"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Classiest moment in the debate:

John Edwards realized (a few seconds after he began speakng) that he had
been
unfairly awarded an extra 30-second response. While he could have
continued to
try to make an extra point he ceded the floor the comply with the rules of
the
debate. We could use a few more elected officials who value fair play and
respect the rules.


Yea, but Edwards also interrupted Cheney while Cheney was speaking. That
is a clear violation of both the rules of the debate and common courtesy.
Personally,
I don't subtract or award many points for one small gaff or one small
positive action
such as these. Anyone can make a simple mistake.

Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.



A "shot"?

Do you mean the shot that Cheney followed with the sincere remark, "Thank you
for the kind words about my daughter"?

?????????????????

The only shot turns out to be Cheney's implied lie that Edwards has never been
in the Senate on the day each week that Cheny presides there, (Tuesday). To be
fair, he only says he "has never met Edwards" before, but the implication is
that
Edwards has never been in the Senate on Tuesdays. Two of the first three votes
I checked on Edward's voting record were on Tuesdays. 10-21-2003 and 5-7-2002.
I only checked three, and two of them were Tuesday.

More of the same crap from these clowns.
Cheney is such an accomplished liar that
he can malign and slander Edwards without "technically" telling a lie. He never
said that Edwards wasn't in the Senate. He never said that he hadn't seen
Edwards in the Senate. He only said he had never met Edwards before the debate,
claimed that Edwards' constituents called him "Senator Gone" and let the
sheeple draw their own conclusions.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.



A "shot"?

Do you mean the shot that Cheney followed with the sincere remark, "Thank
you
for the kind words about my daughter"?

?????????????????


Yea, a shot. Sure, the actual words were not harsh. But as I watched I
certainly
*felt* this as a "shot."

It's usually uncouth for one candidate to bring his opponents
family into a discussion. There may be some circumstances where this would
be
appropriate, say if the Moderator asked a direct question about it. Even
then
the classy answer would be to say something like, "It's not really my place
to comment on that." ~ Just because Cheney recovered well / was graceful
by taking it as a compliement doesn't mean Edwards was right. ~~ In fact
it's similar to when the moderator asked Edwards the question of why/how
he (Edwards) was fit to be VP. When the time turned to Cheney for his 60
seconds "rebuttal" Cheney was hesitant to comment on Edwards fitness.

Let me put it in a slightly different way. Say the question was about
services
for mentally handicapped people. And say Cheney had a mentally handicapped
daughter. Edwards would be considered (I think) very calous to move the
discussion from the abstract to Cheney's child. These should not be
personal
issues but policical ones. (Note: I'm *not* trying to say being gay or
lesbian
is like being mentally handicapped. I'm only saying that bringing the other
guy's
family into the discussion is, in most circumstances, uncool.)



The only shot turns out to be Cheney's implied lie that Edwards has never
been
in the Senate on the day each week that Cheny presides there, (Tuesday).
To be

Fair enough. I do believe this was a misleading statement by Cheney.


Again, I feel compelled to note: I'm routing for Kerry/Edwards and think
they
will be much better for this country than Bush/Cheney. But I also think
Cheney
was much calmer, more direct, and more "professional" then Edwards tonight.

In article ,
says...


Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.

Jeez Wilbur, were we watching the same debate? Edwards was very
deferential to Cheney on his choice to support his family over Bush
policy.

If there was a point made, I think it was a good one. Not recognizing
it certainly paints you as a blind partisan.

jps

WaIIy wrote:
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 00:37:49 -0400, "Gary Warner"
wrote:


Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.

You mean, when Edwards complimented the Cheney family for supporting
each other as a family, and for sticking up for the rights of their gay
daughter instead of disowning her or not talking about it, or when
Cheney thanked Edwards for his kind words?

--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

Harry Krause wrote:
WaIIy wrote:

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 00:37:49 -0400, "Gary Warner"
wrote:


Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.


You mean, when Edwards complimented the Cheney family for supporting
each other as a family, and for sticking up for the rights of their gay
daughter instead of disowning her or not talking about it, or when
Cheney thanked Edwards for his kind words?


Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
WaIIy wrote:

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 00:37:49 -0400, "Gary Warner"
wrote:


Edwards was really classy when he took a shot at Cheney about his
daughter.


You mean, when Edwards complimented the Cheney family for supporting
each other as a family, and for sticking up for the rights of their gay
daughter instead of disowning her or not talking about it, or when
Cheney thanked Edwards for his kind words?


Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch

It was appropriate because the moderate brought up the subject of the
the GOP's main wedge issue this fall, trying to ban gay marriage.

--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch


You may be right.

I hadn't considered the effect such a remark would have on people who consider
homosexuality a vile, deviant, "sin" rather than a biological anomaly.

A liberal hears, "So and so has a lesbian daughter," and to us it sounds like,
"The
Jones family has a kid who is left handed."

Conservatives hear the same remark and perhaps some of them conclude, "The
Jones family must have done a crappy job of raising their kids if one of them
turned out queer. They should have taken them to church more often. How sad to
think that nice young woman is condemned to burn in hell for all eternity."

If Edwards had a malicious intent when he commented on Cheney's daughter and
the support the Cheney family has extended to her, then the comments that it
was a "shot" have some legs.

If a conservative had made that comment, it is more likely that it would have
been malicious than when the same comment is made by a moderate or a liberal.
Goes to frame of reference.

The MODERATOR brought up Cheney's daughter, and Edwards said nothing
but nice things about the daughter, and the Cheneys as parents.

BB


Come to think of it, that's true!
The reference to Cheney's daughter was
contained in the text of the question asked by the moderator.

Will we see a retraction of the "cheap shot" charges by Wally and Eisboch?

Holding my breath here........(not)......

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Was it really necessary for Edwards to even introduce the subject of
Cheney's family issues?

Slick cheap shot in my book.

Eisboch


You may be right.

I hadn't considered the effect such a remark would have on people who
consider
homosexuality a vile, deviant, "sin" rather than a biological anomaly.

A liberal hears, "So and so has a lesbian daughter," and to us it sounds
like,
"The
Jones family has a kid who is left handed."

Conservatives hear the same remark and perhaps some of them conclude, "The
Jones family must have done a crappy job of raising their kids if one of
them
turned out queer. They should have taken them to church more often. How
sad to
think that nice young woman is condemned to burn in hell for all
eternity."

If Edwards had a malicious intent when he commented on Cheney's daughter
and
the support the Cheney family has extended to her, then the comments that
it
was a "shot" have some legs.

If a conservative had made that comment, it is more likely that it would
have
been malicious than when the same comment is made by a moderate or a
liberal.
Goes to frame of reference.




LOL! You are about as non partisan as Dennis Kucinich.