Reptile & Amphibian Forums

For all of you that watched or heard the debates,

I made some interesting observations:

A) Bushs camp made the following excuse about Bushs INABILITY to clearly ennunciate on camera("Because he is a man of few words"
muahahahahahahah lol lol lol lol (Sorry but funny)

B)Bushs camp also spun the rhetoric that the reason for us to believe in him and vote for him is that he has "Core Values" and an internal compass.(At same time we are suposed to ignore his current ACTIONS and decisions)

C)Bushs camp said that Kerry was a "Flip-Flopper" and changed his mind al the time, unlike Bush who had, once again.."Core Values" And who would stay the course.....and wouldnt not weaken his resolve....even if it cost us AMERICAN lives.....

D)Bushes camp made a case that to vote for him could cost the American people, because he is the ONLY SAFE choice. FEAR is the motivator here..over and over again. Vote for our candidate of all will fail.

I listened to Kerry, who spoke ten times better than Bus, and gave some idea of what he intends to do once in office, other than more of the same....but Kerry vowed to keep Troops there, and bring in other a mutinational force to assit them, that way the MORTALITY toll isnt all US troops. We would SHARE the mortality. How conveneient. ..

How about...er....getting the !@#$&%* out ?

Sincerely,

Fred A.

Unfortunately, Bush has left us in a position where we have to stay. We are in a lose/lose situation and to just pack up and leave Iraq now would be a mistake. I hope we can leave soon but we cant abandon something we started. As for the debates, the whole time I was watching I just kept thinking about things they could do on Saturday Night Live. Bush is so simple minded its ridiculous. I was happy to see Kerrys performance as I thought he did well. I was starting to get frustrated with him for not really expalining things, but I feel better now. Im looking forward to next fridays debate. I just hope they actually get to question each other. Bush will be in huge trouble if this happens. Ill also be watching the vice pres. debate. Im curious to see how much fear Cheney will try and put into his answers. Happy debating.

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
16 eggs incubating
7 balls
2.2 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, normal)
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
2 fish
1 rat
1 mouse
5 cats

I kept waiting for Bush to say "What...me worry?"

Still, it was obvious which one had the debate skills.

My observation (actually my wife's who is a pilot) was that Bush...who kept getting caught unprepared and stared at the screen for up to 15 seconds when he was supposed to respond, would never have been cleared to fly a fighter plane as they check for such reaction delays before they qualify a pilot.

Slow reactions under pressure are lethal in a fighter plane.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

...

Bush's "Deer caught in the headlights" look says volumes about this guys capability to run this nation, or lack there of..lol

I'm no fan of Kerry, but round 1 went to him.

Edwards will eat *CHENEY** ALIVE. Edwards was and is a TRIAL lawyer for crying out loud. Given half a chance he will eat Cheneys posterior for breakfast. Should be interesting.

Oh yeah...he MIGHT mention HALLIBURTON

Fun fun

Fred A.

Not neccessarily.....Chenney is the one (of the pair...meaning Bush) that has a brain (as Lieberman found out to his misfortune in an earlier debate).

This should be lively...

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

This shall be interesting to say the least. Maybe we will get to hear ol Cheney sling the "F word" around..lol

It seems like every other week Halliburton is in the news for CHEATING/STEALING etc. Their even courting the idea of selling K.B.&R. for all the CHEATING/STEALING their doing/done.

But I doubt Edwards even brings that up. These debates not really being debates at all. Merely orchestrated interviews under the guise of debate.

Never the less, you might catch one slippin, and loose his cool. Makes for good TV. lolol

~SoBeK~

Do you want a president who will CHEAT on a debate when he is debating someone who's own party calls dumb?
-----
0.1 "Tremper" looking Albino Leopard gecko (Lex)
0.0.1 tiger crested gecko (peachs)
0.1 Red blood python (Rhianon)
0.0.1 ball pythons (FELIX!!!!!)
2.1 Feral cats that we adopted (Fuzzy, Bear, and Tony)

My image Gallery

np
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
16 eggs incubating
7 balls
2.2 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, normal)
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
2 fish
1 rat
1 mouse
5 cats

Come on..... That comment was beneath you...and insulting. Bush lost the debate because he cannot handle himself as well as Kerry did. The lost Bambi eyed stares at the screen were Bush's.

As a former (high school) debate club member I watched the debate and the only one I saw that broke the rules was Bush when he started talking thru Kerry's response instead of waiting for his turn.

There is being "partisan" and then there is just being over Zealous...

Why is it that the loser allways crys "CHEAT!" Says a lot when a president can't hold his own in a debate...

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40749
-----
0.1 "Tremper" looking Albino Leopard gecko (Lex)
0.0.1 tiger crested gecko (peachs)
0.1 Red blood python (Rhianon)
0.0.1 ball pythons (FELIX!!!!!)
2.1 Feral cats that we adopted (Fuzzy, Bear, and Tony)

My image Gallery
"scientia est vox"

So, I went there and oh my god. I would say that site leans just a touch to the right. I wanted to read about the chemical weapons that were found in Iraq but I didnt want to pay the 99.95 for a six month subscription. I guess if Edwards is declared the winner of tonights debate you will say he cheated because he used Kerrys name when he wasnt supposed to. And who is this Joseph Farah. He claims to be your independent, online, intelligence rescource with sources all around the world. Sereiously, if there was a chemical weapon found in Iraq dont you think it would be all over the news? I did a quick google of this guy and he seems to be a whack job. Please tell me you dont subscribe to this guy, please.

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
7 balls
2.1.10 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, 6 normal, 4 anery )
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
1 fish
1 mouse
3.3 cats

Sereiously, if there was a chemical weapon found in Iraq dont you think it would be all over the news?

It was all over the news! Numerous chemical weapons shells were found, though they were old. Something in the neighborhood of 20 have been found (and verified), and they contained various chemicals-(not all from the same batch of shells)

I suspect many more were distroyed along with all the conventional weapons that were being blown up. (after all, a mere 200 tons is pretty hard to find, and easy to lose in the 30,000,000 tons of conventional weapons that we have blown up)

(not to mention all the other weapon violations that the liberals so conveniently overlook, to try and distract the public)

Rodney

Boy I'd hate to be around when you lose your car keys (lol)

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

The only time I can't find my car keys is when I am already holding them in my hand! -LOL. I've done that once or twice when I was in a hurry.

First, consider that the chemical weapons that we did find had all had their marking removed. (the markings that identified them as chemical weapons, opposed to "regular" conventional shells) Then consider how many total weapons were found.

If you had $30,000,200 in one dollar bills and all the serial numbers were removed so you had no way to easily identify them, do you think you could honestly find a specific 200 of those bills that were mixed in with the other 30,000,000? Would you even try to do this, if the act of trying to find them was as potentially deadly as trying to find those chemical weapons?

500,000 lbs. of WMDs, would be the equivalent of about 200 small cars. How hard would it be to hide 200 cars in that much area? How long would it take to hide them? Seems like hiding them would be extremely easy, and finding them (especially if they were mixed in with others or hidden) extremely difficult.

Remember, the reason WMDs are so dangerous is because so much damage can be caused by such a small package. (and because such a small package is so hard to find/protect against)

Rodney

all that area Rodney but...no trees......no trees......

Exploded or destroyed toxic weapons would show up under spectoscopic scans of material taken from destroyed ammo dumps. There would likely be possible (proximity) victims from Unintentional exposure. A meer explosion (like from a direct hit from a missle) would not be adequate to eliminate chemical weapons or even some Biological ones.

Radioactive material would be even easer to locate. Blow up a bunker full of that material and a scan with a gieger counter would go nuts.

I don't recall anyone locating recent (within the last two years) victims of any of those kinds of WMDS.

Boom?.....No NOT A GOOD ANSWER.

fRANK
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

A report out today says that Iraq was further away from having wmd's now than they were in the first gulf war. Not that Hussein didnt want to have them but he didnt have the means to get them. Im sure you have a good explanation for this as well but it seems as if everday the reasons for going to war are more and more unfounded.

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
7 balls
2.1.10 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, 6 normal, 4 anery )
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
1 fish
1 mouse
3.3 cats

1)Kerry has been lying his whole life, so he is very good at it! He reminds me of a very good, unscrupulous, used car salesman. He can talk people into things that they know are not valid.

2)The public has a very short memory. Kerry has flip-flopped so many times on the Iraq war issue that it is amazing, yet he (used car salesman like) is able to say with a strait face that his position has been consistent? He is an amazingly good liar. Did he learn this from Clinton, or is this a trait that anyone from the far left has?

2)Bush had so many facts to get out that would contradict Kerry, and such a short time to do so (within the time frame rules of the debate), that he was overwhelmed. Virtually any republican would rip Kerry to shreds on the facts, but Bush had to also look presidential and dignified by not attacking him, while pointing out all these contradictions.(not that I am the least bit happy about Bush's performance)

The American public is so "hollywoodized" that they put more empahsis on appearance than substance. If you look at the debate on video, Kerry looks much better and won on appearance. If you look at a transcript of the debate, Bush won on substance. Virtually every poly-sci expert will tell you how important appearance is. (not to mention that the publics perception is far more important than reality)

The real question is, why do so many consider appearance to be more important in determining the winner of the debate, than the substance of the debate?

Rodney

Lying(and your backing Bush?) naw...I won't go there....(lol)

It's nothing new...We got a Kennedy in the white House from looks. It doesn,t help when your candidate (Air Bush) gets so rattled he stares blankly at the screen like he's constipated......and Chenney (though I give him the edge on victory last night) looked like a hunched up crook telling painful secrets...

Unfortunately looks matter....

As to the "Shell game" you left out that those old shells were empty....

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."