To: kvkkc1 who wrote (55496 ) 11/1/2000 10:07:11 AM From: PartyTime Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667 >>>Why wouldn't gore debate Bush on NBC earlier? Why did he insist on the commission debates?<<< NBC had a smaller audience and was not a widely recognized forum for presidential debates. Remember? The other networks said they wouldn't participate in an NBC-sponsored Bush vs. Gore debate? Anyway, Gore insisted on the commission-sponsored debates because that's been the recent tradition for presidential candidtaes. What's wrong with that? >>>You can spin it any way you like.<<< Although I vehemently want Bush to lose this election, I think you continue to leave out the fact that I have issues with Gore also. Thus, I'm not a Gore spinner. >>>Doesn't the Academy of Actuaries work for the evil insurance companies? I wonder what their agenda is.<<< They deal with numbers. Not only that, but they deal with numbers better than does Bush. Bush's math, to use his own phrase, is "fuzzy." The Academy of Acturies proved that Bush's statistics that he's been heaping on the American public, are like a bikini: What they reveal is interesting, however what they conceal is crucial. Still, why would Bush, instead of answering the question, blast Gore for the Academy's criticism when it was the Academy which publicly criticized Bush? >>>Brokaw can stick up for gore if he wants. If I was Bush, I'd tell brokaw to piss off.knc<<< Brokaw merely asked Bush to participate. Bush refused. Realizing afterwards the bad press that would result, Bush's handlers made him participate on the second night. Bush, typically, objected to the format and asked for special consideration. Brokaw gave this special consideration to Bush. Unfortunately, however, for Bush, participating meant that he had to deal with the issue raised by Academy of Actuaries who criticized Bush's money plan. Bush pretended, in his respnose, that it was Gore blasting him and not the Academy. Brokaw caught him. Now, that's spin what Bush tried to do. Ain't it?