Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Presidential Debates

Recommended Posts

Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Cc:

quote:

The candidates will NEVER see the questions before the debate, the moderator will be the ONLY person that knows the actual questions, and the townhall style debate will be the same way

You are kidding. Bush is actually going to have to THINK.

This should be interesting.


I love it when you goofballs say that.

Bush flew an F-102 fighter in the national guard, he was one of the top 5% of pilots in his flight school, and was one of the top 5 pilots in his unit. If you think that you don't have to think to fly a fighter jet, you don't know much about flying, NOR about the F-102.

Also, you don't get to be the executive and part owner of a baseball team by being stupid, you also don't get to be one of the most popular governors of Texas by being stupid, you don't get into Yale, no matter who your daddy is, and you sure as hack do not become the President of the United States.

You poor people, all you have left is that President Bush is somehow stupid and can't think.

Underestimate President George Bush at you peril, because he is gonna make Kerry look like an intellectual snob, and liberal elitist in front of the entire country.

Also remember that they said that Reagan was stupid and couldn't think, history proved that to be wrong as well.

But you keep thinking that, it will be my pleasure to laugh at you when you sit there crying about how Kerry Blew it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Jaguar:

But you keep thinking that, it will be my pleasure to laugh at you when you sit there crying about how Kerry Blew it.

The problem is that no matter how it actually turns out, you'll still say Bush beat Kerry...wanna bet?

Just like you said he was making a joke during that press conference I cited. No one was laughing, not even Bush and that was most certainly not a joke.

I don't think Bush is stupid, I just don't think he's that bright. I refute your claims of him pulling his own weight and say that if he wasn't a Bush, he'd be just another yokel.

He was a C student before entering Yale and was a C student while attending the University. He scored 1206 on his SAT's a full 180 points below the median for Yale admissions. He got in because of who he was, period.

Read the history of his acquiring the Rangers and you'll see his fathers friends had more influence and even required to have other managing partners in addition to GW as part of the deal.

His Oil company ventures? Failed Yet he managed to rake it in through stock trades when selling the practically worthless company to Harken who admits, they wanted him for his name when they gave him a position on the board.

Governor of Texas? Not without help from his dad I'm afraid.

GW is the quintessential "fortunate son". More power to him, but that doesn't make him an intellect or qualified for the presidency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Baloogan:

America should do what canada does

Take the most misunderstood/misinterpeded/greatest canadian and stick him as the prime.

Worked great.

CHRETIEN,0.jpg

ROFLMAO!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Liberal Billionaire Begins Lecture Tour In Drive To Oust Bush

By Jeff Gannon

Talon News

September 29, 2004

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- What his millions of dollars in donations to leftist political groups have not yet been able to do, billionaire George Soros hopes to accomplish by pamphleteering in the month leading up to the presidential election. The Hungarian-born immigrant will take his campaign to oust President George W. Bush from the White House to a dozen U.S. cities on a speaking tour promoting the paperback edition of his recent book, "The Bubble of American Supremacy: The Costs of Bush's War in Iraq."

Soros announced his plans during a speech at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. He pledged to spend up to $3 million advertising his appearances in cities situated in battleground states. The billionaire also launched a new web site to publicize his campaign and distribute information about his speeches.

Retired General Wesley Clark and Ambassador Arthur Hartman introduced Soros at the press event. Clark was a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination and Hartman represented a group called Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change (DMCC).

Clark said, "George Soros is sounding the alarm for the American people. Few people in the United States understand better than George Soros the risks to America's world leadership of this administration's foreign policy. I am very pleased to stand with him today to support his work to highlight the costs of this misguided war in Iraq and the need for a change in this country's leadership."

Hartman, speaking on behalf of former career diplomats and retired military officials of the DMCC, said, "Never before have so many retired diplomats and military commanders come together to warn the country we served and love that we need a change in leadership and direction. We are thrilled to join George Soros in this effort and to support his work to bring these fundamental issues to the American people."

Soros began his lecture stating, "President Bush is endangering our safety, hurting our vital interests and undermining American values."

He claimed that Bush's doctrine of preemption, manifested in the invasion of Iraq, caused a vicious cycle of escalating violence. Soros said that a defeat for the Republican in November would be a repudiation of that policy and help to break the circle and regain the respect and support of the world.

Soros, who operates an international foundation that he says promotes the values and principles of a free and open society, warned against Bush's threats to American civil liberties. He claimed that after September 11, 2001, the president silenced all criticism by calling if unpatriotic.

He believes that Bush committed a fundamental error in thinking that whatever action the United States would take against terrorists is "automatically good."

"What we do to combat terrorism may also be wrong," he said.

Soros repeated a talking point recently adopted by the Kerry campaign. He said that Bush inadvertently played into the hands of bin Laden with the invasion of Iraq.

He said, "It was President Bush's unintended gift to bin Laden."

Soros made his political pitch when he said, "If we reelect President Bush, we are telling the world that we approve his policies - and we shall be at war for a long time to come."

He disagreed with Bush's assertion that terrorists hate Americans for being freedom-loving people. He also claimed that the prisoner abuse of Abu Ghraib was not the work of a few misguided soldiers, but part of a system of dealing with detainees put in place by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The billionaire also accused an influential group within the Bush administration led by Vice President Dick Cheney of "itching to invade Iraq long before 9/11."

Soros went on to recite a laundry list of leftist criticisms of the President and his foreign policy. He feigned concern for the safety and morale of American troops and callously implied that combats deaths were in vain and pronounced the liberation of Iraq a "quagmire."

Tuesday was not the first time Soros has made outrageous statements. He raised some eyebrows at a meeting of a liberal activist group in Washington in June when he compared the mistreatment of Iraqi POWs to the deaths of 3,000 Americans on September 11.

He told members of the Campaign for America's Future, "I think that those pictures hit us the same way as the terrorist attack itself ... not quite with the same force, because in the terrorist attack, we were the victims. In the pictures, we were the perpetrators and others were the victims."

Soros continued, "But there is, I'm afraid, a direct connection between those two events, because the way President Bush conducted the war on terror converted us from victims into perpetrators."

He was introduced at the "Take Back America" event by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) who said, "we need people like George Soros, who is fearless and willing to step up when it counts."

Jim Dyke, communications director for the Republican National Committee, issued a statement about Soros' plans, saying, "The only explanation for the Daddy Warbucks of the Democratic Party, George Soros, to step out from behind the curtain 35 days before the election is his obvious concern for his investment in John Kerry."

He continued, "And the only explanation for the Kerry campaign's public embrace of a man who says the President's words conjure up memories of Nazi Germany, spends his millions supporting marijuana legalization, softer penalties for drug dealers doing business around schools and euthanasia liberalization is desperation."


A little history on this guy, Goerge Soro's was a person who helped fund the bush campaign back in 2000, in hope's that Bush would elect him an ambassador position. However someone else got that position and since then Soro's has had a personal vendetta against Bush to oust him

Kinda stupid if you ask me.. going after a president just because you didn't get the position you wanted

quote:

Dole: Democrats Place Politics, Partisanship Over Progress

By Jimmy Moore

Talon News

September 29, 2004

SPARTANBURG, SC (Talon News) -- Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) offered her support for Republican Senate candidates and President George W. Bush in a recent message distributed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Dole said in the e-mail to Republican supporters that she went to Washington to "uphold the principles that made our country a beacon of freedom and opportunity to all."

"Ronald Reagan famously said that this country was the 'shining city on a hill' and I believed it then and still do," Dole exclaimed.

However, Dole said she has been taken aback by the "negative tone and political posturing of the Democrats."

"They have clearly placed partisanship and politics ahead of good policy and progress," Dole observed. "It seems their optimism is gone."

As a result, Dole said Republicans are about "moving America forward."

"The president and the Republican Party are committed to winning the war on terrorism and strengthening our economy," Dole expressed. "Republicans don't look at the problems that face us as insurmountable, we look at them as problems to be solved."

Listing what she believes are the top four reasons to vote for Republicans on November 2, Dole said it focuses on the economy and jobs, the war on terrorism, the strong Republican Senate candidates and President Bush.

"Raising taxes on individuals and businesses doesn't boost the economy," Dole said, referring to what Democrats have done when they are elected to public office. "We need to create a business-friendly environment that adds jobs and fuels small business creation. We also need to put an end to frivolous law suits."

Dole said Republican candidates "understand what it takes to strengthen the economy and are willing to work with the President to do so."

On the issue of the war on terrorism, Dole said it is "going to take a commitment to seeing the task through."

"It will take hard choices and the president is going to need to rely upon the Senate to put progress and good policy ahead of political calculation and partisanship," Dole noted. "[Republicans] understand the struggle before us and always place America first."

As for the team of Republican Senate candidates, Dole said they are "awesome."

"Each candidate cares deeply about their home state and our country," Dole exclaimed. "They are hardworking and running on a positive message. And no one doubts their commitment to, or their readiness to stand with, President Bush."

Dole believes the Republican Party can extend their majority in the U.S. Senate on election day in a few weeks.

Finally, Dole said President Bush has been a "great" leader.

"I am proud to stand with him," Dole stated. "I was honored that he invited me to address the Republican National Convention and I am honored to support him."

The wife of former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole said "no one should doubt [bush's] commitment" to America as evidenced by his handling of unprecedented events over the past four years.

"His administration has tackled and solved the hard problems thrust upon us," Dole reminded. "He has made hard choices and has thrown his full commitment behind them. That kind of leadership is rare and should be fully supported."


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... I'm going after a President I supported in 2000 because he didn't deliver what he promised to the people either... is that stupid too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Takvah:

Hmmm... I'm going after a President I supported in 2000 because he didn't deliver what he promised to the people either... is that stupid too?

He didn't deliver what he promised?

Hmm, tax cuts, the economy is taking off, the terrorists have not struck in the US since 911, etc, etc ad nauseum.

Sounds like Bush has been doing EVERYTHING he promised that he would try to do.

I Wonder what he promised you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jag-

He promised to bring our troops home and to use them responsibly, indicating in his saying this that his predecessor had not. He promised to be responsible with his tax cuts and that it would be giving back to the people the SURPLUS that he felt the government was not entitled to (I happened to agree with that at the time). The problem is that he has not rescinded the tax cuts to pay for the wars he is waging be it against LEGITIMATE targets like terrorists or for that matter to enrich his corporate buddies in the finishing of his daddy and uncle Dickie's war. I pay my bills. I do not borrow myself into debt to win the love of my kids or my wife whereas Bush has not stepped up and said, "I am sorry we have a war to fight and have had several natural disasters and therefor I need to end the tax cuts." (I'm not saying increase taxes, I am saying that we need to stop loaning people money against SURPLUSES THAT AREN'T MATERIALIZING and that is what your TAX CUT IS!)Instead we have him pandering for votes by ignoring the spiraling defecit to BUY votes rather than sound, CONSERVATIVE, fiscal policies that would in the long term strengthen the dollar and lower the burdens that will be placed on our kids and all Americans when somebody has the strength of character to pay this all off.

I do quite well and have all the things in this life that I could want. I am not rich and at the same time I do not expect government to bail my ass out. I have damage to my home from the storms that totals less than my deductible but is still several thousand dollars (and I'm not including things they reimburse like evacuating my family to Tampa etc that are also covered) and I have yet to call FEMA and ask them for the money. Checks are being written like mad for people that make a lot more money than I do... I guess it all depends on your moral compass. So when you make a veiled derogatory statement that would indicate that I "want" something from government akin to a handout I would have to say if anybody is afraid of doing their part it is likely more a burden that you carry than I do. Likely if you had damage you would say, "I pay my taxes and therefor I am owed." The fact is that not all of us pay our fair share and I would dare say you fall into that category. When wondering what it is that I want from government I would suggest instead you consider what it is that you GET from government while believing you stand on your own two feet and require NOTHING.

Fighting with you is like a dog barking at a squirrel in a tree. The dog barks and the squirrel squawks and in the end neither of them can do a thing to the other be it change their mind or kick their ass... but I hope I managed to explain my reasoning. I'm going to vote and hope that change happens and that in another four years some true Conservative will step up and be a man and deal with the nation's problems (while understanding not every Republican will vote for someone just because he's a Republican). If you believe that Bush has done this so be it... I'm not about changing your mind but I don't see where he has come through on anything he promised. We are not safer, we've just been lucky. You talk about no attacks since 9/11 but Bush's slow responses to intelligent countermeasures that would make us safer indicates that maybe he lacks a true desire to see us safer while at the same time saying he does. He has gone kicking and screaming on everything EXCEPT the infringements to our civil liberties contained in the Patriot Act. Whatever you have to say it's been three years and the most powerful military on the planet under the leadership of G. W. Bush has failed to apprehend and/or destroy Al Qaeda. That's just the facts and no amount of candy coating and wishful thinking is going to change that. Even Bush and Cheney say that Al Qaeda is a threat (to keep the people afraid and voting for them) but what I take from their words is that they have FAILED and it's time to give somebody that isn't about fear mongering for election purposes a shot at FINISHING what these guys apparently can't. Another 30 plus kids dead in Iraq today... yeah it's a democratic haven and a brilliant success alright. Saddam needed to go no doubt and the President should have the POWER to destroy LEGITIMATE enemies (without the need to declare war through Congress) when times and circumstances demand it. However, G. W. Bush has shown a reckless disregard for the well-being of America, the lives of our men and women and our reputation by ignoring the facts or in some cases presenting trumped up evidence. You think his intell was legit, many people say it was not and again the facts indicate NO WMDs... not one. YOu can say they are here, there or anywhere whilst SPECULATING but again the FACTS are that we have found NADA. Even if these things were shipped out of Iraq (speaking for speculation's sake) there would have been SOMETHING forgotten or left behind... but nope... nothing.

Everything Bush has stood for and promised is a lie. It's a sham. You can look at his campaign promises and then you can look at his actions as President. NOTHING JIVES, not about the war not about his domestic agenda... none of it. If you accept that, fine. Again, I am not about changing a mind that is unchangeable. I however changed my mind and your confrontational style shows that you have no substance to point to... you just throw crap at people and hope it sticks. I can at least respect that your opinion is yours to do with what you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the kind words nomad, thank you. Florida is a beautiful place to live (at least my area to the north of West Palm is to me) and we know when we live here that these things can and do happen. It is a real pain in the neck to have two of these things land within ten miles of your house within a month but it happened. Looking at it on the bright side I have my home and not much damage, some of my neighbors were not so lucky. The sailboat is still floating and only has minimal damage that insurance will cover. At the very least I can tell the grandkids, "I remember when...".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Whatever Takvah, you still fail to realize that Clintons tax hikes is what got us in trouble in the first place.

Reagans tax cuts is what got us the surplus, and then Clintons Tax hikes is what caused the recession, and caused the surplus to disapear.

The new tax cuts are starting to take effect, and the deficit will go down, if Congress can keep itself under control.

And the war in Iraq, is a part of the War on Terror, you do remember that? Do you not?

You know, killing terrorists before they can kill us as they did 3000 of our citizens on 911.

Oh, that's right Iraq CAN'T be a part of the war on terror, it was an unfinished war and Bush is just ssking revenge because Saddam tried to assassinate his father.

Give me a fricking break.

You guys and your tunnel vision are just too much.

Look at the BIG picture, PLEASE, because this tunnel vision has got you in DEEP trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it just started but thought I'd start off now, Kerry was late going onto the debate floor. Stage Fright? who knows. Here we go again Kerry: "I have a Plan". He's starting to sound Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a Dream". He keeps saying that but I yet to know what any of his plans are.

Damn and I thought I was jumping the gun on this debate CNN: Both candidates took the stage smiling and shook hands -- the only opportunity they are allowed to approach each other, according to the rules of the debate.

[ 09-30-2004, 09:26 PM: Message edited by: LostInSpace ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

bush was very defensive and dare i say a bit whiny... but still he's doing quite good.

kerry... lol, still spewing hindsight condemnation and refferring constantly to vietnam...and yes, he's contradicted himself several times in the first 10 minutes.

they should throw in mud and thongs and have them wrestle too.

btw, where's nader? I wanted to see him yapping up there too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Tac:

bush was very defensive and dare i say a bit whiny... but still he's doing quite good.

kerry... lol, still spewing hindsight condemnation and refferring constantly to vietnam...and yes, he's contradicted himself several times in the first 10 minutes.

they should throw in mud and thongs and have them wrestle too.

btw, where's nader? I wanted to see him yapping up there too

Would you not do that!!!!!!!

You posted what I was just ABOUT to post awhile ago!!!

TAC!!!

Merrrr

Anywho, here's my take

Bush is killing Kerry, everytime Kerry say's something Bush's bounce's back somethign that KERRY said himself at that time

"I didn't support the war" - Kerry

"If you didn't support it then why did you vote for it" - Bush

That's preatty much what was said. Lol, I swear if I had half a penny for every time Kerry lied I'd be a multi-billionier right now

This debate is just streaghting my belief in Bush

Kerry has said some thing's, but funny thing is if you check the congresstional record what is said there, counter's what Kerry says.. in other word's

Kerry is lossing this debate, he's trying very hard to come back but everytime he does Bush keep's putting him back into the Box

Kerry was part of a debate team.. hmm, was that a team full of 1st graders? Cause Kerry certainly isn't doing very well

"My plan is better" - Kerry (just said a couple second's after I posted)

Uh huh.. and you're plan is... what exactly? He say's he has a plan and yet he doesn't tell people... how am I suppose to vote for you if I don't know what you plan on doing, for all I know you might plan on detonating some nuke's in the US to send this war.. and trust me that WOULD end the war

"I will bring the troops back in 6 months" - Kerry

Interesting... I'm checking the congresstional record's and he claim's back in 2003 that he would bring them back AFTER he was elected... then he'll get the UN involved... uhhh.. right... UN.... cowards...

"We havn't been training the troops there" - Kerry

We havn't? Huh, coulda fooled me.. I look at the new's coverage from Fox New's and such and I can see us training Iraq troops.. lol.. such a liar I swear

"Saddam wasn't a threat" - Kerry

Hmmm, the UN had 17 resolution's placed on Iraq and Saddam violated all 17... I think that make's him a major threat

I also recall him saying that Saddam WAS a threat back in 2001-2002, and checking the congresstional record's from that time also prove's that Kerry said that Saddam was a threat

"30 country's where capible of making those weapons" - Kerrys

He's right.. but there's a problem

Those country's would NEVER think of making those weapons because of the US... that's why Bush didn't go after them, because they didn't pose a threat (they weren't actively making WMD's like Saddam was)

"The test here is the credibility of the US" - Kerry

Granted, it is.. but it's not surprising that the US is hated because we took out Saddam, hmm this senator hasn't done his history yet..

My take on the debate so... it's looking good, but Kerry still hasn't convinced me yet.. I love having the congresstional website linked to my laptop, I can check everything that both candidate's say

Let's see, so far between my family personally

Kerry is a -

While Bush is a -

But anywho, to keep going

"To keep sanctions going" - Kerry

How much longer will these Sanction's go? We have several Sanctions on this place, but we can't just keep placing them if they'll keep on violating them

"In order to keep this working we should work with France, Germany and the others"

Work with France and Germany?

After they BETRATED us?

This Senator is short a few marbals... or rather.. is short a couple thousand marbals.. has he conviently forgotten that France and Germany helped arm the terrorist's? (check the congresstional records)

Make's me now wonder if Kerry doesn't care about that.. and if not then that seriously make's me question his ability to be president

Blast, I gotta go to work someone else take over for me (perferably, someone who check's the congresstional record's. Not someone who check's the Baised media)

[ 09-30-2004, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: Kalshion ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush did much better than I thought. Both did well. I declare no absolute winner but rather still up to everyone's opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I will admit Kerry has a much, much more commanding voice and does not waver in his voice when he speaks.

Bush has horrible public speaking skills.

But looking at the content of their words, regardless of their volume or the way they say them, Bush seriously beat Kerry up in my opinion. In content though not in speech itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The whole thing sucked as far as I am concerned.

Bush was uh'ing the night away, couldn't quite get his thoughts together, and Kerry was doing his flip flop thing back and forth.

Neither helped nor hindered their campaign.

I think this debate style is AWFUL, and I agree 100% with Streets assessment on another thread that this format needs to be changed.

That was nothing but an overblown press conference, that was not what I would consider a debate.

And I HATED the lights on the lectern, because when the light turned red, they BOTH, sped up thier words to get it all in.

All in all, I give both of them a D.

Kerry for his lying and all around crap, and Bush for not quite keeping his thoughts together.

Kerry looked very confident up on stage, and Bush jumped him every time, but the format SUCKED.

I will still be voting for Bush, no if's and's or but's, but this debate was a total disapointment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be happy with Bush or Kerry as the president but one thing got me: Kerry said the presidents always had the ability to conduct a preemptive strike.... thats news to me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate my boss, ya know that

She had a computer ready for me.... I asked her yesterday if I could use the computer at work to keep my friend's informed of the debate.. but I never thought she'd ACTUALLY do it

Anywho, I watched the rest of the debate

I'm impressed by the way both candidate's handled themselves

Kerry's flipflopping took a new turn

"Saddam wasn't a threat"

a few minutes later

"Oh well Saddam was a threat that's why we needed to get rid of him"

uhhh... and the liberal's want this guy in office?!

First he say's Saddam wasn't a threat... then a few minute's later he say's Saddam WAS a threat... MAKE UP YOU'RE GOD FORSAKEN MIND

I checkde the other new's agencys

Fox New's, like always, was the only one's to cover this debate LIVE

CNN covered only the first 15 minutes

ABC and MSNBC, from what I could see... never covered it

However, in checking them right now, ABC and CBS are twisting President Goerge Bush's words around and saying one thing when he meant something else

So typical of the liberal media

Then Kerry voted against the 87 bill sup for our troops

Kerry claim's our troops weren't ready and blame's Bush for our troops being poorly equiped

Yet... if you check the voting record, it clearly shows that Kerry voted AGAINST the 87 Bill to EQUIP our troops for war..

Who the hell is this guy? He blame's Bush for his OWN Blunder... LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by Carl Burning:

I will be happy with Bush or Kerry as the president but one thing got me: Kerry said the presidents always had the ability to conduct a preemptive strike.... thats news to me!

You're right, that was strange.

Clinton and Bush have BOTH been given the power by congress to use preemptive force against Saddam Housien and terrorists.

Clinton was too busy with Monica to get it done, but Bush used it, just as he should have.

But Kerry really screwed the pooch on that one, because Clinton and Bush are the ONLY presidents who have been given that Power by congress.

THe War powers resolution act allowed the president to respond to an act of war before coming to congress, but that would not be considered preemptive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kalshion all the networks covered it live.

I think Kerry was articulate and showed that he had a firm grasp on the issues that face the President. Mr. Bush was as always working from the emotion rather than the substance. How many times can you hear "it's hard work" as an excuse for utter and complete failure? Talk about screwing the pooch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they did not Takvah

I was switching between CNN and Fox new's at home and CNN NEVER covered it LIVE (in other word's, they never STAYED with it.. they alway's switched to somethign else... like that one guy's surgury and such.. uh huh)

Live is when you constantly cover something, never swaying away from the topic at hand.. however CNN and others did just that.. they swayed away from it to cover other.. less important... topics

Fox New's was the ONLY station that STAYED with it and covered it for the whole 90 minute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Takvah in my impression Kerry just showed that he can talk firmly about things he has a weak grasp on.

The one part that really impressed me was Bush lecturing Kerry on how and why he didnt persue unilateral talks with N. Korea, that Chinese, Russian and Japanese pressure was needed ON the table and not away from the table.

N. Korea has constantly walked away from the table in the past 30 years, all because its only been talking with the US as the only 'threat' to them. Bush is keeping the international pressure on N. Korea by keeping Chinese pressure on them.

Kerry just doesn't grasp international relations, Bush does imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×