Kos Rapid Response - Concluding Remarks

Questions: 1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12|13|14|15|16|17|18|Conclusion|Chat

Kerry Conclusion:

Obviously the president and I both have very strong convictions. I respect him for that, but we have a very different view about how we make America stronger and safer. I will never cede the authority of our country or our security to any other nation. I'll never give a veto of our security to any other entity, not a nation, not a country, not an institution, but I know, as I think you do, that our country is strongest when we lead the world, when we lead strong alliances. That's the way Eisenhower and Reagan and Kennedy and others did it. We are not doing that today… we need to. I have a plan that help us go out and kill and find the terrorists and I will not stop in our effort to hunt down and kill the terrorists, but I also have a better plan on how we are going to deal with Iraq, training the Iraqi forces more rapidly, getting our allies back to the table with a fresh start, with new credibility, with a president whose judgment the rest of the world trusts. In addition to that I believe we have a crisis here at home, a crisis of the middle class that is increasingly squeezed, health care costs going up. I have a plan to provide health care to all Americans. I have a plan to provide for our schools so we keep the standards, but we help our teachers teach and elevate our schools by funding "no child left behind". I have a plan to protect the environment so that we leave this place in better shape to our children than we were handed by our parents… that's the test. I believe America’s best days are ahead of us, I'm an optimist, but we have to make the right the right choices to be fiscally responsible and to create the new jobs of the future. We can do this and I ask you for the privilege of leading our nation to be stronger at home and respected again in the world. Thank you.

Bush Conclusion

The contest for the presidency is about the future. Who can lead? Who can get things done? We’ve been through a lot together as a country, been through a recession, corporate scandals, war. And yet think about where we are added 1.9 million jobs over the past 13 months, the farm income in America is high, small businesses are flourishing, home ownership rate is at an all-time high in America, we’re on the move. Tonight I had a chance to discuss with you what to do to keep this economy going: keep the taxes low, don’t increase the scope of the federal government, keep regulations down, legal reform. A health care policy that does not empower the federal government, but empowers individuals and an energy plan that will help us become less dependent on foreign sources of energy. And abroad we are at war and it requires a president who is steadfast and strong and determined. I vowed to the American people after that fateful day of September 11th that we would not rest nor tire until we’re safe. The 9/11 commission put out a report that said America is safer, but not yet safe. There’s more work to be done. We’ll stay on the hunt of Al Queda, we’ll deny sanctuary to these terrorists. We’ll make sure they do not end up with weapons of mass destruction. It’s the great nexus, the great threat to our country, is that these haters will end up with weapons of mass destruction, but our long term security depends on our deep faith in liberty and we’ll continue to promote freedom around the world. Freedom is on the march. Tomorrow Afghanistan will be voting for a president and Iraq will have free elections and a free society will make this world more peaceful. God bless.

"Facts" from Bush's concluding remarks to fact check

• Fact 1: 1.9 million jobs over the past 13 months.
• Fact 2: The farm income in America is "high".
• Fact 3: Small businesses are "flourishing".
• Fact 4: Home ownership rate is at an all time high
• Fact 5: The 9/11 commission put out a report that said America is safer, but not yet safe.
• Fact 6: Tomorrow Afghanistan will be voting for a president
• Fact 7: Iraq will have "free elections"

That's all the assertions I could find (even with being generous). Please post a comment if you find any rebuttals to anything Kerry said in his conclusion is posted on the wingnut sites.

TEMPLATE: COPY AND PASTE FROM BELOW THIS LINE VERBATIM FOR EACH QUESTION (use HTML formatting)

<hr> Question ##: <ul>
<li>Questioner: First Last</li>
<li>Occupation: Fooo</li>
<li>Other Info: Foobar</li>
<li>Question: <b>Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat?</b></li>
</ul>

[Bush/Kerry] 2 minute Response
<div class="blockquote">Praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.</div>

[Kerry/Bush] 1 1/2 minute Rebuttal
<div class="blockquote">Praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.</div>

[Bush/Kerry] 30 second extended discussion
<div class="blockquote">Praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.</div>

[Kerry/Bush] 30 second extended discussion
<div class="blockquote">Praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.</div>

---

---

DIARY Q SHORTCUTS (THANKS JUMBO!)

<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/152658/148">1</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/152658/148">2</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/171322/137">3</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/171322/137">4</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/14317/7279">5</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/14317/7279">6</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/1506/47944">7</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/1506/47944">8</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/181256/720">9</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/181256/720">10</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/161539/941">11</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/161539/941">12</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/153629/239">13</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/153629/239">14</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/143524/183">15</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/143524/183">16</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/171927/079">17</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/171927/079">18</a>
|<a href="http://gryn.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/172445/763">Conclusion</a>
|<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/8/18266/3070">Chat</a>

•  Bush Can't Admit a Mistake

  I posted this at Kos and thought you might like it:

  For the second time now, President Bush has failed to come up with any mistakes that he made during his presidency.   The first time he was asked about this was during a press conference earlier this year.

  Tonight, he brushed aside the question with something about how he had appointed some people who turned out to be a mistake.

  So, what we have here is it's ALWAYS SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT.  George W. Bush does not make mistakes.  Other people do.

  by chillinois on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 12:12:01 AM PDT

  •  Appointment Mistakes

    Yeah, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Rice...

    by mndemguy on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 09:14:46 AM PDT

•  energy plan hypocrisy

  Bush stated in his conclusion that he proposed "an energy plan that will help us become less dependent on foreign sources of energy."

  Oops.  Here's the scoop on his energy plan:

      "In public statements, President Bush has
      repeatedly emphasized the need to reduce U.S.
      dependence on foreign oil. The policies
      pursued by the Administration have had the
      opposite effect, however. Estimates from the
      Department of Energy show that U.S.
      dependence on foreign oil is projected to
      increase by nearly 85% under the policies
      proposed by President Bush."

  http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20041001181836-74536.pdf

  For those of you who want the dry numbers, here's the link: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/pceb/pdf/sroiaf(2004)02.pdf  (Table B11, page 42)

  This is an important issue and Bush is not being straight.
  

  by trusty on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 12:52:11 AM PDT

•  Thanks, Gryn.

  for posting the conclusions even though you got robbed of your two questions.  And thanks for the great job keeping track of questions in the chat room (not to mention your cool template and the nice pics of presidents with quotes that used to be on your page. <g>).

  by katerina on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 02:05:00 AM PDT

  •  I stole all those from here

    http://youforgotpoland.com
    

    by Gryn on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 02:23:46 AM PDT

•  Regarding elections in Afghanistan

  From prospect.org

  A WORD ON THE AFGHAN ELECTIONS. I can only assume that tomorrow's presidential elections in Afghanistan will come up in the debate, in the context of the president bragging about his humanitarian splendor. The most obvious response is to simply point to Human Rights Watch's report about the extensive fraud, violence, and intimidation that will mar the vote.
  I spoke earlier this week to a recently-returned administrator for a USAID subcontractor in Afghanistan and he emphasized to me that, these problems notwithstanding, the vote is likely to be a success. The reason, in brief, is that Hamid Karzai enjoys such overwhelming support in the country (in part because of his genuine popularity and in part because, thanks to the dire security situation, none of his opponents have been able to campaign nationwide and gain name recognition) that fraud notwithstanding, the people's choice will win, and his administration will be seen as legitimate. The real question is whether these problems can be significantly ameliorated before the parliamentary elections, where fraud and intimidation really could queer the result and produce a government that lacks the confidence of the people.

  And then there's the question of credit. U.S. military action against the Taliban, clearly, was the necessary precursor for this weekend's events. But the action in question was utterly uncontroversial in American politics. The main line of Democratic criticism of the Bush Afghan policy has been that he hasn't done enough to commit to the security and economic development of Afghanistan. The president's defenders can point out that, as I said above, things aren't so bad in Afghanistan as to derail the elections. Nevertheless, the realistic alternative to the Bush Afghan policy was a situation in which tomorrows vote would be easier, not harder, to secure. The ultimate success of Bush's half-hearted approach to Afghanistan won't really be known until some years after the parliamentary elections are held. It might work Bush's way, but why take the risk when the alternative would almost certainly have worked better?

  --Matthew Yglesias

  by Gryn on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 02:22:16 AM PDT

•  Hey Bush, can you say "pWn3d"

  

  by Gryn on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 02:28:43 AM PDT

•  Fact 1: 1.9 million jobs over the past 13 months

  In the VP debate, Cheney said it was 1.7 million in the last year.  According to factcheck.org, Cheney was correct.  But they also note that this nonetheless makes for a net loss of 913,000 or so jobs over Bush's tenure.  Here's a quote:

  Cheney correctly noted that 1.7 million jobs have been added in the past year, since payroll employment bottomed out in August of last year. New employment figures are due on Friday from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the last report before election day. It now appears certain that Bush and Cheney will end their term with payroll employment still below where it was when they took office, the first time that's happened since the Hoover administration.

  by snorfbat on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 03:15:27 AM PDT

•  Fact 2: The farm income in America is high

  That's true for the massive corporate farm.  But family farms are getting killed.

  60 percent of farms in the U.S. report gross annual sales of less than $20,000. (http://www.agofthemiddle.org/)

  Consider this information from the Food Security Learning Center:

  What is happening to family farms?
  Family farms in the U.S. are in serious decline. Between 1961 and 2001 the number of U.S. farms dropped from 3.82 million to 2.17 million, a loss on average of 41,333 farms per year. The average age of farmers is more than 55 years. Squeezed between expensive inputs and decreasing prices for their products, small-scale and mid-sized family farms cannot cover the costs of production. Debt, bankruptcy, foreclosure and forced evictions threaten family farms.

  Why are family farms in decline?
  Public policy over several decades has promoted the industrialization of U.S. agriculture, large-scale farms, and the corporate control of our food system. A few corporations control energy, fertilizers, seeds, livestock and the distribution of food products. Domestic farm policy sets prices according to the interests of multinational agribusiness corporations, not family farmers. International trade agreements like NAFTA create unfair and unstable markets for small and independent producers. Factory farms and an industrial system of agriculture force farmers out of business and off the land. Meanwhile, our water, soils and air are polluted by industrial and chemical farming.

  by snorfbat on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 03:36:21 AM PDT

•  Fact 3: Small biz ..."flourishing"

  Bush: Small businesses are flourishing.

  As a small business owner who deals with many other small business owners, I can tell you that this is nonsense.

  But you don't have to take my word for it.  According to a study by the Democratic members of the House Small Business Committee, the Small Business Index (SBI) is at a seven-year low.

  How can Bush claim that small businesses are flourishing?  Maybe it's because he's created an Orwellian redefinition of "small business owner" that extends the term to include the very, very rich.  Including, as Kerry pointed out tonight, Bush himself.

  by snorfbat on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 04:26:25 AM PDT

•  Fact 4: Home ownership rate

  Bush: Home ownership rate is at an all time high in America.

  That statement is true, but misleading.  Growth in the home ownership rate took off under Clinton and has been in decline under W.

  Here's what Christian Weller has to say about the topic in his article, "Taking Credit Where Credit is Not Due":

  Homeownership rates have been rising for the past two decades. In the mid-1980s, home ownership in the United States fell below 64 percent. For a number of years, the rate of homeownership remained stable. However, starting in 1995, home ownership rates started to gain momentum. From 1995 to 2000, the rate of homeownership grew by 0.48 percentage points each year. Since 2000, these increases have slowed by 24 percent to 0.37 percentage points per year. That is, during President Bush's tenure, improvements in homeownership have actually slowed, not accelerated.

  by snorfbat on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 04:37:53 AM PDT

•  Fact 5: 9/11 commission, safer, not safe

  Bush: The 9/11 commission put out a report that said America is safer, but not yet safe.

  Former Illinois Gov. James R. Thompson said that the phrase became a truism for the members of the commission: "We are safer today than we were on September 11, but we are not safe."

  So Bush got that one right.

  Of course, the Republican-controlled House rejected the intelligence overhaul bill endorsed by the 9/11 Commission and went with their own bill instead.  And the Republican-controlled Senate trimmed off some of the commission's most important recommendations from the Senate version.  Which means that the two versions will have to be reconciled, taking the implementation past the elections.

  All of which means that this "safer, but not safe" thing will be with us for a while.

  by snorfbat on Sat Oct 09, 2004 at 05:02:02 AM PDT