Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ralphwiggum

Us presidential election 2004

Recommended Posts

Quote[/b] ]If you want to save 404.html  

Interesting....it works for me.... rock.gif

Works for me, too.

Bully, Mr. Prescott! Bully! Bully!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Red Oct

Your still ignoring the key Points

George Bush Jnr. was the man on watch.

No if buts or maybes he was the Commander in Chief on September 11th nobody else.

It was his duty to order the aircraft into the air he was trained to get Nuclear Football to a new location and make that decision for America's defence in 10 minutes.

When it came to the crunch he failed it is there on record and on Film he froze in abject terror when america needed a strong leader and Commander in Chief he was not there.

You cant say oh well Clinton should of done this and Clinton should have done that Clinton was not the Commander in Chief on 9/11 George Bush Jnr. was.

George Bush Jnr. is no good in an emergency he is not a leader he has to be told what to do. 20 minutes he sits there reading an upside down book. America is under attack and he sits there reading an upside down book.

He is so frozen with terror an aid has to come and tell him, ten minutes after the time limit he is trained expected to to act under has expired, to get off his butt.

This is the issue.

This election is not about who said shove it or that Children in the US have the courage to discuss politics.

The issue is having a Commander in Chief who is proven to be able act in the Nations Defense in an emergency.

At a time of chrisis there is no second place

When the test Came George Bush Jnr. Failed

When the test Came John F. Kerry Acted.

America needs a Leader who will act in the Nations Defense America will elect John F. Kerry in November.

Kind Regards Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well as i said you can blame him for alot of the problems and i certianly do... but if security is entirely one mans responsibility, than we wouldn't need the FBI, CIA, or NSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.abacom.com/~pdescham/divers/cretin.jpg
Quote[/b] ]Millions of Canadians recall Prime Minister Jean Chretien's public throttling of an anti-poverty protester during a walkabout in Hull, Quebec in 1996.

Chretien, not cretin had every right to do what he did, he was defending himself. smile_o.gif Smart man, with balls where it does matter.

Edit: Having a difficult childhood of being bullied around, Chretien now does not hesitate to defend himself or others around him when it IS necessary. Unlike Bush, who shits his panties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Red Oct

Your still ignoring the key Points

George Bush Jnr. was the man on watch.

No if buts or maybes he was the Commander in Chief on September 11th nobody else.

It was his duty to order the aircraft into the air he was trained to get Nuclear Football to a new location and make that decision for America's defence in 10 minutes.

When it came to the crunch he failed it is there on record and on Film he froze in abject terror when america needed a strong leader and Commander in Chief he was not there.

You cant say oh well Clinton should of done this and Clinton should have done that Clinton was not the Commander in Chief on 9/11 George Bush Jnr. was.

George Bush Jnr. is no good in an emergency he is not a leader he has to be told what to do. 20 minutes he sits there reading an upside down book. America is under attack and he sits there reading an upside down book.

He is so frozen with terror an aid has to come and tell him, ten minutes after the time limit he is trained expected to to act under has expired, to get off his butt.

This is the issue.

This election is not about who said shove it or that Children in the US have the courage to discuss politics.

The issue is having a Commander in Chief who is proven to be able act in the Nations Defense in an emergency.

At a time of chrisis there is no second place

When the test Came George Bush Jnr. Failed

When the test Came John F. Kerry Acted.

America needs a Leader who will act in the Nations Defense America will elect John F. Kerry in November.

Kind Regards Walker

I suggest you read Chapter 1 of the 9/11 Commission's final report.

The system failed. Not Bush in any direct way.

NORAD, the FAA, the Pentagon (even before its building was hit).

Maybe Franklyn D. Roosevelt should have been impeached, too. Now that would make for an interesting "what-if" scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find it kinda funny that more than 21 medal of honor winners support Bush...

I find it kinda funny, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

After ousting Saddam he plans to take over the job of dictator :

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040625_1215.html

Quote[/b] ]

Voting Official Seeks Terrorism Guidelines

Voting Official Calls for Guidelines for Canceling or Rescheduling Elections Over Terrorism

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON June 25, 2004 — The government needs to establish guidelines for canceling or rescheduling elections if terrorists strike the United States again, says the chairman of a new federal voting commission.

Such guidelines do not currently exist, said DeForest B. Soaries, head of the voting panel.

Soaries was appointed to the federal Election Assistance Commission last year by President Bush. Soaries said he wrote to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge in April to raise the concerns.

"I am still awaiting their response," he said. "Thus far we have not begun any meaningful discussion." Spokesmen for Rice and Ridge did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Soaries noted that Sept. 11, 2001, fell on Election Day in New York City and he said officials there had no rules to follow in making the decision to cancel the election and hold it later.

Events in Spain, where a terrorist attack shortly before the March election possibly influenced its outcome, show the need for a process to deal with terrorists threatening or interrupting the Nov. 2 presidential election in America, he said.

"Look at the possibilities. If the federal government were to cancel an election or suspend an election, it has tremendous political implications. If the federal government chose not to suspend an election it has political implications," said Soaries, a Republican and former secretary of state of New Jersey.

"Who makes the call, under what circumstances is the call made, what are the constitutional implications?" he said. "I think we have to err on the side of transparency to protect the voting rights of the country."

Soaries said his bipartisan, four-member commission might make a recommendation to Congress about setting up guidelies.

"I'm hopeful that there are some proposals already being floated. If there are, we're not aware of them. If there are not, we will probably try to put one on the table," he said.

Soaries also said he's met with a former New York state elections director to discuss how officials there handled the Sept. 11 attacks from the perspective of election administration. He said the commission is getting information from New York documenting the process used there.

"The states control elections, but on the national scale where every state has its own election laws and its own election chief, who's in charge?" he said.

Soaries also said he wants to know what federal officials are doing to increase security on Election Day. He said security officials must take care not to allow heightened security measures to intimidate minority voters, but that local and state election officials he's talked to have not been told what measures to expect.

"There's got to be communication," he said, "between law enforcement and election officials in preparation for November."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

After ousting Saddam he plans to take over the job of dictator :

You mean it's not a legitimate issue?

I don't care who's in the White House. This is something that should be discussed.

But again, all people seem to be able to do here is rant and rave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Avon

Deal with the issue.

10 minutes the is Maximum time a Comander in Chief is trained and expected to move the Nuclear Football and himself to a secure location and give the order for America's Armed Forces to take action.

On 9/11 after George Bush Jnr. has been told America is under attack the man who is suposed to be Commander in Chief sits Frozen in Terror reading an upside down book about goats for 20 minutes.

He then has to be told by an Aid to stand up; he is suposed to be the Commander in Chief it is he who is suposed to tell everyone else to stand up. America continues to be under attack and without a leader because the man who is suposed to be the Commander in Chief can not think for himself in an emergency.

In the mean time when orders should have gone out for the capitols defense nothing happens. Here is the facts.

Quote[/b] ]

57) 9:01 a.m.: Bush later makes the following statement. "And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I used to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a horrible accident.' But I was whisked off from there -- I didn't have much time to think about it." Bush could not have possibly seen the first plane (American Airlines Flight 11) hit the WTC, because the only video showing this was not shown on television till later in the day. So how could he have possibly seen and said this?

9:05 a.m.: Andrew Card walks up to Bush while he is listening to a Goat Story with 16 second graders in Sandra Kay Daniels’s class at Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida. Card whispers in his ear "A second plane has hit the World Trade Center. America is under attack." Bush (commander-and-chief?) keeps listening to this Goat Story

9:23 a.m.: Bush talks privately with Cheney, his National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller and Governor George Pataki of New York. Why does Bush wait from 9:05 (when Andrew Card tells him of United Airlines Flight 175 hitting the WTC) till 9:23 to finally call? He still does not give the authority to the fighters to shoot down any hostile airliners. What is he waiting for?

83) 9:30 a m.: Bush, speaking to the nation from Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida, says the country has suffered an "apparent terrorist attack" and "a national tragedy." He would chase down, "those folks who committed this act." Bush also said, "Terrorism against our nation will not stand." It was an echo of "This will not stand," the words his father, George H. W. Bush, had used a few days after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990-in Bush's opinion, one of his father's finest moments.

http://www.911timeline.net/

Quote[/b] ]Now the only airliner left in the sky with its IFF transponder signal off which has just made a 180 degree turn over southern Ohio / northeastern Kentucky and has been heading directly back to Washington D.C. and The Pentagon since 8:59 a.m. -- is American Airlines Flight 77. Why didn’t these two F-15’s that were 71 miles from NYC and the WTC, immediately redirect to intercept the only dangerous airliner in the sky, American Airlines Flight 77?

These two F-15’s had 34 minutes to reach Washington D.C. before American Airlines Flight 77 hits the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. The mission of these two F-15’s from the 102nd Fighter Wing of the Otis Air National Guard Base is to protect the skies from Washington D.C. to the north. The F-15 has a top speed of 1875+ MPH, so they could have closed the 300 or so miles from their current position to Washington D.C. in just about 10 minutes. At top speed they could have been at the Pentagon 24 minutes before American Airlines Flight 77 hits it.

Quote[/b] ]9:37 a.m.: American Airlines Flight 77 is lost from radar screens and impacts the western side of the Pentagon.

34 minutes when the Order to defend the nations should have gone out but it never did because the man in charge was Frozen in Terror reading an upside book about goats.

Kind Regards Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, something like that had never been done before. Shock is understandable. Gore would probably have done the same thing.

He continued to read a book about Billy the Happy Goat. Even if the posibillity for direct action was limited, shouldn't he at least have turned on CNN to see what was happening?

Had this been a Russian nuclear attack, the US would be a parking lot without any retaliation attack ever taking place.

Republicans like to praise Bush's "leadership". What exactly was that leadership? In a moment of crisis to be paralyzed, uninterested or whatever he was. Are you a "great leader", just because you send troops in harm's way?

Quote[/b] ]And then Bush would have been accused of taking an extreme action by blowing up an airliner. Also, for all they knew, there could have me aircover around.

Actually he did (or was it Cheney? don't recall). It's just that it came about an hour too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a bunker beneath the Whitehouse, Dick Cheney issued an order to shoot down any suspicious aircraft entering Washington airspace. He sent out this order through his aides shortly after the Pentagon was struck. He had no legal authority to issue such an order and later denied having done so, however his aides ultimately confirmed that the order came from him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

After ousting Saddam he plans to take over the job of dictator :

You mean it's not a legitimate issue?

I don't care who's in the White House. This is something that should be discussed.

But again, all people seem to be able to do here is rant and rave.

We want to make sure the terrorists don't disrupt our elections....

....by disrupting our elections??? crazy_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

After ousting Saddam he plans to take over the job of dictator :

You mean it's not a legitimate issue?

I don't care who's in the White House. This is something that should be discussed.

But again, all people seem to be able to do here is rant and rave.

We want to make sure the terrorists don't disrupt our elections....

....by disrupting our elections??? crazy_o.gif

Kind of reminds me when they used to execute people who tried to kill themselves in the middle ages. tounge_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting BBC Pictorial on Kerry

Quote[/b] ]

1.jpg

Privileged childhood

John Kerry was born into a patrician Massachusetts family on 11 December 1943.

His father Richard was a US diplomat, his mother Rosemary a member of the affluent Forbes shipping family.

Kerry's childhood was divided between a string of elite boarding schools and summer vacations in France.

Here he is seen (top right) alongside his brother Cameron (far left), sister Diana (second

2.jpg

Star athlete

Growing to 6'4", Kerry became something of a star athlete both at his prestigious New Hampshire boarding school, St Paul's, and later at Yale University.

Here Kerry is seen (at the back) as part of the university hockey team.

During his time at Yale Kerry joined the secretive Skull and Bones club, an exclusive club for men marked out for future greatness.

Two years later his political rival, and fellow Yale graduate, George W Bush was also selected to join the club.

3.jpg

Brush with greatness

While at Yale Kerry briefly dated Janet Auchincloss, the younger half-sister of Jacqueline Kennedy.

It was this connection that brought him into contact with the charismatic young President John F Kennedy.

Here Kerry is seen (far left) in the summer of 1962 joining the president and other family members for a day of sailing off Narrangasett Bay. (Photograph courtesy of JFK Library)

4.jpg

Vietnam war hero

In 1966 Kerry volunteered to fight in Vietnam, where he carried out two tours of duty.

His first tour was aboard a missile-guided frigate in the Gulf of Tonkin, which largely kept him away from the action.

His second stint was much more dangerous, serving as a fast boat skipper patrolling the waterways of the Mekong Delta.

He was injured three times, and was awarded the Purple Heart three times, as well as both the Bronze and Silver Star.

5.jpg

Anti-war activist

His time fighting in Vietnam made Kerry increasingly disillusioned with the war.

When he returned to the US, Kerry became involved with the anti-war campaign, joining a group called Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

Here he joins other anti-war protesters as they gather at the foot of Boston's Bunker Hill monument in May 1971.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

stupid picture limit.. continued from last post:

Quote[/b] ]6.jpg

Growing fame

In 1971 Kerry stepped into the political spotlight when he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the Vietnam issue.

He famously asked the members of the panel:

"How do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

7.jpg

Media darling

After his appearance before the Senate Committee Kerry became something of a celebrity and a much-sought-after guest on radio and television.

This slick, well-groomed member of the social elite was a far cry from the usual portrayal of an anti-war campaigner and Vietnam veteran.

Here Kerry takes part in a television debate on the Dick Cavett Show.

8.jpg

Political bruising

In 1972 Kerry tried to capitalise on his new found political renown by running for Congress.

He waltzed through the Democratic primary in Lowell, Massachusetts and looked set to win the actual election.

But voters rejected the 28-year-old activist in favour of the Republican Party's candidate and Kerry's dreams of fast-track political glory were left in the dust.

9.jpg

Bouncing back

After his defeat in the Congressional election Kerry immersed himself in his career as a lawyer.

In 1976 he gained his law degree from Boston College Law School and then surprised his liberal friends by taking a job as a full time prosecutor in the district attorney's office in Middlesex County.

It was not until 1982 that he returned to politics, when he was elected deputy governor of Massachusetts behind Governor Michael Dukakis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wait

Quote[/b] ]

10.jpg

Climbing the ladder

Just a few years later, in 1985, Kerry was sworn in as a US senator by George HW Bush, father of his future political rival.

Very quickly after taking office he was given a coveted seat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the panel he had testified before in the early 1970s.

He made a name for himself investigating allegations that the Reagan administration was illegally supplying aid to the Nicaragua Contra rebels.

11.jpg

Brothers in arms

As the years passed the Vietnam war dropped away as a political issue, but it continued to play a central role in Kerry's life.

Joining forces with Republican senator and fellow Vietnam veteran John McCain, Kerry campaigned for improved US relations with Hanoi.

The pair, who went on to become good friends, also investigated the fate of US soldiers still unaccounted for since hostilities ended.

12.jpg

Building bridges

Both Kerry and McCain worked to bridge the diplomatic divide between the US and Vietnam.

The two of them were at President Bill Clinton's side when he announced the normalisation of US relations with Vietnam in 1995.

They were at his side again in 2000 when Vietnam and the US signed a landmark trade deal.

13.jpg

Face in the crowd

In January 2003 Kerry announced his intention to run for the presidency the following year.

At first the quiet man, often accused of lacking dynamism, found it hard to come to the fore.

Kerry was just one of a number of candidates hoping to secure the Democratic Party nomination and Howard Dean remained the firm favourite to win.

Here Kerry tries to prove his mettle in a debate with (left to right) Dennis Kucinich, John Edwards, Al Sharpton and Howard Dean.

14.jpg

Last man standing

In January 2004 Kerry surprised observers by beating Dean in the Iowa caucus. One by one Kerry's Democratic challengers fell away and he became the party's presumed presidential nominee.

In 1995 Kerry had married Teresa Heinz, widow of Republican senator John Heinz, who died in a plane crash in 1991.

Here the would-be first lady joins her husband in celebrating his Iowa victory.

15.jpg

Running mate

To make the Kerry campaign team complete he had to choose a running mate.

After much speculation over who could best unite voters, and even whether his old Republican ally John McCain would get on board, Kerry plumped for John Edwards at the start of July 2004.

The campaign team hope that the youthful lawyer from North Carolina's status as a self-made man, who worked his way up from humble beginnings, will appeal to the electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

After ousting Saddam he plans to take over the job of dictator :

You mean it's not a legitimate issue?

I don't care who's in the White House. This is something that should be discussed.

But again, all people seem to be able to do here is rant and rave.

We want to make sure the terrorists don't disrupt our elections....

....by disrupting our elections???  crazy_o.gif

No. What if the elections are disrupted first by terrorists. That's the main issue.

Note that this already happened in New York, as the article reminds us. How quickly we forget.

But here's the news report:

Quote[/b] ]<a href="http://www.marionstar.com/news/stories/20040723/localnews/904455.html" target="_blank">Terrorists won't stop vote

House approves resolution to keep Election Day on track</a>

By GREG WRIGHT

Gannett News Service

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON -- House lawmakers said Thursday they would not cancel voting on Nov. 2, even if terrorists strike the United States that day.

Rep. Robert Ney, R-Ohio, introduced the House resolution to keep elections on schedule. Although the resolution is symbolic, it carries weight because only Congress has the power to reschedule a national election.

"The House of Representatives today spoke with one, strong voice in stating emphatically that terrorist threats or terrorist attacks will not affect the functioning of our democracy and the process of our elections," Ney said.

The issue of possibly postponing elections arose this month. According to news reports, DeForest Soaries, chairman of the federal Election Assistance Commission, asked Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to consider an election backup plan with Congress in the event of an attack.

Soaries noted that New York City had to reschedule its primary after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

But Ney said U.S. democracy is resilient and noted the United States held regular elections during national crises such as the Civil War and World War II. Ney's resolution passed 419-2.

Some election experts agreed, saying terrorists could claim a victory if an attack forced elections to be disrupted.

"The transition of power in our country has been done very peacefully because we have this ritual," said Lynn Vavreck, an assistant political science professor at the University of California at Los Angeles.

But Thomas Mann, a political expert at the Brookings Institution, said Ney's resolution was unnecessary because it is unlikely a terrorist assault would be large enough to disrupt elections on a national scale.

He said Soaries did the right thing in raising the possible need for a plan to reschedule the election in the event of a terrorist attack, but the issue was overblown by the media and Congress, Mann said.

"It's kind of silly but this Congress is really great at taking a symbolic response to things," he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deal with the issue.

10 minutes the is Maximum time a Comander in Chief is trained and expected to move the Nuclear Football and himself to a secure location

Source?

Even if so, under what circumstances does he have to move to a secure location? Besides, here's what the commission's report says. Keep in mind that it was at 9:05 that Andrew Card whispered to bush: “A second plane hit the second tower.America is under attack.â€

Quote[/b] ]Between 9:15 and 9:30, the staff was busy arranging a return to Washington,

while the President consulted his senior advisers about his remarks. No one in

the traveling party had any information during this time that other aircraft were

hijacked or missing. Staff was in contact with the White House Situation Room,

but as far as we could determine, no one with the President was in contact with

the Pentagon.The focus was on the President’s statement to the nation.The only

decision made during this time was to return to Washington.

So these arrangements were indeed being made at the time.

Again, I suggest reading the report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right click and save as to watch this movie of George Bush Jnr frozen in terror.

http://www.AttackOnAmerica.net/BushAtEmmaEBookerSchool.mov

Thanks for the link. It's been a long time since I've seen this.

I don't see Bush "frozen in terror".

Sorry.

Moving on. smile_o.gif

What do you see?

Almost total inability to concentrate on the comparatively trivial event he's participating in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost total inability to concentrate on the comparatively trivial event he's participating in.

Yeah, but that's nothing unusual for Bush. It doesn't strike you as odd that after hearing that America is under attack that he does nothing? He doesn't ask for more information? He doesnt go to a TV set to see what's happening? He does not summon his advisors and cabinet members? etc etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Pet Goat is the name of the children's book clutched in Bush's hands while America came under attack.  Apparently, a number of folks have submitted reviews of this book at Amazon.com that Amazon chose to remove.  Some are freakin' hilarious and can be read here.

Example:

Quote[/b] ]stars-5-0.gif29 of 29 people found the following review helpful:

our pet president, July 18, 2004

Reviewer:  Erica F. Verrillo (Williamsburg. MA)  

For anybody who wants to know about pets, or goats, or simply wants to avoid the responsibilities of national leadership, My Pet Goat is a "Must Read"!

"A real page-turner! When you pick this one up, you'll wish you never had to put it down!" George W. Bush

Was this review helpful to you?

biggrin_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×