Hmmm, that's another debate unto itself, and an interesting one at that. One could argue that at the time Reagan came to power, the Soviet Union was already in heavy political, economic and technological decay, and that Reagan capitalized on that. After all, Reagan softened his stance in his second term after he met Gorbachev - if he hadn't, Yanayev's hardliners might have prolonged the USSR's agony for a good while.

Whether Bush will be placed alongside Reagan for political flair is still being debated, and will be debated for a few more years. After all, the Soviet Union fell only after Reagan had left power...

Originally posted by Intelearthling
Slayer,
People making $200,000/year already pays 33% of their income in taxes already. People making $43,000 only pays about a 10% after deductions. Well it is according to if they're head of household. But still, why would you want to raise the taxes of a small percentage of people that's already paying out there yahoo, to gain just a drop in the GDP? Doesn't make real sense to me? All it's going to do is, Make American say,"It's better not to better yourself, get an education and stay poor. The Democrats will take care of us."

To tell you the truth, I'm not into economics and I have no clue what you're trying to argue.

long story short bush took kerry to school

kerry got owned. He made himself look really stupid.

Originally posted by marg6043
Why does kerry continue to say "I will"

Is very simple he is the oposing candidate so he is the one that has to promised what he will do and convince the voter, while the acting candidate (bush) has to defend what he already has done.

It's just politics

marg6043,

Kerry would probably have more credibilty with me if he would lay out a plan he has for America instead of saying the exact opposite of what Bush says.

If he was to mention how he would work with Congress and have an original agenda for how he'll run America, I might consider voting for him. I'm a registered Republican, but there is no law saying that I can't vote the other way. Give me a candidate that I believe in and I'll vote for him.

Bush is my only choice, though on some issues he does seem leaning towards the moderates.

Interearthling - Bush has no choice to be leaning towards the moderates. You cannot govern a nation catering to only a segment of your population. Just as Kerry's program - just like Clinton's - is an intermix of moderate Republican and moderate Democrat.

It boils down to a simple question - what is democracy? Does one govern according to the beliefs of the many, or the beliefs of the few (or the one, not to paraphrase Mr. Spock)? Where is the line drawn between what one leader believes to be right and what his constituency believes to be right?

Originally posted by Slayer
To tell you the truth, I'm not into economics and I have no clue what you're trying to argue.

I'm not trying to argue anything Slayer. I'm trying to say that there exists many more people who make well below $60,000/year than people making $200,000/year. I'm not saying to raise taxes on the people with lower incomes, just don't raise the taxes on people that already pays out their "yayas" thats all.

I'm not into economics neither, I just don't want the government messing with my money in case I do happen to happen to make a 6 or 7-figure income. We do live in a country that the potential exists for anyone to become wealthy and I don't believe that it would be right for the government to take more than what's required by the rest of the nation.

Intelearthling,

funny that bush lay out plan so far has proven a fiasco, look at Iraq, what a mess, what happend to bin-laden, and can he lie his butt off on national TV.

Bush clean air act has made the air cleaner, pleaaaasssseeee give me brake I thing I am gonna puke.

Originally posted by Otts
It boils down to a simple question - what is democracy? Does one govern according to the beliefs of the many, or the beliefs of the few (or the one, not to paraphrase Mr. Spock)? Where is the line drawn between what one leader believes to be right and what his constituency believes to be right?

Otts,

I believe that everyone should enjoy the benefits of a capitalist society. No one should ever go to bed hungry or without proper medical treatment when stricken with sickness.

Everyone should be able to have a home with electricity and running water. Everyone should be able to have spare money to set aside for a vacation, a new vehicle if desired. They should be able to get a higher education and progress in their career of choice.

But all this should never be given to them. It is so much more rewarding when a person can work for the necessities they need and luxuries they desire instead of the government providing the bare essentials for them.

[edit on 8/10/04 by Intelearthling]

Originally posted by marg6043
funny that bush lay out plan so far has proven a fiasco, look at Iraq, what a mess, what happend to bin-laden, and can he lie his butt off on national TV.
Bush clean air act has made the air cleaner, pleaaaasssseeee give me brake I thing I am gonna puke.

marg6043,

In WWII, It took America and our allies more than 2 1/2 years after they entered the War against Germany/Italy to gain a foothold on the European continent. It took more than 3 1/2 years to force Japan to surrender and it would have been longer if it hadn't been for the Atomic bomb. Progress is being made in Iraq continuously and soon the Iraqi Army will be trained enough to take care of the insurgents that plague their country. It is crucial that Iraq become a democracy for the sake of, not only it's people, but the entire region.

As for the clean air bit, Congress can pass laws that require strict pollution laws on automobiles and factories alike. If a person is concerned about the quality of air in a region of the country, then I would suggest that a letter to a Congressperson, detailing grievances and signing petitions, should get someone's attention. If not, then keep doing it until it does get someone's attention or vote the "slacker" Congresspersons out when it comes around to election time.

Here you go Jem and Intelearthling, since you said Kerry had no substance and laid out no specific plans for anything:

Fully fund the "No Child Left Behind" Act ... allow NATO to help (or completely take over) the training of Iraqis, something the group brought up as a possibility in a meeting a couple weeks ago, but was ignored by Bush ... implement a process to reduce Russia's loose material in four years rather than the 13 years it would take under Bush's plan ... work on a massive global counterproliferation effort which would include scrapping our own plans for bunker-busting nuclear bombs in an effort to hold ourselves to the same standards we ask of other countries ... increase active duty military spots by 40,000 so that we don't need to use a backdoor draft of National Guard reservists or a reinstated draft to fill our military needs ... remove catastrophic cases out of the healthcare system and pay for them via a federal fund so that they don't artifically impact healthcare premiums, which will allow more affordable personal plans, as well as allow small businesses to offer healthcare packages, which will increase the number of Americans covered ... raise the child-care credit by $1,000 for families to help them be able to take care of their kids ... have a $4,000 tuition tax credit that goes to parents -- and kids, if they're earning for themselves -- to be able to pay for college ... implement tax cuts for people making under $200,000, while repealing tax cuts back to the Clinton level for people making above that ... currently sponsoring a bill along with McCain that will eliminate tax loopholes for businesses that outsource jobs overseas ... create a manufacturing jobs credit and a new jobs credit for people to be able to help hire and be more competitive here in America ... reevaluate the Patriot Act so that it cannot be used in a way to deprive American citizens of their most basic rights ... put the 100-200k frozen embryos already stored away in fertility clinics to use by using them for stem cell research

***********************************************************

Those were just specific plans he laid out tonight that I thought were important, he mentioned some other plans, as well as some basic plans (rather than specifics) that you can go look up yourself if you still have questions. I listened to both sides of the debate, I know Kerry laid out some very definitive, substantial plans, but apparently you missed out on them. I did the work for you by putting some of them in a concise paragraph you can read, if you want to know the rest of his plans, go read the transcript and take note of the stuff you obviously missed the first time around.

PS - I was going to use Kerry's plan as a signature, which inevitably would lead people to complain that my signature was taking up too much room, which would lead me to respond, "you mean Kerry's no-substance plan for America is taking up too much room?" Well yeah, you get my point.

Needless to say, even my concise version of what he stated tonight doesn't even fit in my sig box, so I guess I'll have to cut it out completely

W_HAMILTON,

All this sounds good, but my question is, how is he suppose to implement these plans without support from Congress?

He hasn't said anything about working with Congress to put any of his plans into reality. Does he think that Congress will automatically pass all of his suggestions because he's president?

At least everything that anti-Bush people are against Bush for has been passed in Congress. Congress didn't have to work with Bush. Congress never has to work with any presidents.

EDIT: P.S. Your signature is taking up too much room!Man, I just had to do it!

[edit on 9/10/04 by Intelearthling]

So since Republicans control Congress, they will basically just say "no" to anything John Kerry proposes, hence we should vote for Bush since they'll work with him?

Good enough reason to change my vote!

Originally posted by W_HAMILTON
So since Republicans control Congress, they will basically just say "no" to anything John Kerry proposes, hence we should vote for Bush since they'll work with him?

Good enough reason to change my vote!

The Republican controlled Congress hasn't worked entirely to President Bush's suggestions. There are a lot of moderate Republicans in Congress as well as a lot of moderate Democrats.

I suppose it will be the same no matter who's in the White House at any time.

FLIP Bush creates 'No Child Left Behind' Act

FLOP Then doesn't fund it.
.

FLIP Bush: He [Saddam] was trying to get rid of sanctions for a reason: He wanted to restart his weapons programs.

FLOP Bush, a few minutes later: Sanctions were not working.

[edit on 9-10-2004 by W_HAMILTON]

Originally posted by curme
Come on! XXX number of people viewed this topic! And no one responded? I guess you liberals have no response! Becuase you know you are wrong!

EDIT: Sorry, that's the other guy.

[edit on 8-10-2004 by curme]

Perhaps because the answer is apparent to most people What would you have him say? He is not the president. He can't say "I did" It is a form of telling the public what "he will" do if elected....I saw this post and just assumed the poster doesn't like Kerry and was venting over something that bothered him/her, it was sorta like a rhetorical quesion.....

Originally posted by Intelearthling

In WWII, It took America and our allies more than 2 1/2 years after they entered the War against Germany/Italy to gain a foothold on the European continent.

We are not "liberating" Europe this time, we are "liberating" one littler country, "Iraq"

Common, bush lie last night his butt off and you know it.

by the way your avatar is one of my favorite guardians. I have chimes of them in back porch.

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by Intelearthling

In WWII, It took America and our allies more than 2 1/2 years after they entered the War against Germany/Italy to gain a foothold on the European continent.

We are not "liberating" Europe this time, we are "liberating" one littler country, "Iraq"

We're doing it with 1/10 the number of troops also. If the man-power we had in the European Theatre were available in Iraq, the situation would have been over 6 months ago IMO.

by the way your avatar is one of my favorite guardians. I have chimes of them in back porch.

I liked the gargoyle, I know that's what you're talking about, but since it's October, I might change the avatar quite often from one or the other.