|
Gijith
Daisy Chain Eater

Registered: 12/04/03
Posts: 2,400
Loc: New York
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: mr crisper]
#3203275 - 10/01/04 08:22 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
mr crisper said: pinky, why do you think your analysis of something you didn't even watch is important enough to lock and stick at the top of the messageboard? i have a lot of time for your views and thoughts but this forum is not your personal soapbox.
I'll second that. And pinky, I was gonna wait till you posted whatever additional analysis you were planning before I spoke my piece. But I'll do it now. I think the problem with your analysis - aside form the fact that it's based on a crappy transcript alone - is that you're approaching this as if it was two separate interviews or speeches. One with Bush. One with Kerry. And you've done your analysis as a opinionated point by point dissection of the issues. But what happened last night was not a pair of interviews, nor was it a pair of campaign speeches (despite what people here had predicted). The purpose of an interview or a speech is to give the candidates a chance to declare their positions and make supporting arguments. And while there was some of this last night, it was not the purpose of the debate. The purpose of last night was to have the two candidates square off in a battle, using their respective arguements against one another. In this sense, the postions themselves amount to little more than ammunition. It's the way a candidate uses that ammunition, the skill with which he attacks, that will determine which man is left standing. And Kerry shot Bush down cold last night. For someone like me, who thinks neither candidate has a decent plan for America, they were essentially firing blanks. For a liberal, Kerry's gun was loaded, while Bush's wasn't. For someone like you, it was Bush who had the loaded gun. And for those precious undecided voters, both candidates were firing live ammo. And I have to believe that the majority of undecided voters watching last night saw Kerry skillfully defeat Bush. And not because his positions were more logically sound (there is a significant number of people in this country who honestly feel that their positions are of equal quality), but because he succeeded in the purpose of the debate. PS: yeah, get off your high horse and unsticky that shit
|
Skikid16
fungus fan

Registered: 06/27/02
Posts: 5,666
Loc: In the middle of the nort...
Last seen: 18 years, 9 months
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: JesusChrist]
#3203287 - 10/01/04 08:26 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
We couldn't have gone to war without Congress authorizing the use of force, and John Kerry gave that authorization.
I mean yeah, the Bush Admin are such sticklers for the rules.........
AhHAAHAHAHAHAHAh
Quote:
If he really thinks that it was going to stretch us to thin or divert resources from the real target then he had no reason to vote for the war
Bush had already diverted troops when he started the massive troop buildup in the late summer/early fall of 02.
Quote:
I am still mad that the Kerry camp took shots at Allawi.
While I do respect Allawi, I mean hell, I respect him because he's survived this long, which is REALLY impressive....he was picked by the US appointed Iraq governing council, I mean, he is not a leader picked by the people of Iraq, but rather by those put in place by AMERICA..........
-------------------- Re-Defeat Bush in '04
|
Skikid16
fungus fan

Registered: 06/27/02
Posts: 5,666
Loc: In the middle of the nort...
Last seen: 18 years, 9 months
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: infidelGOD]
#3203325 - 10/01/04 08:42 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
infidelGOD said: Bush gets a D- for his performance in the debate you get an F for your analysis of the debate
Yeah man
Pinky.....its pretty gay that your other thread is sticky, actually REALLY gay.....
-------------------- Re-Defeat Bush in '04
|
silversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!


Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Skikid16]
#3203335 - 10/01/04 08:46 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Ya. I'd like to add that the only real way you can say someone wins on the issues is if you personally happen to agree with them more. Since many posters on this forum don't agree with Bush, it seems a little unfair to sticky a thread saying that Bush wins on the issues.
--------------------
  "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire
|
Ekstaza
stranger than most


Registered: 04/10/03
Posts: 4,324
Loc: Around the corner
Last seen: 9 months, 23 days
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Phred]
#3203448 - 10/01/04 09:50 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Question to Bush: Do you believe the election of Senator Kerry on November the 2nd would increase the chances of the U.S. being hit by another 9/11-type terrorist attack?
- if we lose our will, we lose, if we remain strong and resolute, we will defeat this enemy. (sly dig at Kerry's defeatism. Kerry doesn't want to win, Kerry wants to cut and run). Nonsense, Kerry sees the problems involved with a cut and run strategy and is prepared to go the distance in Iraq with a plan for the inevitable and necessary reduction of American troops in the region.
- But we also have to be smart, which means not diverting attention from the real war on terror in Afghanistan against ObL (no proof ObL is even in Afghanistan anymore. If he is, he no longer has govt support there) That's not the point. The point is that ObL should have been our focus instead of Saddam, who was contained and predictable.
- and taking if off to Iraq where the 9/11 Commission confirms there was no connection to 9/11 itself and Saddam Hussein (bullshit, and many Americans know this. No connection between Hussein and 9-11, okay. No connection between Al-Q and Iraq? Nonsense) This statement leads me to believe that you are going to believe what you want to believe no matter what the truth may be.
- and where the reason for going to war was weapons of mass destruction, not the removal of Saddam Hussein. (again, most Americans recognize there was more to the war than WMD -- which Kerry always said were there anyway. Besides, Kerry himself voted for the "Iraq Regime Change" bill when Clinton was pres, as well as voting to authorize Bush to go to war. He has even said that knowing what we know now he would still have voted for that authorization) Kerry voted for the authorization of force, plain and simple, giving the president the tool of force to be used when necessary. He does not believe that it was necessary at the time it was used. I believe that cops should have guns and that they should be authorized to use them when necessary, but I don't think that all situations are necessarily the time to use that force.
- president has made colossal error of judgment. And judgment is what we look for in the president (tough to make this "judgment" charge stick given Kerry's past statements on Hussein, WMD, Iraq, voting for war, etc. Kerry can't win on this no matter what he says because his prior statements impeach him. Grievous tactical error to go on the attack here because he himself is so vulnerable to devastating counterattack. The only reason he can get away with it is that he is the last to speak here. He needs to hope Lehrer doesn't do a followup. Fortunately, since Lehrer is a Libbie himself, there's little chance of that.)As Kerry said in the debate, he made a mistake in the way he spoke about the war. Bush made a mistake in going to war. Big Difference. Kerry's statements have been twisted and taken out of context in order to take credibility away from him.
- proud that important military figures support me -- Shalikashvili; Eisenhower's son, Admiral William Crown; General McBeak (yeah. all ex military. Big whoop. Extremely lame. "These guys think I'd be better, and they should know, cuz they used to be generals.") Exactly what are you getting at here? I think that the men and women who are fighting or have fought for our country have plenty of valid opinions on national security and if they don't support the current war president, there is a reason.
- ObL escaped, we had him surrounded. But we didn't use American forces, the president outsourced that job too. (Huge error there! You can bet your bottom dollar your average American didn't appreciate the "outsourcing" comment in this context!) I appreciated it very well as I am trained in an industry that is overly outsourced at the moment and I have to work a crappy production line job that endangers my health. With that statement Kerry craftily noted Bush's mistake while tying it to a current issue in the lives of many Americans.
Weak response from Kerry. Lists a few ex-Generals, blames Bush for not micro-managing the commanders in charge of the Tora Bora campaign, uses the tired old "diversion of resources" saw. A big mistake in trying to claim there was no connection between Hussein and terrorism, even knowing that most Americans believe there were. Hell, a significant portion still believe Hussein was involved in 9-11 itself! His many many "stances" on the war in Iraq will hurt him here as well. The "outsourcing" comment was a blunder, pure and simple.
Conclusion -- Bush wins this one handily, despite the cheap shot question he was handed. Lehrer should be ashamed of himself for that one. Bush gets a "B+", Kerry gets a "C-"
Your interpretations of the content of the debate are unique if nothing else.
-------------------- YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH ANY GIVEN DRUG ISN'T THE DEFINITIVE MEASURE OF THE DRUGS EFFECTS.
|
Rono
DSYSB since '01


Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 10 months, 24 days
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: silversoul7]
#3203464 - 10/01/04 10:01 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Since many posters on this forum don't agree with Bush, it seems a little unfair to sticky a thread saying that Bush wins on the issues.
To be fair, I'll unsticky the thread...
-------------------- "Life has never been weird enough for my liking"
|
Skikid16
fungus fan

Registered: 06/27/02
Posts: 5,666
Loc: In the middle of the nort...
Last seen: 18 years, 9 months
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Rono]
#3203512 - 10/01/04 10:20 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
and let it die like bush's control of the election after the debates....
-------------------- Re-Defeat Bush in '04
|
Learyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!


Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 34,084
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 1 hour, 39 minutes
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Phred]
#3203702 - 10/01/04 11:22 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
You only think Bush won on the issues because you like Bush. If you liked Kerry you would probably say Kerry won.
I didn't see the debate either, but I know Kerry won on the "where's Osama?" issue.
-------------------- -------------------------------- Mp3 of the month: The Apple-Glass Cyndrome - Someday
|
Psilygirl
cyan goddess


Registered: 08/28/03
Posts: 4,418
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Learyfan]
#3203806 - 10/01/04 11:45 AM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
i couldnt agree more with everyone's posts...
its not fair to sticky and then LOCK a post claiming something stupid like 'bush won' he made it so no one could argue his OPINION just cause he's a mod. bah made me sick.
-------------------- "Love says 'I am everything.' Wisdom says 'I am nothing.' Between the two, my life flows." Puget Sound Mycological Society
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?


Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Psilygirl]
#3203921 - 10/01/04 01:10 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
KingOftheThing
the cool fool


Registered: 11/17/02
Posts: 27,397
Loc: USA
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Psilygirl]
#3203933 - 10/01/04 01:13 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
just what i said
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Psilygirl]
#3204105 - 10/01/04 02:39 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Psilygirl writes:
its not fair to sticky and then LOCK a post claiming something stupid like 'bush won' he made it so no one could argue his OPINION just cause he's a mod. bah made me sick.
What's your point? You are arguing, in a thread that *I* took the trouble to set up specifically for the purpose of criticism, with links going in both directions so that if you catch one (no matter which one) you'll be directed to the other.
If I'd had the time to do the entire analysis before going to sleep, I wouldn't have locked the thread. There would have been no need. But perhaps you as a relative newcomer to the forum are unaware of how easily threads get derailed in this forum. This way no one needs to scroll back through eight pages of irrelevance in order to find when I said this or where I said that.
When I complete the post, I'll unlock it. I didn't lock it to "abuse" my mod powers or to prevent people from criticizing my opinions. If I didn't want people to criticize the post, then why on earth did I go to the trouble of creating this thread, inviting criticism? Note the title of the thread you're currently posting in -- "Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here". Could I possibly have made it any plainer what I wanted you guys to do? I want you to critique my analysis, fa cryin' out loud! That's the whole frickin' purpose of going to all the trouble to set this up!
Tell me what's easier -- having the post to which you are replying in a separate browser window beside the window in which you are replying, or repeatedly scrolling up through pages of intervening material to find the quote from the first post in the thread that you wish to criticize?
And locking a post at the poster's request is not an abuse of mod powers. I get asked by posters to lock their threads, move their threads, delete their threads, sticky their threads. I have yet to refuse such a request, although the threads I sticky do not always remain stickied permanently.
By the way, I am about to add some more to the analysis. You might want to check it out. I look forward to your reasoned criticism of the new material.
pinky
--------------------
|
trendal
J♠


Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Phred]
#3204120 - 10/01/04 02:44 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
A better idea is to use this nifty little program I found called "notepad.exe" 
If not finished a post but have to leave, just paste the post into notepad and save for later!
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate


Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Phred]
#3204186 - 10/01/04 02:58 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I have learned not to doubt Pinky's actions... just his pollitical standings.
Pinky is a very fair guy.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?


Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Rose]
#3204246 - 10/01/04 03:08 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
painfully fair....
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Phred]
#3204277 - 10/01/04 03:23 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
When I complete the post, I'll unlock it. I didn't lock it to "abuse" my mod powers or to prevent people from criticizing my opinions So if any member on the left half finishes a post and requests it be made sticky and locked at the top of the board until it's finished you will oblige? Or does this new "rule" only apply to you?
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: trendal]
#3204324 - 10/01/04 03:38 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
A better idea is to use this nifty little program I found called "notepad.exe" If not finished a post but have to leave, just paste the post into notepad and save for later!
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?


Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Xlea321]
#3204342 - 10/01/04 03:42 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
where the hell did rollins make that statement?
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
Divided_Sky
Ten ThousandThings

Registered: 11/02/03
Posts: 3,171
Loc: The Shining Void
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Phred]
#3204552 - 10/01/04 04:40 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Bush did a terrible job even though I believe his logic was more sound. He just repeated the same lines over and over without and dodged questions without refuting Kerry's bullshit. He did hit very hard on the issues of dissing prime minister Allawi, saying Iraq was a mistake, but it wasn't ten minutes later, and demoralizing the troops. He had alot of good opportunities and passed them up. He looked really bad too.
I was dismayed that Bush was such a weak debater that he let Kerry get away with some ridiculous spin. It felt like watching Johny Cochrane defending OJ, the prosecutors were nowhere near his league but the facts were on their side. When my freinds say 'Bush acted like an idiot!' I say 'Yes, he is not a good candid speaker and does not react well to public pressure. However, you don't determine the strength of a case by the talent of the lawyer.'
|
Psilygirl
cyan goddess


Registered: 08/28/03
Posts: 4,418
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here [Re: Phred]
#3204696 - 10/01/04 05:38 PM (19 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
first, you didnt have to single me out when ten other people said the same thing before me.
second, thats all fine and good but the rest of us dont have that privelege.
anyways, just dont post and lock such a controversial thread and not expect people to get upset about it. it's propoganda because it's opinion and you didnt give anyone the chance to respond. it's like advertisements with fine print--you sticky and lock this controversial thread and then in tiny print make an insignificant post about where you are allowed to debate the debate.
i certainly didnt feel the way you do about the debate and I WATCHED IT, therefore its not fact...its YOUR opinion (and probably others...) but its not necessarily majority enough or truthful enough to lock and sticky. i vehemently disagree with it.
anyways i'm done i was simply agreeing with what EVERYONE else already wrote, thanks for singling me out, buddy.
-------------------- "Love says 'I am everything.' Wisdom says 'I am nothing.' Between the two, my life flows." Puget Sound Mycological Society
|
|