Baghdad Kerry

[Leo Hubbard]

Seems to me like he's trying to outdo Baghdad Bob.

TIME
This past month has been pretty brutal for you, between the Swift Boat ads, the Republican Convention and the Vice President saying if you get elected, it would invite another terrorist attack. Have you come to any new conclusions about whom you're running against and what you have to do to win?

KERRY
I think the President's unwillingness to walk away from those comments makes it clear that he and the Vice President will say anything and do anything to get elected and to hold on to power. It was a shameful and outrageous effort.

Exuss me, why should the president automatically say these people are lieing when there is no proof they are lieing and all the proof in the world that they are telling the truth? Bush has kept his distance from 527's unlike you people who like to hold events with them. Don't tell me moveon.org is a pac not a 527, I don't care, you still shouldn't be directly involved with them as you have been. Don't tell me about the unbiased media either when your polls go down they up and change jobs from their so called un biased media status to pacs or your own organization.


But you know, I've been in worse situations in my life. The attacks don't attack me as much as they attack Americans and America. They're trying to distract people from the real issues that matter.

You mean like your 19 years of accomplishing nothing? You mean like how you have never authored a bill that actually passed? You mean like how you walk around with a rifle in your hand for the sole purpose of getting NRA votes thinking they are stupid enough to forget you yourself authored the bill that would've outlawed its possession? Fine start arguing the issues and stop telling everyone how you were a vietnam vet. Guess what, I doubt anyone in the world doesn't know that now.


America is not as safe as we ought to be after 9/11.

Thats like saying America is not as safe as we ought to be after WWII. Want do you want us to do become a military camp like Israel has? Then the terrorist really will have won.


I can fight a more effective war on terror.

uhuh. You can spout off the mouth and pretend like all them other countries will suddenly change their strips if you win, ignoring the fact they say "uhuh".


They're taking money from Social Security and transferring it to the wealthiest people in America to drive us into debt.

liar. Show me this box that its kept in I want to see it.


John Edwards and I have better choices. We have a health-care plan for all Americans.

yeah tax everyone into bankruptcy. Gooood plan.


We're going to stop subsidizing jobs that go overseas and create jobs here in America.

Really it is your tax structure that drove them there. It was your double taxation of companies that have HQ's in the US that drove their HQ's overseas. And you already stated you are going to repell Bush's tax cuts which in turn would actually raise taxes on the business owners of these very same businesses, so why would they ever come back under your leadership.


TIME
Speaking of clarity, a number of your allies have said that you haven't drawn a clear contrast between yourself and President Bush on Iraq.

KERRY
The contrast could not be clearer. They spent a lot of money trying to confuse people, but I have been consistent.

This is getting booooring. http://www.flipflopper.com/ talk about being clear :rolleyes:


I would not have interrupted as abruptly the effort to build alliances with other countries. I would not have turned my back on the international community. And Americans are paying a $200 billion cost today because this President rushed to war.

Yeah dealing with Saddam for 12 years and then taking an additional 13 months dealing with the UN is rushing to war. Get real.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040920-695825,00.html

[Leo Hubbard]

I didn't know Boortz wrote on the same Times article until after I did.

DOES KERRY REALLY THINK YOU'RE THIS STUPID?

Well ... of course the answer is "yes." He does think most of the voters are stupid. He's putting quite a bit of reliance on that stupidity in his quest for the presidency --- that plus obsessive-compulsive Bush hatred and the tendency of all-too-many Americans to rely on government for the things that they should be providing for themselves.

OK ... back to the "does he really think we're this stupid" thing:

Reading a recent Time magazine interview of Kerry and you'll find this amazing statement:

"They're taking money from Social Security and transferring it to the wealthiest people in America to drive us into debt."

A few things:

First, during a good part of the past forty years the Democrats were in charge of the Social Security purse strings, and every single year that they had control they took the all of the Social Security taxes that weren't needed to pay current benefits and spent that money on their pet spending programs.

Second -- and this is where Kerry really depends on the economic stupidity of Americans -- no money is being "[transferred] to the wealthiest people in America." Kerry is talking about tax cuts, of course, and tax cuts do not transfer any money. Tax cuts allow people to keep more of the money they earn ... nothing more. No money is taken away from any one person to give to any other person. You earn the money through hard work ... and you get to keep it. How can it be that Americans don't understand this? Two words: Government education.

Finally, remember that a huge number of the "wealthiest people" that Kerry was talking about are actually small business owners ... the very small business owners who provide nearly 80% of the jobs in our economy. Who do you want to have that money? The government, or the people who will use it to create private sector jobs?

http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

[uvex]

I agree.

[toontra]

I agree.

Another meaningful contribution from the member famous for the comment in another thread here, "Democrats make me want to vomit".

[Taft]

You mean like your 19 years of accomplishing nothing? You mean like how you have never authored a bill that actually passed? You mean like how you walk around with a rifle in your hand for the sole purpose of getting NRA votes thinking they are stupid enough to forget you yourself authored the bill that would've outlawed its possession?

Fine, lets talk about that. And Bush's record in the Whitehouse. And Bush's record as Texas governer. And Bush's record as a business leader.

Face it, neither party or candidate wants us talking about the real issues.

Fine start arguing the issues and stop telling everyone how you were a vietnam vet. Guess what, I doubt anyone in the world doesn't know that now.

Kerry will do that just as soon as Bush and company stop using 9/11 and the threat of terror attacks to scare Americans and try to get them to vote Republican. To quote Cheney, "If we make the wrong choice [in the November 2004 elections], then the danger is that we'll get hit again -- that we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States."

Gee, I wonder why Kerry feels the need to appear "tough" to the public. Could it be because GW and Cheney have America--even rural America!--scared of another terror attack?

Thats like saying America is not as safe as we ought to be after WWII. Want do you want us to do become a military camp like Israel has? Then the terrorist really will have won.

Good point. Especially since Bush and co. have given America the feeling that we ARE safe, right? Or wait, I think we are still on CODE RED ALERT from last February.

liar. Show me this box that its kept in I want to see it.

Are you ******* kidding me? A box? That the money is kept in?

Excuse me for seeming patronizing, but have you heard of a bank? Investments? Taxes? Federal funding?

There are about a million ways for money to come from the hands of one party and end up in the hands of another. Very few of those methods actually result in the exchange of hard cash. My guess is that there isn't a single "box" or account that this money resides in.

You may disagree with this statement, but your retort is just crazy.

yeah tax everyone into bankruptcy. Gooood plan.

That's EXACTLY what he is saying. You and freakin' Boortz are quite the pair. He says it, you burp it back up. In either case, it ends up smelling like last night's seefood sampler.

This, my tricky little friend, is what's known as a straw man argument. Here's how it works: one person says something. Another person comes along and rewords that statement into another statement which is related to the original, but has a different meaning. The second person represents this bastardized statement as the first person's position.

Kerry isn't proposing taxing "everyone into bankruptcy." That is a lie. A misrepresentation. In fact, Kerry only wants to rollback the tax cuts on the rich. In fact, Kerry has proposed aide to small business owners.

Please be less deceitful with your arguments.

Really it is your tax structure that drove them there. It was your double taxation of companies that have HQ's in the US that drove their HQ's overseas. And you already stated you are going to repell Bush's tax cuts which in turn would actually raise taxes on the business owners of these very same businesses, so why would they ever come back under your leadership.

Kerry's "double taxation"? Ha! First, as mcrain would tell you, there is no such thing as double taxation. Second, why was this Kerry's idea, plan or implementation? Who proposed the bill? Who voted 'yes' to the bill?

Lies, lies, lies...

If this is going to be your method of argument, why should any of us engage you? You prefer a podium for your rants rather than a venue to debate and openly discuss ideas. If you want to dissect Kerry's ideas, give them fair treatment, understand them, then give us factual information about why they are wrong or bad.

Taft

[Leo Hubbard]

Really it is your tax structure that drove them there. It was your double taxation of companies that have HQ's in the US that drove their HQ's overseas. And you already stated you are going to repell Bush's tax cuts which in turn would actually raise taxes on the business owners of these very same businesses, so why would they ever come back under your leadership.

Kerry's "double taxation"? Ha! First, as mcrain would tell you, there is no such thing as double taxation. Second, why was this Kerry's idea, plan or implementation? Who proposed the bill? Who voted 'yes' to the bill?

Taft
It is the democrats who set up the tax laws so that companies with hq's in the US are taxed not only on the goods sold in the US but also on the goods sold in other countries. Where the double taxation exists is that the US as well as other countries also taxes those good sold in their own countries regardless to where the hq is situated. So when a company in another country sells goods in the US, we tax them, but their own countries doesn't. When a company in the us sells stuff in another country they get double taxed, once by their own government the US, and once by the country in which they sell their goods in. That is double taxation.

These companies had no choice but move their hq's into another country so as to cut their tax debt and be more able to compete with those other companies that don't have the tax structures that those who reside in the US have.

Another point. Kerry intends to raise taxes on the rich. Guess who owns those companies? So Kerry changes the tax structure to get these companies back, but then taxes the crap out of their owners. Result -- they don't come back they stay overseas. If necessary they also stop doing any business in the US.

Another point. Some companies, like Heinz, goes overseas to gain the benefits of lower labor costs, in addition to lower tax cost, and other factors. Raising taxes on the owners will not convince these people to bring their companies back.

Additionally, add up everything Kerry says he's going to do and throw it in the trash can. We can't pay for it. I guess he plans on bringing his magic wand with him to office. Too many people want to raise the price we pay teachers, free medical care to everyone, a chicken in every pot, etc. while simultanously decreases taxes so nobody has to pay for it. Get real.

[Leo Hubbard]

A commercial keeps popping up on tv and a statement of Kerry's keeps rubbing me, its really iritating. "I threw away 6,7,8 9 medals." OH common surely you know how many medals you had. Surely you know how many you threw away. Someone fresh out of the military knows the exact number of medals they have. Just doesn't make sense to me.

[wordmunger]

It is the democrats who set up the tax laws so that companies with hq's in the US are taxed not only on the goods sold in the US but also on the goods sold in other countries.

If this is a democratic problem, then why haven't the republicans, who've been in control of both the house and senate as well as the presidency, fixed it?

[Leo Hubbard]

If this is a democratic problem, then why haven't the republicans, who've been in control of both the house and senate as well as the presidency, fixed it?
Things don't happen overnight.

[Taft]

Things don't happen overnight.

I'm impressed you didn't blame the Democrats. :rolleyes:

Taft

[IJ Reilly]

Please be less deceitful with your arguments.

Based on what I've seen quoted back lately, without deceit, he'd have no argument whatsoever. This person is little more than a right wing spambot lacking any original thoughts of his own or even a nodding acquaintance with honor, decency or intelligence. IMO, he should have been booted long ago for contributing nothing to these boards but an endless supply of mindless, fetid crap -- of which this thread is just another example. If the mods choose to chastise me for this remark, so be it. It's true, and it needs to be said.

[wordmunger]

Things don't happen overnight.

That tax cut for the rich passed pretty quick.

[mactastic]

How about 19 years of accomplishing nothing while wandering around in a drunken and coked up haze? Does that count for anything?

I suppose to some, that's patriotism at it's finest. :p

[toontra]

Based on what I've seen quoted back lately, without deceit, he'd have no argument whatsoever. This person is little more than a right wing spambot lacking any original thoughts of his own or even a nodding acquaintance with honor, decency or intelligence. IMO, he should have been booted long ago for contributing nothing to these boards but an endless supply of mindless, fetid crap -- of which this thread is just another example. If the mods choose to chastise me for this remark, so be it. It's true, and it needs to be said.

IMO you are right.

I have suggested several times in the past that Leo remove himself from this forum. Maybe the mods find it difficult to ban him as (in this recent guise anyway) he somehow manages to steer just within the forum rules.

The bigger picture, however, is he is a troll, and his posts are designed to stir up hatred, and not to stimulate meaningful dialog.

I have him on by "ignore" list (only the second person ever), but I am still forced to read his garbage second-hand in quote form in other members responses to his nonsense

[IJ Reilly]

Trolling is a violation of the forum rules, and IMO no matter how you define it, starting three garbage threads in one morning qualifies as trolling.

[Taft]

Based on what I've seen quoted back lately, without deceit, he'd have no argument whatsoever. This person is little more than a right wing spambot lacking any original thoughts of his own or even a nodding acquaintance with honor, decency or intelligence. IMO, he should have been booted long ago for contributing nothing to these boards but an endless supply of mindless, fetid crap -- of which this thread is just another example. If the mods choose to chastise me for this remark, so be it. It's true, and it needs to be said.

It is true.

What gets me the most is Leo's unwillingness to debate on a level playing field. He does not engage in conversation or debate. Rather, he posts bits of news (mostly opinion) that re-enforce his beliefs, then, when someone questions those bits, he only responds to the pieces which suit him.

What you don't realize, Leo, is that no-one here appreciates the way you behave on these forums. The only possible reason to engage in tactics such as yours is to propagandize. You don't shout opinions at people then run away from conversation if you are truly trying to learn, educate, discuss and grow. The only point to that type of tactic is to try to convert people to your way of thinking.

That sucks. I don't want to be converted. Neither does anyone else on these boards. We came here to be engaged in conversation and hear and discuss new ideas.

That is why most here don't appreciate Boortz, either. We don't want someone "telling us the way it is." Quite frankly, I don't think Boortz has a clue about the world, but that isn't why I dislike him so much. Rather, it is because he avoids fair debate and crams his opinions down the throats of his callers and anyone listening.

I can handle people who disagree with me, but I cannot handle people who are so insular and set in their beliefs that every conversation is a foregone conclusion, every piece of dissent is shouted down, and their idea of debate is copy-pasting bits of news that agree with their opinion.

Taft