My thoughts on the debate: now THAT'S entertainment!

1st question Kerry: Do you have a reply to the people who think you are wishy-washy?

Kerry mentions Bush's tendency to use Advertisements full of lies to portray Kerry as inconsistent. Now, my favorite inconsistency that Bush keeps bringing up is the $87 billion dollars. Here is what I know about Kerry voting for and against $87 billion dollar resolutions for the troops.

First of all, Kerry voting against this resolution doesn't change the fact that the troops were under funded. The resolution passed whether or not Kerry voted for it or against it. Now, Kerry voted FOR a resolution for $87 billion dollars with the stipulation that the tax cuts for the rich were removed. After all, it isn't good policy to have tax cuts during wars. As you may have heard, this has never happened before. Kerry voted for a resolution with outlets to get the money. He voted against Bush's resolution because it didn't have the way to get the money. Remove the tax cuts, you get more taxes, you fund the troops. Which resolution makes more sense?

Second question Bush: No WMD in Iraq, but you still won't admit to anything close to the implication that you may have made wrong choices. What is the problem with you?

Bush has been quite consistent in his views. No one can compare to a man who doesn't even change his answers regardless of new information. Let's take this slow because I don't think Bush is really picking this question apart, or he would admit he was wrong, and then say that we all thought he has weapons. (Of course, I'm still pretty sure that before we went to war, the experts on the scene were questioning the reliability of the 'intelligence' used as reason for the War against Saddam)

Now, No WMD... but it was still important to go. We can't say wrong war, wrong place, wrong time even though it was true. Even though we had plenty of time to figure out that there was no threat, even though Saddam was cooperating with diplomatic efforts (because there were no weapons), even though we had other things to focus on, the president can't allow any of us to doubt that he made the right decision. If there was no threat at all to us, and since there was never a need to immediately go to war like we did, then how was the war the right decision? It's not like we didn't have any military actions going on at the time.

Don't listen to the reports that say the war was at the wrong time. Just believe everything the president says. Don't listen to the report that says there was not only was their no imminent threat, but a diminishing threat. The conservative interpretation of the report is a little different than the liberal interpretation. Liberals like to take a literal interpretation.

Now, both candidates have made many false claims. I heard many claims from both sides that were absolutely false. Kerry once again quoted a figure as $200 million dollars when its more around $120 million. Don't really remember what the number was attributed to at the moment. Which campaign do I think has told the most lies? I think it is Bush's campaign hands down, but the fact is they are both guilty. This is politics. When they lie, they almost always know they are lying. Sometimes they are using inflated figures, sometimes they are just making things up.

Now, when Bush says that "Kerry voted against this" it is probably true. But, when Bush says this, people don't understand, or it just doesn't come to realization, that the bills aren't just "are you for this issue, yes or no". Let's say that Bush says, "so-an-so voted against No Child Left Behind". You think, "What a horrible man, he wants to leave the children behind!" and not "he did the right thing because the president has no plan to fund the initiative."

I'll post more thoughts on the debates later, perhaps.