PDA

View Full Version : Bush Leaves Out Complex Facts in Speech



DeSPURado
09-03-2004, 03:19 AM
Bush Leaves Out Complex Facts in Speech

Thu Sep 2,10:43 PM ET
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

By CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - President Bush (news - web sites)'s boast of a 30-member-strong coalition in Iraq (news - web sites) masked the reality that the United States is bearing the overwhelming share of costs, in lives and troop commitments. And in claiming to have routed most al-Qaida leaders, he did not mention that the big one got away.

&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp

Bush's acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention on Thursday night brought the nation a collection of facts that told only part of the story, hardly unusual for this most political of occasions.

He took some license in telling Americans that Democratic opponent John Kerry (news - web sites) "is running on a platform of increasing taxes."

Kerry would, in fact, raise taxes on the richest 2 percent of Americans as part of a plan to keep the Bush tax cuts for everyone else and even cut some of them more. That's not exactly a tax-increase platform.

And on education, Bush voiced an inherent contradiction, dating back to his 2000 campaign, in stating his stout support for local control of education, yet promising to toughen federal standards that override local decision-making.

"We are insisting on accountability, empowering parents and teachers, and making sure that local people are in charge of their schools," he said, on one hand. Yet, "we will require a rigorous exam before graduation."

On Iraq, Bush derided Kerry for devaluing the alliance that drove out Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) and is trying to rebuild the country. "Our allies also know the historic importance of our work," Bush said. "About 40 nations stand beside us in Afghanistan (news - web sites), and some 30 in Iraq."

But the United States has more than five times the number of troops in Iraq than all the other countries put together. And, with 976 killed, Americans have suffered nearly eight times more deaths than the other allies combined.

Bush aggressively defended progress in Afghanistan, too. "Today, the government of a free Afghanistan is fighting terror, Pakistan is capturing terrorist leaders ... and more than three-quarters of al-Qaida's key members and associates have been detained or killed. We have led, many have joined, and America and the world are safer."

Nowhere did Bush mention Osama bin Laden (news - web sites), nor did he account for the replacement of killed and captured al al-Qaida leaders by others.

Bush's address wasn't the only one this week that glossed over some realities.

Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites), trying to make Kerry look wobbly on defense, implied in his speech that Kerry would wait until the United States is hit by a foe before hitting back. "He declared at the Democratic convention that he will forcefully defend America after we have been attacked," Cheney said.

New York Gov. George Pataki echoed Cheney's line of criticism Thursday night.

Kerry said in his convention speech, "Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response." But he also spoke of pre-emptive action in that address, saying a threat that is "real and imminent" is also a justification for war.

In his keynote address, Sen. Zell Miller (news, bio, voting record) attacked Kerry for Senate votes against the Navy F-14D Tomcat fighter and the B-2 bomber — the heart of his case that the Democrat has stood against essential weapons systems.

He ignored the fact that Cheney, as defense secretary, canceled the F-14 and submitted a budget scaling back production of the B-2.

Miller also said Kerry has made it clear he "would use military force only if approved by the U.N.," a stretch of Kerry's position. Kerry told his convention "I will never hesitate to use force when it is required" and "I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security."

Yahoo (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040903/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_bush_fact_check&cid=694&ncid=2043)

Ruby Ridge
09-03-2004, 10:37 AM
Early in the speech he said he would be cutting the deficit in half and also said that the tax cuts needed to be permanent.

Then he got into his domestic laundry list of increasing Pell grants, funding for community colleges and a number of other things.

If I were Kerry, I would go back to other Bush domestic pledges and demonstrate that he talks about them but they rarely come to fruition and if they do they are underfunded.

We could have a conservative/liberal debate about government spending until the cows come home but this administations biggest failing and the reason they deserve to be sent home this election is the mishandling of the war on terror.

Yonivore
09-03-2004, 11:08 AM
The story leaves out more facts that the President's speech.

JohnnyMarzetti
09-03-2004, 04:32 PM
Most of his speech was political BS.
Hell, even some conservatives were saying that most of it was aimed at the undecided voters...until he got to the teary eyed BS. :cry
And from the look at some of the posts lately...many of you bought it. :lol

Yonivore
09-03-2004, 04:37 PM
"Most of his speech was political BS."
Really? What parts?

SpursWoman
09-03-2004, 04:38 PM
Bush Leaves Out Complex Facts in Speech




Gotdamn, he only had an hour!


:lol :lol

SpursWoman
09-03-2004, 04:47 PM
Most of his speech was political BS.
Hell, even some conservatives were saying that most of it was aimed at the undecided voters...until he got to the teary eyed BS.
And from the look at some of the posts lately...many of you bought it.



How could you really tell what anyone bought or didn't buy with Kerry's nuts in your mouth?

Yonivore
09-03-2004, 04:48 PM
Oh, stop that SW. The visual was almost too much!

SpursWoman
09-03-2004, 04:53 PM
I don't know....I just can't see how people can harbor such obvious hatred for someone they've never even met.

Who run their mouths like they could have done waaaaaaaay better, and know oh, so much more.


It's aggrevating.

Nbadan
09-03-2004, 05:19 PM
Who run their mouths like they could have done waaaaaaaay better, and know oh, so much more.

Billions of dollars in Tax cuts haven't led to the jobs that W. promised us. Hundred of billions of dollars spent in Iraq haven't brought the stability to reconstruct the countries oil infrastructure to the point it was even before the war when Iraq was shipping more than twice the oil it ships now.

W. is leading the nation down the health care path he led Texas where 25% of us no longer can afford insurance compared to 15% nationally. Even Seniors, who last year received one of the largest entitlement programs, aren't happy, and many Republican senators felt betrayed over the administrations blatant under-estimation of the final costs.

Of course, under-estimating costs is a staple of this administration. Early estimates by some administation officials had the Iraq war at $10-$20 billion. It has now cost us nearly $170 billion and counting.

Spurminator
09-03-2004, 05:24 PM
Most of his speech was political BS.

Was this your first Convention?

Tommy Duncan
09-03-2004, 05:28 PM
Billions of dollars in Tax cuts haven't led to the jobs that W. promised us.

Look at the job growth over the past year. What is the unemployment rate now?

I mean you act as though the Clinton tech bubble didn't burst in the spring of 2000 and there wasn't a dramatic slowdown in business spending back then.

Blaming Bush for that is ignorant.

Yonivore
09-03-2004, 05:44 PM
Unemployment at 5.3%. At this time during the Clinton first term? 6.1%

And, Clinton was caught fudging the numbers by claiming a person working two jobs as two separate employed people.

Clinton was enjoying the ride on a fake economy based on the non-business of .com.

Bush inherited a recessionary economy from Clinton.

Clinton has no 9/11 to evaporate several hundred thousand jobs along with millions of square feet of office space. And, the ripple effects on the service, transportation, and travel industry nationwide.

The Bush economic strategy in the midst of a war has been brilliant.

scott
09-03-2004, 07:29 PM
Clinton was enjoying the ride on a fake economy based on the non-business of .com.

How is this any different than the fake economy built up by loose fiscal and monetary policy and massive government spending that you are so proud of?

scott
09-03-2004, 07:34 PM
I mean you act as though the Clinton tech bubble didn't burst in the spring of 2000 and there wasn't a dramatic slowdown in business spending back then.

Blaming Bush for that is ignorant.

You sound like you are blaming Clinton for the tech bubble as though he were the one day trading in pets.com stock, which would be just as ignorant.

Yonivore
09-03-2004, 07:39 PM
Well, Clinton sure took credit for the the fake economy, didn't he?

scott
09-03-2004, 07:41 PM
Which is fine... but humor me and defend Bush's fake economy against Clinton's.

scott
09-03-2004, 07:51 PM
Here's something to get you started while I'm out for the next few days...

Y = C + I + G + X

Where:

Y = GDP
C = Consumption (Spending)
I = Investment
G = Government Spending
X = Trade Surplus

Let me know when you think you have figured out how those variables have impacted the dependant over the last few years.

Yonivore
09-03-2004, 07:54 PM
I can't...nothing's broken yet. All indicators are up from the markets to the housing to employment. It appears to me, that whether President Bush is directly responsible or not, our economy has overcome some pretty steep obstacle since He took office...and, particularly after September 11 when so many businesses were caught up in the ripple effect eminating from New York City.

At least in the case of Clinton, we have the hindsight of knowing how utterly inflated was the .com market. And, we know from revelations, during Clinton's second term, that the unemployment numbers he touted during reelection (higher than they currently are, by the way) were also inflated by counting people twice.

I just got to think that something's being done right.

Now, if it breaks in a big way, such as it did in the .com bust of the 90's or the oil bust of the 80's...you may have a point. However, if it continues to grow, why not enjoy it?