John Kerry For President

Discussion in 'Politics' started by CyberFly, Sep 21, 2004.

  1. duckandmiss

    duckandmiss Pastafarian

    Messages:
    1,743
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think the point of most of these arguements are that some people feel it may be even a little better with Kerry. I would rather have the prosperity and peace of the Clinton years, than the fear and loathing of Bush.
     
  2. Jezmund

    Jezmund Member

    Messages:
    683
    Likes Received:
    0
    No matter which party is in power the United States will continue to police the world to maintain superpower status. No matter which party is in power we will have to continue to sacrifice our civil liberties in order to feel "safer" at home. Both parties will always be in the palms of corporate interest groups. people will eventually start to realize this, hopefully.


    If there is a Kerry administration people will be blinded for four more years. They will have practically the same foreign agenda as the Bush administration and will still cater to corporate interests. The only difference is they will be more diplomatic and better with words. They wont piss-off as many people.

    So the best thing for us to do is stop aligning ourselves with the two parties and just look at the candidates and the true issues. No longer call yourself democrat or republican. If both candidates are pretty much the same (like they are this year) vote for Nader.

    The best thing for America right now is the birth of fresh new parties and popularizing them. Make the corporations powerless in politics. Do whatever you can to support the Green party and others for the next four years. There are all kinds of smaller conservative and liberal parties out there.
     
  3. duckandmiss

    duckandmiss Pastafarian

    Messages:
    1,743
    Likes Received:
    1
    Man, I thougt it was clear that no one in the third party system has a chance of winning this year becasue most of them are not on the ballot in all the tates and dont ahv the money to support themselves. Why would I throw my vote to a party who cant win, Im not making a statement, because no one cares. Though your right, and I will hope to see a strong candidate form one of the other parties within my lifetime. Unfortunantly this is not the year or the climate, I want my friends home from the quagmire and artistic ventures to flourish, and the fear out of my life.

    Also Nader isnt in the green party.
     
  4. HippieInMyHead

    HippieInMyHead Member

    Messages:
    259
    Likes Received:
    0
    During Clinton's presidency there were for the first time in my life federal budget surpluses. The DJIA hit 10,000 for the first time ever. Myself, like lots of others made lots of money. Times were indeed prosperous, although far from peaceful. Clinton really screwed himself and all of America by being with Monica. How? He should have known that the mean spirited republicans would do just as they did, and in doing what they did, they paralyzed his administration. That had to be the most irresponsible thing a president could do. I watched it happening and cursed it then as I do now. Just look at the far reaching effects that those actions had.

    After the attacks on the U.S. embassies in Africa, all of America ignored, or did not admit to the fact that we were at war, or at least, that there were people that were at war with us. Embassies are sovereign soil. Legally, it's the same as attacking the country itself. Most people in the U.S. were obsessed with the daily news on Clinton & Lewinsky. Then came the attack on the U.S.S. Cole. How much plainer could it have been? War had clearly been declared on us. Had Clinton tried to go to war against Al-Qieda(sp?) then, as he should have and maybe would have, I think nearly everyone in the country, especially the press, would have portrayed it as his way of diverting attention from his domestic problems. Clinton fucked up royally just to get his knob polished. And, we have been paying the price ever since. The republicans didn't help the country or themsleves, in my view, by making huge issues out of the president's indiscretions. It was clear to me then that we had far more important things that we should have been thinking about. I couldn't believe that the navy could be attacked and nothing would happen. I was expecting WWIII right then and there. I was pissed about it going unpunished then. I feel great sorrow now, for all of the people lost on 9/11. What did we expect? We as much as said "go ahead...attack our navy, attack our soil, we'll not do anything to punish you. And 9/11 is what we got for it.

    I think Bush is a religious zealot not unlike the people that we're fighting. But he's the one that we have now that is in a position to fight. If anyone feels more threatened now, than prior to the War on Terror and in Iraq, then it is my opinion that you are simply not in touch with the realities of this world. Saddam hated us as much as Osama, except he had some good reasons for it, which is another thread entirely. Again, with a thorough knowledge of recent history, it is easy to understand why he would hate us, thus why he was a threat. His reasons for hating us go all the way back to the Reagan presidency and the foreign policies of that adminstration.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice