John Kerry for President!!!!!

“I'm sorry to report, for those of you living in a cave...

1. Life expectancy is at an all-time high & growing. This is due, in part, to better healthcare. Guess what... that costs $$!

2. We can treat / cure more diseases, and catch them earler, than at any time in history. That accounts for our longer life expectancy, and also, a better quality of life after diagnosis.

Also, those too cheap to buy healthcare insurance increasingly go to an ER for their routine Healthcare needs... since ER's weren't designed for this, they are inefficiennt and their costs are higher. This has to be factored into the equation as well when considering increaseed costs.

And before you socialists respond on your respective bandwagons... it IS NOT your employer's responsibility to provide you with healthcare insurance.. IT IS YOUR's. If you can't afford it, MAYBE you should consider educating yourself, working harder to get a ete job so you can be self-sufficient, rather than sucking at the public teat.”

“"it IS NOT your employer's responsibility to provide you with healthcare insurance.. IT IS YOUR's. If you can't afford it, MAYBE you should consider educating yourself, working harder to get a ete job so you can be self-sufficient, rather than sucking at the public teat."

You mean healthcare ISN'T a right and is actually something to be earned; much like life insurance and car insurance? Heaven forBID!!”

“Dear God! are you guys serious. Oh wait, I educated myself, got a good job and have health insurance, I guess I'll be alright.”

“Arclite,

I believe that Clinton should have been convicted during his impeachment trial. And I still do. I've voted for Bush Senior. I've voted for John McCain. I'm voting for a Republican House member this fall. Want some motives? Bush is just a bad president.

Just a quick check of motives. Do you ever, ever vote for Democrats?

My point is that Bush needlessly squandered several courses of action. At the very beginning of this whole thing there was a possibility not to alienate our allies in Europe. We might not have gotten them on board at the beginning. But the "old Europe" rhetoric of this administration zeroed any possibility of help later - needlessly.

The UN was similar. When things looked good, the Bush administration was full of disdain for the organization.

I don't think that the UN is a panacea. However, it is a possible tool in the box. To just fling it out the window for no reason was stupid.

But, again, neither NATO nor the UN are covers for bad policy. There are/were half a dozen foreign policy issues more important than Iraq.”

“There are millions of kids in this country without health insurance. Should they go out and get jobs too?

But, really, one-sixth of the US population doesn't have health care coverage. That's about 17% of the population. Let's take the 5% of the population that is unemployed and add 5%. For purposes of argument, we'll call this 10% the lazy 10. We'll assume that they don't work or want to. That still leaves 7% who work like mad fiends and still don't earn enough to cover themselves. That percentage adds up to 21 million. I, personally, think that's conservative.

The U.S. has lower life expectancy than other industrialized nations. We also spend significantly more than Europe or other industrialized nations in health care as percentage of GDP.

I am not for a national health care plan. However, the numbers of uninsured have increased dramatically under Bush. And many employers are ditching health care plans like a bad date.”

“The numbers of uninsured have been growing steadily for a long time now, not just under Bush. It's not a "Bush" thing, it's something society will have to decide.

As for "children" without healthcare... I work for the government. Believe me if a child or anyone requires healthcare, they will get it. Children are not dying here as liberals would make it seem to be. We have safety nets all over the place. In my own organization we take care of children who don't have healthcare and guess what, we give it to them. I work for Child Development Services. Same with adults. I had my gall bladder yanked out a couple years ago, fully covered by insurance because I had good healthy insurance. My cousin's boyfriend has no job and no insurance and is a convicted felon (why she's dating him, I have no idea, ha ha!). He went into the emergency room of a local hospital here with awful pains under his ribcage. He had no money and no insurance, but they still did x-rays and found out he had gallstones and needed his gall bladder yanked. The State of California paid for every red cent of his operation to have his gall bladder surgically removed. He paid nothing, nor is he obligated to pay anything. Those who say there are so many "uninsured" people in this country don't understand that the taxpayers will still pay for their health needs.

As for what to do about expensive health care costs, I don't know the answer, but the solution sure ain't blaming Clinton or Bush or Kerry or whoever. And the solution shouldn't lay on the shoulders of struggling American companies, nor should it lay solely on government. People need to take care of themselves and not rely upon others UNLESS they are physically unable to. That's where charity and specific gov't programs may play a role, but the responsiblity lies with ourselves. It's our bodies and it should be our priority that they be healthy, not someone elses. You might hafta forego a new HDTV, or a stereo, or fancy car, or new clothes, but your health SHOULD be more important than those things anywayz. I have spoken, you may all be seated.”

“RL:

"There are millions of kids in this country without health insurance. Should they go out and get jobs too?


No, but maybe their parents should consider their responsibilities before they act irresponsibly for their own enjoyment? Oh, wait... personal responsibility... can;t have any of that, can we?

Having said that... NO ONE is EVER turned away from an E.R. so don't whine that they don't have health care... they do... it's just that E.R.'s weren't designed to provide routine healthcare so it's expensive for them to do so. That's part of the problem.

"That still leaves 7% who work like mad fiends and still don't earn enough to cover themselves."

BS, and you know it. They can afford healthcare, they just have higher priorities. "Let Uncle Sam take care of it".


"The U.S. has lower life expectancy than other industrialized nations"

Maybe that's because of our self-indulgent lifestyle, fast-food (or should I say fast-fat) addictions, and the fact that our youngsters (and many oldsters as well!) sit on their behinds in front of video screens instead of exercising or doing something more healthy?

Bottom line is it isn't G.W.'s fault any more than it is the man in the moon. I don't necessarily like GW or a lot of his policies, but don't blame him, or the conservatives, for things they don't control.

Oh yeah... 4 hurricanes in a row... that MUST be G.W.'s fault!”

“Buck,

That emergency room example points out one reason why the health care costs in this country are so high. The uninsured go to emergency rooms. That is incredibly expensive.

BTW, I am NOT for national health care. I am NOT for some gigantic government handout. But the numbers of uninsured under Bush have increased dramatically. And the amount we spend as percentage of GDP should be able to buy a system that covers most people.”

“Wanderer,

Do you ever believe that government can help on an issue?

In the 1970s, some government officials looked at the high incidence of death in automobile crashes. Instead of just saying, "poor saps, they should drive better", these people put together public service campaigns to encourage seat belt use.

Now, much larger percentages of people use seat belts. That's good government.

I don't disagree that people should have self-reliance. But using government funds for seat belt campaigns is cheaper than paying for hospitals and crash scene investigators.

Now, Wanderer, what happens if the the hurricane hits the place that you work at and in the 6 months that it takes for you to find a job with health care you have to go without health coverage.

If it wasn't Bush's fault, why was it that worker's fault?”

“Hi reformed lurker®! I don't think health care costs are what they are because of uninsured people going to emergency rooms. I think a BIG chunk of it is malpractice insurance related stuff because of trial lawyers looking for ridiculously big payoffs. If we could get some tort reform we could save a lot of money. My point being that people aren't dying in this country because of being uninsured, as so many people would seem to imply that people have no coverage. They do. You say the number of uninsured under Bush has increased dramatically... but what in the flip does that have to do with Bush? Home ownership is also at an all-time high... are people skipping on health insurance costs to put money down on a house or something?

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, life expectancies in the United States is at an all-time high.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/04news/infantmort.htm

It's not all doom and gloom. People are living longer. People are buying homes. People with no insurance are getting cared for... there are lots of low-income and no-income health programs. Sure, things can get even better and we need to work on the health insurance issues in this country, but it's not as bad as so many would suggest and no single President, from any party, is gonna fix it in 4 years. We still have the best medical industry on planet earth and people from all over the world come here for the best doctors. Good things are happening. The bums under the bridge can get free medical attention if they're sober enough to walk to the clinic. I'm not sure why people can't remain positive and acknowledge things are good even if we can make them better? Life in America is the best life on earth!”

“Now, Wanderer, what happens if the the hurricane hits the place that you work at and in the 6 months that it takes for you to find a job with health care you have to go without health coverage.

If it wasn't Bush's fault, why was it that worker's fault?

Why does it have to be someone's "fault"? Does everything have to be someone's fault? Can't accidents happen, and bad things happen, without blaming someone else?

As for the hurricane and someone losing their job for 6 months, they can still have insurance coverage! Not only that, they should be thankful they are alive and thankful that there are charities and government programs that assist people in disaster times like this, instead of trying to find someone to blame! I guess it's all how you look at life. Either you make things happen or you expect things to happen for you. Either you take charge or expect freebies.”

“RL:

In general, I don't believe in big anything... be that big government, or, big business. A smaller, more entreprenurial company will almost always eat the lunch (competitively) of a larger, more entrenched company. They are simply too large to respond to market changes quickly enough. There are exceptions, of course.

That's also one of the easons why I don't believe in big government. There are just waaay too many possible sitiations that can happen to people for mommy government to take care of them all. Be self-sufficient, grow up and take personal responsibility wherever and whenevr you can. You'll be a lot better off for it, and, it will be a lot cheaper than employing 50,000 bureacrats to "adminsiter" the program for you, on your behalf.

If a hurricane hit the place I work, it wouldn't necessarily mean I'd be without healthcare coverage. There are LAWS on the books that would permit me to purchase on my own if I needed to (COBRA) (I'm *assuming* that my company was destroyed by the hurricane & didn't exist??)

Finally, why does something always have to be someone's "fault"? Maybe the hurricane was just Mother Nature doing her thing... maybe it wasn't G.W's "fault", or mine.

Stuff happens, RL, dont try to make everything into an "either/or" situation where someone is "at blame". It was a hurricane, OK? Sometimes bad things just happen, OK? Deal with it, move on with your life and stop looking to government to take care of all life's little snags.”

“For the record, I was writing my response before I saw Buck's... the fact that we both said essentially the same thing simply illustrates the fact that great minds do indeed think alike!”

“Oh God, wanderer. You really want to share Das Boot with Buck!!?!

LOL!


arc - that was a good post, man. I look forward to hearing WWAD!


So, we allow the poor, uninsured to dominate the ER, preventing the resources to go to those who really need it.

mmmmmk, got it!


It't always been a supported fact that it is in a countries best interest to keep its people healthy and educated, two areas that have failed under Bush. If Bush funded NCLB, my opinion would be very different, but when the Executive branch threatens the states like Bush has with NCLB, it is unacceptible! This person *the one we call Bush*, has done his best to destroy years of positive domestic, foreign and economic policy. He was supposed to be an united, not a crapper on everything people before him worked for.....yes, even his Dad, fer crying out loud!


angii - I understand where yer coming from, but there is a big difference between hate crimes and gay rights. We all know that NoProbs missinformed post of:

"We all know nothing of the kind. If you believe that he wants to amend the constitution, fine....." is way off base.

Yes, NoProb, the President does want to waste the resources of our government on such important, Christian issues, like preventing two people of the same sex get married. Hell, the government is real stupid in preventing this. Do we realize the amount of tax money that is lost because of this? Right when we need money, a reveune is not captialized! Go figure.”

“Wanderer and Buck!

You guys are good advocates for your positions here. I think a lot of these issues are questions of degree and process.

The United States spends 13% of its GDP on health care. That is more than any other country. It also spends about twice as much per capita than Canada and Europe.

That 13% is a massive bureacracy. Portions are private sector. Portions are public sector. Both are bloated and inefficient.

I would never argue that we have to spend more money on health care. We already spend TWICE what everyone else does. We really need to spend less than we do, but in smaller, more efficient ways.

I think that the idea that government shouldn't be helping to solve this problem is goofy. The government runs many hospitals and research centers. It will forever be a part of the mix.”

“Good site on this:

http://www.news-medical.net/print_article.asp?print=yes&id=1537”

“The gov't is getting involved in healthcare in a major way by their advocacy of Electronic Medical Records. There are a ton of initiatives underway, and unfortunately it will cost us all a fair amount, at least in the short term. One of the problems within the healthcare system is the incredibly complex buracracy involved on the part of the providers to get paid for their services by the payors. The payors, insurance co's as well as the feds and states via their MediCare & state-versions (MediCal here in CA, etc.) have all made it so complex to file a simple claim that they've created the need for non-clinical personnel just to try to make sense of it all, and keep the software going that's required to submit & track claims. It's ruly a nightmare, and all those costs do nothing to help the provider actually provide better healthcare.

The increased advertising by the drug co's is also one of the worst things to ever happen to healthcare. Everyone who watched TV thinks they need 56 new improved drugs for everything from their diminishing sex-life to simple heartburn. Then they run to their doctor demanding all those meds... and the costs go up, and up, and up.

Liability insurance is also a huge problem. Our litiguous society has helped raise malpractice insurance premiums to unbelieveable levels. You can actually plot, county-by-county, what the costs are across the nation, and guess what.... in many aeas physicians are leaving in droves because they can't afford to practice there anymore. It actually cists twice as much for insurance in Southern CA than Northern CA, as an example, and parts of Riverside County are 1/3rd higher again, all because people sue for the most frivolous things.

I could go on & on about what ails the healthcare delivery system in the U.S. (oh wait, I aleady did, didn't I!), but, rest assured the problems have very little t do with one administration or ne congress. These are endemic problems and societal probems, and THAT's why the costs in the U.S. are so much higher than other countries.

End of rant, for now.”

“Dan Rather, CBS News Anchor -
a. given documents he thought were true
b. failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
c. reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
d. when confronted with the facts, apologized and launched an investigation
e. number of Americans dead: 0
f. should be fired as CBS News Anchor


George W. Bush, President of the United States -
a. given documents he thought were true
b. failed to thoroughly investigate the facts
c. reported documents to the American people as true to make his case
d. when confronted with the facts, continued to report untruth and stonewalled an investigation
e. number of Americans dead: 1100 (and thousands more wounded, not to mention the genocide of Iraq)
f. should be given four more years as President of the United States???”

““Just a quick check of motives. Do you ever, ever vote for Democrats?”

reformed lurker


When forced with no choice but the two major parties, my vote has been almost evenly split in the state and local elections. I may have voted for a few more Repubs because my hot button issue is economics, and no intelligent student of economics votes for socialist principles. I have never voted for a Republican for President, lurker. Does that answer the question to your satisfaction?

I am a liberal, lurker. I have loved to hear some neo-libs here call me a "conservative". When I question people about their beliefs they mostly become defensive and label me as the enemy. Most Democrats prove my point about “open-minded” “non-prejudiced” “liberals” being a hypocritical use of the English language.

Wow, I’m glad that you understand what our foreign policy issue priorities should be. Me, I’m in the dark here. I don’t have access to the kind of information needed to make those types of long term decisions. I feel safer knowing that people like your do.




Laqtis, unfortunately I’m very busy and can’t devote the time to a discussion that you deserve. We’ve passed over so many points. But let me address one that is near and dear:

“It is my feeling that during a time of recession and war, it is bad domestic and economic policy to cut taxes and fight a war on our own at the same time.”

Laqtis


I think that’s A GREAT TIME to cut taxes. The media always parades healthcare and social security when it comes to tax cutting time. But there are so many other areas where the government can cut fat. I like it when people start thinking about budgets. Unfortunately the media has its agenda so most people have a narrow focus. The “war on drugs” is stupid. There’s no other word to describe the “war on drugs” except maybe asinine…. Moronic…





“It's always been a supported fact that it is in a countries best interest to keep its people healthy and educated, two areas that have failed under Bush.”

I disagree


“This person *the one we call Bush*, has done his best to destroy years of positive domestic, foreign and economic policy.”

I disagree



Communist Party USA supports John Kerry

“…one of Kerry's campaign themes is " Let America be America Again." This slogan was borrowed from a Communist poet, Langston Hughes. This is not common knowledge to the average American.

A Vietnam vet group took a trip to Communist Hanoi to investigate a report that John Kerry was in the "Hanoi Hall of Fame." Yes, there is a museum in Hanoi with a section dedicated to foreign activists who help defeat the United States Military in Vietnam. Of course, you would expect Jane Fonda's picture to be there. But, alas, there is John Kerry's picture shaking the hand of a communist official.

How about the press? Solidly behind the left.
Case in point: Viacom owns CBS and Dan Rather. Dan is really the president of the American Leftist Establishment. Every night Dan informs the country what we, the troops and the president did wrong that day. His boss, Viacom, just happens to own the company that published Richard Clark's attack on George Bush and company. Clarke was the hero of the 9-11 hearing. Viacom pushed up the publication date of Clark's book to coincide with the hearings.”


Well I'll bet some of you are thrilled with that endorsement.”

“arc, with your post above firmly in mind, do you know who you're voting for this time? Pretty good paradox, you usually vote on economics, have never voted Repub for Pres, yet the Dem nominee is in the Communist Hall of Fame.”

“Hey, I just started a fascist hall of fame, and GWB is in it!

Kerry being in the some commie hall of fame is just as meaningless as GWB being in my fascist hall of fame.”

“I always enjoy reading your political view RL. I may not agree with them at all points but I enjoy it none the less. It is very refreshing to see there are others who take things on a point by point basis and on merit. I know I come off as a hardline republican but I am nearly dead center and tend to take things as you do. The list of things I am for and against would give anyone the appearance of server schizophrenia.

For:
Right to bear arms (registration and restrictions should be mandatory)
Abortion (against partial birth abortions)
Gay marriage
Death penalty
Tax cuts for all
100% enforcment of immigration laws
Freedom of speech”

“Could you expound on being for the death penalty?”

“Crap, Nigal, I read that as being for the death penalty TAX. Not even close to the same thing. Nevermind.”

“The blanket statement from Arc, stating that voting for socialist principles would make you a fool is just a bit erroneous.
Democracy is a dynamic tension between two different forces. These forces could be expressed as:
Law vs Ethics
Diversity vs Unity
Freedom vs Equality
Private Wealth vs Common Wealth

To vote exclusively for any one side of this argument is to deny the balance required to maintain a real democratic society. We walk a thin line in this country and depend on the better philosophies of both sides, of these dynamic arguments.”

“"Crap, Nigal, I read that as being for the death penalty TAX. Not even close to the same thing. Nevermind."

Like in China where they shoot you in the head and then send a bill to your family for the bullet? LOL!”

“Something like that.”

“just to lighten things up here I thought I would post this joke

Clocks In Heaven . . .

A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.

He asked, What are all those clocks?

St. Peter answered, Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move.

Oh, said the man, whose clock is that?

That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never told a lie.

Incredible, said the man. And whose clock is that one?

St. Peter responded, That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life.

Where's President Bush\'s clock? asked the man.

Bush's clock is in Jesus' office. He's using it as a ceiling fan.”

“Boo! Hisss! Old recycled Clinton joke! Booo!

:)”

““…voting for socialist principles would make you a fool is just a bit erroneous.”

Dunadan


Erroneous, huh? You mean I’m not entitled to an opinion? Is that like the Democratic Party saying that Ralph Nader should not be allowed on the ballot? “We’re the party of choice, but you can’t choose who to vote for.” Now there’s erroneous ethics for ya.


Law vs Ethics

Law vs Ethics? That’s funny. I always thought the law was supposed to be based in ethics. But I have a hard time disagreeing that it often isn’t.


Diversity vs Unity

I understand that the neo-libs want diversity of skin-color, sexual orientation, ethnic background, gender (whatever that means to neo-libs), but that it want unity of opinion (witness their attempts to deny ballot access to Nader).


Freedom vs Equality

Why are these diametrically opposed? And what exactly is equality?


Private Wealth vs Common Wealth

According to socialist principles there is no such thing as private wealth. Eminent Domain is used to take people’s land. Inheritance is taxed surely for the second, and quite possibly the third time, because some neo-libs actually believe that accumulated wealth belongs to the state. Accumulated wealth is forcibly redistributed through taxes.


Dunadan, exactly how do you consider the forcible redistribution of wealth to be ethical? Inquiring minds want to know.”

“Another View:
Why I will vote for John Kerry for President
By JOHN EISENHOWER
Guest Commentary

THE Presidential election to be held this coming Nov. 2 will be one of extraordinary importance to the future of our nation. The outcome will determine whether this country will continue on the same path it has followed for the last 3½ years or whether it will return to a set of core domestic and foreign policy values that have been at the heart of what has made this country great.

Now more than ever, we voters will have to make cool judgments, unencumbered by habits of the past. Experts tell us that we tend to vote as our parents did or as we “always have.” We remained loyal to party labels. We cannot afford that luxury in the election of 2004. There are times when we must break with the past, and I believe this is one of them.

As son of a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, it is automatically expected by many that I am a Republican. For 50 years, through the election of 2000, I was. With the current administration’s decision to invade Iraq unilaterally, however, I changed my voter registration to independent, and barring some utterly unforeseen development, I intend to vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry.

The fact is that today’s “Republican” Party is one with which I am totally unfamiliar. To me, the word “Republican” has always been synonymous with the word “responsibility,” which has meant limiting our governmental obligations to those we can afford in human and financial terms. Today’s whopping budget deficit of some $440 billion does not meet that criterion.

Responsibility used to be observed in foreign affairs. That has meant respect for others. America, though recognized as the leader of the community of nations, has always acted as a part of it, not as a maverick separate from that community and at times insulting towards it. Leadership involves setting a direction and building consensus, not viewing other countries as practically devoid of significance. Recent developments indicate that the current Republican Party leadership has confused confident leadership with hubris and arrogance.

In the Middle East crisis of 1991, President George H.W. Bush marshaled world opinion through the United Nations before employing military force to free Kuwait from Saddam Hussein. Through negotiation he arranged for the action to be financed by all the industrialized nations, not just the United States. When Kuwait had been freed, President George H. W. Bush stayed within the United Nations mandate, aware of the dangers of occupying an entire nation.

Today many people are rightly concerned about our precious individual freedoms, our privacy, the basis of our democracy. Of course we must fight terrorism, but have we irresponsibly gone overboard in doing so? I wonder. In 1960, President Eisenhower told the Republican convention, “If ever we put any other value above (our) liberty, and above principle, we shall lose both.” I would appreciate hearing such warnings from the Republican Party of today.

The Republican Party I used to know placed heavy emphasis on fiscal responsibility, which included balancing the budget whenever the state of the economy allowed it to do so. The Eisenhower administration accomplished that difficult task three times during its eight years in office. It did not attain that remarkable achievement by cutting taxes for the rich. Republicans disliked taxes, of course, but the party accepted them as a necessary means of keep the nation’s financial structure sound.

The Republicans used to be deeply concerned for the middle class and small business. Today’s Republican leadership, while not solely accountable for the loss of American jobs, encourages it with its tax code and heads us in the direction of a society of very rich and very poor.

Sen. Kerry, in whom I am willing to place my trust, has demonstrated that he is courageous, sober, competent, and concerned with fighting the dangers associated with the widening socio-economic gap in this country. I will vote for him enthusiastically.

I celebrate, along with other Americans, the diversity of opinion in this country. But let it be based on careful thought. I urge everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike, to avoid voting for a ticket merely because it carries the label of the party of one’s parents or of our own ingrained habits.

The Union Leader”

“Maybe you guys know this guy from the Orlando Sentinel? A conservative right up there with Novak and Kristol...

Charley Reese: VOTE FOR A MAN, NOT A PUPPET
Americans should realize that if they vote for President Bush's re-election, they are really voting for the architects of war - Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and the rest of that cabal of neo-conservative ideologues and their corporate backers.

I have sadly come to the conclusion that President Bush is merely a front-man, an empty suit, who is manipulated by the people in his administration. Bush has the most dangerously simplistic view of the world of any president in my memory.

It's no wonder the president avoids press conferences like the plague. Take away his cue cards and he can barely talk. Americans should be embarrassed that an Arab king (Abdullah of Jordan) spoke more fluently and articulately in English than our own president at their joint press conference recently.

John Kerry is at least an educated man, well-read, who knows how to think and who knows that the world is a great deal more complex than Bush's comic-book world of American heroes and foreign evildoers. It's unfortunate that in our poorly educated country, Kerry's very intelligence and refusal to adopt simplistic slogans might doom his presidential election efforts.

But Thomas Jefferson said it well, as he did so often, when he observed that people who expect to be ignorant and free expect what never was and never will be.

People who think of themselves as conservatives will really display their stupidity, as I did in the last election, by voting for Bush. Bush is as far from being a conservative as you can get. Well, he fooled me once, but he won't fool me twice.

It is not at all conservative to balloon government spending, to vastly increase the power of government, to show contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law, or to tell people that foreign outsourcing of American jobs is good for them, that giant fiscal and trade deficits don't matter, and that people should not know what their government is doing. Bush is the most prone-to-classify, the most secretive president in the 20th century. His administration leans dangerously toward the authoritarian.

It's no wonder that the Justice Department has convicted a few Arab-Americans of supporting terrorism. What would you do if you found yourself arrested and a federal prosecutor whispers in your ear that either you can plea-bargain this or the president will designate you an enemy combatant and you'll be held incommunicado for the duration?

This election really is important, not only for domestic reasons, but because Bush's foreign policy has been a dangerous disaster. He's almost restarted the Cold War with Russia and the nuclear arms race.

America is not only hated in the Middle East, but it has few friends anywhere in the world thanks to the arrogance and ineptness of the Bush administration. Don't forget, a scientific poll of Europeans found us, Israel, North Korea and Iran as the greatest threats to world peace.

I will swallow a lot of petty policy differences with Kerry to get a man in the White House with brains enough not to blow up the world and us with it. Go to Kerry's Web site and read some of the magazine profiles on him. You'll find that there is a great deal more to Kerry than the GOP attack dogs would have you believe.

Besides, it would be fun to have a president who plays hockey, windsurfs, ride motorcycles, plays the guitar, writes poetry and speaks French. It would be good to have a man in the White House who has killed people face to face. Killing people has a sobering effect on a man and dispels all illusions about war.”

“An on line buddy of mine from Texas said he was voting for W and I said,

"You're from Texas so you have to vote for W. Is Kerry even on the ballot down there?".

To which he simply replied, "Who's she? Never heard of her.".

Made me laugh.”

“I fully understand why Eisenhower would vote for Kerry.

His Dad did nothing while the Russians were installing Nukes 90 miles off the US coast in Cuba.

Sounds like a mind meld with Kerry to me.”

“His Dad did nothing while the Russians were installing Nukes 90 miles off the US coast in Cuba.

manuka
03:47:15 PM
10/01/04

well he did get us involved in Vietnam. He sent military advisors over to help out with the understanding that they wouldn't get shot at or killed. Like that was going to happen.”

“So, President Eisenhower wasn't conservative enough, eh? Just like Barry Goldwater wasn't conservative enough. Like Gerald Ford wasn't conservative enough. Like John McCain isn't conservative enough.

If Ronald Reagan were running in a Republican primary these days, he'd lose.”

“President Eisenhower wasn't as good a president as he was a General, I will agree with that proposition. He is head and shoulders above GW, though IMO.”

“He is head and shoulders above GW, though IMO."

I could care less about which brand of shampoo any President uses.”

“Bush=Content Free

The War in Iraq has gone bad. Bush's less aggressive war on terror is stagnating. The stock market is frozen. The economy is bad.

Bush has no issues to run on, so that's why Buck is talking about shampoo.

Too bad we can't wash the last four years out of our hair.”

“I think Kerry did a better job during the first debate. Bush seemed to take the debate too personally.”

“It's sad when propogandists divide a nation. Fortunately, unlike Germany in the 30's, democracy is sound in America, and slowly but surely, the propgandists will be overcome. Until then, we have to continue to speak out, after all, it's the American way!”

“Kind of like many of the republican wonks on this board.

Bush takes the debate personally because he can't defend his actions with logic or reason, he has to use repetition of opinion, and when he can't back his opinion with reason, logic or facts (GWB spin note: Reason and logic are hard, it's hard work to undertand reason and logic!), and Kerry does, successfully, I might add, of course he'll take it personally, it confuses him.

It's like if my niece asks me to get her a cookie before she goes to bed, and I tell her no. She takes it personally, i.e., I don't like her, and may get mad or upset. If I explain that she can't have a cookie because it has sugar, and will keep her up past her bedtime, or that she just brushed her teeth, which are reasonable and logical facts that I based my answer, not because I didn't like her, kids generally won't understand. That's why GWB has the mentality of a child, and is an idiot. Maybe when my niece is 14, she'll understand the reasoning as she becomes more educated. I wish we had a president that could advance to that level, and we will, come November 2nd.”

“"the propgandists will be overcome."

Buddha Bear
07:51:09 PM
10/02/04

I can't wait till you stop posting either.”

“catchy comeback....”

“I actually feel a bit sorry for President Bush. The presidency became a very different thing after 9/11 than the job he ran for.

And second terms are never, ever good. Bush's would likely be even more tenuous because of his high negative ratings and the bleak situation in Iraq.

So, his alternatives are ignominious loss or four more years of painful drudgery.

You'd have to say that saps the energy and results in performances like we saw on Thursday.

The man needs a rest. And he probably wouldn't be completely upset if we gave him one.”

“Well said.”

“Looks like the race is going to the candidate that has a command of the english language. That's a good thing, since it is our native language.”

“Finally, the truth comes out about the candidates' war records:


”