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 : Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (16191)	10/7/2004 8:20:28 AM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

EDWARDS OUTMATCHED By DAVID WINSTON The New York Post October 6, 2004 -- JOHN Edwards' imper sonation of an attack dog in last night's debate was a little like watching a yapping terrier taking on an old Golden retriever. Dick Cheney was calm, collected, thoughtful and incapable of being ruffled. Edwards had his talking points down pat. He came out of the box with a tough attack on Cheney, claiming, "You are still not being straight with the American people" on the question of Iraq. That was just his opening act. He followed with 90 minutes of harsh attacks in which he questioned the judgment, integrity and truthfulness of both Cheney and President Bush. He lived up to his reputation as a silver-tongued trial lawyer — but, in the end, he simply couldn't close the stature gap with personal attacks. What the vice presidential debate showed was that clever quips and overdone charges are no substitute for strong leadership and a lifetime of experience in public service and public policy. Cheney scored a number of direct hits on Kerry-Edwards. Most important, he put Edwards on the defensive by immediately putting Kerry's 20-year Senate record on national security issues back in play. The vice president was at his best when he stated in a direct and firm style that tough talk in a campaign doesn't erase a 20-year record of being on the wrong side of national security and defense issues. Cheney spent much of the first half of the debate outlining Kerry and Edward's national-security records — their votes, actions and words that ably proved his point. Edwards, like Kerry last week, tried to deflect the attack by claiming that their positions on the Iraq war have been totally consistent. Even their supporters must find that one hard to swallow. But it was Cheney's listing of Edward's sorry attendance record on the Intelligence Committee and on the Senate floor that seemed to take Edwards aback — as did the devastating comment that in nearly four years presiding over the Senate, Cheney had never met Edwards until last night. It was clear the young senator was caught off guard without a prepared quip. Edwards' performance was also marred by his strange behavior on camera whenever the vice president was responding. At times, as he sipped delicately from his coffee cup, he assumed a strange air of disdain — conduct unbecoming for one seeking the second highest office in the land. Throughout the debate, Cheney refused to be baited by Edwards and showed his remarkable command of the facts and his depth of understanding on issues of war and peace, jobs and the economy, and perhaps, most important, the responsibilities of a vice president. The big dog won.

To: American Spirit who wrote (16191)	10/7/2004 8:27:21 AM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 27181

Cheney Trounces Edwards on National Security Tuesday, Oct. 5, 2004 11:33 p.m. EDT Thirty minutes into Tuesday night's vice presidential debate this much was clear: If John Edwards had to face Dick Cheney as opposing legal counsel in the civil suits that made him a millionaire - he'd be penniless today. Cheney repeatedly used Edwards as a Kerry surrogate, painting the Massachusetts Democrat as a man with no core convictions who blows with the political winds. Best line of the evening: Cheney explaining Kerry's conversion from hawk to dove on the Iraq war as a reaction to the success of Howard Dean's anti-war campaign. "If they couldn't stand up to Howard Dean, how can they stand up to al Qaida?" Cheney wondered. While Edwards came out swinging, it wasn't long before the experienced vice president had thrown him back on the defensive. The sharpest exchange came when Edwards insisted that the U.S. had incurred 90 percent of the causalities in the Iraq war, ignoring allied soldiers also killed in the fighting. CHENEY: That's a classic example - he won't count the contribution and the sacrifice of our Iraqi allies. It's their country, they're in the fight, they're increasingly the ones out there putting their necks on the line . . . . They're doing a superb job. And for you to demean their sacrifice, it strikes me as beyond the pale . . . EDWARDS: Oh, I'm not demeaning their sacrifice. No, sir . . . CHENEY: It is indeed. You suggested that somehow they shouldn't count because you want to be able to say that the Americans are taking 90 percent of the sacrifice. You cannot succeed in this effort if you're unwilling to recognize the enormous contribution the Iraqis are increasingly making to their own future.