Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tonto who wrote (3788)	2/24/2004 8:45:18 AM
From: Jagfan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

After weeks of the Kerry campaign's attacks going unanswered, President Bush finally took off the gloves last night and let him have it. Welcome to Campaign 2004. It's about time. Speaking at the Republican Governor's Association reception in Washington yesterday, Bush responded to weeks of attacks from John Kerry. "The other party's nomination battle is still playing out. The candidates are an interesting group, with diverse opinions. For tax cuts, and against them. For NAFTA, and against NAFTA. For the Patriot Act, and against the Patriot Act. In favor of liberating Iraq, and opposed to it. And that's just one Senator from Massachusetts," said the president to loud applause. It's long past time somebody exposed John Kerry's ever-changing positions. Where he stands depends on the audience. What a fraud. Here's an idea! How about John Kerry debating himself? The president also took issue with the Democrats when it comes to national security, which is, by far, the most important issue this election year. He defended his decision to invade Iraq by saying "no friend or enemy today doubts the word of the United States. Our opponents say they approve of bold action in the world, but only if no other government disagrees. They now agree that the world is better off with Saddam out of power. They just didn't support removing Saddam from power." And then, in what could have easily been the line of the night: "Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election ," and the crowd just roared. Of course, before the invasion , Saddam won re-election with 99.9% of the vote. We haven't dug up the 0.1% that voted for somebody else yet. This is why this election is so important...the choice is clear. You can keep a president who believes that Islamic terrorism must by exterminated by any means necessary and will go to any length to protect the safety and security of the United States, or, you can vote for John Kerry, who believes terrorism is a law enforcement problem. The stakes have never been higher. boortz.com

To: tonto who wrote (3788)	2/24/2004 8:47:05 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

All past Presidents seeking re elections have come out and started to campaign after their party convention. They did not feel the need to start any earlier because as an incumbent they have their performance to serve as campaign material. Hence they kept performing on the job and did not feel the need to come out on the campaign trail this early. You think this President could do that. His excuse is that the Democratic party was sticking and he started to see his poll numbers going down. That goes to show how feeble his support and his record is in the minds of the American people. Recall how people wondered why Mondale was even running to challenge Reagan or Bob Dole doing to challenge Clinton. Not this time pal. The President is already on the run. And he is making a joke of his performance by delivering an attack speech to his Repub Governors instead of providing a chronology of his achievements not only on security but in other areas such as economy, education and healthcare.