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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (205615)	10/7/2004 3:45:45 AM
From: Elroy	Respond to of 1573379

George gave a speech yesterday, the transcript is on www.foxnews.com I'm glad to be in a part of the world where people work hard, they love their families. And in which part of the world do people not work hard and not love their families? When Laura speaks, people see a compassionate, decent, strong first lady. Which first ladies were not compassionate or strong? In less than a month you'll have a chance to vote for Dick Cheney (search) and me. Think about that: less than a month. I'm looking forward to coming down the stretch with a positive, strong message. What about the truth? What about a smart message? Thanks to reforms in education, math and reading scores are increasing in our public schools. Is this true? How does he measure this? What reforms, and what scores are increasing are two things I would like to know. Trial lawyers shouldn't be getting rich at the expense of our entrepreneurs and our doctors. If the enterpreneurs defrauded investors (like Enron) and the doctors performed unnecessary surgeries, then the trial lawyers should get rich exposing them, shouldn't they? The senator and I have different views on another threat to our economy: frivolous lawsuits. Then George doesn't explain what is his view on frivolous lawsuits. Strange. How can he claim a difference of opinion without explaining his opinion? The senator and I have different views on government spending. Then George doesn't explain what is his view on government spending. Strange again. During his 20 years as a senator, my opponent hasn't had many accomplishments. Well George hadn't accomplished much of anything for the 20 years prior to becoming president. This is an interesting interpretation of history. About Saddam George says: When he chose defiance and war, our coalition enforced the just demands of the world. Didn't Saddam's regime claim to have no WMDs, and George's regime chose war? And invading Iraq against the wishes of the majority of the world, he describes as "enforcing the just demands of the world"? To win this war, we must fight on every front. What war? Which fronts? What the hell is this looney talking about? And our long-term victory requires confronting the ideology of hate with freedom and hope. I agree with this completely, unfortunately there is zero explanations of how he plans to do this. How does one confront the ideology of hate, and allow the existance of Wahhabist Islam in Saudi Arabia? And this nonsense Senator Kerry assures us that he's the one to win a war he calls a mistake, an error and a diversion. But you can't win a war if you don't believe in fighting. On Iraq, Senator Kerry has a strategy of retreat. I have a strategy of victory. The rhetoric of confusing the current situation in Iraq with a war is entirely misleading. The war against Saddam's regime is over, and the coalition has won. The process of stabilizing what's left, and setting up a system of government that is acceptable to the coalition, the world and the Iraqis is not a war! Bush is misleading the American people by descirbing it as such. The mistake here is not what Senator Kerry said, the mistake is what he did in voting against funding for Americans in combat. That is the kind of wavering a nation at war can never afford. The United States is not at war at the moment. He is misleading the public with poorly chosen rhetoric. The race for president is a contest for the future, and you know where I stand. I'm running for president to keep this nation on the offensive against terrorists, with the goal of total victory. I don't know where he stands!! What's his next offensive move? Keeping the US on the offensive means what - is he going to attack another country? George, what do you mean by keeping the US on the offensive??