What I'd LOVE to hear Kerry say tonight in an opening statement:

[Roland99]

"Tonight, ladies and gentleman, we are here in what has amounted to a scripted TV show. The President's campaign has forced us to stand up here, 10 feet apart, facing a moderator, unable to speak to each other directly. Is that a debate? I say no.

The President's campaign has also tried to setup the winner of tonight's "debate" as the person who doesn't sweat or doesn't go over the allotted time to answer a question.

I ask you, America, is this what's best for you? Or is this what's best for the President's campaign?

I would prefer to have an honest debate in the style of the Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas debates. I mean, after all, the President keeps referring to his party as the party of Lincoln. Does he really mean that or is he just blowing smoke?

So, to conclude my opening statement to you, America. Demand more from your candidates. Demand more from your media. We are here for you, not the other way around."

[helpisontheway]

1. Opening statements are not allowed

nt

[Roland99]

5. Another reason why I think he should do it!

Break the "rules" and see if Bushie takes his earpiece and runs home crying to Cheney.

[nycmjkfan]

2. Roland...

If you ran for President, I'd vote for ya!!

[Roland99]

8. Believe me....

I've thought of running for local office as a start. But, I think the truth scares too many people.

[zulchzulu]

3. That would be cool...although maybe it should...

...be part of the closing statement that goes right back into the Spin Machine.

Keep that section down to two sentences or less. :->

[kentuck]

4. They don't have "opening statements" ??

That's probably part of the rules..

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

6. I'd like to hear "I'm John Kerry, BEE-yatch."

:evilgrin:

[cali]

7. Even if opening statements were part of the program

stating that bush's campaign forced him into anything is a bad idea. What I'd like to see Kerry do, as the candidates are unable to ask each other questions directly, is to say: " If the debate rules allowed it, I'd ask the president....." . That way he could effectively pose any question he wanted. Not saying that bush would answer, but at least Kerry could throw some stuff out there.

[Onlooker]

9. Kerry should clear up

Let me first take a few seconds to clear up two misconceptions:
(1) I voted to give the President the authority to go to war; I did not vote for him to go to war.
(2) I supported one version of the $87 billion military budget; and opposed the other version. The version I supported had financial accountability; the version I opposed did not.
Now, in answer to your question ...

[nostamj]

11. on the $87 billion, I'd be clearer...

The version I supported was paid for by a small financial sacrifice from the wealthiest in this generation. The President threatened to veto that bill.

The version I opposed will be paid for by your children and grandchildren so the wealthiest can keep their full tax cuts.

That is the bill the President signed.

My vote was a protest vote on principle. There was never a question of passage. The question remains, why hasn't the $87 billion been spent on supplies for our troops.

[pacalo]

10. Although the coWard made sure there are "No Opening Statements!"

I'd love for Kerry to get some digs in about the contract debacle. Maybe there will be closing remarks? Hee!

(I usually skip the "Kerry should..." posts; I'm glad I read yours, Roland. Great point!)