![>](style_images/Executiv-909/nav_m.gif)
I don't usually get really worked up too much over specific news reports. But this time it is going too far.
First I read this article in CNSNews about how an anonymous email is being spread stating that President Bush is planning on reinstituting the draft next summer. Apparently there are enough specifics in the email to make it sound very authentic.
The problem is that it was/is anti-War Democrats who have sponsored the bills in question, and who have campaigned for their passage. The White House is firmly set AGAINST the draft.
So, I went looking for some collaboration on the news. It isn't that I don't trust CNSNews, but I figured that someone else would be talking about it. Not much word about it, but I finally found this article in the Rocky Mountain News. It substantiates the claims.
You might question why this is any worse than other rumors that spread through the internet via emails. Well, like a lot of recent hoaxes, it urges people to forward the email to everyone they can think of, especially parents and grandparents of teenage children. Well, most people don't bother to ever check the validity of these types of chain mail, they just get outraged and forward the message along.
But now, just 5 weeks before the presidential election, this is sure to raise a firestorm. And very few people will want to know the truth of the rumour, as there have been rumblings about it for a couple of years, and the email just seems to support the rumblings.
Personally, I see it as a desperate effort by the DNC to stir up support for John Kerry. More and more, the poll numbers are coming back showing that he is falling behind in key states, and may even be vulnerable in some states thought to be firmly in his camp.
Now the big question. Will it work?
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
There are some questions that most people are avoiding asking right now. They are simple, fairly easy to answer, and very important to this election.
Who would Hamas and Hezbollah prefer to be President of the US? Why?
Who would Iran prefer to be President?
Who would be better for North Korea? China?
The reason that people won't ask these questions is that the answer is so very clear. The Secretary General of Hezbollah makes it abundantly clear who he DOESN'T want in the White House:
Click here for the story.
QUOTE |
"The resistance movement [against the U.S. in Iraq] may not be able to remove the U.S. from Iraq within a year, but it will be able to remove Bush, [Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld and [National Security Adviser] Condoleezza Rice, together with their Zionist friends, from the White House," Nasrallah assured his listeners. Nasrallah's scenario requires no deep understanding: Suicide attacks and sabotage operations against the American forces in Iraq will cause American public opinion to turn against the president and not re-elect him, thus bringing about the disappearance of this group of leaders from the White House. |
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
NETWORKS BALK AT BUSH-KERRY DEBATE AGREEMENT
Although the Bush and Kerry camps have meticulously crafted an agreement on
the rules for this year's presidential debates, the television networks
broadcasting them refuse to go along with the plans.
We'll take you inside both campaigns to find out how the networks' stance will
affect the candidates. Kerry Sr. Adviser Mike McCurry and Bush Sr. Adviser
Mary Matalin join us.
Ref. https://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/28/...sion/index.html
So what is the verdict? Who did better in the debate? Personally I think Bush made the mistake of repeating himself too much. Kerry's big mistake is not really saying how his 'better' plan is specifically different from Bush's current strategy.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 3241 100%
It seems like Kerry won this first debate based on the stadistics. He looked more 'presidential' he was less emotional than Bush (you could see he was very upset at certain moments when he was listening Kerry's statements). And Bush could not directly answer the fact of why he went to war against Iraq and not focus his whole attention in Afghanistan when the reports proved that Iraq did not have any involvment with the 9/11 attack.
Kerry lacked specific plans and that would be a big deal for me if I was an American. Nevertheless, he looked stronger than Bush on the debate.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 1089 100%
Kerry may be a better public speaker, but that won't make him a better president. Just because he "looks presidential" doesn't make him qualified to be president. He still can't say what his plan is, only that *IF* it's implemented it will somehow be better than what's happening now. He still can't justify his voting against the $87B for equipment for the troops -- and he tries to point the blame at Bush for not providing that equipment!
I agree, Bush tended to repeat himself a bit much. He also seemed to me to be in a state of exhaustion... But he speaks from the heart, he speaks with conviction, and he has compassion for us, for our troops, and for the people of the world.
IMO
Roz
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 59.5%
I don't pay attention to the debates. I don't use them as a means to make my voting decision. I doubt I am the only one. To me, voting record in the past is the biggest factor in deciding. I am not so much interested in what the tell me they will do as President. I want to know what they did in their other political offices. A politician will promise me anything to get my vote, but their actually prior voting record speaks only the truth.
So, I don't think the debate is all that important, at least not to me. I must admit, I would have been happier if the reports indicated Bush had done better.
QUOTE |
He looked more 'presidential' he was less emotional than Bush (you could see he was very upset at certain moments when he was listening Kerry's statements). |
International Level: Diplomat / Political Participation: 320 32%
QUOTE |
Kerry may be a better public speaker, but that won't make him a better president. Just because he "looks presidential" doesn't make him qualified to be president. He still can't say what his plan is, only that *IF* it's implemented it will somehow be better than what's happening now. |
QUOTE |
I don't consider a lack of emotion a qualification for being president. To me, it is a bonus that Bush feels things deeply. I think it makes him more human/humane/normal |
QUOTE |
and he has compassion for us, for our troops, and for the people of the world. |
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 1089 100%