View Full Version : Cheney/Edwards debate
Anybody watching? :munchin Catch the lame response by Edwards to the direct question from the moderator as to what the "Global Test" is all about? Totally skirted the question.
I think the VP is burying Edwards with facts, and has been going after their voting records.
Edit to add: And their (lack of) consistency.
The Reaper
10-05-2004, 19:51
Anybody watching? :munchin Catch the lame response by Edwards to the direct question from the moderator as to what the "Global Test" is all about? Totally skirted the question.
I think the VP is burying Edwards with facts, and has been going after their voting records.
Edit to add: And their (lack of) consistency.
Concur. VP is kicking his ass, IMHO.
Now I want anyone who runs across a post-debate poll to post the link here so that we can vote for whoever we think won.
TR
The Reaper
10-05-2004, 19:57
Concur. VP is kicking his ass, IMHO.
Now I want anyone who runs across a post-debate poll to post the link here so that we can vote for whoever we think won.
TR
Think Edwards is backtracking to previous questions too much?
Looks like ducking and flip-flopping to me.
TR
Yes I do, simply because the VP is coming at him with straight facts, discussing his attendence record and voting records etc...and he cannot counter.
And let me just say Edwards bringing up Cheney's daughter (gay rights/marriage question) was WAY out of line. Cheap shot.
The Reaper
10-05-2004, 20:11
Family should have been off limits. Edwards was trying to use it to drive a wedge among the Republican constituency. I thought the VP's refusal to respond was telling.
Nice smackdown when he hit Edwards back on his Chapter S corporation which he used to avoid $600,000 in Social Security payments.
Wish he had hit him harder on it.
TR
Family should have been off limits. Edwards was trying to use it to drive a wedge among the Republican constituency. I thought the VP's refusal to respond was telling.
Nice smackdown when he hit Edwards back on his Chapter S corporation which he used to avoid $600,000 in Social Security payments.
Wish he had hit him harder on it.
TR
Agreed TR, for me his response was almost as good as the standard 7th Group reply. :D
I agree that would have been good to hit harder on that since so many people don't look deeper on facts but overall I think he has hammered Edwards but good.
Now I want anyone who runs across a post-debate poll to post the link here so that we can vote for whoever we think won.
TR
Here you go Sir... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/
NousDefionsDoc
10-05-2004, 20:51
I hope nobody explains to these to dufuses the issues involved with "doubling the size of Special Forces."
It looked like a sparring lesson from an old master to a young student to me.
I liked the VP's answer to Halliburton - "Go to factcheck.com" LOL
Also - "I'm President of the Senate and tonight is the first time I ever met you." ROTLMAO. Edwards looked chin jab stunned. :lifter
The Reaper
10-05-2004, 20:51
Here you go Sir... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/
Cheney is losing 3-1 so far.
I found these three articles quite interesting. Increasing rudeness, vandalism, and actual violence by the Dems is shocking to me.
TR
Protestors Ransack Bush/Cheney Headquarters In Orlando
http://www.local6.com/politics/3785861/detail.html
Shots fired into Knoxville Bush/Cheney headquarters
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20041005-024050-1855r.htm
and this one, which seems to have a dead link:
Shot fired at GOP Headquarters in Huntington
NousDefionsDoc
10-05-2004, 20:56
Those people are insane.
They are insane...and desperate.
Here's another poll...from Fox. I find it hard to believe people feel Edwards won, he had nothing of substance. And it can't be his looks...he's too girlie for me.
http://www.foxnews.com/ you need to scroll down a bit it is on the right side of the page.
Who won Tuesday night's vice presidential debate? (From Fox)
a. Vice President Cheney (42%)
6,344
b. Senator Edwards (56%)
8,378
c. I did not watch (1%)
68
d. None of the above (1%)
186
The Reaper
10-05-2004, 21:16
Here is an example the MSNBC/Newsweek spin:
"Cheney promptly challenged those figures, saying the Iraqi security forces had taken nearly half of the casualties.
"For you to demean their sacrifice is beyond the pale," he said to Edwards seated a few feet away.
"Oh, I'm not," Edwards protested before the vice president cut him off."
Cut him off???
It wasn't his turn to speak, it was on the VP's time.
He also spoke out of turn when the moderator screwed up and gave him the floor.
The he "forgot" the rules and mentioned John Kerry twice after they were asked to speak about their position without naming their running mates.
No mention of those gaffe's either, just that Mean old Dick Cheney "cut him off".
TR
They aren't biased. Much.
I flipped on MSNBC but got a headache so switched back to Fox.
rubberneck
10-05-2004, 21:45
You have to disregard all the on-line interactive polls as the Democrats have been sending out mass e-mails the last 72 hours to supporters urging them to vote for Edwards regardless of his actual performance.
Apparently ABC did a quick telephone survey and the VP won by 11 or 12% and interestingly enough Edwards only got 34% (IIRC) of the vote, which means only his base believes he won but no one else does.
NousDefionsDoc
10-05-2004, 22:43
I also liked how Edwards said the solution to malpractice costs is to put more responsibility on lawyers. He wants to put the solution up to the biggest bunch of irresponsible, no good...
:D :munchin
brownapple
10-06-2004, 01:19
Yep, give the sharks and the leeches control over the fish supply... sure, that makes sense... :rolleyes:
The vice-presidential debate was a disapointment for me for various reasons.
I did enjoy the sly way Cheney insinuated that Edwards was picked because of his Southern background (whereas Bush already had the state of Wyoming), and that his youth was a liability because he may still have aspirations. Classic, and well done.
It was the moderator Gwen Ifill who brought up Cheney's family regarding the proposed constitutional amendment:
IFILL: The next question goes to you, Mr. Vice President.
I want to read something you said four years ago at this very setting: "Freedom means freedom for everybody." You said it again recently when you were asked about legalizing same-sex unions. And you used your family's experience as a context for your remarks.
Can you describe then your administration's support for a constitutional ban on same-sex unions?
Roguish Lawyer
10-06-2004, 11:56
I also liked how Edwards said the solution to malpractice costs is to put more responsibility on lawyers. He wants to put the solution up to the biggest bunch of irresponsible, no good...
:D :munchin
I heard that part on the radio, and I do not believe that Kerry or Edwards actually supports any of the things he mentioned. I would be interested to see what they supposedly support in writing, because I am fairly certain that they oppose all of the things Edwards was talking about. I am confident that they are proposing something that sounds like what the Republicans have been pushing for, but is so watered down that it really is meaningless.
I did not watch much of the debate, just heard a little on my way home from the airport.
Airbornelawyer
10-06-2004, 15:38
Yep, give the sharks and the leeches control over the fish supply... sure, that makes sense... :rolleyes:
I prefer remora. It's like a leech on a shark. :cool:
Airbornelawyer
10-06-2004, 15:44
BTW, the problem with malpractice is not the lawyers, doctors or the insurance companies. It is a self-indulgent, irresponsible victim society that always seeks to shift the blame for various problems to someone else, and the jury members that this produces. Also, the politics of envy, which says "soak the fat-cat doctors and insurance companies." I personally blame liberalism for both pathologies, but maybe that's just me.
The Reaper
10-06-2004, 16:33
Another Dem attack on a Bush-Cheney Campaign HQs.
http://www.wisgop.org/view.phtml?func=ch&lg=&id=83
Aren't these people supposed to be non-violent?
Let's see....
How many Republicans showed up and interrupted speeches at the DNC?
How many people do you see tearing down K-E signs from private property?
How many cars with K-E bumperstickers have been keyed?
How many Democratic campaign offices have been attacked or shot up?
How is this conduct by party members explained?
Is this the Armerican Democratic party, or the Taliban?
TR
Roguish Lawyer
10-06-2004, 17:44
Yep, give the sharks and the leeches control over the fish supply... sure, that makes sense... :rolleyes:
I don't know, GH. If there was a group of renegade Special Forces soldiers terrorizing an area, I would want to use Special Forces against them. Fight fire with fire, you know? That's why you guys need people like me and AL. :D :lifter ;)
The Reaper
10-06-2004, 17:54
I don't know, GH. If there was a group of renegade Special Forces soldiers terrorizing an area, I would want to use Special Forces against them. Fight fire with fire, you know? That's why you guys need people like me and AL. :D :lifter ;)
Let me know when you start the war on the other lawyers, I'll send you some spare ammo and set up a local auxilliary for support.
TR
Roguish Lawyer
10-06-2004, 18:09
Let me know when you start the war on the other lawyers, I'll send you some spare ammo and set up a local auxilliary for support.
TR
The war started long ago, and I believe you've already made a contribution.
I'll take the ammo too if you want. ;)
The Reaper
10-07-2004, 18:50
I must be prescient.
TR
National Review
By Stanley Kurtz
October 07, 2004, 8:52 a.m.
Climate of Fear
Some Bush supporters say they fear for their property.
Blogger Robert Musil suggests that a climate of fear has descended upon Republicans in at least some parts of the country. Based in Los Angeles, Musil says most Republicans he's spoken with are afraid to put Bush-Cheney bumper stickers on their cars, or signs on their lawns, for fear of physical retaliation from angry liberals. The problem is not symmetrical, says Musil. Stickers and signs for Kerry are widespread in Republican neighborhoods. Yet even in their own communities, Republicans are holding back. Intrigued by Musil's claim, I put up a post on NRO's blog, The Corner, asking for reader comment. I was quickly flooded with nearly 300 e-mails, almost all of them backing Musil. Here is the story they told.
There is a climate of fear. Again and again, Corner readers say they've been scared off of posting bumper stickers by visions of having their cars keyed or their windows smashed. A typical comment: "Putting a Bush-Cheney sticker on my car would be like adding a bulls-eye that says, 'Please vandalize my truck.'" A reader from Arlington, Va., who lives just a few blocks from national Bush-Cheney headquarters, says he was not afraid to use bumper stickers in 1996 or 2000, but wouldn't do so this year. Bush lawn signs are feared, not only as an invitation to vandalism, but because they might permanently alienate neighbors. A man whose wife was handicapped and dependent on neighbors in case of emergency was wary of starting a neighborhood "war" with a sign. This was a common worry among Bush supporters, even in less dire circumstances. (For more on the Bush-Cheney sign fears, go here, here, and here.)
Are the fears justified? They seem to be. On Tuesday there was a report that several shots had been fired into Bush-Cheney headquarters in Knoxville, Tenn., shattering glass. And late Tuesday evening came a report that protesters had ransacked a Bush-Cheney headquarters in Orlando, Florida. But these are only the most dramatic examples of a broader trend. Plenty of folks told me that their cars had been keyed, dented, or had windows smashed in for carrying a Bush-Cheney bumper sticker. Nasty notes left on the windshield are common. And some drivers get cut off in traffic and flipped off by cars sporting Kerry bumper stickers. One fellow said a couple of young guys pulled up next to his 64-year-old mother's car and signaled her to roll the window down. When she did, they screamed, "Bush is a F**king MORON!"
Apparently, Bush-Cheney cars are routinely keyed in places like liberal Seattle. And liberal Bethesda, Md., has reportedly seen a rash of spray-paintings of Bush yard signs (with Kerry signs left in tact). One pro-Bush family in liberal West L.A. had its yard sign stolen six times. Theft, spray paint, or just tearing to shreds are the weapons of choice against yard signs, but one Bush-Cheney sign was actually set on fire. Even in conservative Idaho, Bush-Cheney cars get keyed. And in conservative Houston, parking while visiting a friend in the liberal midtown section can mean a keyed car. Apparently, these attacks are so common that you can now buy a T-Shirt with a picture of a slashed-out Bush-Cheney logo and the legend, "A person of tolerance and diversity keyed my car."
The fear of violence leads many couples into serious debate. A stolen Bush-Cheney yard sign in liberal Cherry Hill, N.J., prompted one couple to think long and hard before replacing it. Would a rock through the window be next? "You can't hide where you live once you make a mark of yourself," said the husband. (But they did replace the sign.) One woman hints that although her husband called her "paranoid" for deciding against a bumper sticker, he may secretly be relieved at her choice.
Several readers noted that Kerry bumper stickers seem to show up mostly on Mercedes, BMWs, and other "high-end Euro-steel," while Bush-Cheney cars are more modest American models. But at least part of the reason for this could be that Bush supporters are afraid to put stickers on new or expensive cars. Some families with two cars restrict the Bush-Cheney sticker to the beat-up old family van, keeping it off the better car.
Bush-sign protection is an art. Lots of folks report putting signs inside home and car windows, facing out. Magnetized car signs can be removed for safety when parking, and Bush yard signs can be stored in the garage at night. One fellow makes sure to park with his bumper facing a wall. Some Bush supporters have responded to thefts by covering signs in chicken wire or putting them behind fences. But these tactics don't always work.
The most effective strategy seems to be hanging the signs high on trees, or high on a house. But this can be countered by malicious graffiti on the door, which one family has to clean off daily. The best tactic may have been this note, taped to the back of a yard sign: "Thanks! Your theft of this sign will result in a replacement sign and an additional donation of $10 to the RNC. Your contribution is appreciated."
So are those too afraid to use stickers and signs just a bunch of political girly-men? A couple of tough guys said as much to their more timid compatriots: "What kind of wussy are you? I say Bring It On!" But most of the people who wrote in argued that it isn't cowardice to worry about damage to a car that can't be protected when parked. Several people said they'd started sporting Bush T-shirts and caps instead of bumper stickers, because Kerry supporters won't try anything to their face. Readers who do decide to use stickers or signs despite the risks feel courageous. Some folks feel a sense of relief each and every time they return to an undamaged car.
Many Bush supporters avoid the whole problem by adopting a flag strategy. American flags, yellow ribbons, and signs saying "Support our troops" function in many places as proxies for Bush-Cheney signs. One reader noted that none of the homes with Kerry signs on his street display American flags. Other readers say they intentionally use the flag as a proxy. Usually this is safe. But apparently in Seattle, even an American flag can provoke arguments and rude looks. One Seattle neighborhood seems to display U.N. flags and stickers more often than Old Glory. (I guess that meets the "global test.")
Is the violence really unequal? Corner readers sure think so, but it's tough to know for certain when your sample consists of Bush partisans. Still, Corner readers point to repeatedly defaced Bush-Cheney signs in areas where Kerry signs go untouched. Clearly, there is at least some violence against Kerry signs. One reader said that in Columbus, Ohio, the virtual epicenter of this year's campaign, sign violence seems to be about equal. The most frightened Corner readers by far are those who live in or pass through university towns. Yet one reader from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee reports that at least some liberal professors there feel sheepish about displaying their support for Kerry. Still, the repeated message of Corner readers is that property damage is inflicted on Bush supporters at far higher levels than on Kerry supporters. The asymmetry is attributed partly to the general willingness of those on the left to protest, but mostly to the depths of liberal Bush hatred.
Several readers complained about local news stories that hyped minor attacks on Kerry signs while ignoring the more pervasive violence against Bush supporters. Then there's the question of which side's attacks are meaner. The only direct assault on a Kerry supporter described to me was a fellow who's Kedwards sign earned him a couple of frozen waffles on his front porch. Now, I wouldn't hurl waffles myself, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't think the waffle stunt was a great prank. Even when the Bushies strike, they seem to do it more in humor than in anger.
Pervasive liberal vitriol against the president has convinced some Bush supporters that they are in danger. Anti-Bush signs and graffiti seem to be at least as common as pro-Kerry signs. The slogans range from "Bushit," to "Bush is a Stupid A** Moron," to bumper stickers that substitute Bush/Hitler or Bush/Satan for Bush/Cheney.
This brings us to what I call "the mechanism of intimidation." It seems that either past violence or present incivility has the power to intimidate. Several Washington state readers pointed to memories of the violence at the Seattle World Trade Organization protests some years ago as a reason why they would not display a Bush-Cheney bumper sticker. A couple of California readers pointed to violence against conservatives on the Berkeley campus as a reason to hold back.
But overwhelmingly, those who were reluctant to put up Bush-Cheney stickers or signs said that the "rabid" nature of this year's Bush-hatred had convinced them that showing their support for the president was no longer safe. Apparently, in addition to all the keyed cars and bumper stickers, many city stop signs have been painted to read "Stop Bush." More than one reader said that people who deface city property can't be trusted to refrain from violence against private cars. One correspondent had an eloquent take on the mechanism of intimidation:
(Cont.)
The Reaper
10-07-2004, 18:51
...a number of neighborhood Kerry supporters have taken to putting hand written signs on their lawns. They do not threaten violence but manage to cross that invisible line of good taste and neighborliness.... That is, they insult the president personally and by association those who support him.
In the past, an unwritten rule seemed to apply to yard signs. Any neighbor was free to express his support for the candidate of his choice in a tasteful yard sign without having it affect personal friendships. But tactics seeming to violate the unwritten rule are now widely practiced: using insulting handmade signs, planting multiple signs at a single household and placing signs on property lines to make it appear as if neighbors also support Kerry-Edwards. In my mind's eye, this behavior suggests that the Kerry-Edwards supporters are so invested emotionally in the contest that they are willing — no eager — to alienate their neighbors.
This is what has created the climate of fear.
Why do Kerry supporters feel free to vandalize Bush signs and damage the property of the president's supporters? Corner readers agree that it's the liberal feeling of moral superiority that "puts them above the law and gives them leave to abridge the rights of others." Another typical comment was: "There's nothing more intolerant than a tolerant liberal." One reader called for an amendment to Voltaire's classic statement of liberal tolerance: "I may disagree with what you say, but I'll sneak onto your yard in the middle of the night to steal your sign, you fascist bastard."
With all the problems, the tide may be turning. A number of readers report that Bush signs are now proliferating. According to one, they "sprouted like dandelions" after the Republican convention. That may mean even more vandalism and violence as we head toward election day. But this is unlikely to help Kerry.
First, there's the cocoon effect. A number of readers said that the mainstream-media message that it's politically incorrect to favor the president means polls may actually undercount Bush support. Liberals are shocked when the president garners majority support, because they don't know anyone who agrees with him. Yet the truth is that liberal vitriol has simply made the many Bush supporters in their midst go underground.
Anti-Bush violence is a weak and ultimately counterproductive tactic. It is the opposite of Tocqueville's famous "tyranny of the majority." The tyranny of the majority works chiefly through mental intimidation. It frightens and silences by its pervasiveness, and its implicit threat of ostracism. As Tocqueville said, the tyranny of the majority leaves the body and goes for the soul. There is a touch of this in the reluctance of Bush supporters to alienate the neighbors upon whom they depend. But for the most part, the anti-Bush violence leaves the soul and goes for the body (even if it's the body of a car). That is not the tyranny of the majority. It is the rage of a minority, and it can only stir resentment and provoke a reaction at the voting booth. As one Corner reader said: "We may fear retaliation for putting stickers on our cars, but our voice will be heard loud and clear on November 2."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200410070852.asp
I agree! If I were to display a Bush-Cheney sign, my property would be damaged in a heartbeat. :confused:
The most effective strategy seems to be hanging the signs high on trees, or high on a house. But this can be countered by malicious graffiti on the door, which one family has to clean off daily. The best tactic may have been this note, taped to the back of a yard sign: "Thanks! Your theft of this sign will result in a replacement sign and an additional donation of $10 to the RNC. Your contribution is appreciated."
RL? :D
Thanks for the article TR, good read. The libs "tolerance preaching" is simply ironic at best, especially when this stuff comes to light.