Hey Jim . . .

Posted by: MattMac112

Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:30 AM

<br><br>Where was the .. you know .. Swift Boat question?<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: nutty

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:33 AM

moot point. lets talk about where the country is headed and how the hell do we salvage the mess that is Iraq.<br><br>You cant polish a Turd.
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:36 AM

Geeze nutty, you don't get it. I mean, asking about the Guard would have been wrong wrong wrong. But asking about the swift boats was just essential. What a liberal snotrag that Jim Lehrer is! It's a liberal conspiracy to attack our president!<br><br>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:38 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>moot point.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Not to the veterans who are challenging Kerry on this issue. Not when Kerry, during the debate, said:<br><br><blockquote>"let me look you in the eye and say to you: I defended this country as a young man at war, and I will defend it as president of the United States"</blockquote><br><br>This is not a moot point and Jim Lehrer failed, as moderator, to question Kerry on this issue. <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:41 AM

What's with your condescending snottiness?<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: nutty

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:45 AM

his point, he was there, i think even the swifties cant deny he was in Vietnam! but we do have questions of where W was, but frankly i dont care. I want to know how we are going to stop the killings of americans in Iraq and bring the murderer of 3000 americans to justice, by the way that guy is in Afghanistan not Iraq<br><br>You cant polish a Turd.
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:45 AM

What's with your always calling people something?<br><br>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:47 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>What's with your always calling people something?<p><hr></blockquote><p>I guess my greater question is why people can't support their candidate, or point out what they see as right or wrong, without turning in to total @ssholes.<br><br><blockquote>Geeze nutty, you don't get it. I mean, asking about the Guard would have been wrong wrong wrong. But asking about the swift boats was just essential. What a liberal snotrag that Jim Lehrer is! It's a liberal conspiracy to attack our president!</blockquote><br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:49 AM

Just pointing out the liberal bias, that's all. You don't agree that there's such a thing?<br><br>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:51 AM

I'm with you, Nutty. I don't care about the Swift Boat thing. I don't care about the Air National Guard thing. But what I DO care about is CBS, for example, making a BIG issue out of Bush's ANG story, but ignoring, completely, the Swift Vet story. <br><br>Since Kerry centered his campaign around his Vietnam service (which he's now all but abandoned), and this group took serious issue with it, you'd think Lehrer would want to at *least* ask a question and have Kerry directly answer to the largest possible gathered audience.<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:52 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Just pointing out the liberal bias, that's all. You don't agree that there's such a thing?<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>You're being a jerk. Why?<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:53 AM

No no no. I'm being an [censored], remember.<br><br>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 09:55 AM

So, in other words, you're unwilling to rise above this kind of crap.<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:02 AM

The crap heap is at your door, not mine. It's a pattern in a great many of the threads. From argument about trivialities (not always, I grant) to adhomination. There are few things in discussions that get me more upset than adhominem attacks.<br><br>
Posted by: nutty

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:02 AM

maybe, but since foreign policy was the topic i'm glad he stuck to it. maybe in town hall these issues might come up, but people want answers to iraq, osama and the economy. the media has to learn that swifties and national guard dont mean squat<br><br>You cant polish a Turd.
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:06 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>maybe, but since foreign policy was the topic i'm glad he stuck to it. maybe in town hall these issues might come up, but people want answers to iraq, osama and the economy. the media has to learn that swifties and national guard dont mean squat<p><hr></blockquote><p>I completely agree. And you're right. It was a Foreign Policy debate ... When Kerry said he defended this country as a young man, I thought that would've been the opening for Lehrer to ask the quesiton, but he stuck to Foreign Policy. <br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:09 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>The crap heap is at your door, not mine.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Hardly. You're the one squating at the door right now. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> It's a pattern in a great many of the threads.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Show me.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>From argument about trivialities (not always, I grant) to adhomination.<p><hr></blockquote><p>I participate as vociferously as anyone else in this forum. If I stand on the "wrong" side of your politics, I won't apologize for it. Can you rise above it?<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: garyW

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:31 AM

Where was the .. you know .. Swift Boat question?<br><br>I was hoping he would have asked that question because Kerry's answer would have ended that smear tactic for the rest of the campaign. Kerry was spot on the entire debate and would have used that question to his own advantage and would have turned it around to make Bush seem only more pathetic. Don't you think Kerry had the attack answer to the Swifties at his fingertips? Matt, did you really want Bush to have to defend his Guard service to the American public that night in the position he was in? Geeez, you should be thanking Jim Lehrer.<br><br>
Posted by: AfterTenSoftware

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:56 AM

If I had to make a bet I would bet that the "murderer of 3000 americans" is already dead.<br><br>No sig right now, waiting for the next Kerry flip-flop. .
Posted by: SlapLeather

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:57 AM

Me too.<br><br>got to let your eyes adjust
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 10:58 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I was hoping he would have asked that question because Kerry's answer would have ended that smear tactic for the rest of the campaign.<p><hr></blockquote><p>What "smear tactic"? Bush has said he wants all 527 ads off the air and has done nothing but praise Kerry's military service . . . repeatedly. A group of veterans have legitimate questions about Kerry's service record. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Kerry was spot on the entire debate and would have used that question to his own advantage and would have turned it around to make Bush seem only more pathetic.<p><hr></blockquote><p>No question Bush's performance at the debate wasn't good and needs to improve over the next two debates. Poor performance, yes. Pathetic? Hardly.<br><br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 11:05 AM

First, I will show nothing. You can, if you care to, find evidence on your own.<br><br>Second, there's no complaint about your having a different political position. If everyone thought the same it'd be a boring world. It's the mode of the argument that bothers me.<br><br>This is it for me on this issue, by the way, so feel free to have the last word.<br><br>
Posted by: garyW

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 11:07 AM

Your words: Unprepared. Defensive. Repetitive. Out of control. Inexcusable to come to a debate like this...<br><br>For the president of the United States that registers pathetic on my scale. <br><br>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 11:10 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Your words: Unprepared. Defensive. Repetitive. Out of control. Inexcusable to come to a debate like this...<p><hr></blockquote><p>My words around 30 minutes in to the debate. I thought his answers improved as the debate continued on. <br><br>Again, poor performance, yes. Pathetic? No.<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: garyW

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 11:36 AM

<br><br>I'll choose some other adjectives...<br><br>pathetic <br>Function: adjective <br>Definition: sad <br>Synonyms: affecting, commiserable, crummy, deplorable, distressing, feeble, heart-rending, heartbreaking, inadequate, lamentable, meager, melting, miserable, moving, paltry, petty, piteous, pitiable, pitiful, plaintive, poignant, poor, puny, rueful, sorry, tender, touching, useless, woeful, worthless, wretched<br><br><br><br><br>Hey, even Foxnews had a chance to put things in a new perspective after the debate <br>
Posted by: newkojak

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 11:53 AM

Fox News clearly has a horrible bias towards warm white balance.<br><br>-- Charlie Alpha Roger Yankee Whiskey<br>
Posted by: newkojak

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 12:02 PM

Well, put yourself in Jim's shoes. His responsibility was to ask questions that would give each candidate a chance to distinguish themselves and challenge each other in terms of foreign policy. However you feel personally about the Swift Boat stuff or the Air National Guard stuff, you have to admit that both are completely political issues with no relevance to foreign policy. Jim would have stepped over a huge line in playing to those kinds of squabbles.<br><br>Jim did an excellent job as moderator. I don't think he should be criticized for that.<br><br>-- Charlie Alpha Roger Yankee Whiskey<br>
Posted by: MattMac112

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 04:32 PM

Reference the exchange with Nutty earlier in the thread.<br><br>****************<br><br>[color:blue]VOTE</font color=blue>[color:red] for President George W. Bush on November 2, 2004</font color=red>
Posted by: Bryan

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 04:55 PM

<img src=http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/Debatesbeginning/images2/breen.gif><br><br>
Posted by: Michael

Re: Hey Jim . . . - 10/02/04 05:18 PM

He wasn't even there. It was just a cardboard cut-out.<br><br><br><br>