 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Bush/Gore Round 1
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: rabbitrunning Date: 04 Oct 00 - 10:31 AM Actually, Nader was in the building. A UMass kid gave him his ticket. Bush's campaign did such a good job of lowering everyone's expectations for Bush's performance that people are saying he did well. Pfooey. He waited all night to use his cheap shots. Mediscare? Fer cryin' out loud. Although he was right about the "fuzzy numbers" bit... since at that point, Gore was talking about Bush's numbers... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Peg Date: 04 Oct 00 - 12:34 PM rabbit; I saw on th enews that, although he got a ticket, Nader was NOT allowed into the building... troll, you wrote: If people voted intelligently, theyed vote Libertarian. --can't say I agree with everything Libertarians want and so far NONE of these candidates have impressed me, which is why I now reguister as independent... Peg, Naders first claim to fame was "Unsafe At Any Speed" which was aimed primarily at the Corvair. He claimed that poor engineering was the cause of roll-over accidents. GM-like fools- tried a smear campaign that backfired which added creadence to his allegations about the Corvair. But he was wrong. Later tests showed that improper tire inflation was the culprit. But Nader was off and running and after that, anything he said took on mystical status. If he said it, it must be so and anyone who argued was a tool of the dispoilers etc. You get the idea. --I don't think you are aware of the fact that if it were not for Ralph Nader, cars would not be required to have seat belts or air bags. If it were not for Ralph Nader, there would be no government inspection of meat or poultry. There would be no radiation guards on TV sets. There would be no Environmental Protection Agency. There would be no Freedom of Information Act. Yes, maybe someone would have called for such things eventually. Nader did it first. You get the idea. I said all that earlier but I don't think you were listening :)
I read a profile on Nader on the net (ABC NEWS) a few weeks back and it was less than flattering. --why? I just love all these vague criticisms about the man. Can you back this up with examples? I mean, what the hell is "less than flattering" supposed to mean? I read, too, and I have read things about Gore and Bush that made my head swim... Having never met the man, I am in no position to judge him from first-hand experience but from what I've read, i'd say demogogue fits. --yeah, well, you gotta vote with your conscience, and I will vote with mine. Bush is a monster, Gore is liar, and I want someone who will talk some truth for a change. Someone who doesn't kowtow to corporate interests. You surely cannot say that about Bore and Gush... peg
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: GUEST,Luther Date: 04 Oct 00 - 12:47 PM No, actually Nader was not in the building. He got to the front door, with the ticket the kid gave him, where he was stopped by the cops and debate commission honcho John Bezeris, who said "It's already been decided that whether or not you have a ticket you are not welcome in the debate" But turning to the serious issues ... I thought Bush had _much_ better hair and makeup. Gore was funnier, though -- it wasn't just a "lock-box", wasn't it "an iron-clad lock-box"? Or whatever, the material was specified, accompanied by a special hand gesture. What a great bit, I laughed til I thought my sides would ache! The "fuzzy math" thing was just tired, those guys really miss Lee Atwater. ah, the splendor that is our American Democracy!
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Oct 00 - 12:59 PM "Since when is "Likeable" an important part of being president" - no kendall, I wasn't suggesting that it is.
I was just gasping in astonishment at the evident fact that there appear to be lots of people who do see this bloke as "likeable". I can imagine how someone might agree with his politics, and want to see him become president - but seeing him as likeable, on the evidence of that performance, no I don't get it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Lonesome EJ Date: 04 Oct 00 - 01:04 PM You know Peg,I just don't see Bush as some evil guy,or Gore as some great liar.I think they're both pretty decent individuals,and would like to judge them on their beliefs and abilities.In my opinion,it's way too late for Nader to have any impact on the election,so he's out of the picture. I think,for me, it boils down to these decisions- I like the concept of Campaign Reform,if it can be reasonably applied without being gouged with loop holes.I think Gore is genuine on this,and I think the need for candidates to raise more and more money is going to be catastrophic for government.We should have more public forum and debates,less media manipulation and 60 second spots.I also think Gore has a much better grasp of the crisis confronting the environment than Bush.And I think he owes less of a debt to the multinational drug,energy and chemical corporations. I think George's pledge to cut taxes and refund them rather than haave the Government decide how they should be used is appealing.When a bill was introduced in Congress to lower the tax burden on small businesses,Clinton denounced it as "favoring the wealthy".I work 50 hours a week,and make less than I did working for a Corporation, and our household income is under 50,000 per year.When the Democrats sneer at reducing my tax penalties and call me rich,they come close to losing the vote of a life-long Democrat. I also like the personal responsibility emphasis of the Republican Party. But it really comes down to this: which individual has the management skills,the broad view and vision,the common sense,the persuasive power,and the decisiveness to make the best President? Right now,it looks like Gore.That could change. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Peg Date: 04 Oct 00 - 01:21 PM EJ; If Gore were elected I could live with it. I want to do better, though, if at all possible. I am sick and tired of political complacency. I can't not see the big picture, it is the Libra in me, forgive me!!! :) My own wallet, my own backyard, they are the most important thing to me. If Bush gets elected, I will seriously consider emigrating to the UK or Canada. He is a death-mongering Southern Bapist big-oil millionaire who has publically stated he does not think Wicca, a religion with at least a million participants in the US at least count, is even a religion; Cheney is a death-mongering, war-mongering big-oil millionaire who voted against the Head Start program... Have you seen recent stats on the current state of social programs in Texas??? Neither of them supports a woman's right to choose what she may do with her own body. Both of them are in the hip pocket of big money. Gore lies are nothing to Bush's evil, I will say that much. Cheney is an even bigger monster than that; I am in denial about him at the moment... peg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Jim the Bart Date: 04 Oct 00 - 01:47 PM Peg - Gore is pro-choice. Great job summing it all up LEJ. What bothers me about the "personal responsibility" stance of the republicans is that they don't apply their rhetoric to corporate responsibility. There is very little talk about the millions of dollars our government spends cleaning up after big business. I believe it is the personal responsibility of the people who have built their fortunes while fouling the air, water and soil to clean up after themselves. And now there are people who want another pipeline through public land. And while you're right to be angry at being lumped in withe the rich by Clinton, there is no reason to believe that the Republicans will get around to helping a business of your size. After all, eight years of "the great communicator" and another four of George Dubya's daddy didn't give much relief to the family farmer. But it sure did a lot to advance the large corporate farms, ddn't it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Wavestar Date: 04 Oct 00 - 03:16 PM In many ways, I'm so glad I'm not in the country right now, and that I'm missing most of this idiocy and demonstration of American bullshit. However, unlike Mbo, I do care, very much. (And Mbo, I think you should, too. It's your country - if you and I don't care, in thirty years, who is going to?) I didn't get to see the debate, but I've been paying attention to some of the other wrangling, etc, and have several thoughts. Peg, I certainly agree that the two party system needs to be broken up, I doubt I'll vote for Nader. I don't know nearly as much about him as you seem to, but for one thing, I don't honestly believe that none of those things would have happened without him. There's a huge group of people and several organisations behind that movement, of which he is an excellent and very effective figurehead. But beyond that, as LEJ said, it may be too late for him to have an effect on this election. The more salient point regarding Nader, however, is that it's been rightly pointed out that those who vote for Nader are not those who would vote for Bush otherwise. Now, I, like you, could live with Gore as President. Wooden or not, he seems qualified and capable. Remember, some of our most famous and effective Presidents weren't exactly the soul of society and talkativeness, Calvin Coolidge, for example. This is not to say that I don't have serious problems with Gore. I object to his intentions to strengthen FBI and law-enforcement powers to invade my privacy, and the bills he's supported which I feel are in conflict with my right to private communication. I am slightly afraid to think that those he appoints to the Supreme Court will tend to follow his thinking on these matters. On the other hand, it could be Bush. In which case, I think I'll just extend my studies in the UK another few years, and weep for the ignominious fate of my country. I don't want to see that - I really don't, for many reasons, including the ones Peg mentioned. While Gore's appointee's might support wire-tapping, Bush's would support illegalising abortion, and the death penalty, (which is being handled OH so well in Texas, sorry Aine...) I honestly don't think Nader's going to have enough effect that it's worth making the sacrifice of possibly having Bush as President. I see the big picture, and I'll work towards it, but I think that price is too high to pay. Still, I haven't voted yet, you might convince me. I'll vote because it's my duty, I'll vote because there's no other way to change anything. But I don't have to like my choices, and I don't. -Jessica |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Ebbie Date: 04 Oct 00 - 03:35 PM Let me emphasize Bartholomew's statement: Gore is strongly pro-choice. He made it very clear last night. And see, I don't get it- if Gore is as set on not losing votes as some imply, why did he make his position on it so clear last night? You know that he lost some votes in saying it. Bush, on the other hand, tried to have it both ways. IMO. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Mbo Date: 04 Oct 00 - 04:03 PM Jess, I just don't care. Now, if John McCain had been the Republican candidate, I would be the first one in line on electrion day. But since he's not, I stopped caring. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Wavestar Date: 04 Oct 00 - 04:13 PM I don't understand, Mbo. I know it's frustrating and disheartening, but this isn't the sort of thing we can just give up on. As Kendall quoted earlier in this thread, "You must deal with things as they are..not as you wish they were." John McCain would have been better, but since he's not there, there are other choices to make, and you can bet that he would want you making them. -J |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: mousethief Date: 04 Oct 00 - 04:22 PM Ebbie - I don't think there's anybody left who doesn't know that Gore is pro-choice and Bush is pro-life. Don'tcha think?
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Mbo Date: 04 Oct 00 - 04:23 PM Can I make up someone's name on the ballot thingy? Also since I'll be here, 85 miles away from where I'm supposed to vote, I'd have to do absentee. A lot of trouble. BTW did you know Jim Lehrer hasn't voted since 1964? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: kendall Date: 04 Oct 00 - 06:08 PM I contributed to McCains campaign. He lost. I got over it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 04 Oct 00 - 06:45 PM Peg, I hear your words with care Such minds as yours are double dare Keep it up, girl, make 'em think I think you're splendid, here's a wink ;>) They may pretend to sluff you off 'cause comfort zones bequeath their scoff This 'hand me down' we call the world Is ours to care for, their's; unfurled Bush a nightmare, bad words fed Gore a puppet, corporate led The media insists on dead heat running While Nader's press prefers him bumming Could the public all at once Turn their backs to Gore'n Dunce? Maybe is my answer; often We certainly would our hardships soften ttr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: GUEST,annabelle Date: 04 Oct 00 - 06:47 PM thats great Mbo-stop caring, because you didnt get your way--really gonna do alot of good. it is slear that you are all a bunch of left wing pinko-commie-freaks (one of my dad's favorite expressions)but face it, gw is definitly the BEST out of the 2. dont waste your time on nader, or you'll be taking precious votes away from your second and definite choice. if your prefer gore's snake-ish rhetoric to bush's good ole boy accent, then go for him, just dont bitch a bout the idiot you put in the white house. do you think if nader did win, they would re name it the GREEN HOUSE? anna |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Bill D Date: 04 Oct 00 - 06:55 PM I have been watching Gore for 10-12 years....I have actually seen much to like. I 'think' he will be a better president than he is a politician and campaigner. He DID write that book on the environment himself... and he says many of the right things...and he would appoint more tolerable Supreme court justices than Bush...... What we NEED is a totally new selection process, shorter campaigns and finance reform....and a REAL way for 3rd parties to work |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Oct 00 - 07:09 PM Bush is "pro-life"? What a strange use of the term. If you're "pro-life" that should mean you're against the death penalty, you're against killing people in wars, and you're against a system that denies people medical help they need to stay alive. And you're against economic and social policies that put pressure on women to have abortions, within or without the law. And a few other things as well.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Ebbie Date: 04 Oct 00 - 07:11 PM Dear anna- if you're grown up, you can make up your own mind. My pa was fairly right-wing republican- it didn't mean that I have to be. Mbo, until I retired I worked at the Division of Elections. Trust me, it isn't difficult to vote absentee. Up until 5 o'clock the day before the election you can request an absentee ballot by fax, up until 8 o'clock of Election Day you can walk into any elections office and vote an absentee 'questioned' ballot (Which simply means that your votes will not count for the candidates of the district you are in, but your presidential preference will be valid)- no excuses. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Wavestar Date: 04 Oct 00 - 07:21 PM Mbo, you can vote for whoever you like including Mickey Mouse, as long as you vote. And I'm *three thousand* miles away from where I'm supposed to vote, but as long as they send me that ballot, you know my vote will be in. Whether of not Annabelle likes it :) -Jessica the 'pinko' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: rube1 Date: 04 Oct 00 - 07:23 PM Maybe I'm the only one who felt insulted by Gore's patronizing, condescending, spoonfeeding misinformation to kindegarteners attitude, with his bag of ready made statistics and his pandering little stories about Kayla who needs a desk, and that poor woman who drove to Washington in her Winnebago with her poodle and the couple who could afford to go to Canada to fill their prescriptions but couldn't afford them in the U.S. They used to ask about Nixon, "Would you buy a used car from this man?" From Gore, it's a statistical browbeating, not a car, but you're still expected to buy it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: DougR Date: 04 Oct 00 - 07:30 PM No, rubel, you are NOT alone. Some people seem to thrive on this type of "talking down to though." DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Oct 00 - 07:48 PM Yeah, but they all do that these days, produce some named individual out of the blue to put flesh on some statistic or whatever. Someone must have told them it works. It probably does work for a bit too, till people start recognising what's happening and getting sick of it.
It's a bit like turning up at people's bedside after a disaster, or the incident Bush quoted of him hugging some unoffending bloke who'd alrady got quite enough to worry about with being flooded out.
When Maggie Thatcher was still hanging over us here, like some evil miasma, a lot of people genuinely people used to carry cards like kidney donor cards saying that in the event of an accident they did not want to have her visit them in hospital. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Mbo Date: 04 Oct 00 - 07:49 PM I say it's revolution time! The barricades go up in a little over a month! Who is with me? There are ways that a people can fight--we will overcome their power! Come my friends, back to your positions. Night is falling fast... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 04 Oct 00 - 08:19 PM I'm with you 100 per cent Bill D. And Ebbie reminds me of the sound advice I used to get from my wife's aunt in Belfast: vote early, vote often... As for tax "penalities" Lonesome - in what sense are you penalised? I believe the tax burden is lower in the US than anywhere (only Spain in the civilised world comes close). As a result of which, Americans screw up this planet with no constraint and like there's no tomorrow. But then we've had this debate before *BG* Just got to say that I thought Blair was dim enough. But Dubya? Wow! Come back Reagan, wherever your brain is - all is forgiven.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Jim the Bart Date: 04 Oct 00 - 08:37 PM If you like the idea of revolution (and the joys of idealists who are sudeenly thrust into positions of power), get your hands on a copy of the play Marat/Sade (The persecution and assassination of John/Paul Marat as performed by the inmates of the asylum at Charenton under the direction of the Marquis de Sade). I'm sure it must be on video. I was lucky enough to play a small part in it when I went to college in 1968. The ironies were exquisite. Here my friends and I were out on "the barricades", while I also participated in a play about re-enacting the excesses of the French Revolution as performed by lunatics. "And the revolution came and went and unrest was replaced by discontent". Mbo- I know you were half-kidding, but revolution is nothing to kid about. Innocent people get hurt and unless you do it right, the strong only get stronger. Peg - It's a lot less romantic and, in a lot of ways less viscerally satisfying, but you have to DO WHAT YOU CAN, WHERE YOU ARE, WITH WHAT YOU HAVE. If, in your mind, it means supporting a figure like Nader, do so. But don't get carried away with the romance of the crusade or the mystique of the crusader. Nader is nowhere near what you would like to believe he is. How do I know? Because he's just a man. And the system would chew him up and spit him out, even if he could get in the door - which he can't. It is far better to support a "child of the bureaucracy" like Al Gore, who has been raised on the concept of PUBLIC SERVICE since he was a mere tad. Check out his record. It's hard to do, because his handlers have done everything to prevent it, but try to look at him as a man, not as a packaged candidate. His virtues far outweigh his vices. He will govern without embarassing us like Mr. Clinton. Look at your real choice here. And then decide if your idealism is worth turning the keys of the country over to a pirate like Bush and his ilk. I don't mean to offend. But this is important. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: katlaughing Date: 04 Oct 00 - 09:04 PM McGrath, I thought Bush generally looked like a scruffy deer cuaght in the headlights and sounded worse. He had no substance and not enough material to speak of. One radio commentator on NPR this morning said he has been traveling with Bush, been with him everyday of the campaign. He said all he heard last night was the 10 minutes worth of stump speech he's already heard many times before. IMO, he seemed like a little boy/puppet unable to hold his own, at a loss for anything of substance to debate with. Oh, and as for "fuzzy numbers?" I would guess ole Dumbya knows all about those from his big brother and Silverado, which we, the taxpayers, wound up paying for; remember the savings and loan scandel and subsequent bailout? Why in the hell would we continue to nominate, let alone elect, people who've pulled that kind of crap in the past? I did get irritated with Gore when he sighed heavily. I think he has some brilliance which is not showing through because of the handlers he should fire, as Bart said. I have a friend, a politician, whose brother is the CEO of one of the big phone companies. He is a staunch Republican and always taunted her about being a Dem. She got an email from him this summer. He'd had to go to some big shindig and was seated next to Gore. The upshot of that evening was, he was emailing all of his family to tell them what a brilliant and personable man he found Gore to be AND that he, my friend's brother, had agreed to raise $20,000 for Gore's campaign. He was also saying that he wished everyone could get to know Gore in a one on one exchange because it could so totally change their minds about him. Peg, you just said about all that I would about the issues and the people running, except I don't know why you call Gore a liar. It doesn't matter. I am glad you brought up the point about Wicca and Bush. Also, the matter of a woman's right to her own body; that right there is one of THE most important issues as far as I am concerned. Overall, I was pissed that 3rd party candidates, esp. Nadar, were not a part of the debate and I thought they both came off sounding pretty much like canned sound bites. People are getting fed up with the "iron-clad lockbox" on the country's elections and it is time for a revolution, I hope it can be peaceful. BTW, my friend, another one, says the debates should be put back into the hands of the League of Women Voters, as they are here. Letting the two big parties set them up and dictate their format invites abuse and is a sure way to keep their hold on us, shutting out the others. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: rabbitrunning Date: 04 Oct 00 - 09:22 PM Well, the eleven o'clock news show I was watching in Boston missed the "Nader not let in the building" news, but they sure got a lot of burbling idiots from the bars to comment on either the game or the debate. George W. lost any chance of getting my vote when the news broke through about that entire year of missed National Guard drills years ago. I was in the Air National Guard for seventeen years, and if Bush could produce one pay stub from that year, then I might believe that he actually reported for duty. Talk about a character flaw! I'll take a politician who's caught breaking a technical rule to raise money (in a system where money is vitally necessary to any campaign) over a guy who just couldn't be bothered to show up for duty just because he couldn't play with the fun toys. And somehow I just can't see the country benefiting from having a president who can't handle detailed numbers... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Troll Date: 04 Oct 00 - 09:58 PM We had Government inspection of meat long before Nader.I'd suggest "The Jungle", a book about the meat-packing industry which was written around the turn of the century (1900). If the man spends every dime on good causes, why did the article place his personal worth at two million dollars and the value of the apartment where he lives at a hundred thousand in 1970 dollars. according to the article, former staffers claim that he has been known to fire anyone who disagrees with one of his positions. Theres plenty more but don't take my word for it. Look it up for yourself. If he's your man, you should know as much as possible about him from as many sources as possible. Personally, I don't think he's up to the job. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: JamesJim Date: 04 Oct 00 - 11:00 PM Where did Gore get his reputation as a good debater? Surely it wasn't from the debate with the other Texan, little Ross. To me he appeared like a little kid who huffed and puffed and insisted on the last word - he's the kind of guy who would remind the teacher that she hadn't assigned any homework to the class (not mine - actually came from someone on CNN). And I know it will make no difference to those who are for him, but --- do you really think you can believe this guy? Mr. Fabrication himself? He'll say anything to get elected. What I'm most sorry about is that this was the smallest audience to ever watch a debate. And the prediction is that it will decrease over the next 3 debates. I for one would love to see Nader and Buchanan added to the mix. At least there would be a substantive discussion. Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: DougR Date: 04 Oct 00 - 11:31 PM Oh, and kat, you had not heard Gore's message before? Where you been, baby? :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: katlaughing Date: 04 Oct 00 - 11:53 PM Hey DougeRdarlin', I DID say, "they both came off sounding pretty much like canned sound bites!"**BG** stillluvyaanywaykat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Thomas the Rhymer Date: 05 Oct 00 - 04:03 AM I'll say it nice, and only here They fooled us twice, from ear to ear... *BG* The media is, our shining light For coverage's not quite too bright Like a sports game, announcers lean They love their fame, so it will glean They love parades, and keep us marching We play charades, with no researching Spooning feeders fabricate Facts and figures, DON'T RELATE! The score, the action; eve'ning news For our reaction...? 'SAME OLD' blues.... )>; *BF* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: kendall Date: 05 Oct 00 - 08:28 AM Left wing pinkos eh? Is this Archie Bunker calling himself annabelle? One question about Bush. He claims to be pro-life (anti-choice) so, how the hell can he sign over 100 death warrants? By the way, Archie, I used to be a yellow dog republican before I wised up to what they are doing to us. I hear a lot about what Nader gave us, but, here is some of what the democrats have given us over the years. 1 the 40 hour work week 2 social security 3 medicare 4 womens right to vote. 4 judges that honor Roe v Wade When Dan Quale was asked what he thought of Roe v Wade, he thought that was the decision George Washington had to make at the crossing of the Delaware river! (a little humor) !! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: kendall Date: 05 Oct 00 - 08:30 AM George w Bush is another Dan Quayle. He will be good for the comedians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Peg Date: 05 Oct 00 - 01:17 PM Thomas: thanks for the rhymes! Keep 'em coming. kat: I call Gore a liar because he admitted smoking pot a few times in Vietnam, while a Harvard chum of his claims they smoked together literally HUNDREDS of times. I could care if he is still a pothead, but to have the views he has on the death penalty and the so-called war on drugs, I think this is rather hypocritical of him. And as far as I can tell he is not pro-hemp (because this is such a politically sensitive issue, supposedly because of the non-existent marijuana connection, but actually because the big textile corporations like DuPont and Monsanto wan't let it happen and Gore is a slave to the corporate machine) and that does not make him a very environmentally-proactive candidate in my opinion... Bartholomew, thank you for your comments and I do agree this is important. I know it may seem romantic of me to want Nader no matter what the consequences. I know he is far from perfect and a human being like all of us. I just think the country needs change. Last time people felt this way and wanted to shake up the system, their only third-party choice was a megalomaniacal millionaire moron from Texas...this time around, we have a selfless crusader who knows a whole lot about how to get corporate interests to do the right thing, no matter how long it takes...Gee, I sure would love to see Americans freed from the yoke of commercialism and greed and military taxation long enough to realize their creative, intellectual and social potential. When's the last time any of you overheard a scintillating political conversation outside the MudCat or your own musician friends? People are too busy chasing stocks and dropping kids off in daycare so they can rush to their jobs and yak about the latest episode of "Survivor" by the water cooler... troll: you wrote: "We had Government inspection of meat long before Nader.I'd suggest "The Jungle", a book about the meat-packing industry which was written around the turn of the century (1900)." --That was a hundred years ago. This industry is MUCH larger now and the agribusinesses of today are a whole different world from the family-farm based meat operations of Victorian times...what you seem to be ignoring is that the USDA standards system WAS in fact a result of Nader's work, and those inspection and hygiene standards are a direct result of research by his watchdog organization. "If the man spends every dime on good causes, why did the article place his personal worth at two million dollars and the value of the apartment where he lives at a hundred thousand in 1970 dollars." --first, I am still waiting for you to cite "the article"; where did it appear and when and who wrote it? Mr. Nader does not own a car and has lived in the same Washington DC boarding house since the 1970s. His "personal worth" is still money he chooses to spend on charitable causes...he makes a fair amount from lawsuits and he funnels it all back into his consumer advocacy groups. Two million? Gore and Bush have both spent over ten times that much on their campaigns to date... "according to the article, former staffers claim that he has been known to fire anyone who disagrees with one of his positions." --I think most politicians tend to do this sort of thing, don't they? And I would wish them to do so, if it were important to me to have people who shared my vision working with me. "Theres plenty more but don't take my word for it." --okay, I won't. I'd like to know what article you are citing, though... "Look it up for yourself. If he's your man, you should know as much as possible about him from as many sources as possible." --I have looked into it thoroughly. I think he is a decent human being who has done an amazing amount for the citizens of this nation... "Personally, I don't think he's up to the job." --thanks so much for sharing. May the best man win. You don't say who you will vote for, or even if you will vote. Mbo: You can't have a revolution if you aren't even willing to utilize the one tool of democracy guaranteed to us. Your apathy is understandable, but if you don't vote, you won't really have any right to complain later on. It is precisely this sort of apathy that has brought our country to its knees, politically-speaking. 55% of the American people do not vote on a habitual basis. That is a majority! People in places like Afghanistan and Indonesia and Yugoslavia are dying in the streets for the right to have a voice or some semblance of democracy... oh, and I wanted to correct a goof from an earlier post of mine: "My own wallet, my own backyard, they are the most important thing to me." What I meant to say was...they are NOT the most important thing to me!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: katlaughing Date: 05 Oct 00 - 01:44 PM Thanks, Peg, I didn't know that about Gore. I agree with you about the hemp thing. It's the same type of situation which made sure the big oil companies stayed in business instead of cleaner, renewable technologies being made availble a long time ago. I also greatly appreciate your comments and information about Nadar. I have become convinced to vote for him, even though, at the very last minute someone stole the sheets of signatures which would have allowed him to be on the ballot here in Wyoming. I plan to write him in. Something has to wake up the politicians and make them realise people are serious about wanting real change. Thanks, kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Mrrzy Date: 05 Oct 00 - 03:54 PM FFTKAT: If Columbus' sails had not been made of hemp he would never have made it to the new world. It isn't lying to say you smoked pot a few times in vietman even if you did smoke it hundreds of times in the US. Partial truths aren't lies. And it is a good trait to be able to use truths to lead people, inescapably, to incorrect conclusions, and that is exactly what I'd like in a president. It is also a useful trait to be a hypocrite - it's called Manners, half the time. Not speaking the truth can be a good thing. I'm REALLY looking forward to the debates in different styles. So far, the person who looked best was the moderator. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: katlaughing Date: 05 Oct 00 - 04:18 PM My checkbook cover is made of hemp, but I swear I never inhaled!**BG** |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 05 Oct 00 - 04:27 PM "If Columbus' sails had not been made of hemp he would never have made it to the new world." That's the first time I've ever heard anyone come up with a half-way valid argument against hemp...
Are there any politicians who tell the whole truth? Are there any people who do?
I was reading somewhere a piece about how the ability to tell a lie was one of the defining characteristics of being a human being.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Peg Date: 05 Oct 00 - 05:27 PM I am not so disingenuous to think politicians never lie, or that humans are not occasionally better off for the ability to lie... But for Gore to fervently declare to be on the right side of things like the environment, etc. and then not own his own behavior (when he is simultaneously supporting structures that keep non-violent drug offenders in prison, including those caught with marijuana) is hypocrisy of the highest order. And to not be in favor of hemp production and still claim to be environmentally savvy??? This makes no sense...and is also hypocritical. This is why the Clinton sex scandal got so out of hand. He couldn't just say "screw youse all, it's none of your business." He chose to try and take the high road, and it made him look bad. I have no problem with a president who has a sex drive (or who smokes pot). It's lying and then punishing others for the same behavior that gets to me...
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: GUEST,Nancy King Date: 05 Oct 00 - 06:53 PM It amazes me that Dubya seems to have gotten so much credit simply for not taking a major pratfall. The thing is, he's made so many gaffes in other venues that we can count on many more--and if he gets elected, some of them are bound to embarrass the country. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes, but this guy seems really prone to them. I just don't think he's got the knowledge or the brain power to do The Job. I think we need a president who is able to think and speak on his feet. It will be interesting to see how the "town meeting" style debate goes. I don't love Gore, but when I look at the issues--gun control, abortion rights, the environment, fiscal policy, etc.--there's no doubt in my mind who I have to vote for. And wouldn't it be nice to be able to vote FOR somebody terrific instead of voting AGAINST somebody awful? Cheers --Nancy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: kendall Date: 05 Oct 00 - 07:20 PM And what about dubbyas booze and drug use? anyone? He wont talk about it. Maybe he learned that from Willy. Look, I dont care if Nader can walk on water, the fact is HE CAN NOT WIN!! most of the votes he gets will be ones that would have gone to Gore. When you vote for Nader, and Dubbya is elected just remember, you helped put him there. And, if you are a woman, when you lose your right to choose, there will be small comfort in saying "Dont blame me, I voted for Nader." I am an idealist too, but, I am also a realist. I am not voting for Gore, I'm voting AGAINST Dubbya. Given a real choice, I too would like to see Nader upset the corporate apple cart, but, IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN !! Get real folks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: DougR Date: 05 Oct 00 - 08:21 PM Aw, I don't know, Kendall. I kind of feel there is a groundswell for Nader. A lot of people might be fooled come election day. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: DougR Date: 05 Oct 00 - 08:28 PM Oh, and Kendall ...what president signed the bill giving women the vote? Which political party was in power when women won the vote? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: Lonesome EJ Date: 05 Oct 00 - 11:10 PM Nice Doug."Groundswell for Nader".Very sly...:>} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: DougR Date: 05 Oct 00 - 11:57 PM Just what I've heard, Lonesome EJ. Felt I should report it. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: katlaughing Date: 06 Oct 00 - 12:35 AM Kendall, at least in Wyoming it will not make a bit of difference one way or the other if I write Nader's name in; all of the measly electoral votes will go to the Grand Oil Party anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush/Gore Round 1 From: DougR Date: 06 Oct 00 - 01:40 AM Well, kat my love, just encourage others that share your opinion to vote for Nader! The game ain't over 'till it's over! DougR |
|
Subject: Vote for Lieberman/Cheney From: Joe Offer Date: 06 Oct 00 - 03:27 AM The consensus at Bible study this evening was that we liked both Lieberman and Cheney. They both seem like decent, reasonable people who want to serve the needs of our country. Maybe we should give up on Gore and Bush, and vote for Lieberman and Cheney. -Joe Offer- |