|
Post by tjaman on Oct 5, 2004 12:25:05 GMT -5
I'm going to vote for Kerry. I think Dubya is only nominally "in charge" of the most corrupt and craven administration since Harding, and I think President Cheney, in fact, may be a vampire. I believe supply-side economics is responsible for the worst excesses of Enron and Halliburton, I think "No Child Left Behind" is a frontal assault on public schools, I think Dubya's foreign policy resembles nothing so much as the Trenchcoat Mafia, I find his environmental policies offensive, and I think investing America's social security funds in the stock market makes very nearly as much sense as programming decisions made at the WB. You could replace this entire administration with baboons and they'd do a better job. But since there are no baboons running, I'm going to vote for Kerry, who, if nothing else, has no personal or corporate interest in per-barrel oil prices, has proposed some -- any -- other approach in Iraq than "bomb them some more," does not stumble through his speeches like English is a foreign language, bothers to organize his thoughts, consults other people about decisions he makes (as opposed to President Cheney), has a wife no one would mistake for a blow-up doll (ok, that's out of line -- Laura Bush is a charming and gracious person who just seems a little vacant most of the time), and has not, so far as I can tell, chosen a vampire to serve as his running mate. Offend - O - Rama, and my little attempt to live up to the name
|
|
|
Post by Insane Troll Logic on Oct 5, 2004 12:28:15 GMT -5
*applause, applause*
;D
|
|
|
Post by Aunt Arlene on Oct 5, 2004 12:48:58 GMT -5
Well said, TJ. I don't love Kerry so much as I hate the idea of another four years of what we have now. I can't imagine what Bush/Cheney would or could do without having to worry about another reelection. I'm still waiting to find out more about Cheney's energy meetings and how much he has made off the war with Halliburton.
It's unfortunate that the Democratic party couldn't find someone we could rally behind better. I pretty much will vote for Kerry unless he is caught on camera committing a major felony. Even then, I wouldn't vote for Bush.
Tonight's debate might be very entertaining, BTW.
|
|
|
Post by PyleansDontLeaveMe on Oct 5, 2004 14:30:04 GMT -5
I personally would like to not have my civil liberties stripped away, and would one day like to be counted as a citizen with the privilages and responsibilities thereof.
The thing most people fail to realize, or really the distinction most people fail to make, is that 'defense of marriage' is fighting its battle on the wrong front, and the front that they should be worrying about is nothing that they need to be concerned about.
They treat the issue as if marriage in the eyes of the state and marriage in the eyes of God are interchangeable and nondiffrentiated concepts. That if gay couples are allowed to file taxes jointly it will in some way amount to a constitutional writ to force god to let us into heaven.
And they simply are not the same thing. Marriage in the eyes of your church is not marriage in the eyes of the state. That's why they are entirely different ceremonies (although frequently performed simultaneously)
Marriage before god is what the whole standing up in church thing is about. Marriage in the eyes of the state is when you slip off into the alcove with the best man and Maid of Honor and sign the paperwork.
The gay community respects (on the whole) the right of individual churches or religions to take their own stand on this issue. We do not respect the right of the state to relegate us to seperate but equal status by taking away the other half of the equation however.
DOMA people seem to take the issue like they're defending the gate of heaven. Hello people, not your job. Also not really within your power, as far as I understand the religious aspect. What you are doing is working to put us back to the days of seperate drinking fountains and telling me I can't sit at your lunch counter.
|
|
|
Post by tjaman on Oct 5, 2004 14:35:14 GMT -5
LET PY EAT! LET PY EAT!
Hmmm ... there's an odd reinterpretation of Marie Antoinette in there somewhere, but I'm not placing it. ;D
|
|
|
Post by AlyWay on Oct 5, 2004 14:36:50 GMT -5
Definitely not for Bush. Not sure about Kerry either but who else is there? Not fond of Edwards, I have heard some of his voting record in Congress and not a fan of his. Lesser of two evils I guess.
|
|
|
Post by TheMasterGeek on Oct 5, 2004 14:38:36 GMT -5
I want to vote for Kerry, since I agree with most of his policies on the economy, immigration, taxes, health care, gay and lesbian rights, and many other domestic and foreign policy issues. But there is something about Kerry I don't like. I can't put my finger on it right now. Although I dont like Bush, I might vote for him for the reason I know what I can expect from him.
Personally, I feel the Bush administration is failing the President. I believe he was misled by some of his administration Rice, Rumsfeld, and Cheney to goto war with Iraq. I believe that President Bush put his trust in the wrong people in the Administration, he should have followed Powell more than the others when it comes to foreign affairs, after all Powell is the Secretary of State. I think that Bush saw the "evidence" presented to him by some of the Hawks in his administration was exaggerated to him. I think he believe there was WMD's in Iraq, because Putin and many of the Democrats saw the same info.
I also think we need to stay in Iraq for the long haul to make sure it is stablized, and I dont think Kerry will.
In the next two debates, I think Kerry needs to impress me in order to get my vote.
The only person I like on the ticket is John Edwards, he is not the negative conotation of a liberal that the media presents him to be.
And I dont want to vote for Bush, but I might.
Or I just spend an hour in the voting booth agonizing over the decision.
|
|
|
Post by PyleansDontLeaveMe on Oct 5, 2004 14:41:38 GMT -5
It's sad that that's where american politics is, isn't it?
And unfortunately, the realistic look is that if you vote for anyone else (like someone actually qualified to do the job) you're essentially voting to put Bush back in office.
Sigh
Oh for a sensible realization that no democracy can really be expressed through a two party system.
Still.
At least no one in this country is likely to vote Tory
|
|
|
Post by PyleansDontLeaveMe on Oct 5, 2004 14:46:03 GMT -5
There's no way Kerry's going to just pull us out of Iraq. No matter how against the war you are, I don't think anyone reasonable will say that we can just leave now.
We've already unleashed chaos.
I do think that replacing G.B. is the only way that we're going to convince the international community to form an actual coolition (spelling? My brain has suddenly frozen) G. has just given them all the finger too many times, there's no way anybody's going to be willing to work with him anymore.
ANd he's still completely ignoring Powell. I can't imagine why. Powell seems to be the only rational human being working there. I would actually vote for Powell.
Of course, he's proven himself to be smart enough for the job by declaring that there's no way he would ever want it.
|
|
|
Post by TheMasterGeek on Oct 5, 2004 14:51:14 GMT -5
I do think that replacing G.B. is the only way that we're going to convince the international community to form an actual coolition (spelling? My brain has suddenly frozen) G. has just given them all the finger too many times, there's no way anybody's going to be willing to work with him anymore. ANd he's still completely ignoring Powell. I can't imagine why. Powell seems to be the only rational human being working there. I would actually vote for Powell. Of course, he's proven himself to be smart enough for the job by declaring that there's no way he would ever want it. I know you are right. About Kerry better able to get a broader coalition in Iraq, but the thing is I wouldnt matter who was President, nations like France would join the coallition if a tree was elected. There is some evidence the Lazy French Surrender Monkey Chirac will join as soon as Bush is defeated. The world is so anti-Bush right now.
Heck If Powell would quit the administration now, say he is running for President, and have Lance Armstrong as his VP, Powell would win in a landslide.
|
|
|
Post by AlyWay on Oct 5, 2004 14:54:55 GMT -5
i would vote the Powell/Armstrong ticket!
|
|
|
Post by PyleansDontLeaveMe on Oct 5, 2004 15:23:07 GMT -5
And the only thing preventing it... Powell is far to smart to want to do something like that.
|
|
|
Post by AlyWay on Oct 5, 2004 15:42:46 GMT -5
and why would Armstrong give up Sheryl Crow for public office?
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Purple Goddess on Oct 5, 2004 15:47:31 GMT -5
I know you are right. About Kerry better able to get a broader coalition in Iraq, but the thing is I wouldnt matter who was President, nations like France would join the coallition if a tree was elected. There is some evidence the Lazy French Surrender Monkey Chirac will join as soon as Bush is defeated. The world is so anti-Bush right now.
Heck If Powell would quit the administration now, say he is running for President, and have Lance Armstrong as his VP, Powell would win in a landslide. [glow=purple,2,300] Just a friendly rebuttle to that....but it's not a disagreement... The thing that scares me.... there is a large population in the U.S. that DOES continue to support Bush. And none of them give a crap... or are not knowledgable about foreign relations, the environment, the economy or anything else politically relevant....They are concerned with individual and spiritual issues that shouldn't even be in the political arena.... All that was to say, that it scares me that Bush could actually win finally. He plays on the fears of this country and it sickens me. But it sickens me more that people are falling for it....If your trying to give yourself an image of stubburn idiocy, than surely "Dubya" has accomplished this. Needless to say, I'm voting for Kerry...I have a list somewhere of the reasons why....lemme get back to you on that *giggle* Seriously, I think Kerry does have a better shot at bringing ballance, communication, diplomacy, strategic leadership than Bush at the moment. *shrug* "things don't change unless they change" VOTE Lilah!!![/glow]
|
|
|
Post by PyleansDontLeaveMe on Oct 5, 2004 16:35:15 GMT -5
That's the thing that really makes me crazy
Bush's entire platform is based on stirring up fear in the American people.
He hasn't even made an attempt to deny or explain the lies. Hell, he hasn't even acknowledged that he's been caught. Just blithely keeps stirring up the 'Well, if you don't vote for me terrorists are going to attack again.
Hell, Cheney flat out SAID that a few weeks ago. And where's the reporters on that one?
|
|