Saturday, 6 November 2004
"Democratic Party". Try it. Say it once. Why must Republicans stoop to such shallow levels to succeed?
Calling it the "Democratic" Party is a lie on the same level as "jumbo shrimp". It's not dmocratic. It's out to have society run by the rich elite.
"jumbo shrimp" is a lie? It sounds like an oxymoron, but it's not a lie, since there are definitions of the two words that match up... of course, since the rest of your statement is just as ridiculous, I shouldn't be surprised.
And the Republicans are out to have society run by the "moral elite", which basically amounts to shoving a bible up everyone's ass yet banning faggotry. Seems to run counter to a true "republican" ideal, in which the will of the people is merely carried out by elected officials, not shaped by it, wouldn't you think? What sort of cutesy name should we be giving them?
Also, that essay disgusts me. So the person would vote for anyone with solid values, no matter what those values are?
Whether or not Kerry had solid values aside, that renders a pretty awful depiction of a person's character. Would they have voted for Hitler versus the opposition? He had very clear values, he was honest about what they were--oh, yeah, and he was gonna round up all the Jews and the gays and the gypsies and anyone who looked like an enemy of the state, and lock them all in camps. But that's okay, because he had stronger convictions than his opponent!
So the person would vote for anyone with solid values, no matter what those values are?
Perhaps rereading would help:
"He won because he has
values, clearly defined values, and even though I agree with little of what he believes, at least I know what he believes
. At least I know that he really does believe in something
. At least I know that he will do what he says he will do.
"That's disgustingly little, but unbelievably – you offered me less." (italics in original)
Note the second paragraph. Having values is a necessary
condition, not a sufficient
condition, and a bare minimum at that.
You might also want to check out Godwin's Law
I'm fully aware of Godwin's Law. It seems well-designed to have provided protection from any administration that should rise that would be honestly comparable to Nazi Germany. However, anyone--anyone--should be able to concede that there's a point that it's inappropriate to shout "Godwin's Law!" because the comparison does become valid. Where that line is, you may disagree on, but you must agree that the line is there somewhere.
It's easier to rebut something on its merits. You'd have done better if you'd left the last line off of there, to be honest.
It's easier to rebut something on its merits.
Already done. Either you overlooked or forgot that once sentence of the essay, or you intentionally ignored it in your attempt at a reductio ad absurdum. I hope it's the former.
Actually, I considered my statement an acknowledgement that you had rebutted what I said on its merits (I apparently misread the article; oops), and was pointing out that your final statement was not only unnecessary to doing so but detracted from it. Both of your assumed possibilities there are false.
|Date:|| - 0000|| |
Godwin was a goof
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials
Thank you for pointing out this interesting piece!
I read the "Open Letter" (which does sounds as if a Republican shill wrote it). I have no need to respond to it on the page where it was posted - most of the people who commented have already torn the letter to peices with all the same points I'd have made. Some highlights include... :
- A police response to the terrorist attacks would have been far more suitable. Treating them as criminals and not as a military threat would have generated far less of the press attention that al-Qaida needs, as well as denying them the satisfaction of being taken seriously (which has only improved thier morale). The military response, on the other hand, seems to have in fact bolstered the agenda of several Islamic extremist movements, since the disenfranchised denizens of Iraq are now prime recruits.
"It is precisely because the terrorist do live among us that police would be an important defense. Bombing the hell out of Iraq has fattened the Al-Qaida network quite a bit. Four more years must have Osama dancing in his cave."
"This is how it's worked in Europe for many, many years. Their airport security is far more strict than America's is. They work together to smash cells on a regular basis, again much more effort expended... It obviously doesn't always work (Lockerbie, Madrid, dozens of IRA bombings), but I've heard many more reports of overseas cells being caught than domestic ones. Perhaps that Iraq money would've been better spent locally?... (As for the military response), it got one - in Afghanistan, Al Qaeda's true state sponsor. Iraq and terrorism linkage was a stinking, rotting red herring, as evidenced by numerous reports before and after the war."
"Terrorism (a decentralized network of folks that have an agenda contrary to ours) is not new. It came home in a big, terrible way on 9/11 - a shift in place, not in fact. Other countries have had bombs exploding in them for some time now, and many use their police as a primary force in combatting the problem."
"Terrorism IS a crime, not an act of war. Criminals DO live among us, eat with us, work with us, that is the nature of criminals. remember: just because the results were spectacular, doesn't mean the acts were. The acts were guys with boxcutters, who never dreamed the towers would actually fall. And some response involving the military was in fact called for: send our guys into Afghanistan to go after Osama, Al Queda, and root out the regime that supported them: the Taliban. Kerry and the Democrats supported this action 100%. BUT SADDAM HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF IT!!!! IRAQ WAS WRONG!!!!!!! Sorry, I just don't now why it is some people just refust to hear that no matter howmany commissions, reports, soldiers, intelligence officers, etc, tell you those facts. There were no weapons, and Saddam and Osama were enemies, period. Unlike Bush, who wants to just lash out at any easy target (that has lots of oil), Kerry wants to go after actual terrorists."
- "If you truly believe that GWB was given his spot in the Texas Air National Guard because he had the aptitude to be a good pilot, and that he served out his 6 year stint even though no records or statements can reliably back it up...who's insulting whose intelligence now?"
- "I didn't support Saddam Hussein. I just thought we should have spent our blood and treasure chasing Al Quada."
- "Bush tried to claim the power to designate any American citizen an enemy combattent and throw him in jail without presenting evidence, without a trial, without access to a lawyer. That's deeply, deeply anti-American. I believe the SCOTUS will rule in favor of the constitution with the Padilla case, but our president is charged with defending the constitution, not circumventing it."
- "Bush did a very good job convincing America that Kerry didn't know where he stood AND that he was a consistently liberal senator. Seems to me those are contradictory."
- "Maybe this country needs a third party, a centerist common sense party."
- "I'm sure you'd like to present this as a well-thought out letter, but it's really lacking any meat on the important aspects of this election (beyond your fragile feelings). You voted Bush because some Bush-haters from the left alienated you? Because some liberals spouted anti-Christian venom? Puh-lease.
How about real issues, like, say, the economy? The war? The presidents use of unilateral military force in situations that could benefit from a dual approach of hard and soft power? What about him pushing his conservative religious agenda? You've stated you are a believer, but what about the parts of the population who aren't and don't appreciate his faith-based initiatives? Are those Americans not important to you? I forgot we live in a land where Christian values are more important than my own.
You have summed up exactly what I felt in this election, people are voting based on superficial ridiculously inane reasons with little or no concern for important issues."
- "I can't imagine any human being in North America right now, who upon taking national office, would not do everything in his or her power to fight terrorism and keep people safe, .... with one exception. The one who already failed miserably to keep us safe, George W Bush."
- "If George Bush worked for me, the George Bush who was asleep at the wheel when the airplanes hit the tower, the George Bush who has the worst track record of any US president in the history of the planet at protecting me against terrorism, the same George Bush who invaded the wrong country, and hasn't yet got Bin Laden; the same George Bush who has alienated the entire world, the same world needed to created a cooperative permanent world-wide network to maintain constant financial and military vigilance in the perpetual fight against evil, the same George Bush who has repeatedly botched nearly every effort he attempted; the same George Bush who has apparently convinced you that "foreign" humans, are, at their core, essentially *different* than you, that they don't love their children, that terrorist bombs somehow won't kill them too, that they somehow aren't vulnerable to the same threat that you feel vulnerable to; and who apparently have no self interest in cooperating to fight terrorism; if that George Bush worked for me, and he does, I would and did say politely on Tuesday, "Mr. President, it's not personal sir, but, 'You're fired.'"..."
- "If you reward failure and are seduced by personality, you will get failure and personality. I cannot afford the luxury of conning my boss, because if I don't produce results I dont eat. But rather than giving you a safe country, the President gave you a great story, and he changed the subject from his outputs to his personality, and yes indeed, I am very impressed with George Bush's personality, but I don't pay my president to make me like him, I pay my president to produce results, the results that this man has consistently failed to produce."
- "I don't see how liberals are considered elitists when the best-selling books by conservatives are titled "Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism", and "Deliver Us From Evil: Defeating Liberalism", and "Winning the War on Liberty over Liberalism".
You're turned off by the incessant hatred of Bush? What do you have to say about the above, Very Sad American? Those are all best-sellers!"
- "I did not vote for Bush. I will not support him.
I will not support him for the very same reason you did not support Kerry. Exactly, the same reasons. Because I too come from a RED State and every day of this year in this red state I was berated by the Republican Right that my friends and loved ones were perverts, that anyone who voted Democratic was a back stabbing, yellow bellied, unpatriotic piece of slime. I was called and harassed constantly by the Republican Right, up to six and seven phone calls a day to keep Senator Kerry, a man they demonized beyond words in their propaganda, from office.
In short I voted against Bush and his adminstration because they demonized my beliefs, had the gall to continously attack my patriotism (your either for us or against us), and not once in all of their prattle told me how they were going to finish what they started in Iraq. Not once did they make me feel safer in regards to terrorism.
You voted for him because he has clearly defined beliefs, I voted against him because his clearly defined beliefs are a threat to my life and are flat out attacks against me."
- "This election was about murdering people that did no attack us and not finding the people that did. "
- "9/11 showed us that we couldn't be half-assed about terrorism, but there's a difference between beefing up security and going off the deep end against countries we think could maybe hurt us. I guess he didn't say "I'll find the terrorists and kill them" enough for this woman to get it."
- "Global politics isn't high school. If you decide to wear pink ribbons in your hair, the worst thing that can happen in high school is that other girls will say you're ugly. When you run the United States, there's a lot more on the line than your fragile teenage ego. You should get the advice of other world leaders before making decisions that will effect them. This is how you avoid unpleasant things like piles of dead human flesh."
- "I know millionares, too. They risked big and continue to work hard. They also cut every corner in the book. For a person or corporation that wants to maximize profits, if there isn't a law against filtering earnings through off-short bank accounts to dodge U.S. taxes, they're going to do it. This hurts the government and, in turn, hurts your friends who wouldn't be able to survive without food stamps and your relatives who rely on MediCare for drugs. Kerry didn't hate the rich, he wanted to tax them."
- "Stop searching for 'a serious effort to get your message out' by listening to Air America. It's nothing more than the wacky left wing's response to all the wacky right wing's AM radio talk shows."
- "Killing innocent people will never net you a free pass into paradise."
- "With Kerry, there was hope for change. With Bush, there's none. And that's the bottom line. If you hear "venom" from us, it's out of frustration and hopelessness that those who voted for Bush voted for more and more intense of the same."
- "I listened to both campaigns, reviewed the Bush record, and found him lacking in almost every possible way."
- "You failed to discuss President Bush in terms of performance - which is why you will be well-served to follow the news about policy more than politics. Bush's performance has been dismal in every way - and you agreed. The fact that this did not affect your final decision is surprising. You were ultimately more concerned with how Air America made you feel, than the hard, cold, depressing results of the Bush administration. Air America was not affiliated with John Kerry. They're just a bunch of shock-jocks in the same way that Rush Limbaugh & co. are. They don't know you personally and yet you still became defensive. Hello? It's radio. Entertainment. You're not supposed to like it - it wasn't meant for you. You have associated every non-Bush supporter on earth with John Kerry's run for president - and that is unfair to yourself. I think that you did yourself a real disservice by taking the election commentary personally, and not basing your decision on the facts presented by 4 years of poor performance in the White House."
- "This was not an election for Michael Moore or any of the other Kerry supporters, just as it wasn't for Rush Limbaugh et al. This was ONLY for John Kerry or Bush/Ashcroft/etc. If you are truly unhappy with the performance of the latter, as you state you are, then you made the wrong decision for yourself and your beliefs (by voting Republican)."
- "You SHOULD care what Germany and France and everyone else thinks about us. We don't live alone on an island as hermits. Our economy thrives because other countries want to do trade with us, and because the governments of China and Japan buy US government bonds - we'd collapse without all of them."
- "I am sad to see abortion as an issue that divides America; I do not feel that this issue is of great importance at the national level."
- "You seem to hold the Democrats to a higher standard then the Republicans, particular when it comes to the demonization of George Bush. What about the Swift Boat Vets? Or Rush Limbaugh and his many knock-offs? They demonized Kerry as much as the leftist gurus demonized other groups."
- "What do you, as a Bush voter, make of the evidence of torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo? Specifically in Abu Graib, but elsewhere too, the evidence points directly to the top of the Bush administration. And no one's been fired. How do you reconcile that with your idea of a 'man with values'?"
- "Many red state voters feel the same way as you when you say in your post "I don't care what Europeans think about me or my country." Yet many of us on the coasts and in international cities (NY, LA, etc) have to deal with clients from European countries on a daily basis. What they think of our country is not an abstract problem, but an every day, practical one. You may not have business trips to their countries or have to entertain them at meetings here, but we do. Why aren't you guys more sensitive to this problem?"
- "You've given the extreme right an opportunity to govern without checks and balances and will now bear the responsibility for their actions. This is the moment where we see if the ideas of the Right are right. If things go terribly wrong (and I hope they don't) you will have to accept the blame alongside the Jerry Fallwell/Ralph Reed types despite your lip service disgust of their beliefs. You've given them the mandate they sought."
- "Most adults vote for what they think is good for their country, not for who they think seduced them better."
- "I am responding because your letter seemed so symptomatic of the sorry state of your once great nation. You appeal to the Democrats to bring you the kind of candidate you want. Please forgive my bluntness, for I really don’t mean to hurt your feelings: is there any particular reason why you can’t get up off your lazy butt and campaign for the candidate you prefer? If you don’t get involved, then frankly you richly deserve your fear and your morbid feelings. If you don’t get involved, and Karl Rove suckers you again in four years’ time, all credit to him. I will have no sympathy whatever for you."
- "Looking at poll results, Kerry actually did very well with moderates and independents nation wide...this to me means that the Republican party as a whole that is pulling out into raging extremist land."
- "I have to say that I am sorry that you feel more akin to people that ARE antithetical to your self-iterest than those that actually hold your self interest at heart. I am a Kerry supporter DESPITE his personality failings. I for one do not need a warm-fuzzy from a political party or it's candidate. What I need from them is competence. If you feel insulted by the ire that closed minded and fairly uninformed persons raise in liberals I am sorry for you."
- "i know the democrats didn't run the best race, but look at what you voted for: discrimination against gays, no-bid contracts for hallibuton, torture at abu ghraib, a policy of detention and disappearance aimed at arabs in and out of the us, record deficits, trade wars, cherry picked medical research, defunding of birth control education, and the most secretive govenment since the turn of the 20th century, and so on. that's not conspiracy theory, those are all matters of record. that's what you are actively for, actively bringing about in the world. there's no middle ground left in that, i cannot sleep with myself at night if i don't devote myself to fighting people like you, well meaning people that support unlawful torture and execution."
- "Sorry, but you lost me with "I recognize that the war was the right thing to do, given the information we had available at the time the decision was made." The information the public had available, maybe, but the administration knew that it was telling the public lies. Apparently lying is no longer a moral issue to a lot of people.
A huge--HUGE--percentage of people who voted for Bush still think that Saddam Hussein was directly connected to the 9/11 attacks. They think that some of the 9/11 terrorists were Iraqis. The information that these things are not true--information even from Republican sources--apparently makes no difference at all. I have no confidence that there is anything that the Dems could have done differently that would have changed these people's minds. Statements from every hand-picked commission didn't do it; what more convincing could the Dems have said?
People who believe things that are provably not true, with the information widely available, are not, IMHO, 'moderates.' "
- "If Bush's first four years in office weren't enough to tip the scale for you, Sad American, then the Democrats will never have your vote, and probably shouldn't expend too much energy trying to get it. In broadest terms, the Democrats are the party of the people, and the Republicans are the party of the rich. The reason that sounds cliched is that it's been true for generations. Shame on us (the loyal left) for not elucidating that point effectively in this past campaign, and for not showing that there are moral reasons for our positions on abortion, welfare, war, racial equality, marriage (gay and otherwise), social security and the environment. Despite your words, or because of them, I doubt the Democratic leadership will ever be able to get through to you."
- "The republican party has never been the party of inclusion, never been the open-minded, tolerant party. from branding the NEA a "terrorist organization" to claiming that the constitution guarantees "freedom of religion, not freedom from religion" to clamping down on the student visa requirements for foreigners, the republican policies read like a roll call of exclusion for all but god-fearing, american-born, non-unionized citizens."
- "bush's cabinet and henchmen aren't people like you. bush believes in hell-fires for three-day-old infants. and john ashcroft and many other of bush's cohorts ARE the scary kind of christian. he belongs to the assembly of god. if bush wants people to think of his supporters as "reasonable, thinking, moderate christians", then he should appoint people that fit that description."
- "Address the issue that iraq had no connection to al-qaeda, which is the single most incriminating fact for the bush administration."
- "Have you heard about this guy called Rush? D'ya think Air America might be a reaction (albeit not a particulalry mature one) to the rampant homophobic, Hilary-hating, divisive bile that wrong wing talk radio and Fox have been carefully cultivating for the last decade? How come Air America are the bad guys but the Rush (criminal drug addict) gets a pass in Sad American's assessment?"
- "I think the issue of gay marriage was brought to the forefront of the media and referendums on it were placed on many state ballots as a means to just that end; as a way of inspiring a certain kind of voter to get to the polls. Much of the vitriol you have heard has been in response to the perceived hate behind that tactic."
- "I think that President Bush has done more to make terrorism worse than he has to fight it. Don't get me wrong, I think taking the Taliban and Saddam out of power were the right things to do. They were the right things to do before Septemer 11, 2001. However, by leaving Afghanistan early and by pursuing the war in Iraq in the manner he has, I think these President Bush has turned these areas into recruitment zones for terrorist organizations. For every terrorist or soldier we kill there, two more terrorists will join up. for every civilian that dies or is wounded, two more terrorists are born."
- "Every one of my well-off friends, however, not only worked hard to get there, as you mentioned, but also thinks that they have a responsibility to give back. They don't mind paying their fair share of taxes. I saw advertisements from billionaires asking to have their taxes raised. I object to things being made easier for people who make 10-20 times more than I do while I see my friends being laid off and I struggle to just get by. I don't want a hand-out, but I don't see why some who has already succeeded should get one."
- "Saddest of all, Darlin, is that you've been suckered. This whole thing about war in Iraq being "the best choice we could have made based on what we knew" is simply not true. Documents are emerging that prove that there was no consensus among the intelligence community that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. Here's a link from PBS:http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript344_full.html
The administration misrepresented the intelligence. It was all a murderous hoax, and they sold it to us like Florida swampland. This is what George Bush stands for: the big lie that gets thousands of people killed, and makes hundreds of other people rich."
- "Johns Hopkins estmates that one hundred thousand Iraqi citizens have died."
- "Asking those making more than $200,000 a year to relinquish their tax cut in a time of record national deficits is 'demonization of the rich?' "
- "Did it ever occur to you that in an age where transnational terrorism is deemed the greatest threat, we might need the help of the intelligence agencies of, oh, I don't know, France to help forestall another 9/11?"
- "If we really adopt an attitude whereby we're going to do what we wish and the rest of the world be damned, we cannot be surprised when the rest of the world ultimately resents and resists our hegemony. Being the biggest kid on the block doesn't entitle you to a damned thing, and it's dangerous to pretend that it does."
- "Having values is different from being pig-headed, closed minded and manipulative; I think you need to think about that. And stop trying to make yourself believe you were open to voting against Bush: the fact that you only chose the hideousness of Kerry's campaign and focussed on the "values" of Bush's is sickening. Thanks for fulfilling my stereotype of Republicans."
- "Being unwaiveringly wrong is always wrong. Even if Kerry flipped a coin on every decision that he made, he wouldn't be wrong almost all of the time."
- "I agree wholeheartedly. When a party insults you, spite them by voting for someone who will strip women and homosexuals of rights, who will underfund education and hand out no-bid contracts, who will overextend our military, and who will destroy the reputation of the United States and its citizens across the globe."
- "What has Bush shown that he will protect you against Terrorism? This is the administration that ignored a memo titled "Bin Laden determined to attack in the U.S." ONE MONTH BEFORE 9/11. Bush himself has said that he doesn't care if they catch Bin Laden, THE MAN RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ATTACKS. Instead, the government has diverted resources to a never-ending quagmire in Iraq. In the meantime, Afghanistan has continued to deteriorate."
- "So, screw Europe? Yeah, who needs them! It's not like we have any economic interaction with them, or ever need their assistance in any sort of military venture. Didn't you learn in high school that sometimes its better to work together rather than acting like a self-righteous jackass?"
- "The Bush admin has pandered to the fundamentalist vote, worked to suppress minority votes, and attempted to disenfranchise anyone who disagrees with them."
- "Kerry’s campaign, and the moderate Democratic message are indeed flawed in not trumpeting many American "values" that the right rarely mentions, such as preserving our environment (a potentially great issue for JK since his record there is actually terrific), tolerance(remember tolerance as an American value?), justice for the poor and working people (yes, this does mean taking back the tax breaks for the "rich" unless and until the deficit shrinks to where we can afford such largesse), and so on. Is caring for the sick and those in prison no longer a Christian or American value.? If it is, how to explain what we have done in the prisons of Iraq, and are still doing in Guantanamo? Decency in treating prisoners and prisoners of war was an American value in all those WWII movies I grew up watching in rerun on TV.
Fair play is a value. Obeying the Geneva Convention is one hell of a big value that I used to identify with my country’s behavior."
- "I'm amused by everyone on this thread who has said "Bush better watch it, if he goes too far..." He is going to go too far. He's said as much. And there's not a damned thing anyone can do about it.
He doesn't have to stand for re-election and has a committed base of disciplined conservatives in the House and Senate to rubber stamp every idea he has. If the last four years are any indication, Repubs in both houses will not question nor will they improve upon ideas generated at the White House. (Check out how Arlen Specter had to back down when he dared question Our Leader.)
So, we'll get Social Security privatization with no idea of how to pay for it, we'll get the tax cuts being made permanent without an eye to fiscal solvency anywhere in sight, and we'll get a foreign policy that is, at best, "unique". As a fiscal conservative, I fear that the net result of the re-election of George W. Bush will be an eventual devaluation of the U.S. currency. (It's currently falling like a stone next to the Euro.)
Many of us blue staters are in despair over being unable to do anything to halt Mr. Bush, but don't kid yourselves, you Red Staters are just as powerless. He thinks and acts like an autocrat. The influence of public opinion or even other republicans on this administration is practically nil. So, Bush voters are the same as Kerry voters, passengers in the back seat of a car weaving in and out of traffic at ninety miles an hour. Buckle up, it's going to be a bumpy ride."
- "Kerry voted for the 87 billion for Iraq operations, but for paying for it by reversing Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest americans. Bush wanted to do it with more deficit spending, which will ultimately be born by higher taxes on all americans. Bush can speak about Sacrifice, but he refuses to reverse tax cuts for the rich in times of War?"
- "The terrorists were from SAUDI ARABIA. However screwed up Iraq was, it was as close to a bastion of moderately secular government and culture in the Middle East as you would have found. Iraqi Christians were generally safe under Saddam. Now they are fleeing for their lives. Jihadist Terrorists stream into Iraq from Saudi Arabia and Jordan."
- " Bush lied about everything. He lied about who he is: a northeastern elitist, having grown up in the heart of elite-ville. As a former resident of Andover, I can tell you, we "townies" had noting on the PA students when it came to elite, and don't even get me started on Yale. He put on his cowboy persona to fool the gullible into thinking he's one of them. Guess what - if you believe he's one of you, you're one of the gullible. You can't tell the difference between a put-on swagger and a real rancher. He lied about his service during Viet-nam and then had the gall to call into question the service of actual heroes, from John McCain to Max Cleland, to John Kerry. I can't wait to see how he treats the purple heart winners from his current war. Oh, wait, we already know - his new budget calls for shutting down VA hospitals. He lied about the people who attacked us. He lied about the level of threat posed by Saddam Hussein. He lied about the No Child Left Behind act (did you know it requires your child's school to give out your child's full contact information to military recruiters without notifying you?). He lied about who benefits from the tax cuts. He lied about jobs. He lied about pretty much everything."
- "Kerry voted against the 87 billion after Bush set 20 billion of it to be spent without accountability. "
- "9/11 happened on Bush's watch after he was already informed there was going to be an attack. That he sat for 7 minutes frozen while the towers burned."
- "Of course Kerry cares about the rest of the worlds opinion. Bush cared as well, or he wouldn't have kept bringing up the 'coalition'; even he knew it mattered."
More from that page.
- "A nobody who barely makes poverty wages is worried about 'demonizing' the rich. That is so funny! Hope the stocks you bought were Enron. John Kerry wanted to pay his fair share even though he was rich, and you spit in his face. It just didn't sink in to you that he was raising taxes on himself."
- "Bush... isn't a 'Republican'. He is part of the extremist Christian right. Even Pat Buchanan Thinks so. The Republican party is no more; it has been taken over by extremist Christians and YOU gave him the keys to the kingdom."
- "Do you have no identity of your own? Would you let a big strong man into your life who beat you, just because he knew what he wanted and you wanted to draft off of his certainty? Bush lied, wasted money & lives, takes away environmental protections, puts cronies into positions of power, strips social protections, dug us into our deepest debt ever and you like him because he believes in something."
- "Sad American" is a good epithet for this poor woman. It's like she's been manipulated into thinking she has her own mind. I don't think it's her fault. She lives in a country where the mainstream media has been forced to operate in nearly constant reaction mode to the right-wing media that operates as an arm of the Republican party."
- "Thank you for well written letter. However, it makes me want to cry of frustration.
You said you are "a single, heterosexual, college-educated woman in my late 20's with an annual income of about $30,000". There is not much that Bush or the Rebuplican party will give you. They are not representing your interests. You are not their support base.
The Bush administration will seek to further ban abortion, although I doubt they will get it into law within the next 4 years.
The war in Iraq was not right even given the information back then. Factions in the Bush administration wanted that war, even though the real intelligence was not justifying it. I think you should do a little better research on this topic.
Research has shown medicare like in Canada would cost less to the government and individuals than the current system, and provide better health care for more people. But I don't think Kerry or the Democrats could have changed the current situation, the current beneficiaries are lobbying too hard.
Bush and the Rebublicans will make life harder for gays. But regarding gay marriage, I think the best solution would be to declare marriage as a religious institution without any societal effect, and let the churches decide the marriage issues. Marriage should be replaced by Civil Union in the eyes of the government and law, and both heterosexual and gays should be allowed to form Civil Unions. It is the word 'marriage' which is largely responsible for the whole ruckus.
Bush and the Rebublicans will try to strengthen the PATRIOT Act, and other laws along those lines.
To answer your points:
1. What does it matter? How could it be any worse than what we know Bush will do?
2. I agree with another person - saying terrorism is war just gives more power to the terroists. Terrorists are criminals, albeit different from many others. I did not saw Kerry oppose fighting terrorism like in Afghanistan where the situation was very clear.
3. The whole issue was started by Bush supporters. Kerry supporters could have done a better job at responding, but so what? If you think Kerry supporters were more manipulative than Bush supporters, you must have had your blinders on.
4. In other countries people care about what other countries and people think about their country and them. Nobody lives in a vacuum. The USA and Americans will learn this lesson some day, but it may be many years in the coming.
5. Being rich in and of itself is not bad, but it can easily shelter you from the real world. The rich are powerful, and naturally will try to do what is best for them - which is not at all always best for the majority.
6. Why is it that Bush is probably the most hated person on the planet? And why would it matter to you what someone else's opinion of him is?
7. This seems to reduce to 6. I don't think you were really ready for an alternative.
I agree with you that Kerry was not a very good alternative, and his campaign was not very good. But I do think that ANYONE would have been better than Bush. Therefore, I would have voted for Kerry.
Unfortunately I cannot vote.
--European living in USA"
- "Terrorism (a decentralized network of folks that have an agenda contrary to ours) is not new. It came home in a big, terrible way on 9/11 - a shift in place, not in fact. Other countries have had bombs exploding in them for some time now, and many use their police as a primary force in combating the problem."
- "It is self-serving to share and get along with others. We're not the only kids on the playground & we don't always have to be the bully. We worked together with France in the WWs, they helped us gain our independence in the Revolutionary War. Sometimes it's nice to have friends."
- "Because you didn't understand Kerry, doesn't mean Kerry can't be understood. 50 million of us understood him."
And one of the better responses from that page....
- " Anonymous said...
I read your letter, and a lot of what you said made sense -- except your vote. We rarely have good choices in politics, but we make the best of it. You made the worst of it, and did it knowingly.
1. "You didn't give me clear positions on the issues." Granted, but then you chose someone who did not share your views, but had easy answers for complex questions such as abortion which you admit "makes me queasy, but I don't want Roe vs. Wade overturned," a view reasonably close to Kerry's.
2. "How Kerry saw this as a crime, and not as a paradigm-shifting event that deserved a military response" Except Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11. In Dr. Zhivago, when it was suggested that the village the Reds just shot up maybe wasn't the one that sold horses to the enemy, the Trotskyesque Red Army leader replied, "A village betrays us, a village is burned, the point is made."
3. "You insulted my intelligence by the constant mantra of Kerry's service in Vietnam." That was probably a genuine result of his emotional reunion with former Green Beret, Jim Rassmann. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-vietnamvet13mar13,1,4247569.story?coll=la-home-headlines
In response to this you chose someone who wrongly supported the Vietnam War and chose not to fight over someone who rightly opposed the Vietnam War but chose to fight anyway. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Request_Vietnam_duty.GIF
4. "Your constant references to the opinions of the rest of the world scared me" as in "a decent respect for the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them . . . ." Darn those Founding Fathers! http://www.archives.gov/national_archives_experience/charters/declaration.html
5,6,7 "demonization", "hatred", "mocking" were not Kerry.
"I tried so hard to give you guys a chance. I'm young, I'm not extremely religious, and I'm supportive of liberal ideals like fighting for higher wages, stopping outsourcing of jobs, and standing up for the little guy. I wanted to vote Democratic this time, more than I can possibly put into words. You just didn't give me the option."
Sure you had an option. You chose to vote against your ideals, and further, you refused to hold accountable those who ran the government into the ground the last four years. You can blame Kerry all you want; but we have to live with our choices. I'm glad you voted. Now watch the results of your choice. Let's hope both you and Bush have learned something from experience.