Guest MikeSC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 And, sorry, Michael J. Fox doesn't exactly qualify as a medical expert. Nor does Nancy Reagan. Nor does the shaking man. Nor does Christopher Reeve. Why not quote a, you know, doctor? -=Mike
snuffbox Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Tough question for Kerry - Strong, respectful answer. Incredible performances tonight. This is a debate of historical proportions...
Jobber of the Week Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 THANK GOD! Bush nailed that answer. THe Patriot Act simply treats terrorists the way we treated such groups as mobsters. He NAILED this one. Hard. -=Mike Except it's being misused. Strip club owners are not terrorists. And I don't think Cheney "nailed" Edwards when most people didn't know what the hell he was talking about.
UZI Suicide Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Kerry just went totally Bush with that stuttering.
Downhome Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Nor does the shaking man. Screw you, the shaking man knows all.
AndrewTS Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Kerry had a "Bush moment" there. "uh..duh...hu-hu.."
Guest MikeSC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 He'll have a hard time answering the fact that Bush is the most pro-stem cell research President in history. And Bush only banned public funding. Private research is quite legal. -=Mike
snuffbox Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 And, sorry, Michael J. Fox doesn't exactly qualify as a medical expert. Nor does Nancy Reagan. Nor does the shaking man. Nor does Christopher Reeve. Why not quote a, you know, doctor? -=Mike I think Fox was the shaking man... And he was trying to convey a message of hope with those examples.
Guest MikeSC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 And, sorry, Michael J. Fox doesn't exactly qualify as a medical expert. Nor does Nancy Reagan. Nor does the shaking man. Nor does Christopher Reeve. Why not quote a, you know, doctor? -=Mike I think Fox was the shaking man... And he was trying to convey a message of hope with those examples. No, he said he was up there WITH Fox when a shaking man started talking. And, you know, a name of a, you know, doctor or scientist would have been a markedly more beneficial anecdote. -=Mike
GreatWhiteNope Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Nor does the shaking man. Screw you, the shaking man knows all. Shakes McFly! Kerry has a plan to make Teen Wolf 3.
AndrewTS Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 While we've seen some of the same weaknesses as last debate, both guys are much, much improved here.
Jobber of the Week Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 And Bush only banned public funding. Nothing was banned, California is considering funding what Bush wouldn't, although I don't think we need another 9 billion in debt right now. He's getting mightily close to the "stem cell research = abortion" spin.
Guest MikeSC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 He's allowed the research but not allowed all of the public funding. Really not that hard to grasp. And, you know, DROP THE NAME OF A DOCTOR OR SCIENTIST. -=Mike
snuffbox Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 And, sorry, Michael J. Fox doesn't exactly qualify as a medical expert. Nor does Nancy Reagan. Nor does the shaking man. Nor does Christopher Reeve. Why not quote a, you know, doctor? -=Mike I think Fox was the shaking man... And he was trying to convey a message of hope with those examples. No, he said he was up there WITH Fox when a shaking man started talking. And, you know, a name of a, you know, doctor or scientist would have been a markedly more beneficial anecdote. -=Mike Hmmm..my mistake then... I say the answer was good though...he didnt intend to quote doctors because American voters would be more interested in this hopeful anectdote.
Downhome Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 And, you know, DROP THE NAME OF A DOCTOR OR SCIENTIST. -=Mike Go look on JOHNKERRY.COM, maybe some real information is there hiding away. Along with the plans.
Jobber of the Week Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 He's allowed the research but not allowed all of the public funding. FEDERAL funding. Again, California is considering granting funds for the research Bush wouldn't fund.
snuffbox Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Damn, some really good questions tonight.
teke184 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Bush is reinforcing the base here with this Supreme Court vacancy question.
Cartman Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Someone here might know more than I do on this whole embryo buisness. The research being done for stem cell stuff is using embryo's that people donate to fertility clinics right? Isn't that a better option than complete abortion where NOTHING can be gained?
Guest MikeSC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 That's honestly a damned good question by that man. Best audience question of the night, IMO. And, honestly, a damned good answer by Bush. He won't give specifics --- but, uh, mentioning Dred Scott was a little odd. -=Mike
GreatWhiteNope Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Bush is gonna get fucked...up with that kind of logic. "We need someone who will strictly interpret the Constitution without personal opinion" Kerry's gonna shit all over it.
Jobber of the Week Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 "The Constitution of the United States says... Uhhh.. You know, it doesn't say that."
Guest MikeSC Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 He's allowed the research but not allowed all of the public funding. FEDERAL funding. Again, California is considering granting funds for the research Bush wouldn't fund. And not providing federal funding is a little different than BANNING research. -=Mike
Guest GreatOne Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Hell I don't believe we even need a GOOD judge!
snuffbox Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 That's honestly a damned good question by that man. Best audience question of the night, IMO. And, honestly, a damned good answer by Bush. He won't give specifics --- but, uh, mentioning Dred Scott was a little odd. -=Mike I was pretty impressed by Bush's historical reference... And Im sure there were a few Southern Whackos who dont like it, but its good to see Bush say something like that.
Jobber of the Week Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 And not providing federal funding is a little different than BANNING research. -=Mike I'm correcting your language regarding "banning funds." Being more specific can be GOOD.
teke184 Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 Kerry is talking a good talk here. The question, though, is whether his record will show he didn't follow this when appointing federal judges in Mass.
AndrewTS Posted October 9, 2004 Report Posted October 9, 2004 A winnar is Kerry on the Justices question, at least with moderates.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now