Bush performed well in the second presidential debate.

While the Limbaugh Little Leaguers and other right wing fanatics have been
crowing about Bush's "victory" in the first debate, the majority of the country
saw a dramatic difference between Kerry and Bush in their first debate, and the
difference was not in the incumbent's favor.

The Friday night rematch was more evenly fought. D's and R's alike could take
some pride in the overall performance of their favored candidates- and each
side
got off a few "zingers" against the other.

Were the encounters boxing matches, rather than debates, the first would have
been a knockout and the second contest narrowly decided one way or another by
points.

There was an aspect of Bush's performance that must surely concern a geat many
people. How could the confused, bumbling, face-making buffoon from the first
debate have morphed so convincingly into the still bull-headed, but now
adequately communicative full participant in the second?

Such inconsistencies in personality and performance are often symptomatic of
serious underlying issues. Was the POTUS "medicated" for one of the two
debates? If so, which one? Was that the *real* George Bush, standing erect and
making eye contact with the crowd while speaking coherently enough to convince
his loyal base that he hadn't lost his mind entirely?

Which of those Bush's would occupy the White House if he is reselected for
another four years? The smirking incompetent? The oh-so-wrong but adequately
functional statesman? Both at once?

Jekyl and Hyde?
There can be no greater, or more potentially disastrous "flip-flop" than that.

Kerry won the first
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Bush performed well in the second presidential debate.

Yep.



While the Limbaugh Little Leaguers and other right wing fanatics have been
crowing about Bush's "victory" in the first debate, the majority of the
country
saw a dramatic difference between Kerry and Bush in their first debate,
and the
difference was not in the incumbent's favor.

Funny how we all see things, especially those Michael Moore lovers and other
left wing fanatics that see Kerry winning the first debate.

My view:

1st Pres. debate: Kerry won on style, Bush on substance. Perhaps a draw
but edge to Kerry.

Cheney had his way with Edwards in their debate. Edwards came across as a
slick lawyer type.

2nd Pres. debate: Kerry came across as talking down to people, Bush was
more at home and comfortable and came across as genuine. Neither scored a
knockout. Perhaps another draw but the edge this time to Bush.

To date I see the Pres. debates a draw but edge to Bush because of Cheney's
win.

These debates mean something only to the idiot undecided voters. And if
last nights debate was not a convincer either way for them then they are
indeed helpless.

These debates mean something only to the idiot undecided voters.

Those who continue to carefully weigh all available evidence to arrive at the
most thoroughly considered opinions are "idiots"?

Then surely those who decided on the second day of Bush's term that they would
be voting for his reelection, despite anything they might learn in the next
four years are certified geniuses.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
These debates mean something only to the idiot undecided voters.

Those who continue to carefully weigh all available evidence to arrive at
the
most thoroughly considered opinions are "idiots"?

Then surely those who decided on the second day of Bush's term that they
would
be voting for his reelection, despite anything they might learn in the
next
four years are certified geniuses.



Bull****. If you can't make up your mind after hearing Kerry for a year and
seeing Bush in action for 4 you are indeed an idiot.

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:09:42 -0400, JimH wrote:


Bull****. If you can't make up your mind after hearing Kerry for a year
and seeing Bush in action for 4 you are indeed an idiot.

LOL, call them what you want, but they are the ones that are going to
decide the next four years, not you or I.

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:09:42 -0400, JimH wrote:


Bull****. If you can't make up your mind after hearing Kerry for a year
and seeing Bush in action for 4 you are indeed an idiot.

LOL, call them what you want, but they are the ones that are going to
decide the next four years, not you or I.


Bush in action...hehehe...the Howdy Doody Action Figure.

--
"...vice president (Cheney), I'm surprised to hear him talk about
records. When he was one of 435 members of the United States House, he
was one of 10 to vote against Head Start, one of four to vote against
banning plastic weapons that can pass through metal detectors. He voted
against the Department of Education. He voted against funding for
Meals on Wheels for seniors. He voted against a holiday for Martin
Luther King. He voted against a resolution calling for the release of
Nelson Mandela in South Africa. It's amazing to hear him criticize
either my record or John Kerry's."

- Senator John Edwards, 10/05/04

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
These debates mean something only to the idiot undecided voters.

Those who continue to carefully weigh all available evidence to arrive at
the
most thoroughly considered opinions are "idiots"?


They're idiots. What are they waiting for? To see which side of each
issue Kerry finally decides to settle on by November 2?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
These debates mean something only to the idiot undecided voters.

Those who continue to carefully weigh all available evidence to arrive at
the
most thoroughly considered opinions are "idiots"?

Then surely those who decided on the second day of Bush's term that they
would
be voting for his reelection, despite anything they might learn in the
next
four years are certified geniuses.

No, Chuckie, you have it wrong again! The candidates for the presidential
election on Nov. 2nd have been known for six months. If you haven't figured
out who you are going to vote for by now you are and idiot.

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 16:47:12 -0400, "Go Away" wrote:

If you haven't figured out who you are going to vote for by now you are and idiot.

I are what in addition to being AN idiot?

All the best,

Tom
--------------

"What the hell's the deal with this newsgroup...
is there a computer terminal in the day room of
some looney bin somewhere?"

Bilgeman - circa 2004

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 16:47:12 -0400, "Go Away" wrote:

If you haven't figured out who you are going to vote for by now you are
and idiot.

I are what in addition to being AN idiot?


You are also a twit.