Koreyel
Doing a google, I’ll be back.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Oct 8 2004 21:36 utc | 3

The wired thing caught me by surprise a few days ago. What surprised me was not that he was doing or would do a thing like that, but that I hadn’t run across this before.
I was going to post it on the next OT but you beat me to it Bernhard.
If you click on Bernhard’s wired link be sure to scroll down to the pictures. They are worth a thousand words, especially the one with W walking across the stage with the flag behind him.
I read the whole thing, I thought there were some excellent comments.

Posted by: Juannie | Oct 8 2004 21:40 utc | 5

news.google.com snippetes:
“But if those measures fall short, the United States should not rule out military strikes to destroy nuclear production sites in Iran, Obama said.”
“Obama said the United States must first address Iran’s attempt to gain nuclear capabilities by going before the United Nations Security Council and … ”
===========
Obama wants to be president one day. He can not appear soft on defense. I see him only saying “not rule out”, but not “prefer”.
Look how Kerry has to explain himself on the “pre-emptive” thingy. If Obama did rule out the use of force, it would come back to haunt him one day. He would destroy his career with one sentence.
People, remember one thing: Kennedy won with Eisenhower on the fake “missile gap”, but during the Cuba crisis he overruled his war-hawk military staff on invading Cuba.

Posted by: MarcinGomulka | Oct 8 2004 22:43 utc | 7

[CounterPunch]

The US government is not opposed to nuclear weapons. It is opposed to regimes other than its friends having nuclear weapons. Indeed, Congress recently approved a program that would develop new nuclear weapons for use by the US military.
Furthermore, if one looks at the current Department of Energy budget, they will see that the dance is better funded than it has been in years. One item alone-the uranium enrichment fund-has increased from around $320,000,000 to over $500,000,000 just since 2003. Now, if one recalls Washington’s objections to Iran’s nuclear program, it centers on their uranium enrichment process, since it is this process that is required for nuclear weapons development.
the current leadership on both sides of the aisle pursue a course of confrontation and conflict as if that will prevent nations that it opposes to give up their nuclear plans when virtually everyone in the world (who isn’t a US resident) understands that it is the possibility that those nations have nuclear capability that prevents the US from attacking them now.

Posted by: MarcinGomulka | Oct 9 2004 0:01 utc | 9

Beautiful line from Kerry:
“We did something that you don’t know how to do. We balanced the budget.”

Posted by: Citizen | Oct 9 2004 1:45 utc | 11

major coaching:
I saw a heads-up to listen for W saying “of course” when dropping whoppers. many examples from 1st debate transcript.
not a single “of course.” no twitching during K’s comments–well, there’s that unstoppable chin tic.
wonder if he smeared Vaseline on his lips, like the Miss America contestants

Posted by: catlady | Oct 9 2004 2:14 utc | 13

after seeing this debate, i’m reminded of what adlai stevenson was told in his run against eisenhower (1952 or 1956) – “every thinking person will be voting for you”
stevenson’s reply: “unfortunately, that won’t be enough”
at least bush can now think of a mistake he’s made – some of the people he’s appointed haven’t worked out – in order to spare their feelings, he won’t name them on tv – if i was making a list, i’d start with cheney, rice, rumsfeld, wolfie, etc. etc.
i hope that although this is not a spectacular a trainwreck for bush as last time, it will not reverse his slide in public opinion

Posted by: mistah charley | Oct 9 2004 2:56 utc | 15

wire or no wire, Bush did not come across well to my mind (not that I’m predisposed or something) – he sounded like he was yelling the whole time and did not appear like the nice cowboy guy. Kerry was more responsive to the individual questioners – expressed respect for the ones who poked at him while Bush came across like he was mad at folks for asking tough questions.

Posted by: Siun | Oct 9 2004 3:07 utc | 17

I might be halluncinating but Billmon’s written something about tonight’s debate over at the Whiskey Bar.

Posted by: ByteB | Oct 9 2004 4:08 utc | 19

My favorite moment was when Kerry remembered Nikki’s name 20 minutes later and referred back to her.
Talk about being tuned in.

Posted by: koreyel | Oct 9 2004 4:52 utc | 21

Opps, that should have read:
Green Party and Libertarian Presidential Candidates Arrested presidential candidates Michael Badnarik (Libertarian) and David Cobb (Green Party) were arrested tonight.What a wonderful free country we live in. Here are your two choices fucked or fucked lightly.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 9 2004 7:04 utc | 23

It has indeed been a bad week for W, and his performance in the debate won’t help reverse his downtrending popularity. Ergo, we should soon be seeing an “October Surprise”. My guess would be that Osama’s corpse will soon
be made available for the edification of the
American electorate, and needless to say problems regarding its authencity can be finessed for the 3 weeks or so before the election. Meanwhile, suitable successors are
already being groomed for the indispensable role of national hate object.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Oct 9 2004 7:38 utc | 25

I meant
“regarding its authenticity”

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Oct 9 2004 8:41 utc | 27

John Howard won again here in Australia. They (coalition) even have stronger majority then last time…can you believe it? No matter all the lies about Iraq and illegal invasion that has killed so many people in Iraq, lies and incompetence about Bali, intentional fabrications about “children over board” affair that surfaced lately…no matter how they deprived most of Australians of Medicare and their children of decent education and even of tax cuts for middle class…One of the commentators commenting from one electorate said something like this: Here we have this young bloke who bought his house 5 or 6 years ago for $ 160 000 and it’s now worthy &800 000…No wonder he is going to vote for John Howard. They also scared a shit out of people who recently had their selves in a huge debts buying investment properties around in a hope to get to the shoes of the bloke commentator was talking about, telling them how Labor is going to introduce high interest rates…while off course in fact Howard is going to introduce them right after this election.
I am expecting Bush to win too in USA.
There is nothing to be done there…We are heading toward inevitable catastrophe together…
I decided to think and listen about politic as less as I can in next 3 or 4 years and live my private life joyfully as much as I can. I’ve done what I could. I’ll try to stay out of sites like this all tho I probably will not be able to stop read it entirely because of all of you interesting people I met here.
I experienced this terrible feeling of hopelessness and powerlessness before with Serbian elections and Milosevic’s victories. It just hurts and I can’t stand it any more. Back then I thought I found solution in leaving Serbia. I feel I can only leave the Planet now if I want to avoid what is ahead all of us.
It’s plainly wrong what’s happening nowadays with moral of western people. They really do not care about ANYTHING but how to put few more dollars in their pocket and we’ll all pay high price for it in the future…not to mention our children. But it probably is the way it has to be. All we can do is try to save our souls and souls of our children on individual bases. I am trying…all tho I feel devastated right now.
Best wishes to all of you.

Posted by: vbo | Oct 9 2004 12:38 utc | 29

You are making me cry vbo. I share your sadness about Howard hanging on to power but you must not let these things depress you so. (I am speaking to myself here too)
Look at the cheering and comments during the debate last night over at the AllSpinZone for a bright spot. No matter what these reptiles in govt and commerce do they cannot succeed in garroting the spirit of enlightened people.
Keep yer chin up. And don’t leave us because we need you.

Posted by: rapt | Oct 9 2004 16:00 utc | 31

It is is all done now. (Iraq.)
The hesitant mea-culpas based on oh-so-genuine clear-eyed hindsight, the homeopathic doses of truth serum, the squabbles about ineffective propaganda or failed-arm twisting (allies), the blather about bellicose winning of the peace..
Are so much disgusting, putrid water
Under the bridge.
:: Ooops :: I goofed! Sorry Babe! Hope your Mom won’t hate me for ever! ::
Example:
Bremer: “As I look back now … I believe it would have been better to stop the looting that was found right after the war. One way to have stopped the looting would have been to have more troops on the ground. That’s a retrospective wisdom of mine, looking backwards. I think there are enough troops there now for the job we are doing.”
CommonDreams, Feb.18 2004
World Socialist Website (slanted), on why the US encouraged looting in Iraq:
SocWeb April 2003

Posted by: Blackie | Oct 9 2004 17:45 utc | 33

WHY DID BUSH BRING UP DRED SCOTT?
bush brought up “dred scott” as a way of saying, in code that the general public would not understand (and i myself did not understand it, until i saw it being discussed on the web tonight)
“i promise to appoint judges who will reverse roe v. wade, and thereby outlaw abortions”
do a google on “dred scott” “roe” and the pages that come up will demonstrate this to you

Posted by: mistah charley | Oct 10 2004 1:02 utc | 35

@b real:
please do the google search and you will very likely be convinced
i, like you, did not realize this until someone else pointed it out to me – i first encountered the interpretation at paperwight’s blog, although others have independently arrived at this analysis
“slave is to dred scott”
as
“unborn child is to roe v. wade”
is a FREQUENT meme among “right to lifers”

Posted by: mistah charley | Oct 10 2004 22:24 utc | 37

Is w wired? Care to vote?

Posted by: beq | Oct 11 2004 15:51 utc | 39