Democratic Convention

[Ramo]

Sadly, no. It would've been great if he did.

[Agathon]

Nevertheless, I have to say that Sharpton had it goin' on!

Hell yeah, that was one of the best rabble rousing speeches I've ever seen. The ending about Ray Charles was brilliant too.

[The diplomat]

In his speech, Edwards said about Al Queda, "You cannot run, you cannot hide. We will destroy you."

How do you Democrats feel about that? I mean that is the kind of thing Bush says all the time, and the Left accuses Bush of warmongering and baiting the terrorists.

How come it is ok for a Democrat to say that but it is not ok for a republican to say that?

And how will Kerry and Edwards destroy the terrorists since they don't support the means necessary to do it?

[MrFun]

diplomat . . . . I saw Edwards's speech, and I thought all of it was great, including the anti-terrorist statement you pointed out.


As for warmongering, I don't recall myself ever bashing Bush relentlessly for that per say, but rather for his false pretensions, and deliberate deceptions that he has made on the American people.

[Bosh]

And how will Kerry and Edwards destroy the terrorists since they don't support the means necessary to do it?

Such as?

[MrFun]

Another thing diplomat . . . . . Edwards pointed out in that SAME speech HOW Kerry's administration WILL have the means to fight terrorism.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by The diplomat
In his speech, Edwards said about Al Queda, "You cannot run, you cannot hide. We will destroy you."

How do you Democrats feel about that? I mean that is the kind of thing Bush says all the time, and the Left accuses Bush of warmongering and baiting the terrorists.

How come it is ok for a Democrat to say that but it is not ok for a republican to say that?

And how will Kerry and Edwards destroy the terrorists since they don't support the means necessary to do it?

i was glad Edwards said it. I have no problems when Bush says it either, I have problems with Bush on other issues. What I wanted was evidence that Kerry-Edwards will be at least as good as Bush on security.

Edwards saying that was good. Even better was his commitment to winning in Iraq, his statement that Syria and Iran should not be allowed to stop Iraqi democracy, his statement that this can lead to a new era of freedom and peace in the middle east, and his connecting that to the security of Israel.

I eagerly await Kerrys speech.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
I hate, I hate, I hate American politics.

Judy Woodruff and Wolf Blitzer are going on about "oh, this isn't what the Democrats want, and this isn't what the Kerry campaign wants"

If this isn't what the Democrats want, the delegates wouldn't have been fired up as much as they were.

I really wish that Americans would learn to accept fiery politicians...it's like you can't show emotion on stage these days. It's truly pathetic.

what the delegates want and what party higher ups want isnt always the same thing. The dem delegates are activists, often union members - at this convention a lot of them are NEA members. If theyre elected officials, theyre often from "safe districts" - they want "red meat" which may turn off the swing voters the party higher ups are worried about. The Republicans will have the same problem with their fundies. This is a routine problem at recent conventions, and its part of what the higher ups and presidential candidates have to manage.

[GePap]

Originally posted by The diplomat
In his speech, Edwards said about Al Queda, "You cannot run, you cannot hide. We will destroy you."

How do you Democrats feel about that? I mean that is the kind of thing Bush says all the time, and the Left accuses Bush of warmongering and baiting the terrorists.

I thought it was cheesy, but it plays to the crowd.

How come it is ok for a Democrat to say that but it is not ok for a republican to say that?

Who said its not OK for republicans to say it? They just don't follow through

And how will Kerry and Edwards destroy the terrorists since they don't support the means necessary to do it?

The only thing they have voted against was the 87 billion dollar package (they voted for Afghanistan and for Iraq wars)

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


The only thing they have voted against was the 87 billion dollar package (they voted for Afghanistan and for Iraq wars)

and edwards at least said he was for the money, but wanted the admin to give more info and be more accountable. I expect that will be discussed ad nauseum in the next few months.

[lord of the mark]

I thought it was cheesy, but it plays to the crowd.

I must be one of the crowd, i thought it was excellent and necessary. If anything because it makes SOME dems, like our good poster above, uncomfortable, and Edwards showed hes willing to make such people uncomfortable. Its not a question of playing to the crowd, but of which crowd youre playing to.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

I thought it was cheesy, but it plays to the crowd.

I must be one of the crowd, i thought it was excellent and necessary. If anything because it makes SOME dems, like our good poster above, uncomfortable, and Edwards showed hes willing to make such people uncomfortable. Its not a question of playing to the crowd, but of which crowd youre playing to.

It does not make me uncomfortable- it makes him look silly, which is fine by me since I am voting for them no matter what. But you are right, it depends to which crowd they are speaking too- those who would care he said so in a negative fashion are so left they don't vote dem anyway.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

A "Texas Tiger" or "Right Wing Nutjob" take your pick, but yes he does "kick a$$."

So why are we tied up in a couple of ****holes three years later, while listening to Tom Ridge tell us how the topmost leaders of Al Qaeda, whom we failed to capture, are planning to strike us within the US again?

If that's kicking ass, maybe I should practice my Arabic again.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Why don't you ask your buddies, the Democrats?

Unfortunately, a good portion of the Democratic party are commies in disguise.

[DinoDoc]