BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)

Subject: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:08 PM

Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)



Bobert: 23 Aug 10:09 PM:    "Maybe what America needs is another 4 years of Bush".

That reminds me of this:

You're walking down a road and you see a bucket brigade trying to put out a fire. We see you and ask you if you would pick up a bucket and join us in putting out the fire.
"Oh, no" you reply, "let that building burn down. We'll build a much better one". But you forget there are people in the building.





Anybody who thinks there are no differences between Bush and Kerry has his or head buried deep in the sand:

1) Who stands for pre-emptive unilateral war as a foreign policy-- (charitably described as the drunken cowboy school of international relations),-- despite the wretched precedent it sets for the world?. Bush. Not Kerry.


2) Who is pushing for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge? Bush. Not Kerry.

3) Who stands ready to pack the Supreme Court with Justices likely to try to roll back Roe VS Wade, since it offends his supporters? Bush.   Not Kerry.

4) Who looks at antitrust as a joke? (see the slap on the wrist given to Macroslop). Bush. Not Kerry.

5) Who will let people who make over $200,000 per year keep their entire tax cut, though it means cutting social programs? Bush. Not Kerry.

6) Who is against a rise in the minimum wage? Bush. Not Kerry.

7) Who supports a Constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage? Bush. Not Kerry.

I'm sure others can add to this list.



Regarding Vietnam:

Of Bush and Kerry, which one fired at the enemy, was fired upon, and rescued a comrade in Vietnam during a 4 month stint there? Clue: It wasn't Bush.

Unfortunately Mr. Bush did not find time in his crowded schedule to use the expensive, taxpayer-funded pilot training he received to actually prosecute the war (he supposedly believed in) in Vietnam, despite the fact that most of the men he trained with did so. If he chose, he could have gone to Vietnam.

This is what the Kerry camp should be hammering away at--not letting the opposition pick the battle site---not haggling over the seriousness of an injury, nor trying to prove that Bush didn't serve his full time in the National Guard, now that the records have conveniently disappeared . Since the Bush side insists on attacking his record in Vietnam, Kerry or his spokesmen should be asking at every opportunity: why does Bush have absolutely no record in Vietnam? He had pilot training and could have received more if he intended to fight. Evidently, when asked why he wanted pilot training, he answered that his father had been a pilot ( and bona fide hero). Like father, like son? But it seems that this son didn't want to be a hero enough to actually fight. This is a leader of men? And then his surrogates attack the record of a man who actually did go to Vietnam and did fight.

Why do they do this?--because Kerry later turned against the war and made serious accusations against US soldiers' behavior in Vietnam, but supposedly only relaying what the soldiers themselves had said, though, again there is no proof, nor was there pressure for proof at the time of the hearings (1971?)

It should be painfully obvious that the reason they attack Kerry is not his record in Vietnam, but his record after the service in Vietnam. If he had never turned against the war, there would be no "Swift Boat Veterans for Revenge" (the original name before they
decided that "Truth" had a better ring to it.)   Kerry and everybody else could hang out at
the VFW. Of course, in that case Kerry would probably not have survived the primaries to be the Democratic candidate.

But the fact remains that Kerry fought in Vietnam. Bush did not--he talked the talk but did not walk the walk---he is, for sure, Chicken-Hawk in Chief. (Cheney of course is also a paid-up member of the club). Bush, as was said of Franklin Pierce, was the "hero of many a well-fought bottle" (Pierce actually did fight).   Bush likes to play soldier now (while sending real soldiers to their deaths in Iraq.)

As a veteran, that doesn't sit well with me.

At any rate, it should be obvious that there is in fact a world of difference between Bush and Kerry--they are not Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

I can see how tycoons and deep thinkers like "Martin Gibson" want to protect their huge holdings; therefore are against losing any of their tax cut. But for ordinary citizens and sensible individuals it should be clear that the would-be Texan-- (Connecticut-born, Yale, Skull and Bones--)-Bush---should be invited in November to choose whether he wants to adorn Texas or Connecticut (or perhaps Outer Mongolia) as a private citizen.

And for anybody not breathing Socialist air (that must be so thin it makes you dizzy and unable to think), it should be clear that the only way to retire Mr. Bush is not to "vote Nadar" (sic) or to sit home, but to vote for Kerry.

In fact, in the event Bush is re-elected, any American who did not vote for Kerry should refrain from any complaining about Bush's actions in the next 4 years. Can you really be quiet for 4 years? The silence in some quarters might be deafening.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Amos
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:12 PM

Thanks, Ron. Seconded end to end.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Alaska Mike
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:39 PM

Sounds right to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Blackcatter
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:42 PM

Yep - Kerry's going to make it ALL better.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:45 PM

Not so fast, boys...

Lets just take a look at the arguments for Kerry.

1.Pre-emptive wars? Kerry has allready said he would have done the same thing.

2.Drilling for oil. Easier to say you wouldn't do it than to actually not do it if the decision is in yer hands. I don't hear too much from Kerry about how he is going to take on the auto lobby to quit building gas guzzlers or how he's gonna put a lot of dough into mass transit...

3.Supreme Court is allready packed and given the difficulty that Bush has had with getting a number of his extreme righties' confirmed into federal judgeships his chances of getting someone too far right in a Congrss that will most likely have more Dems after Novermebr is slimn to none.

4.Anit-trust? Kerry ain't got clean hands either and has lots of corporate donors who will expect something in reture.

5.The tax break for the wealthy is wrong. How will Kerry get it repealed witha Rebub Congress. Sure, the Dems may pick up a few House seats and maybe one Senate but that ain't gonna be enough to get the tax fiesko repealed. Not close. Social programs? Same answer.

6.Minimum wage. Waht a joke. The minimum wage that the Dems are p[roposing, which still can't get thru Congress, still insures that those earning it will live in poverty.

7. Gay Marriage is nothing but a Repub smoke screen. It isn't a real issue because it won't get the necessary votes in Congrss and then has to be ratifies bu 2/3's of the states. A complete non issue...

As fir Vietnam. Another non issue. Like who cares other than partisan Repubs and partisan Dems? No one, that's who... It's like a storm that will blow over... Much to Karl Rove's disapproval... He'd love to ride that one to election day...

So when I say that maybe America needs another 4 years of Bush I don't mean that I agree with any thing Bush has done. He is a real jerk. Problem is that I know that but not enough Americans have figured it out yet... And America, down the road, might just need to rid itself of such people in the Bush administration as Karl Rove, Condi Tice, Richard Pearle, Paul Wolfowitz forever meaning never forgetting just what these folks are about...

Maybe the lesson is not yet internalized...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: mack/misophist
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 11:47 PM

Dear Blackcatter: When choosing between disaster and the unknown, one is always better off with the unknown. Honest.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:06 AM

1.Pre-emptive wars? Kerry has allready said he would have done the same thing.

That is not true

2.Drilling for oil. Easier to say you wouldn't do it than to actually not do it if the decision is in yer hands. I don't hear too much from Kerry about how he is going to take on the auto lobby to quit building gas guzzlers or how he's gonna put a lot of dough into mass transit...

Kerry is not the Oil Lobby President he'll be able to do a LOT more than Bush.


3.Supreme Court is allready packed and given the difficulty that Bush has had with getting a number of his extreme righties' confirmed into federal judgeships his chances of getting someone too far right in a Congrss that will most likely have more Dems after Novermebr is slimn to none.

One "liberal" Judge dies or retires while Bush is n Roe V Wade is toast. Period.


4.Anit-trust? Kerry ain't got clean hands either and has lots of corporate donors who will expect something in reture.

That's B.S. Bobert. Bush is the most corporate friendly president ever but its not because of Corporate donors. It because he is an Idiot who doesn't know what is good for the country.

5.The tax break for the wealthy is wrong. How will Kerry get it repealed witha Rebub Congress. Sure, the Dems may pick up a few House seats and maybe one Senate but that ain't gonna be enough to get the tax fiesko repealed. Not close. Social programs? Same answer.

There are a lot of fically conservative Republicans it is Bush who is out of step. He got those tax breaks passed as part of the war on terror. Kerry will get them repealed the same way. He'll shame the rich people into giving them up.


6.Minimum wage. Waht a joke. The minimum wage that the Dems are p[roposing, which still can't get thru Congress, still insures that those earning it will live in poverty.

If you care about minimum wage a vote for Nader is wasted so is a vote for Bush.

7. Gay Marriage is nothing but a Repub smoke screen. It isn't a real issue because it won't get the necessary votes in Congrss and then has to be ratifies bu 2/3's of the states. A complete non issue...

Yeah that's true, but the cynical jerk is willing to try to divide the country over it and embarrass his own Vice President in front of his daughter. He's making the election about fear and prejudice. He plays the Orange Alert card every time Kerry gets close in the polls. Are you willing to live through four more years of low level unspecific terror? So that Bush can make the Congress pliant enough to pass more tax cuts and gut Social Security?

As fir Vietnam. Another non issue. Like who cares other than partisan Repubs and partisan Dems? No one, that's who... It's like a storm that will blow over... Much to Karl Rove's disapproval... He'd love to ride that one to election day...

So when I say that maybe America needs another 4 years of Bush I don't mean that I agree with any thing Bush has done. He is a real jerk. Problem is that I know that but not enough Americans have figured it out yet... And America, down the road, might just need to rid itself of such people in the Bush administration as Karl Rove, Condi Tice, Richard Pearle, Paul Wolfowitz forever meaning never forgetting just what these folks are about...

Maybe the lesson is not yet internalized...

You aren't giving your countrymen much credit. But I'll give you one thing. If you do get four more years YOU will deserve it.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Amergin
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:16 AM

I use to admire Nader....but I have lost all respect for the man....He use to be great for this country...but with him accepting support from anti gay and other right wing fascist organisations I have trouble believing he will be good for the country...that is to say if he would even be elected....he is just another politician.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Blackcatter
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:20 AM

The time is long past for a major rehauling of how we run this country. Electing Kerry will not get us any further down the road to that process. Neither will electing Bush. But the worse it gets, the more the middle-class will lose. When they have lost enough, they will get off their fat asses and do something.

Until that time the Middle Class will continue to think they have a chance to be wealthy, while continuing to only pay lip service to the poor.

Fuck Bush. Fuck Kerry. Fuck Nader.

I will vote for Kerry. When he doesn't win, I will join the ranks of the people who will be working to overthrow the government. It will likely have to be a violent revolution since we're almost a police state. But we will try it without violence. If you think I'm kidding, just wait to see the hunger strikes.

Don't worry about foreign terrorists. The offending people will have to look out for the New American Revolutionary Force (NARF!)

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Amergin
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:26 AM

Blackcatter i am with you there, I don;t like Kerry but I despise Bush...but I don't see too many people massing in the streets to get him out.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 06:21 AM

When you want people massing in the streets is in November, at the polls, to pull the Kerry lever. Please point out to me where I said Kerry would make it "all better". The only question is whether 4 more years of Bush will make it worse. The answer should be obvious.

There are any number of reasons to want Bush out---I just scratched the surface.

Turnout in November will determine the election--if the US can raise its pathetic percentage of actual voters that should have the desired result.

But also, be aware that if people who do want Bush out don't vote for Kerry, the other side has enough red-meat issues that they will be out in force (e.g. the Swift Boat Veterans for Revenge and their supporters; the religious Right;, the tycoons)-- (I heard recently about a voting drive by Kerry supporters--who obviously cannot push anybody to vote for a particular candidate--where a woman signed up, then a minute later told the workers "I don't like Kerry; he's for homosexuals.")

If you care at all for diversity in the US---religious, sexual, income etc. you need to register this in November. And it's not by "voting Nadar" (sic) or whining about how Kerry will not bring paradise on earth, nor by red-herring arguments about the irredeemable rottenness of the democratic system. I believe Churchill had something to say on that score, as did Franklin (possibly apocryphal). Franklin said we had "a republic, if you can keep it".

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:16 AM

Obviously I should not have mentioned "income diversity" as desirable in the above list. Nobody wants people to be poor, except that the above-cited tycoons may be fine with it. The poor will squabble over jobs at the bottom of the economic pile, leaving the rich free to amass wealth at the top.

Divide and conquer works just fine, which is why Doug R. etc. are such enthusiastic supporters of Nader.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:22 AM

I should have listed "racial diversity" as desirable, since it enriches the life of the nation.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:42 AM

One more thing:

Walmart (which does gambits like making people who make $26,000 per year supervisors so they don't have to pay overtime, and which pays most of its people so poorly that many are on welfare) has given 90% of its campaign contributions to Republicans.

Macroslop (Microsoft) is also a heavy Bush donor (you don't think they're grateful to the Bushites for their vote of confidence on their monopoly, as expressed in the recent non-punishment administered by the Justice(?) Department?

Is this who you want to run the country?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:38 AM

If Bobert really thinks "America needs another 4 years of Bush ", wouldn't it make more sense for him to hold his nose and vote for him?

The rest of the world certainly doesn't need four more years of Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:41 AM

Hey Bobert,

I think you've been trolled by the partisan Dems. They've beaten this horse to death over and over, and us non-partisan indies are the horse.

The country, and Mudcat, are so polarized right now, and the Democrats so out of line engaging in this bash the lefties campaign, that I'm walking away from people like this in Mudcat and in 3D.

They bash the lefties, because they can't beat the right wing at the ballot box. Which means, they deserve to lose, as any reasonable person knows.

I find it the ultimate irony that these mad dog Dems who INSIST that 4 more years will bring armageddon TO THEM, didn't give a shit about the suffering of poor Americans and poor citizens of the world when it was their boy causing the suffering.

Stop the war on the poor and the planet.

DON'T VOTE DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:50 AM

Looks like its you, me and possibly Blackcatter, GUEST... And Blackcatter needs a little work...

Nadar, Donald Duck 'er Alfred E. Newman in '04.

Kerry is no Savior, thank you...

BObert

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:58 AM

Voting isn't the answer. The problems we find ourselves in can't be cured by the ballot box in a single election, because this isn't a mess that can solved with a single solution. Voting will only be one of many solutions. But I'm even beginning to doubt if the entire idea of the United States of America can be won back from the fascist capitalists. They've got the lock on it at every level.

I am still thinking very seriously of relocating to another country. Just as soon as I can afford it.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:07 AM

There may be subtle differences between the two candidates which, when added up, probably don't amount to a mosquito fart. Both major party candidates are subservient to corporate interests, so whichever one gets elected, it will still probably be "four more years" pretty much like the last four.

Case in point: the issue of reinstating the draft. Given the fact that the Republican leadership currently in power has propagated our armed conflicts overseas (Afghanistan and Iraq), you'd think reinstating the draft would be their idea. Not so. Supposedly this initiative is being spearheaded by "liberal Democrats." Why?

The spin these guys are putting on this issue is that a draft with none of the loopholes built into the last draft, such as college deferment, will eliminate the class bias inherent in the current all-volunteer army. Democrat Charles Rangle thinks his version of the draft will populate our army with more young men and women of "privilege." Who does he think is buying into this?

As a veteran, I'm not totally against the idea of conscripted service to our country. What pisses me off, though, is the smokescreen these guys throw up to mask the real agenda. Bottom line, supplies of cheap oil are too important to the U.S. economy to let them remain in
the hands of people who don't share our dream of "corporate capitalism." Neither political candidate is going to let that happen, and to that end, I believe whoever gets elected in November, Republican or Democrat, will continue our encroachments into the Middle East.

The politicians on both sides of the aisle think we're a bunch of uninformed idiots who'll believe anything we're told. I find this contemptuous and insulting.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,08:58 AM
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:29 AM

Well put there, Guest 9:07.

Kerry and the establishment Democrats haven't gone after the Enrons, the WorldComs, etc for the same reason.

I've said this many, many times. We are living in an unprecedented era of greed, avarice, and malicious hatred of anyone who opposes it. This system of malicious corporate capitalism is being sustained and nourished by an unprecedented level of political graft and political corruption that has taken over the entire political system of both parties, at all levels of government, from local library boards to the US State Department.

Voting for a man who says he doesn't support the Bush/Cheney agenda, but voted in support of it in every crucial vote in the past four years, is not the antidote needed here.

The nation needed REAL CHANGE from the Democratic Party this year, but didn't get it. It isn't the nation that needs four more years of Bush, because it may well destroy us. But the Democratic Party establishment, INCLUDING THE DEMOCRAT VOTERS IN THE PRIMARIES, obviously needs and deserves four more years of Bush, because that is what the party apparatchiks offered, and that is what the party grassroots voters swallowed.

If Bush wins, I'm blaming the Democrats. If Kerry wins, I'm blaming the Democrats. Why blame the Democrats? Because they were the only political force that had the power to stop the takeover of our nation and the world by the malicious corporate capitalists, and chose to get fat and rich off them instead.

The whole system is rotten to the core. Voting for Kerry will not change that one iota, though I do not doubt for a minute that it will make middle class, educated, 'nice' Democrats feel smugly vindicated, regardless of who wins. In their world, it gives them a justification for kicking the working poor they abandoned decades ago to hitch their stars to corporate capitalists.

Yeah, so it is suddenly news that the 'have a little, want a little more' Democrats are so concerned this election year because they fear they won't own enough in Bush's Ownership Society?

Gee, I feel really bad for them. They might not get their vacations in the Caribbean this year.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:56 AM

Courageous "Guests"

"It isn't the nation that needs 4 more years of Bush, because it may well destroy us"


However that doesn't seem to bother you--that says it all.

Where have we heard this before? how about the old accusation levelled at US troops in Vietnam:   "We had to destroy the village to save it"

Exactly how much is Bush paying you to spout this drivel?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Blackcatter
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:07 AM

That's he ironic thing Ron, they're not getting paid, they're deluded enough to actually believe the crap that Bush stutters out.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,8:58
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:08 AM

It bothers me profoundly, Ron Davies. It has bothered me my entire adult life, since I began voting in 1972. But I didn't hitch my gitalong to electoral politics as the solution. I've been fighting to keep the country and the planet out of the hands of the global corporate capitalist fascists my whole life, not just this election year.

So what have you been doing to fight the beast for the past 30 years besides voting for candidates that handed the world to the global corporate capitalists on a silver platter with roast beef?

Here is the difference between you and me, Ron Davies. You seem to think that voting for Kerry is going to change the way things are, and I see a Kerry win as just another bone being thrown to the middle class to appease them. The global corporate capitalist fascists don't give a shit about the US middle class. Hell, even Lou Dobbs knows that.

You know we're screwed when some of the most conservative Republicans are more democratic, more committed to the ideals of democratic institutions as the means of raising everyone's boats, and the most vocal opponents of the Bush/Bush regime.

But you and the fanatic Democrats don't get that nothing will change on Inauguration Day, no matter how the nation votes on Election Day. The time to have been worried about the global capitalists taking over the nation was decades ago. Nothing was done to stop them by mainstream Democrats in 1980, or 1984, or 1988, or 1992, or 1996, or 2000.

A vote for Kerry is much too little, and it's way too late, to make a true difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:00 AM

Lets see- a couple of people suggesting the violent overthrow of the country since elections are not working, one promising to leave the country, (did Baldwin leave yet?)another saying to burn it down before we can make it better- a typical democratic gathering.

How about some positive reasons to vote for Kerry.   Here are some of the things Kerry has said

1.   Knowing everything he knows now, he would still vote for the authorization to go into Iraq
2.   I voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it
3.   (from his journal) I have been here 9 days and we have not received enemy fire.   (after getting his purple heart from being fired on)
4.   It is seared in my mind that I was in cambodia in 1968 when Nixon was president.   (I always thought Nixon was not president until 1969
5. I don't own the SUV, my family owns the SUV

There are differences between Kerry and Bush

1.   Kerry would wait until we were attacked and millions died before he would bomb and aspirin factory
2. Kerry would purchase more middle east oil in lieu of any energy plan.   He would also put 50 cent tax on gasoline destroying the economy.    He would ban SUV's except for himself-
3.   Any Kerry nominee would end up in gridlock
4.   Under Clinton corporate scandals began and none were prosecuted. Under Bush many are in jail- and that is a good thing.
5.   Bush cuts taxes on all working people.   Kerry will raise taxes on all working people.   Lets not make it complicated
6. Bush in the pocket of special interest groups.   Kerry is owned lock stock and barrel by special interest groups.   
7. Bush says he is a comassionate conservative.   Kerry says he is not a liberal, but rather a centerist.   Which is being closer to the truth?

I find it hilarious that people who loathe the military, and supported Clinton over Dole, now say we have to vote for Kerry because he served in Viet Nam and Bush was only in the national guard. By that logic, shouldn't we all get behind McCain who was a true war hero?

About soft money- 80% of the 527's supporting the candidates are from Democrats.   The two big players are Soros at 12.5 millin and some other guy at 15 million.   Only 2 republicans on the top 15.   So be careful what you wish for.   YOu condem the Swift boat ads, but support Moveon.org.    No wonder you can't support Nader.   I disagree with him, but at least his is honest and tells you what he believes.    far more so than Kerry.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,yet another
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:16 AM

"So what have you been doing to fight the beast for the past 30 years besides voting for candidates that handed the world to the global corporate capitalists on a silver platter with roast beef?"

And what have you done guest? Whine a lot?   Talk about revolution?

Don't forget, the "revolution" that built this country was created by the richest men of the country at the time. The average colonist was getting along fine. The Washington's and Jeffersons needed to protect their own interests. There is no such thing as a people's revolution, it has always been and always will be big business. The only way to fix things is to create change from within. Your Don Quixote dreams will never work.

This guest continues to delude him or herself into thinking they have a master plan. Guest knows shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Once Famous
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:21 AM

What a total crock of shit this thread is.

The state of Illinois won't allow Nader on the ballot, thankfully.

Ron Davies, get a life you ridiculous old hippie. I don't have any "huge holdings." I just work for a fine big corporation for almost 20 years.

I might just vote Republican just to see morons like you swim in your own puke. Besides, Kerry just reminds me too much of Herman Munster.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,8:58
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:29 AM

Sigh.

LarryK, NO ONE has suggested the violent overthrow of the US government in this thread, and I challenge you to prove that anyone did with a direct quote. To suggest that organizing political protests to make the nation ungovernable in an election year is not advocating the overthrow of the US government. I'm not talking about rioting. I'm talking about non-cooperation with police orders. Sit downs, sit ins, running away from police and surfacing in a different location, non-violent legally unsanctioned marches, those sorts of protest assemblies.

Protests in the streets are constitutionally protected rights in the US. Maybe you could get your hands on a copy of the Constitution, brush up on the Bill of Rights, that sort of thing, before you leap wholly uninformed and blindly ignorant into these sorts of conversations.

Freedom of assembly is a key right in any democracy, and is intrinsically tied to freedom of speech. Countries where freedom of assembly as a means of publicly protesting government policies isn't allowed, are known as totalitarian dictatorships.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Once Famous
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:35 AM

Go ahead and organize political protests, Guest.

I'll be in a fine restaurant with my wife eating a nice steak. If that's how you enjoy life, clock's ticking.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: pdq
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:44 AM

In Nevada, the Democrats just filed a lawsuit to kick Nader off the ballot.

Why? Three women claim they were "missled" by the people collecting names for the petition that put Nader there.

If being missled by politicians were actionable, we would have the court system completely booked up for eons!

Reminds me of Florida 2000. Democrats tried to slam 30,000 legitimate votes from service men/women stationed overseas. They claimed that a few of the signatures were unverified and the dates the votes were cast were uncertain. The real reason: over 70% of our armed forces personel vote Republican!

Elections are intended to give the public a choice. The Democrats might be happier with the system usually found in Third World countries: only put one name on the ballot.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:52 AM

"The Democrats might be happier with the system usually found in Third World countries: only put one name on the ballot."

Too true.

Of course, the Bush Republicans would prefer we dispensed with ballots altogether.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Amos
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 12:03 PM

PDQ:

The time constraint the Democrats wanted adhered to as regards overseas ballots was only the one required by the state laws.
We have to stick to the facts here, don't you agree? Otherwise it will just degenerate.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: pdq
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 12:17 PM

Yesterday, Democrats filed a suit against Nevada. They are demanding that Nader be kicked off the ballot. So much for choice.

Let's not rehash Florida or I will have to point out that Katharine Harris was required >by law< to purge felons, multiple-registrees and dead people. That is exactly what she did. If she had not, she would have been derelict in her duties and subject to impeachment.

Anyone interested in the subject at hand: NADER 2004, NEVADA...

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 12:27 PM

The Democratic party has done this in every single state where Nader has filed to get on the ballot. They are as bad as the Republicans in Florida in 2000.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Nerd
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 12:38 PM

pdq,

you DID just rehash Florida, so I will point out that she hired a private company to do the purges, the first time this had ever been done. She WAS in fact derelict in her duties, because she used the company to purge not only felons, dead people and multiple registrees but also anyone who had the same name and/or birthdate as those people.

Bobert, I'm surprised to see you say that Kerry "would have done the exact same thing." In fact, what he has said is he would have voted to give authorization to the President, because he (for some reason) trusted Bush to do the right thing. I can't say i agree with him, but that is very different from saying he would have done the same thing as Bush! He has also quite clearly said that he would NOT have gone to war with Iraq unless and until

1) the UN inspections process had fully played itself out
2) there was credible evidence of actual WMD
3) he had built a broad coalition so that we would not be doing 90% of the fighting, spending 90% of the money, and taking 90% of the losses.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 12:49 PM

Yer splitting nosehairs, Nerd.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Nerd
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 12:50 PM

No I'm not, GUEST.

I'm pointing out that Kerry would NOT have done the same thing as Bush. That's pretty simple to understand, even for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:00 PM

"The best is enemy of the good".

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:05 PM

Nader is the best ally Bush has, and Bush knows it. Without Nader, he would not have been president today. Without Nader, he has no chance in 2004.

Nader fans seem to prefer acting on a rigid principle, which has less to do with Nader than it does with the perceived corruption and lack of choice in the two-party system. What they don't understand (or maybe do and just don't care), is that, unlike a European Democracy where a Prime Minister has strength or weakness in relation to the number of his party members in parliament, or at least the number represented by his party and a coalition of others, an American third party candidate has no congressional support and no grass-roots strength. A vote for Nader thus becomes a mere protest vote against the status quo.

I don't have a problem with supporting Kerry instead of Nader. I would have preferred Dean, but Dean, Kerry, and I are all fairly close in political philosophy. And I think that the Bush Administration is taking America in a bad direction.

I believe that most Nader supporters, if they have a political philosophy, would prefer Kerry to Bush. I hope that they are continuing to verbally support Nader, while secretly planning to vote for Kerry at the polls. Otherwise their vote is at best a protest vote, at worst a vote for four more years of the Bush Administration.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:07 PM

See Bobert? Kerry trolls.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Fishpicker
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 01:56 PM

"Fuck Bush. Fuck Kerry. Fuck Nader."


Very instructive!


                        FP

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 02:14 PM

It is instructive! And fun! So join the party and party!

Vote Green, regardless of the shade of green the candidate might be this year. If you are a Nader/Camejo Green, or a Cobb/LaMarche Green, vote the Green Alternative.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,Diogenes
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 02:47 PM

The Republicans are pouring millions into the Nader campaign. Ask yourself why.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 02:59 PM

For the same reason that the Democrats are suing to keep Nader off the ballot.

You can pick your party partisan preferences, but if you stick with the status quo, you are either going to side with Republican brownshirts, or Democratic blueshirts, but all they are all anti-democracy global corporate capitalists just the same.

Ask yourself why.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Once Famous
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 03:01 PM

Yay! They all suck!

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 03:06 PM

Isn't the sensible thing to do (and why nt do the sensibe thing?), if you happens to be in a state where there is a possibility that the vote might be close, and you prefer Nader to Kerry, but prefer Kerry to Bush, is to find someone in a non-marginal state who had been planning to vote for Kerry, and arrange to vote for each other's candidate?

After all, in most states, it doesn't make any difference who you vore for, since the margin between Bush and Kerry one way or another is going to be so wide. And, as demonstrated last time, the popular vote across your country just doesn't matter a damn when it comes to deciding elections.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 03:20 PM

Vote swapping with people in so-called "safe" states isn't exactly the essence of democracy. It's political extortion. No one should ever be forced into those kinds of bargains with the devil, just to vote their bloody conscience.

See, that's the trouble with partisan fanatacism. It makes political extortion seem right and just to people who feel they must win at any cost.

And make no mistake, the Democratic party partisans are into this to win at any cost, except alienating their global corporate capitalist masters who happen to side mostly with the Republicans right now because the Republicans are in power.

Back in the day, New Global Capitalists backed the Carter and Clinton Democrats, the Blair Tories, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,????
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 03:35 PM

" they are all anti-democracy global corporate capitalists just the same."

You say that like it is a bad thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 03:56 PM

Guest- You say "Sigh.

LarryK, NO ONE has suggested the violent overthrow of the US government in this thread, and I challenge you to prove that anyone did with a direct quote.

Please see Blackcatter at 1:20 am   "I will join the ranks of the people who will be working to overthrow the government"   This is immediately followed by Amergin who says "I am with you out there"

What part of "overthrow the government" don't you understand. Next time you challenge me, try to make it a harder challenge to prove you were a complete fool.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 04:01 PM

While on the subject- here are two more differences between Bush and Kerry.

1.   A picture of Kerry is in the Ho Chi Min museum in Viet Nam with a dedication for his support of the communist effort in Viet Nam.    There is no picture and dedication of George Bush.   

2. Kerry admitted on the Dick Cavett show to committing war attrocities such as burning down villages and killing innocent people.   George Bush committed no war crimes.

Question-   Why do people who were obessed with the Iraq prison abuse give Kerry a free pass on his war attrocities?    Isn't burning down a village worse than humiliating a prisoner?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 04:24 PM

You are absolutely right, Larry K.

It was wrong for me to believe anyone would be gullible enough to take what Blackcatter and Amerigin said literally.

My bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 05:03 PM

Larry K -

1. Your claim that the picture is a dedication to Kerry for his support of the communist effort. That is absolutely wrong.

The picture is hanging on a wall in a section that commemorates renewed diplomatic efforts since the Vietnam War. The plaque does not mention Kerry by name. It says - "Mr. Do Muoi, Secretary General of the Vietnamese Communist Party met with Congressman and Veterans Delegation in Vietnam (July 15-18, 1993)." The photo was taken in 1993 when Kerry was in Vietnam as part of a delegation sent by President Clinton.

Also, the museum is not the Ho Chi Min Musuem - it is located in Ho Chi Min City. The museum was formerly called "American War Crimes Museum". The museum contains bottles of fetuses that were supposedly affected by Agent Orange. There are other photos that show corpses and other attrocities from the war. During the 1990's the museum dropped "American" from the name and the official name is actual "War Remenants Museum".

2. Kerry did not say he killed innocent civilians on the Dick Cavett show. Here is what Kerry said -

MR. CAVETT: Well, let's talk about that. Did you see war crimes committed and –

MR. KERRY: Well, I have often talked about this subject. I personally didn't see personal atrocities in the sense that I saw somebody cut a head off or something like that. However, I did take part in free fire zones and I did take part in harassment interdiction fire. I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground. And all of these, I find out later on, these acts are contrary to the Hague and Geneva Conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the applications of the Nuremberg principles, is in fact guilty.

Well, I guess you can interpret statments to read any way you like.

Larry, I find it interesting that the comments you made - including the wrong name of the musuem, are taken almost verbatim from a right wing website.   I don't mean this as a knock, but it may help to look for other sources. "Fair and Balanced" does not mean listening only to Fox News.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Nerd
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 05:04 PM

GUEST,

LarryK, with whom I disagree on almost anything political, has revealed very handily that you are talking out of your ass. You can try to turn it around by claiming that you would have to be gullible to believe what was said, and thus that what was said does not constitute a "direct quote," but that just reveals that you're STILL talking out of your ass.

You'll ignore any evidence that doesn't fit your pre-established conclusion, even something so simple as a direct quote which you yourself CHALLENGED LarryK to provide. It's amusing to witness, yet vaguely sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 05:04 PM

Larry K - one thing you mentioned is 100% correct. The museum does not have a picture of George Bush. Obviously he never set foot in Vietnam.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 05:16 PM

Ah Nerd, don't take me for such an eejit. Can't I have any fun trolling now and then, considering how often the rest of you do it?

LarryK wanted to smear Blackcatter and Amergin as commie pinko bin Laden lovers, and you know it.

COME ON. That was a great set-up. Admit it. You're just jealous cuz LarryK fell for it, and made my job too easy.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Nerd
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 05:42 PM

Guest:

There you go again. Whatever you say, no matter how dumb, you MUST defend to the death with "but I had smart and subtle reasons" or "it really doesn't mean that" or whatever. Like I said, amusing but vaguely sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 05:45 PM

Gee Nerd, I feel so...so...admonished.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: DougR
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 06:13 PM

At least Nader sticks to his convictions. He has an opinion and he states it. As far as I can tell, he does not vacillate from his position. Quite a contrast with his primary opposition currently running for president of the United States.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 06:14 PM

Lonesome EJ makes valid and sensible points from a political strategist's perspective (see Lonesome's post above). Such a strategy however, virtually ensures forever the exclusive credibility of the American Two-Party System.

If I put on my 'cynical' hat, I can readily believe that Democrats and Republicans alike - maybe Democrats a little more than Republicans - are hoping that all American voters have come to the same conclusions as Lonesome EJ, and vote accordingly, because this effectively locks out anyone who might have a great political philosophy but doesn't toe a "party line."

Foolish optimist that I am, I am beginning to wonder if there aren't more than a just a few of us wandering around loose out here who believe if we voted for the person we thought would make the best president instead of strategizing to assure the lesser of two evils wins the office, a bona fide leader with a vision might just be elected president someday?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 06:19 PM

Why on earth is it "political extortion" if two citizens freely agree to cooperate with each other to achieve something they both wish, by vote-swapping?

It's a rational response to a distorted and unfair electoral system.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 06:27 PM

Preferential voting. A great idea that would solve a lot of problems, but I doubt it will ever happen. Why do I doubt it? Because it would solve a lot of problems.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 06:28 PM

No McGrath, fixing the system is the rational response to a distorted and unfair electoral system, not clandestine vote swapping.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 06:40 PM

And in the meantime, GUEST 25 Aug 04 - 06:28 PM ? When I break a string on my guitar, I need to get a new string - but if I haven't got one handy, I'll see if I can cobble up something by knotting the old one to get me through. One rational response doesn't rule out other rational responses.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 07:18 PM

Nor rule in the irrational ones.

The system needs reform badly. It won't be fixed by November. We all need to just accept that, and keep trying to move towards reforms that are achievable.

Right now, the entire system is locked in the grips of a partisan death match, and nothing will happen until after the November election. Nothing.

What will clandestine vote swapping do about any of that?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:09 PM

Could get rid of Bush and his gang, and most of us in the rest of the world would surely breath a sigh of relief.

Billy Bragg once said something about the difference between Labour and the Tories - I can't remember the exact words, but it was that while there was maybe only a few inches between them, those are the inches on which we live.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:49 PM

Guest - how do you propose we "move towards reforms that are achievable"? I am not being argumentative, just asking what positive ideas you have? You've made some cases against the current "partisan" system we live under, but I have not heard any ideas other than voting for Nader. All that does is add a third party into the equation. Nader has his own partisan agenda, as do the other parties. Is there a system of goverment anywhere on this planet that you can point to that fits your model?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 08:56 PM

Nope, it would be a brave new world, just like the one in which the US government was orginally formed.

But then, I know the two party death match partisans like you and the Kerry/Bush fanatics can't wrap your little minds around the idea of revolutionary change anyway Ron, so it would be a mighty big waste of my time to have the same old same old argument with y'all AGAIN.

BTW, there is no system of government on the planet that is like the current incarnation of the US government either, so what's your point?

BTW, I'm not voting Nader/Camejo. I'm voting Cobb/LaMarche.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:29 PM

There you go Guest, all talk and no action. You talk a good game but you really don't have a plan. When someone asks to hear your idea,you cower and deflect. You can't win a revolution with one. If you had ideas, you need to reach people, not antagonize. It really appears that you are just trying to instigate instead of educate. I almost thought we could have a discussion.

I don't know if you realize it, but you have become the partisan you rally against.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 09:54 PM

Stuff a sock in it, Ron. I have no interest in debating anything with you, because you are, to me, a bloody bore. Like I said to Bobert 50 or so posts back, this thread is just more of the lame Mudcat 'Troll for Naderites' game played by all of you Anybody But Bush fanatics, ad nauseum.

So, be my guest to go piss up a rope with this one. Your attempts to bait me ain't gonna work.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:11 PM

Very nice.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:18 PM

What GUEST said!

I have never read such dribble in my life. Heck you'd think that John Kerry would give Jesus a run for His money... Oh, while discovering a cure for cancer, ending world poverty and ______________ (you pick).

Geeze Loise...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Blackcatter
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:32 PM

I am currently working to help ensure that the election in Florida is accurate this time around. How am I doing that? I'm a pollworker. I am in charge of making sure that everyone who walks into my polling place has a chance to vote if it is legal to do so. Many of my friends are also working in the polls or will be poll watchers.

I am friends with the Orange Co. Supervisor of Elections. 6 months ago he recieved a list (compiled by a private firm, commissioned my the state of Florida) of supposed convicted felons in Orange County. Because of the previous problems, he had his peopl go through the list to do their own checking. He discovered that 90% of the names no the list were NOT convicted of a felony ever. He also said that a quick look at the list showed that only 3 names were hispanic (not 3%, just 3) Now, there are plenty Hispanic felons out there, but it didn't take a stretch of the imagination to realize that in FLorida, Hispanics vote overwhelmingly Republican.    The Supervisor of Elections of Pinellas County (Tampa area) did some similar checks. His list was over 30% black, 3 times the % of blacks living in the county and over twice the % of black convicted felons in the state. Hispanic names were suspiciously missing as well. When both SOE's complained, the Governor's office, said they had neither the time of the money to do the work again and told the SOE's that they owuld have to do the work themselves, out of their limited budgets.

I an many others will begin protesting and insisting on a regime change if and when Bush is elected. This is what I mean about over0-throwing the government. It probably wont work, since the middle class is fat and igorant and it's only the truly poor who are getting truly screwed.

We are on the verge of becoming a police state. At some point, the right of the government to rule is abdicated, and they must be removed.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:33 PM

Bobert, you can say what you want about Kerry. I don't think anybody is painting him out like you are interpreting.

Let me remind you of two words from George W. lip's - "mission accomplished".

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 10:58 PM

Blackcatter---what you are doing is great and should be greatly appreciated by all. No rational person could expect you to do more. I wonder if Kerry's people or anybody else could check into the suspicious behavior re: lists. Any chance pressure could be brought to bear on the problem through publicity, or would that be seen as outside influence by carpetbagging Yankees etc.?   

Ron Olesko--it's truly impressive how you have so neatly exposed Larry K's fulminations for what they are: uncritical and even undigested regurgitations of the right-wing line. I suspected as much, but couldn't cite chapter and verse. It's interesting that there's a lot of intellectual laziness both on the far right and on the far left. The difference of course is that as of now the Right has control of the biggest supply of WMD's on the planet. Certainly hope that changes in November.

Doug R.--As I said this mornng 7:16 AM "Divide and conquer works just fine, which is why Doug R. etc. are such enthusiastic supporters of Nader". I will however take this back if Doug R., stalwart Bushite, says he will actually vote for Nader, rather than just encouraging everybody else to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:04 PM

Thanks, we already know who is voting for Kerry and who is voting for Bush in this forum. I vote we ban these conversations until after election day, because nobody here is undecided, so what is the bloody point besides the Kerry folk beating up on the Nader folk?

None. Doh!

Like I said, y'all can go piss up a rope. Nobody cares why you think Kerry is better than Nader.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:09 PM

Comeone guest. You won't debate so obviously your only role is to instigate. When someone criticizes Nader you feel "beaten up". Doh!

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:11 PM

And, fir you opomists: think Diebold...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:21 PM

Thanks fer the chuckle there Bobert!

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Aug 04 - 11:25 PM

Is fun messin' with Dems, ain't it, GUEST? They take stuff all serious. Hey, maybe not as serious as the folks in the other fraternity but serious...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 05:47 AM

Larry K--

I'd be pleased if you could relate to me precisely where Bush fought in Vietnam and again just who was it who rescued a comrade while on a mission there? Was it Bush? Please refresh my memory.

Would you really prefer to be led in combat by George W. Bush with his proven military record ("veteran of many a well-fought bottle) rather than by Kerry? Virtually everyone who served under Kerry disagrees with you.

Also, just why did George not find time in his admittedly packed schedule to use the pilot training, expensively provided to him by the taxpayers, to actually fight the the war he supposedly believed in? Most of the men he trained with did in fact fight. It seems George really wanted to be a hero like Daddy, but not quite enough to actually fight.

This is a man of principle?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 06:19 AM

To all--

Gee, guys, I was hoping we could carry on this debate without gutter language. Have you noticed how many women are participating in the thread? It would be nice to hear what more have to say. Believe it or not, this is not a locker room. We should be able to slash each other to ribbons--- (and Bush, Kerry, Nader or whoever is your chosen target)----very civilly.

Thanks for your co-operation. I knew you would.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 06:22 AM

No revolution was ever won by people shooting their mouths off and losing their tempers.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 06:49 AM

"Martin"--

Kerry reminds you too much of Herman Munster--now there's a well-thought out argument for voting against him. I wouldn't have expected less from you. Well done. Good job.

Also, "Martin"--I'm a "ridiculous old hippy"? I suppose veterans can be ridiculous old hippies. Would you mind telling us about your military background?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 02:14 PM

So lets see- I was challenged to provide quotes and I did.   I mentioned that Kerry's picture was hanging in the museum.   Ron confirmed that it was.   I appreciate the extra information.   Unfortunately, I do not read right wing web sites unless you consider the Druge Report a right wing web site.   Which site are you referring to? (seriously- I did not get my information from a web site)   I had heard there was a picture of Kerry prising his efforts on a radio show- I think Roger Hedgecock.   The fact that the picture does not mention Kerry by name does not change that it is there.

Thanks also for the Dick Cavett interview.   I have heard the audio of that many times. I said that Kerry burnt down houses. I said that Kerry committed war atrocities. Your quote confirmed that. "I did take part in harassment interdiction fire. I did take part in search-and-destroy missions in which the houses of noncombatants were burned to the ground. And all of these, I find out later on, these acts are contrary to the Hague and Geneva Conventions and to the laws of warfare. So in that sense, anybody who took part in those, if you carry out the applications of the Nuremberg principles, is in fact guilty."    If you want to look the other way on these war crimes, that is your right.

Swift boat vets have accused Kerry of shooting an innocent 14 year old in the back.   Who knows if that is correct.    The score is 254 vets against Kerry with 16 for Kerry.   Kerry loves to show a picture of the commanders of Swift Boats.   In that picture about 14 are against Kerry with only one supporting him.   A few are dead and a few refuse to comment.    Your right, it is not fair and balanced. It is overwhelming against Kerry.

George Bush was no where near Viet Nam. Neither was Bill Clinton. In 1992 Kerry said that a persons military record should not matter in a president.   I guess he has changed his mind.   For all those who feel that serving in viet nam is important considertion for a president, I guess you most have voted for George HW Bush and Bob Dole when they ran against Clinton.   Otherwise, that would make you a liar and a hypocrite.   And that wouldn't be fair and balanced.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 02:32 PM

". . . 254 vets against Kerry with 16 for Kerry." Etc.

The 254 vets were not with Kerry and didn't actually see what happened, and the 16 were and did.

Truth or falsity is not a matter of votes. If all 6,000,000,000+ people on earth voted that the earth is flat, it would not alter the fact that the earth is a globe.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 03:00 PM

Ron Davies

There are people here who won't vote for Bush because he looks like a chimp, so my Herman Munster comparison is really quite right on.

As for my military history, I think it is none of your fucking business. I went to college instead so i could get a good job and make a lot of money which has all played out according to plan. Now THAT was well thought out.

What did YOU do in the war, daddy?

For the record, I am UNDECIDED. So just think that you can do all of this political posturing for my sake to try to win my undecided vote. Just think of how much you are all helping me.

I do not at all care what happened with either of thse two pussy flaps 30 years ago, and any intelligent person will tell you that it really doesn't matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 03:07 PM

LarryK - you spin very well.   Of course I confirmed that the photo was in A museum (not the Ho Chi Minh museum as you stated).
Let me give you the benefit of a doubt. Suppose my information was wrong.   Let's say this museum posted a photo that proclaimed Kerry "the best friend of communists", would that make it important?   If the KKK Museum puts up a photo of George W., would that make Bush a racist? I don't think anyone would make that connection.

Drudge used the story that was published at www.freerepublic.com. You heard it on Roger Hedgecock's show. Roger is a well known talk show host who fills in for Rush Limbaugh. Wouldn't you agree that he is a conservative host?   It amazes me that the only place this non-story surfaced was on right-wing websites and talk shows.   As soon as the truth came out, the story died.   Interesting.

As for the Dick Cavett quote, you obviously chose to make Kerry's words fit your arguement, then I can't give you any logic that you would listen to.

You are correct when you say the swift boat veterans ACCUSE Kerry of a number of items. I could accuse you of being a serial bedwetter, but unless I have proof I would be wrong to do so.   Anyone can sign an affadivit, but unless you are in a court of law it is meaningless.

Kerry did not make Vietnam an issue.   He has held up the mirror to show the hypocrisy of those that chose to make his service an issue.

LarryK - we obviously have different opinions. All I suggest is that a simple Yahoo or Google search can provide additional information. We have to make judgements for ourselves, not let someone elses opinion guide our process. The fact that your original post contained erroneous information shows that you did not do any fact checking and just blindly assumed what you heard on the radio was right.   I try not to believe anything I hear on the radio or TV or print that sounds suspicious. Double check.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 09:39 PM

"Martin"--

1) I thought we agreed we were not going use locker room language on this thread, since women don't like it, and it would be good to hear their views on the issue.

2) If you think I have any thoughts of angling for your vote, you are sadly disillusioned.

3) I was just curious as to whether you're a veteran (since I am), in case weighing your opinion proved worthwhile. The Vietnam War was a "pussy flap"?---easy to tell you're not a veteran after all--most veterans do not have that view.

4) It's intriguing that you have in fact been to college--you've hidden it magnificently.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 10:19 PM

Larry K--

I happen to find that standing up for something, being actually willing to risk your life for it, as Kerry did in fighting in Vietnam, is a quality I look for in a president. Kerry stood up and risked his life in Vietnam;   when he came back he, like many, was totally disillusioned and he stood up for that view. As it happens, I am not as convinced as he is on the worthlessness of the Vietnam War, but I respect his change of heart and especially his acting on it.

Bush stood up (from the bar?) and cheered on his fellow pilot trainees from a safe distance in the US. I therefore have precisely zero respect for him.

As a veteran I certainly did prefer Bob Dole's record over Clinton's regarding military service. I was particularly disgusted by Clinton's blatant desire to "keep political options open" (at 19!) by playing fast and loose with his draft board, and I came very close to voting for Dole on that basis.

But military service is not the only issue in a given political campaign. Standing up for the rights of the less fortunate, concern for the environment, international relations factors, and other issues come into play. I liked Dole a lot, but many of his strong supporters alienated me totally. That is also a consideration in a candidate--who are you in bed with?
(Yeah, I know--with Clinton it was even more an issue--but this is actually meant figuratively).

However, as you have so sagely noted, we should be discussing this election, not previous contests.   In this election it's Kerry VS Bush.

Kerry has proven a leader of men in combat. Bush has proven a leader of men from one bar to the next.

The issue of leadership is therefore quite clear to me.

So I go on to other issues. In every one, almost without exception, Bush when he stands for anything--- (on immigration , for instance, he stands firmly on all sides of the issue)---is dead wrong in my estimation. Your mileage may vary.

As to why Kerry voted for authorization for the President to use force against Iraq, he trusted that Bush, as his father had done, would assemble a true coalition rather than going it alone in Iraq. Kerry lived to regret trusting Bush on this, as most sensible people have found in trusting Bush to make the right decision in a host of cases.

On the "bedmates" issue, Bush totally strikes out with me. From Walmart, a blight on the retail landscape literally and figuratively,   to Macroslop, an arrogant yet stupid monopoly with which I have had some personal experience, not to mention the "religious Right", Bush's main supporters range from repugnant to loathsome I hope I'm not being too subtle here.

I suspect that in a given election even you are not such a prisoner of tunnel vision as to focus on only one issue and ignore all others. Or perhaps I am overestimating the care you give to this decision.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 10:54 PM

Ron Davies, yes I am a veteran. You don't know shit. It doesn't make any difference in either case what happened 30 years ago. No one gives a shit. It doesn't have anything to do with today's issues.

By the way, a lot of BIG Jewish money is on Bush because of his support for Israel.

Fuck you. I will swear if I want to. Fuck you again.

Obviously you are not very street wise. A pussy flap is slang. I am sorry if you don't understand slang, but it is apparent that you do not know as much as you think. Who's got a bigger flap over their pussy? Kerry or Bush?

As for college, who cares what you think. I know I went to a fine school and my education pays off for me big time. I'll bring home the cash. You keep being your biggest fan on an Internet web forum.

I'll tell you what you are not overestimating. How big of a pompous snob know-it-all wannabee you come across as.

And just for the record, Ronnie baby, fuck you again.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Ron Davies
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 10:56 PM

"Martin"--

Always remember, there's plenty of room outside the gutter for you. Goodnight.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Once Famous
Date: 26 Aug 04 - 10:59 PM

No gutter here in this mansion, Ronnie baby.

Sweet dreams to you. Hope your spine gets stronger overnight.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Nerd
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 12:10 PM

Okay, I'll bite: what's a pussy flap?

And, no that doesn't mean I'll bite a pussy flap. (I at least have to find out what one is first!)

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and oth
From: Midchuck
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 01:18 PM

Someone up there said we're on the verge of becoming a police state. Whoever it was is probably right.

I cannot accept that voting for a Yale graduate, member of Skull and Balls, or whatever it is, millionaire, will bring about significant change, just because it's a different Yale graduate, member of Skull and Balls, or whatever it is, millionaire.

I intend to vote for the Howling Anarchist candidate. There isn't one? Let's see, how many signatures do I need to get on the ballot in VT....?

Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Aug 04 - 11:11 PM

That's right," Martin". Inquiring minds need to know--just what is a pussy flap. (Hope it's not too crass, but we're not getting any women to partipate in this thread anyway, since near the start.)

And, congratulations are in order for you, " Martin"--you certainly have proven that you will swear if you want to. You have established that point without any doubt whatsoever. I am properly impressed.    Well done. Good job.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and other
From: mdricha
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 03:03 AM

Ron,
It would be a good idea to get your facts straight before posting. The base salary of a begining assistant manager at WalMart is $35,000. Assistant managers and managers of a store have a salary thus they do not get overtime. However, they do get other perks such as bonuses. I know of one manager who just got a nice bonus of $800,000 for the past year. Of course most in management don't get that kind of bonus, but never the less most do get a nice tidy bonus every year. As far as hourly supervisors goes..they are paid hourly and do get overtime if it is needed. Granted..pay vaires for hourly supervisors. I know some who make less then $12 an hour..but there are some who make up to $22 an hour and with overtime make more than some assistant managers.

As far as welfare goes, I can tell you that WalMart does not encourage people to seek it at least in my experience. Perhaps they give resources to those who need it, but they do not encourage it. Kind of funny because there are so many times I really do hate descions made by my company but when i read posts like this, I realize how much I have a need to defend it. WalMart is such an easy target right now because it is the big boy to pick on, but why aren't people picking on other companies such as Dayton Hudson, Home Depot, and McDonalds. Believe it or not, there are some of us out here who are happy to work
at WalMart and we aren't all stupid redknecks either. To all of you who hate Wal Mart..and I know there are a lot of you here (sorry, more of a lurker than being active) then I would just say don't shop there and encourage all that you not know to shop there. Just please don't lie about how the company works. It is just like any other company. Has some great things about it and some bad things about it.

Sorry for the rant..cheers to you all

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 07:13 AM

My facts come from the Wall St Journal, which also points out that salaries at Walmart vary, according to area of the country. I will b glad to cite you chaer and verse, if you need it. I make up nothing except when I'm ridiculing clumsy speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 07:15 AM

Excuse me.

I will be glad to cite you chapter and verse.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 07:54 AM

Walmart "doesn't encourage people to seek welfare". I wonder why. I also wonder why if you are working at other companies, the issue doesn't even come up. Could it by some chance be that the vast majority of other companies pay a living wage?

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: Once Famous
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 09:33 PM

So, don't buy anything at Wal-Mart Ron Davies.

They are not going to go broke. But others certainly get a kick out of making more profit on you for the same item that Wal-Mart sells.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Aug 04 - 10:03 PM

Martin--

You've emerged from the gutter!. Hope you can stay out this time. It's really not that difficult. Good luck to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Aug 04 - 08:33 AM

First of all, I again appeal for everybody to forswear vulgar language, including all "four-letter words" (that includes scatalogical language of all kinds). Martin, I hope you don't have to look that up. Using such language shows a poverty of vocabulary and a poverty of intellect. If the shoe fits....

Now to the matter at hand.

Let's see what we have established. Admittedly. anything "Martin Gibson" says, with the possible exception of information on guitars, must be taken with something approaching a mountain of salt.

But, let's assume for the sake of argument, that he is telling the truth.

In that case:

1)"Martin" lives in a million dollar house.

2) Most Walmart employees make so little that many are on welfare. Walmart has pulled such gambits as making employees who earn as little as $26,000 supervisors so they no longer have to pay them overtime, then forcing them to do that overtime.

3) "Martin" likes to shop at Walmart and defends them strongly, if with needlessly filthy language. So obviously, Walmart's exploitation of their own employees does not bother him. We aren't even going into the "race to the bottom" which results in so many US jobs migrating overseas.

4) "Martin" is a strong Bush supporter.

5) 90% of Walmart's political contributions go to Bushites.


Conclusions.:


"Martin" is perilously close to the stereotype of "heartless capitalist
exploiter".   I suspect this is in fact a title he would glory in.   

Walmart is indeed a blight on the retail landscape.

It's vital to defeat Bush, among other things to restore some sanity to a society which is
becoming increasingly polarized between the "Martin Gibson"s of the US ( no surprise he refuses to give his real name") and the huge majority of the US population on the bottom of the economic pile.

Subject: RE: BS: Open Letter to Nader Supporters (and others)
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 29 Aug 04 - 09:54 AM

Funny, but I have heard documentaries on Australian Radio that mentioned the low wages paid by Walmart...