Hele berichtquote:BOSTON, Massachusetts (CNN) -- As the first major speaker Monday night at the Democratic National Convention, former Vice President Al Gore -- his party's 2000 nominee -- tried to refuel the anger over the last presidential election and redirect it toward winning the contest in November.
"Take it from me -- every vote counts," said Gore, referring to the bitterly contested election that was eventually decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. "Let's make sure that this time every vote is counted."
Gore assailed the policies of the Bush administration in a series of questions. He asked those who had voted for President Bush if the country was more united or divided today; if the promise of compassionate conservatism had rung hollow; if people were troubled by the erosion of basic civil liberties.
quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 03:24 schreef FritsVanEgters het volgende:
Al Gore trapte zojuist af met een krachtige speech.
Een paar grappen over de vorige verkiezingen en de uitslag braken het ijs, vervolgens haalde hij de campagne van 2000 in gedachten terug, met name de verkiezingsbeloftes die Bush toen maakte.
Hele toespraak.quote:Here is a transcript of his remarks:
Friends, fellow Democrats, fellow Americans.
I'll be candid with you. I had hoped to be back here this week under different circumstances, running for re-election.
But you know the old saying -- you win some, you lose some. And then there's that little-known third category.
I didn't come here tonight to talk about the past. After all, I don't want you to think I lie awake at night counting and recounting sheep.
I prefer to focus on the future because I know from my own experience that America is a land of opportunity, where every little boy and girl has a chance to grow up and win the popular vote.
(...)
Let's make sure that this time every vote is counted.
Let's make sure not only that the Supreme Court does not pick the next president, but also that this president is not the one who picks the next Supreme Court.
(...)
It is in that spirit, that I sincerely ask those watching at home who supported President Bush four years ago: Did you really get what you expected from the candidate you voted for?
Is our country more united today?
Or more divided?
Has the promise of compassionate conservatism been fulfilled?
Or do those words now ring hollow?
For that matter, are the economic policies really conservative at all?
Did you expect, for example, the largest deficits in history? One after another? And the loss of more than a million jobs?
By the way, I know about the bad economy. I was the first one laid off. And while it's true that new jobs are being created, they're just not as good as the jobs people have lost. And incidentally, that's been true for me too.
(...)
And of course, no challenge is more critical than the situation we confront in Iraq. Regardless of your opinion at the beginning of this war, isn't it now obvious that the way the war has been managed by the administration has gotten us into very serious trouble?
Wouldn't we be better off with a new president who hasn't burned his bridges to our allies, and who could rebuild respect for America in the world?
Isn't cooperation with other nations crucial to solving our dilemma in Iraq? Isn't it also critical to defeating the terrorists?
We have to be crystal clear about the threat we face from terrorism. It is deadly. It is real. It is imminent.
But in order to protect our people, shouldn't we focus on the real source of this threat: the group that attacked us and is trying to attack us again -- al Qaeda, headed by Osama Bin Laden?
Wouldn't we be safer with a President who didn't insist on confusing al Qaeda with Iraq? Doesn't that divert too much of our attention away from the principal danger?
Artikelquote:BOSTON, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Bill and Hillary Clinton, the pre-eminent power couple in Democratic circles, took center stage Monday night at the Democratic National Convention as they appealed to the party faithful to rally behind John Kerry.
"Tonight I come to you as a citizen, returning to you in a role I've played most of my life. I join you here in Boston as a foot soldier in the fight for our future, as we nominate a true New England patriot for president," Bill Clinton said.
(...)
The nation's 42nd president, 57, was introduced by his wife, the junior senator from New York, who was not on the initial roster of convention speakers.
But Sen. Clinton -- who polls show remains a polarizing figure in politics -- was added after some Democrats objected to her absence.
Hele transcript.quote:BOSTON, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Former President Bill Clinton addressed the Democratic National Convention Monday night. This is a transcript of his speech.
(...)
We Democrats want to build a world and an America of shared responsibilities and shared benefits. We want a world with more global cooperation where we act alone only when we absolutely have to.
We think the role of government should be to give people the tools to create the conditions to make the most of their own lives. And we think everybody should have that chance.
On the other hand, the Republicans in Washington believe that American should be run by the right people -- their people -- in a world in which America acts unilaterally when we can and cooperates when we have to.
They believe the role of government is to concentrate wealth and power in the hands of those who embrace their economic, political and social views, leaving ordinary citizens to fend for themselves on important matters like health care and retirement security.
Now, since most Americans aren't that far to the right, our friends have to portray us Democrats as simply unacceptable, lacking in strength and values. In other words, they need a divided America.
But we don't.
Americans long to be united. After 9/11, we all just wanted to be one nation. Not a single American on September the 12, 2001, cared who won the next presidential election.
All we wanted to do was to be one country, strong in the fight against terror, helping to heal those who were wounded and the families of those who lost their loved ones, reaching out to the rest of the world so we could meet these new challenges and go on with our democratic way of life.
The president had an amazing opportunity to bring the country together under his slogan of compassionate conservatism and to unite the world in the struggle against terror.
Instead, he and his congressional allies made a very different choice. They chose to use that moment of unity to try to push the country too far to the right and to walk away from our allies, not only in attacking Iraq before the weapons inspectors had finished their work, but in withdrawing American support for the climate change treaty, and for the international court on war criminals, and for the anti-ballistic missile treaty and from the nuclear test ban treaty.
Now, now at a time when we're trying to get other people to give up nuclear and biological and chemical weapons, they are trying to develop two new nuclear weapons which they say we might use first.
At home, the president and the Republican Congress have made equally fateful choices, which they also deeply believe in.
For the first time when America was in a war footing in our whole history, they gave two huge tax cuts, nearly half of which went to the top 1 percent of us.
Now, I'm in that group for the first time in my life.
And you might remember that when I was in office, on occasion, the Republicans were kind of mean to me.
But as soon as I got out and made money, I became part of the most important group in the world to them. It was amazing. I never thought I'd be so well cared for by the president and the Republicans in Congress.
I almost sent them a thank you note for my tax cuts, until I realized that the rest of you were paying the bill for it. And then I thought better of it.
Now look at the choices they made, choices they believed in. They chose to protect my tax cut at all costs while withholding promised funding to the Leave No Child Behind Act, leaving 2.1 million children behind.
They chose to protect my tax cut, while cutting 140,000 unemployed workers out of their job training programs, 100,000 working families out of their child care assistance, and worst of all, while cutting 300,000 poor children out of their after-school programs, when we know it keeps them off the streets, out of trouble, in school, learning, going to college and having a good life.
They chose -- they chose to protect my tax cuts while dramatically raising the out-of-pocket costs of health care to our veterans and while weakening or reversing very important environmental measures that Al Gore and I put into place, everything from clean air to the protection of our forests.
Now, in this time, everyone in America had to sacrifice except the wealthiest Americans. And most of us, almost all of us, from Republicans to independents and Democrats, we wanted to be asked to do our part, too. But all they asked us to do was to expend the energy necessary to open the envelopes containing our tax cuts.
Now, if you like these choices and you agree with them, you should vote to return them to the White House and the Congress. If not, take a look at John Kerry, John Edwards and the Democrats.
We've got a different economic policy.
In this year's budget, the White House this year wants to cut off all the federal funding for 88,000 uniformed police officers under the COPS program we've had for 10 years. Among those 88,000 police are more than 700 members of the New York Police Department who put their lives on the line on 9/11.
With gang violence rising, and with all of us looking for terrorists in our midst and hoping they're not too well armed or too dangerous, the president and the Congress are about to allow the 10-year-old ban on deadly assault weapons to lapse.
Now, they believe it's the right thing to do. But our policy was to put more police on the street and to take assault weapons off the street. And it gave you eight years of declining crime and eight years of declining violence.
Their policy is the reverse. They're taking police off the streets while they put assault weapons back on the street.
Now, if you agree with that choice, by all means, vote to keep them in office. But if you don't, join John Kerry, John Edwards and the Democrats in making America safer, smarter and stronger again.
On homeland security, Democrats tried to double the number of containers at ports and airports checked for weapons of mass destruction. It cost $1 billion. It would have been paid for under our bill by asking the 200,000 millionaires in America to cut their tax cut by $5,000. Almost all 200,000 of us would like to have done that, to spend $5,000 to make all 300 million Americans safer.
The measure failed. Why? Because the White House and the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives opposed it. They thought our $5,000 was more important than doubling the container checks at our ports and airports.
If you agree with that, by all means, re-elect them. If not, John Kerry and John Edwards are your team for the future.
These policies have turned a projected $5.8 trillion surplus that we left, enough to pay for the baby boomer retirement, into a projected debt of almost $5 trillion, with over $400 billion in deficit this year and for years to come.
Now, how do they pay for that deficit? First, by taking the Social Security surplus that comes in every month and endorsing the checks of working people over to me to pay for the tax cuts. But it's not enough.
So then they have to go borrow money. Most of it they borrow from the Chinese and the Japanese government.
Sure, these countries are competing with us for good jobs, but how can we enforce our trade laws against our bankers? I mean, come on.
So if you think -- if you believe it is good policy -- if you believe it is good policy to pay for my tax cuts with the Social Security checks of working men and women and borrowed money from China and Japan, you should vote for them. If not, John Kerry's your man.
We Americans must choose for president ... we've got to choose for president between two strong men who both love their countries, but who have very different world views: our nominee, John Kerry, who favors shared responsibility, shared opportunity and more global cooperation; and their president and their party in Congress who favor concentrated wealth and power, leaving people to fend for themselves and more unilateral action.
I think we're right for two reasons.
First of all, America just works better when more people have a chance to live their dreams.
And, secondly, we live in an interdependent world in which we cannot possibly kill, jail or occupy all of our potential adversaries. So we have to both fight terror and build a world with more partners and fewer terrorists.
Now, we tried it their way for 12 years. We tried it their way for 12 years. We tried it our way for eight years. Then we tried it their way for four more. But the only test that matters is whether people were better off when we finished than when we started. Our way works better.
It produced over 22 million good jobs, rising incomes for the middle class, over 100 times as many people moved from poverty into the middle class, more health care, the largest increase in college aid in 50 years, record home ownership, a cleaner environment, three surpluses in a row, a modernized defense force, strong efforts against terror and a respected America in the world.
More importantly, more importantly, we have great new champions in John Kerry and John Edwards, two good men, with wonderful wives: Teresa, a generous and wise woman, who understands the world we're trying to shape; and Elizabeth, a lawyer and mother, who understands the lives we're trying to live.
Now, let me tell you know what I know about John Kerry. I've been seeing all of the Republican ads about him. Let me tell you what I know about him.
During the Vietnam War, many young men, including the current president, the vice president and me, could have gone to Vietnam and didn't. John Kerry came from a privileged background. He could have avoided going too, but instead, he said: Send me.
When they sent those swift boats up the river in Vietnam, and they told them their job was to draw hostile fire, to wave the American flag and bait the enemy to come out and fight, John Kerry said: Send me.
And then, on my watch, when it was time to heal the wounds of war and normalize relations with Vietnam and to demand an accounting of the POWs and MIAs we lost there, John Kerry said: Send me.
Then when we needed someone to push the cause of inner city children struggling to avoid a life of crime, or to bring the benefits of high technology to ordinary Americans, or to clean the environment in a way that created new jobs, or to give small businesses a better chance to make it, John Kerry said: Send me.
So tonight, my friends, I ask you to join me for the next 100 days in telling John Kerry's story and promoting his ideas. Let every person in this hall and like-minded people all across our land say to him what he has always said to America: Send me.
The bravery that men who fought by his side in battle, that bravery they saw in battle, I have seen in politics. When I was president, John Kerry showed courage and conviction on crime, on welfare reform, on balancing the budget, at a time when those priorities were not exactly the way to win a popularity contest in our party.
John Kerry took tough positions on tough problems. He knows who he is and where he's going. He has the experience, the character, the ideas, the values to be a great president.
And in a time of change, he has two other very important qualities: an insatiable curiosity to understand the world around him, and a willingness to hear other views, even those who disagree with him.
Therefore, John Kerry will make choices that reflect both conviction and common sense. He proved that when he picked John Edwards to be his partner.
Now, everybody talks about John Edwards' energy and intellect and charisma. You know, I kind of resent him.
But the important thing is not what talents he has, but how he has used them. He chose -- he chose to use his talents to improve the lives of people like him who had to work for everything they've got and to help people too often left out and left behind. And that's what he'll do as our vice president.
Now their opponents will tell you ... their opponents will tell you we should be afraid of John Kerry and John Edwards, because they won't stand up to the terrorists. Don't you believe it. Strength and wisdom are not opposing values.
They go hand in hand. They go hand in hand, and John Kerry has both. His first priority will be to keep America safe.
Remember the scripture: "Be not afraid."
John Kerry and John Edwards are good people with good ideas, ideas to make the economy work again for middle-class Americans, to restore fiscal responsibility, to save Social Security, to make health care more affordable, college more available, to free us from dependence on foreign oil, and create new jobs with clean energy and a cleaner environment, to rally the world to our side in the war against terror, and to make a world with more friends and less terror.
My friends, at every turning point in our history, we, the people, have chosen unity over division, heeding our founders' call to America's eternal mission to form a more perfect union, to widen the circle of opportunity deep in the reach of freedom and strengthen the bonds of our community.
It happened every time, because we made the right choices.
In the early days of the republic, America was divided and at a crossroads, much as it is today, deeply divided over whether or not to build a real nation with a national economy and a national legal system. We chose to build a more perfect union.
In the Civil War, America was at another crossroads, deeply divided over whether to save the union and end slavery. We chose a more perfect union.
In the 1960s, when I was a young man, we were divided again over civil rights and women's rights. And again we chose to form a more perfect union.
As I said in 1992, I say again tonight, we are all in this together. We have an obligation, both to work hard and to help our fellow citizens, an obligation both to fight terror and to build a world with more cooperation and less terror.
Now, again, it is time to choose. Since we're all in the same boat, we should choose a captain of our ship who is a brave good man, who knows how to steer a vessel through troubled waters, to the calm seas and the clear sides of our more perfect union. That is our mission.
So let us go in tonight and say to America in a loud, clear voice: Send John Kerry.
God bless you.
quote:Now, since most Americans aren't that far to the right, our friends have to portray us Democrats as simply unacceptable, lacking in strength and values. In other words, they need a divided America.
But we don't.
Blaaaaaaaaaaaaat, wees is duidelijk stelletje christenhondenquote:Geachte heer Berends,
Uw bericht hebben wij in goede orde ontvangen en doorgestuurd ter
behandeling door de Tweede Kamerfractie (christenunie@tweedekamer.nl).
Indien uw bericht daartoe aanleiding geeft, kunt u over enige tijd een
nadere reactie van een van de fractiemedewerkers verwachten.
Met vriendelijke groet,
Annemieke Kamphorst
managementassistent
Landelijk Bureau ChristenUnie
Postbus 439
3800 AK AMERSFOORT
tel. 033 - 4226969
fax 033 - 4226968
mail bureau@christenunie.nl
www.christenunie.nl
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: familie_berends@planet.nl [familie_berends@planet.nl]
Verzonden: maandag 26 juli 2004 15:20
Aan: bureau@christenunie.nl
Onderwerp: Amerikaanse verkiezingen
Hallo ChristenUnie,
Is de ChristenUnie voor de Democratische presidentskandidaat John F. Kerry
of voor de Republikeinse presidentskandidaat George W. Bush bij de
Amerikaanse verkiezingen in november?
Met vriendelijke groet,
Peter Berends
Jij bent echt niet goed bij je hoofd he?quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 10:32 schreef pberends het volgende:
[..]
Blaaaaaaaaaaaaat, wees is duidelijk stelletje christenhonden
Jij vind de keuken mooi, dus neem 'm maar ik niet.quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 10:36 schreef Mike het volgende:
[..]
Jij bent echt niet goed bij je hoofd he?
Je krijgt een standaard verhaaltje terug, wedden.. heb je trouwens al deze geprobeerd:quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 10:32 schreef pberends het volgende:
[..]
Blaaaaaaaaaaaaat, wees is duidelijk stelletje christenhonden
ChristenUnieHonden hebben banden met het CDA; een identiek mailtje hadden ze mij gestuurd:quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 12:33 schreef Harry_Sack het volgende:
[..]
Je krijgt een standaard verhaaltje terug, wedden.. heb je trouwens al deze geprobeerd:
www.gerritzalm.nl, www.femkehalsema.nl, www.janmarijnissen.nl
quote:Geachte heer Berends,
Hartelijk dank voor uw reactie.
Ik heb uw bericht ter beantwoording doorgestuurd naar onze Tweede-Kamerfractie (cda.publieksvoorlichting@tweedekamer.nl).
Ik vertrouw erop u hiermee voldoende te hebben geïnformeerd.
Met vriendelijke groet,
Harmke Hulsman
Medewerkster Communicatie
CDA Secretariaat
Postbus 30453
2500 GL DEN HAAG
T (070) 342 48 88
F (070) 364 34 17
E cda@bureau.cda.nl
W www.cda.nl
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: familie_berends@planet.nl [familie_berends@planet.nl]
Verzonden: maandag 26 juli 2004 15:16
Aan: cda@bureau.cda.nl
Onderwerp: Amerikaanse verkiezingen
Hallo CDA,
Is het CDA voor de Democratische presidentskandidaat John F. Kerry of voor de Republikeinse presidentskandidaat George W. Bush bij de Amerikaanse verkiezingen in november?
Met vriendelijke groet,
Peter Berends
Hallo cdaquote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 12:45 schreef pberends het volgende:
[..]
ChristenUnieHonden hebben banden met het CDA; een identiek mailtje hadden ze mij gestuurd:
[..]
Nou hun aanhef is anders ook niet Geachte pberends,.quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 12:49 schreef Harry_Sack het volgende:
[..]
Hallo cda![]()
Trouwens, www.janpeterbalkenende.nl verwijst naar het ministerie van algemene zaken, jammer...
quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 12:08 schreef dVTB het volgende:
Zoals Gore terecht zei: laten we hopen dat deze keer WEL elke stem telt en dat NIET het Surpreme Court bepaalt wie president wordt. De wereld is ontzettend hard toe aan een machtswisseling in de Verenigde Staten. Hopelijk zijn de Amerikanen dat zelf ook.
Wordt Bush herkozen, dan voorzie ik desastreuze gevolgen voor de westerse economieën, omdat we dan nog 4 jaar van zulk beleid krijgen. Hopelijk kunnen de democraten de orde weer herstellen in de VS.
Je *zou* natuurlijk ook inhoudelijk kunnen reageren en mijn kort-door-de-bocht-betoogje de grond inboren. Je vindt blijkbaar dat ik ongelijk heb, dus toon jij dan maar aan dat we zijn gebaat bij nog vier jaar Bush...quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 13:30 schreef PJORourke het volgende:
![]()
Op welke manier zal Kerry een beter beleid voor de economie inzetten. Op cruciale punten zoals het begrotingstekort en het handelstekort heeft de democraat geen firm standpunt ingenomen. Natuurlijk zal het onder zijn bewind beter gaan als hij gekozen wordt, maar dat ligt niet direct aan hem, maar aan het opleven van de economie.quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 13:37 schreef dVTB het volgende:
[..]
Je *zou* natuurlijk ook inhoudelijk kunnen reageren en mijn kort-door-de-bocht-betoogje de grond inboren. Je vindt blijkbaar dat ik ongelijk heb, dus toon jij dan maar aan dat we zijn gebaat bij nog vier jaar Bush...
Wat komisch toch... toen het onder Clinton beter ging 'profiteerde hij van de conjunctuur'. Nu het onder Bush klote gaat 'heeft hij pech, want tsja, de conjunctuur'. En voor Kerry kunnen we NU al voorspellen dat als het onder hem beter gaat, het ligt aan 'de conjunctuur'.quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 14:03 schreef UnderWorld_ het volgende:
Natuurlijk zal het onder zijn bewind beter gaan als hij gekozen wordt, maar dat ligt niet direct aan hem, maar aan het opleven van de economie.
Zie je de trend Verbal?quote:Op dinsdag 27 juli 2004 14:08 schreef Verbal het volgende:
[..]
Wat komisch toch... toen het onder Clinton beter ging 'profiteerde hij van de conjunctuur'. Nu het onder Bush klote gaat 'heeft hij pech, want tsja, de conjunctuur'. En voor Kerry kunnen we NU al voorspellen dat als het onder hem beter gaat, het ligt aan 'de conjunctuur'.
Mocht Bush herkozen worden, en het toch slecht blijven gaan, is dat dan omdat die gemene conjunctuur toch maar even heeft besloten nog wat langer te kutten?Of zeg je nu dat het sowieso snel beter zal gaan met de economie, ongeacht welke president?
quote:Geachte heer Berends,
Dank voor uw mail.
De VVD heeft als geheel geen favoriet voor de Amerikaanse verkiezingen
in november.
Het is aan de Kamerleden zelf om te bepalen naar wie bij hen de voorkeur
uitgaat, Bush of Kerry, maar dit is voor ieder een persoonlijke afweging
en geen politiek standpunt van de VVD-fractie.
Met vriendelijke groet,
VVD Publieksvoorlichting
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: familie_berends@planet.nl [familie_berends@planet.nl]
Verzonden: maandag 26 juli 2004 15:17
Aan: alg.sec@vvd.nl
Onderwerp: Amerikaanse verkiezingen
Hallo VVD,
Is de VVD voor de Democratische presidentskandidaat John F. Kerry of
voor de Republikeinse presidentskandidaat George W. Bush bij de
Amerikaanse verkiezingen in november?
Met vriendelijke groet,
Peter Berends
Ehm, tjsa, qua humor is dit een stuk minder.quote:
| Forum Opties | |
|---|---|
| Forumhop: | |
| Hop naar: | |