Official Vice Presidential Debate Thread.

[Wezas]

Bwahahaha

Edwards: "I talked about it, he's the one that didn't talk about it"

It's about time we had some humor in this debate.

This one is much closer and is actually a good discussion. As opposed to the creaming we saw in the last debate.

[Dhuul]

Cheney is pretty cagey and seems to be holding his own against Edwards.

But Edwards will win the debate because:

1) He's younger and a friggin' supermodel compared to the haggard Cheney.
2) He has better poise...Cheney keeps scowling.
3) A minor issue really, he's right...about Iraq and other things.

[Latrinsorm]

Jesus Edwards reminds me of Clinton.

They sit down? :?:

[Scott]

Damn Edwards reminds me a lot about Bush's debate. He is blinking more then Bush..... and his right eye keeps twitching when he looks at Cheney, it's creepy.

[Ravenstorm]

Edwards is losing points with all the times he's going back to 'old' issues... "Let me just take a moment to address something the Vice-President just said last question..."

Shut the hell up, idiot. Cheney's not doing it and it makes you look bad.

Raven

[Wezas]

Man are Cheney's hands tied on the gay marriage thing. He dissagrees with Bush on the ammendment - but can't say much in this debate.

I honestly feel for him.

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
Edwards is losing points with all the times he's going back to 'old' issues... "Let me just take a moment to address something the Vice-President just said last question..."


Part of the problem is that Cheney takes several pokes at Edwards record and throws numbers around and often Edwards doesn't get the chance to respond. It might just be coincidence - but it seems like Edwards is being cut off more then Cheney.

[Back]

Cheney shouted out FactCheck.org as a good source for information. Except he called it FactCheck.com. LOL. I wonder if that line shows up there.

[Scott]

Originally posted by Wezas

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
Edwards is losing points with all the times he's going back to 'old' issues... "Let me just take a moment to address something the Vice-President just said last question..."


Part of the problem is that Cheney takes several pokes at Edwards record and throws numbers around and often Edwards doesn't get the chance to respond. It might just be coincidence - but it seems like Edwards is being cut off more then Cheney.

Isn't each question format the same?

Question asked

Person A responds
Person B rebuttle
Person A rubuttle
Person B rubuttle

[Ravenstorm]

I'm on Edwards' side and it's bugging me. Maybe it's less an issue with others.

Raven

[Back]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
Edwards is losing points with all the times he's going back to 'old' issues... "Let me just take a moment to address something the Vice-President just said last question..."

Shut the hell up, idiot. Cheney's not doing it and it makes you look bad.

Raven

I think it is a wise move on Edwards’ part to use part of the time of his next question to address the last. They both get the same amount of time. Edwards is using wiser.

[Wezas]

No, the 2nd set of rebuttles is up to the moderator. I'll check the script afterwards - it may just be my perception.

And factcheck.com is not factcheck.org. Neither are coming up (I assume because of the traffic) but factcheck.org page title refers to politics, factcheck.com page title refers to education (not politics)

[Parkbandit]

And PLEASE stop underlining everything you write Edwards.. like you are making sure to bring it up later on. And how many times does he have to break the rules in one answer??

[Back]

Anyone notice Edwards slurping coffee and tearing paper while Cheney speaks? Too funny.

[Wezas]

Yeah, I noticed the ripping paper and flipping pages - the opposing person's mic should be turned down when the other is speaking.

[Wezas]

Closing Arguements:

Damn Edwards has some Charisma.

Cheney has more scare tactics.

[ThisOtherKingdom]

The audience was also supposed to remain quiet, but I heard them laughing. Damn rulebreakers!

[Wezas]

Factcheck.org & Factcheck.com are both back up now.

And Factcheck.com looks like some kind of junk site with links to all kinds of places.

Factcheck.org has some good info about the first Presidential debate (what was misspoken in the debate).

http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=271

[Back]

Ok, debates over and its a media circus of them saying they were better, and they saying them were better yadda yadda.

As Wezas said, Cheney used his scare tactics again “If you don’t vote for us, a terrorist will sneak a nuclear bomb into one of our major cities.” Cheney also used almost every single old argument they’ve been using over and over.

I think Edwards said more tonight than I’ve heard anyone in public say about the truth of this administration while holding up his and Kerry’s records and plans. Cheney didn’t come close to addressing accusations or providing clear insight into what he and Bush want to do.

The most interesting question of the night, I thought, was asking WTF is up with the huge divide in our government and our people after the past 4 years? Now that I think about it, yeah? WTF? One thing I do know, its not good for us and our country and it has happened on this administrations watch.

[Wezas]

Uncommitted voters poll.

Left slanting CBS has it:

42% Edwards
29% Cheney
29% Tie

With, of course, the women more in favor of Edwards.

Will your opinion of the Vice President affect who you vote for for president?

56% Yes.

[4a6c1]

Cheney cracks me up. He debates like, holy shit...what was his name. Calvin Coolidge. He reminds me of him. Dry humor and to the point about what he has to say.

Edwards did ok though. Held his own very well against the more experienced Cheney.

All in all it was what I expected of them both.

[Hulkein]

Online polls are all meaningless, flash polls tonite will give you an idea.

Cheney did a good job exposing the terrible records of both Kerry and Edwards. Something Bush didn't really do.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Wezas
Uncommitted voters poll.

Left slanting CBS has it:

42% Edwards
29% Cheney
29% Tie

With, of course, the women more in favor of Edwards.

Will your opinion of the Vice President affect who you vote for for president?

56% Yes.

You said it.. I'm sure this will be one of the only places that has Edwards winning like that. Well, except maybe Moveon.org or BillClinton.com or JohnKerry.com

[Wezas]

BWAHAHAHAHAHA.

On Larry King:

Cheney's daughter said she "just heard from another network she won't name about a poll that Cheney won this 43% vs. 35%".

Larry King asked Anne Richards what she thought of that. Without hesitation she said "Sounds like Fox News had a poll"

Funny as hell seeing a lady old as dirt pwning Fox News.

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
You said it.. I'm sure this will be one of the only places that has Edwards winning like that. Well, except maybe Moveon.org or BillClinton.com or JohnKerry.com

Actually, the only network that took a poll on this debate that currently doesn't show Edwards leading is......

[Edited on 10-6-2004 by Wezas]

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Wezas
Man are Cheney's hands tied on the gay marriage thing. He dissagrees with Bush on the ammendment - but can't say much in this debate.

I honestly feel for him. Didn't he respond by saying "Thanks for those nice things you said about my daughter" and that's it? That was classy.
Originally posted by JihnasSpirit
Calvin Coolidge. He reminds me of him. Congratulations PB. There's somebody older than you. :saint:

All in all, I liked this debate a lot more. I don't get the guys who were like "OMG IT WAS ROCKY IV IN THERE". I didn't hear near as much repetition as the first debate, which was practically a given going in, but still cool.

[Wezas]

As a side note - I urge all of you to follow Dick Cheney's advice and go to http://factcheck.com

[Ravenstorm]

Now thats funny.

Raven

[Back]

Originally posted by Backlash
Cheney shouted out FactCheck.org as a good source for information. Except he called it FactCheck.com. LOL. I wonder if that line shows up there.

Heh, I’m quoting myself here because I called it.

Cheney pwns himself on Halliburton and FactCheck.org (http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=272)!

[Weedmage Princess]

I missed the debate on television, I'll probably print out and read the transcript later on at work tonight. That's what I did with the Presidential debate last week.

I will say this, I do recommend that people, especially those who are for the most part still undecided (like myself) read transcripts versus watching it and all the hype that ensues. It's amazing how many things on both sides get taken out of context or little bits and pieces of what was said get turned and twisted to be used as bash material.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by LatrinsormCongratulations PB. There's somebody older than you. :saint:

I hate you.

This just in.. the debate DID make a difference:

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Wezas

Originally posted by Parkbandit
You said it.. I'm sure this will be one of the only places that has Edwards winning like that. Well, except maybe Moveon.org or BillClinton.com or JohnKerry.com

Actually, the only network that took a poll on this debate that currently doesn't show Edwards leading is......

[Edited on 10-6-2004 by Wezas]

Actually.. you are incorrect. I was watching ABC news and they had Cheney solidly in the lead. 43-35.. and they did it in a more scientific way that say MSNBC with their online 'poll'.

I was pleased with Cheney and look forward to Friday's debate.

[Weedmage Princess]

ROFL! That billboard is just wrong.

Cheney is fucking awesome. He fucking PWNED Edwards.

- Arkans

[Jorddyn]

Originally posted by Arkans
Cheney is fucking awesome. He fucking PWNED Edwards.

- Arkans

He needs to do some fact checking of his own, though. FactCheck.org doesn't exactly provide gleaming reviews of his history with Haliburton.

All in all, I thought it was a good debate. I was a little disappointed in Edwards' performance, but I don't think he was crushed by any means.

Jorddyn

Just like Kerry should as well.

I just like Cheney's style. Damn better than Edwards.

- Arkans

[DeV]

I think Edwards held his own quite well against the, "older" which doesn't necessarily mean more experienced, Cheney. Both did well in my opinion. Edwards could have brought a little more to the table, but no complaints.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Jorddyn

Originally posted by Arkans
Cheney is fucking awesome. He fucking PWNED Edwards.

- Arkans

He needs to do some fact checking of his own, though. FactCheck.org doesn't exactly provide gleaming reviews of his history with Haliburton.

All in all, I thought it was a good debate. I was a little disappointed in Edwards' performance, but I don't think he was crushed by any means.

Jorddyn

Criticizing Cheney about Haliburton makes about as much sense as you criticizing me about Marriott Corporation. I left that job about 5 years ago.

What people refuse to understand is that Haliburton was and is the ONLY company in the country that could do the job we were asking. Well no shit it's a no bid contract.. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO COULD BID.

I realize that it makes a juicier story that here is the evil Dr. Cheney and his evil company rogue company Haliburton.. but it's not the reality when you actually look into it.

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Well no shit it's a no bid contract.. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO COULD BID.


Or we could let companies from other countries bid for the work. Oh, wait, Bush pwned that.

[Jorddyn]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
Criticizing Cheney about Haliburton makes about as much sense as you criticizing me about Marriott Corporation. I left that job about 5 years ago.


Were you running for public office and had done shady things while working for Marriott Corporation, it would be very relevant.


What people refuse to understand is that Haliburton was and is the ONLY company in the country that could do the job we were asking. Well no shit it's a no bid contract.. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO COULD BID.

And we know this... because we didn't ask anyone else? Also, the fact that the contract was no-bid (which is not disputed) is not the only issue.


I realize that it makes a juicier story that here is the evil Dr. Cheney and his evil company rogue company Haliburton.. but it's not the reality when you actually look into it.

So long as the media is investigating the evil John Kerry for throwing medals over a fence and sitting near Jane Fonda, I have no problem at all with them investigating what led Cheney's company to receive large fines and what laws they may have broken.

Jorddyn

[xtc]

I only caught snippets of the debate (I had a report to complete for work).

Cheney certainly seemed to hold his own and as always did a great job articulating his position and did a great job showing Kerry as being very inconsistent with the way he has voted on bills and his promises now. i.e. Kerry claims he will increase funding for the troops but he has consistently voted against funding for the troops in the past.

I haven't really seen alot of Edwards before but he seemed very fake & phony to me.

Still anyone's game

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Jorddyn
Were you running for public office and had done shady things while working for Marriott Corporation, it would be very relevant.

Oh yes.. the shady moniker. Please produce some of your bullshit shady evidence that Cheney did while working at Haliburton that has anything to do with the bullshit they are claiming now. What's that? You don't have any? Ok.. thanks.



And we know this... because we didn't ask anyone else? Also, the fact that the contract was no-bid (which is not disputed) is not the only issue.

I'm not sure what reading problem you had with "BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO COULD BID" but God.. I even made it all capital letters so you couldn't miss it.



So long as the media is investigating the evil John Kerry for throwing medals over a fence and sitting near Jane Fonda, I have no problem at all with them investigating what led Cheney's company to receive large fines and what laws they may have broken.

Jorddyn

Sorry.. when was the last time you saw a Commander in Chief protesting the army he is supposed to lead? He claims now that he is so very proud of his service and how great the armed forces are. Yea, I believe him.

[Jorddyn]

Oh yes.. the shady moniker. Please produce some of your bullshit shady evidence that Cheney did while working at Haliburton that has anything to do with the bullshit they are claiming now. What's that? You don't have any? Ok.. thanks.

To me, millions of dollars in fines = something shady happened.


Originally posted by Parkbandit
I'm not sure what reading problem you had with "BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO COULD BID" but God.. I even made it all capital letters so you couldn't miss it.

And, with that childish remark, I'm done with responding to you in this thread.

I'd like to remind you, again, that the point of a debate is not to be an ass and piss off your opponent. It is to try to get them to see your point of view. At the moment, I don't care if you have solid proof that Kerry eats babies and Edwards himself shot Kennedy, I won't read it. Really, that's too bad, as you're an intelligent person, and I think you make some good points when you don't resort to insults.

Jorddyn

[xtc]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Parkbandit
Well no shit it's a no bid contract.. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO COULD BID.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is my understanding that Cheney/Bush administration gave the contract to Halliburton to repair Iraqi oil fields when Bush was still saying that he hadn't decided if he was going into Iraq. Giving a contract to your friends at the company you were CEO at without tendering bids from other companies would get you fired in most jobs. Cheney sold all his shares in Halliburton but he still holds options in them......can you say crooked

As far as the notion that there was no else to do the work....please what bullshit.

Competitors to Halliburton

Schlumberger
Baker Hughes
GlobalSantefe
Nabor Industries
Bechtel
Technip
Weatherford International

Hooveronline says there are 34 competitors to Halliburton
http://www.hoovers.com/halliburton/--ID__10697--/free-co-factsheet.xhtml





[Edited on 10-6-2004 by xtc]

[Edited on 10-6-2004 by xtc]

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtc
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Parkbandit
Well no shit it's a no bid contract.. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE WHO COULD BID.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is my understanding that Cheney/Bush administration gave the contract to Halliburton to repair Iraqi oil fields when Bush was still saying that he hadn't decided if he was going into Iraq. Giving a contract to your friends at the company you were CEO at without tendering bids from other companies would get you fired in most jobs. Cheney sold all his shares in Halliburton but he still holds options in them......can you say crooked

Incorrect. On Factcheck.org:


That still would leave the possibility that Cheney could profit from his Halliburton stock options if the company's stock rises in value. However, Cheney and his wife Lynne have assigned any future profits from their stock options in Halliburton and several other companies to charity. And we're not just taking the Cheney's word for this -- we asked for a copy of the legal agreement they signed, which we post here publicly for the first time.

The "Gift Trust Agreement" the Cheney's signed two days before he took office turns over power of attorney to a trust administrator to sell the options at some future time and to give the after-tax profits to three charities. The agreement specifies that 40% will go to the University of Wyoming (Cheney's home state), 40% will go to George Washington University's medical faculty to be used for tax-exempt charitable purposes, and 20% will go to Capital Partners for Education , a charity that provides financial aid for low-income students in Washington, DC to attend private and religious schools.

The agreement states that it is "irrevocable and may not be terminated, waived or amended," so the Cheney's can't take back their options later.

The options owned by the Cheney's have been valued at nearly $8 million, his attorney says. Such valuations are rough estimates only -- the actual value will depend on what happens to stock prices in the future, which of course can't be known beforehand. But it is clear that giving up rights to the future profits constitutes a significant financial sacrifice, and a sizeable donation to the chosen charities.

Can you say "Well above approach?" One little additional tidbit from factcheck.org:


It is important to note here that Cheney could legally have held onto his Halliburton stock options, and no law required him to buy insurance against the possibility that Halliburton wouldn't pay the deferred compensation it owes him. Both the President and Vice President are specifically exempted from federal conflict-of-interest laws, for one thing, as are members of Congress and federal judges.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Jorddyn

And, with that childish remark, I'm done with responding to you in this thread.

I'd like to remind you, again, that the point of a debate is not to be an ass and piss off your opponent. It is to try to get them to see your point of view. At the moment, I don't care if you have solid proof that Kerry eats babies and Edwards himself shot Kennedy, I won't read it. Really, that's too bad, as you're an intelligent person, and I think you make some good points when you don't resort to insults.

Jorddyn

Boo hoo. Sorry, but I will always call it like I see it. I posted that and your comeback was as if you failed to see the capital letters.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings as that was not my intention.

[Ilvane]

Come on, PB. Cheney was the CEO of Haliburton, you mean to tell me he didn't know what was going on?

I mean come on..you weren't the CEO of Marriot, you know there is a difference.

I think Haliburton is a good talk they should have and investigate. There is a hell of a lot more there then there was in Clinton's investigations..:lol:

Now as for Edwards, I thought he did well. Cheney looked pretty scrunched up for most of the debate, like he was going to snarl and bite someone if they challenged him. He was quite rude in some instances too.

I like Edwards because he talks to me like a human being, Cheney talks to me like I'm a lower being.

-A

[xtc]

Cheney stills receives $1million dollars a year in deferred compensation from Halliburton.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,912515,00.html

And to award a contract like that to Halliburton without a proper bidding process smells. It looks like Cheney was doing favours for some friends......perhaps just keeping things warm for himself at Halliburton in case he loses in November. Either way it stinks.

and no I am not just sucking up to Ilvane because she has a cute pic

[Artha]

Cheney stills receives $1million dollars a year in deferred compensation from Halliburton.
He gets that as long as Halliburton exists, it doesn't matter how well they're doing.


And to award a contract like that to Halliburton without a proper bidding process smells.
Yeah, how dare the government give a contract to a company that specializes in the kind of things they need? The nerve of those fascist assholes.

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by Ilvane
Come on, PB. Cheney was the CEO of Haliburton, you mean to tell me he didn't know what was going on?

I mean come on..you weren't the CEO of Marriot, you know there is a difference.

I think Haliburton is a good talk they should have and investigate. There is a hell of a lot more there then there was in Clinton's investigations..:lol:

Now as for Edwards, I thought he did well. Cheney looked pretty scrunched up for most of the debate, like he was going to snarl and bite someone if they challenged him. He was quite rude in some instances too.

I like Edwards because he talks to me like a human being, Cheney talks to me like I'm a lower being.

-A

OMG! Ilvane thought Edwards did better than Cheney??? WTF! I would NEVER have thought that!!!

Edwards could have been asleep and your complete and utter bias would still believe he somehow won the debate.

[Ilvane]

I'll give Cheney about 2 points. One for being nice when Edwards complimented his family, and one for not mentioning Clinton..heh.

-A

[Enoxo]

"He was quite rude in some instances too. "

Cheney was rude? It was Edwards who broke the debate rules on his first question. And then he went on to continuely to talk over the limit, kept on back-tracking to previous questions, and then at one points he even tried to talk over Cheney when it was Cheney's turn to speak! Edwards was clearly the rude person.

Edwards simply showed that he cannot stand up on his position. He didn't even have a reason why he's qualified to be vice-president.

As for Haliburton... I hope they play up Haliburton like they played up Bush's TANG service... it's a losing smear-campaign. It'll only make themselves look worse.

The Government looked at all the companies who were in the business of what Haliburton did. They questioned them to determine if they could do what they wanted on time, on budget, and efficiently. No one could do it on time, on budget, to what Haliburton did. That's why they got a no-bid contract. They were, effectively, the only company to do what needed to be done.

[Keller]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

Originally posted by Jorddyn
Were you running for public office and had done shady things while working for Marriott Corporation, it would be very relevant.

Oh yes.. the shady moniker. Please produce some of your bullshit shady evidence that Cheney did while working at Haliburton that has anything to do with the bullshit they are claiming now. What's that? You don't have any? Ok.. thanks.

In fact, we did post an article pointing out that Cheney hasn't profited personally while in office from Halliburton's Iraq contracts, as falsely implied by a Kerry TV ad. But Edwards was talking about Cheney's responsibility for earlier Halliburton troubles. And in fact, Edwards was mostly right.

Oops?

[ThisOtherKingdom]

One of the false claims Cheney made during the debate was that he had never met John Edwards until the night of the debate. That is false, because they have video tape of them meeting as early as three years prior (sitting next to eachother, no less). This also happens to be a mistake on Edwards part, because he failed to mention that they had in fact met previously.

[Keller]

Originally posted by ThisOtherKingdom
One of the false claims Cheney made during the debate was that he had never met John Edwards until the night of the debate. That is false, because they have video tape of them meeting as early as three years prior (sitting next to eachother, no less). This also happens to be a mistake on Edwards part, because he failed to mention that they had in fact met previously.

I saw the video too. Edwards should have also brought up that Cheney has only been to 2 Tuesday sessions in 4 years and instead has weekly meetings with only the republican senators. They sure are uniters though!

[ThisOtherKingdom]

Originally posted by Keller
I saw the video too. Edwards should have also brought up that Cheney has only been to 2 Tuesday sessions in 4 years and instead has weekly meetings with only the republican senators. They sure are uniters though!

I have also read that. During the debate, Cheney claimed "most every Tuesday" he presided over the Senate meetings when he's actually only done that twice in the last four years according to Senate records. I've also read, although I don't know if this is true, that is also the exact same number of times John Edwards has filled in as presiding member of the Senate — twice.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Parkbandit

Originally posted by Ilvane
Come on, PB. Cheney was the CEO of Haliburton, you mean to tell me he didn't know what was going on?

I mean come on..you weren't the CEO of Marriot, you know there is a difference.

I think Haliburton is a good talk they should have and investigate. There is a hell of a lot more there then there was in Clinton's investigations..:lol:

Now as for Edwards, I thought he did well. Cheney looked pretty scrunched up for most of the debate, like he was going to snarl and bite someone if they challenged him. He was quite rude in some instances too.

I like Edwards because he talks to me like a human being, Cheney talks to me like I'm a lower being.

-A

OMG! Ilvane thought Edwards did better than Cheney??? WTF! I would NEVER have thought that!!!

Edwards could have been asleep and your complete and utter bias would still believe he somehow won the debate.

kind of like your complete and utter bias for Bush after the debate with Kerry?

[Parkbandit]

Originally posted by xtc
kind of like your complete and utter bias for Bush after the debate with Kerry?

Really? Let's see my post on the Presidential debate.


Originally posted by Parkbandit

I swear Ravenstorm.. you flip flop harder than your candidate. Aren't you the guy that posts that polls mean shit.. whenever Kerry is losing.. but then brings them up whenever there is a positive poll number to present?

From the debate last night.. Props for Bush for using Kerry's own words against him.. which was quite funny at the beginning, but then even irritated me a bit later on.

I don't think that it was that Kerry did so well in the debate.. although he was articulate and composed.. I think that Bush lost some votes because of how much he looked angry and less 'likable'. Bush needs to remain calm and composed and stop looking so arrogant and angry. His message is clearer and his economic policy isn't filled with as much bullshit as Kerry's.



I don't know.. I think I didn't say everything was so perfect with my candidate.. as Ilvane constantly does. Complete and utter it was not... thanks for playing though.

[Edited on 10-7-2004 by Parkbandit]

[xtc]

PB I re-read your posts after the Presidential debate and you were somewhat balanced with your opinions I will concede.

However you claimed that Bush pwned Kerry with Kerry's own words during the debate. I watched the whole debate and what I say was a pathetic incoherent stumbling attempt by Bush to use Kerry's words against him. But by my eyes Bush was so scattered it had little to no effect.

Neither would you concede that Kerry won the debate which he clearly did to my eyes. I was shocked at Bush's performance. That said I think Bush will be much stronger in Friday's debate on domestic issues. Pro gay marriage, Pro abortion will work against Kerry in the debate. If Bush is well prepped he should be able to slam Kerry on his voting record on many issues when you compare it to his campaign.

I expected Kerry to get the best of Bush on Foreign issues, I doubt he will do as well on domestic issues.

[Edited on 10-7-2004 by xtc]