Gore and Lieberman

Subject: Gore and Lieberman
From: bflat
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 07:53 PM

I'm impressed with the choice. It is often said that the public doesn't especially care who the VP candidate is. Well, Joseph Lieberman is definitely changing that axiom.

Do we have a songwriter who wants to tackle this? Peter? Mbo?

bflat

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 09:20 PM

I too am very happy with the choice of Joe Lieberman. However, I hated his acceptance speech. The first thing he did was to start quoting the Bible. I'm not listening to Pat Robertson pound the Bible, so why would I want to hear it from Lieberman? Then he went on and on about being Jewish. The Republicans don't have to say a word about it now. I hope Joe leaves it alone because we are supposed to be electing a political leader, not a religious one. == Johnny

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Downeast Bob
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 09:40 PM

Before Lieberman was selected, the only reason I could see for voting for Gore would be to stop Bush. It's about time that a U.S. presidential ticket included a Jew, but I'd rather see a good old fashioned radical Jew. I'm still considering voting for Nader.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 09:43 PM

Stopping Bush is reason enough. I'd even vote for Ventura if it would send George back to Texas.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 09:47 PM

My friend was impressed with a response from Lieberman whihc she heard on the radio tonight. He was talking about the Republicans who are trying to say he is more like them and they were comparing his voting record to Cheney's.

Paraphrasing he said something to the effect that to compare the two was like saying a taxidermist and vet were the same because with either one, in the end, you get your dog back.

I like that and I liked what I saw of him when I lived in CT and he was Attorney General and then in Congress.

kat

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 09:57 PM

I gather Lieberman is one of the most respected guys in either party...pretty conservative in social matters, but good at what he NEEDS to be good at

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: MarkS
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 10:27 PM

I just wonder how Gore can pick somebody whose views on a lot of issues differ so much from his own. But what do you expect from a guy whose family was cozy with Armond Hammer, who ownes about a million dollars in Occidental Petrolium stock, and who bashes his opposition about being in with big oil.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 10:34 PM

"politicians make strange bedfellows"....and we in the US suffer from having only 2 serious parties...it is hard to find a GOOD choice whose views are really close to your own........though watching England and Israel and all those 'votes of confidence'..etc., make me wonder what system I WOULD design

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: JamesJim
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 10:40 PM

ZZZZZZZZZ!

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Sandy Paton
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 10:47 PM

As an unreconstructed liberal, Lieberman has always been too conservative for me, but it doesn't mean I would throw away my vote by giving it to Nader, though I respect Nader greatly. He was good on CrossFire tonight, and his speech to the NAACP was superb, but we all realize that he simply cannot win. Damn it, the attitude of the Supreme Court for the next twenty years is at stake! We must prevent the Bush/Cheney team from making those several upcoming appointments. If you are pro-choice, you must make your vote count where it really counts.

Sandy

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Mrrzy
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 11:03 PM

Anyone want to do the blicky to the other thread, asks Mrr lazily?

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: thosp
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 11:15 PM

blueclicketything to the other thread

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Aug 00 - 11:44 PM

Thank you, Sandy! See the other thread for a lengthy posting I copied from NARAL.

Yeah, Lieberman was more conservative than I liked and I didn't vote for him, but I think he will help in this election.

BTW, where does it say that the VP must be a virtual clone of the Presidential candidate? Do they have to be lockstep on everything?

kat

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 03:58 AM

If they don't get elected they sound like they could be a team of song writers! The new musical: "Monica!" by Gore and Leiberman...(just a thought!)
RtS

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Ella who is Sooze
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 04:28 AM

Arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

(I) POLITICS!

zzzzzzzzzzzz

E

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: kendall
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 05:18 AM

A vote for Nadar is a vote for Bush. A vote for Buchanan is a vote for Gore. I shall hold my nose and vote for Gore. As that old sage (Sandy) said the course of the supreme court is far more important than who sits in the white house.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: catspaw49
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 10:32 AM

Without beating the dead horse about my views on political methodology, we also need to remember that the Congress plays a part in the selection process of the Supreme Court. Whatever your viewpoint and that of the man in the Presidency, the nominee must be approved by the Congress (is that the opposite of Progress?) so supporting and electing the folks who will support your choice has a great importance too.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 11:33 AM

It also has importance in other respects. The final authority on Roe v. Wade, and on similar, narrowly constructed legal issues, rests with the Supreme Court. But abortion rights is a larger issue than Roe v. Wade, or than the Supreme Court. Laws can and should be passed to protect the rights of the people, and to reflect the will of the electorate. Sometimes it's a tricky job to serve the majority while protecting the minority, but that's what these folks in Congress are supposed to do. And if they do their job well, a lot of these issues will never even get to the Supreme Court.

Is the Supreme Court more important than the President? At certain times, on certain issues, yes; on others, no. Don't make the mistake of assuming that the only thing the President does that's important is nominate Supreme Court justices -- the President makes decisions every day that profoundly affect millions of people, for good or ill. If you base your vote on one issue only, be prepared to kiss the rest of your issues goodbye.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Sandy Paton
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 12:24 PM

Yes, but the effect of his/her Supreme Court appointments can outlast the President's term of office by decades! I agree with Catspaw, of course, that the Congress must also reflect our concerns, so vote accordingly. We won on Borg, but weren't able to stop Thomas! Remember being told that Thomas was named because he was "the best man for the job," and that "race" had nothing to do with it? Do you believe that now? Did you believe that then? Do you think that someone may have prevaricated a bit?

Sandy

Subject: Lyr Add: BUDDHIST TALKIN BLUES FOR THE NEW MILLENI
From: Art Thieme
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 12:46 PM

A new song that just erupted from the depths of my whatever: The Buddhist Talkin' Blues For The New Millenium by Art Thieme -- August 9, 2000 -- 11:45 in the morning.

If you wanna vote for Bush and don't really want to do it,
Grease your vote in mutton suet,
Slide into Nader land,
And play right into George Bush's hand.
Your vote will fly away easy.
And the oval office stays sleazy.

Remember back in '63,
They gunned down Jack and we got LBJ,
We all thought we had an o.k. guy,
'Til Viet Nam showed us why,
He was bloodthirsty bum.
Just like the rest.
Didn't care about our lives at all.

You think ya got a good one in and a bad one out,
You put your foot in your mouth and you shake it all about,
You do the Hokey Pokey 'til the cows come home,
And the bottom line remains that the cows are home.
And you are rollin' in it.
'Cause you made your bed in a cow pasture.

So here's what to do for a good guy to be your prez,
Just close both eyes and pick the one that'll do more good,
For the powerless people in the neighborhood.
What you get is still up in the air,
But at least you put in your two cents.
In a fairly decent system.

Now some folks say while they analyze our Eagle,
That if votes could change anything, they'd be illegal,
And that's truth -- one by one,
But taken together they can get a job done.
Might be the wrong job.
Or a hand job,
But at least someone'll be happy.
And get a good night's sleep,
For the next four years.
Maybe eight !

'Cause a vote ain't much but it's all we've got,
To fight the corporate money grubbing crooks,
Who seem to get more and more and more,
While we, by the millions, join the ranks of the poor.

We could turn into animals like old Ted Kazinsky,
Or take our anger and bomb Oklahoma City,
Or teach our kids to shoot their kindergarten pals,
And show 'em how to pray to guns like they were gods themselves.
Yeah, whatever we want to do,
God is on our side.
And you'll have to pry Him from my cold, dead fingers!

So what's the answer to my diatribe?
"Those're Blowin' In The Wind'," said Bobby the scribe.
Ain't no answers that I can see,
Other 'an lean toward the good and do your best.
It don't rhyme at all,
But that's O.K.
Love to all,
Old Art Thieme

(END OF MY "BUDDHIST TALKIN BLUES FOR THE NEW MILLENIUM"-----by Art Thieme----August 9th, 2000 -- 11:30 in the morning. Central daylight time.)

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Mark Clark
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 12:54 PM

Art, that's wonderful! Why don't you run for president? I'd go ring doorbells for you anytime.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Art Thieme
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 01:05 PM

My 4th verse above needs a second line:

Here's an idea for one:

So here's what to do to get a good guy to be your prez,
Just find one who only inhaled PEZ,

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Art Thieme
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 01:07 PM

Mark, Thanks. I'm still hopin' I'll be around when you drive through. Lemme know.

Art

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: DougR
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 01:15 PM

Sandy: True, the Senate's lack of approval of Bork is viewed by Liberals as a victory, and the appointment of Thomas as a defeat. That is not the view of 100% of the people in this forum, however.

The use of the word, "we", as you use it in your posting is a bit strong. Had you used the word majority, which I'm sure reflects the feelings of the majority in the Mudcat, then I'm sure you would have been correct.

My opinion only, of course.

DougR

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Art Thieme
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 01:39 PM

Doug,

You're probably a nice guy even though you're wrong.

Some of my best friends are wrong---

Art

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 02:26 PM

Sandy, the point I was making is that a LOT of the President's actions outlast him (or, eventually, her) by decades. It's an important job, for many reasons, not just the occasional Supreme Court nomination. Folks who use that as their sole criterion on election day are short-sighted, in my opinion.

I'm not a huge fan of either Bork (was "Borg" an intentional misspelling?) or Thomas. But I also am not fond of the way in which people tried to derail Thomas's nomination. Perhaps YOU (DougR's point is well taken) "won" with Bork because the objections to his nomination were essentially honest -- it was his ideology that people found objectionable, and that turned out to be the basis of the Senate's decision not to consent to his nomination. In Thomas's case, people objected to his ideology (and, to a lesser extent, his relatively modest legal accomplishments), but they tried to derail the nomination with a smear on the man's character -- whether or not you believed Anita Hill, she never had a case that would be considered adequately supported by people who hadn't already made up their minds. It was a dishonest smear campaign, which reflected negatively on the people who mounted it. Whether or not I think Thomas was the best person for the job, I'm glad he ultimately survived the process and got the job, if only because I really detest the way people tried to block it.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: catspaw49
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 02:46 PM

WS, your point about the method and the end result are well taken by me. I weary of how we trounce figures in the public eye for their personal lives in general. I'd much prefer to deal with Thomas and his lack of experience and legal viewpoints than whose pubic hair was on a coke can.

Ever since Watergate we have this overwhelming need to dig into the personal lives of pols. Watergate was a crime. And, to quote Bill Maher, a blowjob is not a crime...or even if it is in some states, its not an impeachable offense. Watergate gave us a new breed of journalist which tried to emulate the in depth probing of their predecessors, but would go to any lengths to get a story.

I certainly detested Bork's viewpoints, but his knowledge of Constitutional law was beyond question. We fought the viewpoint, but if he had won out, things would be different a bit, but at least I'd have the feeling I was listening to the opinion of an educated and knowledgable man. If we had fought Thomas on the same grounds, he would have been turned down......and I'm left with a man whose opinions I do not respect; not because of any moral issue, but simply on grounds of knowledge.

I'm waiting now to hear all of the dirt that will be dug out on Lieberman and Cheney. Be assured that their political views will take a backseat to the first hint of some indiscretion.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Whistle Stop
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 02:54 PM

Spaw, I fear you're right; seems to be what elections are mostly about these days.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: GUEST,John Bauman
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 03:09 PM

Where is the folk-singer cynicism?!!

I never cease to be amazed that somehow or the other the "folk" sub-culture is now merely a reflection of the mainstream thought. I could see folk subculture tying itself to libertarianism because it historically presaged coming trends--BUT LIBERALISM?!! We ARE a socialist society and our two party system is the PASS AROUND THE TREASURY TO INSURE OUR CONTINUED POWER PARTY, and the SOCIALISM MANAGEMENT PARTY. To think that folk culture is still mired in an obsolete model of hoping that we BECOME socialist to "protect the worker" or whatever the motive may be seems such a waste of the best minds of the culture. If we are honest, I believe we would have to admit that the only other system that has a fighting chance of engendering any public interest is a reversion to monarchy. We have been completely sold over to the belief that government is the sole distributor of all the wants, needs, hopes, and dreams of the populace.

It doesn't even take a TRAINED cynic to see the absurdity of choosing Lieberman to separate gore from clinton ethically. Lieberman's belief system is obviously empty enough to allow him to believe that what Clinton did was evil (Lying to the public and using his position of power and his charges to propagate those lies and undermine our system of information disemination) and yet take no ACTION on that belief.

The true folk spirit doesn't take a side politically. It takes a side ethically and morally. The true folk spirit doesn't write propaganda, it strives for truth about the human condition. That's what make it ART and not propaganda. For example, the reason that Dylan's "Times They Are A Changin'" stands as art is that it works as well as the theme to a Bobby Kennedy civil rights drive as it would have for a Gingerich Contract for America drive.

You guys regularly exhibit wonderful wit, wisdom, caring, and creditable emotion. But free thinking? I'm not sure this is the "FOLK" I knew.

John

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 03:12 PM

"Free thinking" meaning "Thinking like John Bauman"?

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Amergin
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 04:00 PM

"A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush" Only if folks continue thinking that way....

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: DougR
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 05:36 PM

Art, I'm confident you are a nice person, and thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. "You're wrong" is a strong statement, (and obviously I don't agree) but I respect your right to think it.

And Spaw, your're right oral sex isn't an impeachable offence. Our Commander in Chief Lying under oath, however, should be. At leaswt that is my minority opinion. Best, DougR

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: catspaw49
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 06:14 PM

Well Doug, you're right (far right...sorry, bad joke(:<)), but he was lying under oath about oral sex. He wasn't lying about breakins, firebombings, arms for money, or the like. I just can't take the whole thing seriously. But I respect your opinion and lying I suppose is lying. I sure would like to have all the millions and millions back we spent in taxpayer dollars to hang him for lying about getting his hat blown.

Spaw

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 07:17 PM

Before I get to the point of the rather bizarre thing I heard on the radio today I would like to refer to Art Thieme's very cleverly written song. Cynical it may be, but I must differ in the opinion of LBJ. Putting VietNam aside (that discussion can go on forever about his inheritance---and I disagreed with him) his pro active involvement in things dealing with the elderly, the races, and Medicare is a legacy we should appreciate.

I was listening for a while to the local Pacifica station here today---WBAI. Probably stands for We Believe All Inanities. The female host---with a truly irritating voice--gave her opionion of Al Gore's choice Mr. Lieberman---her opinion----racist. It just proved to her that now more people are included as white just to keep the blacks and hispanics out---we now consider Jews in the White category. Talk of bizarre interpretations!!

I would love to see less talk of his religion and more about what he stands for. Let us face it---we always talk of the President's attendance at church services, prayer breakfasts, etc; So, Mr Lieberman's attendance and beliefs are similar. But---bottom line---who cares. What about the old American thought for politicos---what will you do for me---and what have you done for me lately?

As to the letter W. Morality is not his strong suite either. Well, maybe after age 45 and a chance to run for office. Better he forgets bringing it up. Besides---daddy frightens me.

Bill H

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: GUEST,John Bauman
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 08:27 PM

No Lepus,

Just not being a cliche'

John

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: DougR
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 10:16 PM

Spaw: I suppose a case can be made for "selective" or "acceptable" lying. One was successfully made, I suppose, because the President wasn't convicted by the Senate.

If money is the issue (and I agree the amount spent was ridiculous), all of that money could have been saved had the President simply told the truth. Es so? And it is worth remembering also that the Attorney General's appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate the Clintons was not based on sexual charges.

The investigation of the President's behaviour in the Oval Office never could have taken place had the three judge panel, or the Attorney General, not approved of it.

I know you were kidding about the "far right," I don't consider myself in that category at all, though many here on the Mudcat do, I'm sure. I am pro choice, for example. I know of no far righter in either party that shares my opinion on that.

I just regret that the whole question of abortion has become a political one. Surely there are enough issues that separate the two parties without abortion becoming the pivotal one. Many feel, I guess, that there is not.

I apologize for the Thread creep, but did want to reply to your message, Spaw, and thought others might want to comment on mine.

DougR

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: DougR
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 10:19 PM

Sorry, I'm listening to Forrest Sawyer interview Ralph Nader as I write this and couldn't resist commenting; Nader refers to Senator Lieberman as a Republicat. I thought that was a bit funny.

DougR

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: catspaw49
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 10:54 PM

Funny Doug...I was watching too and had the same thought.

No, I respect your opinions Doug because you do think things through and although we may disagree, at least you're not flying blindly along...nor am I.

And as far as agreement goes........Yeah, I always wondered how things would have gone if Clinton had just come forward with the whole thing when it first came up. He has a strange charisma and the general public is prone to forgive even the worst of the worst at times (no offense, but take a look at Ollie) and admitting the whole thing would have defused the situation. The Starr group didn't find diddly squat that amounted to a damn anyway and the whole lying thing just "enhanced" the process.

CLINTON: "Okay, I had an affair and got a BJ from an intern. Hilary will probably divorce me and that's MY problem. Now what else have you got?"
STARR: "Well, uh.........you might have had some possible insider knowledge in your investments, but we can't prove too much.....We just know you did......uh, we think.....probably........
CLINTON: "Bugger off"

Spaw

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: BK
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 11:14 PM

Cynical? How can I be anything else?? & yes, the president is important in the peversion - or maybe, if we're lucky, enhancement - of the supreme court but I agree that the congress is also important, & cannot find ant reason not to believe that w/the current campaign finance non-system, there is any overweaning theme except utter & absolute corruption. They gotta do it to survice, so it corrupts them. Putrid, rotten to the core..

Do any of you read sci-fi? Get the Jan/2000 issue of Analog (science fiction AND science fact) & read abt how un-elected (but VERY political) officials & congress secretly dismembered part of (and are still dismembering parts of) the constitutional device of the U.S.Patent office & effectivly sold the lot of us down the river. The article is called "Patent Wars" by John D. Trudel. pp 52-61. It has references, URL's.. the whole bit. These efforts will ensure some of us who live long enough - & succeeding genewrations (the common folks, mind you, not the fat cats) will live in a 3rd world nation w/incredibly few, & low-paying jobs.

Cheers, BK

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: ol'troll
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 11:28 PM

Doug. You are not alone.

troll

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Harold W
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 11:40 PM

Speaking of Vice Presidential candidates, the 12th Admendemnt of the Constitution makes a provision that the President and Vice President cannot be from the same state. It seems to me that Dick Cheney (sp?) is flaunting that admendment by changing his voter registration from Texas to Wyoming. Any thoughts on this?

Harold W

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: Sandy Paton
Date: 09 Aug 00 - 11:58 PM

Sexual hanky-panky matters very little to me. Clarence Thomas was about as ill-prepared and poorly qualified for a place on the court as George W. is for the presidency.

If you don't care for the candidates offered by the parties that have a chance of actually winning a national election, where were you during the primaries? If you're an unaffiliated voter (most of whom proudly declare they are "independent"), then you have no right to complain. Get in there and work to nominate a candidate you can enthusiastically support.

Sandy

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: DougR
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 12:08 AM

Yep, Harold W., he was born (I think) and raised (I know) in Wyoming. He represented that state in the U. S. Congress for many years prior to joining the Bush administration in a cabinet position. No conspiracy to be found there, I'm afraid. Also, if he didn't own property or have a residence of some sort in Wyoming, he couldn't have done it. Of course we know, as in the case of Hillery, one can always buy property in a state we have never resided in, in order to establish residence and fulfill the requirements for running for national office.

Spaw: as is the case, in my opinion, in most instances; yes, you're right. Had Clinton fessed up, it would have been over in a couple of weeks.

And Troll, if I'm not alone, why don't you let your presense be known. I could use the help (not that it actually makes any difference). Are we taling a "closet" Republican here? :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: JamesJim
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 12:09 AM

Give it up, Doug. I am totally in agreement with you, but you may as well be talking to your computer. I'm sure that many of the good folks on the left feel the same. We will not convince each other by stating our suspicions, doubts and supposed facts. Instead, why not spend our time on writing a clever folk song like Art Thieme. A dose of humour/levity is always appreciated. I agree that "Gore and Lieberman" sounds like the name of a great law firm, or perhaps they could be accountants. And surely we can do something with the initials of the Republican candidates = BC. (Of course, GL could stand for "Good Liberals," or if you chose to take the name of the Lord in vain,.......) Oh well, I know there are so many good things we could do with this stuff - except take it so seriously. I'm sure I've mellowed in my old age, but I've seen too much of this stuff in my lifetime. Jim

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: catspaw49
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 12:21 AM

Sandy, that is exactly the point regarding Thomas. The reality was that the opposition to him was on the wrong issues. Bork was shot down on issues of importance. Thomas made the court because the opposition was based on what DIDN'T matter. Just plain dumb.

We seem to be so focused on everyone's personal lives that the actual record regarding public service and accomplishments are overlooked. Joe Biden was a decent possible choice a few years ago, but because he plagiarized something in college, he went down the tubes. No one cheated in college or high school huh?

My fear has become that we will NEVER again get the best possible people. Who can stand up to that scrutiny? But if we only have the people we have, then at least let's attack them on things that matter and not "Coke cans and Cigars." You never really win that way. For all of those folks who were overjoyed they "nailed" Clinton.....did you really?

Spaw

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: DougR
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 12:24 AM

Well, JamesJim, I suppose you may be right. Those of us that share views other than our Liberal friends perhaps should just pack up our tents and steal away into the night. It's a lost cause, right?

Tell you why I disagree. There are folks here at the Mudcat that feel so strongly about the need to elect Ralph Nader that they are willing to cast their vote for him.

Common sense and ALL the polls would tell you that they are wasting their vote.

I disagree, and I mean that wholeheartedly. I admire those people, because they are voting for what they think would be the best thing for their country (and that is no BS!). I don't agree with them, but they have the courage of their convictions, and they are willing to lay one of our most valued rights on the line. The right to vote.

I am too. It's that simple. DougR

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: JamesJim
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 12:31 AM

Of course you are right, Doug. EVERYONE should vote, no matter who and why we decide to vote for a particular party/person. We live in a great country and have a great privilige. But my friend, there is humour to be found in everything and it's a good thing to look for as we make our way through life. Why not? My only true point! Jim

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: GUEST,Mickey191
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 12:36 AM

Gore and Lieberman - S - I have the same antipathy for Bush, that I had for R.M.Nixon.He has the most disingenuous smile I've ever seen.Did he ever sell used cars? Let's hope he'll be doing that soon.

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: tradsteve
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 01:08 AM

I wasn't going to vote for Gore before, but now that Lieberman is on the ticket I will. He seems like a good honest, straight forward guy, which almost cancels gore's slimeyness out. But anything to stop Bush. "20 gallons of dumb in a 10 gallon hat."

Subject: RE: Gore and Lieberman
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Aug 00 - 01:09 AM

Dick Cheney has used Wyoming most blatantly and Wyomingites, in general are just idiotic or blind enough to be proud of him.

He grew up here(I haven't found anything which says he was born here), his parents remained here, BUT he left as soon as he came of age and never returned for any length of time. For a long time he worked for Gerald Ford, when he was a congressman from Michigan; then served Ford when he was president.

Cheney came back to Wyoming long enough to get elected to Congress, then went on to be secretary of defense, then moved directly to Texas. A lot of oilmen and livestock companies own land in Wyoming and live elsewhere...they are carpetbaggers and deserve nothing but contempt, IMO, for the way they, and their in-state cronies, including the governor, have continued to turn Wyoming into a Third World state, not only economically, but environmentally and socially, also.

kat