Kerry ocassionally seems to be more intelligent
more willing to admit when something has gone wrong, and less focused on personal interests than W, at least W never seems to contradict himself. with Bush, i may not be 100% happy with the product i'm getting, but at least i know what i am getting.
What? Being undecided? It's just as hard for me to imagine being so sure. For the longest time I was a registered independent and I've voted roughly 50/50 for candidates from both parties
As son of a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, it is automatically expected by many that I am a Republican. For 50 years, through the election of 2000, I was. With the current administration’s decision to invade Iraq unilaterally, however, I changed my voter registration to independent, and barring some utterly unforeseen development, I intend to vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry.
I didn't hear enough to be able to pick a winner, but from what I understand, polling picked Kerry as the winner but no real shift in the polling numbers regarding the election was noted.
My understanding is that the debate went to Kerry. Reading the commentaries on it has not moved me one way or the other however.
Still looks like a coin-flip to me right now.
(yes, go ahead and argue that Rainbow Six is somehow completely different from Counter Strike and vice versa, ITS THE SAME DAMN GAME RETARDS)
One Police officer was beaten in NY by a protestor.
Not sure what movie to see tonight,
Having magical doors in the wall open and something coming out of it only goes so far.
This has happened 2 or 3 times as well.
Two or three times, 2 or 3 times. It's the way half the monster spawn for the first half of the game, it's litteraly 2 or 3 hundred times.
Uhhm no. He said "something coming out and only goes so far"...meaning whatever it was didn't get through the door at you and retreated. There has only been a few instances of this. Can't refer to specific events since I don't like leaving spoilers, especially in a game that relies on the element of surprise.
For months after playing Super Mario Brothers I would jump on mushrooms and stomp turtles or was it stop mushrooms and jump on turtles?
And I really like Kerry's plans for Iraq - "I have a secret plan that I am not going to share with anyone until I am elected".
As complicated as Iraq seems, there are really only three basic options: One, we can continue to do this largely by ourselves and hope more of the same works; Two, we can conclude it’s not doable, pull out and hope against hope that the worst doesn’t happen in Iraq; Or three, we can get the Iraqi people and the world’s major powers invested with us in building Iraq’s future.
Mistakes have complicated our mission and jeopardized our objective of a stable free Iraq with a representative government, secure in its borders. We may have differences about how we went into Iraq, but we do not have the choice just to pick up and leave—and leave behind a failed state and a new haven for terrorists.
I believe that failure is not an option in Iraq. But it is also true that failure is not an excuse for more of the same.
Here is how we must proceed.
First, we must create a stable and secure environment in Iraq. That will require a level of forces equal to the demands of the mission. To do this right, we have to truly internationalize both politically and militarily: we cannot depend on a US-only presence. In the short-term, however, if our commanders believe they need more American troops, they should say so and they should get them.
But more and more American soldiers cannot be the only solution. Other nations have a vital interest in the outcome and they must be brought in.
To accomplish this, we must do the hard work to get the world’s major political powers to join in this mission. To do so, the President must lead. He must build a political coalition of key countries, including the UK, France, Russia and China, the other permanent members of the UN Security Council, to share the political and military responsibilities and burdens of Iraq with the United States.
The coalition should endorse the Brahimi plan for an interim Iraqi government, it should propose an international High Commissioner to work with the Iraqi authorities on the political transition, and it should organize an expanded international security force, preferably with NATO, but clearly under US command.
Once these elements are in place, the coalition would then go to the UN for a resolution to ratify the agreement. The UN would provide the necessary legitimacy. The UN is not the total solution but it is a key that opens the door to participation by others.
In parallel, the President must also go to NATO members and others to contribute the additional military forces and to NATO to take on an organizing role. NATO is now a global security organization and Iraq must be one of its global missions.
To bring NATO members and others in, the President must immediately and personally reach out and convince them that Iraqi security and stability is a global interest that all must contribute to. He must also convince NATO as an organization that Iraq should be a NATO mission—a mission consistent with the principles of collective security that have formed the basis of the alliance’s remarkable history in the pursuit of peace and security.
To bring others in it is imperative we share responsibility and authority. When NATO members have been treated with respect, they have always – always – answered the call of duty. So too with other key contributors. Every one has a huge stake in whether Iraq survives its trial by fire or is consumed by fire and becomes a breeding ground for terror, intolerance and fear.
I know that some will say that this is an impossible task, but I believe it is doable with the right approach. We must lead but we must listen. We must use every tool of diplomacy and persuasion to bring others along.
True, but THAT WAS NOT BUSH's FAULT! You cannot blame him for the CIA blowing their part of the job.
I agree, but what harm has it done? I don't want an essay, give me ONE concrete example of how you personally are harmed by the Patriot Act.
In the long run, yes. The country was a known supporter of terrorism
He DID support the war, but constantly lies about it.
I just mentioned it as an example of a President stating a position in his candidacy and keeping that stand after being elected despite intense political pressure.
The conclusion that Iraq had WMDs were not the result of the administration's interference. That was their INDEPENDENT conclusion.
Again, the truth isn't refuted by you, just glossed over and hopefully forgotten.
I don't know about you, but my rights have not been infringed upon.
No, I'm outlining why Bush has been doing the things NECESSARY to protect this country.
hings Kerry probably wouldn't have the guts to do without the French holding his hand and saying, "It's OK, we approve".
Exactly, the same info Bush had.
If they were all signed on prior to the war based on the info they had, then don't flip-flop later if the info turned out to be bad.
After the war it was: This is Bush's evil war. Bad, Bush, bad.
"Our agents were isolated by government-imposed walls, handcuffed by government-imposed restrictions and starved for basic information technology."
Right now, we need real leadership and foresight to take us through this war on terrorism. Kerry just doesn't have what it takes.