ANSWERING DEBATE QUESTIONS

Blogson _Jon of We Swear took a crack at answering last week's debate questions & his answers are thorough, intelligent, and thought-provoking.

My answers, however, are limited to smart-ass sound-bites, like:

After talking with several co-workers and family and friends, I asked the ones who said they were not voting for you, why. They said that you were too wishy-washy. Do you have a reply for them?
It's true. I once said "I don't like terrorists", but was later quoted as saying "I like terrorists". However, my mike was cut off, and most people didn't hear me finish with "once they've been converted into a fine red mist." My apologies for the confusion.

Yesterday in a statement you admitted that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, but justified the invasion by stating, I quote, "He retained the knowledge, the materials, the means and the intent to produce weapons of mass destruction, and could have passed this knowledge to our terrorist enemies." Do you sincerely believe this to be a reasonable justification for invasion when this statement applies to so many other countries, including North Korea?
Only if the country in question has sweet, sweet oil. The rest of the countries are just target practice for our new nuclear bunker-busters... unless they'd like to cut the crap & start playing nice... looking YOUR way, Kim Jong...

The U.S. is preparing a new Iraq government and will proceed to withdraw U.S. troops. Would you proceed with the same plans as President Bush?
No. My plans include decorating Iraq's borders with terrorist heads on pikes. It's a big border. We've got a LOT of work to do. But other than THAT... yes.

My mother and sister traveled abroad this summer, and when they got back they talked to us about how shocked they were at the intensity of aggravation that other countries had with how we handled the Iraq situation. Diplomacy is obviously something that we have to really work on. What is your plan to repair relations with other countries, given the current situation?
I will repair relations with other countries by graciously accepting their apologies after they admit they were wrong... Oh, and after they bring me a shrubbery.

Iran sponsors terrorism and has missiles capable of hitting Israel and southern Europe. Iran will have nuclear weapons in two to three years time. In the event that U.N. sanctions don't stop this threat, what will you do as president?
Although I can't imagine a situation where UN sanctions would fail to stop a threat [turns away, chokes back a hearty guffaw, turns back], assuming they did, then I would start blowing things up in Iran until the threat was stopped. Possibly a little longer, just because I think explosions look cool.

Since we continue to police the world, how do you intend to maintain our military presence without reinstituting a draft?
By vetoing any legislation that Charles Rangel and his crackpot leftist buddies put on my desk. By the way, you're currently in the lead for the "stupidest question" prize.

We have been fortunate that there have been no further terrorist attacks on American soil since 9/11. Why do you think this is? And if elected, what will you do to assure our safety?
Because dead terrorists can't attack anything... and I will assure America's safety by creating more of these "safety enhanced" terrorists.

Why did you block the reimportation of safer and inexpensive drugs from Canada, which would have cut 40 to 60 percent off of the cost?
Re-import? Are you NUTS? Having been in Canada, those drugs could be contaminated with SARS or Mad Cow Disease, or Socialism!

You've stated your concern for the rising cost of health care, yet you chose a vice presidential candidate who has made millions of dollars successfully suing medical professionals. How do you reconcile this with the voters?
WHAT? My veep is a f***ing trial lawyer?... 'scuse me a second... [shoots Edwards]... consider it reconciled.

You have enjoyed a Republican majority in the House and Senate for most of your presidency. In that time, you've not vetoed a single spending bill. Excluding $120 billion spent in Iran and -- I'm sorry -- Iraq and Afghanistan, there has been $700 billion spent and not paid for by taxes. Please explain how the spending you have approved and not paid for is better for the American people than the spending proposed by your opponent.
I'm spending the money on disassembling terrorists... I'm sorry, I meant "disassembling terrorist organizations"... No, wait... I was right the first time. Anyway, my opponent would only squander the money on gin & hookers for Ted Kennedy. This only makes America safer if it causes Ted to pass out drunk. MY spending protects America regardless of Ted Kennedy's blood alcohol content or proximity to a steering wheel.

Would you be willing to look directly into the camera and, using simple and unequivocal language, give the American people your solemn pledge not to sign any legislation that will increase the tax burden on families earning less than $200,000 a year during your first term?
I'll do even better than that. Not only do I promise not to raise taxes on anyone, anytime, for any reason, regardless of income, but I further promise that anyone caught raising taxes will be rolled in porcupine quills and beaten with a sack of doorknobs.

How would you rate yourself as an environmentalist? What specifically has your administration done to improve the condition of our nation's air and water supply?
Environmentalist? I'm not some tree-huggin', tofu-lickin', spotted-owl-worshippin', granola-snorting, filthy-hippie environmentalist! And I'm going to improve the nation's air & water supply by killing you so you can't use up any more of it with all your annoying breathing and drinking! RARRR! [lunges toward hippy, but is stopped by jolt from shock-collar]

How can the U.S. be competitive in a manufacturing given -- in manufacturing -- excuse me -- given the wage necessary and comfortably accepted for American workers to maintain the standard of living that they expect?
A little more education & ambition, and a little less Coors Light & "Survivor".

45 days after -- (clears throat) -- excuse me. Forty five days after 9/11, Congress passed the Patriot Act, which takes away checks on law enforcement, weakens American citizens' rights and freedoms, especially Fourth Amendment rights. With expansions to the Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, my question to you is why are my rights being watered down and my citizen's -- (word inaudible) -- and what are the specific justifications for these reforms?
Your rights are NOT being watered down. For example, you haven't been thrown in jail without due process for asking these questions... [jots questioner's name on "enemies list" while mumbling under breath "yet"]

Thousands of people have already been cured or treated by the use of adult stem cells or umbilical cord stem cells. However, no one has been cured by using embryonic stem cells. Wouldn't it be wise to use stem cells obtained without the destruction of an embryo?
Obviously embryonic stem cells are NOT the way to go. We should concentrate on adult stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells. Or, better yet, stem cells from adult umbilical cords, like the one connecting John Kerry to his wife's trust fund.

If there were a vacancy in the Supreme Court and you had the opportunity to fill that position today, who would you choose and why?
Diana Ross, since it was her band in the first place, and... um... could you repeat the question?

Suppose you were speaking with a voter who believed abortion is murder, and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person?
I would fake a seizure and run like hell.

During the last four years, you have made thousands of decisions that have affected millions of lives. Please give three instances in which you came to realize you had made a wrong decision, and what you did to correct it. Thank you.
Well, my first mistake was... *GURK!*... *GAKK!*... *twitch*... [runs like hell]