Ralph jumps in

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
I'm leaning toward Mr. President myself.

Well, Nader's platform last time was stated. Here is his website. http://www.votenader.org/

Here is his issues page

http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php

Sadly, it reads like a Democratic Party platform 30 years ago Again, I wish I could vote for him, but will not because he will have no hope of being effective. But, like Carne, I could vote for him in Georgia because Georgia is pretty much most assuredly going to Bush unless these people wise up and tell their Bible Thumpin' ministers to shut up, which, trust me, WILL NEVER HAPPEN. But, stranger things have happened and I would relish being wrong

[estranged4life]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I could vote for him in Georgia because Georgia is pretty much most assuredly going to Bush unless these people wise up and tell their Bible Thumpin' ministers to shut up, which, trust me, WILL NEVER HAPPEN. But, stranger things have happened and I would relish being wrong

Same thing goes for Oklahoma & it's "Bible Belt" mentality, "...And God spoke from the burning 'Shrub'."

Btw, I wonder who the Liberatarian (sp?) party candidate is this year???

Brian j.

[strandinthewind]

It always amazes me that people who quote The Bible or at least their minister's rehtoric HAVE KNOW IDEA what The Bible actually says andor that they are picking and choosing what is convenient!!!!!!

[GypsySorcerer]

Originally posted by estranged4life
Btw, I wonder who the Liberatarian (sp?) party candidate is this year???

Brian j.

I think there a couple Libertarian candidates; the main one is Gary Nolan. I'm voting Libertarian in November. These candidates the past two elections have been mediocre at best.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
The bull**** is from Ralph himself when he duped people into thinking that there was no difference between the two parties. Can you in all honesty sit there and tell me that we'd be in the same boat now if Gore had been our president for the last four years?

Chris, here's the deal. I understand your position. I don't agree with it, but I support your right to think that way and act on it. But I am a radical at heart. I don't believe any real social or political change ever happens by working from within. You can go back for centuries upon centuries and find that real change always happens in a dramatic way. I'm not asking for a revolution here, though to be honest, I've lived through one, and it was kind of cool. I'm asking for this nation, which has become way too complacent, to do some real soul-searching and realize that we can't continue on our path. Voting for Kerry is really just more of the same. Do you not see that the Clinton years were an unequivocal slide to the right? I mean, we had the oral-sex sideshow, but the Clintonites were already giving away the store. Nafta, welfare reform, deregulations, you name it.

Would Gore had done things differently from Bush? Sure. But I truly believe it is a matter of who gives away the most the fastest. The corporations own Washington. Is that going to change with Kerry? No. Would it have changed with Gore? No.

Kerry lost all credibility with me when he voted for the war. Being the radical that I am, I am aghast at the way people who opposed the war, and some of who even marched in opposition, are now rationalizing Kerry's vote. People are voting against, not for. I cannot do that. I've lived in a dictatorship. I remember what it was like when people got the right to vote. And to sit here and squander my opportunity to work toward change because some bull**** party tells me you better vote for our guy or else would be a betrayal to myself, my family's personal struggle and everything I believe in. If I cave in to the party because that party wants it so, it starts too feel a little bit too much like authoritarianism. And it's not for me. I vote my conscience. This, I realize, is a concept somewhat alien to Americans, most of whom when compared to other countries, have not really had to struggle for a good number of generations. And those who are struggling don't vote anyway because they have been so beat down they don't realize this great country has given them the best tool for change of them all -- the right to vote.

Elections in the America of today are a farse. So if I'm going to participate in this farse, since I have no choice other than sitting it out altogether, which is worse, then I will vote my conscience.

Let the chips fall where they may. Until the Democratic party wakes up and gives me a candidate I can support, they will not get my vote. If Bush is reelected, so be it. Four more years of this crap might just be exactly what we need to wake up our nation from this chronic case of political narcolepsy.

You think they're gonna let Nader debate?

No. Which only reinforces my point that elections are a farse.

I know what he's against but I sure the hell don't know what he's for.

Then you haven't been paying attention. Ralph Nader is a great American, and he's done more for you and me than Gore, Kerry or anyone else in Washington could ever hope to (with a couple of exceptions). Go to votenader.com if you want to know what he represents. It's not a secret, believe me. There's no record of saying one thing and acting in diametrically the opposite way, as is the case with Kerry.

Nader and taking votes away from our Democratic nominee

Do you have so little faith in your candidate that you don't think he can win against Nader? That says something about your candidate.

[dissention]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
I am aghast at the way people who opposed the war, and some of who even marched in opposition, are now rationalizing Kerry's vote.

There can be no rationalizing Kerry's pro-war vote; it just can't be done. I support Kerry, but even I won't try to explain away his ****ty vote. If there is one thing that will be the end of Kerry it's that vote. He can complain all he wants about Iraq, but he took a hand in bringing us there. Nor will I tackle his motivations for voting on the ridiculous 'No Child Left Behind' and the other Bush crap. The fact of the matter is that in the past three years, he didn't see a Bush proposition that he didn't like. However, look at the good things he has done and the things he stands for. His record on the environment is extremely admirable (and one of the main reasons I support him), he doesn't support a constitutional amendment that bans gay marriage, and so on. Yes, it will be more of the same rhetoric, but there will also be a big enough change where I won't have to say, day in and day out, that I'm ashamed of my president.

If I voted with my conscience, I would vote for Kucinich in a heartbeat. He's the true liberal and I would say that almost all of us here on this board would vote for him, too. But he stands no chance and his extremely liberal views would not go over with most of America; he doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell.

To be honest, sometimes I look at the people who are running and just think to myself 'Our country will never be great again.' And it may not be. However, if we want to get at least a shred of dignity back, we should support the man who will get ChimpCo banished from the White House. It'll do us good. Kerry won't do wrong by our environment, he won't do wrong by the gays in our country, he won't do wrong when it comes to healthcare, and he won't do wrong when it comes to the fundamental social programs that keep this country and its citizens afloat.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
There can be no rationalizing Kerry's pro-war vote; it just can't be done.

I have no problem doing it!!!!

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I have no problem doing it!!!!

Well, explain it to me because I think he f*cked up big time.

[dissention]

Just to make sure that my zinger doesn't get overlooked:

Three Texas surgeons were having lunch together and discussing surgeries they had performed. One of them said, "I'm the best surgeon in Texas. A concert pianist lost 7 fingers in an accident, I reattached them and 8 months later he performed a private concert for the Queen of England."

One of the others said. "That's nothing. A young man lost both arms and legs in a terrible accident, I reattached them and 2 years later he won 2 gold medals in field events in the Olympics."

The third surgeon said, "You guys are amateurs. Several years ago a guy who was high on cocaine and alcohol rode a horse head-on into a train traveling 80 miles an hour. All I had left to work with was the horse's ass and a cowboy hat. He's now president of the United States."

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
Well, explain it to me because I think he f*cked up big time.

That is because you refuse to acknowledge that the entire world for like 11 years thought SH had WMD based on this intelligence

Again, I think Kerry, like many including Clinton and the entire U.N. for 11 years, saw the intelligence and thought "Oh Sh^t" SH has WMD." Then, Bush says give me the power to go to war on terrorism, and SH is a terrorist because of the WMD. Then W just takes that authority and flies off of the handle with it. Weak I know - but it makes sense at least to me. Again, as I have been saying all along everyone who saw that intelligence thought SH had WMD and was deliberately hiding them from the world for whatever bad reasons

Personally, I wish Kerry would have the sand to say, I am glad SH is gone and the intelligence supported removing him - but Bush is such a dangerous hot head that he stretched the intelligence and flat about lied about some of it in order to go to war. Conversely, I would not have gone to war without the UN or clarification of the intelligence. Or - once I learned the nuclear stuff was bogus, I would have stood down even if it meant egg on my face. Or something like that.

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
Chris, here's the deal. I understand your position. I don't agree with it, but I support your right to think that way and act on it. But I am a radical at heart. I don't believe any real social or political change ever happens by working from within. You can go back for centuries upon centuries and find that real change always happens in a dramatic way. I'm not asking for a revolution here, though to be honest, I've lived through one, and it was kind of cool. I'm asking for this nation, which has become way too complacent, to do some real soul-searching and realize that we can't continue on our path. Voting for Kerry is really just more of the same. Do you not see that the Clinton years were an unequivocal slide to the right? I mean, we had the oral-sex sideshow, but the Clintonites were already giving away the store. Nafta, welfare reform, deregulations, you name it.

Would Gore had done things differently from Bush? Sure. But I truly believe it is a matter of who gives away the most the fastest. The corporations own Washington. Is that going to change with Kerry? No. Would it have changed with Gore? No.

Kerry lost all credibility with me when he voted for the war. Being the radical that I am, I am aghast at the way people who opposed the war, and some of who even marched in opposition, are now rationalizing Kerry's vote. People are voting against, not for. I cannot do that. I've lived in a dictatorship. I remember what it was like when people got the right to vote. And to sit here and squander my opportunity to work toward change because some bull**** party tells me you better vote for our guy or else would be a betrayal to myself, my family's personal struggle and everything I believe in. If I cave in to the party because that party wants it so, it starts too feel a little bit too much like authoritarianism. And it's not for me. I vote my conscience. This, I realize, is a concept somewhat alien to Americans, most of whom when compared to other countries, have not really had to struggle for a good number of generations. And those who are struggling don't vote anyway because they have been so beat down they don't realize this great country has given them the best tool for change of them all -- the right to vote.

Elections in the America of today are a farse. So if I'm going to participate in this farse, since I have no choice other than sitting it out altogether, which is worse, then I will vote my conscience.

Let the chips fall where they may. Until the Democratic party wakes up and gives me a candidate I can support, they will not get my vote. If Bush is reelected, so be it. Four more years of this crap might just be exactly what we need to wake up our nation from this chronic case of political narcolepsy.



No. Which only reinforces my point that elections are a farse.



Then you haven't been paying attention. Ralph Nader is a great American, and he's done more for you and me than Gore, Kerry or anyone else in Washington could ever hope to (with a couple of exceptions). Go to votenader.com if you want to know what he represents. It's not a secret, believe me. There's no record of saying one thing and acting in diametrically the opposite way, as is the case with Kerry.



Do you have so little faith in your candidate that you don't think he can win against Nader? That says something about your candidate.

I have tremendous faith in my candidate and think he can win the election, just like Gore did. The current regine will do anything, anything to stay in power. That is why we must not have a close call this time or the bastards will steal it again. As for the American people waking up, well you have high hopes my friend. I don't want to go off on people in this country being dumbed down into passivity and how they got that way. A very few are questioning what happened on 9/11. You live in one of the affected areas, so perhaps it is perceived differently (a better understanding) there but for the most part people have accepted the spoon fed explanations they were given about it. It's that way with a lot of things now. So the regime is doing whatever the hell it pleases. I'll say it again. They're dangerous.
While Clinton governed with a Centrist to Right hand and I don't like NAFTA or some of the deregulation I can say this: The Clinton years showed us a good economy, peace and put us in good standing with a lot of the world. Frankly, I'm sick of the right bagging on him for all of the current administration's problems like he was the antichrist. Running up huge deficits wasn't Clinton's fault, folks. He also didn't lead us into war on false pretenses and spare me the drivel about the intelligence being the same. I know. I honestly do not think in my heart of hearts he would have lead us into this quagmire. We took one of the very few countries in the Middle East that had no terrorist activity and turned it into a cesspool with daily suicide bombings, completely knocking out it's infrastructure in the process. The plans for said action were apparently drawn up on the inside of a matchbook.
I'm not thrilled with Kerry's IWR vote either. Did he send the troops in? No. Do I think he can lead out out of this mess? Yes. Are Americans a bunch of corporate slaves? Some of us are to a degree, yes. Can we change it? Yes. Are we willing to pay the price? I'll answer that with a question. Are we willing to stop shopping at WalMart?
I'm well aware of the good work Ralph Nader has done. However, every time I see him speak publicly, it's about what they're doing, not what he's going to do. I watched him announce his candidacy on MTP last Sunday morning and that's what it was. What's Ralph been doing about that for the last four years? These people in power now are extremely dangerous. They're playing from their own rule book and making up the rules as they go along. I'm not against third party candidates. However, this is no time to be mucking up the waters in the hopes that the big dogs are gonna throw you a bone. It's too late for that, IMO.
So vote for who you must, I most certainly understand your point of view. I just hope your conscience doesn't come back to bite you in the a**.
I'd like to hear about surviving the revolution sometime.

[gldstwmn]

Originally posted by strandinthewind

Personally, I wish Kerry would have the sand to say, I am glad SH is gone and the intelligence supported removing him - but Bush is such a dangerous hot head that he stretched the intelligence and flat about lied about some of it in order to go to war. Conversely, I would not have gone to war without the UN or clarification of the intelligence.

He has pretty much said verbatim your last sentence. I think it was in one of the debates.

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
That is because you refuse to acknowledge that the entire world for like 11 years thought SH had WMD based on this intelligence

Yup, and I'll continue to refuse it until the day I die. We knew that he had no WMDs, yet we invaded anyways. It's as simple as that.

[dissention]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
I have tremendous faith in my candidate and think he can win the election, just like Gore did. The current regine will do anything, anything to stay in power. That is why we must not have a close call this time or the bastards will steal it again. As for the American people waking up, well you have high hopes my friend. I don't want to go off on people in this country being dumbed down into passivity and how they got that way. A very few are questioning what happened on 9/11. You live in one of the affected areas, so perhaps it is perceived differently (a better understanding) there but for the most part people have accepted the spoon fed explanations they were given about it. It's that way with a lot of things now. So the regime is doing whatever the hell it pleases. I'll say it again. They're dangerous.
While Clinton governed with a Centrist to Right hand and I don't like NAFTA or some of the deregulation I can say this: The Clinton years showed us a good economy, peace and put us in good standing with a lot of the world. Frankly, I'm sick of the right bagging on him for all of the current administration's problems like he was the antichrist. Running up huge deficits wasn't Clinton's fault, folks. He also didn't lead us into war on false pretenses and spare me the drivel about the intelligence being the same. I know. I honestly do not think in my heart of hearts he would have lead us into this quagmire. We took one of the very few countries in the Middle East that had no terrorist activity and turned it into a cesspool with daily suicide bombings, completely knocking out it's infrastructure in the process. The plans for said action were apparently drawn up on the inside of a matchbook.
I'm not thrilled with Kerry's IWR vote either. Did he send the troops in? No. Do I think he can lead out out of this mess? Yes. Are Americans a bunch of corporate slaves? Some of us are to a degree, yes. Can we change it? Yes. Are we willing to pay the price? I'll answer that with a question. Are we willing to stop shopping at WalMart?
I'm well aware of the good work Ralph Nader has done. However, every time I see him speak publicly, it's about what they're doing, not what he's going to do. I watched him announce his candidacy on MTP last Sunday morning and that's what it was. What's Ralph been doing about that for the last four years? These people in power now are extremely dangerous. They're playing from their own rule book and making up the rules as they go along. I'm not against third party candidates. However, this is no time to be mucking up the waters in the hopes that the big dogs are gonna throw you a bone. It's too late for that, IMO.
So vote for who you must, I most certainly understand your point of view. I just hope your conscience doesn't come back to bite you in the a**.
I'd like to hear about surviving the revolution sometime.

"Did you ever know that you're my hero...?"

Amen to everything you said. I knew there was a reason we were pals.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
I just hope your conscience doesn't come back to bite you in the a**.

But, see, that's the beauty of voting your conscience. It can't bite you in the posterior.

[/quote]I'd like to hear about surviving the revolution sometime. [/QUOTE]

I wouldn't call it "surviving." Here's the abridged version of how it all went down: One day, a bunch of Army colonels overthrew the government. It was a military coup. With a twist: You see, the colonels took over and said, "We want democracy." They immediately installed a new president and kicked off the drive toward democracy. The people rejoiced (except for the fascists). A year later they went to the polls.

During the revolution itself, no blood was shed. Only later, during demonstrations, skirmishes and what have you. Still, it was a very peaceful affair by any standard.