bush kerry debate iraq economy?

Question

Health care, taxes also key issues
By Alexandra Abboud
Washington File Staff Writer

President George Bush and Senator John Kerry fielded questions from undecided voters and vigorously defended their stances on health care, the economy and the war in Iraq as they faced off in the second of three scheduled presidential election debates.
The debate, the only one of the three set up in a town hall meeting format, took place at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, October 8.
Bush defended his decision to go to war with Iraq, saying, "Saddam Hussein was a threat because he could have given weapons of mass destruction to terrorist enemies. Sanctions were not working. The United Nations was not effective at removing Saddam Hussein."
Kerry questioned Bush's decision to go to war. "[Saddam Hussein] didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Mr. President," he said. "And if we'd used smart diplomacy, we could have saved $200 billion and an invasion of Iraq, and right now Osama bin Laden might be in jail or dead. That's the war against terror."
Each candidate claimed that a report released October 6 by the Central Intelligence Agency on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq validated his own position.
The town hall forum allowed the candidates to walk around the stage and gesture -- a departure from their first, more formal September 30 debate in Coral Gables, Florida, in which they were required to remain behind a podium -- allowing for a more free-flowing and personal presentation by each.
While the first debate focused specifically on foreign policy, this second debate gave voters an opportunity to hear the candidates' positions on domestic issues that in many ways affect voters most directly, including health care and taxes.
The candidates sparred over one of the most crucial election issues -- the economy -- with President Bush and Senator Kerry defending their differing views on the issue.
"The president was handed a $5.6 trillion surplus...when he came into office," Kerry said. "We now have a $2.6 trillion deficit. This is the biggest turnaround in the history of the country."
Bush defended his economic policies, citing the recent recession and the cost of war. Speaking to Kerry, Bush said, "Like you, I'm concerned about the deficit. But I am not going to shortchange our troops in harm's way. And I'm not going to run up taxes, which will cost this economy jobs."
The issue of health care also played an important role in the debate, with one questioner inquiring about the importation of low-cost prescription drugs from Canada.
President Bush cautioned that the safety of prescription drugs coming into the United States must be carefully considered, and said the Food and Drug Administration and the Surgeon General are currently working to insure that such importation can be done safely. "I want to remind you that it wasn't just my administration that made the decision on safety. President Clinton did the same thing, because we have an obligation to protect you," he said.
In response, Senator Kerry said the administration blocked a bill to bring less expensive prescription drugs into the country. "We're not talking about Third World drugs. We're talking about drugs made right here in the United States of America that have American brand names on them in American bottles," he said.
Polls continue to show Bush and Kerry in a statistical dead heat as they begin preparation for their third and final debate on domestic issues October 13 in Tempe, Arizona.
(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Answer 1

So what's your question??

Answer 2

Reviewing what we know about 9/11, it's almost certain that the attacks would have taken place regardless of who was in office (preparations were underway before the election). The genius of this country is centered in great part around its ability to achieve compromise. Think about it - the foundation of this nation is based on the balance of power, freedom of expression and rule of law. And after 9/11, under Bush, that came to and end. Balance of power ceased to exist, with the rubber-stamp Republican Congress, and the Supreme Court bench stacked with conservatives. And the administration used this political capital to the hilt. Freedom of speech came under the greatest assault since the McCarthy era, where disapproval of the Bush administration was voiced as unpatriotic and un-American. People label each other hatefully as 'conservative' and 'liberal', as if only one deserves to be a true American. And the end of the rule of law, that's still unwinding to this very day - the Bush administration has demonstrated clear contempt and utter disregard for the laws of this nation. And if it becomes apparent that they have broken the law, they simply change the law, aided and abetted the Republican Congress. People who call themselves conservatives scream and kick and yell against any and all criticism of the Bush administration, but they are themselves betrayed: It would be hard to imagine any other administration, Democratic or Republican, that was as utterly irresponsible and perpetrated so much mismanagement as the one currently in power. People seem to not understand that it has nothing to do with ideology or political alignment. I've heard a number of lifelong Republicans who believe that the Bush presidency is the worst in the history of this nation. It's about corruption, horrific mistakes, total incompetence in international relations and profound mismanagement. These aren't complaints. This is what's happened. So, a snapshot of how things would be different with any other leader, regardless of political party? Maybe something like this: -The Federal budget would be in far better shape without $1b a week for the Iraq war, enormous corporate welfare for oil companies that are making historical profits and tax breaks for the wealthy. The wealthy and corporate America would be asked to pay their fair share, and we would be in a position to do something about social security, etc. - The average American worker, being free of such punitive tax programs as the AMT, would be able to save more, and have greater spending power, which would increase the value of the dollar and bolsters of overall economy. We would not find ourselves in 2007 teetering on the edge of another recession. - The war in Afghanistan would be in much better shape, since the entire world would not have been alienated by an ill-advised invasion of Iraq. The US military would be free to act in areas of actual threat, such as Iran and North Korea, and they would have much greater international support, which would bring the Iranians and N. Koreans to the table much faster. - The US would be in much better shape to address the true dangers, such as the trade deficit with China, who use virtual slave labor to produce goods for Americans, and then use the massive profits to lend us money. Clinton began a program with Cambodia where US companies would agree to buy goods that had been produced by manufacters using fair labor practices, and it worked - until thrown out by Bush.

Answer 3

Live in the now already!! This is 2007!!!!

Answer 4

Bush is best. Kerry is a phony.

Answer 5

Isn't hindsight great! Bush is an idiot!