speed up the train and wait for the crash??

The rest of the world will not hate Kerry because he is not Bush? That is your argument? Ok people don't hate Bush for no reason. They hate him for what he has done, mainly in foreign policy with all of his self serving ideas, invasions and occupations my friend. Kerry has already stated he would have done the same thing (as if there was any doubt considering he voted for it to begin with). So using basic common sense, wouldn't people eventually see Kerry for what he is and then hate him? I'm really going out on a limb here... What makes you think he won't start more unnecessary wars? As a matter of fact, he would have started this very unnecessary war, so I would conclude that is actually quite possible that he would. How is Kerry going to make anything better for Iraq, I'm still confused on that one. Kerry isn't going to be the president of Iraq. That is the problem with American's they just can't mind their own damn business. Iraq needs to mind Iraq and the people there need to make it a better place. (Unfortunately since we destroyed it, we should help rebuild it, but the way they want not the way we want). You are against the war, for the environment and other things you are certain you agree with Willow with, yet you still think that Kerry is the best choice. Ummm I think you are one confused person because Kerry doesn't agree with any of that. Why can't you people see that.

 

Kerry is not the best choice, but there are only two choices and he is the best of those two choices. I don't support Kerry as much as I just want Bush out of office, like so many others. Nader can't do that.

Are you an expert on Kerry or something, you seem to know something a lot of us don't. He will be better on issues like the environment, the economy, and giving us back more freedoms.

You must really love Bush. What do you hope to gain by voting for Nader(Bush)?

YOu dumb Nader voters are what got us in this mess to begin with, you should be ashamed.:$ Do you really think Gore would have gone war with Iraq?

Does Kerry have a connection with the House of Saud? Does he have connections with big oil? Is he a retard?
NO!

It's OK, you can support Kerry, we'll still think you're a radical hippy who sees through all the BS of politics.

 

LOL you are the dumb one my child, and you are falling for thier bait hook line and sinker. Don't you get it, Bush and Kerry are not the ones with the power here, they are the puppets. If you want the knowledge I have do some research as I have done. You will come to find what I already know, which is that they are NOT the only two candidates and we do not have to settle for second or third best. I am so sick of everyone in this country settling for mediocrity and being complacent with just getting by. For me there is more to life than that. I absolutely refuse to believe that Kerry is going to make any difference.

 

I saw Kerry speak last week and I think he might make a good president, and I do mean might make one. Hard to tell. One thing I know is I want Bush gone, I think he's worse than Nixon, who was at least a competent crook. If nothing else Kerry can bring a clean slate to foreign policy, perhaps build better relations with some of the governments who have closed their minds to America.

As for speeding up the train:

I think a more likely scenario is the only thing that undergoes a total destruction is our freedoms. You think the Patriot Act and Homeland Security are bad now, just re-elect Bush and you'll realize you ain't seen nothing yet. If you think Americans would rise up righteous and overthrow such a government then I applaud your faith in them, but I don't share it.

 

Newo, sweeite, how can he bring a clean slate to foreign policy when his policy is almost exactly the same as Bush's? Furthermore, since no one believes me, he came out and straight up told everyone that he would have done the same thing Bush did. He said that even knowing that there were no WMD he would have still invaded. Duh people, wake up and get a damn clue! This is so frustrating for me. Stop listening to what the stupid media is telling you and do some real research. Kerry is not going to come out and make a speech and say, yes I'm a very bad man and I want to do bad things to help myself and look out for my own best interests, but I'm not Bush. Don't you get that. Neither one of them are going to tell you the truth. You have to find the truth. The media which is the biggest slut of them all in this, isn't going to tell you the truth either.


I think I have just come to the conclusion that Americans don't want to hear it. They don't want the truth. They want to be lied to so it will make them feel better about things so they can go on their merry way popping prozac, feeding their kids ritalin and driving stupid SUV's around, sitting at home watching stupid sitcoms, tuning out reality, replacing it with someone else's idea of what is true and right, until they all become piles of mush that will do whatever someone tells them. Including invading countries killing off people raping its land of natural resources then leaving.

 

Kerry said he voted to authorise the President to go to war, because without the President having this authority Saddam would not have cooperated with weapons inspectors. But he said he would not have proceeded in the way George Bush did. Some people think this is evasive, but I think it is a reasonable answer.

The point is very much whether something should have been done, you just want to evade it. So you're still sticking with the "may" have caused more ethnic cleansing story? "Some historians" still? All that's happening here is that you are alluding to OTHER peoples doubts as a way of discrediting the Kosovo campaign without actually having the guts to take your own position. The campaign may have prevented another Srebrenica. That's the point with intervening to prevent genocide successfully - there was no genocide, so then people like Willow can complain that we intervened for nothing. Aren't you glad there was no "cowboy bullshit" in Rwanda? On top of that, UN studies of the impact of depleted uranium residues in the Balkans show that there is no significant risk. It is merely wishful thinking on your doom-mongering part.

You are just desperately clutching at straws because ALL actions by evil America MUST be condemned ALLWAYS. To concede that a US intervention might have done some good would suggest that maybe the US isn't universally evil, which of course would be a slippery slope leading to debates about whether US actions were right or wrong, rather than simply how wrong they were. The next thing you know, voting matters, and ivory tower residents who support a hypothetical green anarchist utopia start to look a bit ridiculous.

The "computer boom" did not carry the entire economy of the United States along for eight years. This is an attempt to simplify the entire economy and a two term presidency into a dismissive, cynical soundbite.

So you say.

First of all China is not our "most favoured nation", it has "most favoured nation status" as a trading partner, LIKE MOST COUNTRIES DO. Mysteriously, Clinton "shipped jobs out of the country" yet unemployment fell to historical lows. You just hate the unemployment statistics, don't you Willow - so inconvenient to your theory of perpetual economic doom.

Again, the poverty numbers tell the real story. They fell. DON'T YOU JUST HATE THAT? Doesn't it just make you furious that the poor got less poor?

 

By clean slate I mean he would be a new president and governments which are not receptive to Bush may be willing to hear what Kerry has to say. He might fuck it up, but Bush already has!

BTW most of us don't drive SUVs or take prozac or ritalin, and if these medications turn you into passive sheep then we'd better pray marijuana never gets legalized!

I'm voting for Kerry to get rid of Bush and hoping Kerry will surpass our expectations. Not exactly a ringing endorsement, but that's how is is.

 

Point, I'm not sure why you mixed my and Willows posts together to answer them, I guess to save space. I'll answer all I can, because I agree with Willow on most of this but I can't speak for her.

First of all, I'm not talking about how he voted, I'm talking about when he came out the other day and said he would have done everything that Bush did, the same way. Kerry said that even knowing that there were no WMD, he would have still invaded Iraq. Granted, his camp is saying that he would have done the same thing, but no lied to the American people about it. Oh how noble of him. So he was going to do what have a press conference and say "Hey America, I want to go invade Iraq for no damn reason, or rather, because Saddam is a bad man, and he is really getting on my nerves. It has nothing to do with September 11th, so don't even think that it does. Nevermind, that America put him in power and taught him to be a bad man, nevermind that we gave them wmd, nevermind that we've been giving them money for years, none of that matters, I just want to invade Iraq today, and since I'm in charge that is what we will do, then we can have oil, see people, so it is a very good idea to invade Iraq today, and that is what we will do."

Now I can't speak for Willow, she will have to come to her own defense as I know she is quite capable of, but it is my personal opinion that the US never helps anyone for the sake of helping them. US always has its own agenda first. I didn't say there is anything wrong with that, but let us not pretend that the US has any desire to help anyone but themselves here.

I'm not sure if you are saying that you do believe that Gore invented the internet or not by your statement. If you are, the only thing I can do for you is to point you in the direction of the nearest mental health facility and hope you get well soon. I really hope that isn't the case, because for the most part you seem intelligent, I must have misunderstood.

The internet boom, did in fact employ a lot of people, both directly and indirectly. I don't see what is so bad about admitting this. It created jobs, stocks, etc. All good things come to an end eventually. I'm sure there has been much more extensive research done to explain why the internet boomed then fizzled when it did. That would be interesting to know. I'm busy, so I can't be bothered to look it up, because I don't really think it matters much now. Whether or not it "carried" the whole economy, I'd say it was probably 80% responsible for it. I mean think about it all of those people who just started businesses online and everyone started selling and trading and all sorts of shit, companies made a lot of money, in turn paid employees more and people spent money. It really quite simple. Would we have survived without it, sure, but it was very influencial.

I honestly do not believe statistics, as I have studied sociology quite a bit and done some of my own research. Then again I'm not a professional or expert in the field and I'm sure everyone will assure me that all statistics are accurate. However, if you do know what goes on in the welfare to work program (as in speak to someone who has participated in it) you would know that it isn't exactly all that everyone would have you believe it is. Sure is it better than what we could expect republicans to come up with, of course it is. It is a very good idea actually, Clinton just didn't take it as far as he could. Guess he was busy thinking about other things.

I guess the only point that I was trying to make is just because someone claims to be a democrat doesn't mean he is as liberal as many of us want him to be. It doesn't mean that he is going to do what we want him to do. That is why I don't even pay attention to the stupid labels anymore. If I like what a candidate stands for then I will vote for him, if not, I ignore him. I've got no time for mudslinging bullshit. It is really quite simple. I would have loved to see Kucinich get the democratic nomination, if he had I would have voted for him, but the democrats went in a different direction and I do not agree with the decision, nor do I agree with what Kerry stands for and doesn't stand for. I am not voting for someone with whom I cannot even agree on major issues like going to war. That is just the way I feel about it.

 

I didn't. All of my quotes were from Willow's post.

That's not exactly what he said. I'll agree he has been vague on the issue, so if you're not going to give him any slack, then yes he has approved the war. If you're willing to consider his nuances, I suggest you read this http://slate.msn.com/id/2105096/ to see why I disagree with your interpretation.

It would be hard to argue that we intervened in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Somalia to help ourselves.

We did not put him in power, we did not give him WMDs, and we did not give him much aid other than agricultural loan guarantees. Contrary to popular belief Saddam was never a real ally of the US, the only time we helped him out significantly was when it looked like Iran was going to win the war and seize all the oilfields, so we tipped the military balance back to neutral.

Do we have the oil? No.

This is the typical unsupportable Willow hyperbole that I was objecting to, not Gore and the internet. I don't give that much credit/blame for economic performance to presidents, but I don't pretend that an 8 year boom can happen without the administration having ANYTHING to do with it.

 

I agree with this.

Exactly. I don't drive anything, I have no car. And I'm definitely not depressed.

Me too.

 

My Bad! I meant to say,


BTW most of us don't drive SUVs or take prozac or ritalin, and if these medications turn you into passive sheep then we'd better pray marijuana never gets legalized!

 

greenthumb, for the record, I was not attempting to be "on your case" in particular. I certainly understand why many people will be voting for Kerry this year. I don't think those people are particularly evil or anything - I simply disagree with them. I do NOT believe that Kerry will make anything "better" - other than making democrats FEEL better like Clinton did. I also am of the belief that the American agenda is already set. There are government documents from the 1970's detailing the fact that the United States would be attempting to take over large parts of the middle east in order to control the natural resources of that region for the forseeable future. There are documents and government quotes from the 1950's detailing how the United States would ensure that most of the world remain impoverished in order to preserve the wealth of the west. It, then, is no coincidence to me that the exact plan the ruling elite had up to 50 years ago has been carried out, nor do I believe that Kerry has any intention of derailing that plan. If he did, I assure you, he would already have been assasinated. The ruling elite have no intention of giving up their grip on power and wealth, and THAT is why I believe people are foolish for believing in Kerry.

Pointbreak, your dismissal of the computer boom is patently ludicrous. The wealth generated by the massive growth in that industry during Clinton's presidency is well-known and well-documented by the vast majority of economic experts. The growth in that industry fueled growth in all other industries and fueled job growth. I am not saying that Clinton had NO fiscal ideas that were superior to Bush - what I am saying is that for ME - PERSONALLY - I did NOT approve of what Clinton did OVERALL.

I did NOT approve of the constant bombings of Iraq and the sanctions against that country.

I did NOT approve of the continuing sanctions against Cuba.

I did NOT approve of the welfare-to-work bill.

I did NOT approve of Clinton's pharmaceutical factory bombing.

I did NOT approve of the war in Kosovo.

I did NOT approve of the continuing billions to Israel.

I did NOT approve of the "most favored nation" bullshit with China.

I did NOT approve of shipping huge numbers of good-paying jobs to the third world.

I did NOT approve of increasing rainforest imports.

I did NOT approve of increased funding for the immoral and unconstitutional 'war on (some) drugs,' or tougher prison sentences for nonviolent drug possessers.

I didn't vote for Clinton, and I'm not voting for Kerry. Those individuals who feel that people like these represent their views should feel free to vote for them. I simply do not feel represented in any way by Kerry, and will not be voting for him EVEN IF he isn't Bush.

 

You don't? You might want to check on some statistics then, because the SUV is the most popular type of car purchased, and more people are taking prozac (or some such drug) and feeding their kids ritalin than 1) ever before in history, 2) more than any other country. And you all think this is a good thing. I'm not certian what marijuana has to do with it. If you honestly believe that the United States is not a nation full of passive sheep, then I haven't got anything else to say, I will give up and jump off a fucking bridge, because they are. They settle for what is good enough to get by and they want the most shit so they can feel superior to everyone else. Just take a step back and don't be so defensive, and look around. Watch the people around you and see what is going on. As far as I can tell though, I'm not the passive sheep here, everyone defending Bush is. Everyone who is buying into the notion that Kerry is going to make a difference. Everyone telling me to sit down and shut up, people telling us not to make waves, people who actually believe that the government is helping the people of this country. Those are the passive sheep. I don't know you, I wasn't specifically singling you out. In general that is what is happening to this country. I guess we will just have to wait 25 or 30 more years and see what happens so I can come back to this very board, look up this thread and tell you I told you so. Then will everyone feel better? Then will people wake up?

 

Pointbreak, I'm sorry I was confused because I had posted something quite similar to what Willow said before and I thought you were replying to mine and hers at the same time.
But if you do not believe that we helped Saddam, and Iraq in the past, and if you honestly do not believe that we do not have the oil, then I can't talk to you all I can do is laugh at you. There were a lot of reasons we went to Iraq, and getting oil was one of them. Maybe it was maybe it wasn't the main reason, but I haven't got to prove that to anyone or even myself. No one showed me proof, but in my heart I know that is what happened. Quite honestly I wish there were a way to prove it to all of you. I want to prove you wrong, but Bush isn't going to come out and tell us that, because he knows it is wrong to kill human beings for oil. No one is ever just going to come out and tell you why we actually went into this war. I just don't understand why you believe the government so much. Seems like a really bad place to be putting your faith these days.

 

Not only did we give Saddam money and technology, the Reagan administration blocked EVERY SINGLE ATTEMPT by the UN to sanction Iraq or Saddam for gassing the Kurds and Iranians. I'd call that HELP. But probably just because I hate America.

 

http://hdr.undp.org/docs/statistics/indices/stat_feature_1.pdf

As this report shows, since 1990 the proportion of the world population living on less than $1 a day has fallen, the proportion which is undernourished has fallen, the proportion of kids in primary education has increased, educational gender equality has increased, child mortality has fallen, and access to both water and sanitation has improved. But Willow waves this all away and says there is no point in voting for Kerry because she read a document written in 1950 that says the US is conspiring to perpetuate world poverty.

Except that I didn't dismiss it. I said that the "computer boom" did not carry the entire economy of the United States along from 1993 to 2000. I stand by my point that you are trying to simplify the entire economy and a two term presidency into a dismissive, cynical soundbite.

Well, you sure seem to be trying hard to avoid it.

So you didn't believe in no-fly zones to protect the Kurds?

And what would you have said if there had been a Kosovo Srebrenica?

Blamed for trading, blamed for not trading. Its no wonder you oppose Kerry, how could he please you?

So you complain that the US conspires to keep the third world poor, but when US jobs go to the third world, you complain about that too - even as US unemployment and poverty hits record lows.

The conclusion here is obvious - you refuse to support Kerry because that would mean actually standing for a set of imperfect policies - something voters have to do - because you'd prefer to sit back and wait for some hypothetical utopian candidate who somehow managed to meet all of your contradictory and incompatible "anti" principles.

 

I don't know about Willow, but I am not looking for the ideal candidate, I would have proudly and happily voted for Kucinich who believes in pretty much the same things that I do. Why not vote for someone who can represent you to the fullest?

 

Agreed.

Agreed. Though Castro needs to quit treating his own people like shit. So the sanctions by lifted upon his agreeing to human-rights standards.

Not agreed. Why should welfare recipients be allowed to take the jobs of already established, harworkiing, and sometimes financially struggling workers?

It's like economic affirmative action. "Sorry Bob..I know you have been here for 20 years and you have a certification in this field...but Joe here is legally entitled to take your job because he's in a welfare program."

That's bullshit and that's exactly what has been happening. I have had several relatives laid off to make room for welfare-to-work people.

I'm sorry...refresh my memory on this one? You arent talking about illegal drug plants are you?

Again another comment made by someone who obviously doesnt know anyone who lived under the thumb of Milosevich and his rapist-murdering Serbian military regime.

Agreed.

100% Agreed

Agreed. and PointBreak before you rush into your "but 3rdworlders need work too" shpeel.

Let me remind you that the reason why these jobs are shipped to those countries is because there are no worker-protection laws, unions, or minimum wage.thus making the profit margin higher for corporations. They dont ship jobs to Mexico out of the love for the culture and people.

Agreed.

agreed..these people need medical treatment not prison time and pot is less dangerous then most legalized drugs.

 

One of my Best friends is a Bosnian Muslim and his dad was slaughtered over there in a city with like 40,000 people in it, many of them ended up dying. Milosivich needed to be stopped. His mom and little sister along with him fled over here, and he works his ass of as a senior in high school just to support his family. Thank god they made it out of that hell hole.

 

Kerry was not my favorite either, I preferred Kucinich, Edwards and Dean over him. But I gotta vote Kerry now, my conscience would suffer greatly if I voted Nader and Bush got in again. That is how serious a mess we are in, that people are voting for a guy like Kerry just to get the incumbent out.

Nader is a spoiler. Gore should've been the president and the world would've been a much better place today.