I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Original post by Xelindrya
I REALLY don't get it. Yeah yeah.. being a survivor of 9/11 and all that jazz you'd think I'd be angry about rubbing our faces in 9/11. That's not my point really.
Regardless of the issue I don't understand why the media seems to imply that the public doesnt want Bush to use 9/11 in any of his campaining but bring special attention to Kerry when he does as if he's telling us something new.
this CNN clip ticked me off 'Had I been reading to children and had my top aide whispered in my ear, 'America is under attack,' I would have told those kids very politely and nicely that the president of the United States had something that he needed to attend to -- and I would have attended to it,'
GIMME A BREAK Dont tell me what you WOULD have done if you're president, tell me what you THINK you can do. Don't tell me you change laws, because you can't, our senate does that NOT you.
Don't use what you WOULD have done on 9/11 to justify yourself as 'better' than the currnet president. Hindsight's 20/20 and makes you look stupid to try to change it. I won't even drag out his flip flop on the war issue .. that's not important to me as much as saying that he THINKS he would have done better on 9/11. That ANNOYS me! The World was changed forever, crap that NO ONE could predict happens and now this guy who wants to be my president says 'well I would have...' GRRRRRRR backseat driver from hell!
If I had known a plane was gonna fly through my building maybe I would have .... (deleted I got too personal)
point is... this is BS and it ticks me off!
Just had to get that off my chest. I know I am in minority for not liking Kerry. I'd have preferred to other democrats (the general or edwards) going up against Bush. Kerry makes me think of Ken from Ken & Barbie, plastic smiles and easily positioned to make you think he's something you want. He's show me NOTHING that makes me think he's qualified to be president. And no I really don't give a flying Feck about this 3 purple hearts!
VENT!!!!
Moehick
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Hey, agree to disagree. Are you getting married there or just looking?
Common Sense
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
I am sorry, I gotta say one more thing about your post as follows:
And in 1850... In the 1950s... In the 1960s...
'That is exactly my point. At times like these we had strong presidents that took a stand to right injustices against people.'
We also had 1850--Millard Fillmore. Lame president. 1950s--Truman. Strong President. Eisenhower. So-So. 1960s--Kennedy. Ok. Johnson. Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Nixon. Watergate.
Overall, not so great.
I got married at Westbury. It was great. We are enemies in politics, but in reception halls, friends! (Terrible paraphrase of the end of the Declaration of Independence,)
heidla
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Posted by Common Sense
TO THE FOLLOWING POST:
'This can't be a state issue (and shouldn't be an issue at all, IMO...everyone should be able to marry), because of comity (full faith and credit). A marriage recognized in one state has to be recognized in another, and if NY were to permit homosexuals to be married (and not just together in a civil union, which is not a concept that other states have), that marriage would have to be recognized in each and every state, even those that don't allow it. So instead, Bush just wants to make it unconstitutional so that no one, anywhere, can be in a homosexual marriage.'
Your explanation is WRONG. The Defense of Marriage Act...SIGNED BY OUR GREAT DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON allows states to overcome the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution. That is why a Civil Union in Vermont is NOT recognized in any other state. Whereas a heterosexual marriage in Vermont is RECOGNIZED in every state. I repeat, the last Democrat in the White House signed this law--a law that proved to be a devastating blow to gay marriage. And he signed on a Sunday morning at 2 a.m. after most papers had gone to press in 1996 so that he could point it out to his middle of the road Reagan Democrat constituents without pissing off his liberal backers. Why did he do it? Because the only thing the man believed in was ENHANCING HIS OWN POWER...by the way, pragmatism is not a terrible thing for a politcian.
Just don't believe Republican Bad, Democrat good. Sesame Street is not in Washington.
Yes, Clinton did exactly what you said. That is why I am not a Clinton fan ( I am an Independent). The difference is that he did not try to change our governing doctrine to support his belief. Kerry is not for gay marriage, but at least he recognizes (or seems too) the fact that amending the constitution is a dangerous game. To start allowing amendments that deny rights instead of grant them is treacherous territory IMO.
I am not so naive as to believe that any one party has all the answers. It just so happens that this voting year my beliefs fall more in line with the Democratic Party.
myasmom
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Heidla..that was well said. What I get from people is that so many are looking at either Republican or Democratic party to have the answers and truth is neither one is what I consider the perfect candidate(s). But so many people I know will argue to the death for one party ...sorry I wont cause history proves that we have had presidents from both sides and we still are not a perfect country. So that tells me that no one is 100% right for the job since running this country is actually ran by through a joint effort of both parties behind the scenes. The presidents of modern are becoming just political figures who either gets praised when things go right or the person the American people can blame when things go bad...if you look at the law making process. Checks and balances if for a reason. Its so no one can get power hungry..and sometimes the right thing is so obvious but not even the president can go ahead on his own and change it.
I woke up a long time ago. Sometimes running this country isnt as 'Nice and Purty as some people want our shattered utopia to be. We didnt get to be 'The power country' by singing Kumbaya, we had to do a little torturing..ok Alot, make a little love by helping other countries when it benefits us even if minor.... So thats why there are moments in history where Some people beleive we exercised too much power and other examples where people think too little was done.
verdila
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
I know this doenst address the original post but just wanted to throw this out there:
Q: Who helped abolish slavery?
A: Abe Lincoln - a Republican.
This does address the first topic:
I too dont understand why Kerry is allowed to say what he wouldve done following 9/11, Hindsight is 20/20...but if we look at his record in Vietnam, where he fought there and then came home and led the fight against the soldiers and war, then one can possibly surmise this is what he would have done after 9/11?
On the issue of gay rights, I am for them actually....but it is not of primary concern to me. Ending terrorism, getting our soldiers home and morale high for them and keeping taxes lower, job rate up is more concern for me.
jannshari
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Edited because I just don't feel like perpetuating the argument anymore and I'm not in the mood for it.
I guess you could call me a flip-flopper, too!.
Moehick
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Posted by verdila
I know this doenst address the original post but just wanted to throw this out there:
Q: Who helped abolish slavery?
A: Abe Lincoln - a Republican.
Nobody said Republicans were all bad, there have been plenty of good and bad on both sides. I just don't think Bush has demonstrated that he is deserving of 4 more years.
Jenn524
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Posted by myasmom
Heidla..that was well said. What I get from people is that so many are looking at either Republican or Democratic party to have the answers and truth is neither one is what I consider the perfect candidate(s). But so many people I know will argue to the death for one party ...sorry I wont cause history proves that we have had presidents from both sides and we still are not a perfect country. So that tells me that no one is 100% right for the job since running this country is actually ran by through a joint effort of both parties behind the scenes. The presidents of modern are becoming just political figures who either gets praised when things go right or the person the American people can blame when things go bad...if you look at the law making process. Checks and balances if for a reason. Its so no one can get power hungry..and sometimes the right thing is so obvious but not even the president can go ahead on his own and change it.
I woke up a long time ago. Sometimes running this country isnt as 'Nice and Purty as some people want our shattered utopia to be. We didnt get to be 'The power country' by singing Kumbaya, we had to do a little torturing..ok Alot, make a little love by helping other countries when it benefits us even if minor.... So thats why there are moments in history where Some people beleive we exercised too much power and other examples where people think too little was done.
Very well said. This is what I have been trying to explain for over a couple of days now. No party is going to be able to solve all the problems of this country. And what's right for one person is not right for another. Our country goes on what the majority wants-that's just how a democracy works. Yes every now and then you get a great president who does something radical, like abolish slavery or give women the right to vote-but those presidents are few and far between. As far as this election goes I don't see either nomination being that kind of president.
The president is a figurehead. They really don't have as much control as everyone thinks. Voting for your senators is actually much more important yet very few people do. We have a checks and balances system to prevent any president to just walk in and do what they want-case in point Bush with the gay marriage amendment.
Sassyz75
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Posted by verdila
I know this doenst address the original post but just wanted to throw this out there:
Q: Who helped abolish slavery?
A: Abe Lincoln - a Republican.
This does address the first topic:
I too dont understand why Kerry is allowed to say what he wouldve done following 9/11, Hindsight is 20/20...but if we look at his record in Vietnam, where he fought there and then came home and led the fight against the soldiers and war, then one can possibly surmise this is what he would have done after 9/11?
On the issue of gay rights, I am for them actually....but it is not of primary concern to me. Ending terrorism, getting our soldiers home and morale high for them and keeping taxes lower, job rate up is more concern for me.
The Republican party of Lincoln's days is not the same as the Republican party of today.
kdelace
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
wow. these posts are sensitive. agree to disagree??? BOTH candidates scare me and I am concerned for this country, either way.
myasmom
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Actually I think these posts are not really that bad. Nothing insensitive like how we can get on the BHB boards..lol
OctGroom
Posted:
Member since
Re: I may get blasted for this but, why is it not ok for Bush to bring up 9/11 but kerry can? (policital vent)
Posted by kdelace
wow. these posts are sensitive. agree to disagree??? BOTH candidates scare me and I am concerned for this country, either way.
Exactly how I feel...
Bush's domestic/economic policies are frightening.. though I do trust Bush to handle the war on terror better than Kerry. (ie. foriegn policy). IMO
Kerry doesn't make me feel like he's a leader I can be proud of.. There are a number of issues upon which he and I already disagree and to me, he's way too elitist. Smug. IMO.
I think a lot of my frustatrion was expressed in that jibjab.com song.
OK.. I already know that a lot of you will disagree with me.. Believe me, that's cool.
Hey--
We all remember that little lexicon about opinions and a------- --> everyone's got one.
Come November.. I probably vote for a Third party candidate... (No.. not Nader either.)
