Chicken George afraid to debate in front of real people

Just what you want in a President....a guy who's scared to death of being asked a question by someone who isn't one of his own partisans or shills. If his ideas are so great, and his leadership so strong, shouldn't he be able to take a tough question from someone who doesn't agree with him?

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3586-2004Sep7.html

Bush Likely to Bow Out of 1 Debate

By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 8, 2004; Page A08

President Bush may skip one of the three debates that have been proposed by the Commission on Presidential Debates and accepted by Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), Republican officials said yesterday.

The officials said Bush's negotiating team plans to resist the middle debate, which was to be Oct. 8 in a town meeting format in the crucial state of Missouri.

.....

The audience for the second debate, to be at Washington University in St. Louis, was to be picked by the Gallup Organization. The commission said participants should be undecided voters from the St. Louis area.

A presidential adviser said campaign officials were concerned that people could pose as undecided when they actually are partisans.

"It's not a fear of the format," said the adviser, who refused to be identified to avoid annoying Bush. "They want two debates that are focused on clear differences on foreign and domestic policy. We benefit from the differences."

Clinton nixed a third debate in 1996. The League of Women Voters propose a schedule and the candidates say yay or nay. Of course the incumbent has final say on the schedule.

This isn't unique to this election.

[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Clinton nixed a third debate in 1996. The League of Women Voters propose a schedule and the candidates say yay or nay. Of course the incumbent has final say on the schedule.

This isn't unique to this election.[/quote]

The LWV doesn't run the presidential debates any longer. They stopped in 1988.

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2003/december/1212_lwv_liberal.shtml

[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Clinton nixed a third debate in 1996. The League of Women Voters propose a schedule and the candidates say yay or nay. Of course the incumbent has final say on the schedule.

This isn't unique to this election.[/quote]

The LWV doesn't run the presidential debates any longer. They stopped in 1988.

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2003/december/1212_lwv_liberal.shtml[/quote]

That wasn't his point.

To quote someone else, just apply it to Clinton:

"If his ideas are so great, and his leadership so strong, shouldn't he be able to take a tough question from someone who doesn't agree with him?"

CTL

[quote name='CTLesq']
That wasn't his point.

To quote someone else, just apply it to Clinton:

"If his ideas are so great, and his leadership so strong, shouldn't he be able to take a tough question from someone who doesn't agree with him?"

CTL[/quote]

Clinton regularly attended campaign stops where anybody could show up, not just hand-picked supporters. He was frequently heckled, but talked his way through the heckling with good cheer.

Chicken George, apparently afraid of the public he serves, only goes to campaign events attended by his supporters. The general public is not invited, and any naysayers who might get in are ushered out of the room for as little as wearing his opponent's t-shirt.

To me, his avoidance of the third debate is part and parcel with his phony campaign stops. He can't insure that every person in the audience will be a fawning fan, so he's going to take his ball and go home.

What a wimp.

[quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='CTLesq']
That wasn't his point.

To quote someone else, just apply it to Clinton:

"If his ideas are so great, and his leadership so strong, shouldn't he be able to take a tough question from someone who doesn't agree with him?"

CTL[/quote]

Clinton regularly attended campaign stops where anybody could show up, not just hand-picked supporters. He was frequently heckled, but talked his way through the heckling with good cheer.

Chicken George, apparently afraid of the public he serves, only goes to campaign events attended by his supporters. The general public is not invited, and any naysayers who might get in are ushered out of the room for as little as wearing his opponent's t-shirt.

To me, his avoidance of the third debate is part and parcel with his phony campaign stops. He can't insure that every person in the audience will be a fawning fan, so he's going to take his ball and go home.

What a wimp.[/quote]

So showing up on campaign stops is equivilant to debates?

And if the Bush campaign choses not to do events with the public your point is?

Bush is doing no more or no less than Kerry - he is doing what benefits his campaign. If Kerry wants three debates its because he believes its to his advantage. If Bush only wants to debates its because he believes it favors him.

But if I was intellectually bankrupt I might was create threads calling Bush a "wimp".

CTL

Gee, GWB at leasts answers questions.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040908-104357-3415r.htm

"Today marks the one-month point since Sen. John Kerry last answered questions from reporters traveling with him on the campaign trail.
The last time the Democratic presidential nominee took questions from them was Aug. 9 on the edge of the Grand Canyon, when the small traveling press pool accompanying him was allowed to ask eight questions.
And the last time Mr. Kerry held a full-fledged press conference where he faced questions from the entire corps of national reporters covering his campaign was Aug. 2 in Grand Rapids, Mich. He took two questions then.
Since early August, the only substantive policy question Mr. Kerry has answered was one lobbed at him by an ABC correspondent about whether he wanted to respond to Vice President Dick Cheney's charge that Mr. Kerry wanted to wage a more "sensitive" war on terror.
"No, it's just ... it's sad that they can only be negative," Mr. Kerry said. "They have nothing to say about the future vision of America. I think Americans want a positive vision for the future."
Last month, the Massachusetts senator promised that if elected he would hold monthly press conferences. That promise came amid reports that President Bush was restricting access to his rallies and town hall meetings to Bush supporters and volunteers, and was requiring them to sign a loyalty oath.
"I'm going to have a press conference at least once a month to talk to the nation about what I'm doing, because I don't have anything to hide," Mr. Kerry told a Wisconsin audience Aug. 3.
The president also has gone long stretches without a formal press conference. It has been a couple of months since his last one.
But White House officials said Mr. Bush often takes questions after making policy announcements to the press, or at the end of a meeting with a foreign leader.
"He takes questions on a regular basis. He did a number of interviews before the [Republican] convention," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters who asked about Mr. Bush's availability yesterday.
Mr. Bush took questions from reporters at least four times in August, including Aug. 2, when he announced his plan to revamp U.S. intelligence services; Aug. 9, when he appeared with Poland's prime minister; Aug. 15, when he toured damage from Hurricane Charley in Florida; and Aug. 23, when he answered a series of questions after meeting with his national security team at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.
At his Grand Canyon press conference, Mr. Kerry said he would have voted to authorize the war in Iraq even if he had known that no weapons of mass destruction would be found.
It was a statement that has drawn ridicule from Republicans and disdain from some fellow Democrats who argue that the Iraq war is unrelated to the fight against terrorism.
Since then, campaign officials have kept a greater distance between Mr. Kerry and the reporters covering him.
Campaign spokesman David Wade said yesterday that "John Kerry talks to the American voters every day" and accused Mr. Bush of forcing attendees to his campaign events "to swear loyalty to his campaign."
"The real question is why George Bush and his campaign are trying to dodge a national debate in front of a town hall of Americans," Mr. Wade said. "It's pretty clear they're afraid to talk about their record." "

Couple of big differences between Kerry and Clinton. Kerry doesn't answer questions, even when he answers them, and at least Clinton like you said dealt with hecklers, whereas Kerry fans attack people non-supporters trying to ask a relevant question.

http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=2274529

[quote name='dtcarson']Couple of big differences between Kerry and Clinton. Kerry doesn't answer questions, even when he answers them, and at least Clinton like you said dealt with hecklers, whereas Kerry fans attack people non-supporters trying to ask a relevant question.

http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=2274529[/quote]

I saw that full video last night and this guy stood up to interrupt Kerry's speech. The guy wrestling him down is not a member of Kerry's campaign and Kerry himself was calling for calm and restraint.

Too much force? probably
Any fault of Kerry's? nope

Kerry needs to start talking or he's already lost. Which is fine with me but I'd like there to be an actual reason to consider him as a candidate.

[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='dtcarson']Couple of big differences between Kerry and Clinton. Kerry doesn't answer questions, even when he answers them, and at least Clinton like you said dealt with hecklers, whereas Kerry fans attack people non-supporters trying to ask a relevant question.

http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=2274529[/quote]

I saw that full video last night and this guy stood up to interrupt Kerry's speech. The guy wrestling him down is not a member of Kerry's campaign and Kerry himself was calling for calm and restraint.

Too much force? probably
Any fault of Kerry's? nope[/quote]

He didn't suggest it was Kerry's fault. He said "Kerry supporters".

CTL

[quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='dtcarson']Couple of big differences between Kerry and Clinton. Kerry doesn't answer questions, even when he answers them, and at least Clinton like you said dealt with hecklers, whereas Kerry fans attack people non-supporters trying to ask a relevant question.

http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=2274529[/quote]

I saw that full video last night and this guy stood up to interrupt Kerry's speech. The guy wrestling him down is not a member of Kerry's campaign and Kerry himself was calling for calm and restraint.

Too much force? probably
Any fault of Kerry's? nope[/quote]

He didn't suggest it was Kerry's fault. He said "Kerry supporters".

CTL[/quote]

Most dems tend to be stupid s just looking for a handout.

[quote name='CTLesq']
So showing up on campaign stops is equivilant to debates?

And if the Bush campaign choses not to do events with the public your point is?

Bush is doing no more or no less than Kerry - he is doing what benefits his campaign. If Kerry wants three debates its because he believes its to his advantage. If Bush only wants to debates its because he believes it favors him.

But if I was intellectually bankrupt I might was create threads calling Bush a "wimp".

CTL[/quote]

Chicken George supposedly works for us all, whether we voted for him or not, and is answerable to us all.

The fact that he'll only speak with people in his own camp speaks volumes about how well he feels he can defend his position before a skeptical crowd. And in my book, that does make him a wimp. Strong leaders will engage anyone, even those who disagree with them. Chicken George hides from the public.

[quote name='dennis_t']
Chicken George supposedly works for us all, whether we voted for him or not, and is answerable to us all.[/quote]

Nice rhetoric. I don't disagree. But it is besides the point.

[quote name='dennis_t']The fact that he'll only speak with people in his own camp speaks volumes about how well he feels he can defend his position before a skeptical crowd. And in my book, that does make him a wimp. Strong leaders will engage anyone, even those who disagree with them. Chicken George hides from the public.[/quote]

So if he decides he is better off campaigning in a competitive swing state instead of a state that will without question go for Kerry - how do you feel about that.

If Bush wanted to hide from the public he wouldn't be engaging in any debates.

It was suggested they have three debates. That is as arbitrary as having 4 or 2 debates. Because Bush chooses not to participate in all the debates is his choice.

Kerry wanted a debate a week from now until the election. Does that make him a wimp becuase he would be spending time infront of a debate questioner and not in front of voters?

Your assertion of Bush being a wimp is merely partisan rhetoric which under any number of standards (see above) is inconsistent and rather weak.

Enjoy your thread and getting the last word in.

CTL

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='dtcarson']Couple of big differences between Kerry and Clinton. Kerry doesn't answer questions, even when he answers them, and at least Clinton like you said dealt with hecklers, whereas Kerry fans attack people non-supporters trying to ask a relevant question.

http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=2274529[/quote]

I saw that full video last night and this guy stood up to interrupt Kerry's speech. The guy wrestling him down is not a member of Kerry's campaign and Kerry himself was calling for calm and restraint.

Too much force? probably
Any fault of Kerry's? nope[/quote]

He didn't suggest it was Kerry's fault. He said "Kerry supporters".

CTL[/quote]

Most dems tend to be stupid shaq-fus just looking for a handout.[/quote]

Exactly. And most black people don't have a job, listen to rap music and are in a gang. Most Irish Americans are drunks. Most Jews are cheap money lenders. Intelligent.

[quote name='Mr Unoriginal'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='dtcarson']Couple of big differences between Kerry and Clinton. Kerry doesn't answer questions, even when he answers them, and at least Clinton like you said dealt with hecklers, whereas Kerry fans attack people non-supporters trying to ask a relevant question.

http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=2274529[/quote]

I saw that full video last night and this guy stood up to interrupt Kerry's speech. The guy wrestling him down is not a member of Kerry's campaign and Kerry himself was calling for calm and restraint.

Too much force? probably
Any fault of Kerry's? nope[/quote]

He didn't suggest it was Kerry's fault. He said "Kerry supporters".

CTL[/quote]

Most dems tend to be stupid shaq-fus just looking for a handout.[/quote]

Exactly. And most black people don't have a job, listen to rap music and are in a gang. Most Irish Americans are drunks. Most Jews are cheap money lenders. Intelligent.[/quote]

Two things,
1. Stereotypes exist for a reason
2. You only have to look at polling results to see that I'm right. I just forgot to include hippies and homosexuals in my statement.

"Stereotypes exist for a reason."
I notice you don't mention what that reason is. Because it damn sure isn't because they're all true.

Of course, I'm not going to say that all stereotypes are false, that would be... a stereotype.

Just that, most stereotypes, like those mentioned about black people, Irish people, and Jews, should be taken with a grain of salt.

[quote name='SwiftyLeZar']"Stereotypes exist for a reason."
I notice you don't mention what that reason is. Because it damn sure isn't because they're all true.

Of course, I'm not going to say that all stereotypes are false, that would be... a stereotype.

Just that, most stereotypes, like those mentioned about black people, Irish people, and Jews, should be taken with a grain of salt.[/quote]

The reason is that they are usually true. Not always, but enough to create the stereotype in the first place.

Actually, its not because they're 'usually' true - its because they're more true than any other stereotype. Stereotyping is a necessary skill for survival (bright red snakes are bad) They're less useful when applied to people, but the human brain is pretty much hardwired to create them. If you would wipe out every stereotype in the world, they'd be replaced within 15 minutes with brand new ones.

[quote name='Drocket']Actually, its not because they're 'usually' true - its because they're more true than any other stereotype. Stereotyping is a necessary skill for survival (bright red snakes are bad) They're less useful when applied to people, but the human brain is pretty much hardwired to create them. If you would wipe out every stereotype in the world, they'd be replaced within 15 minutes with brand new ones.[/quote]

Ok, well thanks for that, much more accurate and scientific than my explaination.

The stingy conservative stereotype exists for a reason, too.

[quote name='Quackzilla']The stingy conservative stereotype exists for a reason, too.[/quote]

Of course. Don't forget that's a stingy christian conservative. Also (and this ties into the christian aspect, of course) they hate all sex, and they all want to see the gays dead at the bottom of the ocean.

Bush is just afraid he will get a question more challenging than, "Can I pray for you?"

[quote name='Drocket'] Stereotyping is a necessary skill for survival (bright red snakes are bad) [/quote]

So by your logic, the stereotype of black people being criminals means that we should assume all black people are evil and should be pre-emptively arrested for our survival?

What the fyck is up with all the "Chicken George" bullshit? grow the up.

[quote name='Quackzilla'][quote name='Drocket'] Stereotyping is a necessary skill for survival (bright red snakes are bad) [/quote]

So by your logic, the stereotype of black people being criminals means that we should assume all black people are evil and should be pre-emptively arrested for our survival?[/quote]