Jamie's take on the 2004 Election... — Page 4

what just happened? on the RNC?? Who was that women?

---

an inbound ballistic missile track i think might have caused a slightly different reaction. heat blooms registered on satellites as denoting a launch i think would have caused a different reaction. a mushroom cloud or the threat or indication of a nuclear attack might would have caused a different reaction.

the first defense in the case of the president in he event of an attack on the homeland is mobility which is why he can communicate with any and all branches of the military and civilian government from air force one. once on that plane he might as well be in the situation room of the white house.

well, jrb, a lot of the decision process is set up for exactly that reason to be able to continue to function in the event that the president and or the vp is incapacitated. would you rather everything in the country stopped while they figured out who's in charge? do you really think that's a possibility?

---

And the President wasn't incapacitated. There was no doubt who was (or should have been in charge) that day. Get up out of the room, get in a car and get to the f*ckin plane. And in the meantime, grab a godd*mn cellphone from one of your secret service agents and try to call someone...anyone...dick, condi, rummy...SOMEONE!

That said, I do agree that it's not the most crucial (in)action he's ever undertaken. There are MANY more reasons to not only feel he is not worthy of another for years, but also to HATE his administration.

I'm still flummoxed by the lack of curiosity! I mean...someone comes up to me and whispers 'America is under attack', my first reaction would not be, 'Oh...I'm sure it's being taken care of...now where were we?'

---

Ah...but you have me all wrong, my elephantine friend!

I, unlike everyone here, refuse to believe he's an idiot. It's too easy to dismiss him.

Coward...maybe. I also have a theory that those seven minutes shaped his policy since then. I think those seven minutes in which he was paralyzed by fear rankled him to the core. And in response, he felt he needed to grow a big metaphorical d*ck and prove that he's a man.

Just a theory...and far fetched. But since we're baking pretzels, I thought I might as well put on an apron.

love,
your friendly, neighborhood ass.

---

wahoo? as in chief wahoo? are you and indians fan, bway?

nah, it's going to either be a squeaker or a bush romp.

---

but, bway, i just did. it's easy, you just form the words and say 'em. it's even easier to type them.

if last night's response from kerry was indicative of the campaign to follow, i'd say it will be quite a romp. when i say romp i'm talking 7%-15% popular vote margin which in this polarized year would be quite a feat.

---

I can't wait for a debate. If Kerry learns one lesson from the Gore Campaign, it's to take the battle directly to Bush. He can't debate his way out of a paper bag,

I KNEW they looked familiar!!!

Do you think Miller was particularly effective? He seemed completely unhinged! It was a HOWL!

---

papa... I'm not trying to attack you, just understand where you're coming from. I'm just curious. What exactly has dubya done for you lately? I mean really. What have you gained, or how have you benefited, from his presidancy? Or is it that having him as your president just makes you feel safer? Because I think that's how a lot of people feel. They know we're not better off in any way as a country, or a people, since he took office. He's done nothing to improve the economy, create jobs, improve education, overhaul the healthcare system, improve the enviornment, better our relations with the world-wide community, etc., etc., etc. So if it's just that he makes you feel safer, how so and why? Because he capitalized on 9/11 to instill fear and used it as an opportunity to create a non-existant enemy to go to war with? Because he's not afraid to launch a pre-emptive strike against a third-world country with no WMD's but (and I'm sure it was just a coincidance) plenty of oil! Oh... I know. It must be because you admire him for wanting to liberate the people of Iraq and free them from a tyranical dictator. But then why aren't we bombing North Korea, or Iran, or Saudi Arabia, or any number of other places under a dictatorship, and who also happen to have WMDs? The bottom line for me is... if you like the direction the country is heading and you really think we're better off today than we were four years ago... then go ahead and vote for him. As for me, I'll take my chances with Kerry, thank you very much.

Excerpt from a recent editorial by Gore Vidal:
"Where there is no known Al Qaeda sort of threat, we create one, as in Iraq, whose leader, Saddam Hussein, had no connection with 9/11 or any other proven terrorism against the United States, making it necessary for a President to invent the lawless as well as evil (to use his Bible-based language) doctrine of pre-emptive war based on a sort of hunch that maybe one day some country might attack us, so, meanwhile, as he and his business associates covet their oil, we go to war, leveling their cities to be rebuilt by other business associates."

---

y'know, when someone says, "i'm not trying to attack you" it generally means that they are about to attack you. it's like a parent saying to a child before spanking them, "this is going to hurt me more than it's going to hurt you." if you want to know where i'm coming from, curtain, it's not that hard to doa search and discover it. i think i've left a pretty wide trail of positions on this board. i don't feel the need to justify myself to every single soul that asks as i'm one of the few republicans on the board and everytime a new soul joins out merry little band they demand to know how on earth i could support george. if you really want to know, do a little looking. there are some very intersting things to learn on this site of you look a bit (not that i include any of my ramblings in that category, but you could look).

i actually respect more the people who come right out and call me a fascist than those who feel the need to hide behind qualifiers while they try to put me into a pre-made category of their own design. sorry, kiddo, i don't fit.

it was carvey and nealon, robbie. like i said the other day, it takes a certain amount of shall we say chutzpah to take a line that was coined to poke fun at your own intolerance and use it without any shred of irony to poke fun at others and to make it actually work.

---

Updated On: 9/3/04 at 12:42 PM

Well papa... I'm sorry you feel that way. I didn't mean to put you on the defensive, but I don't see how anything I said in my last post could be interpreted as a personal attack. I was just expressing my opinion and stating my views, and asking (not demanding) you for yours. But honestly, your last post was about what I expected. No substance whatsoever. You have a lot in common with your boy 'dubya'.

P.S. I'm sorry I'm just a lowly 'stand-by'. One day I hope to be crowned a 'Broadway Legend' like yourself. Maybe then you'll deem me worthy to have a dialogue with. A girl can dream... can't she? Such a welcoming community of individuals!

---

Updated On: 9/3/04 at 01:04 PM

Well if Bush finally AGREES to debate Kerry, we'll see how it all goes down.

---