Republican Convention

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

More analysis of Zell's lies by the DNC.

 

http://www.democrats.org/news/200409020007.html

[NoCalMike 0]

On the radio here they just played a clip of Cheney speaking, I am not sure if it was from his speech last night or something new today, but the played the quote, "We are in a war we didn't start, but we will finish" A war we DIDN'T START!?!

 

Umm.....WTF?

 

If Kerry doesn't speak out on that quote, he is a damn fool.

[Styles 0]

On the radio here they just played a clip of Cheney speaking, I am not sure if it was from his speech last night or something new today, but the played the quote, "We are in a war we didn't start, but we will finish" A war we DIDN'T START!?!

 

Umm.....WTF?

 

If Kerry doesn't speak out on that quote, he is a damn fool.

hint: War On Terror

[NoCalMike 0]

On the radio here they just played a clip of Cheney speaking, I am not sure if it was from his speech last night or something new today, but the played the quote, "We are in a war we didn't start, but we will finish" A war we DIDN'T START!?! 

 

Umm.....WTF?

 

If Kerry doesn't speak out on that quote, he is a damn fool.

hint: War On Terror

:hint "pre-emptive strike"

 

Unless Cheney is solely speaking about Afganistan, because the Iraqi War is a war we definately started.

[Styles 0]

More analysis of Zell's lies by the DNC.

 

http://www.democrats.org/news/200409020007.html

More analysis of Zell's lies by the DNC.

 

http://www.democrats.org/news/200409020007.html

ARE YOU CALLING ME A LIAR, YOU NEW ENGLAND COMMIE SCUM???

 

Not only that, but I think your breath stinks!

 

YOU TAKE THAT BACK, YOU HIPPY MOTHERFUCKER

 

What did you say to me? Al, did I hear what I thought I heard...

 

I think you should kick his ass...

 

IF IT'S A DUEL YOU WANT, IT'S A DUEL YOU'LL GET! WHATCHYA GONNA BRING TO THE FIGHT, SISSY BOY? SPIT BALLS!?!?

[Styles 0]

You just stay right there, mister. I'm bringing some backup!

 

You can count on me Howard. I invented 17 different types of martial arts techniques

 

Did somebody grab my tushy? Oh Howard, I knew it was you...

 

You my war hero, dog, let's kick some turncoat ass!

 

Folks, I'm glad you all came here to support me, but appears Zell Miller was too much of a wuss to show up...

 

OVER HEAR VERMONT CHEESE! I'VE BEEN WAITING HERE TO DUEL FOR AN HOUR...BUT...I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHY I CAME TO THIS DUEL ANYWAY...I'M GOING TO TAKE A NAP! TURNCOAT!

 

You did it Howard! You really showed Zell Miller!

 

NO, WE ALL DID IT! NOW EVERYONE BACK AT MY PLACE FOR MILK AND COOKIES!!! YARGHHHHH!!!!!!!

 

 

ok, sorry if that was trolling I couldn't resist.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Since Cheney isn't running for President, what he did is more than a little immaterial.

If the Vice President isn't so important, then why do we even bother to a 'ticket'? Why not appoint the Vice President?

 

 

 

You actually vote for the VP? Sad.

Well, the Electoral College votes for the Vice President. As I have noted.

 

If you really want to get technical, we don't vote for the President. We vote for Electors. Who will vote for the President and the Vice President.

 

Now, if the Vice President was so meaningless, why do they put him on a ticket? why does the electoral college vote for a vice president?

 

You wanna go into that, instead of trying to dismiss it with one inaccurate line?

 

If you REALLY want to compare VP's, the Dems are very much on the short end of the stick in that debate. Let's just say Quayle was MUCH better qualified for the slot than Edwards.

 

Considering I wasn't mentioning that. Nope.

 

And wait.. qualifed..

 

DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT THE VICE PRESIDENT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING?

 

What sort of qualifactions are there for this job?

 

Anyways, I'd feel much better with John Edwards being next in line than Dan Quayle. Dan Quayle was a rather poor choice for Vice President. Considering his strength didn't involve anything related to talking.

 

I don't know if the mainstream of the GOP has much room to talk about Civil Rights in the 1960s. Considering they nominated a man who voted against the Civil Rights Act

Who, Goldwater?

 

Yes, Barry Goldwater.

 

That's why he won 87% of the vote in Mississippi. That's why he won your state too.

 

And if you want a lengthy discourse on the Democratic party's record on race, you might not like the outcome.

 

I'll put up a conclusion. The Southern Wing of the Democratic Party was basically corrupt. The South was filled by one-party states. The National Party didn't do much for a long time because they feared losing votes. FDR did a little bit (enough to piss off Texas and South Carolina). Truman did more (Dixiecrats in 1948).

 

Of course, I am dealing with someone who will probably use the actions of one to categorize the entire party.

 

You may not like the outcome of a search to find out what party the segregationists went to in the 1960s.

 

they refused to pass a platform plank saluting the Civil Rights Act (at the 64 convention)

Yet Republicans were the force in the passage of it. Weird, huh?

 

Yeah, and they didn't want to take credit for it either.

 

They're so modest!

 

You know, there is a reason why Barry Goldwater got 6% of the African-American vote. I'm not quite sure what it is. It probably involves disowning the CRA.

 

and they had no real problem with getting the support of Southerners.

You mean like the Dems, who had no problem siccing dogs on blacks and taking a blind eye to lynchings and the outright annihilation of black communities?

 

The National Democratic Party is to blame for lynchings?

 

I knew the reason that anti-Lynching measures never passed as due to the leaders of the Democratic party.

 

Again, the Dems don't have a history to actually stand on.

 

And the Republicans don't have more than a story to stand on when it comes to Civil Rights. The Republican history on Civil Rights is "We did something for you over 150 years ago, and our Senators passed the Civil Rights act, and then we nominated a guy who voted against it". Why do African-Americans hate the GOP?

 

Some of them being segregationists (some weren't, of course). Everett Dirksen did the right thing, but the rest of his party didn't follow his ideals.

Who did LBJ look to for passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts?

 

Hint: Not the Democrats.

 

Ignoring of course that the CRA passed by a 73-27 margin. Of course Dirksen and most of the GOP did the right thing in breaking the filibuster.

 

I'm sure the VRA also passed by a huge margin. I'd have to check to make sure.

 

Then again, the Northern Democrats also voted for the CRA by a margin of 43 to 1.

 

Dirksen did the right thing, working with Johnson and Hubert Humphrey.

 

Who put the confederate flag over the SC State House? Why, Fritz did.

 

That would put him more towards 2.

 

His final speech to the SC legislature keeps him away from 3.

 

"As we meet, South Carolina is running out of courts. If and when every legal remedy has been exhausted, this General Assembly must make clear South Carolina's choice, a government of laws rather than a government of men. As determined as we are, we of today must realize the lesson of 100 years ago, and move on for the good of South Carolina and our United States. It must be done with law and order."

 

Although, there's plenty of other reasons to be wary of Hollings. Such as if you're a tech person.

 

I don't care what political party he associates himself with, last night he came off APPEARING LIKE the stereotypical, old, angry, bitter blue-hair republican.

Not according to focus groups.

 

Well, not according to at least one focus group (the Luntz one). It's red meat. Some will like it, some will not. It's the matter of where the "moderates" are. I don't think the Moderates will be coming out for Bush after hearing Zell claim Kerry would "out-source our National Security to Paris" or hearing that Zell knocked on the door of W's soul and got an answer.

They will. In droves. Kerry is aware that things are going VERY badly for him right now.

 

very badly..

 

which is why Bush is crushing Kerry in the polls right now.

 

By a percentage point or two.

 

Heck, Bush Sr. didn't support Reagan's tax cuts. They still passed regardless.

 

Bullshit.

 

H.W. Bush denied that he had bashed Reagan's tax cut idea in the primary, and then they showed the "Voodoo Economics" clip. I'm pretty freaking sure that Bush didn't come right out in 1981 and stand against the tax cut.

Bush did not support them. This is hardly news.

 

You have sources to back that up. I'd imagine. I'd think that Bush, being a non-supporter of the tax cuts, wouldn't have denied criticizing the tax cuts.

[Highland 0]

Either this whole thread needs to be put in classics, or at the very least, the dueling posts in this thread have to be taken out and those put in classics.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Haha, nice job, Slapnuts. For once.

[Stephen Joseph 0]

This thread has to be classics.

 

Really, we should just post a Zell vs. Dean thing

[Slayer 0]

Slappy's posts were damn funny, but picture-based threads make for horrible classic threads in the long run (see: TSM party)

[Justice 0]

YOU THINK THAT I DON'T HAVE FRIENDS OF MY OWN, PINKO FAG?! I HAVE A MAN WHO WILL UNLEASH 200 TYPES OF PAIN ON YOUR ASS.

 

I'm going to slap the fuck out of you so much that your mom is gonna feel it. Feel the wrath of RUMSFELD!

 

Lion Claw Stance!

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

"HAH! I eat these Democrats for breakfast. Dean thought I did a number on him in the primaries... wait until I unleash my trump card. ZELL! LOOK WHO I FOUND!

 

"Reporting for duty, sir!"

 

"I want you to destroy them."

 

"Right away, sir."

 

 

Meanwhile, at Dean headquarters...

 

"YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS! WE'VE GOT TO HIT THEM WITH A PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE!"

 

"Well, I do have an idea...

 

 

...

 

 

 

 

...

 

 

 

 

"You rang?"

 

"MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! EAT THAT, MILLER!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

Will Fatty Moore be able to counter Rumsfeld's striking paw? What about the evil eye? Can Dean take the upper hand on Zell Miller once and for all? Find out... next time!

 

 

To be continued...

[Justice 0]

This has offically become the greatest CE thread of all time.

[Guest Brian]

Are you guys actually going to be able to talk about the convention after this? Classic.

[Special K 0]

Oh my God, that's just wonderful. Cheers, Slapnuts.

 

I wish Dean was still making those speeches. He brightened up my life. I think he should have a segment on Comedy Central where he blasts Bush and breaks 2x4s over his own head.

 

Damn, Zell looks like he's seeing the ark of the covenant in most of those pictures.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I don't have a caption for this one, but it's worth posting.

 

[Guest Brian]

You Can't See Me!

[Guest MikeSC]

Since Cheney isn't running for President, what he did is more than a little immaterial.

If the Vice President isn't so important, then why do we even bother to a 'ticket'? Why not appoint the Vice President?

You actually vote for the VP? Sad.

Well, the Electoral College votes for the Vice President. As I have noted.

 

If you really want to get technical, we don't vote for the President. We vote for Electors. Who will vote for the President and the Vice President.

 

Now, if the Vice President was so meaningless, why do they put him on a ticket? why does the electoral college vote for a vice president?

 

You wanna go into that, instead of trying to dismiss it with one inaccurate line?

And as long as the VP hasn't raped anybody or engaged in acts of butchery, what they do is of virtually no consequence.

 

Why do they? I, honestly, couldn't tell you. ORIGINALLY, whomever came in 2nd in the electoral college became VP --- meaning the VP likely wouldn't agree with the President. However, since that stopped after, I believe, Jefferson --- the President should be able to treat the VP post like any cabinet level post.

If you REALLY want to compare VP's, the Dems are very much on the short end of the stick in that debate. Let's just say Quayle was MUCH better qualified for the slot than Edwards.

Considering I wasn't mentioning that. Nope.

 

And wait.. qualifed..

 

DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT THE VICE PRESIDENT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING?

Yup, they don't. But, the press had a field day going over how light Quayle's resume was (do you even remember 1988?) --- while ignoring that he was friggin' GRIZZLED when compared to the present VP candidate for the Dems.

I don't know if the mainstream of the GOP has much room to talk about Civil Rights in the 1960s. Considering they nominated a man who voted against the Civil Rights Act

Who, Goldwater?

 

Yes, Barry Goldwater.

 

That's why he won 87% of the vote in Mississippi. That's why he won your state too.

Good for him. Of course, I wasn't yet a gleam in my parents' eye in 1964 --- but hey, irrelevancy is fun.

And if you want a lengthy discourse on the Democratic party's record on race, you might not like the outcome.

I'll put up a conclusion. The Southern Wing of the Democratic Party was basically corrupt.

And who made Jim Crow the fact of life in the federal government?

 

Why, Woodrow Wilson --- that "progressive".

The South was filled by one-party states. The National Party didn't do much for a long time because they feared losing votes. FDR did a little bit (enough to piss off Texas and South Carolina). Truman did more (Dixiecrats in 1948).

Then they brought in JFK and, much as people hate to admit it, he didn't do a damned thing in his term. Civil rights groups were MORE than mildly pissed that he failed to do ANYTHING they thought he would.

Of course, I am dealing with someone who will probably use the actions of one to categorize the entire party.

The "actions of one"? Umm, there were A LOT of them. Hell, good luck finding a Republican as openly racist as the Democrats tended to be.

You may not like the outcome of a search to find out what party the segregationists went to in the 1960s.

The ones who changed their ways --- see Thurmond, Strom --- went Republican. The ones who didn't --- see Fulbright, William or Gore Sr., Al --- stayed in the fold.

they refused to pass a platform plank saluting the Civil Rights Act (at the 64 convention)

Yet Republicans were the force in the passage of it. Weird, huh?

Yeah, and they didn't want to take credit for it either.

 

They're so modest!

They're politicians. Of course they want to take credit for it.

 

God knows the Dems have had no beef taking credit for the economy of the 1990's which Clinton had little to do with the growth of.

and they had no real problem with getting the support of Southerners.

You mean like the Dems, who had no problem siccing dogs on blacks and taking a blind eye to lynchings and the outright annihilation of black communities?

 

The National Democratic Party is to blame for lynchings?

They did NOTHING to even try and stop it. Who ELSE is there to blame?

Again, the Dems don't have a history to actually stand on.

And the Republicans don't have more than a story to stand on when it comes to Civil Rights.

Hmm, freed slaves. Gave them the vote. Gave women the vote. Passed the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. Equal number of black Supreme Court Justices.

 

Yup, nothing there.

The Republican history on Civil Rights is "We did something for you over 150 years ago, and our Senators passed the Civil Rights act, and then we nominated a guy who voted against it". Why do African-Americans hate the GOP?

No, the GOP treats them like adults. The Democrats coddle them, patronize them --- and then don't do a damned thing for them.

Some of them being segregationists (some weren't, of course). Everett Dirksen did the right thing, but the rest of his party didn't follow his ideals.

Who did LBJ look to for passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts?

 

Hint: Not the Democrats.

Ignoring of course that the CRA passed by a 73-27 margin.

And which party provided most of the votes?

Of course Dirksen and most of the GOP did the right thing in breaking the filibuster.

 

I'm sure the VRA also passed by a huge margin. I'd have to check to make sure.

 

Then again, the Northern Democrats also voted for the CRA by a margin of 43 to 1.

Too bad their Southern brethren couldn't.

 

Even worse, the Dems have never actually APOLOGIZED for any of their actions for 100 years.

very badly..

 

which is why Bush is crushing Kerry in the polls right now.

 

By a percentage point or two.

Obviously, Kerry's people know it's worse than the polls indicate. You don't panic and clean house from a position of strength.

Heck, Bush Sr. didn't support Reagan's tax cuts. They still passed regardless.

 

Bullshit.

 

H.W. Bush denied that he had bashed Reagan's tax cut idea in the primary, and then they showed the "Voodoo Economics" clip. I'm pretty freaking sure that Bush didn't come right out in 1981 and stand against the tax cut.

Bush did not support them. This is hardly news.

 

You have sources to back that up. I'd imagine. I'd think that Bush, being a non-supporter of the tax cuts, wouldn't have denied criticizing the tax cuts.

Bush ALSO wanted a political future. He wasn't dumb.

 

Well, until he went along with the Dems on that tax hike.

-=Mike

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Why do they? I, honestly, couldn't tell you. ORIGINALLY, whomever came in 2nd in the electoral college became VP --- meaning the VP likely wouldn't agree with the President. However, since that stopped after, I believe, Jefferson --- the President should be able to treat the VP post like any cabinet level post.

Well, it took long enough to allow for the appointment of VPs.

 

Granted, I'm not a huge fan of the current electoral college although I don't see much reason to have a seperate vote for Vice President.

 

 

Yup, they don't. But, the press had a field day going over how light Quayle's resume was (do you even remember 1988?) --- while ignoring that he was friggin' GRIZZLED when compared to the present VP candidate for the Dems.

 

It was more of the "dumb stuff" thing. Edwards and Quayle weren't the least experienced candidates for VP or President. Although Edwards has had 6 years in the Senate, and Bush had 6 years as Governor of Texas. That might be close, considering that the Governor of Texas isn't that strong of a position (the Lieutenant governor has most of the power).

 

And who made Jim Crow the fact of life in the federal government?

 

Why, Woodrow Wilson --- that "progressive".

 

and who kept it going for twelve years? Harding, Coolidge and Hoover. Of course, a Southern Progressive is a politician who is for poor white people and pretty much that's the biggest difference. That's a contrast to the Henry Wallace type of Progressive.

 

Then they brought in JFK and, much as people hate to admit it, he didn't do a damned thing in his term. Civil rights groups were MORE than mildly pissed that he failed to do ANYTHING they thought he would.

 

Johnson was much more suited to get stuff done in the Senate and probably much more willing to sacrifice Southern votes.

 

The "actions of one"? Umm, there were A LOT of them. Hell, good luck finding a Republican as openly racist as the Democrats tended to be.

 

Considering that the Republicans didn't start fielding viable candidates in the South until the 1960s, and the days of blatant racism were gone by then. There's probably a better example than someone like Helms, but the person probably isn't well known anyways.

 

The ones who changed their ways --- see Thurmond, Strom --- went Republican. The ones who didn't --- see Fulbright, William or Gore Sr., Al --- stayed in the fold.

 

Strange, I thought the story was that Strom changed his ways six years after going Republican. Must have been a diversion.

 

Then again, Gore and Fulbright were both out of office by the 1970s. They would both be around 2 on the scale of Southern Politicians.

 

Hmm, freed slaves. Gave them the vote. Gave women the vote. Passed the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. Equal number of black Supreme Court Justices.

 

Not much more than a story or two in most Americans lifetimes. Other than appointments, the CRA and possibly the VRA (which I would have to check on)

 

Ignoring of course that the CRA passed by a 73-27 margin.

And which party provided most of the votes?

 

The Democrats

 

Too bad their Southern brethren couldn't.

 

True. But they chose to do what would get them votes instead of what was right.

 

Even worse, the Dems have never actually APOLOGIZED for any of their actions for 100 years.

 

Confusing the national party with the Southern Branch. I'm pretty sure that apologies are irrelevant right now. The idea of segregation is six feet under and the mourners of it's death are few.

 

Obviously, Kerry's people know it's worse than the polls indicate. You don't panic and clean house from a position of strength.

 

I haven't heard too much on who's leaving the campaign. I've heard that people are joining the campaign. It might be more like "adding new stuff" instead of "cleaning house"

 

Bush ALSO wanted a political future. He wasn't dumb.

 

Well, until he went along with the Dems on that tax hike.

 

So, where are those sources?

 

And yes, a tax hike makes you look like a jackass after you promise to not raise taxes. But, we've noticed that.

[NoCalMike 0]

Ok the intro Bush video is coming on now.....with the speech to follow.......here we go........

 

Kerry is going to have a rebuttal at 12:00am eastern time tonight, and he has a chance to speak the fuck up for once and COUNTER some points that were pressed during the RNC........God Forbid he makes this about him serving and Bush/Cheney not......

 

Alrighty then........be back after the speech.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Exceprts from Kerry's speech tonight, via Kos:

 

We all saw the anger and distortion of the Republican Convention.  For the past week, they attacked my patriotism and my fitness to serve as Commander-in-chief.  We'll, here's my answer.  I'm not going to have my commitment to defend this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they could have and by those who have misled the nation into Iraq.

The Vice President even called me unfit for office last night. I guess I'll leave it up to the voters whether five deferments makes someone more qualified to defend this nation than two tours of duty.

 

Let me tell you what I think makes someone unfit for duty. Misleading our nation into war in Iraq makes you unfit to lead this nation. Doing nothing while this nation loses millions of jobs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting 45 million Americans go without healthcare makes you unfit to lead this nation. Letting the Saudi Royal Family control our energy costs makes you unfit to lead this nation. Handing out billions of government contracts to Halliburton while you're still on their payroll makes you unfit. That's the record of George Bush and Dick Cheney. And it's not going to change. I believe it's time to move America in a new direction; I believe it's time to set a new course for America.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Watching HD Dubya right now.

 

Where's all the money for these health centers going to come from if we're cutting taxes?

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

AT THE 2004 REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION

 

AS PREPARED

 

Mr. Chairman, delegates, fellow citizens: I am honored by your

support, and I accept your nomination for President of the United States.

 

When I said those words four years ago, none of us could have

envisioned what these years would bring. In the heart of this great city,

we saw tragedy arrive on a quiet morning. We saw the bravery of rescuers

grow with danger. We learned of passengers on a doomed plane who died with

a courage that frightened their killers. We have seen a shaken economy

rise to its feet. And we have seen Americans in uniform storming mountain

strongholds, and charging through sandstorms, and liberating millions, with

acts of valor that would make the men of Normandy proud.

 

Since 2001, Americans have been given hills to climb, and found the

strength to climb them. Now, because we have made the hard journey, we can

see the valley below. Now, because we have faced challenges with resolve,

we have historic goals within our reach, and greatness in our future. We

will build a safer world and a more hopeful America-and nothing will hold

us back.

 

In the work we have done, and the work we will do, I am fortunate to

have a superb Vice President. I have counted on Dick Cheney's calm and

steady judgment in difficult days, and I am honored to have him at my side.

 

I am grateful to share my walk in life with Laura Bush. Americans

have come to see the goodness and kindness and strength I first saw 26

years ago, and we love our First Lady.

 

I am a fortunate father of two spirited, intelligent, and lovely

young women. I am blessed with a sister and brothers who are also my

closest friends. And I will always be the proud and grateful son of George

and Barbara Bush.

 

My father served eight years at the side of another great American-

Ronald Reagan. His spirit of optimism and goodwill and decency are in this

hall, and in our hearts, and will always define our party.

 

Two months from today, voters will make a choice based on the records

we have built, the convictions we hold, and the vision that guides us

forward. A presidential election is a contest for the future. Tonight I

will tell you where I stand, what I believe, and where I will lead this

country in the next four years.

 

I believe every child can learn, and every school must teach-so we

passed the most important federal education reform in history. Because we

acted, children are making sustained progress in reading and math,

America's schools are getting better, and nothing will hold us back.

 

I believe we have a moral responsibility to honor America's seniors-

so I brought Republicans and Democrats together to strengthen Medicare.

Now seniors are getting immediate help buying medicine. Soon every senior

will be able to get prescription drug coverage, and nothing will hold us

back.

 

I believe in the energy and innovative spirit of America's workers,

entrepreneurs, farmers, and ranchers-so we unleashed that energy with the

largest tax relief in a generation. Because we acted, our economy is

growing again, and creating jobs, and nothing will hold us back.

 

I believe the most solemn duty of the American president is to

protect the American people. If America shows uncertainty and weakness in

this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This will not happen on

my watch.

 

I am running for President with a clear and positive plan to build a

safer world, and a more hopeful America. I am running with a compassionate

conservative philosophy: that government should help people improve their

lives, not try to run their lives. I believe this Nation wants steady,

consistent, principled leadership-and that is why, with your help, we

will win this election.

 

The story of America is the story of expanding liberty: an

ever-widening circle, constantly growing to reach further and include more.

Our Nation's founding commitment is still our deepest commitment: In our

world, and here at home, we will extend the frontiers of freedom.

 

The times in which we live and work are changing dramatically. The

workers of our parents' generation typically had one job, one skill, one

career-often with one company that provided health care and a pension.

And most of those workers were men. Today, workers change jobs, even

careers, many times during their lives, and in one of the most dramatic

shifts our society has seen, two-thirds of all Moms also work outside the

home.

 

This changed world can be a time of great opportunity for all

Americans to earn a better living, support your family, and have a

rewarding career. And government must take your side. Many of our most

fundamental systems-the tax code, health coverage, pension plans, worker

training-were created for the world of yesterday, not tomorrow. We will

transform these systems so that all citizens are equipped, prepared-and

thus truly free-to make your own choices and pursue your own dreams.

 

My plan begins with providing the security and opportunity of a

growing economy. We now compete in a global market that provides new

buyers for our goods, but new competition for our workers. To create more

jobs in America, America must be the best place in the world to do

business. To create jobs, my plan will encourage investment and expansion

by restraining federal spending, reducing regulation, and making tax relief

permanent. To create jobs, we will make our country less dependent on

foreign sources of energy. To create jobs, we will expand trade and level

the playing field to sell American goods and services across the globe.

And we must protect small business owners and workers from the explosion of

frivolous lawsuits that threaten jobs across America.

 

Another drag on our economy is the current tax code, which is a

complicated mess-filled with special interest loopholes, saddling our

people with more than six billion hours of paperwork and headache every

year. The American people deserve-and our economic future demands-a

simpler, fairer, pro-growth system. In a new term, I will lead a

bipartisan effort to reform and simplify the federal tax code.

 

Another priority in a new term will be to help workers take

advantage of the expanding economy to find better, higher-paying jobs. In

this time of change, many workers want to go back to school to learn

different or higher-level skills. So we will double the number of people

served by our principal job training program and increase funding for

community colleges. I know that with the right skills, American workers

can compete with anyone, anywhere in the world.

 

In this time of change, opportunity in some communities is more

distant than in others. To stand with workers in poor communities-and

those that have lost manufacturing, textile, and other jobs-we will

create American opportunity zones. In these areas, we'll provide tax

relief and other incentives to attract new business, and improve housing

and job training to bring hope and work throughout all of America.

 

As I've traveled the country, I've met many workers and small

business owners who have told me they are worried they cannot afford health

care. More than half of the uninsured are small business employees and

their families. In a new term, we must allow small firms to join together

to purchase insurance at the discounts available to big companies. We will

offer a tax credit to encourage small businesses and their employees to set

up health savings accounts, and provide direct help for low-income

Americans to purchase them. These accounts give workers the security of

insurance against major illness, the opportunity to save tax-free for

routine health expenses, and the freedom of knowing you can take your

account with you whenever you change jobs. And we will provide low-income

Americans with better access to health care: In a new term, I will ensure

every poor county in America has a community or rural health center.

 

As I have traveled our country, I have met too many good doctors,

especially OB-GYNS, who are being forced out of practice because of the

high cost of lawsuits. To make health care more affordable and accessible,

we must pass medical liability reform now. And in all we do to improve

health care in America, we will make sure that health decisions are made by

doctors and patients, not by bureaucrats in Washington, DC.

 

In this time of change, government must take the side of working

families. In a new term, we will change outdated labor laws to offer

comp-time and flex-time. Our laws should never stand in the way of a more

family-friendly workplace.

 

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society,

because ownership brings security, and dignity, and independence.

 

Thanks to our policies, homeownership in America is at an all-time

high. Tonight we set a new goal: seven million more affordable homes in

the next 10 years so more American families will be able to open the door

and say welcome to my home.

 

In an ownership society, more people will own their health plans, and

have the confidence of owning a piece of their retirement. We will always

keep the promise of Social Security for our older workers. With the huge

Baby Boom generation approaching retirement, many of our children and

grandchildren understandably worry whether Social Security will be there

when they need it. We must strengthen Social Security by allowing younger

workers to save some of their taxes in a personal account-a nest egg you

can call your own, and government can never take away.

 

In all these proposals, we seek to provide not just a government

program, but a path-a path to greater opportunity, more freedom, and more

control over your own life.

 

This path begins with our youngest Americans. To build a more

hopeful America, we must help our children reach as far as their vision and

character can take them. Tonight, I remind every parent and every teacher,

I say to every child: No matter what your circumstance, no matter where you

live-your school will be the path to the promise of America.

 

We are transforming our schools by raising standards and focusing on

results. We are insisting on accountability, empowering parents and

teachers, and making sure that local people are in charge of their schools.

By testing every child, we are identifying those who need help-and we're

providing a record level of funding to get them that help. In northeast

Georgia, Gainesville Elementary School is mostly Hispanic and 90 percent

poor-and this year 90 percent of its students passed state tests in

reading and math. The principal expresses the philosophy of his school

this way: "We don't focus on what we can't do at this school; we focus on

what we can do-We do whatever it takes to get kids across the finish

line." This principal is challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations,

and that is the spirit of our education reform, and the commitment of our

country: No dejaremos a ningún niño atrás. We will leave no child behind.

 

We are making progress-and there is more to do. In this time of

change, most new jobs are filled by people with at least two years of

college, yet only about one in four students gets there. In our high

schools, we will fund early intervention programs to help students at risk.

We will place a new focus on math and science. As we make progress, we

will require a rigorous exam before graduation. By raising performance in

our high schools, and expanding Pell grants for low and middle income

families, we will help more Americans start their career with a college

diploma.

 

America's children must also have a healthy start in life. In a new

term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children

who are eligible but not signed up for the government's health insurance

programs. We will not allow a lack of attention, or information, to stand

between these children and the health care they need.

 

Anyone who wants more details on my agenda can find them online. The

web address is not very imaginative, but it's easy to remember:

GeorgeWBush.com.

 

These changing times can be exciting times of expanded opportunity.

And here, you face a choice. My opponent's policies are dramatically

different from ours. Senator Kerry opposed Medicare reform and health

savings accounts. After supporting my education reforms, he now wants to

dilute them. He opposes legal and medical liability reform. He opposed

reducing the marriage penalty, opposed doubling the child credit, and

opposed lowering income taxes for all who pay them. To be fair, there are

some things my opponent is for-he's proposed more than two trillion

dollars in new federal spending so far, and that's a lot, even for a

senator from Massachusetts. To pay for that spending, he is running on a

platform of increasing taxes-and that's the kind of promise a politician

usually keeps.

 

His policies of tax and spend-of expanding government rather than

expanding opportunity-are the policies of the past. We are on the path

to the future-and we are not turning back.

 

In this world of change, some things do not change: the values we try

to live by, the institutions that give our lives meaning and purpose. Our

society rests on a foundation of responsibility and character and family

commitment.

 

Because family and work are sources of stability and dignity, I

support welfare reform that strengthens family and requires work. Because

a caring society will value its weakest members, we must make a place for

the unborn child. Because religious charities provide a safety net of

mercy and compassion, our government must never discriminate against them.

Because the union of a man and woman deserves an honored place in our

society, I support the protection of marriage against activist judges. And

I will continue to appoint federal judges who know the difference between

personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law.

 

My opponent recently announced that he is the candidate of

"conservative values," which must have come as a surprise to a lot of his

supporters. Now, there are some problems with this claim. If you say the

heart and soul of America is found in Hollywood, I'm afraid you are not the

candidate of conservative values. If you voted against the bipartisan

Defense of Marriage Act, which President Clinton signed, you are not the

candidate of conservative values. If you gave a speech, as my opponent

did, calling the Reagan presidency eight years of "moral darkness," then

you may be a lot of things, but the candidate of conservative values is not

one of them.

 

This election will also determine how America responds to the

continuing danger of terrorism-and you know where I stand. Three days

after September 11th, I stood where Americans died, in the ruins of the

Twin Towers. Workers in hard hats were shouting to me, "Whatever it

takes." A fellow grabbed me by the arm and he said, "Do not let me down."

Since that day, I wake up every morning thinking about how to better

protect our country. I will never relent in defending America-whatever

it takes.

 

So we have fought the terrorists across the earth-not for pride,

not for power, but because the lives of our citizens are at stake. Our

strategy is clear. We have tripled funding for homeland security and

trained half a million first responders, because we are determined to

protect our homeland. We are transforming our military and reforming and

strengthening our intelligence services. We are staying on the offensive-

striking terrorists abroad-so we do not have to face them here at home.

And we are working to advance liberty in the broader Middle East, because

freedom will bring a future of hope, and the peace we all want. And we

will prevail.

 

Our strategy is succeeding. Four years ago, Afghanistan was the home

base of al-Qaida, Pakistan was a transit point for terrorist groups, Saudi

Arabia was fertile ground for terrorist fundraising, Libya was secretly

pursuing nuclear weapons, Iraq was a gathering threat, and al-Qaida was

largely unchallenged as it planned attacks. Today, the government of a

free Afghanistan is fighting terror, Pakistan is capturing terrorist

leaders, Saudi Arabia is making raids and arrests, Libya is dismantling its

weapons programs, the army of a free Iraq is fighting for freedom, and more

than three-quarters of al-Qaida's key members and associates have been

detained or killed. We have led, many have joined, and America and the

world are safer.

 

This progress involved careful diplomacy, clear moral purpose, and

some tough decisions. And the toughest came on Iraq. We knew Saddam

Hussein's record of aggression and support for terror. We knew his long

history of pursuing, even using, weapons of mass destruction. And we know

that September 11th requires our country to think differently: We must,

and we will, confront threats to America before it is too late.

 

In Saddam Hussein, we saw a threat. Members of both political

parties, including my opponent and his running mate, saw the threat, and

voted to authorize the use of force. We went to the United Nations

Security Council, which passed a unanimous resolution demanding the

dictator disarm, or face serious consequences. Leaders in the Middle East

urged him to comply. After more than a decade of diplomacy, we gave Saddam

Hussein another chance, a final chance, to meet his responsibilities to the

civilized world. He again refused, and I faced the kind of decision that

comes only to the Oval Office-a decision no president would ask for, but

must be prepared to make. Do I forget the lessons of September 11th and

take the word of a madman, or do I take action to defend our country?

Faced with that choice, I will defend America every time.

 

Because we acted to defend our country, the murderous regimes of

Saddam Hussein and the Taliban are history, more than 50 million people

have been liberated, and democracy is coming to the broader Middle East.

In Afghanistan, terrorists have done everything they can to intimidate

people-yet more than 10 million citizens have registered to vote in the

October presidential election-a resounding endorsement of democracy.

Despite ongoing acts of violence, Iraq now has a strong Prime Minister, a

national council, and national elections are scheduled for January. Our

Nation is standing with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, because when

America gives its word, America must keep its word. As importantly, we are

serving a vital and historic cause that will make our country safer. Free

societies in the Middle East will be hopeful societies, which no longer

feed resentments and breed violence for export. Free governments in the

Middle East will fight terrorists instead of harboring them, and that helps

us keep the peace. So our mission in Afghanistan and Iraq is clear: We

will help new leaders to train their armies, and move toward elections, and

get on the path of stability and democracy as quickly as possible. And

then our troops will return home with the honor they have earned.

 

Our troops know the historic importance of our work. One Army

Specialist wrote home: "We are transforming a once sick society into a

hopeful place-The various terrorist enemies we are facing in Iraq," he

continued, "are really aiming at you back in the United States. This is a

test of will for our country. We soldiers of yours are doing great and

scoring victories in confronting the evil terrorists."

 

That young man is right-our men and women in uniform are doing a

superb job for America. Tonight I want to speak to all of them-and to

their families: You are involved in a struggle of historic proportion.

Because of your service and sacrifice, we are defeating the terrorists

where they live and plan, and making America safer. Because of you, women

in Afghanistan are no longer shot in a sports stadium. Because of you, the

people of Iraq no longer fear being executed and left in mass graves.

Because of you, the world is more just and will be more peaceful. We owe

you our thanks, and we owe you something more. We will give you all the

resources, all the tools, and all the support you need for victory.

 

Again, my opponent and I have different approaches. I proposed, and

the Congress overwhelmingly passed, 87 billion dollars in funding needed by

our troops doing battle in Afghanistan and Iraq. My opponent and his

running mate voted against this money for bullets, and fuel, and vehicles,

and body armor. When asked to explain his vote, the Senator said, "I

actually did vote for the 87 billion dollars before I voted against it."

Then he said he was "proud" of that vote. Then, when pressed, he said it

was a "complicated" matter. There is nothing complicated about supporting

our troops in combat.

 

Our allies also know the historic importance of our work. About 40

nations stand beside us in Afghanistan, and some 30 in Iraq. And I deeply

appreciate the courage and wise counsel of leaders like Prime Minister

Howard, and President Kwasniewski, and Prime Minister Berlusconi-and, of

course, Prime Minister Tony Blair.

 

Again, my opponent takes a different approach. In the midst of war,

he has called America's allies, quote, a "coalition of the coerced and the

bribed." That would be nations like Great Britain, Poland, Italy, Japan,

the Netherlands, Denmark, El Salvador, Australia, and others-allies that

deserve the respect of all Americans, not the scorn of a politician. I

respect every soldier, from every country, who serves beside us in the hard

work of history. America is grateful, and America will not forget.

 

The people we have freed won't forget either. Not long ago, seven

Iraqi men came to see me in the Oval Office. They had "X"s branded into

their foreheads, and their right hands had been cut off, by Saddam

Hussein's secret police, the sadistic punishment for imaginary crimes.

During our emotional visit one of the Iraqi men used his new prosthetic

hand to slowly write out, in Arabic, a prayer for God to bless America. I

am proud that our country remains the hope of the oppressed, and the

greatest force for good on this earth.

 

Others understand the historic importance of our work. The

terrorists know. They know that a vibrant, successful democracy at the

heart of the Middle East will discredit their radical ideology of hate.

They know that men and women with hope, and purpose, and dignity do not

strap bombs on their bodies and kill the innocent. The terrorists are

fighting freedom with all their cunning and cruelty because freedom is

their greatest fear-and they should be afraid, because freedom is on the

march.

 

I believe in the transformational power of liberty: The wisest use

of American strength is to advance freedom. As the citizens of Afghanistan

and Iraq seize the moment, their example will send a message of hope

throughout a vital region. Palestinians will hear the message that

democracy and reform are within their reach, and so is peace with our good

friend Israel. Young women across the Middle East will hear the message

that their day of equality and justice is coming. Young men will hear the

message that national progress and dignity are found in liberty, not

tyranny and terror. Reformers, and political prisoners, and exiles will

hear the message that their dream of freedom cannot be denied forever. And

as freedom advances-heart by heart, and nation by nation-America will

be more secure and the world more peaceful.

 

America has done this kind of work before-and there have always

been doubters. In 1946, 18 months after the fall of Berlin to allied

forces, a journalist wrote in the New York Times, "Germany is-a land in

an acute stage of economic, political and moral crisis. [European]

capitals are frightened. In every [military] headquarters, one meets

alarmed officials doing their utmost to deal with the consequences of the

occupation policy that they admit has failed." End quote. Maybe that same

person's still around, writing editorials. Fortunately, we had a resolute

president named Truman, who with the American people persevered, knowing

that a new democracy at the center of Europe would lead to stability and

peace. And because that generation of Americans held firm in the cause of

liberty, we live in a better and safer world today.

 

The progress we and our friends and allies seek in the broader Middle

East will not come easily, or all at once. Yet Americans, of all people,

should never be surprised by the power of liberty to transform lives and

nations. That power brought settlers on perilous journeys, inspired

colonies to rebellion, ended the sin of slavery, and set our Nation against

the tyrannies of the 20th century. We were honored to aid the rise of

democracy in Germany and Japan and Nicaragua and Central Europe and the

Baltics-and that noble story goes on. I believe that America is called

to lead the cause of freedom in a new century. I believe that millions in

the Middle East plead in silence for their liberty. I believe that given

the chance, they will embrace the most honorable form of government ever

devised by man. I believe all these things because freedom is not

America's gift to the world, it is the Almighty God's gift to every man and

woman in this world.

 

This moment in the life of our country will be remembered.

Generations will know if we kept our faith and kept our word. Generations

will know if we seized this moment, and used it to build a future of safety

and peace. The freedom of many, and the future security of our Nation, now

depend on us. And tonight, my fellow Americans, I ask you to stand with

me.

 

In the last four years, you and I have come to know each other. Even

when we don't agree, at least you know what I believe and where I stand.

You may have noticed I have a few flaws, too. People sometimes have to

correct my English-I knew I had a problem when Arnold Schwarzenegger

started doing it. Some folks look at me and see a certain swagger, which

in Texas is called "walking." Now and then I come across as a little too

blunt-and for that we can all thank the white-haired lady sitting right

up there.

 

One thing I have learned about the presidency is that whatever

shortcomings you have, people are going to notice them-and whatever

strengths you have, you're going to need them. These four years have

brought moments I could not foresee and will not forget. I have tried to

comfort Americans who lost the most on September 11th-people who showed

me a picture or told me a story, so I would know how much was taken from

them. I have learned first-hand that ordering Americans into battle is the

hardest decision, even when it is right. I have returned the salute of

wounded soldiers, some with a very tough road ahead, who say they were just

doing their job. I've held the children of the fallen, who are told their

dad or mom is a hero, but would rather just have their dad or mom.

 

And I have met with parents and wives and husbands who have received

a folded flag, and said a final goodbye to a soldier they loved. I am awed

that so many have used those meetings to say that I am in their prayers-

to offer encouragement to me. Where does strength like that come from?

How can people so burdened with sorrow also feel such pride? It is because

they know their loved one was last seen doing good. Because they know that

liberty was precious to the one they lost. And in those military families,

I have seen the character of a great nation: decent, and idealistic, and

strong.

 

The world saw that spirit three miles from here, when the people of

this city faced peril together, and lifted a flag over the ruins, and

defied the enemy with their courage. My fellow Americans, for as long as

our country stands, people will look to the resurrection of New York City

and they will say: Here buildings fell, and here a nation rose.

 

We see America's character in our military, which finds a way or

makes one. We see it in our veterans, who are supporting military families

in their days of worry. We see it in our young people, who have found

heroes once again. We see that character in workers and entrepreneurs, who

are renewing our economy with their effort and optimism. And all of this

has confirmed one belief beyond doubt: Having come this far, our tested

and confident Nation can achieve anything.

 

To everything we know there is a season-a time for sadness, a time

for struggle, a time for rebuilding. And now we have reached a time for

hope. This young century will be liberty's century. By promoting liberty

abroad, we will build a safer world. By encouraging liberty at home, we

will build a more hopeful America. Like generations before us, we have a

calling from beyond the stars to stand for freedom. This is the everlasting

dream of America-and tonight, in this place, that dream is renewed. Now

we go forward-grateful for our freedom, faithful to our cause, and

confident in the future of the greatest nation on earth.

 

God bless you, and may God continue to bless America.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

And remember: he's gonna restrain government spending, too.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Heh. Activist judges. If this was a drinking game of catchwords, I'd be sloshed by now.

 

Fuck you, George.

[BUTT 0]

What the hell just happened?

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I just came out into the living room and a bunch of people went running for the door. What happened?

[The Mandarin 0]

"E-C-DUBYA!" "E-C-DUBYA!"

 

Anyways, what the hell was that?

 

I did like the matching yellow hats though.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

This seems like a standard Bush stump speech. His "vision" for America includes outrageous spending with no plan to fund it. His foriegn policy speech is his standard preemptive doctrine. Nothing new.