Asturian-American Migration Forum

First of all...in this posting I was talking about Teresa Heinz Kerry.

This was your quote.....

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." --G.W. Bush, 3/13/02"

Re: Osama Ben Laden...this is what President Bush actually said in that March , 2002 Press Conference. Q

Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive? Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the threat of --

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission.

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding at all.

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well-supplied; that the strategy is clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.

And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shahikot, and I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shahikot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly. We're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped. We have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means.

Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it. Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

Barbara, I agree that those comments are too vulgar, but overall she's like a breath of fresh air. I cannot stand that bible-swinging Laura Bush, especially considering that her religious convictions never made her doubt as to her husbands right to sign death sentences. I'm sure Bush's pulse didn't tremble when he signed those papers that sent people to the electric chair, and if she were a true Christian she would have convinced him to spare their lives. Some people might deserve to die, but who are we to decide? The same goes for sending other people's children to die in those surreal wars that oddly enough just make his family keep getting wealthier.

The expression you use "highest office in the world" really got to me. I'm floored, it sounds like you consider that Bush is second only to God! Barbara, no matter how much you like him, he's just a sneaky businessman without scruples, getting richer with the aid of the honest but naive folks who believe all his lies.

-------------------------------------
Barbara, estoy de acuerdo que esos comentarios son demasiados ordinarios, pero en general es como un soplo de aire fresco. No soporto a la santurrona de Laura Bush, especialmente teniendo en cuenta que sus creencias religiosas nunca la hicieron dudar del derecho que tenía su marido a firmar sentencias de muerte. Estoy segura de que a Bush nunca le tembló el pulso cuando firmaba los papeles que mandarían a personas a la silla eléctrica y si ella fuera una verdadera cristiana le habría convencido para que les conmutara la pena. Hay personas que merecen morir, pero quiénes somos nosotros para decidirlo?
Lo mismo que enviar a los hijos de otros a morir en esas guerras surrealistas que curiosamente cada vez hacen más rica a su familia.

La expresión que utilizas: "el cargo más alto del mundo" me impactó. Estoy anonadada, suena como si consideraras a Bush el segundo en importancia después de Dios!
Bárbara, por mucho que te guste, no es más que un hombre de negocios astuto y sin escrúpulos, que se está haciendo cada vez más rico con el apoyo de gente honrada pero ingenua que creen todas sus mentiras.

Saludos
Terechu

Barbara,

I don't understand your point in posting Bush's whole answer. Thanks for looking that up, but my point is still made: Bush said we would never stop until we found and killed bin Laden, and now he's flip-flopped and says that bin Laden is not important.

This is the man that orchestrated the deaths of 2,000+ Americans here on American soil! And Bush says "I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you."

Well, Mr. fake President, you SHOULD BE spending ALL your time on him. If you really cared about the security of this country and the memory of the 9-11 dead, you WOULD be spending time on him.

Art, me ha encantado tú comentario (qué bonito sería el mundo sí todos pensaramos en el más débil),eso es lo qué deberían hacer los politicos pero me parece a mí,qué hacen lo mismo qué aquí estan deseando todos llegar al poder para luego hacer lo qué les da la gana,y asegurarse una pensión vitalicia, oye tú serías un buen presidente y además descendiente de ASTURIANOS,no te parece?

-------------
translated by Art

Art, I was delighted by your commentary (how beautiful the world would be if we all thought of those weaker [than us]). This is what the politicians should do, but it seems to me that they do the same thing they do here. They all want to get in power just to be able to do whatever they want, and to guarantee themselves an annuity for life [retirement pension]. Hey, you'd be a good president -- [and so much the better that you're] descended from ASTURIANS -- don't you think?

Terechu...I guess you consider me one of those "honest but naive folk who believe his lies." I can assure you that thats not the case...I have my eyes wide open.

Let me tell all of you something...

I have been posting on this 2004 Election and 9/11 3/11 before this. I have read a lot of postings and have responded to the ones who have angered me. But...let me tell you...I do not think that Senator Kerry would make a good President, but I never said things about him that were in bad taste.

You, on the other hand...

"sneaky business man without scruples"
"Mr. fake President"
"mean and merciless individual"
"not that fool squatting in the White House"
"that fool in the White House"
to name a few...

Terechu...you spoke about the executions in Texas during the time George W. Bush was Governor...by the way, they were done by lethal injection, not electric chair.

The criminals who were executed weren't in prison for a traffic violation...these are people who did horrific things to other people.

By the way, Senator Kerry is a Roman Catholic...why does he believe in late term abortion? You talk about executions of the guilty, what about executions of babies in the womb who are 7/8 months along babies that could be born...is that ok. President Bush is against this very thing.

You complain all the time about President Bush being whatever...How about those papers that were presented by Dan Rather CBS News...where did those fakes come from...huh!

By the way, Xose I printed the entire Press Conference dealing with this subject so there will be no misunderstanding of what he said...

Kerry, like the vast majority of Americans, believes that abortion is (and should be) between two people: a woman and her doctor. If you don't like late-term abortions, don't have one. I really wish Christians would quit trying to enforce their religious beliefs through U.S. law.

Abortion IS NOT murder. Dropping cluster bombs on innocent villagers, however, is....

Terechu,

I am very sorry that you do not like the Bush's. Apparently they must have offended you some way, and I surely cannot figure how or why since you live in Spain.

To label George Bush as the governor of Texas responsible for signing death decrees leaves me a little puzzled. You see under American judicial law, and I believe that includes Texas, a person tried and convicted of a capital offense, i.e. murder in the first degree, as an example, is tried before a jury (hopefully of his peers) and if found guilty is then sentenced by a judge or a jury that determines the penalty phase of the trial. I do not know how Texas operates, if a judge or jury makes that decision. The governor does not sign the papers for death, but that is done by the judge after his decision or the jury, and I assume that applies to Texas law. A governor can commune or set aside a death penalty or delay the death penalty if called upon. A lawyer, group or whatever can request that of a governor and then the governor must decide. I have no record of how many requests Bush had and refused vesus the current or other governors.

George Bush has been labeled the governor of Texas that while in office had the most deaths by execution (leathal injection). That is true at present. From Dec. 7, 1982 thru Aug. 26, 2004, 285 individuals have been executed in Texas, according to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, and the split is as follows by governors for the past 25 years:

Current governor, James Perry,Republican, 2000-Present: 86 individuals
George Bush, Republican, 1995-2000: 95 individuals
Ann Richards, Democrat, 1991-1995: 67 individuals
William Clements, Republican, 1987-1991: 11 individuals
Mark White, Democrat, 1983-1987: 25 individuals
William Clements, Republican, 1979-1983: 1 individual.

As per the Texas Dept., a total of 463 men and 9 women currently sit on death row awaiting their fate. The men are in the Huntsville prison. Some governor in the future, maybe Governor Perry, may set the new record.

Currently 39 of our 50 states have the death penalty. As you can tell by the number of states that do and do not have the death penalty, that it is a state law not a federal law. However, given a federal crime, then the US government can decree the death penalty if the individual is found guilty by trial of a capital offense.

Now as for Laura Bush, why pick on her. She has grace, class, style, manners, etc., fitting for our first lady. I don't remember her being a Bible thumper, or swinging her Bible as you say. It's good that she believes in one God and has that faith. That's good in any first lady. Also, I don't believe I have had an occassion to see her push her religious beliefs off on others.

In this election Kerry's wife worries me in that she exhibits a crass attitude. Her comments, while cute to some, are troublesome to others. Last comment about kids going naked, probably taken a little bit out of context, nevertheless, was a bit Marie Antoinette (let them eat cake).

Anyway, currently Bush is a head in the polls. May not last until election day, who knows.

Xose, you remind me of the old Spaniards living in Spelter. Seems that they liked to argue for the sake of arguing never conceding a point to each other. It was a checker match without checkers and was done for hobby with far too much idle time on their hands. They remained friends, but rivals. Exhibited some jealousy towards each other, however.

Your dialog with Barbara is like that.

Maybe you to have too much idle time and your posting are your hobby, only arguing for the sake of argument never conceding a point.

Ken,

I am not just arguing to be argumentative, I really feel passionately about my beliefs. That said, I AM 1/4 Spanish, so arguing politics is certainly in my blood, as you point out!

That's what makes the world interesting, I reckon....

Believe it or not, I don't sit online all day.... I just check back whenever I get a chance and put in my 2 cents. I'm enjoying our debate. It's interesting to see the Red States perspective, even though I obviously don't agree with it.

Just to clarify, the documents that CBS based its reporting on were not found to be fakes. CBS simply determined that it could not verify the authenticity of the documents one way or the other. That makes them not good enough for professional news reporting.

If, however, the allegations were false, Bush could clarify all of this very easily. But it's obvious that he can't do that because he really didn't take his commitment to the military seriously.

I agree with those who say that worrying about the Bush and Kerry's youthful Vietnam era behavior is preventing the public from considering much more important issues. It's true that we're not hearing enough debate of substantive issues.

A few issues I'd like to hear the candidates debate openly and honestly include:

• their plans for dealing with the chaos in Iraq,
• their plans for dealing with terrorism,
• their plans for reversing the huge number of jobs lost during the Bush years,
• their plans for reversing the current record budget deficits,
• their reaction to the massive transfer of wealth to the rich (thanks to Bush Republicans) at the expense of the middle class,
• their reaction to the reductions of civil rights and liberties contained in the Patriot act and other recent decrees and legislation, and
• their plans for reversing the devastating anti-environment policies instituted during the Bush administration.

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

Quiero clarificar que los documentos en que CBS se basó su reportaje no fueron encontrados ser falsificaciones. CBS simplemente determinó que no podía verificar la autenticidad de los documentos. No reúne al criterio para el reportaje profesional de noticias.

Sin embargo, si las alegaciones sean falsas, Bush podría clarificar todo muy fácilmente. Pero es obvio que no puede hacerlo porque realmente no tomó su compromiso militar seriamente.

Estoy de acuerdo con los que dicen que la preocupación sobre el comportamiento en la era de Vietnam de los jovenes Bush y Kerry impide que el público considera cuestiones mucho más importantes. Es verdadero que no oímos bastante debate de cuestiones sustanciales.

Unas cuestiones me gustaría que los candidatos debatan abiertamente y francamente incluirían:

• sus proyectos para tratar con el caos en Irak,
• sus proyectos para tratar con terrorismo,
• sus proyectos para invertir el enorme número de empleos perdidos durante los años de Bush,
• sus proyectos para invertir los déficit presupuestarios corrientes de récord,
• su reacción a la transferencia masiva de riqueza al rico (agradece a Republicanos de Bush) a cargo de la clase media,
• su reacción a las reducciones de los derechos civiles y las libertades contenidos en el Patriota actúa y otros decretos y legislación recientes,
• sus proyectos para invertir la política de antiambiente devastadora instituida durante la administración de Bush.

-79,189: Average number of jobs created monthly under Bush.

2,931,000: Number of jobs lost in the private sector since Bush took office.

675,000: Number of Americans experiencing long-term unemployment (27 weeks or more) when Bush took office in January 2001.1

1,871,000: Number of Americans suffering long-term unemployment in March 2004.

For a full accounting of the Bush record, go to http://www.democrats.org/economy/bushrecord.html . Those are staggering numbers. Republicans on the board: please refute if you can. Note, however, that any answer with the word "Clinton" in it is unacceptable.

Art, you "old" liberal, you. I was reading your ideas for a debate agenda and agreed with you, except some of your bullets are so far left that they fall off the "flat" earth. How and when did the Patriot Act effect you? Have you been investigated for some possible terrorist activities? Has your library card been reviewed by some super suspicious looking government agent? Sounds like a James Bond thriller. Here in the heartland we don't feel those idle threats from uncle sam, or fear the Patriot Act. The Act is a necessary item during these terriorist war years. I think in WWII, under one great President, Roosevelt, we enacted similar legistation to protect our Country.

See, I too was once a Democrat until the Party left me with the likes of Carter, Clinton, Sharpton, Kerry, Dean and Dennis "the menace" from Cleveland (that's what we called him when he was mayor Cleveland when I lived there). See I am a Democrat of Roosevelt, Stevenson, Truman.

As for the transfer of wealth, give me a break. Ever since the industrial revolution there has been individuals who have made lots of money, and scandals did go with it. If you are refering to the tax cuts under Bush, then, again, I believe you miss the reason for a tax cut. It was to stimulate a drooping economy, which is slowly coming back. You see during the go-go years of Clinton, and they were good, we had the dot coms, as an example. A bunch of companies without a basis for being in business, except for an idea. These companies employed thousands of people, couldn't make payroll, tried an IPO and a few individuals got rich and the late comers in buying those stocks suffered the consequence, as well as their employees. I was one of those that lost 40% of my portfolio on dot coms. I don't blame the government or the dot com, as I am responsible for my own actions and stupidity for not understanding what I was buying. The big market drop and the layoffs of the Bush years begin in mid-March, 2000, two months after Bush assumed office. That leads one to believe the job losses and sour economy started well into the Clinton years. Sept. 11 didn't help, but greatly added to the economic down fall. Look at the airlines. US Air about to go under. And if we do NOT end the terriorist threat, you can expect many more years of economic upheavel.

What can I say about wealth, if you were dealt a bad lemon, then make lemon aide.

I am not a tree hugger, so my comments on the "devastating anti-environment policies" will only anger you. I guess Kerry should sale his SUV's, yacht, jet, and multi-houses. Oh, I forgot, they do not belong to him, but his family. Technicality! I guess Kerry, himself, rides a horse to work, travels by stage coach and lives in a log cabin or some other low tech shelter.

What do you do as an individual to protect the environment? Sometimes it starts at home. Do you recycle? Do you own cars? What type of fuel do you use to heat and cool your home? Have you been active with your state government for your state legislative body to enact rules govering the ecology in your state. Why is it always the federal government? The fed's deal with interstate, while the state is intrastate. Art, I believe you live in Maryland, right? How active are your US senators and representatives on these issues? I don't mean alot of words, as that is BS. Have they introduced any legislation or co-sponsored any legislation on the environment? Ask yourself those questions.

They probably are like John Kerry. No evidence of sponsoring or championing any bills in their years in Congress. Just drawing a great salary. I hope I am wrong about your Congressional representatives. I know I am not wrong about Kerry--missing in action as a US Senator.

Xose, I was greatly impressed by your stats until you pointed out that your basis for information was the DNC. That is like Dan Rather, I forgot to verify the accuracy of the information, but used it.

Look, I could counterpoint those with stats from the RNC, but why?

Sorry my man, you got to do better for information then the DNC or RNC.

Think you have been hanging around DuPont Circle too long. You gotta get out of the beltway and see life as it really is.

The DNC didn't make those numbers up. For the record, those numbers come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 3/04, a government agency.

Who would you prefer I get my info from? Fox News or Bill O'Reilly?

Still, here's more data from the DOL's Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost) showing that since Bush took office, 70,915 people have lost their jobs in mass layoffs. That sucks. And I still don't hear you being able to refute my facts from before. It's not enough to say that my data is biased since it comes from the DNC (actually, the DOL). Back up your words with your own facts, if you can.

Still, here's a great example from the NY Times showing compassionate conservatism at its best: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/nyreg ... ng.html?hp

And please don't accuse me of not knowing how the REAL world works. Saying I can't understand the real world because I live in D.C. would be like me saying you can't understand anything that doesn't relate to cows and wheat because you live in KS.

Some things I know: We are wasting $87 billion in Iraq. We are drowning future generations in massive federal debt, and people are losing their jobs only to find that they can't replace the lost salary at Wal-Mart.

Ken,

Thank you for your "right on" replies...I agree with everything that you said and more.