October Thread #2: Decision 2004

[Todd Patten]

OK. I know that some of you are resistant to political threads, but in my mind, this is one of the most important elections the United States has seen in a generation. Throw in the fact that I live for this stuff and I couldn't resist.

Let me give you my background: I am a child of a staunch republican. My father ran for office (lost) and always stressed the importance of democracy in action. I'm a registered republican. I supported McCain in the primaries and voted for Bush in the general election. I also voted for Clinton, twice. I guess that makes me an independent

This year, I will not be voting for Bush. I rather have my member lopped off. No exageration. I'm not thrilled with Kerry, but George Bush has not EARNED a second term.

So, what do I ask those who support Bush? Why should I support Bush? Seriously, lay out why I should support Bush. I can go through some of the replies and counter replies.

Taxes. Bush is a conservative who cuts taxes.
Umm, yes, he cut taxes. At the same time, due to the lack of general funding, my property taxes have increased far more than my personal income taxes. Oh, and Bush is NOT a conservative. He, and his republican controlled congress, are spending us into oblivion! At some point, at some time, we're going to have to pay this debt off. How? Cut spending? Please, let me know what you would cut. Welfare? Given that entitlement programs account for less that .33% of the national budget, you've got a ways to go.

Moreover, take a look at our economy. Trickle down does not work. As evident by the recent report on projected job cuts, we're going nowhere and fast. Thankfully however, corporate profits are soaring

Terror and The War,
I'm an isolationist. It worked wonders when Reagan and others applied it to the Soviet Union. Not a shot fired and the enemy was defeated. I could go over the litany of bogus statements by Bush and Crew regarding Iraq and the weapons, but it would take far too many pages. Just this past weekend a report came out regarding the so called "tubes" and the knowledge that they were not for nuclear use. Yet this governement went on to say they were. These type of manipulative announcements are incredibly dangerous to a democracy.

People have told me that we are safer today then we were before we invaded Iraq. The cite that there has not been an attack on American soil since September 11th. Umm, well, when was the last foreign terrorist attack on American soil BEFORE Septerber 11, 2001? Anyone? Anyone? Seems to me that this is a bogus assessment given the previous pattern.

Moreover, who attacked us on September 11, 2001? And, where is the man who heads this organization? And why is he still alive? And why did we dedicate 10,000 of our armed forces to chase the enemy who attacked us, then send 250,000 troops to a region nowhere near where the man who attacked us is located? Let alone that the country never even threatened us, or could threaten the United States? Is it me, or are we in just as dangerous a situation as we were BEFORE September 11th?

Bush is looking out for families and God.
Well, being one who truly embraces liberatarian ideals, I prefer that Bush stay the hell out of deciding what is best for my family. A constitutional amendment banning gay marriage?!? Please, go through the amendements to the Constitution and find me one that REMOVES rights and priviledges of this countries citizens. Oh yeah, Prohibition. That one was repealed because people wised up to the fact that our Constitution was about supporting the basic rights, not restricting them.

Moreover, religion has no business in our government. It seems to me that there is a certain element in this country that would love to see religion become an integral part of our government. However, these are the same people that knock the Islamic based governments. Trust me, it matters not what the religion is, mixing government with religion is very dangerous.

The bottom line for me is that George Bush and his administration had an amazing opportunity to do things right given the republican dominated congress. However, they blew it at every turn. It's time for a change.

Some say that you do not change a horse mid-stream. Well, when that horse is an @ss, you better change it because you aint getting anywhere.

October 27th is the magic date for any spruprises BTW. Five days before the election.

[paulnj]

WELL, SAID !

but, I (being a candidate for the PATRIOT ACT) can still say that NO candidate is truely the RIGHT choice, only the BETTER CHOICE ;)

THE PATRIOT ACT is unconstitutional TOO.....

[Peter_AUS]

The stupid thing is, we go to our polls in three days time to vote for a new government here in Australia, and similar things could be asked as well.

We have a leader, who lied about certain things, won the last election because of those lies, is running again for his fourth term in office as Prime Minsiter (yes they can stay in power for as long as the people elect them to), has lied about the war in Iraq, WMD, we are targets of Terrorists, have Terrorists cells (supposedly) here in Australia as well.

Yet the likely hood is that he will be re-elected, because of scare campaigning and probably lies regarding his opposition as well, and as you said, "People don't like changing horses in mid stream". He even campaigns that under the opposition, Interest rates will skyrocket up, the economy will collapse and we will be worse under their government.

This comming from a person that has been sitting on 8 billion $$$$$$'s and giving it away in election promises.

Bought about 10 of the American War Tanks, that we can't transport as we don't have the facilities to transport them, they are obsolete and are very costly to run. Bought Submarines, that don't work properly, Helicopters that aren't spec'd properly and need heavy modifications, etc.

Yet the likely hood he will be re-elected.

Go figure that one out.

Oh yes, he also has us now involved with Free Trade Agreement with the USA, which we have redress over, if something goes wrong. No right of appeal to anyone, as the USA has the right to tell us what to do. Which is completely wrong.

[paulnj]

PETE, tell that guy....................

NEVER MAKE A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL(USA) HAHAHA ;)

[Todd Patten]

Wow Peter. You simply underline that people, in groups, act much the same way! I did not realize how close you guys were to election time. I am going to make sure I follow it. Do you have any recommended web sites that cover news in your region? I'd love to check it out.

Honestly, I figured that Howard was in a bit of trouble given that, at least at one point in time, the very large majority of Australian citizens were not in favor of commiting troops to the efforts in Iraq. Wasn't there a confidence vote a while back?

Here's the thing, and it's been tested and proven for millenia, if you create an atmosphere of fear in your citizenry you can make them do anything. Some of the most ruthless leaders in history mastered the art of making the population feel threatened and using that fear to their advantage. Very rational and logical people will react in a collective illogical manner. It's quite remarkable. Shoot, look at this country. Even though it has be discounted by our intelligence agencies, countless investigative reports, and our own congressional committees, a large majority of Americans STILL believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the September 11th attacks, and had intimate contact with Al Queda. Why? Because George Bush and his crew managed to convince the public of this without a single shred of true evidence.

Personally, when I hear people say that they are willing to give up privacy and basic rights given by God himself, in an effort to be "safer", I shake my head and realize we as a country are moving towards a very dangerous end. Seems to me that this is occurring in places outside my borders. Very frightening. I fear the enemy within more.

[mjm]

Todd, can you explain to me why I should vote for president? I see no reason to vote for the president, he LOST the popular vote last time and is in the White House now. That tells me that my vote means absolutely nothing.

I live in California and the state is already going for Kerry (who I would vote for), so my vote wouldn't really change anything for California or the country.

Thanks.

[walterick]

Anyone who uses fear to control the masses should be run from - no questions asked.

As previously stated, the majority of Americans didn't vote for him last time, I think we'll get it right again

Unless we're succumbing to fear...

Kerry may be ugly but at least he's not using fear as a mind control device.

That's the deepest-seated issue during this campaign I can put my finger on. So I'll leave it at that.

Rick

[Janie]

I have one... the democrats are trying to get the draft reinacted and bush opposes it. Kerry is a wants to send more of our guys into iraq if he gets in and bush wants more iraqis trained to fight instead. Do you support a draft?

OK. I know that some of you are resistant to political threads, but in my mind, this is one of the most important elections the United States has seen in a generation. Throw in the fact that I live for this stuff and I couldn't resist.

Let me give you my background: I am a child of a staunch republican. My father ran for office (lost) and always stressed the importance of democracy in action. I'm a registered republican. I supported McCain in the primaries and voted for Bush in the general election. I also voted for Clinton, twice. I guess that makes me an independent

This year, I will not be voting for Bush. I rather have my member lopped off. No exageration. I'm not thrilled with Kerry, but George Bush has not EARNED a second term.

So, what do I ask those who support Bush? Why should I support Bush? Seriously, lay out why I should support Bush. I can go through some of the replies and counter replies.

Taxes. Bush is a conservative who cuts taxes.
Umm, yes, he cut taxes. At the same time, due to the lack of general funding, my property taxes have increased far more than my personal income taxes. Oh, and Bush is NOT a conservative. He, and his republican controlled congress, are spending us into oblivion! At some point, at some time, we're going to have to pay this debt off. How? Cut spending? Please, let me know what you would cut. Welfare? Given that entitlement programs account for less that .33% of the national budget, you've got a ways to go.

Moreover, take a look at our economy. Trickle down does not work. As evident by the recent report on projected job cuts, we're going nowhere and fast. Thankfully however, corporate profits are soaring

Terror and The War,
I'm an isolationist. It worked wonders when Reagan and others applied it to the Soviet Union. Not a shot fired and the enemy was defeated. I could go over the litany of bogus statements by Bush and Crew regarding Iraq and the weapons, but it would take far too many pages. Just this past weekend a report came out regarding the so called "tubes" and the knowledge that they were not for nuclear use. Yet this governement went on to say they were. These type of manipulative announcements are incredibly dangerous to a democracy.

People have told me that we are safer today then we were before we invaded Iraq. The cite that there has not been an attack on American soil since September 11th. Umm, well, when was the last foreign terrorist attack on American soil BEFORE Septerber 11, 2001? Anyone? Anyone? Seems to me that this is a bogus assessment given the previous pattern.

Moreover, who attacked us on September 11, 2001? And, where is the man who heads this organization? And why is he still alive? And why did we dedicate 10,000 of our armed forces to chase the enemy who attacked us, then send 250,000 troops to a region nowhere near where the man who attacked us is located? Let alone that the country never even threatened us, or could threaten the United States? Is it me, or are we in just as dangerous a situation as we were BEFORE September 11th?

Bush is looking out for families and God.
Well, being one who truly embraces liberatarian ideals, I prefer that Bush stay the hell out of deciding what is best for my family. A constitutional amendment banning gay marriage?!? Please, go through the amendements to the Constitution and find me one that REMOVES rights and priviledges of this countries citizens. Oh yeah, Prohibition. That one was repealed because people wised up to the fact that our Constitution was about supporting the basic rights, not restricting them.

Moreover, religion has no business in our government. It seems to me that there is a certain element in this country that would love to see religion become an integral part of our government. However, these are the same people that knock the Islamic based governments. Trust me, it matters not what the religion is, mixing government with religion is very dangerous.

The bottom line for me is that George Bush and his administration had an amazing opportunity to do things right given the republican dominated congress. However, they blew it at every turn. It's time for a change.

Some say that you do not change a horse mid-stream. Well, when that horse is an @ss, you better change it because you aint getting anywhere.

October 27th is the magic date for any spruprises BTW. Five days before the election.

[opus]

Right now I'm studying the French Revolution in a college history/literary class. Some of the parallels I see in what the French government (under Robespierre) was doing in the end and some of the ways I see fear exploited here are quite frightening. These guys inspired patriotism, then used fear and patriotism to turn people against each other to "fight the enemy within". The people thought they were being protected by some of the harsh measures taken against "traitors" (moderates), until the measures started being turned against them themselves.

Americans are being asked to give up freedoms in the name of public safety. Very, very slippery slope. And what kind of safety can anyone guarantee in the end, anyway? There is none.

Very interesting stuff.

I'll not debate politics, but I will strongly advocate the study of history.

[ACArmstrong]

>>> the democrats are trying to get the draft reinacted and bush opposes it.<<<

Sorry, Janie - that's just plain wrong. Yes, two democrats have proposed absolutely absurd legislation that talks about the draft - one is Charles Rangel (sp?) - he's a black man who has seen first-hand how the Vietnam draft destroyed the lives of the poor and minorities. He has made it clear that his legislation was a way of creating public discussion about a possible draft and how the wealthy (Bush, Cheney, Delay) never pony up their young to fight the wars. Somehow, they always get out of it. Rangel's point was that if this war is worth fighting - it's worth sending Bush's twins, right? Wrong - it got the exact reaction Rangel wanted in Congress. It was defeated by the Republican majority handily.

That's another scare tactic. John Kerry and John Edwards adimantly OPPOSE a draft and have vowed NOT to institute one on their watch.

[Todd Patten]

Andy -- I'll give Janie this. Kerry did propose on his web site mandatory service for high school students in exchange for college tuition. Here's the archive link

This is not a draft. It's proposed as a service, whether it be community or armed. This proposal is very much like the current system in other democratic countries, such as Israel, where young men and women are simply obligated to contribute to their country in some way or shape. It's an interesting idea, but I definitely don't support it.

Janie -- get real about the draft however. The Democrats are the LAST party that would be supportive of a draft. I'm curious how much research you do with this stuff or if this is echoing the National Review and Rush's argument of the day. Personally, I love listening to Rush, Glen beck and others. I then spend time researching their accusations. Many are grossly inaccurate or slanted. However, it scares me that there is a HUGE percent of our population who do not bother to check the facts and take Rush as "truth".

Back to the facts. This matter does not scare me a bit. Let's face it, neither idea would pass in any form of legislation. Given that both are likely to be shot down by Democrats, and there is no way in hell the Republicans are going to support anything Kerry puts up there, it's a non-issue.

Lastly, how can those who support Bush accuse Kerry of wanting to abandon the efforts in Iraq and make our country a more dangerous place ( ) in one voice, then accuse Kerry of wanting to commit troops via the draft in the other? Which one is it? Bush supporters are throwing tons of illogical crap against the wall and checking to see what sticks.

mjm -- Anyone who understands the current voting system knows that while the electoral college system is flawed, it's more accurate than a straight popular vote. If we were to elect purely based on popular vote, candidates could concentrate purely on the east coast, california and major cities in between and win the election. Rural states would be left completely out of the loop. No one would ever bother to concern themselves with Montana, North Dakota and Vermont. Most importantly, people have to stop whining about Florida and move on.

You may not think your vote matters, but I completely disagree. If we learned anything from Florida -- no matter who you supported, it is that every vote counts.

Janie -- I want to get back to your comments for a second then I will end my diatribe. It scares the heck out of me that Bush may just be re-elected. If for only the Patriot Act. If Bush is re-elected, with a Republican dominated congress and no consequences for the next election, there's a good chance that this legislation will be renewed. Legislation that rapes the rights of people all across the country. Legislation that uses tactics exactly like those that the Soviet Union used. You know, we used to comment about people "just dissappearing" in the Soviet Union because they voiced dissent? The Patriot Act allows this to occur in our own country. This piece of legislation, with multiple parts that have already been shot down by various courts as being unconstitutional, has a good chance of being made permanent. Why? because the American public can be convinced that it makes them safer. But at what expense?

I don't agree with Kerry on a lot of accounts. But this election, for me, goes beyond my personal money matters (taxes). There are things that are far more important. Intangibles that will effect our country for centuries to come.

[adina]

For my part, I cannot give you any reasons for voting for Bush. And, truthfully, I am not greatly impressed with Kerry either.

We're brought up to believe that the United States is this amazing country that's invincible, with liberty and justice for all -- yet every time an election rolls around -- "politicians" are the only choice we're given to choose from to structure the administration. Politicians = lawyers, lawyers = a downward spiral of ruin for everything in their path. I've been in the legal field for over 30 years and have first hand experience with that fearsome path. Yes, I KNOW Bush was never a lawyer -- I'm not sure exactly what previous relevant experience he brought to the table but, he's certainly a politician (in his own awkward, stumbling way) regardless.

I've heard it said to ask yourself "How much better off are you today than you were 4 years ago?" In my case, I am out of work, my investments have plummeted, and my immediate future is uncertain. I understand that my circumstances are not those of the normal average citizen. Nonetheless, my situation mirrors much of the economic conditions of our current administration, i.e., its not working, and investments along with the immediate future remain uncertain.

I would simply like to see us given better choices to select from instead of repeatedly having to choose the lesser of two evils.

And -- why, for the love of God, can't we get someone who is photogenic

Just my one-cents worth...
Penny

Clinton was pretty photogenic

[paulnj]

I am ready for a FEMALE president! YES FEMALE!!!!!! Angelina Jolie would GET MY VOTE. CRAZY enough to marry Billy Bob Thorton and EASY ON THE EYES. But then again I think Marion Barry would be a good choice too.... the dude lived life ;)

SPEAKING OF MARION....Marion (shug) Knight too

http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefme...9/T629407A.jpg

http://www.mugshots.com/IMAGES/Mugsh...ion-Knight.jpg

ALL 3 would get my vote OVER the CHOICES we have now.

[ACArmstrong]

Penny - you make some great points. I love politics. I love to study politics, but I'd probably never run for office. Could you just imagine how I'd be dragged through the mud over my most recent photo shoot?

However, I do have a proposal for getting the right kind of person to run for president:

1. Make it illegal to privately fund a campaign.

2. Publicly fund campaigns (minimally).

3. Require candidates to appear on Television in debate format for one hour every week for the months of August, September, and October preceding the election. That's right - 16+ debates on the issues.

[Michael]

Being from the neighbourhood (Canadian spelling!) to the north, I have to admit that I just don?t see how Bush is going to get re-elected. How is it possible for a man that has been dragged through the mud so much to even see a slight chance of getting elected again? I know Canada might be fed all the left-wing rhetoric and I may be biased in my own views, but I just don?t see him in office again. I have numerous, even countless, American friends and not one of them is voting for Bush. On top of that, I found myself reading through this and it sounds as if not one of you are going to vote for the war monger again. This brings great hope to me as a citizen of North America! Although we may not be politically related the connection between the States and Canada is palpable anywhere you go up here.

fficeffice" />>>

Please get rid of that runt. He is useless and sounds funny to! By this I mean his disgruntled laugh after every comment not the accent of Texas. And for those of you sitting on the fence about voting, no pun intended, please do your society a favour. After all, democracy does mean a form of government in which the supreme power is retained and directly exercised by the people, yes the PEOPLE! For those who do not vote in a democracy it is basically suggesting you choose not to be part of a unified government of the people. Therefore, you should not have the right to complain or benefit from what your government provides because you did not show your hand, or ticket, in the electoral process. That is just one reason why you should get out and vote.

[Outdoorsman]

Well.... I hate politics. But here's my two cents:
Bush is a lying scumbag who should be castrated and then dragged through the streets naked and on fire, at the least. Kerry is a weak little sleaze who should be drowned in some viscous liquid publicly. The VP is a hideous monstrosity of a gargoyle and Edwards is a slick car salesman with no soul.
All the debate and discussion over who will win and who will not is, to me, pointless. The system is fundamentally corrupt and the candidate who wins will be the one with more money. I have no faith in the system and I believe it is absolutely not representative of the will of the people.
I'm voting Libertarian. "Wasted vote"? Maybe. But no one has to live with that decision except me, so there.
Doom and gloom on this end....

[Todd Patten]

If the Liberatarian party would get their act together, it'd be a very viable option. Voting Liberatarian is not a wasted vote. They represent what the Republican party used to be -- not the gross bastardization of what it has become.

[Todd Patten]

Interesting debate tonight. I'd give it a draw. Bush did an OK job to come back and remedy his previous performance.

[megan]

I'ts a pretty polarized election, even more so than Bush/Gore. I can see why people are confused, afraid and frankly, so extreme in their beliefs this time around. Heck, I survived 9/11, pass Ground Zero every day on the way to work, and *really* don't want that to happen again, although I fear that something *will* no matter which rich guy gets elected. That said, I will be voting for Kerry - and yes, I'm voting *for* him, not *against* Bush. My reasons have little to do with 9/11, Iraq, etc. and more to do with women's issues that I have vehemently supported and marched for for almost half my life. I was decided before Bush even took office. Now, JFTR, if Kerry didn't support the issues I do, I'd be voting for Nader, no matter what the "costs." And JFTR again - I did not vote Clinton into office. I protest voted for neither dem or rep. I could not support a candidate, no matter what his views, that was such a scoundrel when it came to how he treats women.

Megan

[Peter_AUS]

Just an update on our countries Federal Election held yesterday.

The Government were re-elected with an increased majority in the Lower house and appear to maybe have gained control of the Upper House (The Senate) as well either outright or with help of another minor party that gave their preferences to the Government which helped them get re-elected and take further seats they might not normally have obtained.

So now they can put through legislation that has up to now been blocked by the Senate which is a shame, as there needs to be some control over the Government in the Lower House by the Senate to ensure fairness in Politics.

It would appear from comments above that it is likely that Bush will get in, given that the PM John Howard retained government here for a 4th time, which was history making in its self.

He lied, got us involved in a war unneccessarily, taxes us as the highest taxing Government in Australias history, scared people with inaccurate information and has promised to spend upwards of 8 -10 Billion $$$$'s in the next three years (usually this doesn't happen as they make excuses on why they can no longer commit to thier promises). Probably a bit like what happens over there as well.

So much for Honesty in Government.

But then after seeing what your opposition is like, I don't think I like either of them to win.

[yaronsh]

To bring some photography into this thread.... The first two pictures are from the Boston area, the third from Montreal.
- Yaron

[adina]

After watching the election, we have decided that we would like someone who can speak past 3rd grade abilities.

"Hunt 'em down and kill um"? "Missura" ?

Please, does no one know how to enuciate their words?

Ever see Mystery Science Theater 2000? With the three guys in the theater making fun of the whole movie? That was us watching the debate.

[walterick]

YES, I loved that show! My mom, my cousin and I woud roll on the floor watching them ham it up to the worst movies EVER!! LOL props to you , Adina!

Did you catch Bush's use of the term "internets?" Or my personal favorite of the night: "If you read the Constitution it says... - pause - look of consternation on Bush's face -"Well, it doesn't say..."

I don't even remember his point I was chuckeling so heartily!

[Trevor Ash]

I'm surprised no one has complained yet. Consider me the first.

[schrackman]

I will have to agree with Paul somewhat in that this election is not really about choosing the best guy for the job, just the better of the two. That's why I feel compelled to vote George Bush. I have lots of problems with Mr. Bush and the Republican party, but more so when comes to John Kerry and the Democratic party.

While I am not what you would call a war advocate, I think the U.S. did the right thing to go into Iraq. And, I don't believe all the mantra that Bush lied to do it either. Get real, people. If people want to blame someone, blame Saddam. The ball was in his court, and he could have prevented this war if he wanted to. But he didn't. And so we invaded. Simple as that. Besides, I think our troops on the ground know which man they'd prefer to have as a commander-in-chief, and Bush will be their obvious pick.

As far as the economy is concerned, it ain't too shabby considering what it has gone through. The Bush administration inherited a recession from the previous administration, and then had 911 to contend with. Those were two major obstacles to getting the ecomony going again, but it is going despite all the pessimists.

On the other hand, I'm not happy in the least with this administration in certain areas of the domestic side. And here is where the Libertarian in me comes out. I don't want my federal government in the prescription drug benefits business. No, let's go further than that, because some of the issues I'm concerned about transcend this administration...I don't want my federal government involved in things in which it has no business constitutionally...social security, welfare, health care, education, et al. If the government wasn't so bogged down with these issues, and rather left them to the states, then perhaps it would have been able to focus on its constitutional powers such as the safety and welfare of American citizens and thus possibly avoiding what happened on 911.

In addition to this, while the administration talks about the tax cut it got through I seriously doubt our government (under any administration) is as generous as it would like to seem. Most people forget that there was a time when Americans paid no federal income tax. Then, there was a temporary income tax. Then, it became permanent and required the establishment of the IRS. Now, Americans shoulder a huge tax burden every year to fund programs that don't work, redistribute money to people who won't work, and pay ridiculous salaries to politicians who don't show up for work (can anybody say "Edwards"?). Our federal government needs to be put on a strict diet, but I can't foresee that happening anytime in the future�at least not with the kind of politicians found in both the Republican and Democratic parties.

As for Kerry, well, let's just say I find a brick wall more interesting to listen to and to look at.

Ray