The link to this article will take you to a PDF file. Link A month ago the projections for the deficit and spending came out of an independent research group that watches trends in the economy and then looks out for several months to see what the economy will do. The res
blogic: I think the 2 keys to the debate are Edwards ability to highlight Cheney's statements about Kerry's election inviting a terror attack and the lack of a plan in Iraq. I think that Cheney's keys are citing Edwards inexperience and indeciveness. Whichever is able to draw out the other's weakness will gain the offensive and win. The problem in this is that neither is going to be easy to draw out. Cheney will stay wi
landen81: Historically it's interesting to note that political power and tradition is so tied to the "expected." No one ever expects revolution which is why when it occurs it is very difficult to stop. Some examples include Hitler in Germany, Napolean in France, Stalin in Russia and Cromwell in England. None of the political systems were the same as the U.S. but the countries were in a state of turmoil, poor economically and very divided.
Myrrander: I agree it is not a high probability also. Many things would have to happen and the American people would have to stand by and watch it go down. But, in a country that divides along so ABB, ABK it increases the possibility. You will note in the thread here that neocons aren't coming out of the woodwork to call it outrageous. What does that tell you?
Draginol: Put up my comments on the thread in an article. State what you want. I think you will find that JU would not agree. I did not defend CBS. As for Bush, I have said repeatedly: 1. What occured 30 years ago in either man's life is not important to the election. 2. That I am undecided and see an interesting clash of ideas in the election.
Myrrander: It's interesting to me that no one takes any of Bush's and Cheney's connections seriously. If you were going to declare martial law and supplant the political system it certainly would take business to back it. You might look at a situation like this: Kerry wins the election. A terrorist attack occurs Bush states that we can't have orderly change of government because the threat of another at
Bakerstreet: The Soviet Union is gone. But we are pissing off Russia everyday with our support of terrorist organizations in Chechnya and elsewhere. Unemployment is lower? You got to be kidding me. Many times in the 50's and 60's it approached 2%, not the 5.5% Counted and 5% not counted that we have today. Saddam Hussein is gone, but Osama Bin Laden, General Omar (head of the Taliban), and Al Zawahiri are much more dange
Grim Xiozan: More likely Al Franken, but same idea. Hehehe.
Draginol: "Reaching" suggests that the thought is not outside of the realm of possibility. Consider how different the U.S. is now from 9/11. We are on a constant state of alert, the country is deeply divided over the future and economically we are much weaker than 4 years ago. This is no longer our parents' country. Revolution occurs in situations like this where "power" is grabbed by those who believe they know best.
Draginol: What you said was: "CrispE: I recall you being one of the most vocal people resisting the CBS memogate scandal." That is a LIE. I was not only not vocal on the scandal which you most certainly know but also never said they did nothing wrong. You can either admit that in an honorable fashion or you can stand the scrutiny of the JU readers. Somehow, I think it will be a long time before we read that you regret your statem
The first debate was very interesting to watch but there was something that I saw the first time that took several days of pondering to understand. Why was Bush so fidgetty, perhaps squirmy is the word in the first 22 minutes? What was going on that made him so out of touch with what he was supposed to be doing (i.e. grabbing the initiative) that allowed Kerry to be
drmiler: Well, I rarely expect you to support my positions but glad that you agree.
Ciperl: Actually, the emotions on this election are running so high in some parts of the country I'm surprised that reports of shootings haven't occured. Bill Cafferty even did a montage of soldiers and asked "which ones are Democrats and which Republicans"? I think if people want to tell the world whom they support by signs, banners, etc. that's great! Go to it, boys and girls!
Draginol: Why is it that when someone disputes what you say on your thread that they must just be "emotional left wingers" but when you falsely accuse me of doing something and show your own bias (which is no small or unemotional thing) then we hear the sound of one hand clapping? Or is this "if you do something wrong, never admit it" syndrome something that runs through conservatives a pattern?
Draginol: What I said about the CBS situation was that it was INCONCLUSIVE. I did not defend CBS in an article or a post. I am not ideologically tied to either candidate or party. I am leaning Democrat at this point in time on the basis of the inability of Mr. Bush to admit that he has done anything wrong in Iraq and the deficit crisis that I can see no end to if he gets reelected. Mr. Kerry, IMO, will change both of those situations and b
blogic: Shhh....that was the democrats November surprise! Now they will have to win both houses to get it on Fox News!
Draginol: It would be ok if Bush had notes. That mean Mr. Kerry always gets his way. Seriously....first Republicans say that Lehrer threw only tough questions at Bush, now this piece of trash. Can't they just admit Bush blew it and move on?
JoeUser Forums
rugbyshawn: Yes, you can, but he can only be elected in Chicago where death is only a distraction not an obstacle!
JoeUser Forums
landen81: Actually, Dwight Eisenhower would not support President Bush IMO and indeed, thought war the last resort Bush only talks about. Eisenhower would think Kerry a good alternative based on his experience and knowledge of the American system. Ronald Reagan was not a Republican's Republican in the sense that he came up through party channels either. I think Reagan's problem with the President would be that he moved too quickly
Rightwinger: The army that fought for Iraq in the war and then broke and ran we LET GO. Many have become part of the problem (perhaps 1/2). The second problem is that outside of Baghdad and Basra, the Iraqi "police force" works for either the Muslim Clerics or the insurgents. Link The link describes one such case but there are other examples. Our real
blogic: Yesterday's CNN poll had Bush with a 52 to 39% advantage in "Bush will win the debate" question. However, there is a bigger point, Kerry has a chance to tell us what he would do as President and differentiate himself from Bush. If he does this, I think people will see that he would be just as tough on terrorism as Bush but much better for the economy. So, while I agree the opening bias f
Myrrander: The difference in Afghanistan is that the warlords actually "volunteer" militia forces for training by the NATO forces and then use their training as an intelligence gathering mission for when they go back into their own militias. Afghani warlords pretty much know all of our tactics and so when they make an attack, they know where and when to do it with almost no chance of repercussions. However, aren't things really "ge
Draginol: The problem with your argument is that it is anecdotal. "Most" engineers requires some kind of evidence. How many engineers do you know out of the millions that are Americans? BTW: Wouldn't an attitude like that constitute an "Intellectual arrogance" all by itself? Hmmmm......
There is so much information coming out of Iraq that Americans are becoming bored with the daily stats on how many bombs blew up and how many casualties and deaths occured. We are constantly amazed by the neocons marching men like Allawi in front of the camera and Congress to speak words written by a Bush speechwriter reassuring us that things are getting better. We
wuxiaomao: Thanks! Well that makes it official. W is gay and proud! Woohoo! (BTW: Didn't know that site. So, the link was nice.)