Reply With Quote
The (blank) in your signature reminded me...hey, Kori, why can't I cuss in here anymore?
[nevermind] (I had a previous expletive asterisked over)
I think Edwards looked bad. Cheney went in and hammed the hick from Carolina.
The (blank) in your signature reminded me...hey, Kori, why can't I cuss in here anymore?
[nevermind] (I had a previous expletive asterisked over)
Yeah you can, I just chose to do it like that.
Wow, I was wondering why so many thought Edwards won on the MSNBC poll I saw this morning.. now I know... That's some sleazy stuff, IMO.
Holy , exstatic thought those online polls weren't being hijacked as part of a DNC effort.
He already is.
He made it very clear who has the brains in this administration.
Edwards held his own but Cheney was a as usual.
Cheney ripped Johnny Appleseed to shreds. Most media pundits who usually are favorable to Dems weren't even trying to spin it into a "draw."
Yes, Cheney could be president if needed. Mayberry? No ing way.
That was a flat out lie. Tim Russert acknowledged that he personally knows the two met on several occasions and were even on Meet the Press together.I think it's interesting that a sitting Senator had never met the President of the Senate.
What a liar he is.
I also noticed Cheney couldn't say crap when Edwards called him on his voting record and the fact the Cheney himself proposed many military cuts himself.
And Cheney couldn't defend the fact that the current administration has a net loss in jobs. That's a fact jack!!!!
The interesting thing is that it didn't seem to strike Edwards as being off. Wonder why. It's not surprising that the senator made such a weak impression given how many of his senatorial duties he missed.That was a flat out lie. Tim Russert acknowledged that he personally knows the two met on several occasions and were even on Meet the Press together.
What a liar he is.
Those cuts were forced by a Democrat controlled Congress at the end of the Cold War.I also noticed Cheney couldn't say crap when Edwards called him on his voting record and the fact the Cheney himself proposed many military cuts himself.
That's nice. Outside of the chronological connection can you actually put together a real one?And Cheney couldn't defend the fact that the current administration has a net loss in jobs. That's a fact jack!!!!
you can see how much these polls are worth after the RE-election......
Polls have never mattered to me..before OR after the election.
I knew going in that Cheney was going to be one tough mofo and he was.
He is a tough, sharp, polished politician who knows how to debate and proved it last night.
What I saw and what was made clear to me is the fact, and many have speculated this before, that Cheney just may be running this administration. And I'm not being sarcastic or stupid. The fact that Dubya can't express the way Cheney feels is what hurts Bush. Cheney showed he is "the man" in this administration.
Edwards did okay to not fall flat on his face but never the less he took some hard shots from Cheney but he did swing back even though he had the weaker punches.
Good debate.
Seriously, I think it's great this is being made into a big deal. Given the cir stances of all THREE encounters, none of them seemed, to me, to be encounters that would be memorable. The most intimate encounter, sitting next to each other at a Prayer breakfast, could have been very forgettable.
Do you realize how many such groups the Vice President sits in on?
Now, this "lie" crap would have substance if, say, the Vice President and Senator Edwards had participated in a substantive committee or policy group prior to last night. But, given that Edwards was rarely at work, that seems unlikely...which was the Vice President's point.
Yeah, this whole "lie" can be brushed aside by the Vice President stating the obvious; "Wow, really? Must have been a pretty forgettable encounter."
I hope this gets play time...it's gonna be fun to watch.
So, Edwards brings up 4 ancient and rather obscure instances of where the Vice President voted against liberal causes. Shocker!
In order for the Vice President to have responded, he would have had to recall the specific cir stances of each of the debates on those issues...none of which, by the way, have any relevance to today's election.
That was a "girlie mahn," move.
Cheney's cuts were proposed, pursuant to a (Demoncratic) Congressional mandate, after the end of the Cold War at a time when the military was being reformed. Kerry's consistent anti-military record transcends all eras and all global cir stances.
I will agree with you on one point. Vice President Cheney failed to take advantage of many opportunities to rebut John Edwards on some very specific issues. That bothered me all night until, on the way to work this morning, it occurred to me...
The Vice President had 120 seconds (90 second rebuttal and one 30 second follow up) to avail himself of any opportunities to rebut Edward's points. And, given the "target rich" environment Edwards kept serving up, the Vice President merely ran out of time. Too bad.
Last edited by Yonivore; 10-06-2004 at 10:15 AM.
I don't think Cheney was a "girlie man" at all.
Me either, Joe.
So we're being told this morning that sitting next to each other at a breakfast (read, PR appearance) makes up for Senator Gone not being around to do his job on Capitol Hill?
I remember a few weeks back the libs running around screaming about how much time Bush supposedly spent vacationing at the start of his presidency. That got thrown back in the Demos' faces, and now you are all pointing to a meaningless prayer breakfast, or maybe 30 seconds of cordialities at Dole's inauguration?
WTF?
Huh? WFT!?
Well, the bottom line is this, Joe. For the Vice President to have been lying last night...you'd have to prove that meeting John Edwards was a memorable event.
And, judging by the Vice President's response to Edward's wife, Miss Piggy, of "Oh yeah.", I'd say it wasn't.
So it has to be a "memorable" event to remember?
That's the definition of memorable, Joe.
I think you're looking at it from the perspective of, if you had met a U.S. Senator, you'd remember it. , Vice President Cheney is surrounded by high-ranking officials, every day. It's quite possible he doesn't remember the three instances when he and Edwards share the same air.
I'll give you an example.
I attended, about a year ago, a function at the Capitol and sat next Carol Keeton-Strayhorn. She's such a loud-mouthed extrovert who dominated the conversation, I cannot even recall who else was at the table with me -- some of them I knew and some I didn't.
Now, if one of those people, I didn't know, were to sit across from me in a debate -- I might well claim I'd never met them before. Then they'd say, "you do remember that time we sat with Strayhorn at the Capitol," right? I'd say, "Oh yeah."
And, unless you produced photographic evidence, I might still not remember meeting you but would probably remember the event that brought us together.
What this tells you is that Edwards surely remember when he was in the presence of the Vice President -- even if his presence there was not memorable to the Vice President. And, THAT, was the point of Vice President Cheney's slam..."Mr. Edwards, you're so inconsequential (on top of being undependable and perpetually absent from your job) that I don't remember ever meeting you. Of course, it's perfectly understandable that you'd remember being with me."
That's what the viewing public saw in that exchange...and, you people whining about it being a "lie" is only underscoring the massive difference in the importance of these two people. Think about it.
Point taken, Yoni.
How do you forget being on Meet the Press together? Tim Russert came right out after the debate with this. There's only like a handful of people on the set! And I'm quite sure that the principals are introduced.
And Tim said Cheney and Edwards shook hands.
I wonder if he remembers everyone he tells to "Go F**k themselves".
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
