Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
There was no question -- none -- that the troops would get funded. The only question was how. Taxwonk now has my proxy on this.
|
Good, your off that bull shit that he just voted for a different way to fund and have conceeded it was a protest vote. A CIC does not have this luxury, however, nor should someone who wants to give protest votes at the expense of sending a clear message to our troops be president.
Quote:
|
It's hard for me to believe that you want to pick this fight. With Bush's malapropisms, faux folksiness (fauxiness?), scowling, grimacing, and so on, it's a wash for you guys, at best.
|
What in the hell does this have to do with anything, other than deflecting the critisism of your candidate?
Quote:
|
First of all, I don't know what you're talking about. Second of all, my objection to Bush's approach to diplomacy is not that it lacks decorum or respect, but that it serves our country's interests poorly.
|
As is my objection to Kerry's approach.
Quote:
|
"Bring it on." And a good diplomat doesn't build a "coalition" of the coerced and bribed. (I might say something about the particular countries in the coalition, but after the vice-presidential debate the White House removed the list and links to it from the White House web site.)
|
Again, not responsive.
Quote:
|
No. There is now and there has been a split among Democrats over the war. Many Democrats supported it. Many opposed it. Howard Dean was the first viable candidate to oppose it, and got support for tapping into the people who felt unrepresented.
|
Yes, and many supported and opposed it.
