Debate Proves AGAIN - Bush is a COMPLETE IDIOT

[5Reasons]

My goodness, how did this man become president? :eek:

[ProSouth]

Bush got his ass whoooped. Bush looked confused and kept repeating himself over and over again. Kerry was definately on the offense and Bush on the defense. Wasn't Bush the first one to break the so-called 30+ page agreement by addressing Kerry directly??

What's do you guys think about the debate?

[5Reasons]

I think Bush wish he had some pretzels, a few beers and perhaps some blow for old time sake. :o

[ProSouth]

Let's count the following during the debate:

1. How many times there was a long pause after he was asked a question.

2. How many times he said "ahhh" before and during an answer.

3. How many times he repeated himself over and over and over again.

4. How many times he didn't use all his time to answer a question. (His people probably told him keep his comments to a minimum. More talk makes you look stupid. They were right.)

Damn, even Bush's facial expessions made him look ignorant.

[counterattack]

W got his *sswhooped last night in the debates and now today we have a new terror threat, wake up america these neocons are nut cases they are actually trying to scare you into voting george bush back into office.

well how about this for scary isn't it odd that the only time this presidents approval ratings and poll numbers go up is when tragedy happens, they are actually hopping for a terror attact to happen is this the type of leader we want?

[Miss Tam-Tam]

Let's count the following during the debate:
1. How many times there was a long pause after he was asked a question.
2. How many times he said "ahhh" before and during an answer.
3. How many times he repeated himself over and over and over again.
4. How many times he didn't use all his time to answer a question. (His people probably told him keep his comments to a minimum. More talk makes you look stupid. They were right.)
Damn, even Bush's facial expessions made him look ignorant.

Bush was never fit to be President. He is an empty suit who is a figurehead for the neo-conservative agenda in this country. His limited intellect makes him incapable of even "faking" an intelligent response; "Dubya" Bush is unable to piece together two coherent sentences. His brain is burned out from years of unfettered boozing and coking. In addition, I suspect there is some developmental impairment as well. It is the shame of Yale that they gave our fake Chief Chimp a free academic pass on his father's power/money. That kind of "affirmative action" helped to give us history's worst President. No amount of prepping by Bush's handlers can fill the cavern of his empty gourd. Kerry cleaned Bush's clock and the Republicans know it. We cannot yet exhale because we know that the neo-cons will stop at nothing to steal the election for Bush. When they're running scared is when they get dangerous. Look for the likes of Karl Rove, Bush's nasty tricks manager, to try to pull some last minute, fake "revelation" about Kerry. Put nothing past these people. After Bush's dismal performance last night, the corporate media in this country can no longer effortlessly shill for Bush and continue to create a separate reality to sway the sleepy "sheeple" of this country. Alas, no doubt they will try.

[JoefromPGH]

Actually, I don't think Bush could have attended or graduated from an Ivy League school on his Daddy's influence alone. He had to have some above-average intelligence.

Fact is, when someone lies, they are constantly put on the defensive. Think about it...isn't it far easier to take over a conversation when you know you are right and much more difficult to defend yourself when you know you are wrong? Only good lawyers are adept at the latter.

Bush was clearly nervous and so he should be.

Lets hope the voters who are hanging on the fringe can see the light and vote for someone to lead this country who IS a leader. I can't wait for the economic debates where Bushee says "all is well." Yeah, all is well for the millionaires but the poor are getting poorer. And I can't wait to see Edwards and Cheney. Edwards claim to politics is his ability to accentuate the positive...he will kick Cheney in the you know what!

[Miss Tam-Tam]

Just the facts:

http://breakbushoff.com/

[ProSouth]

I think the Republicans will "create' some sort of terrorist scare or incident to make Bush's approval rating go up before the election. They are that desperate.

[Doofus1]

Maybe, Pro, but you have to admit, none of our embassies in friendly countries, ships in friendly ports of call or office buildings in our cities have been blown up lately. I guess they are doing something right.

[Houseguest]

I think you're giving this administration too much credit Doofus. There is absolutely no time table for when an "act of terror" may take place. These people are VERY patient.

[ProSouth]

That's suppose to be to Bush's credit???? Come on. So using that same line of thinking I guess us getting bombed to sh*t and our troops getting killed in Iraq is to who's discredit??? Sadaam Hussain??? LOL

[ProSouth]

Very patient and kicking our ass. They got us spooked to the point where it put us in a recession and changed our whole way of living. Bush sure gets credit for that.

[Doofus1]

Isn't that the point--fight them there instead of here? Or should we just not fight them at all? Or should we just wait and fight them after we are attacked again?

I'm no fan of the Iraq war. It was the wrong place IMHO. But you can't deny the fact that it has served as a magnet to draw terrorist money and effort away from attacking us on our soil.

Pro, you're whining about the economic impact caused by the Iraq war? I think we have all been skating. Personally, I think there should be increases in the income and gas taxes to pay for it and there should be some form of mandatory service of every male over the age of 18 and under the age of 50 in a home guard--as the British did during WWII. Old fat slobs like me should be sacrificing too.

[5Reasons]

Let me get this right: Cheney wanted to LIFT sanctions on Iran (a terrorist state) when he was head of Haliburton, but he wanted NELSON MANDELA to be kept in jail because he was a terrorist?

As they often say, a black voting for a national Republican candidate is like a chicken voting for Perdue.

You know, there's something more taboo that scholars and others won't touch, but someone will eventually muster up the courage to talk about. Cheney is the embodiment of contemporary 'white identity' cultural politics. There's something ethnic/cultural and visceral about his worldview that appeals to whites, especially white males. He appeals to their darker sides, their remnants of imperialism and other hegemonic tendencies.

I forget who said it, but a scholar was ridiculed for putting forth the theory that the Iraq War was done to appease the "white male ego." As laughable as that theory is, there's some element of truth to that hypothesis.

The reason why this President is still popular in many parts of this country is because the country DOES NOT CARE if Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. After 9/11, someone (an Arab) was "going to get it." In many ways, this was an old fashioned 'lynch mob' reaction. If you can't catch the black that did it, grab anyone you can find.

[black4rob2]

Personally, I think there should be increases in the income and gas taxes to pay for it and there should be some form of mandatory service of every male over the age of 18 and under the age of 50 in a home guard--as the British did during WWII. Old fat slobs like me should be sacrificing too.

What about the people who disagree with the war or any other future war for that matter? I don't feel as though someone who is totally against the war and what this current administration stands for should have to go and fight against their will. I'm not speaking out ouf cowardness, because I would not have a problem defending my country if I felt that it was a just reason to do so...

[black4rob2]

First of all, I think both the moderators did a great job of making the debate somewhat interesting, but I think the questions were all wrong.

We are dealing with an administration that is very big on Foreign Policy (I think we would all agree), although the WRONG foreign policy. You hear Bush and Dick talk about WMD, Irag, Saddam and all that other garbage. It is all BS!!! What about the Haiti's, the Jamiaca's, the DR's. All of these countries lost thousands due to hurricanes last week. Haiti has been in the state of turmoil all summer and still to this day. We still have homeless people in Newark Penn Station!

I understand that we have issues of security with other countries, but if you are not going to do it the right way, then don't do it all and focus on issues at home.

i don't understand how we are suppose to be this big bad country that everyone should follow when we have more issues internally than most.

If I was the moderator of the debates; these are the questions that I would ask:

1: What the F_ck will you do as President of the United States about the homeless problem at Newark Penn Station and Washinton DC around the corner from the White House?

2: What the F_ck are you going to do as President of the United States about Ms. Johnson who lives on South 14th street and Avon, but can't leave her house because of the corrupt Newark City Cops dealing with the Bloods and Crips outside her house?

3: What the F_ck are you going to do as President of the United States about these city Kids paying $2,000.00 a semester for books they need to be educated?

4: What the F_ck are you going to about the Newark residents who can't go to the doctors office because of insurance?

5: What the F_ck are you going to do about Newark, Essex County, Camden County, New Jersey, New York, Atlanta, Houston, Savannah, Columbus, St. Louis, and the rest of this country.

What the hell are you going to do when Korea decides they want to test out their weopens program on Maui?

What are you going to do when Bin Laden says its time for part 2?

Are you going to say that the intelligence reports were't credible, or are you going to bomb Spain this time?

:mad:

[Miss Tam-Tam]

Because, literally, our lives depend upon it. Just think. It would take a new President at least two terms to clean up the terrible mess that Dubya's crew has made:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/08/opinion/08herbert1.html?oref=login

October 8, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Working for a Pittance
By BOB HERBERT, The New York Times

Reality keeps rearing its ugly head. The Bush administration's case for the war in Iraq has completely fallen apart, as evidenced by the report this week from the president's handpicked inspector that Iraq had destroyed its illicit weapons stockpiles in the early 1990's.

Coming next week are the results of a new study that shows - here at home - how tough a time American families are having in their never-ending struggle to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads. The White House, as deep in denial about the economy as it is about Iraq, insists that things are fine - despite the embarrassing fact that President Bush is on track to become the first president since Herbert Hoover to preside over a net loss of jobs during his four years in office.

The study, jointly sponsored by the Annie E. Casey, Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, will show that 9.2 million working families in the United States - one out of every four - earn wages that are so low they are barely able to survive financially.

"Our data is very solid and shows that this is a much bigger problem than most people imagine," said Brandon Roberts, one of the authors of the report, which is to be formally released on Tuesday. The report found that there are 20 million children in these low-income working families.

For the purposes of the study, any family in which at least one person was employed was considered a working family. Very wealthy families were included.

The median income for a family of four in the U.S. is $62,732. According to the study, a family of four earning less than $36,784 is considered low-income. A family of four earning less than $18,392 is considered poor. The 9.2 million struggling families cited by the report fell into one of the latter two categories. And those families have one-third of all the children in American working families.

Not surprisingly, the problem for millions of families is that they have jobs that pay very low wages and provide no benefits. "Consider the motel housekeeper, the retail clerk at the hardware store or the coffee shop cook," the report said. "If they have children, chances are good that their families are living on an income too low to provide for their basic needs."

Neither politicians nor the media put much of a spotlight on families that are struggling economically. According to the study, one in five workers are in occupations where the median wage is less than $8.84 an hour, which is a poverty-level wage for a family of four. A full-time job at the federal minimum wage of $5.15 an hour is not even sufficient to keep a family of three out of poverty.

Families with that kind of income are teetering on the edge of an economic abyss. Any misfortune might push them over the edge - an illness, an automobile breakdown, even something as seemingly minor as a flooded basement.

For the families in these lower-income brackets, life is often a harrowing day-to-day struggle to pay for the bare necessities. According to federal government statistics, the median annual rent for a two-bedroom apartment in major metropolitan markets is more than $8,000. The annual cost of food for a low-income family of four is nearly $4,000. Utility bills are nearly $2,000. Transportation costs are about $1,500. And then there are costs for child care, health care and clothing.

You do the math. How are these millions of poor and low-income families making it?

(A lot of those families are going to get a shock this winter as price increases for crude oil get translated into big jumps in home heating bills.)

The economy relies heavily on the services provided by low-wage workers but, as the report notes, "our society has not taken adequate steps to ensure that these workers can make ends meet and build a future for their families, no matter how determined they are to be self-sufficient."

Mr. Roberts said he hoped the study, titled "Working Hard, Falling Short," would help initiate a national discussion of the plight of families who are doing the right thing but not earning enough to get ahead. "Seventy-one percent of low-income families work," he said. More than half are headed by married couples. But economic self-sufficiency remains maddeningly out of reach.

Even in a presidential election year, these matters have not been explored in any sustained way. We're quick to give lip service to the need to work hard, but very slow to properly reward hard work.


E-mail: bobherb@nytimes.com