SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sam who wrote (146581)9/29/2004 11:30:13 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 281500
 
How to Debate George Bush
____________________________

By AL GORE
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
THE NEW YORK TIMES
September 29, 2004

This year, as usual, the dominance of attack advertisements on television has made it hard to get a clear picture of where the candidates stand. But the same media revolution that brought us the 30-second commercial also brought us televised presidential debates - and ever since the first of them 44 years ago, they have played a crucial role in shaping voters' opinions of the candidates.

America has long been devoted to the clash between opposing advocates as the best way to evaluate information. In this era of media clutter, it is all the more important for voters to have this moment of simple clarity when the candidates appear before them stripped of advisers, sound bites and media spin.

My advice to John Kerry is simple: be prepared for the toughest debates of your career. While George Bush's campaign has made "lowering expectations" into a high art form, the record is clear - he's a skilled debater who uses the format to his advantage. There is no reason to expect any less this time around. And if anyone truly has "low expectations" for an incumbent president, that in itself is an issue.

But more important than his record as a debater is Mr. Bush's record as a president. And therein lies the true opportunity for John Kerry - because notwithstanding the president's political skills, his performance in office amounts to a catastrophic failure. And the debates represent a time to hold him to account. For the voters, these debates represent an opportunity to explore four relevant questions: Is America on the right course today, or are we off track? If we are headed in the wrong direction, what happened and who is responsible? How do we get back on the right path to a safer, more secure, more prosperous America? And, finally, who is best able to lead us to that path?

A clear majority of Americans believe that we are heading in the wrong direction. The reasons are obvious. The situation in Iraq is getting worse. Osama bin Laden is alive and plotting against us. About 2.7 million manufacturing jobs have been lost. Forty-five million Americans are living without health insurance. Medicare premiums are the highest they've ever been. Environmental protections have been eviscerated.

In the coming debates, Senator Kerry has an opportunity to show voters that today American troops and American taxpayers are shouldering a huge burden with no end in sight because Mr. Bush took us to war on false premises and with no plan to win the peace. Mr. Kerry has an opportunity to demonstrate the connection between job losses and Mr. Bush's colossal tax break for the wealthy. And he can remind voters that Mr. Bush has broken his pledge to expand access to health care.

Senator Kerry can also use these debates to speak directly to voters and lay out a hopeful vision for our future. If voters walk away from the debates with a better understanding of where our country is, how we got here and where each candidate will lead us if elected, then America will be the better for it. The debate tomorrow should not seek to discover which candidate would be more fun to have a beer with. As Jon Stewart of the "The Daily Show'' nicely put in 2000, "I want my president to be the designated driver.''

The debates aren't a time for rhetorical tricks. It's a time for an honest contest of ideas. Mr. Bush's unwillingness to admit any mistakes may score him style points. But it makes hiring him for four more years too dangerous a risk. Stubbornness is not strength; and Mr. Kerry must show voters that there is a distinction between the two.

If Mr. Bush is not willing to concede that things are going from bad to worse in Iraq, can he be trusted to make the decisions necessary to change the situation? If he insists on continuing to pretend it is "mission accomplished," can he accomplish the mission? And if the Bush administration has been so thoroughly wrong on absolutely everything it predicted about Iraq, with the horrible consequences that have followed, should it be trusted with another four years?

The biggest single difference between the debates this year and four years ago is that President Bush cannot simply make promises. He has a record. And I hope that voters will recall the last time Mr. Bush stood on stage for a presidential debate. If elected, he said, he would support allowing Americans to buy prescription drugs from Canada. He promised that his tax cuts would create millions of new jobs. He vowed to end partisan bickering in Washington. Above all, he pledged that if he put American troops into combat: "The force must be strong enough so that the mission can be accomplished. And the exit strategy needs to be well defined."

Comparing these grandiose promises to his failed record, it's enough to make anyone want to, well, sigh.
_____________________________________

Al Gore, vice president from 1993 to 2001, was the Democratic presidential nominee in 2000.

nytimes.com



To: Sam who wrote (146581)9/29/2004 11:43:10 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Let's check out the Constitution Party of Texas:

Preamble

We, the members of the Constitution Party, gratefully acknowledge the blessing of the Lord God as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of this Nation. We solemnly declare that the foundation of our political position and moving principle of our political activity is our full submission and unshakable faith in our Savior and Redeemer, our Lord Jesus Christ. We hereby appeal to Him for mercy, aid, comfort, guidance and the protection of His Divine Providence as we work to restore and preserve this Nation as a government of the People, by the People, and for the People.

The U.S. Constitution established a Republic under God, rather than a democracy.

Our Republic is a nation governed by a Constitution that is rooted in Biblical law, administered by representatives who are Constitutionally elected by the citizens.

In a Republic governed by Constitutional law rooted in Biblical law, all Life, Liberty and Property are protected because law rules.

We affirm the principles of inherent individual rights upon which these United States of America were founded:

• That each individual is endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are the rights to Life, Liberty, Property and the Pursuit of the individual’s personal interest;

• That the freedom to own, use, exchange, control, protect, and freely dispose of Property is a natural, necessary and inseparable extension of the individual’s unalienable rights;

• That the legitimate function of government is to secure these rights through the preservation of domestic tranquility, the maintenance of a strong national defense, and the promotion of equal justice for all;

• That history makes clear that left unchecked, it is the nature of government to usurp the liberty of its citizens and eventually become a major violator of the people’s rights; and

• That, therefore, it is essential to bind government with the chains of the Constitution and carefully divide and jealously limit government powers to those assigned by the consent of the governed.

The Constitution Party calls on all who love Liberty and value their inherent rights to join with us in the pursuit of these goals and in the restoration of these founding principles. We speak for Americans: hardworking, productive, taxpaying men and women who constitute the backbone and the heart of the American Republic and its economy.

These are the producers; these are the ones who should be "first considered and always remembered." It is on their backs that government is carried, and it is out of their pockets that government is financed. Without them and without the product of their skills and their labors, there would be no source to fund the legitimate functions of government nor would there be charity to support the private institutions helping those in need.

No nation can survive if it fails to honorably address the problems which concern these citizens. To these productive but generally forgotten Americans, we offer this platform. It responds to their desires; it is the voice that speaks of them and for them, as does that of no other political party.

State Sovereignty

Our federal republic was created by joint action of the several states. It has been gradually perverted into a socialist machine for federal control in the domestic affairs of the states.

The federal government has no authority to mandate policies relating to state education, natural resources, transportation, private business, housing, health care, ad infinitum.

The Constitution Party calls for the federal government to divest itself of operations not authorized by the Constitution. We call upon Congress to extract the federal government from enterprises which compete with private free enterprise.

New World Order

(One World Government)

We say "No!" to the so-called New World Order; and "Yes!" to the national sovereignty of the United States of America.

The Constitution Party opposes any alliance or participation in any treaty or agreement which compromises our independence as a nation, or which subverts our Constitution by improperly committing us to participation in foreign conflicts or intervention in foreign wars.

We join with other American patriots to oppose the surrender of American liberty and autonomy to any form of world government or any organization which works toward that end.

We call upon the president and Congress to terminate the membership of the United States in the United Nations and its subsidiary and affiliated organizations.

All treaties must be subordinate to the Constitution because the Constitution is the only instrument which empowers and limits the federal government.

No treaties (even if signed by the president or one of his agents on behalf of the United States) lacking the Constitutionally required two-thirds concurrence of the Senate may be implemented, in whole or part, by Congressional act, Executive Order, or bureaucratic regulation(s).

The Framers assumed, as a matter of course, that treaties would be subordinate. In fact, the stated reason for the particular wording of the Constitution concerning treaties was to make sure pre-existing treaties, including post-Revolutionary peace treaties concluded after the Articles of Confederation, would remain valid.

Thomas Jefferson, addressing the question directly, had this to say: "...surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way."

Foreign Policy

The only Constitutional purpose and basis of foreign policy is to serve the best interests of the U.S., not to police the world. We pledge our allegiance to the American Republic. We say "No!" to any so-called New World Order or to any one-world government. Not one whit of American autonomy may be given up to any international organization or group of nations.

We oppose entangling foreign alliances. NATO no longer serves a defensive purpose and the U.S. must withdraw from it.

The Constitution Party opposes any alliance or participation in any treaty or agreement that compromises our independence as a nation, or that subverts our Constitution by improperly committing us to participation in foreign conflicts or intervention in foreign wars.

All treaties must be subordinate to the Constitution, since the Constitution is the only instrument which empowers and limits the federal government.

The United States must not enter into agreements that would have an adverse impact on the security and safety of this nation.

The Constitution Party calls on the United States to withdraw from the United Nations and to require the U.N. to move out of the United States.

The United States must withdraw from all international monetary and financial institutions and agencies, e.g., the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, WTO, NAFTA, GATT, etc.

Under no circumstances shall any international power or agency levy a tax on American citizens.

Ever since World War II, the United States has provided military and non-military aid to over 100 nations. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been poured down that bottomless pit — with little evident benefit to the safety and security of the American people. Not only have we given aid to our "friends," but even to "neutrals," by means of which aid we hoped to buy their "friendship." Finally, we are now committing ourselves to send the taxpayers’ dollars to those who have been our enemies for years. This must stop!

Congress and the President have a duty to provide for the defense of this country, but the American people have no similar duty to provide for the defense of any foreign nation. Further, the U.S. Government has no Constitutional authority to tax the American people to provide aid of any kind to foreign governments.

The Constitution Party, therefore, will terminate all programs of foreign aid, whether military or non-military, to any foreign government or to any international organization, including the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, and other similar institutions.

The United States should recognize Taiwan (Free China) as a sovereign nation. We should also withdraw recognition of Communist China, which is a murderous and tyrannical regime enslaving the Chinese people.

cptexas.org