General Cycling Discussion - Couple Points for Kerry

Although I'm not a Kerry supporter, I gave him a couple extra points for mentioning 'bike' or 'bicycle' on three separate occassions during his acceptance speech.

Is there a transcript out there somewhere? I didn't see his speech and am curious as to the context.

Nevermind... found on The Boston Herald (http://news.bostonherald.com/dncTranscripts/view.bg?articleid=37841) website.

There was a good article about GWB on CNN online recently about his MTB experiences.

Ivan

Him and one of his "swiftboat" mates were also wearing LiveStrong wristbands.

Him and one of his "swiftboat" mates were also wearing LiveStrong wristbands.

Yes they were. He also went for a bike ride yesterday before the speech to "clear his head." I'm already voting for the guy but this is icing on the cake.

Yesterday he...

1. Gave a great speech.

2. Rode his bike.

3. Mentioned riding his bike as a child in his acceptance speech.

4. Wore a LiveStrong band during the process.

(BTW, there was no mention of him wrecking. :p )

He knows a lot of words and how to use them, but he seems to have forgoton about CONCISE. Cripes somone turn on the 'wrap it up' sign, fade to music.

He knows a lot of words and how to use them, but he seems to have forgoton about CONCISE. Cripes somone turn on the 'wrap it up' sign, fade to music.

apparrently he cut himself short a few times to make sure the speech stayed in the hour window the networks would give the convention.

Although I'm not a Kerry supporter, I gave him a couple extra points for mentioning 'bike' or 'bicycle' on three separate occassions during his acceptance speech.

As a kid he rode his bike into Soviet East Berlin? Um.....yeah. Ok.

Well heck yes, lets vote for the guy because he rides a bike; most of the time though the public votes on who has the best hair style. Makes you wonder how we get the politicians we get.

(BTW, there was no mention of him wrecking. :p )

Yeah, why bring up old news. That happened a few months ago.

Although I'm not a Kerry supporter, I gave him a couple extra points for mentioning 'bike' or 'bicycle' on three separate occassions during his acceptance speech.


Bike, bike, bike.

(Do you like me better now, too?)

<snip> most of the time though the public votes on who has the best hair style. Well....... John Kerry DOES have more presidential hair
http://img40.exs.cx/img40/304/Jfk.jpghttp://img40.exs.cx/img40/2348/RonaldReagan.jpg
http://img40.exs.cx/img40/9299/johnkerry.jpg

Now compare those to:

http://img40.exs.cx/img40/4853/Bushchimp56.jpg

See what I mean?

Bike, bike, bike.

(Do you like me better now, too?)

yes..

Better to vote on biking than hair. At least we can be relativly sure that he won't stuff a stick in our spokes when it comes to bike lanes/paths. heck maybe he could smooth the formation, just a little the pres is busy job, of a Tour de Rockies or some such multi-state competition.
It don't matter much to me anyway, if bush is here 4 more I'm bailing out, ex-patriot, if kerry's turns out just as bad, same deal. This country's been going downhill for a quite a while now, the currant sob might just be enough to drive in those last couple coffin nails. Or not, I may just end up sitting on my lazy American arse whatching it crumble around me.

It don't matter much to me anyway, if bush is here 4 more I'm bailing out, ex-patriot,
You mean expatriate (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=expatriate%20)

Spelen shmelun. I don't speell whell and I don't fele lyk spenden mie dae loocing up werds in da dikshonary :p . Besides if you can tell that it is spelled wrong you know what the intended meaning is, so what's it to ya?

Better to vote on biking than hair. It don't matter much to me anyway, if bush is here 4 more I'm bailing out, ex-patriot, if kerry's turns out just as bad, same deal. This country's been going downhill for a quite a while now, the currant sob might just be enough to drive in those last couple coffin nails. Or not, I may just end up sitting on my lazy American arse whatching it crumble around me.

Well you better start bailing out now, the sooner the better. Kerry is just as bad if not worse than Bush.

Where Bush Got His Marching Orders

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry ( D - MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "San Fran Nan"

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit
missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he
is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F.. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapon stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation .. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his
consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

SO NOW THESE SAME DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, AND THAT HE TOOK US TO WAR UNNECESSARILY! But was just the CIA responsible for the bad intel on Iraq? NO! The U.S. also got "bad" intel from Russia, England, Israel, Australia, Kuwait, and the Iraqi resistence just to name a few...ALL BEFORE BUSH TOOK OFFICE. Makes one want to ponder their naval as to why so many different intellegence agencies including our own gave false intel to president Clinton and Bush and members of the congress and senate.

Spelen shmelun. I don't speell whell and I don't fele lyk spenden mie dae loocing up werds in da dikshonary :p . Besides if you can tell that it is spelled wrong you know what the intended meaning is, so what's it to ya?
Some (ahem) less enlightened people might think you've gone "commie" or something calling yourself an "ex patriot". Merely clarifying old boy.


By the way thanks a heap for blowing up my spell checker :rolleyes:

Well you better start bailing out now, the sooner the better. Kerry is just as bad if not worse than Bush.

Where Bush Got His Marching Orders

"<snip> edited to reduce space

SO NOW THESE SAME DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, AND THAT HE TOOK US TO WAR UNNECESSARILY! But was just the CIA responsible for the bad intel on Iraq? NO! The U.S. also got "bad" intel from Russia, England, Israel, Australia, Kuwait, and the Iraqi resistence just to name a few...ALL BEFORE BUSH TOOK OFFICE. Makes one want to ponder their naval as to why so many different intellegence agencies including our own gave false intel to president Clinton and Bush and members of the congress and senate.So many quotes what right wing website did you raid and not give credit too? Hmmm?

Seems to me that the Bush family and the Bin Ladens have been BUSINESS PARTNERS FOR DECADES http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&theme=saudi

edit: I understand that this has been floating around in the e-mail loops for a while now, kinda like the "JATO Car". (http://www.snopes.com/autos/dream/jato.asp) and so you merely cut and pasted the email without checking your facts.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Yet this is what Kerry actually said that day, in its complete text:

Second, without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses.

He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America's response to that act of naked aggression. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel and trying to assassinate an American President. He miscalculated his own military strength. He miscalculated the Arab world's response to his misconduct. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.

That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm.
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.

Regrettably the current Administration failed to take the opportunity to bring this issue to the United Nations two years ago or immediately after September 11th, when we had such unity of spirit with our allies. When it finally did speak, it was with hasty war talk instead of a coherent call for Iraqi disarmament. And that made it possible for other Arab regimes to shift their focus to the perils of war for themselves rather than keeping the focus on the perils posed by Saddam's deadly arsenal. Indeed, for a time, the Administration's unilateralism, in effect, elevated Saddam in the eyes of his neighbors to a level he never would have achieved on his own, undermining America's standing with most of the coalition partners which had joined us in repelling the invasion of Kuwait a decade ago.

In U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm or face the most serious consequences. Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing. But the burden is also clearly on the Bush Administration to do the hard work of building a broad coalition at the U.N. and the necessary work of educating America about the rationale for war.

As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don't have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action.

The Administration must pass this test. I believe they must take the time to do the hard work of diplomacy. They must do a better job of making their case to the American people and to the world.


"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002


Yet this is what Ted Kennedy said that day:

We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction. Our intelligence community is also deeply concerned about the acquisition of such weapons by Iran, North Korea, Libya, Syria and other nations. But information from the intelligence community over the past six months does not point to Iraq as an imminent threat to the United States or a major proliferator of weapons of mass destruction.




"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

What Gore actually said that day:

Nevertheless, all Americans should acknowledge that Iraq does indeed pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf region, and we should be about the business of organizing an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. Now, let's be clear, there's no international law that can prevent the United States from taking action to protect our vital interests when it is manifestly clear that there is a choice to be made between law and our survival. Indeed, international law itself recognizes that such choices stay within the purview of all nations. I believe, however, that such a choice is not presented in the case of Iraq.

The rest of the quotes seem to be made by Democratic Senators or Representatives who were basing their comments on the now-known lies from the Bush Administration. You get the picture.

You've got to stop getting your "facts" from forwarded e-mails and / or G. Gordon Liddy the same guy who worked so hard for Tricky Dick in a hotel called Watergate and start reading what people ACTUALLY said, not force fed snippets and edited quotes.
.

But people live on snipets, they'll die if you take their snipets away. :D


Some (ahem) less enlightened people might think you've gone "commie" or something calling yourself an "ex patriot". Merely clarifying old boy.


By the way thanks a heap for blowing up my spell checker :rolleyes:
Ahh ok I didn't notice the link or that you spelled it the same way, just asumed you were correcting spelling, my bad, I know better than to asume things.
Far from commie considering Costa Rica actually(most popular congressman there is a Libertarian). I was considering college in China(semi-commie) however because they want more international exchange, and I know a guy studying to be a doctor there for 7,000 usa dollars a year(includes room, board, the works) same deal(and quality) here 50,000. Get this, he didn't get a tooth worked on before he left the usa, so he had it fixed there, they used some super advanced lazer drill(way beyond whats commonly used here) that didn't even need novacane, and filled or capped whatever they did for 50 chinese dollars which was about $6.50 american :eek:

apparrently he cut himself short a few times to make sure the speech stayed in the hour window the networks would give the convention.

That pretty well sums up the world we live in. Holy cow, it isn't like it is important or anything. We are just facing probably the single most important election in recent memory. Make sure they wrap it up quick so nobody misses, "Everybody Loves Raymond!" :mad:

That pretty well sums up the world we live in. Holy cow, it isn't like it is important or anything. We are just facing probably the single most important election in recent memory. Make sure they wrap it up quick so nobody misses, "Everybody Loves Raymond!" :mad:

or big brother 5 i believe.

:(