[tabs]

Straight up Bush lost the debate....he was on the defensive the whole time...and never once could put together Kerrys inconsistent statements and use them against him. It was a very bad night for Bush, and might very well cost him the election.

1. Kerry want to negioatiate with N Korea unilaterally, when he wants to build coalitions on every other subject.

Fact of the matter is Bush is right about bringing in all the other concerned nations (having a vested interest) in the negioations with N Korea.... The N Koreans are notorious at playing games during negioations.

2. Kerry is right when he says the GREATEST danger is Nuclear Proliferation...mostly in loose Nuclear materials falling into the wrong hand....he made a comment about the porousness of Americas borders....and that Bush isn't doing enough to close those borders.

Reality check here...Theres virtually no way you can check all the cargo that comes into America....the logistics of doing it are astronomical..yet Bush didn't respond..but how can he and not appear like he isn't doing his job.

3. Does Kerry believe that Al Queda and Bin Laden are the only enemies we face in the war on terror...I have long felt that Gore would have invaded Afgan and once that was acomplished and had Al Queda on the run, Gore would have called it good...Here that same logic surfaces again...one thing we must not forget is that the people who FUND terrorism are our enemy too, and this is a spiders web that reaches into places we can only imagine...And are those people who secretly fund Terrorism people who John Kerry would call friend????

The big question that must/will be answered is how much involvment did Sodam have in funding Al Quedea in paticular...and how much of that money came from the Food for Oil program...and who facilitated that corruption...those people are our enemies as well..(.I personally think that it is more a case of greed than malice towards the USA..but grievous harm was done to our country none the less..).


All in all I would say Bush is doing a competent job as President, he does make mistakes and usually corrects his course once they are apparent...Remember that American AWAC that was forced down in China in 2001...Bush made the appropriate meaningless apology and we got the plane back... Bush is obviously not a detail man.. as Regan wasn't , but is willing to make the hard decisions in a straight forward manner...

One thing Bush could not say is how close to collapse America came after 911. Kerry knows fully well how grievous the situation was and still plays the game like it's business as usual...

I personally think Kerry would make a BAD President..His beliefs and more over his backers are extreme Liberals... when Kerry says that he would defend America he means it...I have in numerous posts talked about the "system" and how it limits and dictates what the policies of the USA are going to be...and that any elected offical is just a temporary occupant of the office.

I would postulate here that if a major terrorist attack takes place in the USA on a Kerry watch, it was apparent that Kerry was in some way negligent or his response was weak willed...Kerry will not survive his term as president..it maybe that he is just left as a seat warmer like Jimmy Carter was after his faux pau's....there will be in one way or another a coup de etat....so beware of any sudden illness that the President might develope.

There is one thing about Bush...he does let U know that the USA is in a dangerous high stakes game and that the outcome is in no way certain..