Quote:
Originally posted by Cowperson+Oct 6 2004, 08:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cowperson @ Oct 6 2004, 08:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Flame On@Oct 6 2004, 08:02 PM
One guy couldn't do it though which might be illuminating for some. One guy couldn't really answer about their Israel foreign policy either which also illuminates.
|
Not that it has anything to do with the point.
I thought Edwards was cleverly parroting what the Bush administration thinks - "Israel has a right to defend itself, Arafat isn't a partner to negotiate with, etc, etc."
Seemed like a great attempt to assure those on the right about Israel, an attempt to take those votes from the Bush side.
Cowperson [/b][/quote]
Well your point was that some might find it illuminating that Edwards couldn't contain himself within the limits of the debate as set out by the host of the debate. I.e. he kept saying Kerry. Which was really a light moment in a two hour talk where he slipped a couple of times and not about content, about the debate format.
Not something to hang your vote on I don't think. My point was that, along the same line of not being able to do something, Cheney didn't really answer an important foreign policy issue about Israel and Palestine. Important to the globe and US. I think that's more illuminating and used your theme to reach that decision, but if you can't see that you better straighten out those crooked smiley eyes of yours.
