Did John Kerry cheat during the debate?????

[Kayz]

Drudge is reporting that Kerry cheated during the debate by bringing his own pre-written notes to the debate, which is against debate rules:


http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm

 

[bustafood]

I don't know, but I wouldn't put it past him.

 

[Kayz]

I thought the split screen thing was out, too. It's like they only showed Bush's reactions, too.

Oh, and let's not even begin with the lop-sided questions by the dolt of a moderator. Not a single question about what Kerry did after he got back from the war, but all sorts of questions about how Bush screwed up.

True...and the moderator never asked Kerry about his senate record or about specific votes he made that contradicts his current stance.

Every question was focused towards Bush and what he has done.

 

[Phreezer]

I thought the split screen thing was out, too. It's like they only showed Bush's reactions, too.

Oh, and let's not even begin with the lop-sided questions by the dolt of a moderator. Not a single question about what Kerry did after he got back from the war, but all sorts of questions about how Bush screwed up.

Hmmmm... Imagine that... Questions about what is going on right now in the world and not about something that happened 30 years ago.... Those bastards went so low as to stick with the current issues......How could they?!?!?!

 

[Slick Arrado]

Hmmmm... Imagine that... Questions about what is going on right now in the world and not about something that happened 30 years ago.... Those bastards went so low as to stick with the current issues......How could they?!?!?!

I don't know how that moderator can sleep at night. LOL. Maybe that group, Veterans For Debate Truth, will get to the bottom of it. Come on people, stay focused, and vote for Dubya.

 

[Tiki]

Hmmmm... Imagine that... Questions about what is going on right now in the world and not about something that happened 30 years ago.... Those bastards went so low as to stick with the current issues......How could they?!?!?!

The "30 years ago" rightfully was left out of the debate, but Kerry's Senate record should have come up. How he voted in the Senate gives a VERY good idea of what he would do as President. However, Bush could have brought up Kerry's record in the debate and did not. The Republicans have a lot of ammunition with Kerry's voting record (not to mention all the votes he has skipped, especially as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee). I would think the Republicans would go after his record harder in the future.

 

[Quasimoto]

When there is evidence that one of the candidates is a traitor to this nation, it's not just some event that means nothing. Meeting with the enemy during a war, lying before senate, etc...this isn't stupid shit like how he got his purple hearts or whether he lied about being in Cambodia or not. This is serious business that deserves attention. The obvious lack of ANY questions on any of this makes you wonder the motives of the moderator.

You guys are only pissed cuz bush lost the debate. If he had won, no matter the question, you all would have been thrilled. If you are angry about the first Pres debate, just see what Edwards does to the DICK on tuesday.

I agree theres been enough talk about their history, would you have liked Lehrer to ask Bush about his wife killing a guy when drunk ? It doesnt matter now...the format was foreign policy . Bush was supposed to shine on Iraq and Afghanistan. I'd be scared if i were a shill for the Pubbies too.

 

[db2]

Drudge is reporting that Kerry cheated during the debate by bringing his own pre-written notes to the debate, which is against debate rules:


http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc57.htm

Wtf is drudge? Bush took a huge blow from this debate and the republicans are reeling. Of course they would like to discredit this debate, bush got his ass handed to him. I actually felt bad for Bush during the debate, he had no substantial comebacks, and looked like a child arguing with his father. Those of you who feel this debate was a draw, clearly had your bush goggles on that night. As anyone with half a brain could see how one sided the debate was. Not to mention Bush got his ass whipped by a liberal on a debate that was supposed to be his strong points. Just imagine whats going to happen when they go head to head on domestic issues,, The tide has changed, in that debate the conservatives got dropped, now get up and take it like men instead of looking for exscuses.

 

[mrpg13]

You guys are only pissed cuz bush lost the debate. If he had won, no matter the question, you all would have been thrilled. If you are angry about the first Pres debate, just see what Edwards does to the DICK on tuesday.

I agree theres been enough talk about their history, would you have liked Lehrer to ask Bush about his wife killing a guy when drunk ? It doesnt matter now...the format was foreign policy . Bush was supposed to shine on Iraq and Afghanistan. I'd be scared if i were a shill for the Pubbies too.

I knew I'd see your flaming liberal ass chiming in...j/k


Seriously though, do you really think Edwards will destroy Dick??

I highly doubt it. Edwards can talk a good game, but Cheney is a very intelligent guy(like him or not). It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[Quasimoto]

I knew I'd see your flaming liberal ass chiming in...j/k


Seriously though, do you really think Edwards will destroy Dick??

I highly doubt it. Edwards can talk a good game, but Cheney is a very intelligent guy(like him or not). It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I think tuesdays debate will be awesome for Kerry/Edwards. Edwards has made a living making people believe him. He will be ready for DICK. What is it about Dick that made you think he has a fully functional brain ? I know his wife is a smart broad...i read her lesbian cowgirl book "sisters" .

A trial lawyer against someone who hates the truth. I cant wait.

Frosty - Illegal how ? I have asked you this like 3 times and you cant answer it. It wasnt illegal.

 

[db2]

I knew I'd see your flaming liberal ass chiming in...j/k


Seriously though, do you really think Edwards will destroy Dick??

I highly doubt it. Edwards can talk a good game, but Cheney is a very intelligent guy(like him or not). It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Cheney is an old school cut throat politician, Edwards is one of the top private attorneys in the country, they will definately go at it, and it will be a good one.

 

[Tiki]

I think tuesdays debate will be awesome for Kerry/Edwards. Edwards has made a living making people believe him. He will be ready for DICK. What is it about Dick that made you think he has a fully functional brain ? I know his wife is a smart broad...i read her lesbian cowgirl book "sisters" .

A trial lawyer against someone who hates the truth. I cant wait.

Frosty - Illegal how ? I have asked you this like 3 times and you cant answer it. It wasnt illegal.

A trial lawyer against someone who hates the truth. I cant wait.

What a wise statement. Because, as we all know, trial lawyers ALWAYS SEEK THE TRUTH.

 

[Kayz]

Hey Quasi...was that you who stole the laptops from Bush HQ up in the northwest last week?????

 

[Kayz]

Quasi...it is illegal because Kerry was still a uniformed officer meeting with a known enemy in a time of war. Kerry was not active at the time, but he was still an enlisted officer.

 

[Quasimoto]

What a wise statement. Because, as we all know, trial lawyers ALWAYS SEEK THE TRUTH.

The truth isnt going to be making a full appearance in this election Tiki. Sorry if you expected it would. Dont expect either side to be very forthcoming...that said..Edwards has made a career of making people believe him, whether its actually true or not.

We have gotten used to politicians lying to us..and if they keep it to a minimum it seems ok to most. Like GWB saying that Afghanistan has 10 million registered voters ( there arent that many elegible voters in Afghanistan ) or Kerrys comment that we've incurred 200 billion in cost of the Iraq war ( we havent yet but we will actually be there soon )

here are some more lies from both parties according to factcheck.org

Other Factual Stumbles

Bush said that 10 million people had registered to vote in the coming presidential election in Afghanistan, which he called a "phenomenal statistic." But that's a disputed figure. Human Rights Watch issued a report Sept. 29 citing "widespread multiple registration of voters." It said the 10 million figure is probably inflated.

Bush said he has increased spending on curbing nuclear proliferation by "about 35 percent" since he took office. But The Washington Post reported Oct. 1 that Bush proposed a 13 percent cut in his first budget as President -- about $116 million. Much of the increases since then have been added by Congress, the Post reported.

The Post also said Kerry misspoke when he asserted that Bush is spending "hundreds of millions of dollars to research bunker-busting nuclear weapons" when in fact the budget for research on that weapon is less that $35 million. The Post said the administration has set aside nearly $500 million for future budgets -- but that's contingent on Congress approving production of such a weapon.

The AP noted that Kerry misspoke when he said "we got weapons of mass destruction crossing the (Iraq) border every single day, and they're blowing people up." Kerry meant terrorists were crossing the border, not nuclear weapons.

The AP also caught Kerry's mistake when he referred to looking at KGB records in Treblinka Square in a visit to Russia. Treblinka was a Nazi death camp. Kerry meant Lubyanka Square.

The New York Post noted that Kerry was mistaken when he said "they had to close the subway in New York when the Republican Convention was there," blaming Bush for not supplying money to fix tunnels and bridges. Actually, New York subways continued to run during the convention. "We did not stop any trains," said Transit Authority spokesman Paul Fleuranges. "I will not guess or opine what he (Kerry) was talking about."

And Bush overstated matters when he said "My administration worked with the congress to create the department of homeland security." In fact, Bush opposed creation of the separate department for nearly nine months before turning around and supporting it.

 

[Kayz]

Wtf is drudge? Bush took a huge blow from this debate and the republicans are reeling. Of course they would like to discredit this debate, bush got his ass handed to him. I actually felt bad for Bush during the debate, he had no substantial comebacks, and looked like a child arguing with his father. Those of you who feel this debate was a draw, clearly had your bush goggles on that night. As anyone with half a brain could see how one sided the debate was. Not to mention Bush got his ass whipped by a liberal on a debate that was supposed to be his strong points. Just imagine whats going to happen when they go head to head on domestic issues,, The tide has changed, in that debate the conservatives got dropped, now get up and take it like men instead of looking for exscuses.

LOL.....you don't know who Matt Drudge is?? Damn, what rock have you been living under for the past 10 years????

And yes Kerry won on points, the same way Al Gore did. Ironically though, Bush gained in all the internals like "who do you trust more?", "who is better to fight terrorism"?

You are so blind that you are unable to see the bigger picture here.

 

[Quasimoto]

You are so blind that you are unable to see the bigger picture here.

What is the bigger picture Kayz ?

 

[Kayz]

What is the bigger picture Kayz ?

That "winning" a debate on style (which Kerry did do) means nothing if the internals do not reflect the same.

Even all the political pundits said that Bush had more of a substantive argument, but that he did not articulate well at all.

At the same time Kerry won the debate, the voters saw that Bush was still tougher on terrorism and was more trustworhty than Kerry.

 

[Quasimoto]

It's no secret that Bush doesn't speak well at all when he's not doing a memorized speech. I think people realize that considering that more people would still vote for Bush even though a very good majority thought he "lost" the debate.

They said that there wouldn't be split screens, but there were and the dems used it against Bush. Why was it they didn't show splits when Bush was talking? Why did they do splits at ALL when they said they wouldn't?

Why did they concentrate on Bush's record and why Kerry thought he screwed up but they made no real mention of Kerry's record in the Senate or what he said?

Kerry was saying the same old stuff...he just said it a lot better than normal. Bush was saying the same old, but he just said it worse than he did before. But I think people will do the RIGHT thing and look past what they say and look at their records. At least that's what they SHOULD be doing. They're just speaking to gain votes to win office...that speech can't be trusted. Their records show their true colors.

The split screen was shown almost exclusively dude..Atleast on the channel i was watching the debate on. What record does bush have to run on Frosty ? Just cuz you dont like Kerrys doesnt by default mean that Bush's is good, does it ?

 

[Mark Kerr]

Looking past the obvious fact that Kerry is a better speaker than Bush, I think the debates were pretty even. That is what I pretty much expected, seeing as I believe Kerry merely relies on the fact that he ISN'T BUSH and Bush only does well when he can explain things simply. I saw this tie coming...

However, for those of you who want to see a lop-sided debate, watch the Edwards/Cheney debate coming up.

Edwards is known as one of the sharpest litigators in the South, right up there with Joe Jamail. Edwards made millions convincing people to believe him (often despite evidence). I see some major ownage coming.

Also, I like Edwards, I believe he has the communication skills of Clinton, but with the substantive ideas of Reagan. I like Edwards so much I wish he was a conservative!