Dubya's Convention Speech.... Don't worry about the facts...

JoseCuervo

New member
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
9,752
Location
South of the Border
Funny how the leader of the "War on Terror" forgot to mention the Terrorist... :D

Bush Glosses Over Complex Facts in Speech
In Convention Speech, Bush Glosses Over Some Complex Facts About Iraq Coalition, Terror War

The Associated Press



NEW YORK Sept. 3, 2004 — President Bush glossed over some complicating realities in Iraq, Afghanistan and the home front in arguing the case Americans are safer and his opponent cannot deliver.
On Iraq, Bush talked of a 30-member alliance standing shoulder to shoulder with the United States, masking the fact that U.S. troops are pulling by far most of the weight. On Afghanistan and its neighbors, he gave an accounting of captured or killed terrorists, but did not address the replenishment of their ranks or the still-missing Osama bin Laden.

Bush's acceptance speech Thursday night conveyed facts that told only part of the story, hardly unusual for this most political of occasions.

He took some license in telling Americans that Democratic opponent John Kerry "is running on a platform of increasing taxes."

Kerry would, in fact, raise taxes on the richest Americans but as part of a plan to keep the Bush tax cuts for everyone else and even cut some of them more. That's not a tax-increase platform any more than Bush's plan for private retirement accounts is a platform to reduce Social Security benefits.

And on education, Bush voiced an inherent contradiction, dating back to his 2000 campaign, in stating his stout support for local control of education, yet promising to toughen federal standards that override local decision-making.

"We are insisting on accountability, empowering parents and teachers, and making sure that local people are in charge of their schools," he said, on one hand. Yet, "we will require a rigorous exam before graduation."

On Iraq, Bush derided Kerry for devaluing the alliance that drove out Saddam Hussein and is trying to rebuild the country. "Our allies also know the historic importance of our work," Bush said. "About 40 nations stand beside us in Afghanistan, and some 30 in Iraq."

But the United States has more than five times the number of troops in Iraq than all the other countries put together. And, with 976 killed, Americans have suffered nearly eight times more deaths than the other allies combined.

Bush aggressively defended progress in Afghanistan, too. "Today, the government of a free Afghanistan is fighting terror, Pakistan is capturing terrorist leaders ... and more than three-quarters of al-Qaida's key members and associates have been detained or killed. We have led, many have joined, and America and the world are safer."

Nowhere did Bush mention bin Laden , nor did he account for the replacement of killed and captured al al-Qaida leaders by others.

He attacked Kerry for voting against an $87 billion package for Iraq and Afghanistan operations that included money for extra sets of body armor and other supplies, mocking his opponent for saying the issue was complicated. "There's nothing complicated about supporting our troops in combat," Bush said.

But the bill in question was not solely about supporting troops and Kerry's campaign said he ultimately voted against it because, among other reasons, it included no-bid contracts for companies. (Yeppers, $320,000 for Body Armor, $8 Billion for Halliburton....) :rolleyes:

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, who tracks the accuracy of campaign rhetoric at the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School for Communication, said Bush overstepped on a few claims about Kerry.

"The speech distorts Kerry's positions by suggesting that he opposed Medicare reform when he instead favored an alternative, and opposed tax cuts for all when he in fact supported the middle class cuts and opposed cuts for those making more than $200,000," she said.

And on Bush's second-term domestic initiatives, she was not surprised to find missing dollar signs.

"One expects acceptance speeches to make grand promises without specifying the ways that the money will be raised to pay for them," she said. "This speech is no exception."
 
Between the arrogance of Cheney and ineptitude of Dubya's reading(must not have been written in Crayola) last night I'm not surprised his rating only improved by 3 points overnight!!
Now if Kerry can put away the uniform and concentrate on economic factors affecting the majority of households he'll make some progress.
Can't wait for the debates!!!

Chas
 
Both conventions reminded me of sychronized Swimming, I enjoyed some parts and held my breath on others. Yes, the debates are where we actually get to see the man and not the machine.
 
Division and diversion
Rabid Zell Miller speech harkens Buchanan's culture wars


NEW YORK - Maybe John Kerry should take it as a compliment. George W. Bush and his gang have decided that the only way they can hold on to power is to throw so much dirt at Kerry that he ends up looking like Pigpen. In the process, they are painting the Democratic Party as a collection of lily-livered, America-hating, French-loving, defense-destroying, United Nations-kowtowing girlie men.
Oh yes, and the Bush boys are also calling for bipartisanship and national unity.

As one Democrat put it, the “Republicans have dealt in cynicism and skepticism” and “mastered the art of division and diversion.”

The Democrat who spoke those words happens to be Zell Miller. That would be the old Zell Miller, from his keynote speech to the 1992 Democratic National Convention -- a speech, by the way, that was infinitely less harsh than Miller's performance on Wednesday. It's impressive that Miller has proved to be such a fast learner in the folkways of the crowd he's now running with. Miller will proudly stand as the man who gave one of the most vicious and demagogic convention speeches in the television age. From Miller's speech, you could assume that the Democrats had nominated Saddam Hussein from his jail cell.

How else to explain the stuff Miller just made up? “Today's Democratic leaders,” he said, “see America as an occupier, not a liberator.” Excuse me, but which Democratic leader is he talking about?

“In their warped way of thinking,” Miller said of members of the party he addressed 12 years ago, “America is the problem, not the solution. They don't believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.” He is talking here about a Democratic Party that rallied to President Bush after 9/11 and was almost unanimous in supporting the war against the Taliban.

“Senator Kerry,” Miller added at one point, “has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations.” Has made it clear? Here's what Kerry said in his acceptance speech last month: “I will never give any nation or institution a veto over our national security.” Now that's pretty clear.

Thank the Lord that there are still Republicans who have not been poisoned by the philosophy of win-at-any-price. In the early hours of Thursday morning, I ran into Sen. John McCain, who spontaneously brought up Miller's speech. “I think it backfires,” McCain said, his face a picture of genuine astonishment. “It makes (Pat) Buchanan's speech in Houston look like milquetoast.” McCain was referring to Buchanan's “culture wars” speech widely thought to have damaged the first President Bush at the 1992 Republican convention.

But these Bush guys are smart. Note that they made sure the most incendiary words spoken at this convention came from the mouth of a nominal Democrat. If the backlash McCain predicts develops, they can lay the blame on old Zell, the disgruntled member of Kerry's party. And Miller was so rabid that when Dick Cheney started piling his own mud on Kerry a few minutes later, the vice president looked like a mild-mannered college professor.

But Cheney was no less adept than Miller at distorting Kerry's record. Consider this Cheney characterization of what Kerry said in his acceptance speech. “He declared at the Democratic convention that he will forcefully defend America -- after we have been attacked. My fellow Americans, we have already been attacked. We are faced with an enemy who seeks the deadliest of weapons to use against us, and we cannot wait for the next attack.”

What Kerry actually said -- in a speech that repeatedly referred to the ongoing war on terrorism -- was this: “Let there be no mistake: I will never hesitate to use force when it is required. Any attack will be met with a swift and a certain response.” The old Zell was right: Cheney's sleight of hand here is a perfect example of the “art of division and diversion” -- and distortion.

Personally, I'm sorry the Republicans did all this because I had intended to write about what a masterly political speech Laura Bush had given the night before. She pushed all the right buttons in appealing to moderate undecided voters. But subtlety of the sort the first lady practiced carried an expiration time of exactly 24 hours.

If re-electing the president requires leaving the country more broken and more divided along party lines than it already is, we now know this a price those in power are happy to pay.
 
"But these Bush guys are smart. Note that they made sure the most incendiary words spoken at this convention came from the mouth of a nominal Democrat. If the backlash McCain predicts develops, they can lay the blame on old Zell, the disgruntled member of Kerry's party. And Miller was so rabid that when Dick Cheney started piling his own mud on Kerry a few minutes later, the vice president looked like a mild-mannered college professor."

It also guarantees them another Republican seat kept warm by this idiot come next election!!

Chas
 
Campaign 2004: Bush Opens Double-Digit Lead
TIME Poll: Among likely voters, 52% would vote for President George Bush, while 41% would vote for John Kerry and 3% would vote for Ralph Nader



Friday, Sep. 03, 2004
New York: For the first time since the Presidential race became a two person contest last spring, there is a clear leader, the latest TIME poll shows. If the 2004 election for President were held today, 52% of likely voters surveyed would vote for President George W. Bush, 41% would vote for Democratic nominee John Kerry, and 3% would vote for Ralph Nader, according to a new TIME poll conducted from Aug. 31 to Sept. 2. Poll results are available on TIME.com and will appear in the upcoming issue of TIME magazine, on newsstands Monday, Sept. 6.

Most important issues: When asked what they consider are the most important issues, 25% of registered voters cited the economy as the top issue, followed by 24% who cited the war on terrorism as the top issue. The situation in Iraq was rated the top issue by 17% of registered voters, moral values issues such as gay marriage and abortion were the top issue for 16% of respondents, and health care was the most important issue for 11% of respondents.

Bush vs. Kerry:
The economy: 47% trust President Bush more to handle the economy, while 45% trust Kerry.
Health care: 48% trust Senator Kerry to handle health care issues, while 42% trust Bush.
Iraq: 53% trust Bush to handle the situation in Iraq, while 41% trust Kerry.
Terrorism: 57% trust Bush to handle the war on terrorism, while 36% trust Kerry.
Understanding the needs of people: 47% said they trust Kerry to understand the needs of people like themselves, while 44% trusted Bush to understand their needs.
Providing strong leadership: 56% said they trust Bush to provide strong leadership in difficult times, while 37% said they trust Kerry to provide leadership in difficult times.
Tax policy: 49% trust Bush to handle tax policy, while 40% trust Kerry.
Commanding the Armed Forces: 54% said they trust Bush to be commander-in-chief of the armed forces, while 39% said they trust Kerry.

Bush on the Issues:
Iraq: Half (50%) of those surveyed approve of the way President Bush is handling the situation in Iraq, while 46% disapprove. In last week’s TIME poll, 48% approved of the way Bush was handling the situation in Iraq and 48% disapproved.
Terrorism: Almost two thirds (59%) said they approve of how President Bush is handling the war on terrorism, while 38% disapprove. Last week’s TIME poll found 55% approved of Bush’s handling of the war on terrorism, while 40% disapproved.
The Economy: Survey respondents were split on the President’s handling of the economy. Almost half (48%) said the approved of Bush’s handling of the economy, while 48% said the disapproved.

Other results include:
Was U.S. Right Going to War with Iraq? Over half of those surveyed (52%) think the U.S. was right in going to war with Iraq, while 41% think the U.S. was wrong to go to war.

Have the United States’ actions in Iraq made the world safer? Almost half (45%) think the United States’ actions in Iraq have made the world safer, while 45% think the world is more dangerous. In a similar TIME poll taken Aug. 3 – 5, over half (52%) said the world was more dangerous, and 38% said the world was safer.
 
Chas, Zell-- a nominal Democrat?
Maybe so to some in the"blue" states, and obviously so in Mass. with the two K's. But for most of us, people like him and others such as Joe Leiberman are representitive of what the party once was and still should be.Instead, the party now seems to be solely concentrating on gaining power and seldom concetrating on doing the right thing. I seem to remember another son of Mass.saying " Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country!" These days the Democrats are simply asking "What can we do for you to get your vote?" Pandering to those who want every thing done for them with no effort on their part.Little concern is given to doing the right thing. If that were corrected you might be suprised at how many "red" states would turn "blue." I'm a lifetime Democrat who will no longer vote that way until things change. I don't think that will happen, so -----

Also, since I am from Fla, two other thoughts.
We are being overrun by people from "red" states who come down here and arragantly expect the local governments do do every thing for them including wiping thier a**es. If they have to have everything done for them, I'll be happy to help them find I-95 north!!!

And, If these idiots down here can't figure out a ballot, I definatly don't want them voting for the President of the most powerful country in the world!!!
 
LL,
That comment was in quotes. Not my interpretation. Mine is his next "office" should be padded with no sharp objects!!
Regardless, if your biggest concerns for our country is "bluebirds" I suggest some serious studying before voting!!
Stay safe this weekend.

Chas
 
My bad. Didn't see the quotes. Still it doesn't change my opinion.
Re: " bluebirds", Not a national political concern. Just venting at these idiots, particulary with this hurricane bearing down on us.We have an area, Palm Coast, which is known locally as the fifth borrough of N Y, that is loaded with people who expect the government to take care of their every need during an emergency and do it right now! Many don't think that they have any responsibility to take care of problems themselves.
Thanks for your concern about this weekend. We're located thirty feet from the shore of Lake George, 14 miles long and 7 wide, which can be a real problem. We are all boarded up- can't even see outside- and are waiting-- Hopefully it will stay south. Two of these in three weeks gets a little unnerving!
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,160
Messages
1,949,565
Members
35,065
Latest member
Hamms12oz
Back
Top