2004 Presidential Elections

[jim]

newguy said:
Keep them dependant on goverment and they have to keep voting for you.

Hmmmm, survival of the fatheadedest.

[Guest]

Jim,
That comment about keeping them dependent on govt is my sarcasm about what the Dems do. The Democrats want to keep people poor and dependent on them.  That's what gives them the votes and power. When people get successful they don't need the Democrats.

[New Guy]

So why don't I leave? I will as soon as I can convince my family to flee before we suffer the depressions of another depression

Jim,
Where would you go?  This is the greatest nation on the planet.  It has the best economy, the best standard of living, the best defense and the best people. Why do you think so many people are trying to get in here, legally or illegally? We all need to keep working to make this country even better.  

[airspuds]

vegas

[Bruce Brakel]

vegas

For January-March might make sense.

[jim]

Viva New Zealand!

"When people get successful they don't need the Democrats."
I guess I understand this assessment, but I guess I just have a problem with the [implied] stereotype of Democrats being limpnoodled, impoverished Socialists.

NewGuy, IF all republicans suddenly vanished and you were forced to vote democrat, whom would receive your endorsement and why?

[New Guy]

NewGuy, IF all republicans suddenly vanished and you were forced to vote democrat, whom would receive your endorsement and why?

Jim,

Excellent question.  I guess that gets back to the thread-starting subject.

I'll assume that you are referring to presidential candidates?

Let me first rule out a few:

Sharpton is fun and entertaining but isn't a serious candidate. I watched one Dem debate and he didn't have a clue to one of the major foreign policy issues. (I can't recall it) I actually felt bad for him because he was so clueless.  It was like that boy and girl on Leno.

Dean is a total leftist wacko. Enough said.

Kuchinich I have not studied but he doesn't seem to be mainstream anyway.

Edwards I wouldn't trust. If I didn't know better, I would think he is a Clinton clone. He's a smooth talking, smiling personal injury lawyer. He likes to claim that he is a moderate but he's as liberal as they come. He has been a major obstruction in Bush's court nominations.

Kerry is an ineffective version of Ted Kennedy. He's an elite (married to the heir of Heinz fortune) eastern liberal that is detached from America.  He speaks only with the tired liberal buzzwords. I understand he has been in the senate for many years but sponsors little and does little. In one speech recently he said "Bush f***ed it up". Not Presidential. But what really gets me thinking. I've known hundreds of WW2, Korean War, and Vietnam vets and none brag about their record and few talk about war. He seems to with every speech. That's odd.

Clark has no experience. A few months ago he had no party affiliation. Suddenly he's a Dem candidate.  If you listen to him over time you will see many inconsistencies in statements and beliefs. Rather than being lies I almost think he's confused. Also not a serious consideration for President.

Bottom line, I guess I'd have to go with Leiberman (I guess he dropped out tonight, however.). I don't agree with his liberal ideas but he would be my "lesser of the evils". He has experience and is very smart. With the exception to his compromising of some beliefs when running with Gore, he has integrity, honesty and decency. (How he put up with the sleaze of Clinton, I don't know.)  Whoever wins, they will likely be working with a GOP Senate and House and I think of all the candidates, Leiberman would work the best with them.

Jim,

[jim]

It really is difficult, with any candidate from any party (except for Nader), to tell wha is simply repitition of political buzzwords and heartfelt honesty.
Although Sharpton's answers on domestic issues were right on target, I think Kerry is the only Dem left who can defeat Bush. And yes, he does resemble Uncle Ted, but has fewer "responsibilities" to american big business.  But I do not know if he can turn this country around.

[Jon Brakel]

...but I guess I just have a problem with the [implied] stereotype of Democrats being limpnoodled, impoverished Socialists. ...

I don't know about a stereotype but I know one Democrat who is a noodle-armed whacko socialist!    

[New Guy]

Saw this in Drudge today.  Guantanomo was discussed earlier.  Thought it would be of interest:

(It's choppy because I simply cut and paste. I may have missed a country or two while hurrying)
See: http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040204-051623-5923r

Guantanamo – Total 650 detainees (but new and releases frequently)

UPI has tentatively determined the nationalities of 619 of Camp Delta's inmates from 38 countries

160 from Saudi Arabia
Yemen with 85,
Pakistan with 82,
Jordan with 30
Egypt with 30
Afghans 80
Morocco 18
China 12
Kuwait 12
Tajikistan and Turkey with 11 citizens each
Nine British citizens of Muslim background
Both Tunisia and Russia have eight of their nationals
France and Bahrain both have seven each
Australia (2) and Canada (2.)
two Chechens, two Uzbeks and two Syrians
Bangladesh, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Iraq, Kenya, Libya, Mauritania, Qatar, Spain and Sweden all have a single citizen in Camp Delta.
two Georgian and two Sudanese

[jim]

yeah, i read that this am in the Chicago SunTimes (but that article said 649 detainees I think)
but it is quite different from numbers & demographics released back in Sept or so.......

I get most of my news from NPR (woo-hoo, more bleeding heart liberal dems! - gotta luv 'em!) and various internet sites with their sources coming from outside the US

[New Guy]

Some of my tax dollars go to funding that NPR left wing propaganda machine?

[damonshort]

for all you Lord of the Rings fans....

http://flash.bushrecall.org

[jim]

better to NPR than Rupert Murdock

Also, is it true that all records of George Jr's tenure as Governor of Texas are sealed and unavailable for public viewing? I thought that info is certainly a matter of public record.

[New Guy]

I'm beginning to agree with recalling Bush.  He is waaaaaay to liberal. I was hoping for a President that would slash all these entitlement programs.

[jim]

Aw, c'mon....
He created the largest bureaucracy in the history of this country: the Dept of Homeland Security!
Why, well, because somebody, somewhere, might hate the US and have some sort of weapons - or at least the ingredients for weapons - well, at least the plans to get the ingredients......

He's not liberal!  Bush withdrew the US from the World Court of Law because it "was delving into too much detail".

He also removed the US from the UN's Human Rights Commission. I guess that commission allowed too many liberals to live [in poverty].

[mirth]

You two wanna go off & get married somewhere? Jeez, you sound perfect for each other.

[jim]

We can wed in Waco and honeymoon in Maine.
For my wedding present, I want Kuwait.

[mirth]

Actually, I think you want to wed in Massachusetts....

[jim]

Not until that constitutional amendment is passed!
Its all about tax-exemtion, I mean, Free Love, baby!