Third Debate: Your Comments

Bush explained that he wanted the amendment to restrain judges from further action creating "rights" that are not found in the constitution, for protected classes of people -- and doing so in defiance of the wishes of the people as democratically expressed through their legislatures. No hypocrisy there.

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Lash wrote:

Mary Beth Cahill (Kerry's chief strategist)characterized it as an attack. She said Mary Cheney is a public figure and, as such, is fair game.

The benficiary of a compliment is not described as "fair game".

Children of politicians shouldn't be used against their parents, no matter what the issue.

your party has smear attacks down to a science....so they need to quit whining if they think they've been on the receiving end of one.....no one likes a whiner....live by the sword.......

The RNC nor Bushco has attacked Algore's alkie son, Dean's theft by taking son, or anyone else's children. There is a difference in whining and calling someone out for a low attack against a candidate's child.

and I recall many petty remarks about Amy Carter and Chelsea Clinton not being attractive...
Not by the RNC or a candidate. If you want to blame Bush for everything said in the public forum, I guess the DNC will be brought up on charges for the Unions attacking Republican campaign HQ..

the smear on McCain in 2000
Forget exactly what was said. You may get this one.

....the unwarranted smear of Max Cleland
His record was examined. He was only smeared by Coulter, that I know of. Not the RNC or Bush. Bush commended Cleland's service.
...the thinly veiled innuendo about Kerry and Edwards being "queer" for each other after Edwards was announced as VP candidate?
Hell, they always looked like they were about to tongue each other. Go after Leno and Conan on this one. And the JibJob brothers, who put them in bed together in their cartoon!!

The further slurs on their manhood over the "sensitive war" remark? That was done by Cheney himself. Cut the pissing and moaning folks and don't dish it out if you can't take it.

That was directed at Kerry--in response to his own statement. Not one of his kids. Gutter politics.

But Kerry is clearly benefiting as well from, of all things, the very attacks that had battered him in the first place. For months Kerry has been caricatured as a weak lefty waffler, most recently in an ad sponsored by the National Rifle Association's political arm showing the Senator as a poodle with pink bows over the line that dog don't hunt. So uncommitted debate viewers were probably surprised by what they saw for themselves: a Time poll found that after the first debate, Kerry's favorability ratings actually surpassed the President's. By 5 points, voters found Kerry more likable than Bush, even as they viewed Bush as more steadfast. If, when voters get to watch Kerry up close for 90 minutes, they see someone even minimally plausible, it not only helps Kerry, it may also hurt Bush's own credibility, since he has made it so clear that he thinks Kerry is not suited to be President.

Dookiestix wrote:

These boneheads in the White House wanted to make a constitutional amendment banning homosexual marriage, and all the benefits it provides. So why NOT throw it back in their face and test their hypocrisy on the subject matter?

What "benefits"? To whom? At what cost?

Bush explained that he wanted the amendment to restrain judges from further action creating "rights" that are not found in the constitution, for protected classes of people -- and doing so in defiance of the wishes of the people as democratically expressed through their legislatures. No hypocrisy there.

Well, I guess the Dems are compassionate to gays when it suits them--and guts them in public for their own expediency.

Fair weather and conditional tolerance. The Hallmark of the Democrat Party.

oh and I did think Kerry won all three debates, as a large majority of voters seem to think as well. He was consistently himself, presidential. With his opponent, we had the Three Faces of Bush.

They were a rough passage for Mr. Bush, who saw his September lead over Mr. Kerry slip away as the Democratic nominee established himself as a plausible presidential alternative. In a crucible where voters measure the self-confidence, authority and steadiness of the candidates, Mr. Kerry delivered a consistent set of assertive, collected performances. Mr. Bush appeared in three guises: impatient, even rattled at times during the first debate, angry and aggressive in the second, sunny and optimistic last night.

George Bush says, "Don't get a flu shot". What next? Set your own broken bones? Self sutures?

Not necessarily a reliable indicator, but Yahoo News poll "Who Won the Oct. 13 Presidential Debate?" currently shows 447651 votes:
Bush 35% 153308 votes
Kerry 63% 278776 votes
tie 4% 15567 votes

I haven't seen a thread about this yet so here it is.

I have absolutely no doubt that should Bush get reelected and appoint judges to the supreme court, which no doubt the next president will. Roe v Wade will become a memory.