GW for two reasons. He supports many of my ideas and I know what he stands for.

 

That'll be because he never flip flops like Kerry, right?



The list of Bush major policy U-turns is as audacious as it is long. Among the whiplash-inducing lowlights:

In September 2001, Bush said capturing bin Laden was “our number one priority.” By March 2002, he was claiming, “I don’t know where he is. I have no idea and I really don’t care. It’s not that important.”

In October 2001, he was dead-set against the need for a Department of Homeland Security. Seven months later, he thought it was a great idea.

In May 2002, he opposed the creation of the 9/11 Commission. Four months later, he supported it.

During the 2000 campaign, he said that gay marriage was a states’ rights issue: “The states can do what they want to do.” During the 2004 campaign, he called for a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Dizzy yet? No? OK:

Bush supported CO2 caps, then opposed them. He opposed trade tariffs, then he didn’t. Then he did again. He was against nation building, then he was OK with it. We’d found WMD, then we hadn’t. Saddam was linked to Osama, then he wasn’t. Then he was … sorta. Chalabi was in, then he was out. Way out.

We didn’t need more troops, then we did. We didn’t need more money, then we did. Preemption was a great idea — on to Syria, Iran and North Korea! Then it wasn’t — hello, diplomacy! Baathists were the bad guys, then Baathists were our buds. We didn’t need the U.N., then we did.

And all this from a man who, once upon a time, made “credibility” a key to his appeal.

 

So you have 4 to 5 things that ARE questionable at best since no one knows the real story. That is absolutely wonderful, you liberals have a lot to hang your hat on…

Kerry has so many flip-flops, some 20 years worth there is neither enough time or bandwidth to list them all…

You will all be sad little puppies in Nov, when President Bush is RE-Elected...

 

so it's okay for Bubbya to flop around like a beached carp, but if the other guy does it, he's totally ureliable.

Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E?

Sort of like the time you and I were debating about Mr. Bush's DUI's and his dubious military past. You said that you weren't going to hold his past against him. Seems to me that over the last few months, that is all you do, just not regarding Bubbya. You complain about Kerry's military record, protesting the war after coming back from Vietnam, his votes from 20 years ago, etc, etc. Either you aren't going to hold someones past against him or you are. Which is it going to be, Burt? Hypocrisy or even handedness?

 

I don’t recall a time where we were debating about President Bush’s past as far as they way you mention above. You state “dubious” military past and that I stated somewhere I wasn’t going to hold that against him.

Why would I hold it against him for serving his country albeit in the reserves? If you want to hold that against him then that is your prerogative. I am not going to hold honorable service to ones country against them. It’s a plus in my book, something Clinton never did…

As far as DUI’S, that’s a bad situation and I disapprove of that from anyone, including President Bush. However, I am not going to hold something like that against someone that did so in their youth while they were NOT serving their country or holding a public office but I will for the “record” say that anybody who drives after drinking (DUI & DWI) is an absolute BONEHEAD and deserves to have their butt whipped.

Kerry is fair game because he himself has brought his past into the debate, not President Bush, not me, not anyone but Kerry himself. Kerry is fair game on his 20 plus year record because it is relevant to the debate regardless how old the record it because it is things he has done WHILE holding public office.

Therefore there is no Hypocrisy on my part. Now many liberals would like for you to believe that and if you speak to any simply ask them since Kerry can’t seem to shut up about his Vietnam service then why can’t someone like me question him on it? Ask them when Kerry mentions in his speeches to look at and vote for him based on his public record of some 20 years then why can’t someone like me question it.

There is no reason to talk about DUI’S from either man that may have happen before their time in public office because it is irrelevant unless it is something that happen while they were in office or while they were running for office.

As far as flip-flops there is a difference between someone that flip-flops and actually changes their mind based on sound logic. I can respect someone that has changed their mind for a reason and one they can explain. Now that is not to say President Bush may have not had a few flip-flops I am sure he has but he has changed his mind on a few things based on sound logic. The one that comes to mind is his stance on “Nation Building”. He was against that prior to the 2000 election, he was against that up until September 11, 2001 then logic changed his mind…

I am sure there may even be a few things Kerry changed his mind on due to good logic though I highly find that unlikely because Kerry for 20 some years has been known to say what ever will please who he is talking to at the time.

In any regards Kerry has a long record of just good ol’ flip-flops just so he can be on both sides of the argument depending who he is talking to and the vast majority of his flip-flops have no good logical reason such as the ”I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it” If there was something he did not like about the bill he should have acted like a man and stood his ground and tell people he did NOT vote for it because…..

He didn’t do that because he is weak and a follower and not someone that could ever lead this country. Kerry is your poster boy for ”Flip-Flops are Us”

He was for the Vietnam War before he was against it and tried his best to screw as many military personal as he could then he continued that in office for some 20 years…


Hypocrisy or even handedness?

Fair and Balanced my friend...

 

yeah, just like foxnews, AKA the US version of the Soviet New Agency Tass...

 

4 More Years- Enough Said!!

 

I think you mean CNN.

 

 

Ya know, this thread has gone AMAZINGLY smooth (so far). Thanks guys.

 

This fighting back and forth is horrible, simply horrible.
I suggest this thread be closed immediately!

(closed only because if this recent fighting. not because Bush got too many votes)

p.s.
not only closed but, could it also be deleted from the website so no one can ever see it?


p.p.s
If it can't be closed and deleted or just closed, could you play with the numbers in the poll so I don't have to drink so much? thanks.

 

bump

 

rebump :santa:

 

Bump

 

Just voted, put my vote in for Bush.

I'm a youngin'... just a 23 year old. However, I have served in the army and consider myself knowledigable (however spelling is a problem of mine) in enough of politics to support my vote.

Mostly, the things Kerry stands for are not what I support, Bush supports more of the issues that are important to me.

And to the whole "flip-flop" scene, every politicain has their 'bouts. However, it does seem that Kerry switches just to persuade more of an imagine of popularity. (example: if he believes it will be more popular to his election to support an idea he previosly did not, then he swicthes for the sake of the election)

Also, no President has ever been, will ever be, or is completly liked. Arging issues is cool, gets more debate out. However, it can get clouded and old. Political arging is like adults being transformed to bickering teenagers and schoolkids again. I may not like Kerry and his ideas, but I would die for his right to continue expressing them. I may support Bush and you may not. You may not like me for that and consider me even the most atrocious person for supporting what you believe to be a killer of American Troops. Fine, you have that right and I really do respect that; however, you should respect me for my beliefs also.

I really think we are going to get Bush for another 4 years (or some of your viewpoints, stuck with Bush for another 4 years) Chances are the Democrats are stuck with a President several times in their life that they don't want, and Vice Versa for the Republicans. This just happens to be the time when the Democrats are stuck with someone they don't like. The Republicans were shafted when Clinton was in office. It's like a fugoid occilation, back and forth, back and forth.

There are some very strong points to support why I believe we will continue to have Bush, but I'll stop for now, I have class, maybe if someone questions what I have to say, I can respond later. To the rest of you, take it easy, don't get to out of hand, and show some respect if you expect to have it.