Kerry vs. Bush: On the issues

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Here Ronnie, I'll get things started:

TOPIC #1-- IRAQ

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/iraq/index.html

A Strategy for Success in Iraq

To establish security and move forward with the transition to Iraqi sovereignty, the President must show true leadership in going to the major powers to secure their support of Lakhdar Brahimi’s mission, the establishment of a high commissioner for governance and reconstruction, and the creation of a NATO mission for Iraq. These steps are critical to creating a stable Iraq with a representative government and secure in its borders. Meeting this objective is in the interests of NATO member states, Iraq’s neighbors and all members of the international community. True leadership means sharing authority and responsibility for Iraq with others who have an interest in Iraq’s success. Sharing responsibility is the only way to gain new military and financial commitments, allowing America to truly share the burden and the risk.

I. Make Iraq a Part of NATO’s Global Mission

NATO is now a global security organization and creating a stable and secure environment in Iraq must be one of its global missions. Every member of NATO has a huge stake in Iraq’s future. NATO agreement to take on this mission should be reached no later than the NATO summit in late June. NATO can take on this mission in phases, beginning with taking control of Iraq’s border security, and taking over responsibility for northern Iraq and/or the Polish sector, and the training of Iraqi security forces. This would free up as many as 20,000 American troops, open the door to participation by non-NATO countries like India and Pakistan, and send an important message to the American people that we are not bearing the security burden in Iraq virtually alone.

II. Authorize a High Commissioner for Governance and Reconstruction

An international High Commissioner should be authorized by the UN Security Council to organize the political transition to Iraqi sovereignty and the reconstruction of Iraq in conjunction with the new Iraqi government. Backed by a newly broadened security coalition, the High Commissioner will organize elections and the drafting of a constitution, and coordinate reconstruction. The High Commissioner should be an individual who is highly regarded by the international community and who has the credibility and capacity to talk to all the Iraqi people. The High Commissioner should be directed to work with Iraq’s interim government, the new US Ambassador, and the international community after June 30 to ensure a process that continues to move forward on the path toward sovereignty, while focusing on the immediate needs of the Iraqi people. While the process of establishing the High Commissioner is underway, we must fully support the efforts of Lakhdar Brahimi to set-up an Iraqi interim entity.

III. Launch a Massive Effort to Build an Iraqi Security Force

We need a massive training effort to build an Iraqi security force that can actually provide security for the Iraqi people. We must accept that the effort to date has failed and must be rethought and reformed. Training must be done in the field, on the job as well as in the classroom. This key task should be part of the NATO mission, and units should be put on the street with backup from international security forces. The creation of viable Iraqi security forces – military and police – is crucial to a successful exit for us and other international forces.
---

Ron, you'll have to handle Bush's Iraq policy statement. I searched around www.georgewbush.com, and I couldn't even find the word "Iraq" in a policy search under "Homeland Security" and "National Defense." It must be in there somewhere, right? This is his re-election website, and we're talking about a major election item here, so please help us out, ok???

[mburbank]

Wait a minute, wait a minute, there are issues?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Yup, and as soon as Ronnie pastes the Bush mission for Iraq, in clear terms, we can begin a comparative analysis. I'm really happy about all of this, because we are now finally going to be done with "politics as usual," and get into real substantive matters. Right, Ronnie?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

....?

[Stabby]

Aww, I was hoping on learning something in this thread. :(

[Ronnie Raygun]

Kevin, stop being so lazy and find them for yourself. Why do I have to do it for you, it's your thread.

Kerry was waffled on everything he's ever said thus having no credibility. You can't believe anything he says.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/

Go here, find out what you want to know and get back to me.

[ziggytrix]

You couldn't find anything relevant at the whitehouse site either, huh Ron?

[Ronnie Raygun]

I didn't look.

I think this whole thread is stupid....just for the record.

What does it matter what Kerry has to say?

[ziggytrix]

Because he's the guy trying to take Bush's job away in November.

[Ronnie Raygun]

What does that have to do with what he's saying?

He's been on both sides of almost every issue.

His words have no meaning.

That's why this thread is stupid.

[ziggytrix]

Because he doesn't polarize every issue into blanket categories of right and wrong, you paint him as being on both sides of every issue.

You are aware that Congressional Bills read much longer than "Are you For or Against soldiers getting more armor?" right?

[Ronnie Raygun]

I'm talking about not only votes but personal statements.

Does John Kerry support the war in Iraq?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support Gay Marriage?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support NAFTA?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support Gun Rights?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support abortion?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support tax cuts?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support affirmative action?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support the death penalty?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support the legalization of Marijuana?

Yes and No.

Does John Kerry support Israel security?

Yes and No.

What does it matter what he has to say. He's just the Anti-Bush and that's his only role.....a puppett.

[ziggytrix]

Which part of "he doesn't polarize every issue into blanket categories of right and wrong" is addressed by your post?

His SOUND BITES are meaningless, but if you actually read anything he's had to say, you would know better.

http://issues2000.org

Why don't you do a little homework and actually see what his stance on the issues is? Or are you more comfortable repeating FOX News headlines like a mantra?

[AChimp]

Kerry is nice and central. Middle of the road is the only way to go. :)

[Ronnie Raygun]

In other words, he doesn't stand for anything.

[ziggytrix]

That makes a good slogan Ronnie. I bet you just looooooooooove slogans!

[Ronnie Raygun]

It is a slogan.

Slogans are for protesters.

www.protestwarrior.com

[glowbelly]

i answered yes and no to almost all of those statements up there, too.

yup. i mean nope. i mean yup nope.

[Dole]

Ronnie, you are really starting to lose it big time. Whats going on??

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I didn't look.

I think this whole thread is stupid....just for the record.

What does it matter what Kerry has to say?

I think this says a lot about you, Ronnie. I'm certainly not being "lazy," because unlike you, I actually took the time to look through Kerry's website and see his stance on the issues. I'd love to see the same from Dubya, but in reference to Iraq, they simply didn't exist on his campaign site (but hey, thanks for the White House link, maybe that'll give us something).

You spend a lot of time cutting and pasting partisan opinion columns, which have an incredibly slanted take on things. I'm sure Max and I do the same thing. The one difference however is that you have shut your mind off to any kind of debate on, well, anything. You let Newsmax.com, front page mag, the Weekly Standard, and Rush Limbaugh decide what you think for you. That's fine for people like you and me, who are essentially decided voters. But I feel it's a dis-service to those on this board who may be undecided about the November election. I thought what we were doing might be educational, ya know, presenting both sides from the proverbial horse's mouth? But you'd rather post all-capped rants with misleading, partisan rhetoric. It makes Kevin sad. :(

Here's what I'll do: I'll look at the White House website, and do your job, ok? And maybe you'll jump in on the next topic....?

And for the record, this is our thread, bud. :)

[Ronnie Raygun]

"I think this says a lot about you, Ronnie. I'm certainly not being "lazy," because unlike you, I actually took the time to look through Kerry's website and see his stance on the issues." - Kevin

We already know what Bush's stance is! He 's acting it out. He doesn't have to put it on paper....he's made it perfectly clear what is objectives are......

...and as I've said before, Kerry's words are meaningless so all you've done is wasted more time in an attempt to prove some stupid point.

Kevin, you really used to be better than this. Honestly, ....you used to be able to prove some valid points but this is just ridiculous.

[mburbank]

W's been on a lot of sides of a lot of issues too aand he's the one who says you can believe what he says.

Is he for capping CO2 emission or against it?
Both

Is he in favor of fully funding his own AIDS initiative or against it?
Both

Does he want a department of Homeland security or not?
Both

Does he want an investigation of 9/11 failures or not?
Both

Is there a connection between Al quaida and Saddam or not?
Both

Will Condi testify under oath or not?
Both

Will he testify alone or not?
Both

Will he testify for more than an hour or not?
Both

Is he in favor of fully funding no Child Left Behind or not?
Both

He's against stem cell research because it destroys embryos, but in favor of in vitro which destroys embryos.

Is the price of medicare reform $400 billion or $500 billion?
Both

Are the troops absolutely staying in Iraq only one year or not?
Both

Are we done asking for extra funfding of Iraq until after the election or not?
Both

Did we ever show up for Alabama guard duty or not?
Oooh, tough one.

And then there are all the issues he's dead solid on even though they are utterly contrary to reality!

Donald Rumsfeld is doing a greatjob, there are weapons of Mass Destruction, There's no scientiffic evidence of global warming, mission accomplished.

Presidential elections are almost always the lesser of two evils. Our electoral system doesn't allow for seriously good men to get anywhere near the whitehouse. Anyone who thinks anything else is begging to be taken advantage of.

[ziggytrix]

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

[KevinTheOmnivore]

We already know what Bush's stance is! He 's acting it out. He doesn't have to put it on paper....he's made it perfectly clear what is objectives are......

Fair enough. However, I think it would be good to see a policy-versus-policy comparison. I mean, if we didn't hold Bush to his words, then he could do just about anything in Iraq and claim success, right? And that'd be cRaZy!

...and as I've said before, Kerry's words are meaningless so all you've done is wasted more time in an attempt to prove some stupid point.

You paste threads about two leftists in Portland who hate football players. You waste a LOT of time here for far lesser causes than this one. Let's use our powers for good now, ok? Copy and paste some substance, rather than partisan attacks, ok?

As for Kerry's record: In a way, you're right. A guy spends a few decades in Congress, and yeah, you'll have a whole record of compromising and political leverage moves to exploit (a 1.5 term governor from a state that invests more power actually in the Lt. Governor doesn't have such a problem).


Kevin, you really used to be better than this. Honestly, ....you used to be able to prove some valid points but this is just ridiculous.

This doesn't even make sense. What "points"did I raise, let alone need to defend? Are you in the right thread? Is everything ok, Ronnie? Is thisDelta labor issue putting morestress on you?

[Ronnie Raygun]

The fact you keep talking about my jobs situation in such a negative light only shows that you are a despicable person....which proves the point I made earlier.

All I'm saying is that you used to be better at proving your side of the issues.

[mburbank]

You know, you can say lot of things about Kevin, but when you call him a despicable person (and he's always been way more polite to you, than, say, I have) it just shows you're off the deep end. I mean, if Kev is your idea of despicable how the hell do you even measure most people?

Tell me your just messing around and I'll know he isn't right that you're in some sort of emotional, paranoiac distress.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Ronnie, YOU came hereand essentially politicized your job situation. You starteda thread blaming liberals and labor unions for jeopardizing your career. You are such a Republican, ideological hack, that you turned your own job insecurity into a plug for George W. Bush. After that, all jabs are fair game (it should also be noted that I've had meat heads like Vince take attacks at my job and my work ethic repeatedly, and I've taken it with a grain of salt and played along. I didn't think any less of Vince for it, at least not any less than I already had).

Back to the topic: You're whining that I don't make points with clarity, but then can't restate the point. ....?

Here's the point. I started a thread pertaining to real issues and policy. You don't like Iraq? We'll move on then. But you won't, because you'd rather post bullshit polls, bullshit proof of WMD, and other partisan shit from biased conservative mags, rather than have a real discussion about this stuff. Your arguments are juvenile, you don't care about the issues, all you care about is cheering for your favorite team-- the Republicans.

[Ronnie Raygun]

Yes. Yes.

It's all bullshit if it conflicts with your agenda.

And I posted that thread about my job situation for two reasons.

#1. Because I know it to be true.

#2. I wanted to see how many of you would use it as leverage against me.

And, everyone who has commented in fact has.

It reaffirms what I alreday know to be true about most of you.....and that's o.k. You are who you are.

[sspadowsky]

You're a coward, Ronnie.

[Dole]

Not too much mention really fucking weird, paranoid and desperate lately.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I think "coward" is appropriate. But let's not leave out "opportunist," "nitwit," "apparatchik," and "whiner." Those work as well.

It's all bullshit if it conflicts with your agenda.

What the hell is "my agenda," you dolt? If you mean my point, I've already stated it. If you "conflict" with my point, then show me. Prove it.

Once again, my point is that you aren't truly interested in issues, nor do you really care about the well being of Americans. You aren't actually a conservative, you're a Republican. You support a party and its ambitions, not its ideas. I tried to start a thread dedicated to policy comparison, and yoú called it stupid. Your brain can't handle it. The only thing you can handle is what the Right-Wing tells you to handle.

And I'm fairly certain, that rather than responding to this with a viable argument, you will most certainly reply with "You know what you are Kevin, I ams what I ams, and nobody will need to know what nothing is never anyway," or some other semi-cryptic bull crap that allows you to avoid defending your positions. You say I'm worse now at expressing my opinions, well what the hell are you? Your opinion is what Newsmax wants it to be, and that's sad.

To quote a poet and a scholar: "The problem is, Conservatives put the guy in office and he's not promoting Conservative policies."

With that said, these things don't seem to bother you, Ronnie.

[mburbank]

Us liberal lefties is like communis' an ant colonies. We just a homogenous lump wif ony the just one viewpoint amongst us, like a nes' a cockroaches or somesuch.

[Ronnie Raygun]

That's o.k. Max.....you are a dying breed.

[sspadowsky]

There's a long way to go until November, Ronnie. Don't start polishing your jackboots just yet.

[Ronnie Raygun]

"There's a long way to go until November"

I've said that more than anybody here.....

[sspadowsky]

You should be paying more attention to the second half of my statement.

[Ronnie Raygun]

You should be paying attention to my entire statement.

[sspadowsky]

You mean Rush's statements? Your statements are not your own, dear boy. You are an automaton.

[Ronnie Raygun]

That's silly.

I don't really get to listen to Rush as often as I would like.....

I was Conservative before I even heard of Rush Limbaugh, and I'll be Conservative long after he's dead and gone.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I was Conservative before I even heard of Rush Limbaugh, and I'll be Conservative long after he's dead and gone.

You're not a conservative.