[N8 v2.0]

Cuz if it ain't, someone PLEASE let Sen. Kerry know???

From Kerry's speech in Cincinnati yesterday:
"...Kerry marked the 1,000th death in Iraq on Tuesday as a ``tragic milestone,'' saying the soldiers gave their lives on behalf of country, freedom and ``the war on terror.'' Kerry has previously not linked the Iraq war to the fight against terrorists..."

Did he not get the memo?

 

[Westy]

I'm hoping this will lift Ham Sandwich a few points in the polls.

 

[N8 v2.0]

I'm hoping this will lift Ham Sandwich a few points in the polls.

...more...

As in, "a few more points in the polls."

 

[fluff]

Who defines what is part of the 'War on Terror' N8? If it is Bush then we must go with his definitions as it's his war, not Kerrys.

Regardless of whether one thinks it's a good idea to have attacked Iraq as part of the 'War on Terror', if that's what Bush did, then it's part of it, even if it is a strategic error or has been done for the wrong reasons.

It's pretty fvcking stupid to attack someone Kerry for using Bush's terminology, whilst at the same time that person is defending Bush's position.

Or can you not see that?

 

[Toshi]

ugh. kerry is a dope as well. i think i really will vote for nader. again.

 

[Westy]

ugh. kerry is a dope as well. i think i really will vote for nader. again.

If Nader actually had a shot at getting elected would you still vote for him? Why?

Although driven differently than the major two parties I find him even more idealistic and scary than the major parties. I hate our two options this year but will give Kerry my anti-Bush vote. It would be nice to have someone who is running who would be realistic in the office, even if it was a no shot 3rd party candidate.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Who defines what is part of the 'War on Terror' N8? If it is Bush then we must go with his definitions as it's his war, not Kerrys.

Regardless of whether one thinks it's a good idea to have attacked Iraq as part of the 'War on Terror', if that's what Bush did, then it's part of it, even if it is a strategic error or has been done for the wrong reasons.

It's pretty fvcking stupid to attack someone Kerry for using Bush's terminology, whilst at the same time that person is defending Bush's position.

Or can you not see that?

Oh please...!!!

The liberal Dimocrates are responsible for totally separating the Iraqi War from the War on Terrorism. It’s on Page 1 of the Dimocratic Party Play Book. Do you have that short of a memory?

Please recall that the war in Afghanistan is a War on Terrorism while the Iraqi War is Cheney/Halliburton's War for Cheap Oil.

Can't try to have it both ways... wait... you can if you're Kerry!

 

[fluff]

Oh please...!!!

The liberal Dimocrates are responsible for totally separating the Iraqi War from the War on Terrorism. It’s on Page 1 of the Dimocratic Party Play Book. Do you have that short of a memory?

Please recall that the war in Afghanistan is a War on Terrorism while the Iraqi War is Cheney/Halliburton's War for Cheap Oil.

Can't try to have it both ways... wait... you can if you're Kerry!

Then you're just as much of a dick as he is. Thanks for illustrating my point.

 

[Toshi]

If Nader actually had a shot at getting elected would you still vote for him? Why?

maybe. i disagree with him on several major issues, but i think a shift in his direction from its current course would be good

from http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php?cid=34

• "Maintain commitment to affirmative action" - don't agree
• "we must challenge misallocation of resources caused by the growing concentration and wealth by agribusiness, chemical, biotechnology and financial corporations over the food and fiber economy" - agree. he supports industrial hemp, too
• "There is something fundamentally unsound at work if the legislative branch of the federal government sees fit to file articles of impeachment against one President for his sexual indiscretions and stands idly by as his successor peddles blatant falsehoods in the service of implementing an unprecedented brand of war-mongering, warfare, casualties, and endangerment of the United States in the world" - agree
• "restoration of civil liberties, repeal of the Patriot Act, and an end to secret detentions, arrests without charges, no access to attorneys and the use of secret evidence, military tribunals for civilians, non-combatant status and the shredding of probable cause determinations" - heartily agree
• "enforcement of consumer protection laws, especially against the terrible abuses in low-income communities" - eh, not a barn burner for me
• "The US needs to crack down on corporate crime, fraud and abuse" - yes!
• "The federal government must not impose an overemphasis on high-stakes standardized tests" - yup
• "The cost of campaigns creates a stranglehold making politics a game for only the rich or richly funded. Major electoral reforms are needed to ensure that every vote counts, all voters are represented through electoral reforms like instant run-off voting, none-of-the-above options, and proportional representation, non-major party candidates have a chance to run for office and participate in debates, and that elections are publicly financed" - i am highly in agreement with this
• "We need to make environmental protection a priority for our energy, trade, industrial, agricultural, transportation, development and land use policies" - too strong for my tastes. i think human quality of life should come first, and if environmental regulations are required to maximize this then so be it
• "The complexity and distortions of the federal tax code produces distributions of tax incidence and payroll tax burdens that are skewed in favor of the wealthy and the corporations further garnished by tax shelters, insufficient enforcement and other avoidances" - i agree. having an idle rich class and offshore corporations that pay no taxes is offensive
• "While global trade is a fact of life, trade policies must be open, democratic and not strip-mine environmental, social and labor standards" - i don't know enough about nafta etc. to have a strong opinion either way
• "The United States needs a redirected federal budget that adequately funds the crucial priorities like infrastructure, transit and other public works, schools, clinics, libraries, forests, parks, sustainable energy and pollution controls" - yes, i think the u.s. spends too much on pork barrel defense projects. even cheney agrees with me.
• "The Nader Campaign supports a single-payer health care plan that replaces for-profit, investor-owned health care and removes the private health insurance industry (full Medicare for all)." - i do think that universal health coverage is needed, whether via nader's system or other means
• i can't make heads or tails out of the nader website's longwinded immigration bit, but i do agree with his statement that "The long term solution to immigration is reducing the rich poor divide between the United States and other nations by peacefully supporting democratic movements"
• "We should not be mired in the occupation of Iraq risking further upheavals when our infrastructure, schools and health care are deteriorating" - agree
• "By requiring equitable trade, investing in urgently needed local labor-intensive public works (infrastructure improvements), creating a new renewable energy efficiency policy; by fully funding education and redirecting large bureaucratic and fraudulent health expenditures toward preventive health care we can reverse this trend and create millions of new jobs" - eh, not so hot on this. sounds like he wants a mini civilian conservation corps...
• "The mass media in the United States is extremely concentrated, and the messages that they send are too broadly uniform" - i agree, but i don't think it's the govts problem. read the bbc (or alternet, from that "what news do you read" thread), sheesh
• "Our foreign policy must redefine the elements of global security, peace, arms control, an end to nuclear weapons and expand the many assets of our country to launch, with other nations, major initiatives against global infections diseases" - agree. there are many problems with this world which will never draw attention or be addressed if we are in a state of perpetual war
• "We must make ending poverty a priority and weave that goal into a network of policies" - don't agree. universal health care and equal access to education is as far as i would go
• about the USDA: "As a result of this agribusiness takeover, the short-term profits of a few economically powerful companies come before protection of the environment and the family farm, production of healthy food, and the interests of consumers" - i agree, altho it's not high on my list of priorities
• "Non-union workers need upgraded rights against the likes of Walmart." - no, i think we should concentrate on enforcing our existing labor laws first and then let the market run its course

N8, i challenge you to come up with a similar list of why you support bush based on his stance on the issues (as opposed to on empty soundbites).

 

[golgiaparatus]

maybe. i disagree with him on several major issues, but i think a shift in his direction from its current course would be good

from http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php?cid=34

• "Maintain commitment to affirmative action" - don't agree
• "we must challenge misallocation of resources caused by the growing concentration and wealth by agribusiness, chemical, biotechnology and financial corporations over the food and fiber economy" - agree. he supports industrial hemp, too
• "There is something fundamentally unsound at work if the legislative branch of the federal government sees fit to file articles of impeachment against one President for his sexual indiscretions and stands idly by as his successor peddles blatant falsehoods in the service of implementing an unprecedented brand of war-mongering, warfare, casualties, and endangerment of the United States in the world" - agree
• "restoration of civil liberties, repeal of the Patriot Act, and an end to secret detentions, arrests without charges, no access to attorneys and the use of secret evidence, military tribunals for civilians, non-combatant status and the shredding of probable cause determinations" - heartily agree
• "enforcement of consumer protection laws, especially against the terrible abuses in low-income communities" - eh, not a barn burner for me
• "The US needs to crack down on corporate crime, fraud and abuse" - yes!
• "The federal government must not impose an overemphasis on high-stakes standardized tests" - yup
• "The cost of campaigns creates a stranglehold making politics a game for only the rich or richly funded. Major electoral reforms are needed to ensure that every vote counts, all voters are represented through electoral reforms like instant run-off voting, none-of-the-above options, and proportional representation, non-major party candidates have a chance to run for office and participate in debates, and that elections are publicly financed" - i am highly in agreement with this
• "We need to make environmental protection a priority for our energy, trade, industrial, agricultural, transportation, development and land use policies" - too strong for my tastes. i think human quality of life should come first, and if environmental regulations are required to maximize this then so be it
• "The complexity and distortions of the federal tax code produces distributions of tax incidence and payroll tax burdens that are skewed in favor of the wealthy and the corporations further garnished by tax shelters, insufficient enforcement and other avoidances" - i agree. having an idle rich class and offshore corporations that pay no taxes is offensive
• "While global trade is a fact of life, trade policies must be open, democratic and not strip-mine environmental, social and labor standards" - i don't know enough about nafta etc. to have a strong opinion either way
• "The United States needs a redirected federal budget that adequately funds the crucial priorities like infrastructure, transit and other public works, schools, clinics, libraries, forests, parks, sustainable energy and pollution controls" - yes, i think the u.s. spends too much on pork barrel defense projects. even cheney agrees with me.
• "The Nader Campaign supports a single-payer health care plan that replaces for-profit, investor-owned health care and removes the private health insurance industry (full Medicare for all)." - i do think that universal health coverage is needed, whether via nader's system or other means
• i can't make heads or tails out of the nader website's longwinded immigration bit, but i do agree with his statement that "The long term solution to immigration is reducing the rich poor divide between the United States and other nations by peacefully supporting democratic movements"
• "We should not be mired in the occupation of Iraq risking further upheavals when our infrastructure, schools and health care are deteriorating" - agree
• "By requiring equitable trade, investing in urgently needed local labor-intensive public works (infrastructure improvements), creating a new renewable energy efficiency policy; by fully funding education and redirecting large bureaucratic and fraudulent health expenditures toward preventive health care we can reverse this trend and create millions of new jobs" - eh, not so hot on this. sounds like he wants a mini civilian conservation corps...
• "The mass media in the United States is extremely concentrated, and the messages that they send are too broadly uniform" - i agree, but i don't think it's the govts problem. read the bbc (or alternet, from that "what news do you read" thread), sheesh
• "Our foreign policy must redefine the elements of global security, peace, arms control, an end to nuclear weapons and expand the many assets of our country to launch, with other nations, major initiatives against global infections diseases" - agree. there are many problems with this world which will never draw attention or be addressed if we are in a state of perpetual war
• "We must make ending poverty a priority and weave that goal into a network of policies" - don't agree. universal health care and equal access to education is as far as i would go
• about the USDA: "As a result of this agribusiness takeover, the short-term profits of a few economically powerful companies come before protection of the environment and the family farm, production of healthy food, and the interests of consumers" - i agree, altho it's not high on my list of priorities
• "Non-union workers need upgraded rights against the likes of Walmart." - no, i think we should concentrate on enforcing our existing labor laws first and then let the market run its course

N8, i challenge you to come up with a similar list of why you support bush based on his stance on the issues (as opposed to on empty soundbites).

A vote for nader is as valuable as a vote for ham sandwich... Realisaticly you have 2 candidates. You have no choice but to vote for the lesser of 2 evils, whichever you think it may be.

 

[Skookum]

N8, i challenge you to come up with a similar list of why you support bush based on his stance on the issues (as opposed to on empty soundbites).

I wonder if his list would have "Shooting M-16's at brown people is cool"

 

[Skookum]

A vote for nader is as valuable as a vote for ham sandwich... Realisaticly you have 2 candidates. You have no choice but to vote for the lesser of 2 evils, whichever you think it may be.

Yes that's realistic, and that's the reality of why we're putting our grandchildren in hock.

 

[Toshi]

A vote for nader is as valuable as a vote for ham sandwich... Realisaticly you have 2 candidates. You have no choice but to vote for the lesser of 2 evils, whichever you think it may be.

actually, thanks to the beauty of the electoral college this isn't true. it's highly likely that washington will go to kerry as it did to gore in 2000. thus my hypothetical vote for nader has a point, as it tells the democrats to step up and address the concerns of nader's voters yet doesn't give bush any of those precious electoral votes. at least in theory.

 

[Toshi]

I wonder if his list would have "Shooting M-16's at brown people is cool"

i think it would be more like

• "bush is our motherland's leader in a time of war" - agreed, we must stay the course at all costs
• "kerry is a flip flopper" - haven't you seen the ads?
• "bush is country people like you and me" - i don't like intellectuals!
• "bush is a true american. are you?" - yes i am! <salutes>

but go ahead, prove me wrong

 

[Westy]

maybe. i disagree with him on several major issues, but i think a shift in his direction from its current course would be good

I pretty much agree with your comments and I certainly respect Naders attempt to tackle problems without bowing to special interests but many of his solutions would create even greater problems including the derailment of the US economy.

And what is with what seems to be unilateral support for family owned farms? My great grandfather was a coachbuilder and got put out of business by Henry Ford there was no uproar over that. Industrialized food is more efficient, and in theory should provide cheaper food and use less resources in doing so. Although I feel that whether corporate or indepented, farms should have tighter environmental regulations, they are some of the biggest polluters.

 

[Westy]

i think it would be more like

but go ahead, prove me wrong

Your forgot the most important one
Bush wants to give me a tax cut-I am greedy and now that I have money I could care less about anyone else

 

[narlus]

toshi, i voted for nader in last election for the same reasons. but i *really* doubt that the Dem/Rep stranglehold on the political process will ever allow a viable 3rd party to become reality.

 

[Toshi]

toshi, i voted for nader in last election for the same reasons. but i *really* doubt that the Dem/Rep stranglehold on the political process will ever allow a viable 3rd party to become reality.

i share your doubts but i think the parties' agendas are malleable. just look at how far the republicans have shifted from the newt gingrich "contract w/america" era to the current nation builders...

 

[narlus]

you mean the "contract on america"?

nah, i can't see another party wheedling in; it seems like there's a lot of grab like ballot politics (keeping people off 'em) and stuff that goes on a lot. if a libertarian party ever really got some strength rolling, i might be in for that.

 

[fluff]

maybe. i disagree with him on several major issues, but i think a shift in his direction from its current course would be good

from http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php?cid=34

• 
  1
• "While global trade is a fact of life, trade policies must be open, democratic and not strip-mine environmental, social and labor standards" - i don't know enough about nafta etc. to have a strong opinion either way
  
  2
• "By requiring equitable trade, investing in urgently needed local labor-intensive public works (infrastructure improvements), creating a new renewable energy efficiency policy; by fully funding education and redirecting large bureaucratic and fraudulent health expenditures toward preventive health care we can reverse this trend and create millions of new jobs" - eh, not so hot on this. sounds like he wants a mini civilian conservation corps...
  
  3
• "The mass media in the United States is extremely concentrated, and the messages that they send are too broadly uniform" - i agree, but i don't think it's the govts problem. read the bbc (or alternet, from that "what news do you read" thread), sheesh
  
  4
• "We must make ending poverty a priority and weave that goal into a network of policies" - don't agree. universal health care and equal access to education is as far as i would go

• 
  1. He's right, so long as you value every nations' peoples' lives as high;y as those of US citizens.
  2. He simply wants to do things for the right reasons rather than for maximum profit. I agree with his stance, big business probably wouldn't.
  3. It is the government's problem when the law allows one man to have vast swathes of media control. How can an honest and straight message get out. To say it's not the govt's problem is like saying decent democracy is not the govt's problem. Not everyone has access to alternatives, plus which if you through enough mud it sticks. Your election is about spin.
  4. 'universal health care and equal access to education' is a major step towards his goal. Stopping exploitation is all that is needed in addition and you support that in other measures.
  
  He'll never get a fair crack of the whip outside people like yourself who bother to try and find out what is really happening.
  
  Vote for him.

 

[Changleen]

I feel at this point it would be helpful to post a link previously posted by Fluff (I think)..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/americas/2004/election_issues_guide/default.stm

 

[Changleen]

According to everyone's 'Political Compass' results, we're all probable Nader voters... And if you take a random sample of people off the street you'll probably find most of them end up in the bottom left quadrant - but still we're given Bush and Kerry to choose between...

 

[N8 v2.0]

According to everyone's 'Political Compass' results, we're all probable Nader voters... And if you take a random sample of people off the street you'll probably find most of them end up in the bottom left quadrant - but still we're given Bush and Kerry to choose between...

What's with the "we're" paleface?

Gotta be an American to vote.

 

[Changleen]

Here's my passport:

 

[N8 v2.0]

This is prolly more like it:

 

[Changleen]

No, N8, that's called a Bra. Women (who I guess you have little contact with) wear them under their shirts. (Again, something I expect you have little idea about) - You don't need a Bra to vote, or apparantly a brain, more's the pity.

 

[N8 v2.0]