; especially once we leave Iraq high and dry.
All of the things I think that Bush and company could do better, I KNOW the dems will do worse. Read your history. Read their platforms. Read their voting records in the Congress.
So that’s my first post...I haven't written in years (yes, as hard as it may be to believe I am an ex English major)...Hopefully I'll get a little more focus as I get back in practice..
