C'mon....you truly believe it just because they say it? In their own words, all americans should have the same healthcare that congress enjoys. He says that he's going to reduce family premiums by $1K per year. Who exactly is going to foot the tab for that? Rolling back the tax cuts ain't gonna cover that. You have the Senator with the most liberal voting record in the US Senate stating that he wants to reduce spending and you believe that?....Why? His own record doesn't remotely support giving that benefit of the doubt.

No offense, George! ;-)

I can't believe anyone would even try to mitigate the fact that Edwards brought up Cheney's daughter solely for political gain. It was despicable. He will say anything.

Cheney's response was, as said before, to deflate the issue.

I just listened to a replay of the debate on the radio-it still doesn't seem apparent that Edward's bringing up Cheney's family was a very big deal. My impression of the debate after listening is that Cheney really came across much differently than he is portrayed. His low-key presentation didn't come across sounding cynical and condescending and he's certainly capable of doing that. Edwards had more to gain with undecided voters in this debate IMO, just because he is a relative unknown. He certainly didn't come across as scared on the radio.

I certainly agree that Kerry's voting record is pathetic-tax and spend. Don't forget-if he's elected he will have to deal with the House and Senate. Checks and balances will come into play. Listening to local radio and reading local papers the past few days leads me to believe that Bush (at this point in time) is in a little trouble. No good news from Iraq and more damning news about WMDs (or the lack thereof) is not reflecting well on Bush's rush to war in Iraq. Rumsfeld and Bremer's remarks lately have got to be causing George W. some major pain. If Kerry's able to run a smart campaign, attacking when appropriate, doing well in the next debate, etc. this election is going to be closer than I ever dreamt. Neither one of these candidates will have me rushing to the polls on November 2 anxious to vote for someone that I'm excited about.

"Bush has been spending more and more and increasing the deficit. From what I heard from Edwards, he and Kerry want to reduce spending and only increase taxes for those that make over $200,000 and reduce taxes for middle income families, as well as cut the deficit in half. Doesn't sound very spend hoggish to me, but quite the opposite. Unless you just throw them under the "They're democrats so they must want to spend more" category."

Kerry and Edwards have some pretty lavish spending ideas - from the extravagant health care promises to doubling the contributions toward the int'l AIDS epidemic to increasing spending in Iraq (training Iraqi troops outside of Iraq?!) and many more I can't remember. Rolling back the tax cuts for the top rich guys ain't enough to pay for all they propose.
The best way to increase gov't revenues is to grow the economy. Best way to do that is cut taxes and regulations. Everybody knows that, right?

Bush, remixed.

My internet provider's default start up page is run my MSNBC. I regularly check the latest news there before moving on to other things. Wanting to hear what the President of the United States had to say at an important speech in Pennsylvania today, I was stunned to find a complete lack of coverage. Well, almost complete lack of coverage. I clicked on the buried "headline" that claimed to cover the speech and found one paragraph in reference to the speech and 20 paragraphs of response by the Kerry campaign.
I haven't checked, but I'm guessing other mainstream media organizations have also tried to squelch this speech.

I found the text of it here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11390-2004Oct6.html

It's not a funny link. It's not spin. It is one of the most powerful and concise messages (the parts about Iraq, the war on terrorists, and foreign policy) I have ever read from an elected official.

The coverage I've encountered said Bush scrapped the speech he had oringally planned for today in favor of a speech carefully crafted to regain points he lost to Kerry during the debate. I say this before reading the text of the speech, which I am about to do.

Hmmm...

In reply to:

---

Ten million students will get record levels of grants and loans to help with college.

---

Could this be because college is now so damned expensive? And the same 10 million will have mounds of debt when they finish school.

Ok, BigWill, how is this any different than what he said during the debate, other than the fact that it was all written out for him beforehand?

PM.....That mp3 was brutal. It's like pouring lemon juice on an open wound. It's like nails on a chalk board. It's like a VERY bad hangover.

Good Job!!!!

OK...what's up w/ this crap with having to register to see websites? It's starting to pi$$ me off! Can nothing ever be anonymous anymore?

Sorry, turbo, they didn't make me register.

pmb, I was a little pissed at what I saw as slanted media coverage (non-coverage of the speech and biased coverage of the VP debate) so I believe I may have exaggerated a little. It WAS NOT the Gettysburg Address, but it WAS concise, clear and focussed. There was definitely some stuff that was not said at the debate (but has been said here). He said the things that we all wished he had said at the debate, but was unable to stammer out, or was directed not to say, or was hesitant to say. Probably just practice for Friday's debate.
I'm guessing now that Kerry has publicly committed to a stance on the Iraq War, he will have to stand and defend it without further mutations. But you never know...