Why I don't like anyone not voting for Kerry (and why I love Noam Chomsky)

No, I think it's going to take years of hard work to make things better, a little at a time. And to what degree does he support these things? Every bit as much as Bush? He has committed to getting our troops out of Iraq during his first term.

Let's face it, any candidate who doesn't support fighting the war on terrorism doesn't have a chance in Hell of getting elected. Kerry has stated he intends to develop better relations with foreign powers, thus getting their cooperation in building better intelligence networks to weed out terrorist organizations. And for this he's lost a lot of support because he's perceived as being too soft on terrorism!

Fine, don't vote for Kerry. Re-elect Bush and give him a mandate to continue flushing the world down the tubes.

 

greenthumb, all I want to know is this:


Why do you think that Kerry is so "antiwar" when he is CURRENTLY stating that he would have voted to invade Iraq KNOWING that there were no weapons and no threat to the US? Why do you think he is "antiwar" and will improve the situation in Iraq when he has SAID HIMSELF that he will send 40,000 MORE troops to Iraq? How is this a commitment to pull out of Iraq?

I've asked these questions repeatedly to Kerry supporters, and the only response I've gotten was one person who said that they thought Kerry was lying about wanting to send more troops just to placate the people who support the war. So I'm supposed to ASSUME that Kerry doesn't mean what he's saying?

 

I believe there are much more effective ways to detract from elitist powers than merely voting in an election. Vote with your dollar.

Nah, it wasn't meant as an insult. I just don't think you can grasp what people go through out in the harsh world of poverty, unemployment, nonexistent health care. I think it's safe to assume you don't live out on your own at your age. So perhaps that's why these issues don't concern you as much as the admittedly intriguing issues of the powerful elite of the world.

I don't think the American people are ready to go much deeper. But yes, I agree 9/11 should be fully investigated and our involvment should be exposed. Skull and Bones....I don't know...I heard a program on NPR about it, nothing notable came of it. I mean, if someone as incompetent as Bush could be tapped, that sort of subtracts from its importance in my eyes. They went to the same school, same elitist frat, well what about that is really condemning?

It's all relative. If this wasn't such a serious election, (Bush really sucks) then yes it would matter more. In light of the importance of voting B* out though, it takes on less significance. I wonder as well, but it doesn't sway my vote.

You "bet" he knew? You can make assumptions and so can I, but we may never know. Kerry has pretty much said it was a mistake.

The choice (the viable choice) isn't between Kerry and Nader.

 

Believe me, I understand your concern and I agree he has had difficulty defending his vote. However, it was not a vote for the war, as I've stated before. Please don't spin it that way. I have a feeling all you independents get your info about the candidates from their opponents! Anyways, he voted to show our country was serious about inspections and to show we were united and our threats were legitimate. I agree he shouldn't have trusted Bush, but that's hindsight. Here is something Kerry said that gives me some confidence in him as an antiwar candidate:

"This was the hardest vote I have ever had to cast in my entire career," Kerry said. "I voted for the resolution to get the inspectors in there, period. Remember, for seven and a half years we were destroying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In fact, we found more stuff there than we thought we would. After that came those four years when there was no intelligence available about what was happening over there. I believed we needed to get the weapons inspectors back in. I believed Bush needed this resolution in order to get the U.N. to put the inspectors back in there. The only way to get the inspectors back in was to present Bush with the ability to threaten force legitimately. That's what I voted for."

"The way Powell, Eagleberger, Scowcroft, and the others were talking at the time," continued Kerry, "I felt confident that Bush would work with the international community. I took the President at his word. We were told that any course would lead through the United Nations, and that war would be an absolute last resort. Many people I am close with, both Democrats and Republicans, who are also close to Bush told me unequivocally that no decisions had been made about the course of action. Bush hadn't yet been hijacked by Wolfowitz, Perle, Cheney and that whole crew. Did I think Bush was going to charge unilaterally into war? No. Did I think he would make such an incredible mess of the situation? No. Am I angry about it? You're God damned right I am. I chose to believe the President of the United States. That was a terrible mistake."

Also: Kerry on ABC's This Week on Oct. 12, 2003. The administration "rushed to war," Kerry complains. "They did not give legitimacy to the inspections. We could have still been doing inspections even today."

So, I don't know what you get from that, but I conclude with a fair amount of faith and assurance that he would not have gone to war if he was the president and he didn't approve of Bush's going to war. I don't think Kerry has shown he is like Bush, for that is extreme. I defend him when people compare him to Bush, especially when their comparisons are surface ones such as Skull and Bones etc.