« Who nominates Michael Badnarik? | Main | Bush Is Up In Election Results »

July 26, 2004

Free George Bush & John Kerry Political Cartoon

Attention to all bloggers! We have seen a lot of anti-bush and anti-kerry political cartoons. This cartoon was recently made by jibjab.com. It is not an anti-bush or anti-kerry cartoon but it is a very funny political cartoon about George Bush and also a very funny cartoon about John Kerry. Click Here and see free George Bush & John Kerry political cartoon. Listen how the 2004 presidential candidates poke fun at each other and sing a long to the song :"This Land".

Posted by Tuck at July 26, 2004 08:17 PM

Comments

This is really funny, but it does little more than give people a good laugh. We need more web sites that tell people about the issues and less about frivolous things like this.

Posted by: Michael at July 26, 2004 11:12 PM

What are you talking about? Frivolity is usually what people base their vote upon.

Posted by: David at July 27, 2004 12:25 AM

Great fun!!!

Posted by: Peter Spielmann at July 27, 2004 07:23 AM

It's nice to laugh at both sides. This election scares me. Though I am concerned with too much military action, I am petrified of the Democratic swing to do nothing, say everthing actions of the past. I don't care what the world the world thinks of us. If we are to die, let's do it fighting and not hugging.

Posted by: Brian at July 27, 2004 12:00 PM

I love it!

Posted by: izzylouhoo at July 27, 2004 01:13 PM

eet ees funnny

Posted by: John Doe at July 27, 2004 02:44 PM

Funny, but how long are the media going to give the impression that republicans are dumb and democrats are brains...It is getting a bit old...

Posted by: steve at July 27, 2004 03:04 PM

In my many years, I have never seen a president weather so many catastrophies and give discive leadership like president Bush. When he made a decision, he carried it out even though it sometimes was very difficult to do. He has put into place a Home Land Security for our nation that up until now there have been no more terrorists successes in our nation. He has nipped a recession in the bud with his tax cuts and we are now seeing a growing economy. He has deposed a mass murderer, Saddam Hussein from Iraq and has instituted reform to democracy in that country against all odds. Saddam Hussein was paying Palestinian terrorist suicide bombers to kill the innocent Israeles with a reward of $25,000 to the family of the suicide bomber. This has been stopped. He has changed the mind of the Lybian leader to permit inspections. He has never caved in to the demands of the terrorists or yielded to their demands when they kidnapped innocent victims. He has fulfilled without the help of the UN the job that they vacillated in doing. He has brought honor to the presidential office that had been dishonored by the previous president. He has brought honor to the name of the commander-in-chief and honor to those under his command. He has tried to place reputable judges in their judgeships, but has been blocked by Ted Kennedy's stranglehold on the approval committee with the use of filabusters when honorable justices were blocked because they would not pass "Ted Kennedy's litmus test." He is running now a courageous race to return as our next president hoping to have enough conservative senators to lead this country forward and away from anarchy. He was placed in his position by the Almighty and the Almight will place him there again, unless the Almighty has decided to give a god-hating electorate what they deserve with a people pleaser. He has not used slander against his opponent, but has only spoke of the senate voting record of John Kerry. His opponent has permitted others to slander our president without trying to hush them or correct their slanders. We need a decisive president and president Bush is that person.
Jimmy Crowder

Posted by Jimmy Crowder at July 27, 2004 03:08 PM

Posted by: Jimmy Crowder at July 27, 2004 03:15 PM

Vote for Bush and Live.

Posted by: Priest at July 27, 2004 03:32 PM

NEWSFLASH PEOPLE!!!

GOD DOES NOT VOTE!!!

Bush was not put in place by "The almighty". He was put in place by THE AMERICAN PEOPLE (or the supreme court, but lets not split hairs). That's what DEMOCRACY MEANS!!!!

The King of England was said to be "annointed by god", but the united states elects the president. THE PEOPLE decide who the president is.

Even from a religius standpoint, saying god decided the president is rediculous. God gave man "free will". That idea behind democracy is that we use our "free will" to decide FOR OURSELVES who the president should be. Are these not the same free will???? Of course they are!!

Posted by: Aaron at July 27, 2004 05:38 PM

Well, I have to say, those cartoons are funny, and yes a good laugh is always a good thing. Seriously, I have watched the forums on this site for a few weeks, and am amazed at some of the venom, but bottom line, the future of America rest with George W Bush, there is no way that anyone can convince me that we would be safer with a Kerry presidency, and for that matter safer with any of the current crop of Democrats in any position including the cabinet. Vote Bush and thrive, vote Bush and live, and vote Bush and win!

Posted by: Mark at July 27, 2004 06:41 PM

i just have some quick questions,
when in our nation's history have we had a president that is so hated by the rest of the world? I don't remember hearing about a president that made it so difficult for other countries to trust America. Especially countries that have been our allies for decades.
Plus what happend to saving the environment and making the world a better place for our children? Bush's tax cuts depleted a budget surplus and brought us back into a deficit, A RECORD DEFICIT. I personally don't see where he has improved my life in any way during his presidency. Land that has been protected for as long as we've been protecting land has now been opened up to development, is this what we really want? I think our nation would find it very hard to bounce back from four more years of Bush.

Posted by: libno the terror at July 27, 2004 07:37 PM

Liberal is a fancy way of saying you have no morals or values. Kerry=Liberal Liberal=disaster

Posted by: Bush Supporter at July 28, 2004 12:02 AM

Priorities, everyone has them, and the first and foremost has to be our security. Once we have that under control we can then concentrate on the other issues that we all want to improve. America has been so soft in the past in respect to our national security by letting the terrorists control without reprimand. We need to show the world that we again are a strong and dedicated country and will no longer coward to the terrorists of the world in spite of what the UN is trying to sell. We need to set an example for the rest of the world to follow in reference to our stand against terrorists. France, Spain and the Philippines have already folded to the terrorists and who knows who will be next.
This is not a pleasant thing for any president to have to do and we have and will continue to suffer until it is resolved. It must be done if we are to survive as a free country. America must improve its image to the world and president Bush is the only one that has the dedication and stamina to get this very unpleasant job done. Lets all get behind our president, putting all the politics and head bashing aside, to accomplish this mission and restore the US as a world leader and a country to be reckoned with!

Posted by: Jim at July 28, 2004 10:07 AM

The libbys can't handle anyone with any sort of conviction that differs from them. The vitriolic language coming out of the "mainstream" press truly makes me understand the dangers we are facing. Freedom of the press is one of the cornerstones of our freedom. When the mainstream bases all their sources in the liberal rags like the NY or LA Times, there is little wonder why this country is so divided. If the direction the dems want to take this country doesn't set well with you like it doesn't for me do what it takes to re-elect Bush and Cheney.. Our president has stood fast in the face of world terror. While the libbys would let the UN dictate to us and compromise our sovereignty as a nation.
"Appeasers believe that if you keep on throwing steaks at a tiger, the tiger will turn vegetarian." Kerry is an appeaser. If Kerry were elected the 2nd amendment would be in jeopardy. I'd recommend people read Madison's letters to New York in the "Federalist Papers" to truly understand the significance of the 2nd Amendment in today's society. It is crucial to protect the individual against a federal tyranny.

Make a difference, join and support the NRA. Contact the Bush Campaign and contribute, inform your friends and colleagues to make a difference in November. Kerry is the most liberal person this country has seen in an election race since 1984 with Dukakis.

http://www.nraila.com
http://www.georgewbush.com

"I am the NRA"

Member since 1998

Posted by: Farmer Jones at July 28, 2004 10:19 AM

Hey Bush Supporter, I think you got the definition of liberal wrong. When I look up Bush, I see no morals, no values and IGNORANCE just like yourself.

Posted by: Kevin at July 28, 2004 12:52 PM

"The Labor Department announced that employers added 288,000 new jobs in April. In total, over 1.1 million jobs have been added from April to August, with 8 consecutive months of gains."

We have not had a terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11. In a free and open society that is a miracle.

Bush inherited a recession and the terrorists were planning to attack us during the previous administration.

We are seeing much needed improvement. Finally we have integrity in the White House. I challenge anyone to show hard core proof that Bush has not kept his integrity and credibility in tact. We did the U.N.'s job by taking down Saddam. The resoultions were passed. Johns Edwards and Kerry agreed. Does the greatest nation in the history of the world need a permission slip from France to lead a coalition to protect the interests of the rest of the free world? Keep in mind France was in bed with Saddam and his boys.

Bush sees the evidence. Michael Moore, Hollywood, and the rest of us do not. Based on the evidence he has protected our interests,even when we have personally attacked him. That's integrity. I am not sure why that offends some 50% of the population of the U.S., but I for one am grateful.

Posted by: Chris Tatem at July 28, 2004 02:06 PM

What i have seen in the last four years is a president that has NOT sold the white house for contrbutions. I have seen a president that has NOT used the White House for immoral sexual deviations that some would easily excuse as acceptable behavior. I have seen a president that has put 1200.00 back into my pocket a year. I have seen a president that cares more about the people of the united states than appeasing the united (corrupt) nations. This president has made decisions when they weren't popular, then stuck by them when the heat was on.I truly find it amazing that people put a woman in power as a senator for no other reason than her husband cheated on her and she stayed with him to futher her own aganda. that is sad. I think the only right decsion to make is to make sure Kerry dosen't get in and run this country by caring what other countries who i might add have hated us , Or should i say have been jealous of us for more than just four years. I have been to the other countries and long before Bush became president they hated us. The French people hated us back when i was there under Jimmy Carter, and they still hate us now. So if anyone thinks John Kerry will get the french and germans to change their minds they are in lala land. Watch as the elections get closer as the democratic party starts with the Elderly scare tatics and the Retoric that the republicans will take your social security and the Locus are comingm hide your tomatoe plants. It is funny they can't run on there records, just hate filled retoric that is nothing more than scare tatics. This is one registered Democrat that is voting for BUSH!

Posted by: Larry at July 28, 2004 02:37 PM

Farmer jones do you actually look at what each candidate stands for or do you just listen to the media? The media only tells bias views and most people believe what the say. also what is your definition of morals? if your definitions include the murder of millions of innocent babies and gay marriage well then you got tons of morals just like kerry. well sorry to tell but none of those things are morally right and bush doesnt support any of those things so i think its you and kerry who got no morals. maybe you should research what each candidate stands for before you say anything.

Posted by: me at July 28, 2004 02:39 PM

So let me get this straight, we should arm ourselves so we can defend against an overbearing government? What's a 9mm pistol going to help you do against a cruise missle? You live in a world of false conscienceness, stroking your gun to help bloat your ego and make you feel like you have any standing in this world. Fact of the matter is topics like this are obsolete and tired. In our political process leadership falls in the hands of who the populous would like. Meaning that if such a dictatorship were to arise you'd be too busy praying to our new leader and loving every aspect of him to even think about picking up a gun.

It's those who do not pose questions, who do not have any real passionate beliefs, who do not participate in the democratic process that cause dictatorships to arise. You think Hitler flexed his military might to gain control? It was his charisma and appealing to the people that made him powerful. The NRA is an organization founded on the belief that harming your fellow man is okay and a coalition of scared little boys who have no oratory powers, no other source of power in the world and thus must stoop to the lowest common denominator.

A bit of advice, put down your weapons and talk about what made you reach for it in the first place. More hearts will be won by the printed word than the bullet.

Posted by: RealAmerican at July 28, 2004 03:07 PM

Vote for Bush...4 more years. At least we will get someone who stands on his convictions. Everytime Kerry speaks, he says something different than the previous time (about the same subject) I just don't trust him. Bush is the better man - hands down ! ! ! ! ! !

Posted by: anne at July 28, 2004 03:07 PM

I was just browsing this site, and it looks to me that I have come to a republican site. This country is divided 50/50, and looking at the comments, is sounds to me that 50% of Americans who are democrats do not have any morals or are corrupted? It is sad to see, that the people on this site do not have an open mind. What about the 3.5 mil jobs we have lost? With that health insurance. My husband lost his job because of outsourcing, and so have a lot of friends of ours, and I have a heart condition. Homeland Security is important however, many people die because they do not have insurance, what is worse?Come down from your high horse and smell the roses. We are all one under God and America is the UNITED states. Bashing and insulting your opponents is not moral either, God bless

Posted by: Jeanette at July 28, 2004 04:27 PM

During these evil times in our nation, when unborn babies are killed just before and/or during birth, homosexual sins are called rights, and environmental concerns over shadow human need; we must have a leader, who stands firmly for moral issues. GEORGE W. BUSH is that man. The future of our grandchildren depends upon a majority of solid conservative votes in November. Flip-flop politicians will say anything to get elected. Once elected they will force their own agenda. Let's stay the course with our current forceful leader, who stands for God and County. President Bush needs us to vote and we need him to serve another four years.

Posted by: James Kirksey at July 28, 2004 09:05 PM

Dear Farmer Jones,

Thank you for proving my point. It seems that liberals this election cycle keep calling President Bush names, keep referring to him as ignorant but have at no point that I have seen anywhere, set forth 'HOW' the Kerry/Edwards ticket would do better, (Probably because Kerry/Edwards have failed to propose any meat in their arguments.) All I hear from the left is hate, and a severe lack of fact or misrepresentation of fact. And to the guy who said that GW was the most hated President in recent history by our allies, a brief history lesson, RONALD REAGAN, the press and the liberals said the same thing about him prior to his second term, and the election wwas supposed to be close too. I guess the word Ignorant is in the eye of the beholder.

Posted by: Mark at July 28, 2004 10:25 PM

One thing that is true about the jibjab.com cartoon- Kerry was all ad hominem (stupid, etc.) while Bush actually talked about what was wrong with Kerry (plus there was also ad hominem too). In short, I think it accurately portrays what the two campaigns really have behind them and what they will do when the debates start.

Posted by: phil at July 28, 2004 10:26 PM

I apologize Farmer Jones, My previous post should have been directed at Kevin and his refeence to President Bush being Ignorant, I copied the wrong posters name. You sir, have the right idea.

Posted by: Mark at July 28, 2004 10:31 PM

I loved this! And just to let everyone know, there are no real liberal or conservatives. I can't believe the small minded people that we have in our country today. The real truth is there are many spectrums of beliefs from radical consevatives to radical liberals. We all know that if someone is too radical, nothing good will ever be achieved. Look at the example of Bin Laden!
No administration is perfect, not Bush, not Clinton, not Wilson, not even either of the Roosevelt administrations. All I am saying is for everyone to get their facts straight before they judge Kerry or Bush. Do your homework, read!!!! Listening to the television will do you absolutely nothing. Republicans, prove the stereo types wrong, and Democrats, do the same. Quit listening to the outlandish slanders. WE are deciding this election. It is our duty to do the research and do some homework. We should be able to give more than a two sentence answer as to why we are voting for the right president. And really, go out and vote. Bless you all!!!!!!!

Posted by: MissKMW at July 29, 2004 12:39 AM

This is a VERY FUNNY cartoon video and I recommend it for anyone regardless of which side of the aisle you're on. Hillarious !

President Bush has shown SOLID LEADERSHIP under some very difficult circumstances and I believe that America's future rests with him. With all the " I hate Bush" attacks, Farseneheit 9/11, liberal and leftists attacks, President Bush still shows strong character and leadership.

Stand Your Ground Mr. President, We're With You !
God Bless America

Posted by: J.R. at July 29, 2004 08:59 AM

I used to be a right wing Republican, but I do not believe that the Republicans represent all of the people of this nation. Republicans feel threatened if people do not think the same way they do. They are the party of the rich and the privileged. I resent the vilifying of the name "liberal": "liberal" means generous, free, giving, and it implies giving the most to the most--or maybe all the people.

The conduct of the Iraq war shows that Bush falters. Bush does not represent me and many Americans.

Posted by: David at July 29, 2004 10:11 AM

P.S. Just a note to Mr. "I am the NRA"
Before you go bashing on the Liberals, why don't you get your facts straight. Dukakis ran in 1988, not 1984. Proving those stereo-types correct one more time again!

Posted by: MissKMW at July 29, 2004 10:48 AM

Hey Kerry supporters, maybe you can explain something to me. I have been watching the Democrat Convention on PBS every day and I am confused as to what the heck Kerry thinks. On one hand Democrat after Democrat accuses Bush of spreading the military too thin (an argument that I agree with) and underfunded (even though Kerry voted against the funding...) On the other hand they complain about how much the war has cost. Then of course there is the new commercial where Kerry says we are funding schools in Iraq while not funding them at home. Yet, all the Democrats insist that they woulde not pull out of Iraq. Howard Dean said in an interview with Jim that Kerry's plan was not much different than Bush's. My question is, what is Kerry going to do about the war in Iraq that is different from Bush? He seems to want to make it a campaign issue but does not have a position. I know Bush's plan but what is Kerry's? And if the Democrats are so concerned about those of us in the military when are they going to start supporting better funding and higher pay for us? All the lip service to the military I have seen is offensive to me because I do not see any concrete proposals from Democrats on how they will help the military. Bush gave us a raise within his first one-hundred days, thats better than what we got under Clinton. So why should I vote for Kerry? Until I see the Democrats practice what they preach my vote is solid for Bush.

P.S. I don't care if he served in Vietnam. I know a lot of people who have and it doesn't in itself qualify you for President.

Posted by: W.T. Barton at July 29, 2004 12:14 PM

I could not imagine what Gore would have done after the 9/11 attacks. I guess he would have acted like his former boss and dropped a couple of bombs on an empty tent, after an Environmental Impact study was completed by GreenPeace. In all fairness, most likely any President would have reacted the same way Bush acted. The difference between the Donkeys and Elephants is when you start a Elephant stampede, nothing will stop them until they reach their goal, where as Donkey's will only go so far then just quit, then they won't move out of stubborness. I have never seen a stampede of wild donkeys anyway. That is exactly what has happened in the war on terrorism. Bush(the elephant)explained at the onset that we were going to get the attackers and then onward toward removing them globally. The donkeys said: "Yeah, let's go get em, we're with you man...(that's the hippie coming out in them)". Now the donkeys say: "hey man... let's just do afghanistan man....." they just quit. That is the Democrats entire outlook on things: Only treat the symptom so they can "FEEL" good and admire their good deeds; where as Republicans treat the sore, but also look to heal that which is causing the sore. For if you don't heal the cause, the sore will return. You libs had best be thankful you had President Bush, so we won't have to worry about these types of things in the future.

One other thing, while you read these blogs, notice the intellectual thoughtfulness of most "crazed right-wingers" compared to the 3rd-gradish immature view of a lot of Democrats. We are accused, by the libs, as the uneducated, unenlightened ones in America, but just listen to your comments and your Hollywood leaders, who at best may have a liberal arts degree. I guess the liberals wait to have a script written for them (since they own Hollywood), before they actuaully know what they think. I also move to add another emblem to their mascot holdings: windshield wipers! Because they flip back and forth, and just remove what's on the surface....all the while shouting that they have stopped the rain.

Posted by: Jeff at July 29, 2004 02:25 PM

Plain and simple this country needs a commander in chief who will lead and not succumb to the pressures of the world and terrorists. The United States of America is the world powerhouse and needs to stay this way. As long as we are number one then the world will hate us. What we all need to understand is that if people don�t hate us then we are no longer on top. Our President took the �Bull by the Horns� told the UN to shove it!! And above all took care of the American People. This is something that our former president did not ever do. No matter what anyone says we are much safer since we invaded Iraq. Vote for a president that will make a decision for the people and not for his political career. Vote George W. Bush

Posted by: Justin King at July 29, 2004 04:23 PM

Hey Jeff, if you want to get the complete scoop on just how insane Hollywood has become, you should read "Hollywood, Interrupted" by Andrew Breitbart & Mark Ebner.
The "Hollywood Elite" really believe they are the chosen ones and feel it is their duty to enlighten the rest of America with their wisdom. The truth is they're really not much better than the guests on Jerry Springer's show.

Posted by: RT at July 29, 2004 06:02 PM

I may disagree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!

Posted by: David at July 29, 2004 06:03 PM

It's amazing to me how a good number of the people in this great country don't understand what America stands for. They don't understand what freedom is, and the necessary sacrifice to keep it in existence. They don't understand the Constitution and how it protects this country from falling. If all would unbiasly study and learn the truth of these, people wouldn't be succumbed to this media-kindled hatred towards President Bush. He is a great man and who does represent, lead and defend the United States with honor and dignity. He cares about the right principles not the right words to say when the camera is on. He is a compassionate leader who is full of good heart and righteous intentions! That’s who I want as President of the United States of America! That's who I believe the majority of America truly wants too!

Posted by: Brandon at July 29, 2004 11:52 PM

George Bush is a good guy, and has helped our nation get through some tough times. I'll give him my vote.

Posted by: Peter R at July 30, 2004 12:06 AM

I agree with Jeanette!! WE NEED GW TO STAY THE COURSE! Kerry and Edwards stood there and offered America everything it wants even if it is contradictory. The fact is, they do have there own agenda and it does not include anything they have promised. Kerry is about as far from Presidential material as George Burns is to winning the next Boston Marathon.

Posted by: Robbe Zappa at July 30, 2004 12:37 AM

Hey,

Just returned from Iraq, what a neat and beautiful place it is. Scenes straight out of Charleston Hesston�s 1960�s biblical movies. It was pretty cool. Some day I hope to go back and visit the Garden of Eden. The Americans are showing hope and compassion, the Iraqi's are doing their best, but most of all the kids have hope.

Side note --the Abu Gharib prison scandal is just that a scandal -- the people involved were promiscuous and out of control. These young people were overwhelmed, leaderless and perverted. Their commanders were the result of the welfare Guard instituted by President Clinton. Don�t join if you don�t want to fight.

Now to the real subject at hand. Ask any Operation Iraqi Freedom Vet who is not a Welfare Soldier what kind of shape they think a three time Purple Heart winner would be in � I am confident they will tell you they would be dead two times over. It doesn�t take a Rocket Scientist to figure out John Kerry�s motives during the Vietnam War. I commend him on going, but what was his goal. 4 months? If he really was a member of a �Band of Brothers� then why would he leave them? I am not questioning his patriotism just his motives. I know I have a multitude of lifelong friends from OIF and I will NEVER leave them.

Why all the hatred from the left? What do they really care about the War in Iraq? What do they know that we don�t? Let me see � Michael Moore � white, fat, multimillionaire; John Kerry � white, skinny, gigolo (billionaire) Did you see the shot with one of Teresa Heinz�s sons staring at one of John Kerry�s daughters tits in the bleachers � disgusting; John Edwards � white, chunky, multimillionaire Did you see him throwing his kids around like Michael Jackson � his poor daughter was scared trying to hold onto his hand and he yanked it forcibly away numerous times SICK. Oh yeah the point: what in the hell do whoever the anti-Bush is made up of think � the three Amigos are going to help them � wake up, please.

If you saw the putrid state of affairs in Iraq you would never discount this war! They were like the dogs caged up at the Best Friends Animal Sanctuary in Utah. Another putrid place. Anyways the left would have us believe the no kill theory � like at Best Friends where urbanites abandon their dogs because they get in the way of their quest for dollars. Its okay though because they will have a nice place caged in with other dogs to wilt away. They usually start to go insane within 2 months Imagine 35 years. The link is the left talks and the right acts. Plain and simple. Bush never said anything other than he was going to kick their ass as long as it takes. Did he? The left on the other hand tries to humiliate ours troops in Iraqi, our coalition (us and the little guys � the ones who have lived through the tyranny of Russia and Germany) France has such a Muslim influx that they think they can�t do anything. COWARDS, make Goebbel (Hitler�s Michael Moore) propaganda movies, thrust the hypocrisy of the bourgeoisie Hollywood on us � maybe we can sue all the actors at the conventions and on the media for promoting a political agenda � I never intended to donate to the Whoopi Goldberg left when I went to see Sister Act.
We are all still alive � the terrorist are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan � so are Americans and others, so let us honor them instead of treading on them. Everybody isn�t born to be a soldier, but everybody should have respect and quit trying to live in an imaginary World. The truth is based on perception sometimes, but when it is integrated with cynicism than it is tyrannical in a time of war. Voice your opinion and talk with others, have conversations not confrontations. If there is one thing we all know � it is that we know nothing! Don�t say you are going to take the high road just do it! And remember if we didn�t have the big drug companies we wouldn�t have Lance Armstrong! Viva le Lance!

Smile � the sun came up today � quit wasting time arguing and just write how you feel not how you think they should think.

- yours forever

An American Soldier

Posted by: GI Iraq at July 30, 2004 02:29 AM

One last point �

Someday soon I think people in the United States of America will realize a couple of things:

1.) Someday soon 50% of the population will be supporting the other 50% - I don�t know about you, but if I didn�t pay taxes I wouldn�t vote to increase them. Reality is - civil war is on the horizon � workers against non-workers.
2.) Racism: go to foreign countries and learn what racism really is!
3.) The real battle of our time is still Democracy vs. Communism. US vs. China
Battleground: Middle East.
Why? I don�t know ask your dad! Read about the Caspian Sea, South China Sea and see what is really going on.
4.) Try walking in my shoes: quit thinking you could do somebody else�s job i.e. Presidency of the United States.
5.) Conspiracies: if your life is so boring that you believe in Michael Moore�s conspiracies than you need to get a job.
6.) Marriage: I�ll give you a million dollars if you can stick it in my ass and make me pregnant or a female immaculate conception.
7.) Ward of the State: each government program gathers more constituents, welfare, and unemployment, on and on and yet you don�t realize you are just a ward of the state. Dumb Ass!
8.) Life: whatever you want it to be � your perception is your reality so if you want to change it then learn so you can figure out how to do it better.

Oh there is a mistake in there � just want to see who can read!

Posted by: GI Iraq at July 30, 2004 03:05 AM

It's amazing and incomprehensible to me how anyone, with any intelligence and judgement, would describe George Bush a leader with "values"

There are ample examples, verifiable, that we can all refer to which show that President Bush has lied and flipped-flopped in his explanations. Does that show "values?"

Mr. Bush, even with a silver spoon in his mouth, has failed in everything he has tried, only to be bailed out by his family connections and the Supreme Court (2004 election).

When a man states in a speech to the "super-rich" that they are his base, who do you think he is working for?

When a man, and his family, hold hands with the Saudi Royal Family, is it far off to think that they could put their own interests ahead of Americans?

When the Bush administration fights tooth and nail to not make the financial help, the $87B, for Iraq's reconstruction repayable loans, isn't it logical to question why?

Who are their priorities, Iraqi's or Americans?

Note that the 87B, most of it, ends up in the pockets of the contractors, namely Haliburton. Is it too far-fetched to think that there is something suspicious about this circular flow of cash from us the taxpayers to a specific interest that is connected to the White House -- especially in light of the fraudulent bidding process for those contracts?

Is it too hard for some of you to see that it has taken thousands of innocent Iraqi's and over 900 of our own American soldiers lives to free the Iraqi people from Saddam. How many more of our own have to die before we will say that the price for liberating Iraq is way too high? Should we sacrifice more American blood, your son or husband or wife or daughter, to free North Koreans? Cubans? Chinese? etc.

Is it so difficult to see that the so-called "coalition" in Iraq is a sham, that in reality it is only the Brittish and us. The rest are token contingents.

When Bush is disliked by not just 50% of Americans, but also much of the rest of the world, including friendly countries and prior allies, is it that they are all blind and simply do not understand Bush's "genius." Is most of the world wrong?

Some people that do not like Bush think that he has masterminded all these issues and many more. I am not one of them. I just think he is way over his head, as he was when running his oil company or when he was at Yale. He is mediocre in terms of intelligence, he is short-sighted, and too extreme with his dogma. He is simply incompetent to run a business, let alone our country.

I surely hope that the Republican Party does a better job in selecting a better candidate for the Presidency next time around, we are all stuck with this one for now. At this moment Reagan, which I was not too fond of, or even Bush Senior would be a much better choice than this junior Bush. The reason I do care about the Republican candidate is that if he wins, it affects my life and the life of all others.

If you are truly and honestly for values and for America, vote for Kerry. He might not be the best candidate, he has his own issues, but at least we can trust that he will bring the rest of the world to our side again. We can trust that Kerry, who actually served in the military -- in battle -- has the courage to face the enemy head on. He will not hide behind a group of kids in a classrooom, Kerry will be a decisive commander-in-chief.

Posted by: Jose at July 30, 2004 05:26 AM

It's interesting, and somewhat funny, how one of the previous bloggers congratulated himself for the thoughtfulness of "crazed right-wingers" (Barton) postings here.

The reason it is funny, is that the so-called thoughtfulness is actually somewhat shallow in reasoning. Many of the arguments made here, by everyone, are mere generalizations with very little substance. It is a rehash of what we all see in the media.

Take the comment by MissKMW above "Then of course there is the new commercial where Kerry says we are funding schools in Iraq while not funding them at home. Yet, all the Democrats insist that they woulde not pull out of Iraq."

Her intention is to give an example of how contradictory these statements, given by democrats, are. If one were to give a little more thought to these statements, we could come to agree that they are not contradictory. We must stay to complete the job, that is a general agreement, but do we have to take on all the burden. There are allies that can be tapped by a more respected and diplomatic President such as Kerry. Also, we can still reverse the decision by Bush to not make the 87B (or the 20B that went to Iraq directly to be more precise) repayable loans with Iraqi oil - over time.

We could reduce the overall cost of the war by having the Iraqi's pay their own way to freedom and for their own schools. But the Bush administration has fought that fiercely. Do you wonder why? And don't tell me that Republicans are now philanthropists.

It is quite possible to reduce the cost of war and "free" up some money to pay for our own schools in America.

Is my interpretation of the democratic comments above feasible in your minds? At least a little bit? If so, then the contradiction sought by the writer is undermined. If it is undermined then many other of her arguments also become suspect.

This is only 1 example of the shallowness whether by design or ignorance that abounds in most of these blogs. So, I would not be too proud of the "thoughtfulness" of your conservative bloggers. But my guess is that Bush supporters may find it difficult to comprehend these complexities*.

----------------------------------------------
* I know that my last comment may be somewhat rude, but I just want to make the point that in my view Bush caters, with his soundbites and charades (such as the fighter-pilot stunt) to the ignorant. Again, I am not sure if it is by design or by genuine incompetence. But the fact remains that Bush is attractive to people like himself.

Posted by: Jose at July 30, 2004 05:58 AM

Why don't the youth vote? I'll tell you why the youth can't vote. The 15 million U.S. "youth" enrolled in American colleges are hindered by the process of absentee ballots. People complain about the steady decrease of youth voters since giving sufferage to 18 year olds, yet they don't note the vast increases in college enrollment. We can't vote. I tried and found out in order to hold a REAL "get out the vote" activity on a college campus you need specific information to each individual county. How about the kids that have to fly back to Florida to vote? Enough with "Vote or Die" it doesn't help if you live away from your voting district. Could someone please give P. Diddy a clue. We can't vote because the process blocks us from doing so. WHY IS NO ONE SEEING THIS!!!

Posted by: Disenfranchised College Student at July 30, 2004 07:40 AM

I remember back in the 2000 election.
What did Bush promise?
Compassionate Consevativism?

There is nothing compassionate or conservative about unilateral pre-emptive war, promoting far right agendas that alienate half the country, and sending our troops to war without the real reason, a real plan, and real financing to get the job done.

George W. Bush said he would unify this country and ALL HE HAS DONE IS DIVIDE.

He has divided us from each other and the world.

And a clue for all of you Liberal does not mean immoral or not Godly.

That is something someone made up.

And if you haven't read your Bible lately.

Jesus was inclusive not exclusive. He gave love and gave it freely even to those who maybe didn't deserve it. And still does.

We should all live and have a leader that lives by THIS principal.

We need a uniter not a divider.
We need a promoter for all the people not just Big Business and the Thick Religious Right (Wrong).
We need someone that can communicate not a man who went to Yale and can barely audibly speak speeches written for him.
We need a vision not a canned plan from old Reagan mafia.

We need a real leader.

We need John Kerry.

And if not him, a cow could do better.

Posted by: Melissa at July 30, 2004 10:29 AM

Im only 16 years of age and i can not vote. But if i can make swing voters vote, thats all i want in america im not saying vote kerry or bush even though i do support kerry i just want anyone who dident vote VOTE, now about this cartoon i thought it was very funny because its so true all R's and the D's is sit around and yell at each other like this fourm here all you adults are sitting around finding bad stuff on bish or kerry why wont you do somthing dont be a coward and im tired of hearing about france and all that b%*#@!$^ going to iraq was pointless....
(Edited)

Posted by: Rego at July 30, 2004 10:40 AM

Dear Disenfranchised College Student:

Jesus came to cause the greatest DIVISION of all. Read this: Luke 12:51 - "Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I have come to bring strife and division!"

Sorry to burst your peace bubble.

Posted by: Jeff at July 30, 2004 05:36 PM

I believe most of us think of Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton when we hear the word Liberal. It is therefore hard to imagine that (Based on voting records) Kerry/Edwards is a MORE LIBERAL team than Kennedy/Clinton would have been.

Posted by: Richard at July 31, 2004 05:56 AM

If Kerry voted FOR the 87billion before he voted AGAINST it... did it ever occur to anyone to ask who voted AGAINST it before they voted FOR it? It didn't pass the first time... did anyone think to ask why not? Is anyone aware of what a meaningless protest vote is? There's a lot of ignorance out there, and yes, that's Our Fearless Leader's base.

FactCheck is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, project funded by the Annenberg Foundation. Many of you would do well to get your facts straight.

http://www.factcheck.org/default.aspx

Also, there's this... odor... in the air. The stench of folks speaking ill of that which they do not know. Go to Kerry's site, check it out, don't take Bill O'Reilly's word on EVERYTHING.

http://www.johnkerry.com

All this talk about security and defense seems a little superstitious. How much do you know about the military, it's budgeting, it's strategies? Here's another non-partisan site, devoted to all things defense, check it out, educate yourself.

http://www.cdi.org/

Posted by: michelle at July 31, 2004 12:05 PM

Check out http://www.swiftvets.com/ for the real truth about John Kerry

Posted by: Jim Rodkey at August 1, 2004 08:19 PM

hello people wake up i don't see how you can possibly call bush "honest" and "loyal" and then call librals people with no values. First of all bush is a lieing moron, he might be a good lier but that won't save him, i will not vote for someone who immaturely attacks a nation that did NOTHING to us and then changes the reason, you know when clition lied nobody died, when bush lies because of his stupid fear mongering to attack anyone that he doesn't like and call them "communist" oh sorry the new word is "terrorist" and calls everyone in america terroists that say anything about the government that is bad, sounds like Stalin to me, nope just the Patriot Act. our founding fathers said that if we have to "destroy civil liberites to increase defence we don't deserve either" so i guess bush doesn't. oh and by the way bush leaves out all the poor and focuses on the rich in the society gives them trillion dollar tax cuts and then throws us into war hello you idiot low taxes + big spending=big DEFICIT! plus my school is now left behind because our town is in debpt so much for the "no child left behind act" oh yeah maybe if he didn't pull the funds and covered it by attacking kerry u might have known, and you say also that kerry bashes more than bush if u go to the bush site Kerry is on the front page with tons of anti-kerry propoganda and on the kerry site it isn't like that. plus this president is obessed with religion it is scary, hitler said he was placed in his position by god too u know, plus he wants to alienate people by teaching faith based? oh, but they say they are open, ok, put a buddist in a catholic church and if they don't do the cerimonies lets just socially abuse that person. i hate bush he is the worst president we have ever had i don't care what kerry has done the devil himself would make a better leader! bush is a INSAINE FEAR MONGERING LUNITIC!

Posted by: Matthew at August 6, 2004 02:16 PM

What I find amusing is the people that are angry at Kerry for supporting "the mortal sin of homosexuality".

Are all of you homophobes that insecure with yourselves that you can't stand the sight of seeing someone different from you happy?

Furthermore, your perception of "sin" has no place in our government. We need to keep religion and religious values OUT of our government, or we may someday be forced to repeat the days of religious persecution as we did in the late 17th century.

As a heterosexual Christian, I believe that we should "judge not, lest we be judged". Doesn't the bible say that?

My biggest gripe with Republicans is that they are out to better themselves, and only themselves. I believe that if you make better society as a whole, it will become better for each individual. Instead, the Republicans who have come from extremely wealthy families have money and power handed to them (e.g. - "W"), and then slam the poor man by saying that "he has to work for equality".

Hypocrisy, my friends, is not what this nation was founded upon. The founding fathers would be turning in their graves if they saw what was going on in their beloved USA today.

Do you think Thomas Jefferson would approve of the environmental debacle going on in this country today? Would Samuel Adams approve of the tax cuts to the filthy rich, and the rollback of child tax credits to the middle and lower classes? Would George Washington approve of this "war" we're fighting?

The answer to all three is no. You, I, George W, Tom Ridge, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, and Condoleeza Rice all know it.

Let's make a vote for fairness and equality. Vote for a green environment and clean water that our children and grandchildren may enjoy. Lets vote for sensible foreign policy (domestic, too...have we forgotten about our OWN problems?). Restore dignity and truth back to the White House.

If you disapprove of what's going on in your government today, write to your congressman or congresswoman. Write to your Senator. Pick up the phone and do something!

Remember, we learned in 2000 that every vote counts! On November 2nd, get out and exercise your right to vote, and vote for John Kerry and John Edwards!

Posted by: Jon at August 10, 2004 12:26 PM

Do you know how to tell when "John Kerry" is lieing? Very simple - "He opens his mouth!"

One must have morals - pride and dignity about himself and others to run for President ---- Thus far - "Bush" shines far above "Kerry" ---- It was a sad day for us all on 9/11 - I am very thankful that "Bush" was in charge of our country - that he held us together as "One Nation Under God Indivisible With Liberty and Justice for All!"

If any one out there pays attention to Fox News and the History Channel ---- they will get a better idea of what this world is up against (Weapons, Mass Graves, Brualitity, Hatred, Jihad, killings, bombings, slayings - heheadings, etc....--- it is not about 2 people running for political office --- it is about the one person whom believes strong enough in life that he is able to unite --- and will continue a path in the direction for the PEOPLE today, our children and their grandchildren to come ............

There is enough Negative in the world - without voting in a President without own personal accountability ----- I want a President with ethitics ----- one who believes in America and the Principals we were founded on!

How many of you - on 9/11 - first words out of mouth --- "Oh my God --- and how many of you believed strong enough to be on your knees in prayer --- and how many felt the instant relief of knowing God was a part of our lives and our uncertainty ------ "Bush" is a believer --- during 9/11 we all were!

Cast your vote as if you were admist a terriost attach --- whom do you want to lead your life path through it! Could any of us acted as George Bush on 9/11 taking the fire attacks from others whom believe he has over reacted..... How much further should we fall - before we stand firm aginst the evil around us - making the choice to stand tall?

Posted by: Bb at August 11, 2004 10:29 AM

Jon I would ask you to show me anywhere in the US Constitution where it says Separation of Church and State. It seems that Liberal Democrats want to read into the Constitution anything that fits their needs. This Country was founded on Religion and the right to practice without persecution. The Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." It didn't say the Government and Religion couldn't co-exist.

You talk of Hypocrisy when the two men running for the Democratic ticket are two of the wealthiest men in America. They go to a Wendy's for a photo op and have 5 star lunches delivered to their busses from a Yacht club. You lump all Republicans as the extremely wealthy, but I see very few Hollywood types in the Republican Party. I guess getting paid 1 mil per episode for a sitcom doesn't count as wealthy does it. John Edwards and John Kerry have more money that President Bush but it's the Republicans who are the wealthiest. You want to see a Hypocrite take a good long look in the mirror.

As for the rollback on child credits you can thank the DEMOCRATS for that one and all the other rollbacks that are coming down the line. In order for President Bush to get his tax cuts through Congress (so stimulate the economy) they had to concede to the Democrats who would agree to the tax cuts if they were ALL rolled back by 2010. Don't blame the Republican for the actions of the Democrats.

When the President wanted to give TAX paying families a check for the child tax credit it was the Democrats that said it was not fair unless every family received the check INCLUDING families that did not pay one single cent of taxes. So here we have someone who did not pay taxes and they still get a credit that you and I as tax paying citizens earned. I guess that's you idea of a just moral society though.

Here is a story I read on my clubs web site.

A young self proclaimed Liberal Democrat just home from college on a break asked her father how he could possibly be a Republican. He said I feel I should be able to keep what I earn, I worked hard for it and I don't feel that I should pay more taxes to help others who don't work.

She told him that he was wrong and that it's the responsibility of the wealthy to take care of the poor.

He changed the subject and asked her how school was going. She said, man it's hard. I study all the time, never get to go out and have fun. It's not at all like I though it would be. He asked about her grades and she said she was working harder than most but had a 4.0 average.

He then asked about her roommate and how she was doing. Oh she parties all the time, rarely studies and has a 2.0 average, but she seems to be enjoying herself.

The father suggested that when she goes back to school she should go see the dean and tell him that you want to give your roommate 1.0 of your average and that way you both can have 3.0 averages and everyone is happy.

She said NO way I worked hard for those grades and she partied all the time and didn't study for the tests.

Her father said, "Welcome to the Republican Party"

Bottom line is, if the people keep relying on the government to live then they will never try and better themselves. That is the Democrats underlying philosophy. Keep the poor, poor and promise them social programs to they will keep voting for them. As long as there are Social Programs there will be poor people.

I myself grew up in the slums of the big city, rarely had shoes on my feet, went hungry many nights and made myself a promise that I would not live my life that way. I joined the Military out of High School and am doing pretty well for myself. There is always a way out if you are willing to look for it.

I guess you are an expert on the thoughts of dead people too. You have know Idea what the founding fathers would have thought, so don't try and preach what you don't know.

Posted by: Wayne at August 11, 2004 12:39 PM

I'm registered Independent, but it's easier to believe in the Republicans than the Democrats, maybe the problem with unemployment in this country is not Bush's "so called evil plot" to protect the wealthy, maybe its the fact that a lot of Americans are just damn lazy, and the Democrats help them be lazy. I work hard for what I have, and its not that much, just what I need to live comfortably, I ALSO EXPECT PEOPLE TO WORK FOR ALIVING, is that wrong?? I don't like the fact that money comes out of my paycheck to help people who are sitting on their butts doing nothing, why should I? why should you?If we made it a volunteer program, would you give half your paycheck to someone with no job, and no initiative to look for one? I doubt it. Like I said I'm registered Independent, but you can't call Republicans stupid at every turn just because you have no answers. And also, when is a man worth billions with 4 mansions worth millions speaking for the common man?? All these "Rock stars and Hollywood elite" with their millions, are they speaking for the common man too? maybe they should start giving there money away, sell there mansions and help the lazy? I don't see that happening either. As I read through these posts, I see people making valis points and Arguments (Republicans) and people throwing out frustrated name calling (Democrats) Bur if you stand for a weaker military, higher taxes, high price gasoline, your kids doing mandatory community service to graduate,and helping the lazy be lazy, then vote for Kerry, I'LL BE VOTING FOR BUSH, (Go ahead Democrat, call me stupid now, I'll be waiting)

Posted by: Chris at August 12, 2004 10:24 AM

Hi Wayne U R stupid. well don't cry - you were begging for it. truth is all you so-called conservatives are all a bunch of sheep that are being led by the nose by the likes of Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, and all the other jerks at Fox, MSNBC, etc. who all have the same agenda -screw the working man & look out for the rich. If you had to think for yourself you would be lost. I just can't believe how many of you out there just can't send this country to hell fast enough. When you & your so-called president speak of evil you should be looking in the mirror because you are the most evil of all.

Posted by: Big D at August 13, 2004 02:33 AM

I was a registered and voting Democrat until 1980 when I saw the light and changed parties. I just couldn't stomach Legal Murder (Abortion) and the systematic pushing of God out of this country that was founded on His name. In 1980 we voted Ronald Regan into office after Jimmy Carter down-sized our military almost to extinction, and allowed Iran to maintain 51 Americans in captivity, and ran the economy into the dumper. Now we are allowing Gay marrage, truth benders like Michael Moore and Al Franken and pushing the limits on embryonic stem cell research to push us closer and closer to the brink. We survived Jimmy Carter, we survived Billary Ramrod-Clinton. I'm not sure we have another save in us.

Posted by: Ron at August 13, 2004 06:33 PM

Instant Hero?

There is something that has been bothering me for some time. And the more I think about it, the less sense it makes. John Kerry received three Purple Hearts in Vietnam. Not one, not two� But three! I would like to know how many other people have received three of these awards. I am sure there may have been a few. And it is not just the number of awards that really makes this amazing, but the fact that he (John Kerry) did it in just four short months!
What makes this truly monumental is: most people honored with this award have received wounds severe enough to require months of recuperation. A lot of the defenders of our country received this award posthumously (did not survive the wounds). Also, you don�t receive multiple purple hearts for a single wound, nor for multiple wounds received at the same time. This means he (John Kerry) would�ve received the wound, been medically treated, recuperated and returned to battle three times!! And in four short months!! This would be nothing short of miraculous. Then, he (John Kerry) was sent back stateside, after just four short months in Vietnam! And he shows no ill effects of these wounds to this day. Take a look around our Veteran�s hospitals to see what medial problems a �wounded� Vet suffers from. Then take a look at John Kerry. Is this a miracle in the making?
Is there a credibility issue here? Were these wounds of the severity to really deserve a �Purple Heart� and not detract from, or denigrate the names, of the real �Heroes� who�ve received this award? Were these awards (along with the other awards received by Mr. Kerry) pushed through by influential �Friends� and/or Family to pad a future political career?
I think Mr. Kerry should be required to wear a label reading �Instant Hero � Just add Medals� And subtract credibility.

R. E. Gragg
Sergeant First Class, U.S. Army Retired

Posted by: Ron at August 13, 2004 06:43 PM

i've been watching these elections for almost fifty years... i have yet to see "anyone" tell the truth.... they can promise you anything and they dont have to deliver nothing, its just a dog & pony show and when its over,30% of the american people will vote........

Posted by: charles at August 14, 2004 12:20 AM

There's nothing funnier than a desperate Democrat, wiggling and waggling all over the place. Very entertaining.

Posted by: Shirley Stanford at August 16, 2004 04:00 PM

www.bush4more.com

4 more years.

Posted by: bt at August 19, 2004 04:00 PM

www.kerryoniraq.com

good documentary on the candidate.

Posted by: bt at August 19, 2004 04:33 PM

Let's get this straight. The United States of America has REAL enemies. Some are apparent and others are more overt (I know that there are liberals running for the Oxford dictionary to look up "overt” To make it easy on you it simply means hidden.) Some are foreign and some are domestic.

Foreign enemies are usually easy to spot, they are the ones that, you know blow up buildings and behead innocent Americans. But then, there are the domestic enemies of the Country on whom we shall concentrate.

They are the ones that blend in with everyone else. They are the ones that promise the American electorate a better day, but never really lay out the plan. They are the ones that daily criticize the President of the United States (POTUS) and diminish the war effort. They are the ones that say that they support the troops in the war, but systematically block every attempt to fund the war that is being fought; at every opportunity, they seek to break the moral of the troops that are fighting, by telling them that the war in unjust and un-winnable. They are the ones who seek to silence 250 combat veterans who dare to speak up about there eyewitness account of the actions of the man that wants to be the next Commander in Chief.

At the risk being of be labeled verbose, I will wrap it up (For my liberal friends verbose means wordy.) At this unfrequented time in American history, it is these domestic enemies that stand to do more harm, than any of the foreign enemies. That is why it is absolutely imperative that any American who would like to see America strong and vibrant throughout the world and at home, get out to vote. But we can't stop there. We must ensure that our neighbor, friends and co-workers vote. More importantly, we must ensure that each voter is well equipped with facts and platform knowledge on which each candidate stands. It recent days it seems that JFK the Second has a wobbling platform from which he continues to waffle back and forth between both sides of all issues. He is baseless. Therefore, I am voting for GWB.

I challenge any liberal to point out one policy the JFK2 has uttered that they actually support. Tell me what about JFK2 that you actually like. It is well established that liberals don't like Bush for several reasons, but I want to know what it is about Kerry that makes him standout.

Posted by: Just Cause at August 21, 2004 06:23 AM

Kerry/Edwards is on the rocks!!! Let the Fat Lady sing, it's all over.

Posted by: Brian at August 24, 2004 11:31 PM

about the dems screaming about the deficit - clinton DID NOT balance the budget, leaving us "without debt" - that plan was supposed to run to 2010 - then, it MIGHT have been balanced, IF nothing came up - wars, extra aid to other countries, ect. about what this war is costing us - the military aint there for decoration, honey!!! would you rather save money, or be destroyed by iran, north korea, ext? why dont dems see that??????????????/

Posted by: MaryAnn at August 27, 2004 01:43 PM

Oh my word! I can't believe all of the republicans on this site! I was worried about the polls, but I didn't realize how many people on this site are for Bush. If I could vote I would vote for Kerry... duh. I can't believe people can say that Kerry is a bad man for being pro-choice. George Bush is "pro-killing twenty-year-olds for no reason and killing little Iraqi children and adults." I believe that is a lot worse. I also don't understand this whole thing about being against gay people. I for one didn't wake up one morning and decide to be strait, I just am. What makes you think gay people choose to be gay? I don't get it! And, besides, just because you can't have babies with your partner doesn't mean you can't adopt. Imagine all of the children in the orphanages finally getting adopted. That would solve over-population. Instead of basing all information on the Bible, think about what could really be true from the Bible. Personally, I don't think God would frown upon someone that was born gay. Everyone is different and I think he understands that. You talk about all of this thing about loving your neighbor, but you don't care about killing Iraqis, kids in the military, and you hate gay people... a bit contradicting, eh?

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at August 29, 2004 01:25 PM

FlamingLiberal,

I relly think that your statement that Bush is pro-killing 20 years olds and Iraqi children is harsh. Using you logic, compare the deaths in the war of Terror in the last three years with abortion. There is no comparison, the number of abortions is far greater than lives lost in the war. Do you think it was also wrong for Americans who gave up their lives to free the blacks from slavery in the American Civil War? Do you think it was wrong for Americans to give up their lives to defeat Hitler and Mussolini in Europe? If the war on terror is a success the loss of life, though tragic, will have been worth something to the freedom of all people in the world. The same can not be said about abortion.

I don't hate gays, but I am a conservative Christian who believes that the Bible says that homosexuality is a sin. I also belive that gossip, lying and hate is also a sin. I simply disagree with the gay lifestyle for me personally. There is far more data to back up the gay lifestyle as a choice and the supposed gay gene has been discredited by many in medical research. I don't have a problem with gay civil unions but I believe that marriage is a religious committment that involves three people, a man, a woman and God. I also belive that gay civil unions should have all the rights of a married couple but I don't agree with calling it a marriage because it is in violation of the principles of scripture.

These are all complex issues that should neither be embraced nor dismissed without understanding all of the facts and concerns on both sides of the issue and can not be painted as broadly as you have.

John Kerry has said that he believes, from a moral point of view, that life begins at conception. He then disregards his moral convictions and votes to allow for something he would have to agree is murder because it's the taking of a human life. To me, this demonstrates a lack of moral conviction. I could understand his position better if he though life began at birth, but that's not what he said. If he believes that life begins at conception and then can set aside his moral convictions to allow for abortion, what else is he willing to set aside his moral convictions.

The values that he claims to have, must be based upon something and I believe that our values are an outward expression of our moral positions. In standing on both sides of this issue I believe that John Kerry demostrates that he is not willing to embrace his own morals and therefore has no moral clairty and that negates his claim that he has values.

Posted by: Jim Rodkey at August 30, 2004 02:36 AM

I don't care how many people have been killed in the war. No one should have died...
Would you rather have a bunch of teenage kids living on the streets, doing drugs, and trying to raise their babies or have more kids in school, getting an education and straightening up their lives? If we have a bunch of highschool dropouts raising our future generation (our future leaders), the world will soon be doomed. There are also some people who say, "Teenagers shouldn't have sex anyway." So, to "teach them a lesson" we are going to make them go through birth and make them drop out of school to take care of their baby? I, personally think we should be more focused on helping them straighten out their lives rather than be so worried about punishing them.
WE ARE FIGHTING A WAR THAT CAN'T BE WON! It's like watching poor children and adults squirm for our own sick amusement. I am not amused by this war at all. I do believe that we did the right thing freeing the slaves. I, however, don't think we should be in Iraq. George Bush gave us about a million reasons why we were there and none of them have been proven yet. So, don't even compare this war to the Civil War because that is just SICKENING!
About whether we call it marriage or not, what's the difference? I mean come on... if I am eating pasta, I can call it pizza, but it's still pasta. I know that food shouldn't be compared with marriage, but I think you get my point. I think marriage is for two people that love each other and God, not necessarily a man and a woman. I am a christian as well, but I just don't see God getting so mad about gay people getting married.
I am not going to change your mind and you are not going to change mine. Let's just agree to disagree now that we have both shared our views. I think it is important for people my age (I'm in eighth grade) to be able to express their opinion, since we can't vote.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at August 31, 2004 08:11 PM

with best regard to this , i would like to asked if whether internationally country can undertake such voting

Posted by: baba at September 1, 2004 01:57 PM

FlamingLiberal,

I agree with you on that we are all responsible for the youth of America. When a young woman finds that she is pregnant, we need to offer viable alternatives and we should be stepping up to help care for her child, make sure she finishes high school and becomes a responsible and contributing citizen of this great land. Most people opposed to abortion feel this way, some don't, some are exactly as you state and I feel sorry for them. It's not about punishing them, it's about accountability for our actions. It's not about condemnation, it's about helping to lift them up so that they don't have to go through the rest of their lives punishing themselves as many women do after they have an abortion. We need to be willing to help them. That's the only way we can change the world. This is what your President means when he calls for Compassionate Conservatism.

I would prefer that the abstinance policy would be the direction, but it's tough and I know it. I've been out of the 8th grade for a real long time, but not that long that I don't remember what it was like to be a teen. Actually, I don't think it's about teaching a lesson to anyone. It's about the value of a human life, no matter what age, the unborn child, the youth, the adult or the elderly. All life is valuable.

You might find that an odd statement for one who supports the war but my support for the war has far less to do with the 3,000 who died on Septemeber 11th than it does with 1.3 million people Saddam Hussein killed. We should have intervened long before, economic sanctions didn't help, negotiations didn't help, he just kept killing and he had to be stopped.

War is never a popular agenda, there are always those who are opposed to it and their voices should never be quieted. We need to hear from them because they hold us all accountable. But sometimes war is a necessity. When all other options have been pursued and the only way to end the atrocities of a man like Hussein, then war becomes the only other option.

If you watched the Republican National Convention you would have heard from an Iraqi woman who was part of a delegation from her country which has been formed to come to this country and get the message out about what the liberation forces are doing for her and her people in Iraq. She compared it to our own civil war. 11.3 million people died. More had their hands cut off and were branded with x's on their foreheads because they spoke in opposition of Suddam. Somebody had to step in. America is the strongest force in the world, moraly, economically and militarily. This great priveledge also carries with it great responsibility.

In many ways you are right. The war on terrorism can not really ever be won. There will always be a few groups who are opposed to reason and basic human understandings and will have hearts filled with hatred. The real victory of the war on terror is about stopping the agenda of the last 30 years that empowers terrorism and allows countries the freedom to harbor, support and encourage terrorism. That war can be won and we have made a great deal of progress in that arena. Al Sadyr's militia is now sitting down to peace talks with the government in Iraq. That's very positive.

You might not see God getting mad about Gay marriage but there are 14 seperate and distinct passages in scripture where God deals directly with the gay issue. In those passages, God tells us he doesn't like it. I'm not comfortable with telling God what God thinks. God is, after all, God. I think God knows what's best for us. God created us and I see the Bible as sort of an owner's manual for us. It's the instruction book on how to find real peace, joy and happinnes in this life. If we all paid a whole lot more attention to the instructions, stopped telling God how wrong he is and started living our lives according to the instructions, I really belive that we wouldn't have anything to discuss in the blogs.

Keep on expressing your views. You won't learn a whole lot if you only engage in debate with people who agree with you. Debating with those who disagree with you gives you an opportunity to hear the issue from a different perspective. Then you can evaluate your positions and in doing so you will either find your positions strengthened or you will be challenged to change your mind.

I do think that, perhaps being in the eigth grade, so firmly aligning yourself as a Flaming Liberal is a rush to judgment. That isn't to diminish your age or your credibility. You have a lot of life to experience ahead of you and you don't know what path you will find youself on as time passes. It is only my intention to encourage you to expand your horizon and invetigate before you identify yourself so quickly to an extremist position.

I have been called, at various times in my life, a liberal and a conservative based on the person I endorse as President. This year I will vote Republican because this is the party that most aligns with my political and personal views. The next 4 years will dictate how I vote then. The truth is that I am first and foremost a Christian. I am biased by my faith. I'm also not a perfect Christian because my journey in this life isn't over yet. Because I'm not perfect, I defer to God's advice on issues that I can't totally understand. If God tells me something through the Bible that something is wrong, then I figure God knows what God's talking about and I'm not qualified to tell God that God is wrong.

Posted by: Jim Rodkey at September 3, 2004 03:53 AM

Hey...
I understand that life is important whether it it is a fetus or adult, but I don't understand why people are dying right now. Why are we having this war? Oh yeah, because Cheney is making money off of it, that's right...
Half the time, the man that gets a woman pregnant just runs off and leaves the baby and the mother. Should the man not be responsible for his actions as well? Should only the women be penalized for their actions? I know that some men do stick around, but what about the ones that don't? I am also not saying that I am dumb enough to engage in such activity that would cause me to get pregnant either... don't worry... haha.
I don't think we should tell God if he is right or not either, but his word is more important to me than what is in writing. Whether it states it in the bible or not doesn't prove it's true or false. Afterall, God didn't literally write the bible. I mean, come on, he didn't speak english...
I also don't think you should say I haven't done research just because I am an eighth-grader. I watched the conventions, Democratic and Republican. I also wrote a four-page report on the candidates' goals. From the research I've done, I can definitely tell I am a liberal Democrat. I am not trying to be rude... just trying to let you know that I am not just some mindless, apathetic middle schooler. Not all middle schoolers are either. Okay, so a great majority is, but not all of us... haha...
Thanks for your time and I look forward to another response from you...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 4, 2004 06:35 PM

I love Bill Clinton!

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at September 5, 2004 06:58 PM

I hate Bill Clinton

Posted by: bill clinton at September 6, 2004 12:52 AM

That's too bad...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 6, 2004 11:28 PM

Flaming Liberal,

I didn't mean to imply that you haven't done reasearch or that you are mindless. My point is that you have a whole life ahead of you and as you experience more of life, many of your opinion will change.

People are dying in Iraq right now in an attempt to put an end to things like the terrorist attack on the school in Russia. Brave men and women are giving the ultimate sacrifice so that all of us might have freedoms that the terrorists want to take away from us.

God speaks all languages, he created them all. The Bible was originally written in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek and I recommend checking out Josh McDowall's "EVIDENCE THAT DEMANDS A VERDICT" for an essay on Biblical accuracy. It might provide you with some more information on while the testimony of the Bible is reliable as the word of God. Also, check out 2 Timothy 3:16.

As I've already stated, I don't find you to be mindless, in fact I find it very refreshing. I teach Jr. and Sr. High Sunday School at our church and I'd love to have more students who question. Only being concerned about ourselves is not a problem with 8th graders, it's a problem with all ages. Once our focus shifts away from ourself and onto the needs of others, the world becomes a much better place for us.

It's okay that you have liberal views, many of my own views are liberal, especially concerning social issues. I also have views that are strongly conservative. It would be nice if every issue was a matter of right and wrong but it's usually a lot more complex than that.

Men do need to be more accountable and unfortunately many of them aren't. Glad to hear that you understand the consequences and have taken a stand for yourself. If more people were like you, the world wouldn't even be debating the abortion issue.

By the way, I liked Bill Clinton too.

Posted by: Jim Rodkey at September 7, 2004 07:47 AM

Thanks...
I was reading a magazine the other day and I came to an article written by a sixteen-year-old Iraqi girl. She said she didn't like the war at all. She also said she wishes we wouldn't have come over there in the first place. Did you know that kids missed school for a whole year because of us? That is simply wrong. Here is what it said in the article...
"I live in Basra, a city in southern Iraq. No bombs fell on houses in my area, but of course I was scared. The noise from the bombs and gunfire terrified my brothers and sisters, and they cried all the time. Since we never knew where the bombs would fall next, I missed a year of school.
It was hard--- I want to be a teacher, and my studies are the most important thing to me. But I am also a Muslim, so I believe that if God wills it, I will make up the time I lost. Even so, I wish the war here had never happened.
Now we have no security in place, and terrorists are setting off bombs. These terrorists aren't really religious--- they do it for their own purposes. However, because of the chaos that took place in the world, some people say that the violence is caused by Islam. But I read the Holy Koran ever day. It teaches you that you must deal with others peacefully. Islam comes from the word silm--- meaning peace.
My faith gives me hope that my new government will be more cooperative now. After all, we all want peace in our countries."

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 7, 2004 02:19 PM

FlamingLiberal,

The young girl and many like her did miss school because of the war but 1.3 million Iraqi's were killed by Suddam Hussein and will never go to school again. It's estimated that over 2/3 of them were women and children, some just to test Sarin and Mustard gasses developed in Hussein's labs. I believe that the terrorists do a great diisservice to the faith of Islam.

Over 100 years ago, America engaged in a Civil War to bring freedom to millions of blacks who were bound in chains and tortured by their masters. We said enough, we said they deserve their freedom and many died fighting for that freedom. Because we went to war, many slave owners killed their servants, tortured them even more but would we really want to go back and not fight that war. Sometimes wars are necessary to end an evil being committed against a group of people who are made weaker by their conditions. Once the dust of war has settled, we honor those who fell in the battle because they brought freedom and liberty to a people they did not know but did it simply because it was the right thing to do. I believe that our soldiers are doing this right now. I believe that our soldiers are sacrificing much for a people they do not know so that the world will be a better place to live in for all people and that 50 years from know we will look back and see that this was a good thing.

During a war, many disagree. During the Civil War, many opposed going to war, the same thing happened in both World Wars. Those caught up in the midst of the conflict faced days of fear and just wanted it to end. But history always offers a kinder perepective because we experience the results.

I do believe that peace will come to that land, our intention is not to occupy their land but to help them win their freedom and find a peace from escaping the clutches of a brutal dictator. Not all young girls were a priveledged as the young girl in the ariticle you read. Not all girls were allowed to go to school, simply because they were girls. As teachers, many women were not allowed to teach boys. Not because of their religion, but because a dictator said so and militant leaders pushed their agenda on the people through a corruption of the Islamic faith.

Most Americans are ignorant of the Iraqi faith and people. The only religious views many want to tolerate is Christianity, but we must hear from those in Iraq and others in the Islamic faith so that we can better understand their voice and their hopes. Thanks for pointing out the article.

Posted by: Jim Rodkey at September 8, 2004 12:56 AM

Mr. Rodkey-
You have to admit that George W. Bush has come up with many reasons for going to war. Not one has been proven.
*Weapons of mass destruction: Where are they? Cheney says that they know where they are and they know that they have them. If we knew they had them and where they were, we would be done by now. Instead, Cheney is protecting his precious Halliburton by risking the lives of innocent twenty-year-olds.
*Freeing the Iraqis: We aren't freeing them! We are simply torturing them, ruining their country, and killing them! Of the 18.4 billion dollars raised by Congress to rebuild Iraq, only 3.5 million dollars has been spent. More than half of that total was used for security and law enforcement... not reconstruction.
*Terrorism: Okay, first of all, open your eyes, did Sadaam Hussein attack us? I don't think so. We captured him. Great... but now what? What do we do now? What ever happen to Bin Laden anyway? "Our country is safe. We caught some guy that wasn't bugging us. Sure, the terrorists are still lurking and we are killing lots of innocent people (some of our own...) and endangering our country even more, but Cheney is making money... FOUR MORE YEARS!" Honestly... I just don't get how people can say this and mean it without feeling completely ignorant.
I can't think of any other reasons Bush has come up with in his small brain, but if you can think of anymore, I would love to hear them. I wish I could vote. You don't understand how difficult it is for people my age to sit there and put their lives in other people's hands. I look forward to another response...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 8, 2004 07:56 PM

Flaming Liberal,
Take a look at this quote from John F Kerry,

Jan 23, 2003: "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."

According to;
http://www.kerryquotes.com/

And why can't you vote?

Posted by: Wayne at September 8, 2004 11:11 PM

I am not old enough to vote...
My sister wants to get on though so I have to go... I shall post more later...

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at September 9, 2004 06:46 PM

Flaming Liberal,
I have to admit, your very well thought out. Let's look at some simple facts though.
1. The world is better off without Saddam, just ask the Kurds.

2. Iraq may have not had a connection with 9/11, but they have connections with terrorists. Kerry has even made this statement.

3. If this war is for oil, why is gas still almost $2.00 a gallon?

4. Did you ever think of the strategic point of going into Iraq? Saddam had the 4th largest army in the world. Now we have Iran surrounded. Many people thought this way about the Japanese not that long ago, and the Russians.

5. If we shouldn't vote for him than who should we vote for? I did say vote for and not against. Show me something Kerry has done for America while in the senate. After the first WTC bombing, Kerry legislated for $6.3 billion in intell cuts.

So FL, don't mean any disrespect just thought I would shorten your name, what are we to do? Vote someone in who stands on every side of every issue, just to get rid of someone that people hate? Or should we look at the big picture, remember 9/11 and vote for the best candidate for leading a war in terror?

I'm glad someone as young as yourself has taken an interest in politics, let's just look at all sides and all new sources.

I think someday you may be president by the way you debate. That was meant as a compliment.

Have a good day.

Posted by: Wayne at September 9, 2004 10:00 PM

Thanks...
Okay... I am not one of those people that is just completely against Bush and that is why I would vote for Kerry, don't worry. I researched both candidates on the internet and watched the news. Now, I understand that the news can be very misleading at times and I take that into consideration. I don't know that much about Kerry's accomplishments, but I do know a lot about his plans. I also know about Bush's mistakes and they are too huge to forget. John Kerry seems like a great candidate to me. I don't know how to explain it in any way other than saying it is just one of those gut feelings. Not only do I highly support Kerry, but I am completely upset with George Bush, so I guess that adds to the feeling...
*Sure, Sadaam Hussein was a man that did very bad things, but look at us now. What are we doing? Very bad things. We have ruined a country with lots of history. I almost started crying when I saw the mosques around all of the fighting. It is very upsetting. This was a beautiful country that was doing just fine. Sure, they had a horrible leader, but I think they would rather have a bad leader than an army trying to change their beliefs. I think they would rather be under Sadaam than an army of Americans taking torturous pictures of them. I know that I can't speak for them... no one can. We just have to listen to them and think about what they would really want though, instead of being obsessed with making sure that everyone is like us. Our country has always been obsessed with being a "free country" and being "independent" and now we want more people to be exactly like us? Our way of doing things is not the only right way. I don't know if you had a chance to read it, but I posted an excerpt from a magazine article that an Iraqi girl wrote. You can read it if you'd like.
*Why should we attack a country that has connections with terrorists instead of worrying more about the actual terrorists (***BIN LADEN***)? When you think about it, it is like taking revenge on a bully's friend, instead of facing the actual bully. We are not making our country safer by having this "war on terror."
*You're right. The gas prices have gone way up since the war was started. We depend on the Middle East for our oil but then we beat up on the smaller countries. What's up with that? George Bush hasn't done anything to decrease our level of dependence on the Middle East for oil. I am not saying that I KNOW anyone else will, but at least with another man in office we have a chance of it.
*Why should we try to get rid of Iraq just because they have a strong army? It is like trying to get rid of a kid just because he gets good grades or something (If you can't tell, I spend a lot of time at school...). I just don't think we would want people coming in and invading our country to hurt us just because we have a strong army. No one wants that.
*John Kerry believes in a better environment. Now, I know you are saying you shouldn't vote against people and I completely agree with you on that one. But, look at George Bush's accomplishments as governor of Texas. He ruined the beaches. Now, when you walk down them, you find little oil patches everywhere. Now, I may not know much about Kerry's senator career but I do know that he didn't do anything to harm our country. He didn't mess anything up and I think that is enough to take the vote of anyone. John Kerry also fought in Vietnam. George Bush didn't. John Kerry volunteered to go even though he didn't have a "military background" and I think that shows great leadership. He took charge. When he got back, he realized he didn't like the war so he became a VVAW. Maybe he didn't agree with it, but he still fought in it. I mean, come on, who agreed with it anyway?
Thanks for your post! Wow, you know what stinks though? Next election year, I will only be 17, so I still won't get to vote! I will be 21 before my vote starts to really count. Boo...
Anyway, thanks for your comment about being a president. I always thought it would be... not cool... but interesting to have that big a say in what goes on in our country. The stress level just seems so huge though. But, I mean, who knows? Someone has to do the job...
I look forward to another response from you.
HAVE A GREAT DAY!!!

P.S. Did you like having Bill Clinton as president? I did... just wondering what your opinion was...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 11, 2004 03:35 PM

FL,
Another well thought out post on your behalf. It is really nice to have someone with a brain to debate here, this menas you. To answer your question about Bill Clinton. To be honest with you, I wasn't really into politics when he was president. I did like him and did vote for him. I wish he would have done more after the USS Cole. I don't know what I wanted him to do, but something would have been good. I don't really care about the whole Monica thing, I think the one that should be mad at him for that is his wife.

As far as Kerry's senate record not harming our country, it depenmds on how you look at it. I put our national security very high on my issues after 9/11. His record reflects one of cutting defense. The other thing that makes me very nervous about him is his changing his mind. I know it's a good thing to change your mind when your wrong, but that would make him worng on things 4 or 5 times.

I know Bush has his faults, like all of us. I just think he is better on defense and looks out for the little guy.

I'm glad there is finally someone who I can have a conversation on this subject without getting verbally attacked.

How old are you anyway? You don't sound like your too young to vote. Well keep up the great posts. People like you are the ones that help form others opinions.

Posted by: Wayne at September 12, 2004 12:02 AM

I would like to point out that being pro-choice doesn't mean "pro-abortion."
I am pro-choice because I believe that whether a woman has the baby or not is her choice. I myself cannot imagine not having the baby just because I would be curious to know who my baby ended up being. I don't think it is a horrible thing for a woman to do. I am just saying that I myself would find it hard to go through life not knowing what kind of person my baby was going to end up being.
I just had to point that out to you all...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 12, 2004 01:40 PM

TWO MORE MONTHS! TWO MORE MONTHS!
Yay Kerry!
Yay Michael Moore!
Yay Bill Clinton!
Yay... vote Kerry...
~HaRdCoRe DoNkEy~

Posted by: Yay Michael Moore! at September 12, 2004 04:46 PM

Thanks...
Debating really is no fun when you just sit there and attack each other. What's the point in that, right?
When people say that Bill Clinton was a bad person for his own personal mistake, it kind of makes me angry. His mistake did nothing to ruin our country or harm anyone. Sure it hurt people on the inside, but no one was physically harmed. People make mistakes, and they should be forgiven.
I think at some point in time everyone changes their mind about something. George Bush as changed his mind plenty of times as well. I think it is better to admit your mistakes though. You shouldn't keep it inside all of the time. People also say that John Kerry says one thing and then does another, when really, all politicians do that at some point. John Kerry doesn't do it nearly as much as most politicians.
You're right as far as saying everyone has faults. I think that is true. We all make mistakes. George Bush's mistakes are way too huge for anyone to forget though. He made mistakes that affected our whole country... our whole world, in fact! People say they like him because he is an average guy. Personally I want someone smarter and stronger than me running our country, though. I don't care to have someone on or below my intelligence level as high up as Bush.
I am in middle school. I promise! Haha... anyway... I just started finding politics interesting when George Bush was "elected" in 2000. Ever since, I have been doing research for myself to find out about all of the different issues. Thinking back, I have a lot of "debate buddies" from different sites! Hee hee...
I have to go now. Keep posting and have a great day!
P.S. Do you like the electoral vote system? I don't! I think they should use the popular votes. Just because a state is small doesn't mean it should have less say, right?

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 12, 2004 09:03 PM

As I sit here and watch the news, I find out that our stupid, ignorant president has decided to spend yet more of the money raised by Congress for security in Iraq. Hmm... don't you think that 1.75 million dollars is enough? I do! Why don't we take the 18.4 billion dollars raised by Congress for something called "RECONSTRUCTION?" I mean, isn't that the what the money is for anyway? YES! Sorry. I am just very irritated. I just saw a dead baby on t.v. because of our STUPID LEADER. It just put me over the edge...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 13, 2004 06:38 PM

FL,
When do you consider the start of life? I know people have different views of this, but wouldn't you say if you think life starts at conception than abortion is murder?

I also agree with you that we should do away with the electoral vote, I think it takes away some peoples voting power. For example, everyone knows that California will vote democrat. What about the republican voters in that state? Or when a state has a very close election, half ths state loses out because the other half plus one likes the other guy? Not fair. I know this means Al Gore would have been a shoe in, that thought makes me a little uncomfortable.

As far as Bush spending more money in Iraq, what choice do we have? If we cut and run, or lose, the terrorist will have a victory and they will fight even harder. Did you also see that Russia is getting more aggresive with terror now?

I know Bush has made mistakes, but I think we are looking in two different directions. The illegal alien thing he did, I do not like. As far as national security goes, I think he is right on, and this in my view outweighs the other.

Liberals always point out the deficit. My view is, I too think it is out of hand, but after 9/11 our economy was trashed. Don't you think our economy is much better off now than after 9/11?

I await your next posts, and keep up the good work. You are what America is about, and if you run for president I am sure you will do well, but I have to vote more conservativly. No offense implied.

Have a good day.

Posted by: Wayne at September 13, 2004 10:26 PM

It's okay. I wouldn't expect your vote anyway... haha...
I think that life starts when the baby is taken out of the mother's body. I think life starts the first time the baby takes hold of its mother's or father's hand with its small little fingers. I cannot imagine myself getting an abortion, like I said, but I still think other women should have that option. What about rape? If a woman is raped, does she then get certified to have an abortion? Some people say it is only okay for a woman to have an abortion if they were raped. What makes the baby any more innocent in that case? If a raped woman has the right to abortion, why doesn't a woman that either chose to have sex or was pressured into it have that same option? The life at hand is still the same. I am not saying you are one of those people that says that. I was just trying to clear up that when people do say that, it gets on my nerves. Now, I don't think the government should control whether you have a baby or not. Personally, I think if I had the choice of living on the streets with a loser for a mother or being dead, I would choose to never have been born at all. Now, I know that this sounds weird, but I really and truly believe that is how I would feel. Imagine a teenager having a baby and then blaming the baby for her horrbile life. No one deserves that.
We wouldn't be the center of attention if Bush had never started the war anyway. And, yes, I am saying that Bush started the war. I will not be known as a member of a group of people that started this war. I don't care if you say that rebuilding will bring on the terrorists, we got ourselves into this mess and now we have to get out of it. What happens when Bush runs out of volunteers to kill in this pointless war anyway? Will my brother end up in war? Will my sister? WILL I? This is truly horrible and we need to get out of it. Congress raised money to rebuild Iraq, not to work on security and law enforcement. Let's face it, George Bush has gone completely crazy with the money.
Personally, I felt safer when we didn't have Bush in office. Nobody likes George Bush! Ask my friends who went to Europe. They all can't stand him. They want him gone. Hmm... this sounds just like the way we felt about Sadaam. And what did we do to get rid of him? We invaded a country and killed their people. Is that going to happen to us next? We are making everyone else angry with us, and I think they have a good excuse.
3.5 million jobs or so were lost while Bush was in office. Our economy is worse than it has ever been before. That is not good. The only new jobs Bush has started are all minimum wage. Do you honestly think our economy is good right now?
Thanks for the post. I look forward to more of yours as well. And, again, I have to say, I would not expect you to vote for me, don't worry. I am sure you would make a good president too, but I am extremely liberal. Haha...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 14, 2004 04:12 PM

FL,
Did you know that Kerry thinks life starts at conception? Yes, that's right. So does that make abortion murder to him? Look, I am not saying I want to outlaw abortion, it is just something I would not choose to do. It all goes back to taking resposibility for your own actions.

As far as the economy is going, we took a major hit on 9/11. How many countries could withstand something like that? How do you explain the lower unemployment rate?

And as to getting out of Iraq. Let's say we cut and run from there. Then the Kurds will fight the Soonies, the Soonies fight the Sheites(spelled wrong), and Turkey and Iran just foaming at the mouth to get in and kill them all. Then oil production is halted in those countries and surrounding areas, price of oil goes thru the roof and our economy suffers greatly because we did not finish what we started. I would like to think that we have given the Kurdish children hope for a better future, as well as the whole middle east. I'm sure there were people who thought the way you do back in 1942 about the Japanese and Germans.

Looking foward to your post and thank you for keeping it civilized. It's nice to know that people can still disagree without insulting each other.

Posted by: Wayne at September 14, 2004 09:44 PM

Flaming Liberal,

I have to wonder, with your abortion talk and all... Do you support Laci's Law? Its a law that allows people to be prosecuted for criminal acts that kill or otherwise harm unborn children.

An example I would like to show would be the following:

If a girl is driving to the hospital, and she's 9 months pregnant. A drunken driver hits her head on, hurting her slightly, but causing her to lose the baby. If John Kerry's view on this were to prevail in the Senate, the guy driving the car would ONLY get a DUI, and no charges would be filed against him for killing the child inside of the woman. John Kerry voted AGAINST this, but thank god it passed anyways. It was signed into law by President Bush. There's a sadness that comes over me whenever someone proclaims life as 'starting at birth', because its not even debateable. At conception it already larger than millions of known 1-cell LIFE forms. The debate about when the baby gets a 'soul' is non-existant as well. In the NIV version of the bible, God proclaims in Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb... I knew you".... I can only hope you change your mind on this issue Flaming Liberal... I can only hope....

Posted by: Conservatism at September 14, 2004 10:04 PM

Conservatism---
I am a girl. Imagine me getting raped. Do you think I should have to have the baby? I am only in eighth grade. Should I have to go through with a C-section and have a child before I even enter highschool? If you say no, because I was raped, you are basically saying a woman should be punished and that is what the baby is... a punishment. That is truly wrong. My getting raped would not make the baby any less innocent than if I made the bad decision of having sex before I was ready. People say you should be accountable for your actions, and that is true. But I have a question for you. Would you rather see irresponsible teenagers on the streets, doing drugs, with a baby in their arms, or teenagers going to college and having a successful future, turning their lives around... and then having a baby and raising it correctly? I am not saying abortion should be used as birth control, because that is just wrong. I am saying, if a teenager makes a mistake, they shouldn't be thrown out on the streets expected to make their way. They should have a chance to fix their life. I am not saying I would ever engage in such activity, but I know that there are some people out there that would. The pressure is huge and, unfortunately, some kids buy into it. I have to say that I, myself, couldn't ever imagine getting an abortion. I am just saying other kids should have the choice.

Sincerely,
Flaming Liberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at September 15, 2004 06:37 PM

Wayne---
I am sorry but I have a test to study for, so this will be a short post...
I think your opinion on abortion would change if you actually knew someone that had a baby at a young age. Even someone like me that you met at a posting site. Imagine if I ever got pregnant. Should the option of abortion not be available to me? You don't have to answer that, just trying to get you to see my view. Now, don't worry, I am not planning on getting pregnant any time soon...
I am sorry but I don't quite understand what you are asking me here about the economy... I certainly do think the unemployment rate is high...
You're right, we do need to finish this war. But George Bush and Dick Cheney have only come up with plans of making it bigger. I am not just saying that either. They literally said they were planning on hitting other countries in the Middle East. How many more people have to die before George Bush realizes how horrible this war is?
Anyway, I better go study now... I look forward to another response from you as well. Bye!

~Flaming Liberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 15, 2004 06:43 PM

FL,
I have stated that I do not want to outlaw abortion for the reasons you cited. However, seeing how you are only in eighth grade, that makes you yor parents responsibility, and it sounds like they have done a great job raising you. Would they throw you out if you were pregnant? Kerry has stated that life starts at conception, yeet he is pro-choice. Does that make him for murder? Just a thought. With the rape thought in mind, I can see you point of view that the baby would be a punishment, a reminder of the horrible act commited against a young woman. With that being said, there is another side to look at. What did that baby do wrong?

As far as unemployment rates go, it is now lower than when Clinton ran for re-election. Lower than when Bush got in office, so how can you say it is too high?

Posted by: Wayne at September 16, 2004 08:26 AM

"Lower than when Bush got in office, so how can you say it is too high?"

Posted by: Wayne at September 16, 2004 08:26 AM

Wayne,

Just to show that I'm not biased about incorrect information. The statement is not accurate. In fact it was around 4% when Bush entered the office, and is now 5.4%. I just don't wanna see you get jumped on like D. Jones does in every other post haha...Otherwise, great posts!! keep it up!!

Posted by: Conservatism at September 16, 2004 12:59 PM

Wayne,
Unfortunately, not all parents are as great as mine. Some would put their kids out on the streets if they got pregnant. Some already put their kids on the street because they don't want the kids.
I do not think Kerry is for murder, because everyone has a different idea of when life really starts. I think he realizes that some people don't agree with him as far as when life starts goes, so he is willing to make an exception for them.
I was simply saying that some people that are pro-life say there should be an exception for people that were raped. And, in that case, I was wondering how that baby was any less innocent than one that was conceived on purpose or as the result of a stupid mistake. I was not saying the baby is any less innocent. I already stated that I cannot see myself getting an abortion. I just think that people should have that choice.
Maybe I wasn't clear when I said the unemployment rates are high. I should have said not enough people had good or successful jobs. Over a million jobs were lost when Bush was in office. The only ones created were minimum-wage, burger-flipping jobs. I think four years is long enough. Well, I guess we will see how everyone else feels in 47 days...

Sincerely,
Flaming Liberal

P.S. Did you hear that Arnold Schwarzenegger may have a chance at running for president? How scary...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 16, 2004 04:29 PM

Flaming Liberal,
I am an RN, I have seen many, many pregnant teen-agers. And I have seen many pregant women who chose abortion. By the way, very rarely do teen-agers choose to have abortions! I know of one! Most of the women who choose to have an abortion suffer terribly afterwards. They suffer from depression, remorse, regret and many even become suicidal! They are also very angry because they feel that they have been lied to! In the case of rape there is now the morning after pill that is almost fail-safe in preventing pregnancy if administered within 72 hrs of intercourse. Women do not die in childbirth anymore. Occasionally we lose a baby, but childbirth fatalities are extremely rare and are usually because the woman had some serious medical problems and risked having a baby against their Drs advice. I agree that an unwanted pregnancy is a huge crisis and there are no easy solutions. I just resent the lies that the abortion rights activists keep spinning. Abortion is NOT a simple solution to a huge problem, more times than not it catapults the problem into a life crisis! I know, I've met these women, talked with them, and held them in my arms while they've cried!
Medical science has proven that fetus's as early as 16 weeks, smile, suck their thumb, and respond to verbal and physical stimuli.
I have to ask a question, shouldn't the fathers of these unwanted children have ANY say in what happens to them? Would you want someone else making the decision on whether YOUR baby should live or die?
Abortion rights is a complex subject, one that deserves researching and understanding the truth! Not just the spin that activists want you to believe! And that means activists on BOTH sides. I personally believe that abortion is wrong! But I also know that my generation is far too selfish to ever make the wrong right! My only hope is that your generation will not flinch from seeing the truth and doing something to change what future generations will recognize as a barbaric practice. The truth is that millions of children have been sacrificed on the altar of convenience. And we have lied and said 'rape' and the 'health of the mother', when the truth is that only a miniscule fraction of the abortions performed in this country are done for those reasons.
Good luck to you, I hope your choices are wise and that you will diligently seek to know the truth!

Posted by: kathy at September 16, 2004 08:49 PM

FL,
I have to agree on the Arnold issue, it is a bit scary. But back to unemployment. I would like to thank Conservatism for the information and I stand corrected. However, it is lower than when Clinton ran for re-election. If Bush lost 1 milliion jobs and the unemployment rate keeps falling, how can we still be short 1 million jobs? Did 9/11 have anything to do with the job losses?

I am glad you have great parents, and it shows by the way you debate people. This is a compliment. Isn't his something that America should strive for? Better parents? Not everything can be a social program and handed to people. You must make your own life, no matter what cards you are dealt, you can make a change or you can lay down and take whatever life throws at you. I was very poor growing up, I'm not rich now but I have made a good life for myself, wife and son with another son on the way in December. Together we have bought a house and even remodeled most of it to our liking, we did all this without help from the government. I am not saying people don't need help, just that the best help is doing for yourself.

What are your plans for your life? What are your goals? Do you want to make your own life or have someone give it to you?

I await your post.

Posted by: Wayne at September 16, 2004 11:21 PM

Kathy,
If the father of the baby sticks around, then they most likely will have a say in what happens to their baby. But, unfortunately, not all fathers do stick around. I don't think abortion is the solution to any problem. I just think that whether the baby is born or not should not be controlled by government or anyone else. It should be the choice of the woman and the man. Again, I must say that I cannot imagine myself ever having an abortion. I am just saying that I feel that women should have that right.
It is just like the gay marriage issue. I would never get married to a woman because I am not gay, but I think people should have that right.
I hope you can see my views and understand where I am coming from.
I look forward to hearing from you.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 17, 2004 08:46 PM

Wayne,
The unemployment rate is not what I am concerned with. I understand that 9/11 could have had something to do with all of the jobs lost but I still think everyone should realize that somewhere around 3.5 million jobs were lost under George Bush's presidency and he is held partially responsible for that.

Thanks. I have been blessed with a wonderful life, and for that I am thankful.

Congratulations on the new baby! I am sure you and your wife will do a great job raising him/her and I wish you both the best of luck.

I have lots of plans! Wow, I could just go on. I plan on attending the University of Florida and majoring in writing and minoring in political science. I then want to attend the Iowa Writing Workshop. I will come back to Florida and write a novel, have it turned into a screenplay, and become FAMOUS! Haha... those are my dreams anyway...

I have always been told to hold on to my dreams... and I definitely will! I have already come up with an idea for a novel, so that kind of excites me. I have written many short stories and poems. My parents say I would make a good political speech-writer. I think that would be great fun as well.
And I, of course, want to make my own life. My family knows a guy that just graduated high school that has a disability and I just feel so bad for him. I know he is probably the happiest guy alive because his family isn't exactly poor so he can basically do whatever he wants as far as the money issue goes. But what happens when he wants to meet a girl and maybe start a family? I don't know... I just feel so bad. I can't imagine always relying on other people for what I want. That is what I hate about group projects! Haha... I have to go now...
I look forward to another post. Good luck with the baby...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 17, 2004 08:58 PM

FL,
Damn, you almost make me want to be a liberal, Haha just kidding. Seriously, you are well thought out and well spoken. Thanks for wishing me luck with my new baby, I know you really mean it.

As far as the loss of jobs, haven't we gained any of those jobs back? Is Bush going to get blamed for the tragedy in Florida too? People have lost everything there, yet he seems to actually care for those people. This is the Bush I see, someone who cares for the people and not the polls. In Kerry I see the opposite.

Hey, when your book is published, can I get an autographed copy? If you write anything like you debate it will be a best seller. And seeing how your liberal, I'm sure the NY Times will put it on their list.

My point of asking about your future was to see if you wanted a better life for yourself or wanted the government to tell you waht kind of life you can have. Maybe I am not getting my point across the right way. I was very poor when I was young, and my mother still is poor in many ways, only financialy though. I wanted a better life than that which was given to me, more importantly I wanted more for my children, and I think I have accomplished that so far. I don't want handouts or programs for myself, I want to make it on my own. Do you know what I mean? This is what I was trying to get across to you.

I await your next post, and start writing that best seller.

Posted by: Wayne at September 17, 2004 11:47 PM

FL,

I have read many of your post, and I have to give you a lot of respect. You make very concise and intelligible posts, but, and I'm sure you have heard this before, what about the rights of the baby. It's not the baby's fault that the mother and father were irresponsible and made a baby. I agree with you in the case of rape or incest, but most abortions are a form of birth control. This what angers me about abortion, if the irresponsible parties would have used any number of contraceptives, then they would not have to make that choice. Since you are so young, I will say that the best form of BC is to wait until you are mature enough to handle a child. Just to let you know, my view is to wait until you are married, I know that is kind of old fashion, even though I am not that old.

P.S. Your parents should be very proud of you.

Posted by: David Lowery at September 18, 2004 01:01 PM

Legalizing abortion was the WORST MISTAKE ever made in this country. Promoting the LIBERALISM of FREEDOM OF SEX AT AGE 12 an so forth. Promoting the MISGUIDANCE of all these young girls to go to an ABORTION CLINIC instead of their OWN PARENTS.
Here, the PARENTS are at FAULT... not the children..
PARENTS are responsible for the SAFETY and HEALTH of their own children. And only because there are several LIBERAL thinking parents promoting this, then ABORTION is to be LEGALIZED. (Even without parental consent).
ABORTION is MURDERING.
Specially the LATE ABORTION pushed by MRS.HILARY CLINTON for so many years.
As a Medical Doctor, this is a REPUGNANT issue in both medically and moral.
TO MAKE IT LEGAL, you DELIVER only the HEAD of the BABY, then, BEHEAD HIM/HER or PUNCH A HOLE IN HIS HEAD TO DESTROY THE LIVING BRAIN.
THEN, after you have KILLED, you are able to DELIVER.? the dead child.
This, my dear friends, its not only a MURDERED but he most HORRENDOUS thing to do.
I personally will say, "I ALWAYS THOUGHT THIS COULD ONLY HAPPEN IN "HELL".
THANKS for trying to bring HELL to the UNITED STATES.
People whom perform this, should be treated as MURDERERS.
People whom SUPPORT this, should be treated as MURDERERS AS WELL.

Posted by: Riccardo at September 18, 2004 02:48 PM

Wayne,
Thanks for all of the compliments! Boy, that's boosting...
I think it is great that Bush cares about the Floridians, that is really important! I live in Florida! Lots of people lost their jobs because of the hurricanes too, I know. But, the economy is really bad right now, and I still think that the president should take some of that responsibility. I think that Kerry really does care for the people of America. In one way, he wants to win because he thinks his plan is better than Bush's. I am sure Bush cares about the American people too, but he doesn't seem to be showing much care to the Iraqis, and that is wrong. Maybe he doesn't realize it, but he turned many of our allies against us, putting us in more danger than we were in before. I know that what the people did on 9/11 was bad, but what about what we are doing to the Iraqis? I seriously don't think the Iraqis are responsible for what happened to the World Trade Center. In fact, I am almost positive. I think we should be more focused on the actual terrorists, not the people that have connections with them.
Thanks! I would love to send you a copy of my novel. I can't tell you what it is about yet, but I can tell you it won't be entirely about politics, so I am sure you won't be clenching your teeth the whole time you read it. Haha...
Yeah... I got the point, don't worry. Ha, ha. I just thought it was the perfect opportunity to tell you what I wanted to do when I grow up. Anyway, I am very proud of you on making it on your own! Congratulations! You made it!!!
I shall begin writing that novel right away!

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 18, 2004 04:55 PM

David Lowery,
Thanks for the compliment!
I do believe that the baby deserves rights, but I still don't think the government should have control over this issue. Sure, it is a sad thought, but when you think about it, sometimes you need to think about the expecting mother. And, besides, I think you are thinking about the baby in a way, because otherwise the poor kid would have a horrible life. I am not saying this should justify the thought of abortion, I am just saying people make mistakes. And for that, they should not be punished. Or, at least, not in my opinion.
Don't worry! I am not planning on getting pregnant until I am married! But I still think that women should have the right to make their own decisions.
Thanks for the post...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 18, 2004 05:00 PM

Riccardo,
Nobody deserves this kind of response to any debate. I would never call someone a murderer! Nobody supports abortion! You can be pro-choice, but still not support abortion. I would never consider getting an abortion, but I still support women's rights. And I am not ashamed to support rights of women. If you want to call me a murderer for supporting a woman's rights, then call me a murderer, but I believe that this post you sent me was quite rude and I would never consider writing to a person in such a manner.

I don't know where you work, but I certainly have never heard of such treatment to babies.

I look forward to hearing from you...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 18, 2004 05:09 PM

David,
I am not sure if I said thanks or not about saying my parents should be proud of me so...
THANKS!

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 18, 2004 05:16 PM

FlamingLIberal:
I am certainly Pro-choice. I believe abortion should always be considered when medically necessary. If the mother's live is at stake, or in case of mental suffering (like in the cases of rape "as an example" ...)and please do not take this in context for a fight. I do not look for any fight but for a civilized intelligent conversation.
The problem is, when you LEGALIZE "all" kind of abortions. No matter the age of the fetus, no matter how cruel this may be, without taking in consideration if these fetus/baby is already capable of feeling pain.
Yes, here in the United States, there are many LIBERAL SENATORS that are currently pushing a legislation that allows the LATE ABORTION which should be considered a MURDER.
These babies CAN and could survive outside the womb (after 24 weeks of gestation)and they FEEL PAIN...
The late abortion implicates an abortion AFTER this 24 weeks of gestation period.
I have worked in many hospitals (11), throughout the United States for the past 24 years, and this procedure is not performed at a hospital level but at an ABORTION CLINIC level.
I started medical school at age 16. Performed my first delivery at age 18. And I have been practicing medicine for 25 years. Under any point of view, medical, religious or moral, it is a murder to kill a living human (chop the skull and then deliver the dead baby) in any part of this world.
Please check the legislation. (Legislation that has been banned by President Bush by the way... and approved by Mr.Kerry...)

Posted by: riccardo at September 18, 2004 07:47 PM

Riccardo,
Unfortunately, there is no way of making a law that has exceptions. You can't make a law that says you can have an abortion, unless...

It just doesn't work that way. And, I have to ask you something. You say that the baby should not be killed because it has rights. How is a baby that resulted from rape any less innocent than one that was conceived on purpose? It isn't. So, you are basically saying the baby should be used as a punishment towards the mother, instead of worrying about the baby's rights. It just doesn't make sense...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 18, 2004 08:41 PM

FL,

Do you realize how many couples out there that cannot have a baby, I agree; if you don't want it and it was a mistake, then give it up for adoption. Like I said, I don't think a woman should have to carry to term as a result of rape or incest. On the other hand, if you get pregnant because you are careless, then abortion should not be an option. There are several programs out there to help young girls to stay in school while they are pregnant. On top of that, there are so many options for BC, why don't these girls and boys use them? If they cannot control themselves, then at least use BC, it's not that hard. I remember what it was like as a teenager, I made some mistakes, and I sure my daughters will make some mistakes, but I used BC, both my ex-wife, and me before we got married. I just hope I can teach my daughters to abstain, and failing that, to use protection. If they did get pregnant, I would not kick them out and stop loving them, I could never do that, but I would consul them on what they did wrong, and hopefully show them where they went wrong, and not to do it again. Thank you for your reply, and you are welcome. You parents must be very good people!

Posted by: David Lowery at September 20, 2004 11:14 AM

You're right. It is a shame that more couples don't just use birth control. I just feel like what happens to a woman's baby should be her choice, not the governments. I think it is horrible that people aren't responsible and they make mistakes, but regardless of whether they are responsible or not, they deserve help. We had some kids from the TAPP program come to our school. It's a program for teenage parents. It provides them with a daycare for their kids while they go to school. They don't go to a normal school, though and their babies don't get nearly enough attention from the mothers. They just get attention from the people at the daycare center. That is truly sad. Some of the kids in the TAPP program were as young as eleven. Two of the girls that talked to us had to get C-sections because they weren't developed enough. This is very sad.
I look forward to another response...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 20, 2004 04:13 PM

FL,
Your TAPP story truly is sad. Shouldn't we be helping kids before they get in trouble first? Try and steer them away from the rough life and onto a track of success? When I say success I mean making a way for yourself, not everyone can be rich, but middle class isn't so bad. I know cause that's where I am, I love my family and would do whatever it takes to provide for them, it takes perserverence and hard work to raise a family, not govt. handouts. I agree that people need help now and again, but is it a way of life?

There are too many people out there that take advantage of the system, maybe we should try and improve the system, give people some self respect ane pride. I don't have the answers to the problems, I just know handouts do not produce pride and respect.

Posted by: Wayne at September 20, 2004 09:58 PM

FL,

I here what you are saying, but unless you are rich, or you or your husband make enough for one of you to stay home and take care of your children, that is the way it will be. My wife and I both work, therefore my daughters had to stay with someone else while we were at work. I am very grateful that my mother is close to me and can help me with this, I would rather have a family member watch them then a stranger. You say "I just feel like what happens to a woman's baby should be her choice" well I say that a baby is not a choice, the baby is a human being, not some piece of garbage that you can throw away when you get done with it. Again I say, abstain and failing that us BC. Abortion should only be used when a woman is raped or when incest is involved. Abortion should not be used as a form of BC. I thank you for your educated post, I wish other people on this blog were as nice and well behaved as you, and to think you are in 8th grade, right?

Posted by: David Lowery at September 21, 2004 01:19 PM

We have been trying to steer girls in the right direction for a really long time now and, unfortunately, this hasn't been working. I think it is horrible that some people use it as a form of birth control, but what about the ones that don't? Unfortunately, there is no way of eliminating all of the possible problems in this situation. The bottom line is that all women deserve this right. The government can't control any of that. Again, I want to point out to you that I would never get an abortion, but I still think women should have that right.
I look forward to another post from you.
~FlamingLiberal

P.S. If you click the link with my name, it will take you to my writing website with some of my work. I am most proud of my short stories. Feel free to check it out if you'd like.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 21, 2004 04:34 PM

My apologies...
That link was broken. This one should work though.
Thanks!
FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 21, 2004 04:35 PM

FL,
When are you going to finish "And Then She Caught Him"? That is a great intro for a book.

Keep up the good writing, and finish this story, or just tell me what is with the shoes!!

And by the way, are we making any headway into turning you into a conservative? j/k

Talk to you later.

Posted by: Wayne at September 21, 2004 10:30 PM

"Unfortunately, there is no way of making a law that has exceptions. You can't make a law that says you can have an abortion, unless..."

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 18, 2004 08:41 PM

FlamingLiberal,

Actually you CAN do that. In fact, the vast majority of laws are not 'simple' laws. They include a series of exceptions. Take the tax code for instance. It has more exceptions than you'd be able to count. Partial-birth abortion is another instance... It is banned today thanks to the Republican controlled Government. The law states in other words thats "Abortion is legal, EXCEPT for partial-birth types." So please, make sure you know the facts before you post what you 'think' to be true.... D. Jones has learned that the hard way.

Posted by: Conservatism at September 22, 2004 03:35 PM

David---
Yes... I am in eighth grade.
I understand that a baby is not a choice. Maybe the way I worded that sounded bad. What I meant is this: parents can tell a child what they can and cannot do. A child is your own responsibility. The government has no claim over it whatsoever. And, again, I want to ask you something. How is a baby concieved from rape any less innocent than a baby concieved from a stupid mistake? When you place the baby in categories such as rape or mistake, you are basically using the baby as a punishment. Abstaining is definitely the best choice... the choice I live by, but unfortunately, not everyone stands by this.
I await your next post.
~Flaming Liberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 22, 2004 04:40 PM

FL,
I posted here earlier but do not see it.

What I had said was I visited your site, your reading is exceptional, but the story with the woman in the shower? What's with the shoes? Please finish this story, were the shoes stolen? Magic? What a great intro for a book. It kept me thinking about what was going to happen. So what happens? You can't leave it like that!

OK, I am calm now, please finish it.

You will no doubt be the next Stephen King, Dean Koontz, Anne Rice, or maybe even a John Grisham. Keep up the good work.

Posted by: Wayne at September 22, 2004 10:16 PM

Been away from this blog for a while. Enjoyed reading the posts. Nice to see you are still here FlamingLiberal. While I still disagree with you, you are holding firm to your beliefs and still raising vaild questions.

Concerning The President's comments on going to war in Iraq. You should really read his speech from 2003 about going to war. Many of the things he's now being quoted as saying, he never said. Also, you should understand that many of the terrorists we are now facing in Iraq are not Iraqi. While it seems like a valid complaint about the money not spent on the rebuilding efforts, think about this. What good would it do to rebuild in places like Najaf before we settle the insurgents? In the terrorists would lay down their arms and go back to their own countries, the war in Iraq would be over and the rebuilding would begin. In the more peaceful areas, it's already taking place, you just aren't hearing about on the evening news because good news doesn't draw ratings. There are more hospitals, schools and firehouses in stabalized areas of Iraq, thanks to our troops and civilian contractors. If you've watched the news you might have seen clips of the police forces which now include women, although the news media doesn't bother to draw your attention to this.

Keep on posting. Your an encouragement to me!!!

Posted by: Jim Rodkey at September 23, 2004 02:12 AM

FL,

There is really no difference, but with rape there is the morning after pill. If you look at it this way, if a woman or girl is raped, she does not know if she is pregnant or not, therefore if she takes the morning after pill, this is more or less a BC method. Now if she does not take the pill and then finds out that she is pregnant then I believe that she should carry to term. I look at it the same way as being irresponsible, she had a chance to use BC but choose not to. Look this subject is very difficult to debate, rape and incest are very sick, I personally believe that if you rape, either a stranger or one of your family, then the man that did it should be put in jail for life w/o parole, or death. This kind of crime is one of the worst forms. Anyway, to get back to kerry, I agree with him on one thing, believe it or not, life begins at conception, so how can he be Pro-Choice? A human life is a human life, it does not matter to me if that life is 1 second or 100 years, the innocent should not be put to death for a stupid mistake.

Posted by: David Lowery at September 23, 2004 08:57 AM

Conservatism---
Thanks for the correction! Although there are no laws that don't have SOME exceptions, they are still very complicated. And I still believe that making a law against something like abortion is just wrong...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 23, 2004 04:12 PM

Wayne---
I finished the "And Then She Caught Him" story already. There just isn't enough space on the page to put the whole story on there! Sorry...
And, sorry, but no, you aren't turning me into a conservative. Haha...

~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 23, 2004 04:14 PM

Jim Rodkey---
Welcome back! I was just pointing out the money issue for those that were saying we were in Iraq because we wanted to help the Iraqis. It truly is a shame that the news never shows anything good. I know we are trying to rebuild now, but we shouldn't have even gone there in the first place. I just feel like we are experiencing Vietnam all over again!
I look forward to more posts from you and welcome back to the forums!

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 23, 2004 04:19 PM

David Lowery---
I have to agree that rape is truly the worst crime anyone could ever commit. What about the people that either can't afford birth control, or are too afraid to talk to anyone about it? It would be a shame for that person to be held responsible for that they had nothing to do with. I know the thought of abortion is very sad, but the thought of a teenager on the streets raising a poor child is also truly sad. I believe that this is a right that should not be taken away.
I look forward to more posts from you...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 23, 2004 04:31 PM

Wayne---
Thanks again for all of the encouragement! People like you motivate me to continue writing.
The story excerpts on my site are only excerpts... I have finished writing all of the stories. They just don�t fit! Just so you know... the story you requested information on is not a mystery, necessarily. It keeps you wondering about the characters, but there are not �car-chase scenes� or anything of that nature. Thanks again!!!

FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 23, 2004 04:32 PM

FL,

There are plenty of places to get free BC. I hate to even mention their name, but Planed Parenthood is one place. If someone is to afraid to talk about BC then more then likely they would be too afraid to do anything that might get them pregnant. I will have to ask you, what about the right of the baby?

I look forward to your response.

Posted by: David Lowery at September 24, 2004 01:48 PM

David Lowery---
You deserve lots of respect.
I don't know how to respond to this in any way other than simply saying abortion is a very difficult topic to debate. Though, you have not changed my mind as to whether it should be a choice or not, I still find it very hard to find the words to describe how I feel. I think it is great that free birth control is offered. I still think that while the rights of the baby are important, the rights of the mother are equally important. Whether the mother made a mistake or not should not take away her rights. I hope you can better understand my view as I now better understand yours. I know that I may never persuade you to believe the way I do, and you will never persuade me to believe the way you do, but talking about the issues is still very important.
I look forward to hearing from you.
-FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 25, 2004 02:22 PM

I'm watching the debate...
YAY

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at September 30, 2004 08:59 PM

Where is everyone? Anyway, I was just waiting for everyone to get back to the forums to ask you all what you thought of the debate. Personally, I think John Kerry did the better job. In fact, the people across the street from us took out their Bush-Cheney yard sign right after the debates. That means something...
Anyway, I look forward to hearing from you all again. Bye!
FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 3, 2004 03:05 PM

FL,
I agree Bush did not look as good as I hoped he would. Kerry has not changed my mind because it seems like it was all smoke and mirrors. He never answered a question specificaly or directly. It was a Bush bash-a-thon. Kerry started out by saying Saddam was not a threat and ended the debate saying Saddam was a threat. Which one do you think he meant?

Posted by: Wayne at October 3, 2004 10:45 PM

Well, I think that to debate without knowing what you will be asked before-hand is very difficult. I think John Kerry meant that Sadaam Hussein was a threat, but he wasn't as big a threat as Osama Bin Laden. I think the problem with Bush is all he said was the same thing over and over again. How immature is the term "flip-flopper" anyway? Bye!
FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 4, 2004 04:31 PM

I have a question. I have a couple of ideas for a novel. I don't know if I should do the political one, or the non-political one. What do you think? Thanks!

FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 4, 2004 05:19 PM

FL,
I know debating without knowing what the questions are is difficult. It would be even harder if your answer changed from day to day.

To answer your question about the novel, what would the non-political one be?

Posted by: Wayne at October 4, 2004 09:35 PM

Iraq: Politics or Policy?
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

Published: October 3, 2004

Sorry, I've been away writing a book. I'm back, so let's get right down to business: We're in trouble in Iraq.

I don't know what is salvageable there anymore. I hope it is something decent and I am certain we have to try our best to bring about elections and rebuild the Iraqi Army to give every chance for decency to emerge there. But here is the cold, hard truth: This war has been hugely mismanaged by this administration, in the face of clear advice to the contrary at every stage, and as a result the range of decent outcomes in Iraq has been narrowed and the tools we have to bring even those about are more limited than ever.

What happened? The Bush team got its doctrines mixed up: it applied the Powell Doctrine to the campaign against John Kerry - "overwhelming force" without mercy, based on a strategy of shock and awe at the Republican convention, followed by a propaganda blitz that got its message across in every possible way, including through distortion. If only the Bush team had gone after the remnants of Saddam's army in the Sunni Triangle with the brutal efficiency it has gone after Senator Kerry in the Iowa-Ohio-Michigan triangle. If only the Bush team had spoken to Iraqis and Arabs with as clear a message as it did to the Republican base. No, alas, while the Bush people applied the Powell Doctrine in the Midwest, they applied the Rumsfeld Doctrine in the Middle East. And the Rumsfeld Doctrine is: "Just enough troops to lose." Donald Rumsfeld tried to prove that a small, mobile army was all that was needed to topple Saddam, without realizing that such a limited force could never stabilize Iraq. He never thought it would have to. He thought his Iraqi pals would do it. He was wrong.

For all of President Bush's vaunted talk about being consistent and resolute, the fact is he never established U.S. authority in Iraq. Never. This has been the source of all our troubles. We have never controlled all the borders, we have never even consistently controlled the road from Baghdad airport into town, because we never had enough troops to do it.

Being away has not changed my belief one iota in the importance of producing a decent outcome in Iraq, to help move the Arab-Muslim world off its steady slide toward increased authoritarianism, unemployment, overpopulation, suicidal terrorism and religious obscurantism. But my time off has clarified for me, even more, that this Bush team can't get us there, and may have so messed things up that no one can. Why? Because each time the Bush team had to choose between doing the right thing in the war on terrorism or siding with its political base and ideology, it chose its base and ideology. More troops or radically lower taxes? Lower taxes. Fire an evangelical Christian U.S. general who smears Islam in a speech while wearing the uniform of the U.S. Army or not fire him so as not to anger the Christian right? Don't fire him. Apologize to the U.N. for not finding the W.M.D., and then make the case for why our allies should still join us in Iraq to establish a decent government there? Don't apologize - for anything - because Karl Rove says the "base" won't like it. Impose a "Patriot Tax" of 50 cents a gallon on gasoline to help pay for the war, shrink the deficit and reduce the amount of oil we consume so we send less money to Saudi Arabia? Never. Just tell Americans to go on guzzling. Fire the secretary of defense for the abuses at Abu Ghraib, to show the world how seriously we take this outrage - or do nothing? Do nothing. Firing Mr. Rumsfeld might upset conservatives. Listen to the C.I.A.? Only when it can confirm your ideology. When it disagrees - impugn it or ignore it.

What I resent so much is that some of us actually put our personal politics aside in thinking about this war and about why it is so important to produce a different Iraq. This administration never did. Mr. Kerry's own views on Iraq have been intensely political and for a long time not well thought through. But Mr. Kerry is a politician running for office. Mr. Bush is president, charged with protecting the national interest, and yet from the beginning he has run Iraq policy as an extension of his political campaign.

Friends, I return to where I started: We're in trouble in Iraq. We have to immediately get the Democratic and Republican politics out of this policy and start honestly reassessing what is the maximum we can still achieve there and what every American is going to have to do to make it happen. If we do not, we'll end up not only with a fractured Iraq, but with a fractured America, at war with itself and isolated from the world.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 5, 2004 02:37 AM

Wayne,
I am sorry that you believe that Kerry is a "flip-flopper." The only thing you can say that he changed his mind about that is actually valid is that he voted for the war before he voted against it. That is the ONLY thing. I think that it would be really hard to debate if you are like Bush, who doesn't know any word consisting of more than give letters. I also think it would be hard to debate and defend yourself if you have no record on which to run.
Well, the non-political idea is about life's "chapters."
Thanks, and I look forward to hearing from you...
~Flaming Liberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 5, 2004 04:44 PM

Mr. Ochoa,
I read your post, and I would just like to tell you how much respect I have for you. By the way, thanks for the comment on my blog. I appreciate it greatly. Thanks for educating yourself!

~FlamingLiberal~

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 5, 2004 04:50 PM

Friends, I return to where I started: We're in trouble in Iraq. We have to immediately get the Democratic and Republican politics out of this policy and start honestly reassessing what is the maximum we can still achieve there and what every American is going to have to do to make it happen. If we do not, we'll end up not only with a fractured Iraq, but with a fractured America, at war with itself and isolated from the world.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 5, 2004 02:37 AM

You have finally said something I agree with, now if you can show me an example of how Kerry would fight this war better we will be getting somewhere.

Posted by: Wayne at October 5, 2004 08:03 PM

It would be even harder if your answer changed from day to day.

Posted by: Wayne at October 4, 2004 09:35 PM

You must be talking about Bush...

Posted by: Democrat at October 5, 2004 08:14 PM

Democrat,
Sorry friend, I wasn't talking to you. Since you have taken it upon yourself to include yourself in my conversation let me ask you this, how has Kerry supported our military troops? Show an example of what makes him a good leader. All I ask is that you back your statements with facts. For example voting records, legislation that he has sponsored, things of this nature. Not rhetoric and promises.

Posted by: Wayne at October 5, 2004 11:03 PM

Wayne,
So sorry. I was just looking over my post and I realized I said "give" instead of "five." Anyway... I was just wondering if you watched the Vice Presidential Debate. I did. I think they both did very well, but I would have to say that I definitely agree with John Edwards.
I look forward to a response...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 6, 2004 06:12 PM

FL,
I did watch the VP debate. I thought Cheney won it hands down. Edwards wasn't bad, but if he really met Cheney before that night why didn't he defend himself? Why didn't he tell Cheney that they sat next to each other? Cheney made his point on Edwards voting record and I guess it made Edwards nervous about his attendance. I will be watching this Friday as well and will listen to both candidates very closely. Let's see if Kerry's voting record comes into play.

Posted by: Wayne at October 7, 2004 10:38 PM

Wayne,
The VP debate was truly interesting to watch. I think they both did a great job. It just depends on who you agree with. I wish Edwards would have come out and said that he had met Cheney before that night, but Cheney was the liar in the first place anyway. I think that they both did a great job defending their candidate. Personally, I think John Edwards did better. That's probably just because I agree with him on practically all of the issues though...
~FlamingLiberal
I look forward to another response.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 8, 2004 05:45 PM

FL,
Did you get to see the pres debate on Friday? If so , who do you think won?

Posted by: Wayne at October 8, 2004 11:39 PM

Wayne,
I did have the pleasure of seeing the presidential debate on Friday. And I believe that both candidates performed to the best of their abilities. George Bush did a lot better than he did last time. I still have to say that I think that John Kerry did a better job this time though. I understand how some people would call it a tie, but if you look up the facts, you can see that Bush got some wrong. For instance, he misstated the Dred Scott case. Anyway, I don't really remember exactly what he said it was, but he did get it wrong. I think they both did better than they did on the first one, but I would have to say that John Kerry won. Maybe it's just because I'm a Democrat... I don't know...
What did you think?
I look forward to your response.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 9, 2004 02:50 PM

FlamingLiberal,
Thanks for your very kind words. Listen, FL, As young as you are, you are still much better educated than those folks who are trying to convince you to take the George W. Bush position. I know that you are supporting John Kerry. Good for you. I did go visit your blog and was greatly impressed again. For a 14 year old, you are quite a lady. You take care.
Abel

Your POST follows:

"Mr. Ochoa,
I read your post, and I would just like to tell you how much respect I have for you. By the way, thanks for the comment on my blog. I appreciate it greatly. Thanks for educating yourself!

~FlamingLiberal~

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 5, 2004 04:50 PM"

Posted by: Abe l P. Ochoa at October 9, 2004 03:26 PM

Wayne,
I hate to tell you this, and I wish that I had actually said those words but they actually were from an article that I POSTed called:

Iraq: Politics or Policy?
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: October 3, 2004
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 5, 2004 02:37 AM

You said, "You have finally said something I agree with, now if you can show me an example of how Kerry would fight this war better we will be getting somewhere.
Posted by: Wayne at October 5, 2004 08:03 PM"

As for John Kerry doing a better job than George W. Bush, Well, it's obvious to me that John is a lot smarter than George and, for that reason alone, I would expect that he would do a better job. Already, there is no question in my mind that Kerry couldn't possibly do a worse job than what George has done. The examples are there too but I won't waste my time going over them. You make the time and fulfill your responsibilities of researching this issue.

Posted by: Abe l P. Ochoa at October 9, 2004 03:45 PM

Mr. Ochoa,
Thanks! Have you seen Fahrenheit 9/11? Michael Moore is just brilliant, isn't he? I am reading his book "Dude, Where's My Country?" right now. So far, it is great. Anyway, I want to thank you for your time. I better get going...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 9, 2004 06:22 PM

I personaly think that the reason for the terroist attack any way was because we let another BUSH in office!

Posted by: Gail at October 10, 2004 01:04 AM

FL,
Did Kerry state everything correctly during the debate? He said he has had one position on Iraq, which position is it? I still don't know where he stands on Iraq. If you are going to start quoting Michael Moore and using his facts then it is a lost cause for you. There are several things wrong with F9/11. Although he nver seemed to lie, many things are taken out of context, or the full truth is never told. For example, the natural gas pipeline in Afghanistan he talks about? Clinton put a stop to that in the 90's. Bush never had anything to do wiht it. The begining scene where Gore is celebrating with Stevie Wonder happened the night before the election, Gore was watching the results in his home town.

As for Abel,
He has been proven worng on this blog to many times to count. He relies on foreign news agencies for his facts. He just recently tried to tell me the republicans past a bill and Bush signed it to disenfanchise voters without the democrats either trying to stop them or knowing what was going on. This is ridiculous.

It really doesn't matter what I think is the truth, we will see waht America thinks next month.

Posted by: Wayne at October 10, 2004 03:48 PM

FlamingLiberal,
I think the world of Michael Moore and have seen a couple of his movies and read a few of his books but I still haven't seen Fahrenheit 9/11. I am really planning to buy it (DVD) but haven't had time to visit Wal Mart. I really don't need to see it, however, because there's absolutely no way that I would ever consider voting for the likes of George W. Bush. I'm from Texas, you see, and I know how he hates to see working people getting organized into powerful labor unions. That's a long story. You have a good day and I'll continue reading your very interesting POSTs. Please know that I support your political positions 100 percent. Take Care!
Abel

Mr. Ochoa,
Thanks! Have you seen Fahrenheit 9/11? Michael Moore is just brilliant, isn't he? I am reading his book "Dude, Where's My Country?" right now. So far, it is great. Anyway, I want to thank you for your time. I better get going...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 9, 2004 06:22 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 10, 2004 08:55 PM

Remarks by Al Gore
May 26, 2004
As Prepared

George W. Bush promised us a foreign policy with humility. Instead, he has brought us humiliation in the eyes of the world.

He promised to "restore honor and integrity to the White House." Instead, he has brought deep dishonor to our country and built a durable reputation as the most dishonest President since Richard Nixon.

Honor? He decided not to honor the Geneva Convention. Just as he would not honor the United Nations, international treaties, the opinions of our allies, the role of Congress and the courts, or what Jefferson described as "a decent respect for the opinion of mankind." He did not honor the advice, experience and judgment of our military leaders in designing his invasion of Iraq. And now he will not honor our fallen dead by attending any funerals or even by permitting photos of their flag-draped coffins.

How did we get from September 12th , 2001, when a leading French newspaper ran a giant headline with the words "We Are All Americans Now" and when we had the good will and empathy of all the world -- to the horror that we all felt in witnessing the pictures of torture in Abu Ghraib.

To begin with, from its earliest days in power, this administration sought to radically destroy the foreign policy consensus that had guided America since the end of World War II. The long successful strategy of containment was abandoned in favor of the new strategy of "preemption." And what they meant by preemption was not the inherent right of any nation to act preemptively against an imminent threat to its national security, but rather an exotic new approach that asserted a unique and unilateral U.S. right to ignore international law wherever it wished to do so and take military action against any nation, even in circumstances where there was no imminent threat. All that is required, in the view of Bush's team is the mere assertion of a possible, future threat - and the assertion need be made by only one person, the President.

More disturbing still was their frequent use of the word "dominance" to describe their strategic goal, because an American policy of dominance is as repugnant to the rest of the world as the ugly dominance of the helpless, naked Iraqi prisoners has been to the American people. Dominance is as dominance does.

Dominance is not really a strategic policy or political philosophy at all. It is a seductive illusion that tempts the powerful to satiate their hunger for more power still by striking a Faustian bargain. And as always happens - sooner or later - to those who shake hands with the devil, they find out too late that what they have given up in the bargain is their soul.

One of the clearest indications of the impending loss of intimacy with one's soul is the failure to recognize the existence of a soul in those over whom power is exercised, especially if the helpless come to be treated as animals, and degraded. We also know - and not just from De Sade and Freud - the psychological proximity between sexual depravity and other people's pain. It has been especially shocking and awful to see these paired evils perpetrated so crudely and cruelly in the name of America.

Those pictures of torture and sexual abuse came to us embedded in a wave of news about escalating casualties and growing chaos enveloping our entire policy in Iraq. But in order understand the failure of our overall policy, it is important to focus specifically on what happened in the Abu Ghraib prison, and ask whether or not those actions were representative of who we are as Americans? Obviously the quick answer is no, but unfortunately it's more complicated than that.

There is good and evil in every person. And what makes the United States special in the history of nations is our commitment to the rule of law and our carefully constructed system of checks and balances. Our natural distrust of concentrated power and our devotion to openness and democracy are what have lead us as a people to consistently choose good over evil in our collective aspirations more than the people any other nation.

Our founders were insightful students of human nature. They feared the abuse of power because they understood that every human being has not only "better angels" in his nature, but also an innate vulnerability to temptation - especially the temptation to abuse power over others.

Our founders understood full well that a system of checks and balances is needed in our constitution because every human being lives with an internal system of checks and balances that cannot be relied upon to produce virtue if they are allowed to attain an unhealthy degree of power over their fellow citizens.

Listen then to the balance of internal impulses described by specialist Charles Graner when confronted by one of his colleagues, Specialist Joseph M. Darby, who later became a courageous whistleblower. When Darby asked him to explain his actions documented in the photos, Graner replied: "The Christian in me says it's wrong, but the Corrections Officer says, 'I love to make a groan man piss on himself."

What happened at the prison, it is now clear, was not the result of random acts by "a few bad apples," it was the natural consequence of the Bush Administration policy that has dismantled those wise constraints and has made war on America's checks and balances.

The abuse of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib flowed directly from the abuse of the truth that characterized the Administration's march to war and the abuse of the trust that had been placed in President Bush by the American people in the aftermath of September 11th.

There was then, there is now and there would have been regardless of what Bush did, a threat of terrorism that we would have to deal with. But instead of making it better, he has made it infinitely worse. We are less safe because of his policies. He has created more anger and righteous indignation against us as Americans than any leader of our country in the 228 years of our existence as a nation -- because of his attitude of contempt for any person, institution or nation who disagrees with him.

He has exposed Americans abroad and Americans in every U.S. town and city to a greater danger of attack by terrorists because of his arrogance, willfulness, and bungling at stirring up hornet's nests that pose no threat whatsoever to us. And by then insulting the religion and culture and tradition of people in other countries. And by pursuing policies that have resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent men, women and children, all of it done in our name. President Bush said in his speech Monday night that the war in Iraq is "the central front in the war on terror." It's not the central front in the war on terror, but it has unfortunately become the central recruiting office for terrorists. [Dick Cheney said, "This war may last the rest of our lives.] The unpleasant truth is that President Bush's utter incompetence has made the world a far more dangerous place and dramatically increased the threat of terrorism against the United States. Just yesterday, the International Institute of Strategic Studies reported that the Iraq conflict " has arguable focused the energies and resources of Al Qaeda and its followers while diluting those of the global counterterrorism coalition." The ISS said that in the wake of the war in Iraq Al Qaeda now has more than 18,000 potential terrorists scattered around the world and the war in Iraq is swelling its ranks.

The war plan was incompetent in its rejection of the advice from military professionals and the analysis of the intelligence was incompetent in its conclusion that our soldiers would be welcomed with garlands of flowers and cheering crowds. Thus we would not need to respect the so-called Powell doctrine of overwhelming force.

There was also in Rumsfeld's planning a failure to provide security for nuclear materials, and to prevent widespread lawlessness and looting.

Luckily, there was a high level of competence on the part of our soldiers even though they were denied the tools and the numbers they needed for their mission. What a disgrace that their families have to hold bake sales to buy discarded Kevlar vests to stuff into the floorboards of the Humvees! Bake sales for body armor.

And the worst still lies ahead. General Joseph Hoar, the former head of the Marine Corps, said "I believe we are absolutely on the brink of failure. We are looking into the abyss."

When a senior, respected military leader like Joe Hoar uses the word "abyss", then the rest of us damn well better listen. Here is what he means: more American soldiers dying, Iraq slipping into worse chaos and violence, no end in sight, with our influence and moral authority seriously damaged.

Retired Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni, who headed Central Command before becoming President Bush's personal emissary to the Middle East, said recently that our nation's current course is "headed over Niagara Falls."

The Commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, Army Major General Charles H. Swannack, Jr., asked by the Washington Post whether he believes the United States is losing the war in Iraq, replied, "I think strategically, we are." Army Colonel Paul Hughes, who directed strategic planning for the US occupation authority in Baghdad, compared what he sees in Iraq to the Vietnam War, in which he lost his brother: "I promised myself when I came on active duty that I would do everything in my power to prevent that � from happening again. " Noting that Vietnam featured a pattern of winning battles while losing the war, Hughes added "unless we ensure that we have coherence in our policy, we will lose strategically."

The White House spokesman, Dan Bartlett was asked on live television about these scathing condemnations by Generals involved in the highest levels of Pentagon planning and he replied, "Well they're retired, and we take our advice from active duty officers."

But amazingly, even active duty military officers are speaking out against President Bush. For example, the Washington Post quoted an unnamed senior General at the Pentagon as saying, " the current OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) refused to listen or adhere to military advice." Rarely if ever in American history have uniformed commanders felt compelled to challenge their commander in chief in public.

The Post also quoted an unnamed general as saying, "Like a lot of senior Army guys I'm quite angry" with Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush Administration. He listed two reasons. "I think they are going to break the Army," he said, adding that what really incites him is "I don't think they care."

In his upcoming book, Zinni blames the current catastrophe on the Bush team's incompetence early on. "In the lead-up to the Iraq war, and its later conduct," he writes, "I saw at a minimum, true dereliction, negligence and irresponsibility, at worst, lying, incompetence and corruption."

Zinni's book will join a growing library of volumes by former advisors to Bush -- including his principal advisor on terrorism, Richard Clarke; his principal economic policy advisor, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, former Ambassador Joe Wilson, who was honored by Bush's father for his service in Iraq, and his former Domestic Adviser on faith-based organizations, John Dilulio, who said, "There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. What you've got is everything, and I mean everything, run by the political arm. It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis."

Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki told Congress in February that the occupation could require "several hundred thousand troops." But because Rumsfeld and Bush did not want to hear disagreement with their view that Iraq could be invaded at a much lower cost, Shinseki was hushed and then forced out.

And as a direct result of this incompetent plan and inadequate troop strength, young soldiers were put in an untenable position. For example, young reservists assigned to the Iraqi prisons were called up without training or adequate supervision, and were instructed by their superiors to "break down" prisoners in order to prepare them for interrogation.

To make matters worse, they were placed in a confusing situation where the chain of command was criss-crossed between intelligence gathering and prison administration, and further confused by an unprecedented mixing of military and civilian contractor authority.

The soldiers who are accused of committing these atrocities are, of course, responsible for their own actions and if found guilty, must be severely and appropriately punished. But they are not the ones primarily responsible for the disgrace that has been brought upon the United States of America.

Private Lynndie England did not make the decision that the United States would not observe the Geneva Convention. Specialist Charles Graner was not the one who approved a policy of establishing an American Gulag of dark rooms with naked prisoners to be "stressed" and even - we must use the word - tortured - to force them to say things that legal procedures might not induce them to say.

These policies were designed and insisted upon by the Bush White House. Indeed, the President's own legal counsel advised him specifically on the subject. His secretary of defense and his assistants pushed these cruel departures from historic American standards over the objections of the uniformed military, just as the Judge Advocates General within the Defense Department were so upset and opposed that they took the unprecedented step of seeking help from a private lawyer in this city who specializes in human rights and said to him, "There is a calculated effort to create an atmosphere of legal ambiguity" where the mistreatment of prisoners is concerned."

Indeed, the secrecy of the program indicates an understanding that the regular military culture and mores would not support these activities and neither would the American public or the world community. Another implicit acknowledgement of violations of accepted standards of behavior is the process of farming out prisoners to countries less averse to torture and giving assignments to private contractors

President Bush set the tone for our attitude for suspects in his State of the Union address. He noted that more than 3,000 "suspected terrorists" had been arrested in many countries and then he added, "and many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way: they are no longer a problem to the United States and our allies."

George Bush promised to change the tone in Washington. And indeed he did. As many as 37 prisoners may have been murdered while in captivity, though the numbers are difficult to rely upon because in many cases involving violent death, there were no autopsies.

How dare they blame their misdeeds on enlisted personnel from a Reserve unit in upstate New York. President Bush owes more than one apology. On the list of those he let down are the young soldiers who are themselves apparently culpable, but who were clearly put into a moral cesspool. The perpetrators as well as the victims were both placed in their relationship to one another by the policies of George W. Bush.

How dare the incompetent and willful members of this Bush/Cheney Administration humiliate our nation and our people in the eyes of the world and in the conscience of our own people. How dare they subject us to such dishonor and disgrace. How dare they drag the good name of the United States of America through the mud of Saddam Hussein's torture prison.

David Kay concluded his search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq with the famous verdict: "we were all wrong." And for many Americans, Kay's statement seemed to symbolize the awful collision between Reality and all of the false and fading impressions President Bush had fostered in building support for his policy of going to war.

Now the White House has informed the American people that they were also "all wrong" about their decision to place their faith in Ahmed Chalabi, even though they have paid him 340,000 dollars per month. 33 million dollars and placed him adjacent to Laura Bush at the State of the Union address. Chalabi had been convicted of fraud and embezzling 70 million dollars in public funds from a Jordanian bank, and escaped prison by fleeing the country. But in spite of that record, he had become one of key advisors to the Bush Administration on planning and promoting the War against Iraq.

And they repeatedly cited him as an authority, perhaps even a future president of Iraq. Incredibly, they even ferried him and his private army into Baghdad in advance of anyone else, and allowed him to seize control over Saddam's secret papers.

Now they are telling the American people that he is a spy for Iran who has been duping the President of the United States for all these years.

One of the Generals in charge of this war policy went on a speaking tour in his spare time to declare before evangelical groups that the US is in a holy war as "Christian Nation battling Satan." This same General Boykin was the person who ordered the officer who was in charge of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay to extend his methods to Iraq detainees, prisoners. � The testimony from the prisoners is that they were forced to curse their religion Bush used the word "crusade" early on in the war against Iraq, and then commentators pointed out that it was singularly inappropriate because of the history and sensitivity of the Muslim world and then a few weeks later he used it again.

"We are now being viewed as the modern Crusaders, as the modern colonial power in this part of the world," Zinni said.

What a terrible irony that our country, which was founded by refugees seeking religious freedom - coming to America to escape domineering leaders who tried to get them to renounce their religion - would now be responsible for this kind of abuse..

Ameen Saeed al-Sheikh told the Washington Post that he was tortured and ordered to denounce Islam and after his leg was broken one of his torturers started hitting it while ordering him to curse Islam and then, " they ordered me to thank Jesus that I'm alive." Others reported that they were forced to eat pork and drink alcohol.

In my religious tradition, I have been taught that "ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so, every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit� Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them."

The President convinced a majority of the country that Saddam Hussein was responsible for attacking us on September 11th. But in truth he had nothing whatsoever to do with it. The President convinced the country with a mixture of forged documents and blatantly false assertions that Saddam was in league with Al Qaeda, and that he was "indistinguishable" from Osama bin Laden.

He asked the nation , in his State of the Union address, to "imagine" how terrified we should be that Saddam was about to give nuclear weapons to terrorists and stated repeatedly that Iraq posed a grave and gathering threat to our nation. He planted the seeds of war, and harvested a whirlwind. And now, the "corrupt tree" of a war waged on false premises has brought us the "evil fruit" of Americans torturing and humiliating prisoners.

In my opinion, John Kerry is dealing with this unfolding tragedy in an impressive and extremely responsible way. Our nation's best interest lies in having a new president who can turn a new page, sweep clean with a new broom, and take office on January 20th of next year with the ability to make a fresh assessment of exactly what our nation's strategic position is as of the time the reigns of power are finally wrested from the group of incompetents that created this catastrophe.

Kerry should not tie his own hands by offering overly specific, detailed proposals concerning a situation that is rapidly changing and unfortunately, rapidly deteriorating, but should rather preserve his, and our country's, options, to retrieve our national honor as soon as this long national nightmare is over.

Eisenhower did not propose a five-point plan for changing America's approach to the Korean War when he was running for president in 1952.

When a business enterprise finds itself in deep trouble that is linked to the failed policies of the current CEO the board of directors and stockholders usually say to the failed CEO, "Thank you very much, but we're going to replace you now with a new CEO -- one less vested in a stubborn insistence on staying the course, even if that course is, in the words of General Zinni, "Headed over Niagara Falls."

One of the strengths of democracy is the ability of the people to regularly demand changes in leadership and to fire a failing leader and hire a new one with the promise of hopeful change. That is the real solution to America's quagmire in Iraq. But, I am keenly aware that we have seven months and twenty five days remaining in this president's current term of office and that represents a time of dangerous vulnerability for our country because of the demonstrated incompetence and recklessness of the current administration.

It is therefore essential that even as we focus on the fateful choice, the voters must make this November that we simultaneously search for ways to sharply reduce the extraordinary danger that we face with the current leadership team in place. It is for that reason that I am calling today for Republicans as well as Democrats to join me in asking for the immediate resignations of those immediately below George Bush and Dick Cheney who are most responsible for creating the catastrophe that we are facing in Iraq.

We desperately need a national security team with at least minimal competence because the current team is making things worse with each passing day. They are endangering the lives of our soldiers, and sharply increasing the danger faced by American citizens everywhere in the world, including here at home. They are enraging hundreds of millions of people and embittering an entire generation of anti-Americans whose rage is already near the boiling point.

We simply cannot afford to further increase the risk to our country with more blunders by this team. Donald Rumsfeld, as the chief architect of the war plan, should resign today. His deputies Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and his intelligence chief Stephen Cambone should also resign. The nation is especially at risk every single day that Rumsfeld remains as Secretary of Defense.

Condoleeza Rice, who has badly mishandled the coordination of national security policy, should also resign immediately.

George Tenet should also resign. I want to offer a special word about George Tenet, because he is a personal friend and I know him to be a good and decent man. It is especially painful to call for his resignation, but I have regretfully concluded that it is extremely important that our country have new leadership at the CIA immediately.

As a nation, our greatest export has always been hope: hope that through the rule of law people can be free to pursue their dreams, that democracy can supplant repression and that justice, not power, will be the guiding force in society. Our moral authority in the world derived from the hope anchored in the rule of law. With this blatant failure of the rule of law from the very agents of our government, we face a great challenge in restoring our moral authority in the world and demonstrating our commitment to bringing a better life to our global neighbors.

During Ronald Reagan's Presidency, Secretary of Labor Ray Donovan was accused of corruption, but eventually, after a lot of publicity, the indictment was thrown out by the Judge. Donovan asked the question, "Where do I go to get my reputation back?" President Bush has now placed the United States of America in the same situation. Where do we go to get our good name back?

The answer is, we go where we always go when a dramatic change is needed. We go to the ballot box, and we make it clear to the rest of the world that what's been happening in America for the last four years, and what America has been doing in Iraq for the last two years, really is not who we are. We, as a people, at least the overwhelming majority of us, do not endorse the decision to dishonor the Geneva Convention and the Bill of Rights�.

Make no mistake, the damage done at Abu Ghraib is not only to America's reputation and America's strategic interests, but also to America's spirit. It is also crucial for our nation to recognize - and to recognize quickly - that the damage our nation has suffered in the world is far, far more serious than President Bush's belated and tepid response would lead people to believe. Remember how shocked each of us, individually, was when we first saw those hideous images. The natural tendency was to first recoil from the images, and then to assume that they represented a strange and rare aberration that resulted from a few twisted minds or, as the Pentagon assured us, "a few bad apples."

But as today's shocking news reaffirms yet again, this was not rare. It was not an aberration. Today's New York Times reports that an Army survey of prisoner deaths and mistreatment in Iraq and Afghanisatan "show a widespread pattern of abuse involving more military units than previously known.'

Nor did these abuses spring from a few twisted minds at the lowest ranks of our military enlisted personnel. No, it came from twisted values and atrocious policies at the highest levels of our government. This was done in our name, by our leaders.

These horrors were the predictable consequence of policy choices that flowed directly from this administration's contempt for the rule of law. And the dominance they have been seeking is truly not simply unworthy of America - it is also an illusory goal in its own right.

Our world is unconquerable because the human spirit is unconquerable, and any national strategy based on pursuing the goal of domination is doomed to fail because it generates its own opposition, and in the process, creates enemies for the would-be dominator.

A policy based on domination of the rest of the world not only creates enemies for the United States and creates recruits for Al Qaeda, it also undermines the international cooperation that is essential to defeating the efforts of terrorists who wish harm and intimidate Americans.

Unilateralism, as we have painfully seen in Iraq, is its own reward. Going it alone may satisfy a political instinct but it is dangerous to our military, even without their Commander in Chief taunting terrorists to "bring it on."

Our troops are stretched thin and exhausted not only because Secretary Rumsfeld contemptuously dismissed the advice of military leaders on the size of the needed force - but also because President Bush's contempt for traditional allies and international opinion left us without a real coalition to share the military and financial burden of the war and the occupation. Our future is dependent upon increasing cooperation and interdependence in a world tied ever more closely together by technologies of communications and travel. The emergence of a truly global civilization has been accompanied by the recognition of truly global challenges that require global responses that, as often as not, can only be led by the United States - and only if the United States restores and maintains its moral authority to lead.

Make no mistake, it is precisely our moral authority that is our greatest source of strength, and it is precisely our moral authority that has been recklessly put at risk by the cheap calculations and mean compromises of conscience wagered with history by this willful president.

Listen to the way Israel's highest court dealt with a similar question when, in 1999, it was asked to balance due process rights against dire threats to the security of its people:

"This is the destiny of democracy, as not all means are acceptable to it, and not all practices employed by its enemies are open before it. Although a democracy must often fight with one hand tied behind its back, it nonetheless has the upper hand. Preserving the Rule of Law and recognition of an individual's liberty constitutes an important component in its understanding of security. At the end of the day they (add to) its strength."

The last and best description of America's meaning in the world is still the definitive formulation of Lincoln's annual message to Congress on December 1, 1862:

"The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise - with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country. Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history�the fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor to the latest generation�We shall nobly save, or meanly lose the last best hope of earth�The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just - a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever bless."

It is now clear that their obscene abuses of the truth and their unforgivable abuse of the trust placed in them after 9/11 by the American people led directly to the abuses of the prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison and, we are now learning, in many other similar facilities constructed as part of Bush's Gulag, in which, according to the Red Cross, 70 to 90 percent of the victims are totally innocent of any wrongdoing.

The same dark spirit of domination has led them to - for the first time in American history - imprison American citizens with no charges, no right to see a lawyer, no right to notify their family, no right to know of what they are accused, and no right to gain access to any court to present an appeal of any sort. The Bush Admistration has even acquired the power to compel librarians to tell them what any American is reading, and to compel them to keep silent about the request - or else the librarians themselves can also be imprisoned.

They have launched an unprecedented assault on civil liberties, on the right of the courts to review their actions, on the right of the Congress to have information to how they are spending the public's money and the right of the news media to have information about the policies they are pursuing.

The same pattern characterizes virtually all of their policies. They resent any constraint as an insult to their will to dominate and exercise power. Their appetite for power is astonishing. It has led them to introduce a new level of viciousness in partisan politics. It is that viciousness that led them to attack as unpatriotic, Senator Max Cleland, who lost three limbs in combat during the Vietnam War.

The president episodically poses as a healer and "uniter". If he president really has any desire to play that role, then I call upon him to condemn Rush Limbaugh - perhaps his strongest political supporter - who said that the torture in Abu Ghraib was a "brilliant maneuver" and that the photos were "good old American pornography," and that the actions portrayed were simply those of "people having a good time and needing to blow off steam."

This new political viciousness by the President and his supporters is found not only on the campaign trail, but in the daily operations of our democracy. They have insisted that the leaders of their party in the Congress deny Democrats any meaningful role whatsoever in shaping legislation, debating the choices before us as a people, or even to attend the all-important conference committees that reconcile the differences between actions by the Senate and House of Representatives.

The same meanness of spirit shows up in domestic policies as well. Under the Patriot Act, Muslims, innocent of any crime, were picked up, often physically abused, and held incommunicado indefinitely. What happened in Abu Ghraib was difference not of kind, but of degree.

Differences of degree are important when the subject is torture. The apologists for what has happened do have points that should be heard and clearly understood. It is a fact that every culture and every politics sometimes expresses itself in cruelty. It is also undeniably true that other countries have and do torture more routinely, and far more brutally, than ours has. George Orwell once characterized life in Stalin's Russia as "a boot stamping on a human face forever." That was the ultimate culture of cruelty, so ingrained, so organic, so systematic that everyone in it lived in terror, even the terrorizers. And that was the nature and degree of state cruelty in Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

We all know these things, and we need not reassure ourselves and should not congratulate ourselves that our society is less cruel than some others, although it is worth noting that there are many that are less cruel than ours. And this searing revelation at Abu Ghraib should lead us to examine more thoroughly the routine horrors in our domestic prison system.

But what we do now, in reaction to Abu Ghraib will determine a great deal about who we are at the beginning of the 21st century. It is important to note that just as the abuses of the prisoners flowed directly from the policies of the Bush White House, those policies flowed not only from the instincts of the president and his advisors, but found support in shifting attitudes on the part of some in our country in response to the outrage and fear generated by the attack of September 11th.

The president exploited and fanned those fears, but some otherwise sensible and levelheaded Americans fed them as well. I remember reading genteel-sounding essays asking publicly whether or not the prohibitions against torture were any longer relevant or desirable. The same grotesque misunderstanding of what is really involved was responsible for the tone in the memo from the president's legal advisor, Alberto Gonzalez, who wrote on January 25, 2002, that 9/11 "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."

We have seen the pictures. We have learned the news. We cannot unlearn it; it is part of us. The important question now is, what will we do now about torture. Stop it? Yes, of course.

But that means demanding all of the facts, not covering them up, as some now charge the administration is now doing. One of the whistleblowers at Abu Ghraib, Sergeant Samuel Provance, told ABC News a few days ago that he was being intimidated and punished for telling the truth. "There is definitely a coverup," Provance said. "I feel like I am being punished for being honest."

The abhorrent acts in the prison were a direct consequence of the culture of impunity encouraged, authorized and instituted by Bush and Rumsfeld in their statements that the Geneva Conventions did not apply. The apparent war crimes that took place were the logical, inevitable outcome of policies and statements from the administration.

To me, as glaring as the evidence of this in the pictures themselves was the revelation that it was established practice for prisoners to be moved around during ICRC visits so that they would not be available for visits. That, no one can claim, was the act of individuals. That was policy set from above with the direct intention to violate US values it was to be upholding. It was the kind of policy we see - and criticize in places like China and Cuba.

Moreover, the administration has also set up the men and women of our own armed forces for payback the next time they are held as prisoners. And for that, this administration should pay a very high price. One of the most tragic consequences of these official crimes is that it will be very hard for any of us as Americans - at least for a very long time - to effectively stand up for human rights elsewhere and criticize other governments, when our policies have resulted in our soldiers behaving so monstrously. This administration has shamed America and deeply damaged the cause of freedom and human rights everywhere, thus undermining the core message of America to the world. President Bush offered a brief and half-hearted apology to the Arab world - but he should apologize to the American people for abandoning the Geneva Conventions.

He also owes an apology to the U.S. Army for cavalierly sending them into harm's way while ignoring the best advice of their commanders.

Perhaps most importantly of all, he should apologize to all those men and women throughout our world who have held the ideal of the United States of America as a shining goal, to inspire their hopeful efforts to bring about justice under a rule of law in their own lands.

Of course, the problem with all these legitimate requests is that a sincere apology requires an admission of error, a willingness to accept responsibility and to hold people accountable.

And President Bush is not only unwilling to acknowledge error. He has thus far been unwilling to hold anyone in his administration accountable for the worst strategic and military miscalculations and mistakes in the history of the United States of America.

He is willing only to apologize for the alleged erratic behavior of a few low-ranking enlisted people, who he is scapegoating for his policy fiasco.

In December of 2000, even though I strongly disagreed with the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to order a halt to the counting of legally cast ballots, I saw it as my duty to reaffirm my own strong belief that we are a nation of laws and not only accept the decision, but do what I could to prevent efforts to delegitimize George Bush as he took the oath of office as president.

I did not at that moment imagine that Bush would, in the presidency that ensued, demonstrate utter contempt for the rule of law and work at every turn to frustrate accountability�

So today, I want to speak on behalf of those Americans who feel that President Bush has betrayed our nation's trust, those who are horrified at what has been done in our name, and all those who want the rest of the world to know that we Americans see the abuses that occurred in the prisons of Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo and secret locations as yet undisclosed as completely out of keeping with the character and basic nature of the American people and at odds with the principles on which America stands.

I believe we have a duty to hold President Bush accountable - and I believe we will. As Lincoln said at our time of greatest trial, "We - even we here - hold the power, and bear the responsibility."

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 11, 2004 12:23 AM

Fl,
you previoulsy stated this;

I also think it would be hard to debate and defend yourself if you have no record on which to run.

So why is it Kerry won't talk about his voting record?

Posted by: Wayne at October 11, 2004 08:30 AM

Wayne,
Of course people make mistakes! George Bush and John Kerry both had mistakes in their methods of debating. I will not disagree with you on that one. People say he has said many different things about the war in Iraq. You can't just say "I disagree with it." John Kerry knows that. The fact that he is speaking at a level higher than those Americans in the majority confuses most Americans. He didn't say "I am for it." "I'm against it." There are so many different issues in Iraq. He said he was for going into Afghanistan, because he feels that they are a threat. He doesn't however think that the war in Iraq is necessary. I agree with him one hundred percent there. I think both candidates did better Friday night, however I would have to agree with John Kerry.
As for Michael Moore, he is brilliant. Even if you don't agree with him, you should still be able to appreciate his documentary as a work of brilliance. He didn't write it hoping people would just watch his movie and vote for John Kerry. He wrote it to bring people to a realization so they would then do the research and vote accordingly. The fact that you saw Fahrenheit 9/11 as a Republican definitely earns respect. At least you saw it before criticizing it.
As for Abel, I think he is a very well-educated man that deserves respect from all.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 11, 2004 04:13 PM

Wayne,
Kerry has talked about his voting record many times. He came out and admitted that he voted "for the war before he voted against it." Remember? It is Bush who needs to admit his mistakes...
I don't know if you happened to see it or not, but on the debate Friday night, Bush was asked whether he would state three of his mistakes and how he could fix them. He didn't answer the question...
I await your next post.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 11, 2004 04:16 PM

Mr. Ochoa,
Thanks again for your kind comments. I really think you will appreciate Fahrenheit 9/11. My mom saw it in theaters and then bought it on DVD so I could see it. It was wonderful. I have also seen bits and pieces of Bowling For Columbine. My mom has seen Roger and Me and she said it was quite sad, but very interesting to see.
I await your next post, and I can't wait for you to see Fahrenheit 9/11.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 11, 2004 04:59 PM

FL,
Why didn't Kerry get a question about three mistakes of his? This is an idiotic question, who in there right mind would say here are three things my opponent will do better? Cmon, this is getting ridiculous.

Posted by: Wayne at October 11, 2004 11:42 PM

Wayne,
Being president also means taking responsibility for your mistakes. You don't have to say that your opponent would do better or anything. You just have to admit to three mistakes you have made. Personally, I thought it was a brilliant question. Ask the people asking the questions why they didn't ask Kerry about his mistakes. I can't answer that.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 12, 2004 03:53 PM

Wayne,

Look Wayne, don't feel too bad about not knowing anything. It's really not your fault. Obviously you're not too bright. Kerry has stated his position regarding Iraq countless times but he doesn't expect people like yourself to ever get it right, so don't worry on that score.

You say about me, "He has been proven worng on this blog to many times to count." Tell me, when have you ever, even once, proven me wrong? You don't even know what a proof is or how to go about getting one. Surely you must know that what you said was another lie. Of course I understand that you Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republicans are unable to do anything other than lie but still, you should at least try to tell the truth every once in a while. Lying is an addiction, you know.

You also say, "He (Abel) just recently tried to tell me the republicans past a bill and Bush signed it to disenfanchise voters without the democrats either trying to stop them or knowing what was going on." This is another lie. I said that the Republicans passed a bill but I never said that it was to disenfranchise voters, it was supposed to help voters, so obviously you didn't understand at all, what I said. As I recall, the Act was called Help American Voters Act (HAVA).

About next month, I already know about all the lies that you Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republicans are going to be saying about our candidate John Kerry. For the good of our country I hope that Americans don't fall for your HH pro-Bushite Republican lies, but you're right, we'll know about that next month. I hope it's not a too close election to give you Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republicans an opportunity to steal the election from the American people again like you did in 2,000. By the way, Michael Moore never took anything out of context. He told the truth and that's why you HH pro-Bushite Republicans don't like him. Try to behave yourself, you hear!

Your POST follows:

"FL, Did Kerry state everything correctly during the debate? He said he has had one position on Iraq, which position is it? I still don't know where he stands on Iraq. If you are going to start quoting Michael Moore and using his facts then it is a lost cause for you. There are several things wrong with F9/11. Although he nver seemed to lie, many things are taken out of context, or the full truth is never told. For example, the natural gas pipeline in Afghanistan he talks about? Clinton put a stop to that in the 90's. Bush never had anything to do wiht it. The begining scene where Gore is celebrating with Stevie Wonder happened the night before the election, Gore was watching the results in his home town.
As for Abel,
He has been proven worng on this blog to many times to count. He relies on foreign news agencies for his facts. He just recently tried to tell me the republicans past a bill and Bush signed it to disenfanchise voters without the democrats either trying to stop them or knowing what was going on. This is ridiculous.
It really doesn't matter what I think is the truth, we will see waht America thinks next month."
Posted by: Wayne at October 10, 2004 03:48 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 12, 2004 09:11 PM

FlamingLiberal,

Yes, I know that I'll enjoy seeing Moore's Fahrenheit 911 and I will see it as soon as I can. Like you, I saw "Bowling For Columbine" about the mixed-up kids at Columbine in Colorado and like your Mom, I saw "Roger and Me" about all the auto jobs that Flynt, Michigan lost. I have Moore's "Downsize This," which is about greed and downsizing. You have my Email address in your web site so email me whenever you have any questions, etc. As always, my warmest regards to you.

Your POST follows:

"Mr. Ochoa, Thanks again for your kind comments. I really think you will appreciate Fahrenheit 9/11. My mom saw it in theaters and then bought it on DVD so I could see it. It was wonderful. I have also seen bits and pieces of Bowling For Columbine. My mom has seen Roger and Me and she said it was quite sad, but very interesting to see.
I await your next post, and I can't wait for you to see Fahrenheit 9/11.
~FlamingLiberal"
Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 11, 2004 04:59 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 12, 2004 09:34 PM

Abel,
You have not seen M.Moore's movie so you wouldn't know if anything was out of context, would you?

As for proving you wrong, the HAVA act you like to tout must have been voted for by some democrats, right? I didn't know that republicans could pass anything without some democrats voting for it.

As far as me behaving myself, I have treated FL with respect from the begining, I tried to do the same to you but you insist on calling me names,"Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republicans". I don't hate heroes at all, I have stated that Kerry is admirable for volunteering to go to a war many did not want to go to. Like Clinton for example. I still voted for Clinton, the fact that he did not go did not sway my vote.

Why have you become so hateful towards me as of late? Have I done something to offend you?

Posted by: Wayne at October 12, 2004 11:00 PM

FL,
I am asking you, what 3 mistakes do you think Kerry has made in the past four years?

Bush's 3 mistakes in my mind are as follows;

1. The whole illegal alien thing he did. Not a smart move for many reasons.

2. Allowing George Tenet to stay on after saying Iraq was a slam dunk and it surely was not. I still think the world is a better place without Saddam and his sons.

3. And last of all I think the president has been to mercifull with our enemies. I am not saying that we should slaughter everyone, just overpower them and put an end to this.

I await your response.

Posted by: Wayne at October 12, 2004 11:05 PM

Posted on Mon, Oct. 11, 2004

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/9893811.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

Senate OKs $137 billion in corporate, special interest tax breaks

By Sumana Chatterjee
Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON - The Senate on Monday approved $137 billion in tax breaks for corporations and special interests over 10 years, including a $10 billion buyout for tobacco farmers. The giveaways were needed to win votes for otherwise unpopular legislation intended primarily to end a trade fight over illegal U.S. subsidies to export industries.

The measure passed 69-17. The House of Representatives passed the bill on Oct. 7 by 280-141. President Bush is expected to sign the bill before Election Day.

Supporters hailed its passage as critical to creating jobs while opponents called the measure a massive corporate giveaway. It includes tax breaks for Alaskan whalers, natural gas companies, the timber industry, Hollywood filmmakers and cruise-ship companies.

To win support from tobacco-state lawmakers, tax writers included a $10 billion industry-financed buyout for tobacco farmers. That provision drew heated bipartisan criticism from Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, who'd sought to make the buyout contingent upon Federal Drug Administration regulation of tobacco products. They lost.

"This bill allows big tobacco companies to market cigarettes to your children," Kennedy said.

The legislation's basic purpose is to end increasingly high tariffs imposed on 1,600 American products. The European Union had complained that certain export subsidies constituted unfair trade practices. The World Trade Organization agreed and imposed tariffs, which started at 5 percent and are now up to 12 percent.

In response, the bill would repeal $49.2 billion in export subsidies, a move unpopular with the subsidies' beneficiaries. To build support for the bill, its sponsors lowered the tax rate for domestic manufacturers from 35 percent to 32 percent, at a cost to the Treasury of $76.5 billion over 10 years.

To spread the benefits more widely, tax writers expanded the definition of manufacturing to include construction companies, engineering and architectural firms, film and music companies, and the oil and gas industry.

NASCAR track owners won a break worth $101 million for grandstand expenses.

Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, said the bill would help his constituents, who've been hit hard by the manufacturing slump. "This bill goes a long way to helping us," he said.

The tax breaks drew criticism from fiscal conservatives.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called the measure the "worst example of the influence of the special interests I have ever seen."

Despite the $137 billion in tax breaks, the bill officially won't add to the record federal deficit. It includes various revenue-raising provisions such as customs fee extensions and closes alleged tax "loopholes" worth $81.7 billion over 10 years that together will pay for the bill, making it "revenue neutral."

One example: The bill tightens rules that give multinational companies incentives to incorporate overseas to avoid paying U.S. taxes.

"We're closing loopholes on tax scams to shelter (multinational companies') money offshore," said Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md. She called the loophole the "Bermuda Triangle" of the tax code.

To encourage Hollywood moguls to make fewer films in inexpensive foreign locales, lawmakers included a $336 million tax break over five years to allow studios to expense up to $15 million in the first year of production of small and independent films made in the United States. It would give them more tax breaks if production occurs in low-income communities in Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri or Tennessee.

In a provision proposed by Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Bob Graham, D-Fla., the measure would give cruise-ship companies a $28 million tax break by allowing them to delay filing certain expenses. Murkowski, who's in a tight race to return to the Senate, also won a provision to permit the deduction of charitable contributions that support native Alaskan whaling.

Archery-gear makers, fishing tackle-box makers and foreign gamblers all would benefit, too. The bill would give a $27 million tax break to encourage foreigners to gamble at U.S. horse and dog racetracks and $9 million in tax breaks to U.S. makers of bows and arrows.

One provision would reduce excise taxes from 10 percent to 3 percent on fishing tackle boxes. A major beneficiary is Plano Molding Co. of Illinois, which is headquartered in Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert's district. The cost to taxpayers is $11 million, according to the budget watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, the bill would also provide these tax breaks:

-$231 million to finance $2 billion in bonds for four malls, including the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minn.

-$495 million to allow shipbuilders such as Northrop Grumman to use a different accounting technique; sponsors: Sens. John Breaux, D-La., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine.

-$995 million for aircraft leasing and shipping income exemptions.

-$247 million over five years to help producers of small jets and planes, 60 percent of which are built in Kansas. Beneficiaries include Lear Jet and Cessna; sponsors: Sens. Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts, both Kansas Republicans.

-$27 million to farmers who replace livestock because of drought, flood or other weather-related conditions; sponsors: Sens. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and Craig Thomas, R-Wyo.

-$234 million for the distilled spirits, wine and beer industry.

-$150 million for an Alaska natural gas pipeline.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/9893811.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2004 KR Washington Bureau and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.realcities.com

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 13, 2004 02:39 AM

Abel,
Just as on the other area of this site that I am talking to someone else, the same holds true here. I am talking to FL not you. If you can't have a nice debate here then don't talk to me at all.

Posted by: Wayne at October 13, 2004 07:58 AM

Wayne,
You can talk, debate??? all you want but:

1.) Try to avoid your Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican lying as this upsets me.

2.) Try to refrain from being mean and hypocritical or call insulting names to people as this also upsets me.

3.) Make an effort to respect the opinions of other people because it upsets me too, if you don't.

4.) Above all, don't use labels that HH pro-Bushite Republicans have previously "demonized" to describe people. Example sentence: "I didn't know you were such a Liberal?"

Think you can do all that? If you do that, you'll find that you can debate??? all you want and I won't come by and interfere in any way. I would say to just behave normally like a nice guy but I know how difficult that is for you Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republicans so I won't even bother. OK, I'll say it anyway, just try to be a nice fellow. Will you do that? I hope you are able to succeed. My warmest regards to you.

Your POST follows:

"Abel, Just as on the other area of this site that I am talking to someone else, the same holds true here. I am talking to FL not you. If you can't have a nice debate here then don't talk to me at all."
Posted by: Wayne at October 13, 2004 07:58 AM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 13, 2004 01:53 PM

Wayne,

The only thing that has been extrememly out of context has been the lies that the Swift Vets have been telling without any documentation of support. Sure, they have written some testimonials but only after John Kerry began working on his political goals. That's completely unacceptable.

I dislike what you are doing when you make efforts to support these lying veterans. Yes, veterans are like other people and they have motives, etc., and will lie as well, when it suits them.

As for HAVA, the Act passed with mostly Republican votes and perhaps a few democratic votes. This act was signed into law by George W. Bush but I am not optimistic that it'll prove effective as written. Lets hope that it is. I would hate to see the Florida debacle happen all over again in 2,004.

Frankly, you have offended me by pretending or playing the role of what I call a Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican. I prefer and even like "real" Republicans like John McCain and many others who refuse to be brainwashed and are still clearly independent of the failure, George W. Bush.

Visit the different Boards on this BLOG and find my POSTs---you'll see what I mean. I sometimes POST articles about them. I really admire sensible Republicans who still use their brains to think logically. I would never think of calling these Republicans hateful or liars.

We do have many fine Republicans who are respectable and honorable. I even voted for one of them--John McCain, in the Republican Presidential primary prior to the 2,000 election. You should look for them, study them and perhaps become a little bit more like them.

Your POST follows:

"Abel, You have not seen M.Moore's movie so you wouldn't know if anything was out of context, would you?
As for proving you wrong, the HAVA act you like to tout must have been voted for by some democrats, right? I didn't know that republicans could pass anything without some democrats voting for it.
As far as me behaving myself, I have treated FL with respect from the begining, I tried to do the same to you but you insist on calling me names,"Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republicans". I don't hate heroes at all, I have stated that Kerry is admirable for volunteering to go to a war many did not want to go to. Like Clinton for example. I still voted for Clinton, the fact that he did not go did not sway my vote.
Why have you become so hateful towards me as of late? Have I done something to offend you?"
Posted by: Wayne at October 12, 2004 11:00 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 13, 2004 02:25 PM

Wayne,
Before I answer your question, I have to admit that I don't know much of Kerry's past choices. I'll do my best to answer your question though. Here goes...

*If I'm talking about the debates, I would have to say that the way Kerry worded his feelings about the war in Iraq could have been better. I think it is fine that he said it was the wrong war, because that is what he believes, and I wouldn't want him to just say what people want to hear. But, he could have said it in a way that explained his case better. He could've explained what he was going to do to fix it in more detail as well.
*Another mistake would have to be his voting for the war in the first place. People have labeled him as a "flip-flopper" because of this. I do not think that it is bad that he changed his mind, but to some people, that shows insecurity. I'm not one of those people.
Well, I'm very sorry, but I do not know of any other mistakes he has made. I know that I didn't answer your question perfectly, but I at least tried, right? Haha...
I await your next post.
~FlamingLiberal
P.S. I am not trying to be rude, but you shouldn't be so harsh to Mr. Ochoa. I believe you mentioned something I was talking to him about in one of your posts when you said the thing about Michael Moore.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 13, 2004 04:20 PM

Abel,
You can call me "Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican" but I can't say that someones ideas are liberal and that they sound liberal? What is this? I am truly confused Abel. I have been trying to spell your name correctly and treat you with respect but for some reason you are trying to pick a fight and bring me down to your name calling level.

It won't work Abel, this is the last time I will address you as long as you feel the need to call me names.

FL,
If I have insulted you please let me know how so I may apologize for what I may have done wrong.

Posted by: Wayne at October 13, 2004 06:38 PM

Wayne,
I do not feel that you have insulted me in anyway. I am sorry if it seemed I was insinuating you have. I do think that name-calling is wrong, whether it is coming from a Democrat or a Republican too.
Anyway, to bring up a new issue, I have to ask you, do you support Amendment 3? I do not. And, just so you know, as you are answering this question, my dad is a lawyer. His friend is a malpractice lawyer. So is my uncle. Just keep this in mind, so you don't say something to offend me in anyway. Ha ha... just a warning.
I await your next post.
~FlamingLiberal
P.S. And another thing, I don't think my opinion of Amendment 3 would be any different even if my father was not a lawyer. It's just my opinion...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 13, 2004 09:00 PM

I am watching the debate right now.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 13, 2004 10:07 PM

FL,
Amendment 3, are you talking about the marriage amendment? If so, I do beleive that marriage is between a man and a woman. I do not support anything that infringes on that.

Having said that, I am not against gay or lesbian couples. I think they have a right to some sort of union or contract that entitles them to benefits of commiting yourself to someone else. I just don't want it to be marriage.

I think amendment 3 should be put to a national vote and let Americans have the final say. Not a judge, senator or even the president.

I assume this is what you are refering to as the 3rd amendment entails quatering of soldiers.

I do not think you have insulted me. Let me explain what happened. This is Abel's post;

Wayne,

Look Wayne, don't feel too bad about not knowing anything. It's really not your fault. Obviously you're not too bright. Kerry has stated his position regarding Iraq countless times but he doesn't expect people like yourself to ever get it right, so don't worry on that score.

I guess I am stupid, keep reading.

Here is another;

Wayne,
You can talk, debate??? all you want but:

1.) Try to avoid your Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican lying as this upsets me.

2.) Try to refrain from being mean and hypocritical or call insulting names to people as this also upsets me.

3.) Make an effort to respect the opinions of other people because it upsets me too, if you don't.

4.) Above all, don't use labels that HH pro-Bushite Republicans have previously "demonized" to describe people. Example sentence: "I didn't know you were such a Liberal?"

All this posted by Abel.

I have never refered to anyone being liberal as being a negative. I do not agree with the liberal point of view but isn't that what America is? You don't agree with the conservative point of view, hence your screen name. I am saying these things in general, not on specifics. In general I agree with conservatives. Anything I say, any point of view I have, if it does not agree with Mr. Ochoa, than in his own words I am lying. Why can't I disagree? This is the kind of attitude that has slowly driven me more conservative.

Let me know what you think of this. I have had nice conversations with you and another Kerry supporter, CollegeStudentforChange, and I respect both of your opinions, but for the most part Kerry supporters on this site have not been nice.

Talk to you soon.

Posted by: Wayne at October 13, 2004 11:27 PM

FL,
You stated a couple of times you dad is a lawyer and so is your uncle and also your father's friend is a lawyer as well.

I am not someone who thinks all lawyers are bad. I do not blame lawyers entirely for all the frivolous law suits. People need to be held accountable for this as well. I have known lawyers who truly are good people. I don't think everyone thinks all lawyers a evil money grubers.

With the way you have treated me, it is fair to say your parents have raised you well, and with that being said it is fair to assume that your dad is a fair person, which in turn means he is probably a fair lawyer. Just my thoughts on this matter.

Have a good day.

Posted by: Wayne at October 14, 2004 07:45 AM

Wayne,
Okay, sorry, I wasn't sure if I said something that made you think I was mad at you or something.
I am also sorry I wasn't very specific about the amendment. I was talking about the amendment that says a patient cannot sue their doctor. Sorry for the confusion. And, no, you haven't insulted me in anyway.
I look forward to your next response and sorry again for the confusion.
P.S. I believe that gay couples should be allowed to get married. Or, at least, have the rights of a married couple. I think they should at least be allowed to visit each other in the hospital.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 14, 2004 04:03 PM

Wayne,
Sorry. My mom just told me that the Amendment 3 I was referring to is only in Florida. I think that's why I confused you. Sorry...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 14, 2004 05:04 PM

FL,
Now that I know what Amendment 3 is I will still give you my thoughts on it.

I would never want to vote away a patients rights. Why in this country is everything either the extreme one way or when it comes back it is the extreme the other? I know doctors are suffering from frivilous law suits. Isn't there a way that if the law suit is proven frivilous that the plantif and the plantif's lawyer can be held responsible for that? This doesn't sound all that difficult to find a middle ground that benefits everyone.

What are your thoughts and how does your Dad feel about frivilous law suits? I just can't beleive that everything that goes on today is such a major problem.

Oh, by the way, you never insulted me. You and another on this site that are Kerry supporters have treated me like gold. The others name is CollegeStudent for Change, or Henry. Thanks for debating civily and not calling me a dummy or liar like the rest of the Kerry supporters have here.

I await your next post.

Posted by: Wayne at October 14, 2004 11:37 PM

ABOVE ALL, DON'T LISTEN TO THE LYING HERO HATING PRO-BUSHITE REPUBLICANS!

WHY JOHN KERRY WILL GET MY VOTE:

George W. Bush blames faulty or flawed information from the CIA for his belief that Iraq had WMDs and he excuses himself by saying that other countries as well as Democrats including Kerry had the same bad intelligence that he had. He thinks that makes his mistakes acceptable.

The truth is that George W. Bush always received better information from the CIA than the others did. The truth is also that he had a greater responsibility than the others in that he was the President and the others were not. The truth is that he has never accepted responsibility for what happened in his watch or apologized to the American people for his failure to "connect the dots," regarding what the terrorists planned and carried out. The truth is that America is still not safe from possible terrorists attacks. Why should Americans think that his mistakes won't happen again?

George W. Bush did lie to the American people in order to get their support for his ill advised and illegal invasion of Iraq. George W. Bush wasn't interested in just capturing Osama bin Laden---he was after Saddam Hussein. Why should we trust him now? You know the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you;
Fool me twice, shame on me." I don't believe the American people will want to give George W. Bush a second opportunity to lie to them again.

Frankly, on giving the most tax breaks to the wealthiest 1 percent of the population. That was a mistake too. The recovery didn't come about because the wealthiest 1 percenters merely reinvested their money and didn't spend it like the Average and below American would have done. Why should Americans think that George W. Bush will now begin to represent the Average American?

Finally, George W. Bush did get a surplus of billions in the US Treasury from the Bill Clinton Administration at the beginning of his term. All this money was misspent on the reckless tax breaks to Huge Corporations, Industries, and wealthiest Americans and now we have deficit spending and our national debt has accumulated negatively to the point where we are now in danger of becoming another third world country. We own billions of dollars to Japan and Communist China. It'll take our children's children years to repay our national debt and that's just not right. We owe our children and their heirs a life better than that. Why should we now believe that George W. Bush will ever change his attitude toward Corporations, Industries, and wealthy Americans?

BE SURE TO VOTE THE KERRY/EDWARDS TICKET ON NOVEMBER 2, 2004!

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 15, 2004 09:20 PM

Wayne,

Look at the last POST I have attached and tell me that you are not inferring that being a Liberal is a negative. You said, "I didn't realize you were so liberal," only because you didn't like the opinion of CollegeStudent4Change. Well, this displeases me because CollegeStudent4Change is not as old or as experienced as you are so I don't consider you being fair. I also ask you why, when Governor Howard Dean yelled, did he lose the Democratic Primary?

Pick on me and I am experienced and I'll call you a Lying Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican which is what you are. Be a man and accept what you are or stop doing what you're doing.

Face it, George W. Bush lied to the American people and his policies are obviously against the American middle class. Any intelligent American is able to see that. Why can't you?

Tell the truth or be called a liar---what's wrong with that? You are obviously only seeing one side of the story and that's Bush's side whereas I can see both sides and I'm able to judge and reject what George W. Bush is doing and has done to the American people. This is not funny! George W. Bush is bringing down our country and I have no choice but to fight against that happening.

Two of your POSTs follow:

"I have never refered to anyone being liberal as being a negative. I do not agree with the liberal point of view but isn't that what America is? You don't agree with the conservative point of view, hence your screen name. I am saying these things in general, not on specifics. In general I agree with conservatives. Anything I say, any point of view I have, if it does not agree with Mr. Ochoa, than in his own words I am lying. Why can't I disagree? This is the kind of attitude that has slowly driven me more conservative.
Let me know what you think of this. I have had nice conversations with you and another Kerry supporter, CollegeStudentforChange, and I respect both of your opinions, but for the most part Kerry supporters on this site have not been nice.
Talk to you soon.
Posted by: Wayne at October 13, 2004 11:27 PM

"CollegeStudent4Change,
I didn't realize you were so liberal. Did you hear any of either candidates answers? Why when someone on the left yells its because they are passionate? When someone on the right yells they are losing their cool. You starting to sound like a hypocrite."
Posted by: Wayne at October 9, 2004 09:36 AM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 15, 2004 09:51 PM

Abel,
1. Bush inherited a recesion

2. Bush's policies were barely in place when we were attacked. I am not blaming the attack on the previous administration, we just did not expect that type of attast. Republican and Dewmocrat alike.

3.Kerry has been in Washington for over 20 years and has not shown anyone he can lead. He tried to cut our intell budget after the first WTC attack and voted against almost every weapon system we now use.

4.As far as UBL goes, is he the only terrorist? Was Saddam a terrorist? I think he was. Look at the mass graves recently found with the women and children all with bullets in the head.

5.Clinton did leave a surplus, and then we were attacked, how much do you think America needed to be bailed out after noone going to work for almost a week? The whole country shut down which means no income for anyone yet bills still arrived.

6.Kerryu had the same intell as Bush, Russia, France, Germany and Great Britian yet you only want to punish Bush? What kind of leader would that make Kerry? Bush stood on his own tow feet and made a tough decision, history will tell whether he is wrong or not. History has told Kerry is often wrong. He voted against the first Gulf War, and several votes against what it took to win the cold war yet somehow you think he will be able to fight this war? It just doesn't add up.

7.You may have noticed that not once did I try and insult you, can you give the smae respect back? I am not a liar and do not try and misrepresent facts. I try and look at both sides and if there were a candidate that would fight this war better I would vote for him/her. The fact of the matter is that either Kerry or Bush is going to be president in January 2005 and I am voting Bush.

I await your response.

Posted by: Wayne at October 16, 2004 09:24 AM

Abel,
Why don't you ask Henry if I insulted him by referring to him being liberal? Henry and I get along just fine, as do Flaming Liberal and I. Like I have said before, keep your nose out of my conversations with others. I have not attacked CollegeStudentforChange(aka Henry)or Flaming Liberal, so stop trying to start a fight because it is not going to happen.

I do not think being liberal is a bad thing, I just don't agree with that point of view so why would I vote for someone with liberal tendencies? If you think liberal is a bad word I don't know what to say to you.

If I were to say to someone I didn't realize you were so conservative you wouldn't say anything, would you?

Pick on me and I am experienced and I'll call you a Lying Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican which is what you are. Be a man and accept what you are or stop doing what you're doing.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 15, 2004 09:51 PM

If you notice here you are the one calling people names because they don't agree with you. I am confused as to why you chose to post here and not on the subject site that Henry posts on. Is it because he has already told you I did not offend him? Do you think FL will take your side? She may agree with your choice of candidates but I am sure she can tell you that I have been nothing but nice to her. I have treated her with a kind of respect that you only give to those who agree with you and think you are right.

It seems I have lied by saying I would not address you as long as you are calling names. I will continue to defend myself and my right to choose the candidate that I think is right. Just as you have the same rights, just don't try and start fights with people who are having a VERY civil debate.

Posted by: Wayne at October 16, 2004 02:24 PM

This must be the part of the blog you were talking about before, Wayne. This is my very first post outside of the "Bush up in results" one.

So how are you, Flaming Liberal? Wayne told you about me I used to post under the name of "CollegeStudent4Change."

Posted by: Henry at October 16, 2004 06:55 PM

Wayne,
If I could vote, I would vote no on Amendment 3. My dad is also against it. You're exactly right. It does take away the rights of the patients. When a doctor messes something up on a patient's surgery, it could take away their ability to continue working. They need the money they get from doctors to support themselves. They don't just sue to be mean. Well, that's how I feel.
I await your next post.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 16, 2004 08:10 PM

Abel

I think Wayne is a fine person. His posts are very informative and polite. I did not see anything derogatory in his postings to Henry.

Abel - YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS NAME CALLING AND TRYING TO CREATE RULES TO SUIT YOUR OWN BELIEFS. THAT IS WRONG!! EVERYONE HAS THE SAME RIGHTS TO SAY WHAT THEY THINK ON THIS BLOG - NOT JUST YOU.

PLEASE STOP WITH THE NAME CALLING AND MAYBE OTHERS WILL TREAT YOU WITH RESPECT.

Most of what you say is right out of the DNC playbook - no facts, just spin. If you prefer to believe people who will stop at nothing to win on Nov 2nd then go for it. They will not get my vote or any other clear-thinking Americans' vote either.

Posted by: Calamity Jane at October 16, 2004 08:27 PM

Wayne,

Granted, you Talk the Talk but you fail to Walk the Walk. I know you are a Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republican (LHHPBR). You are either a LHHPBR or you're just an ignorant fool who doesn't realize what you're doing. You take your pick. Which are you?

My Answers to your LHHPBR POST follows:

You say, "1. Bush inherited a recesion
(Ans.) Yes, which gave him an opportunity to give tax relief to the most wealthy Americans who needed it the least.

You say, "2. Bush's policies were barely in place when we were attacked. I am not blaming the attack on the previous administration, we just did not expect that type of attast. Republican and Dewmocrat alike.
(Ans.) The attack came about because George W. Bush was unable or unwilling to connect the dots. Of course he's blaming the messenger or flawed intelligence.

You say, "3.Kerry has been in Washington for over 20 years and has not shown anyone he can lead. He tried to cut our intell budget after the first WTC attack and voted against almost every weapon system we now use.
(Ans.) If that's so, why did he get the title of being the most Liberal Senator in the US Senate? This statement is simply a LHHPBR lie.

4.As far as UBL goes, is he the only terrorist? Was Saddam a terrorist? I think he was. Look at the mass graves recently found with the women and children all with bullets in the head.
(Ans.) Yes, UBL was the main terrorist. No one ever claimed that Saddam was a Saint but we need to remember that we trained him (CIA)and we paid him out of our American tax-payers dollars. Tell the whole Saddam story not just the part you LHHPBR's like. Saddam and Iraq never harmed us---It was unnecessary and illegal for us to invade Iraq. Talk about the countless numbers of innocent civilian Iraqis that we have killed too. Where did Saddam bury them? Where are we burying them now? To hear George W. Bush talk, we haven't even killed one but you know better, don't you?

You say, "5.Clinton did leave a surplus, and then we were attacked, how much do you think America needed to be bailed out after noone going to work for almost a week? The whole country shut down which means no income for anyone yet bills still arrived.
(Ans.) We already talked about the tax breaks given to the most wealthy Americans.

You say, "6.Kerryu had the same intell as Bush, Russia, France, Germany and Great Britian yet you only want to punish Bush? What kind of leader would that make Kerry? Bush stood on his own tow feet and made a tough decision, history will tell whether he is wrong or not. History has told Kerry is often wrong. He voted against the first Gulf War, and several votes against what it took to win the cold war yet somehow you think he will be able to fight this war? It just doesn't add up.
(Ans.) That Kerry and others had the same intelligence that President Bush had is a LHHPBR lie. Only stupid people believe Bush when he tells this whooper. Are you one of them?

7.You may have noticed that not once did I try and insult you, can you give the smae respect back? I am not a liar and do not try and misrepresent facts. I try and look at both sides and if there were a candidate that would fight this war better I would vote for him/her. The fact of the matter is that either Kerry or Bush is going to be president in January 2005 and I am voting Bush.
(Ans.) Yes, you're a liar too when you accept the LHHPBR lies as your own and keep repeating them. All input information become output information for you as nothing sticks in you head. That is what disturbs me greatly about you but what disturbs me even more is that you misrepresent facts and are doing a terrible disservice to middle class Americans. Shame on you for that! One more thing, you do insult people who listen to you if they don't accept your line of thinking. You start slowly asking stupid questions and asking for stupid answers that have nothing to do with reality. The fact is that George W. Bush is currently serving as President and he screwd up when he invaded a country that had done us absolutely no harm. The fact is that George W. Bush lied to the American people in order to get our support for his illegal invasion. The truth is that George W. Bush has completely alienated us from the rest of the world and that we are now considered a Rogue Nation. Frankly, you displease me greatly when you deny the truth of what George W. Bush has done. Not only that but you redestribute the lies that other LHHPBRs are speading out. As I have told you before, there are some decent and honorable Republicans around but you refuse to consider being one of them. One more thing, the only reason that I respond to you is because of all the lies that you tell and I'm concerned that some of them might become inclined to listen and believe your lies. I wouldn't want them to vote against their own economic interests like you are going to do. Another truth is that this election is more about the kind of job that George W. Bush has done and less about John Kerry who is applying for Bush's job. If you want to stop being a LHHPBR, talk more about Bush and less about Kerry from now on. One final word, I am a proud LIBERAL now. You LHHPBRs have turned me into one. I used to be a Conservative who turned into a Moderate who turned into a Progressive but I'm now a die-hard LIBERAL. Thanks to the LHHPBRs.

Your LHHPBR POST follows:

"Abel, Why don't you ask Henry if I insulted him by referring to him being liberal? Henry and I get along just fine, as do Flaming Liberal and I. Like I have said before, keep your nose out of my conversations with others. I have not attacked CollegeStudentforChange(aka Henry)or Flaming Liberal, so stop trying to start a fight because it is not going to happen.
I do not think being liberal is a bad thing, I just don't agree with that point of view so why would I vote for someone with liberal tendencies? If you think liberal is a bad word I don't know what to say to you.
If I were to say to someone I didn't realize you were so conservative you wouldn't say anything, would you?
Pick on me and I am experienced and I'll call you a Lying Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican which is what you are. Be a man and accept what you are or stop doing what you're doing.
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 15, 2004 09:51 PM
If you notice here you are the one calling people names because they don't agree with you. I am confused as to why you chose to post here and not on the subject site that Henry posts on. Is it because he has already told you I did not offend him? Do you think FL will take your side? She may agree with your choice of candidates but I am sure she can tell you that I have been nothing but nice to her. I have treated her with a kind of respect that you only give to those who agree with you and think you are right.
It seems I have lied by saying I would not address you as long as you are calling names. I will continue to defend myself and my right to choose the candidate that I think is right. Just as you have the same rights, just don't try and start fights with people who are having a VERY civil debate."
Posted by: Wayne at October 16, 2004 02:24 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 16, 2004 09:14 PM

Abel,
Here is the latest posting of the person that you insist I have offended;

Sure, Wayne, anything for a good friend.

Don't worry, if anybody insults you while you are gone, whether it's a Bush or Kerry person, I'll defend you. Since everyone seems to know who I really am by now I just dropped the "college student" name. So you can relax and rest from posting I got your back.

Abel, Wayne is a very nice guy all you have to do is show people respect, even if they don't agree with you. You may think he offended me but I can't find any post where he showed any disrespect since he began to know me. I can see why some people insult you, because you throw the first stone with the immature namecalling. And here's one more tip - don't bother reposting this message you have a bad habit of consistently repeating everything other people say.

Posted by: Henry at October 16, 2004 04:09 PM

As everyone can clearly see, I have not offended Henry in any way, in fact we have had great conversations about politics and other things as well. We get along just fine without your interference.

Posted by: Wayne at October 16, 2004 10:56 PM

Wayne,

I know how you "Close Minded Brainwashed Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republicans," (CMBLHHPBR) work. I know that you first "Demonize" a word like "Liberal" and then begin to use it against people that you want to hurt or fool. If any reader really wants to know you, I suggest that they visit the other boards on this BLOG to read your POSTs. Do you now deny that you've been using the "demonized" version of the "LIBERAL" word?

I have said this before because I realize that it has happened. The demonized "Liberal" word is now being used against John Kerry even though John is more of a Conservative or Moderate at minimum. My duty is now to pass this important information out and I'm doing that.

In contrast, your goal is to fool the American people who foolishly believe in the "Demonized" version of "Liberal." You CMBLHHPBR have already given the word "Liberal" a negative connotation. You may fool others but I have read about the political techniques you CMBLHHPBR follow and I know. I'm not going to be fooled by the likes of you CMBLHHPBRs.

Therefore, what you're saying is still another lie meant to confuse people who don't know. You, on the other hand, have been brain washed into working by the methods that you're using. You are guilty of hiding the real issues from the American people by guiding them into false ones that are really non-issues and hiding the real ones from them.

Why don't you discuss the economy and what George W. Bush is doing to improve it? Why don't you discuss the lack of jobs available to the American worker? How about Iraq, why don't you discuss what George W. Bush is going to do to bring our boys home? How about discussing what George W. Bush is doing to improve our Port's Security? How about discussing our Nuclear Power Plants and their lack of security?

These are the real issues of today. Why would you want to evade the real issues to bring out the dumb ones that only serve to confuse voters? Let's remember that I know your techniques of working.

Like I said, you're evading the real issues and bringing into focus fake ones that'll serve to confuse American voters. If you want me to leave you alone, you have to stop doing that. Am I not being clear with you? Have I not told you this before? Stop being a CloseMinded Brainwashed Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republican (CMBLHHPBR).

My problem with you has nothing to do with any other specific individual. I'm the one who knows what you're doing and if you don't change your ways, you'll keep hearing from me in the hope that others will find out the kind of person you are and be a little more careful in how they view you and in what you're about. Like I said, if any reader really wants to know you, I suggest that they visit the other boards on this BLOG to read your POSTs.

If you continue with your CMBLHHPBR techniques, I'm going to be visiting all the different Boards on this BLOG to inform everyone about you. I know how you get around into every Board on this BLOG. You really do need to change you technique methods if you want to make friends and influence people. Am I being clear now?

Your CMBLHHPBR POST follows:

"Abel, Why don't you ask Henry if I insulted him by referring to him being liberal? Henry and I get along just fine, as do Flaming Liberal and I. Like I have said before, keep your nose out of my conversations with others. I have not attacked CollegeStudentforChange(aka Henry)or Flaming Liberal, so stop trying to start a fight because it is not going to happen.
I do not think being liberal is a bad thing, I just don't agree with that point of view so why would I vote for someone with liberal tendencies? If you think liberal is a bad word I don't know what to say to you.
If I were to say to someone I didn't realize you were so conservative you wouldn't say anything, would you?
Pick on me and I am experienced and I'll call you a Lying Hero Hating pro-Bushite Republican which is what you are. Be a man and accept what you are or stop doing what you're doing.
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 15, 2004 09:51 PM
If you notice here you are the one calling people names because they don't agree with you. I am confused as to why you chose to post here and not on the subject site that Henry posts on. Is it because he has already told you I did not offend him? Do you think FL will take your side? She may agree with your choice of candidates but I am sure she can tell you that I have been nothing but nice to her. I have treated her with a kind of respect that you only give to those who agree with you and think you are right.
It seems I have lied by saying I would not address you as long as you are calling names. I will continue to defend myself and my right to choose the candidate that I think is right. Just as you have the same rights, just don't try and start fights with people who are having a VERY civil debate."
Posted by: Wayne at October 16, 2004 02:24 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 17, 2004 01:06 PM

Kerry Bumper Stickers

Vote Kerry - The Sears Tower Is An Eyesore Anyway

Vietnam War Hero - But For Which Side?

Whatever you believe, I do, too - Kerry '04

John Kerry - Saying Whatever It Takes To Get Your Vote

John Kerry Won't Just Take A Stand On The Tough Issues - He'll
TakeTwo Or Three Of Them

John Kerry: Betraying America Since 1971

John Kerry: Al Gore Without The Charisma

John Kerry: Pretending To Fight Against Special Interests Since Very
Recently

John Kerry: When you absolutely, positively HAVE to lose the war on
terrorism overnight!

Waffles And Ketchup Anyone?

Don't vote for anyone who looks like a Q-Tip

Endorsed by Al-Qaeda, Al-Jazeera, and Al-Gore

Everything To Everyone - Kerry 2004

Help Me To Help You Scr** Up America

John Kerry: The President Dukakis We Never Had

Keeping too much of your own money? Vote Kerry!

Kerry - Anti-Pro-whatever

Kerry - Citizen of the United Nations

Kerry - The same economy as Clinton, without the burning sensation.

Kerry: Catholic When It Counts!

More Positions Than Gumby

More Waffles than Belgium

On the issues, he's everywhere you want him to be

Spending Money Left and Left

There are some things money can't buy. For everything else, there's
Teresa.

These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others

Posted by: Wayne at October 17, 2004 03:11 PM

This question is for anyone that wants to answer it.
Who do you think will win the 2004 election and why?
As for me, I think John Kerry will win. Although some people say it is too close to call right now--- and it is really close--- I still think John Kerry has a good chance. It has been, what, fifty years since a president was re-elected with a job approval rating of under 50%. Right now, I believe President Bush's is at 47. It was at 52 before the first debate. After the first, it went to 50, and then 47 after the second debate.
I look forward to what everyone has to say about this. If you want to keep up with George Bush's approval rating, my link will lead you to a site that updates almost daily. Thanks!
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 17, 2004 03:51 PM

Abel,
You talk about me "fooling" people, but do you remember when you said republicans voted for HAVA and Bush passed it? I am attaching a list of senators that voted for it, both republican and democrat alike. This list includes both Kerry and Kennedy voting Yes. Who is trying to fool who here?
Election Overhaul-Passage

Bill Number: S.565
Date: 2002-04-11
Sponsor: Bill sponsored by Dodd, D-CT

Roll Call Number: 0065
Bill passed

State District Name Party Vote
AK Sr Senator
Ted Stevens Republican Y
AK Governor
Frank H. Murkowski Republican Y
AL Jr Senator
Jefferson B. 'Jeff' Sessions Republican Y
AL Sr Senator
Richard C. Shelby Republican Y
AR Sr Senator
Blanche Lambert Lincoln Democrat Y
AZ Sr Senator
John S. McCain Republican Y
AZ Jr Senator
Jon Kyl Republican Y
CA Sr Senator
Dianne Feinstein Democrat Y
CA Jr Senator
Barbara Boxer Democrat Y
CO Jr Senator
Wayne A. Allard Republican Y
CO Sr Senator
Ben 'Nighthorse' Campbell Republican Y
CT Jr Senator
Joseph I. Lieberman Democrat Y
CT Sr Senator
Christopher J. Dodd Democrat Y
DE Jr Senator
Thomas Richard Carper Democrat Y
DE Sr Senator
Joseph R. Biden Democrat Y
FL Jr Senator
Bill Nelson Democrat Y
FL Sr Senator
Daniel Robert 'Bob' Graham Democrat Y
GA Sr Senator
Zell Bryan Miller Democrat Y
HI Jr Senator
Daniel Kahikina Akaka Democrat Y
HI Sr Senator
Daniel K. Inouye Democrat Y
IA Jr Senator
Thomas 'Tom' Harkin Democrat Y
IA Sr Senator
Charles E. 'Chuck' Grassley Republican Y
ID Jr Senator
Michael 'Mike' D. Crapo Republican Y
ID Sr Senator
Larry E. Craig Republican Y
IL Sr Senator
Richard J. 'Dick' Durbin Democrat Y
IL Jr Senator
Peter G. Fitzgerald Republican Y
IN Jr Senator
B. Evan Bayh Democrat Y
IN Sr Senator
Richard G. Lugar Republican Y
KS Jr Senator
Pat Roberts Republican Y
KS Sr Senator
Samuel D. 'Sam' Brownback Republican Y
KY Sr Senator
Mitch McConnell Republican Y
KY Jr Senator
Jim Bunning Republican Y
LA Jr Senator
Mary L. Landrieu Democrat Y
LA Sr Senator
John B. Breaux Democrat Y
MA Jr Senator
John Forbes Kerry Democrat Y
MA Sr Senator
Edward M. 'Ted' Kennedy Democrat Y
MD Jr Senator
Barbara A. Mikulski Democrat Y
MD Sr Senator
Paul S. Sarbanes Democrat Y
ME Sr Senator
Olympia J. Snowe Republican Y
ME Jr Senator
Susan M. Collins Republican Y
MI Jr Senator
Debbie Ann Stabenow Democrat Y
MI Sr Senator
Carl Levin Democrat Y
MN Sr Senator
Mark Dayton Democrat/Farmer/Labor Y
MO Sr Senator
Christopher S. 'Kit' Bond Republican Y
MS Jr Senator
Trent Lott Republican Y
MS Sr Senator
Thad Cochran Republican Y
MT Sr Senator
Max S. Baucus Democrat Y
MT Jr Senator
Conrad Burns Republican N
NC Sr Senator
John Reid Edwards Democrat Y
ND Sr Senator
Gaylord Kent 'Kent' Conrad Democrat Y
ND Jr Senator
Byron L. Dorgan Democrat-NPL Y
NE Jr Senator
E. Benjamin 'Ben' Nelson Democrat Y
NE Sr Senator
Charles T. 'Chuck' Hagel Republican Y
NH Sr Senator
Judd A. Gregg Republican Y
NJ Sr Senator
Jon Stevens Corzine Democrat Y
NM Jr Senator
Jeff Bingaman Democrat Y
NM Sr Senator
Pete V. Domenici Republican Y
NV Sr Senator
Harry M. Reid Democrat Y
NV Jr Senator
John Eric Ensign Republican Y
NY Sr Senator
Charles E. Schumer Democrat Y
NY Jr Senator
Hillary Rodham Clinton Democrat Y
OH Jr Senator
George V. Voinovich Republican Y
OH Sr Senator
Michael 'Mike' DeWine Republican Y
OK Sr Senator
Don Nickles Republican Y
OK Jr Senator
James M. 'Jim' Inhofe Republican Y
OR Sr Senator
Ron Wyden Democrat Y
OR Jr Senator
Gordon Harold Smith Republican Y
PA Sr Senator
Arlen Specter Republican Y
PA Jr Senator
Richard J. 'Rick' Santorum Republican Y
RI Sr Senator
John F. 'Jack' Reed Democrat Y
RI Jr Senator
Lincoln D. Chafee Republican Y
SC Sr Senator
Ernest F. 'Fritz' Hollings Democrat Y
SD Jr Senator
Tim P. Johnson Democrat Y
SD Sr Senator
Thomas A. 'Tom' Daschle Democrat Y
TN Sr Senator
William H. 'Bill' Frist Republican Y
TX Sr Senator
Kay Bailey Hutchison Republican Y
UT Sr Senator
Orrin G. Hatch Republican Y
UT Jr Senator
Robert F. Bennett Republican Y
VA Sr Senator
John W. Warner Republican Y
VA Jr Senator
George Felix Allen Republican Y
VT Sr Senator
Patrick J. Leahy Democrat Y
VT Jr Senator
James M. 'Jim' Jeffords Independent Y
WA Jr Senator
Maria Cantwell Democrat Y
WA Sr Senator
Patty Murray Democrat Y
WI Sr Senator
Herbert H. 'Herb' Kohl Democrat Y
WI Jr Senator
Russell D. Feingold Democrat Y
WV Jr Senator
John D. 'Jay' Rockefeller Democrat Y
WV Sr Senator
Robert C. Byrd Democrat Y
WY Sr Senator
Craig Thomas Republican Y
WY Jr Senator
Michael B. Enzi Republican Y

Abel,
You have now been caught in a lie.

Posted by: Wayne at October 17, 2004 05:39 PM

FL,
I really don't know what will unfold in the next 2 to 3 weeks with the election. With my views I can only hope for Bush, I know you and others are hoping the other way and I respect that.

I am sorry I have to defend myself for what feels like an eternity against Abel, but I honestly feel I have gone out of my way not to throw the first stone. I have resrted to name calling after being called a liar, dumb, stupid and hero hater to name a few. I just get tired of the one way methods of a few.

Oh, by the way, the Kerry bumper sticker thing I posted I thought was funny and have laughed at many Bush things as well. For example the time Bush said it was an honor to shake the hand of the Iraqis he met that had their hand cut off by Saddam. That was funny too.

Posted by: Wayne at October 17, 2004 05:47 PM

Lol, although I don't agree with some of those bumper slogans, Wayne, I have to admit they were funny. To make it fair, I made my own Bush bumper stickers:

Bush: Ignorance is Strength

Bush/Orwell 1984

It's 2004. Do you know where your civil liberties are?

Bush - Think inside, not outside the Box.

Regime Change begins at home.

Somewhere in Texas a village is missing its idiot.

Like Father like Son One Term is Enough.

I Give W an "F" Fail Bush in 2004.

Read My Lips: No more Bushes.

Nobody died when Clinton lied.

No Jobs, No WMD'S, No Brains - Know Bush.

I'm on a NO CARB Diet:
NO C-heney
NO A-shcroft
NO R-umsfeld
No B-ush
And certainly no Rice.

More Trees, Less Bush.

Kerry Bush out of the White House in '04.

Plant a Bush in Texas in '04.

Bush said "Bring it On" and Mothers of Soldiers Wept Until Dawn.

A Vote for Bush in '04 is a Vote for the Draft in '05.

9/11 Does Not Equal Iraq.

Bush/Cheney: Weapons of Mass Deception.

It's NUCLEAR Not NOOKYULAR, Idiot.

My Comments To All Bloggers:
Some of these slogans aren't funny. But I can still make fun of Bush and you guys (or gals) can make fun of Kerry or whom I sometimes call "Frankenstein." It's a free country after all we can say whatever we want. I'm not posting to insult any of the bloggers. However, I can post to make the candidates look like a joke. You know, just for a few laughs. I recently saw a cartoon that parodies Bush's opposition to fully funding stem cell research. Tell me what you think about this:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/umedia/cx_rrogers_umedia/latest

To Wayne

As I said before, I will defend you as I promised if anyone throws mud at you. Thanks for introducing me to Flaming Liberal I appreciate it very much. I hope she notices me eventually. We may support different candidates but we're both rooting for the Yankees. Let's finish off those Red Sox!

Posted by: Henry at October 17, 2004 06:51 PM

Hi, Henry! I am doing well, thanks. How are you?
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 17, 2004 08:54 PM

Wayne,
Though not completely accurate, some of the bumperstickers were clever. I'll agree with you there.
You have done a great job keeping our debates civilized. And, for that, I thank you.
Have a great day!
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 17, 2004 09:01 PM

Henry,
Great bumpersticker ideas! It really bugs me how Bush says "Nookyular" too. Haha... anyway, great bumperstickers. It's a pleasure to meet you!
What college do you go to? I want to go to the University of Florida once I finish middle school and high school.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 17, 2004 09:05 PM

Wayne,
I saw what you said about me on your posts in the other section of this site. I just want to thank you for your kind words.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 17, 2004 09:31 PM

Abel and Wayne,
You guys are both really smart, respectable guys. Maybe you just need to set aside your differences and move on. This site is meant to be used to debate and post opinions. It shouldn't be used to make fun of people or call people names. Though we agree on candidates, I have to say you have been pretty harsh, Abel. I know that it isn't any of my business what you and Wayne talk about, but maybe you need to show him a little more respect.
And, as for Wayne, maybe you shouldn't fight back with mean comments. I don't know who started it, but I think someone should end it. Just have civil debates. That's what makes posting so fun. I have had a great time talking to both of you. Wayne has become a good friend, and so have you, Abel. I just think you guys need to try to get along.
I think you will both find debating more enjoyable when you have more meaningful debates. I have had a great time debating with Wayne and we don't agree on the issues. Wayne has shown great respect for me, and so has Abel. Why can't you guys respect each other?
Anyway, that was my nosy post of the day. Haha...
Sorry to butt in to your conversation.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 17, 2004 10:00 PM

Henry,
These were my favorties,

Bush: Ignorance is Strength

Bush/Orwell 1984

It's 2004. Do you know where your civil liberties are?

Very clever. Speaking of the lighter side, have you noticed that Theresa looks like Tootsie? Remember that Dustin Hoffman movie where he dressed as a woman? I mean no disrespect to Lurch or Tootsie. lol.

I know Bush can't say nuclear, but have you heard Kerry say "idear"?

You guys definitely have th upper hand with the jokes, so I am a little out gunned. Just don't "misunderestimate" me. lol

Posted by: Wayne at October 17, 2004 11:15 PM

FL,
You are certainly welcome for the civil debate. What did you think of my answer to Ammendment 3? For that matter, what have you thought of my views on all the issues we have discussed?

Posted by: Wayne at October 17, 2004 11:18 PM

Abel,

The only senator I can find that voted against HAVA in the senate was a Conrad Burns-Republican. Not Kerry, Kennedy or any other democrat. I can't wait to see you answer this.

Posted by: Wayne at October 17, 2004 11:21 PM

Wayne,

What's your point? After the 2,000 election in Florida, most representatives wanted to make sure that what happened didn't happen again.

As a matter of fact, it's possible that it could happen again. Let hope not but, once again, if it's a very close election, as expected, it's possible that the election will be stolen again from the American people.

I'm not like you. I just don't trust the George W. Bush Administration and I don't expect that I ever will. I simply don't like it when one of our Presidents makes it a practice to lie to the American people.

Your CMBLHHPBR POST follows:

"Abel, The only senator I can find that voted against HAVA in the senate was a Conrad Burns-Republican. Not Kerry, Kennedy or any other democrat. I can't wait to see you answer this."
Posted by: Wayne at October 17, 2004 11:21 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 18, 2004 12:31 AM

Abel,
My point about the HAVA bill is that you wanted me to beleive that it was a republican run bill to effect the democtat voters. I have now proven you that the democrats voted for this bill 100%. I really don't know why you felt the need to mislead me on this.

I know we have our differences so maybe we can all a truce. Stop calling me a liar and hero hater and whatever else you call me. Stop referring to me a dumb and I in return will show you the same respect. I really do not want to fight with anyone here.

Please Abel, I am begging you, let's be civil towards one another. The ball is in your court now and it is your decision.

Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 12:33 PM

Wayne,

I told you about the Help America Vote Act only to show that people wished to make sure that the election debacle of 2,000 never happen again. You now tell me that the Republicans supported the bill and that the Democrats voted for it too. Well, I would hope so. I still think, however, that the 2,000 debacle can be repeated again if the election is close enough. I sense that I have said all this before. In any case, it was never my intention to mislead you regarding this bill but merely to talk about it.

As for our differences, I'll be looking to see that you stop your evil ways and if you do, you won't have to be concerned about me. I simply cannot stand Closed-Minded Brainwashed Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republicans (CMBLHHPBR) and how they preach and what they preach. Above all I don't like the lies they tell about our American Hero John Kerry who had the guts to go fight for us in Vietnam. What I recommend is that if you can't talk politely about him to simply keep quiet and let the people decide without your negative "suggestions." Think you can do that?

Your POST follows:

"Abel, My point about the HAVA bill is that you wanted me to beleive that it was a republican run bill to effect the democtat voters. I have now proven you that the democrats voted for this bill 100%. I really don't know why you felt the need to mislead me on this.
I know we have our differences so maybe we can all a truce. Stop calling me a liar and hero hater and whatever else you call me. Stop referring to me a dumb and I in return will show you the same respect. I really do not want to fight with anyone here.
Please Abel, I am begging you, let's be civil towards one another. The ball is in your court now and it is your decision."
Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 12:33 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 18, 2004 03:40 PM

Wayne,
I think you are a very well-spoken man. Though I may not agree with you on all of the issues we have discussed, I have found it very easy to understand where you are coming from. Thanks to your intelligence, I now better understand your views and have more respect for them. I have had many debates with people, but I have never understood their views as clearly as I have understood yours or had as much respect for their opinions. Thanks!
As far as Amendment 3 goes, I would vote against it. I think it takes the rights of the patient away and what's going to happen to all of the lawyers that study malpractice? I just don't understand why it is a question in the first place, you know? Like you said, there have to be other ways of getting rid of all of the frivlous law suits.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 18, 2004 03:48 PM

To Abel

Abel please stop calling Wayne a liar he's trying to be nice with you and you're rejecting his offers to be friendly. If you keep calling republicans or other Bush supporters liars and whatever other names you have up your sleeve then you could be shooing any undecideds in here away from Kerry. In other words, you're actually hurting rather than helping the Democratic nominee. If Kerry and Edwards lose, then they should place part of the blame on you for contributing to their defeat.

To Flaming Liberal

Hi, I'm doing great too. Just like you, I prefer Kerry over Bush. I'm a full time student with a GPA of 3.4 at Queens College in Flushing, NY. Before the debates, I was undecided but after watching the first presidential debate, I went to Kerry. As for who will win the election on November 2nd, I have no idea this is definitely the weirdest presidential election I have ever seen. One poll shows Bush leading and another shows Kerry leading. Take for example that USA-Gallup Poll - Bush is up by 8 points while in the Reuters Poll they both receive 45%. I have a feeling this is going to be a pretty close election like in 2000. If Bush or Kerry wins, it's most likely to be by a squeaker not by a landslide so this looks like it's going to be another nail-biter.

In the meantime I came up with some new bumper sticker slogans:

George Bush: When he makes a colossal error he STICKS WITH IT.

Bush/Ashcroft 1984

Dick Cheney: Receiving Millions from no-bid contracts in an undisclosed location.

Ashcroft: Trampling on our constitutional rights for another 4 years.

I lost my Job. Bush lost my Vote.

Warning: Give W the Pink Slip in '04 or the next one could be yours!

Posted by: Henry at October 18, 2004 07:04 PM

Henry,
It's nice to meet you. What's your major? Isn't New York great? I went there a couple of years ago, and it was just amazing.
I'm 13, in the eighth grade. I live in Florida, in a small town where I am in the minority as far as being a Democrat. lol. It's very difficult living around all of these Bush-supporters. Especially since half of them aren't educated supporters. They just listen to the media. People like Wayne, I can actually respect because he is at least educated and has formed his own opinions. He doesn't just go with whatever anyone else says. It's funny. You drive down our street and, across from our house is a Bush-Cheney sign, the house next to us has one, the house diagonally from us has one on a car, and then you see our house. It stands out; the only one with a Kerry-Edwards sign. We have to be the only Kerry supporters for miles. How sad...
Anyway, that's a little about me. I look forward to more fun discussions with you!
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 18, 2004 10:24 PM

Henry,
By the way, great bumper stickers. I especially like "George Bush: When he makes a colossal error, he STICKS WITH IT."
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 18, 2004 10:27 PM

Abel,
You did tell me that HAVA was a republican sponsored bill and Bush signed it and led me to beleive that it was bad somehow for America. I have shown you who voted for it and against it and now you want me to beleive that you thought it was a good idea? I can't by it.

I asked, begged you to stop calling names and I guess you just can't. Well, I am not the type of person to lie down and take it. Please refrain from your hate preaching, name calling game or I will be forced to stick up for myself.

Thanks Abel for making everyone's opinion welcome here yet again.

Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 10:35 PM

Henry and FL,
Thanks for your encouragement, I am really trying to hold my toungue with Abel but it gets progressively harder when the man can't stop calling names.

In the past I have said Kerry is a hero for going to Vietnam, a place many chose not to go to. What happened when he came back is another story, but I can even look over that seeing how it was over 30 years ago. I do not agree with Kerry's views, I am more conservative, therefore I am voting for Bush.

Does this make me an idiot, hero hater, liar or close minded?

Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 10:38 PM

A disturbing letter I found,

I am a senior citizen. During the Clinton Administration I had an extremely good and well paying job.

I took numerous vacations and had several vacation homes.

Since President Bush took office, I have watched my entire life change for the worse.

I lost my job.

I lost my two sons in that terrible Iraqi War.

I lost my homes.

I lost my health insurance.

As a matter of fact I lost virtually everything and became homeless.

Adding insult to injury, when the authorities found me living like an animal, instead of helping me, they arrested me.

I will do anything that Senator Kerry wants to insure that a Democrat is back in the White House come next year.

Bush has to go.

Sincerely,

Saddam Hussein

Just a joke. I thought it was funny.

Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 10:57 PM

JM,
The truth is that I'm still a conservative but what George W. Bush has been doing to our country is completely unforgivable.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at September 26, 2004 02:58 AM

Didn't you just say you were more liberal?

Lie #2 and counting. You just couldn't stop calling names could you?

Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 11:04 PM

Abel,
Here is your post;

Published in the May 17, 2004 issue of TheNation
"Vanishing Votes"
by Gregory Palast

The article starts with:

On October 29, 2002, George W. Bush signed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Hidden behind its apple-pie-and-motherhood name lies a nasty civil rights time bomb.

find it and read it. That's all. Have a pleasant day.

And your follow up post;
Wayne,
Well, look for the article, It's upward from here and I wrote and submitted it on October 4, 2004. You'll find it, read it carefully and tell me what you think. The Republicans voted for it and it was signed by George W. Bush.

On October 29, 2002, George W. Bush signed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Hidden behind its apple-pie-and-motherhood name lies a nasty civil rights time bomb.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 4, 2004 03:18 PM

So now why wouldn't I think that you were saying this bill was a bad idea?

And finally one last post that you made here on Oct 13,

As for HAVA, the Act passed with mostly Republican votes and perhaps a few democratic votes. This act was signed into law by George W. Bush but I am not optimistic that it'll prove effective as written. Lets hope that it is. I would hate to see the Florida debacle happen all over again in 2,004.

As you can see Abel, you did lie right here in this post. You said it was a mostly republican vote and I have shown you only one person voted against it and he was republican. All democrats voted for it. I will not stand for your disrespect to me anymore.

Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 11:18 PM

As for the "Liberal" label, I'm now a proud Liberal myself and I proudly admit it.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 12, 2004 10:32 PM

Here is the liberal side of Abel. Like I said Mr. Ochoa, lie #2. Maybe we should just drop it now, it's getting embarrassing in here.

Posted by: Wayne at October 18, 2004 11:22 PM

Henry,

First, about Wayne, I know Wayne and he's a liar. Right now he's playing a game with you although you may not realize it but I know that he's a liar. Don't be concerned about Wayne as he is completely close minded not unlike George W. Bush who is also a liar.

I need to call Wayne and his other cohorts what they are for the simple reason that innocent "undecideds" may be unaware about them and be fooled by them into voting for George W. Bush who is a complete failure as President.

George W. Bush has never, not even once, represented the middle class or the American worker. He has always represented the wealthy interest of HMOs, Corporations, Oil, Banking Industries, and the multi-millionaires, etc. You know this but guess why it's seldom discussed.

George W. Bush is really not interested in "fixing" problems in Education, Social Security, the Environment, Wages for workers, Benefits for workers, Small Businesses, Outsourcing Jobs, etc. These real issues are not what George W. Bush is about but he still needs our votes and so the games begin.

What these pro-Bushites do is to brainwash people like Wayne and teach them how to convince other naive folks to vote for people like George W. Bush. It's all a game for them but it's mostly about telling lies. Lies are an important factor in playing their game and I have to admit that they are good at it.

These are shrewd people who act very innocently and some of them even believe that what they're doing is correct or true but it's always based on lies. Take these SwiftBoat veterans, for example, some have been already been shown to be monetarily benefiting directly from the Bush Campaign. It's all a game for them, nothing more.

Their method of operation is dependent on getting us to shift meaningful issues into false ones that aren't really important. That's why they bring in what they call wedge issues like abortion, gay and lesbian issues, etc. They cannot get into the real issues because their candidate George W. Bush will lose if they do. Play their game if you want to but at least be aware of what they're about.

One final thing. I want you to understand that there are some good honest Republicans around but they're having the same kind of problems with George W. Bush and his cronies. They are people like Brad Barr, Colin Powell, John McCain, and many more. I would never dream of calling them liars or insulting them but guess what? These Pro-Bushites do just that!

My point is that you need to learn to distinguish these pro-Bushite Republicans from Real Republicans. Many books have been written about these neo-republicans and how twisted their views of the world is. George W. Bush unfortunately got taken in by this bunch and is now completely brainwashed and in their grasp. Good luck to and my warmest regards to you.

Your condensed POST follows:

To Abel, Abel please stop calling Wayne a liar he's trying to be nice with you and you're rejecting his offers to be friendly. If you keep calling republicans or other Bush supporters liars and whatever other names you have up your sleeve then you could be shooing any undecideds in here away from Kerry. In other words, you're actually hurting rather than helping the Democratic nominee. If Kerry and Edwards lose, then they should place part of the blame on you for contributing to their defeat.
In the meantime I came up with some new bumper sticker slogans:
George Bush: When he makes a colossal error he STICKS WITH IT.
Bush/Ashcroft 1984
Dick Cheney: Receiving Millions from no-bid contracts in an undisclosed location.
Ashcroft: Trampling on our constitutional rights for another 4 years.
I lost my Job. Bush lost my Vote.
Warning: Give W the Pink Slip in '04 or the next one could be yours!
Posted by: Henry at October 18, 2004 07:04 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 19, 2004 02:07 AM

To Flaming Liberal

I didn't realize you were so young. Anyway at least you live in a swing state I live in New York so I'm in Kerry country, actually it's more like anti-Bush country. I have a few cousins who live in Fort Lauderdale ever been there? I also have a few more in Fort Myers. I'm not really a democrat I'm an independent. My major is Computer Science.

To Wayne

Just ignore Abel if he's still bothering you pretend he doesn't even exist. By the way, that Saddam letter was great. Can you come up with one that features Osama bin Laden?

I came up with a funny joke. Remember John Hinckley, Jr.? He's the guy who was sent to an institution for the mentally ill after trying to kill Reagan to impress his girlfriend, Jodie Foster.

One day, Hinckely was sitting in his room at the institution. A security guard came to visit him and delivered him a letter. The letter said "From the White House." Hinckley opened the letter and it was from George Walker Bush himself. The letter said:

"Dear Mr. Hinckley,
I know that you are going through some tough times. I wrote you this letter so that you will know that I have you in my prayers as well as my wife, Laura. We both hope that you will regain your mental health so that you could be on your way to a better life. Your family misses you and they love you very much. We hope that eventually you will be able to leave the hospital so that you could reunite with your loved ones.

Sincerely,
President George W. Bush

P.S. - John Kerry is dating Jodie Foster"

Posted by: Henry at October 19, 2004 11:20 AM

Henry,
I have been to Ft. Lauderdale...
I have a question. How do you feel about Capital punishment?
I look forward to your response.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 19, 2004 03:53 PM

Abel,
You are the one who has been proven the liar. I know you won't respond to my posts about your lies until you think I have forgotten them, but I won't. I asked you to be nice and you refused. I will not let this drop.

Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2004 04:26 PM

Abel,
You mentioned John McCain, guess who he is supporting? GW Bush. Is he still a good republican in your eyes?

In your eyes the only "good" republicans are the ones that agree with you.

Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2004 06:24 PM

ROBERT SCHEER
The 9/11 Secret in the CIA's Back Pocket
The agency is withholding a damning report that points at senior officials.
Robert Scheer

October 19, 2004

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-scheer19oct19,1,654534,print.column?coll=la-util-op-ed

It is shocking: The Bush administration is suppressing a CIA report on 9/11 until after the election, and this one names names. Although the report by the inspector general's office of the CIA was completed in June, it has not been made available to the congressional intelligence committees that mandated the study almost two years ago.

"It is infuriating that a report which shows that high-level people were not doing their jobs in a satisfactory manner before 9/11 is being suppressed," an intelligence official who has read the report told me, adding that "the report is potentially very embarrassing for the administration, because it makes it look like they weren't interested in terrorism before 9/11, or in holding people in the government responsible afterward."

When I asked about the report, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee, said she and committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) sent a letter 14 days ago asking for it to be delivered. "We believe that the CIA has been told not to distribute the report," she said. "We are very concerned."

According to the intelligence official, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity, release of the report, which represents an exhaustive 17-month investigation by an 11-member team within the agency, has been "stalled." First by acting CIA Director John McLaughlin and now by Porter J. Goss, the former Republican House member (and chairman of the Intelligence Committee) who recently was appointed CIA chief by President Bush.

The official stressed that the report was more blunt and more specific than the earlier bipartisan reports produced by the Bush-appointed Sept. 11 commission and Congress.

"What all the other reports on 9/11 did not do is point the finger at individuals, and give the how and what of their responsibility. This report does that," said the intelligence official. "The report found very senior-level officials responsible."

By law, the only legitimate reason the CIA director has for holding back such a report is national security. Yet neither Goss nor McLaughlin has invoked national security as an explanation for not delivering the report to Congress.

"It surely does not involve issues of national security," said the intelligence official.

"The agency directorate is basically sitting on the report until after the election," the official continued. "No previous director of CIA has ever tried to stop the inspector general from releasing a report to the Congress, in this case a report requested by Congress."

None of this should surprise us given the Bush administration's great determination since 9/11 to resist any serious investigation into how the security of this nation was so easily breached. In Bush's much ballyhooed war on terror, ignorance has been bliss.

The president fought against the creation of the Sept. 11 commission, for example, agreeing only after enormous political pressure was applied by a grass-roots movement led by the families of those slain.

And then Bush refused to testify to the commission under oath, or on the record. Instead he deigned only to chat with the commission members, with Vice President Dick Cheney present, in a White House meeting in which commission members were not allowed to take notes. All in all, strange behavior for a man who seeks reelection to the top office in the land based on his handling of the so-called war on terror.

In September, the New York Times reported that several family members met with Goss privately to demand the release of the CIA inspector general's report. "Three thousand people were killed on 9/11, and no one has been held accountable," 9/11 widow Kristen Breitweiser told the paper.

The failure to furnish the report to Congress, said Harman, "fuels the perception that no one is being held accountable. It is unacceptable that we don't have [the report]; it not only disrespects Congress but it disrespects the American people."

The stonewalling by the Bush administration and the failure of Congress to gain release of the report have, said the intelligence source, "led the management of the CIA to believe it can engage in a cover-up with impunity. Unless the public demands an accounting, the administration and CIA's leadership will have won and the nation will have lost."

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 19, 2004 10:05 PM

FL and Henry,
If you don't mind I would like to answer Fl's question as well on capital punishment. Now that I introduced you two I feel like the red headed step child.

I beleive that there is a place for capital punishment. If it were used correctly it would be a huge deterent to capital crime. Just think about the ones you love the most being caught by a despicable criminal that tortured them before killing them or worst yet leaving them to die a slow painful death. Now I ask you, would you want something done to them for taking your loved one from you.

What if the loved one was a defenseless child? One that was brutally killed or perhaps damaged for the rest of their life. The poor child would never get a chance to live a normal life. Maybe it is physical scars or maybe emotional ones. I look at my 2 year old boy and I know if someone were to hurt him I would want blood. Sounds harsh I know, but he is my life. The same goes for my pregnant wife, who is my best friend as well. I know I would have to go on, but I don't even want to think what life would be like without either of them in it, and last but not least, my unborn son that is due right after Christmas.

So these are my reasons for capital punishment. Just try and imagine someone you love, perhaps your mother or father, or maybe it's a younger brother or sister, that has done nothing to deserve any kind of abuse. Imagine them having to suffer, much like the ones that jumped from the WTC towers holding hands so they did not have to burn to death. Now I ask you, would you want the guilty sitting in prison, or paying the price that they have charged the ones you love?

I know this was kinda long and I am sorry for that. I just feel very strongly about this subject. I love my family dearly and they are my reason for breathing and I feel it is my job to protect them whenever possible. Maybe my imagination is too lively because I get teary eyed thinking about what horrible things could happen to them.

Sorry again for the length of this post.
Have a nice night.

Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2004 10:07 PM

I am for the death penalty. So yes, Flaming Liberal, I favor capital punishment.

Posted by: Henry at October 19, 2004 10:22 PM

I was just on a web site(www.operationac.com), that allows you to adopt a soldier. This seems like a great idea and I have signed up to help our troops out. The cost is nominal. Send what you can and write to them as well. Let's show our support for our troops.

www.operationac.com

Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2004 10:23 PM

Henry and FL,
I have seen Sen. Edwards several times on TV and notice he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin but rather something else. Do either of you know what it is? It's round but I can't make out what it is. It's not important, I was just curious.

Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2004 10:37 PM

Wayne,

Wrong aqain, John McCain is still a good Republican because he refuses to lie for George W. Bush. Not only that, McCain also apologized to Americans and the world for having said that Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction and for saying that there was a direct connection and cooperation between Saddam and Osama bin Laden's Al Qaida Terrorists.

John McCain also refused to repeat or accept the lies that the SwiftBoat veterans were saying about John Kerry. In fact, McCain requested that the SwiftBoat veterans stop using the Ads at once and, just like you, they refused to stop all their Kerry lies. You also need to understand that George W. Bush never once asked them to stop using their lying Ads.

John McCain is a serious politician and I think the only reason he endorsed George W. Bush may be because he's still thinking of running for president as a good and honorable Republican. After all, he's still young enough to run for President come November 2008.

As for you "proving" anything regarding me, you're a liar in making this statement too. I have already told you that you don't even know what a proof is. Look that up and find out before you make false and stupid statements in front of other people.

All this information has been provided to you on POSTs in this BLOG. The information is on this and other Boards but you apparently just don't get it. For once get serious about this election and stop trying to misinform people. that's all I ask of you.

As for not responding to you, I only respond if you have something interesting or educational to offer. Your last POST asking about John McCain passed that test and that's why I'm responding now. Otherwise, I wouldn't have wasted my time. As I have said before, my responses are for strictly for the benefit of the still remaining undecideds that visit this BLOG from time to time. I'm happy to say that they are not "Brainwashed" or "Close Minded" like you.

Finally, let me remind you that I have previously stated that I supported John McCain when he was running for President in the Republican Primary about four years ago but unfortunate, the idiot Bush won and now we're stuck with him in the White House. Hopefully that won't be for too much longer.

Your CMBLHHPBR POSTs follows:

Abel, You mentioned John McCain, guess who he is supporting? GW Bush. Is he still a good republican in your eyes?
In your eyes the only "good" republicans are the ones that agree with you."
Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2004 06:24 PM

"Abel, You are the one who has been proven the liar. I know you won't respond to my posts about your lies until you think I have forgotten them, but I won't. I asked you to be nice and you refused. I will not let this drop."
Posted by: Wayne at October 19, 2004 04:26 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 19, 2004 11:03 PM

www.operationac.com

Wayne, are you sure that this is a legitimate website? What if it's just a scam and that you're donating your money to a bunch of con artists instead of helping our brave men and women in the military? Just a warning if you find anything suspicious.

Posted by: Henry at October 19, 2004 11:54 PM

I'm very disappointed in the Yankees they were leading the ALCS 3-0 and now all of a sudden they're tied. If they lose to Boston in Game 7 then they will have only themselves to blame. Blowing a commanding lead like that is embarrassing.

Posted by: Henry at October 20, 2004 12:15 AM

Well, Wayne, to answer your question about Edwards' button I remember him saying that it was the same pin that his older son wore before he was killed in a car accident several years ago so that pin is a reminder of his son.

Posted by: Henry at October 20, 2004 12:30 AM

Journal Gazette | 10/18/2004 | Clerks spill Bush v. Gore details

Posted on Mon, Oct. 18, 2004

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/nation/9949251.htm

Clerks spill Bush v. Gore details

By Charles Lane

Washington Post

WASHINGTON - The inscription on the front of the Supreme Court building says "Equal Justice Under Law," but the court's motto could just as easily be "What Happens Here, Stays Here." In a town where confidential information travels fast, the justices protect their internal deliberations fiercely - and, usually, successfully.

But in the October issue of Vanity Fair magazine, former Supreme Court law clerks from the court's 2000-01 term speak out - under cover of anonymity - about what they saw behind the scenes during the fateful case of Bush v. Gore.

That case, decided by a 5-4 vote, ended the contentious recount in Florida, thereby giving the presidency to George W. Bush.

Writers David Margolick, Evgenia Peretz and Michael Shnayerson recount the views of former clerks to liberal justices who opposed the ruling. Those clerks contend that the decision was an exercise in partisanship by conservative Republican justices.

Lawyers are buzzing - but the buzz centers less on the article's content than the fact that some of the brilliant, ambitious young men and women who work for the justices broke their vow of silence.

"Since 'The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court' (the 1979 Supreme Court expose by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong), I don't think there has been another case where law clerks spoke so openly to the press about the inner workings of the court," says Noah Feldman, a professor of law at New York University and ex-clerk for Justice David H. Souter. "I'm shocked."

The justices have had no public reaction. Chief Justice William Rehnquist declined a request to comment for this article.

The Vanity Fair sources do not deny the importance of in-chambers confidentiality, a lifetime obligation spelled out in the written code of conduct that all law clerks pledge to uphold when they come to the court. They simply felt bound by a higher duty.

"We feel that something illegitimate was done with the Court's power, and such an extraordinary situation justifies breaking an obligation we'd otherwise honor," one clerk told the magazine. "Our secrecy was helping to shield some of those actions."

Most of the Bush v. Gore clerks aren't talking to the media, even to comment on the article's accuracy, which, as several pointed out privately, would require them to reveal confidential information. But their private comments about the leakers tend to break down along partisan lines, with conservative clerks condemning them and liberals expressing understanding, if not support.

"There's nothing outrageous about what they've done," says a former clerk for a liberal justice, who asked not to be named because of his own concerns about his relationship with other clerks and the court. "It's in the spirit of whistle-blowing if not actual whistle-blowing."

But an open letter in the Sept. 27 issue of Legal Times from 96 mostly conservative former law clerks and lawyers who practice before the Supreme Court branded the leaks "conduct unbecoming any attorney or legal adviser working in a position of trust."

Most of the criticism in the Vanity Fair piece is aimed at Justices Antonin Scalia, Sandra Day O�Connor and Anthony Kennedy, all of whom voted in favor of Bush. Scalia is depicted bullying Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg into watering down her dissenting opinion. O'Connor is described as emotionally fixated on stopping a recount and Kennedy as overly influenced by his right-wing clerks.

As the Vanity Fair article's authors concede, the clerks present no document or other "smoking gun" proving that the conservative justices deliberately decided the case to suit their partisan preferences - a charge that members of the court on both sides have denied publicly.

While calling their account "by far the best" inside look yet, the article acknowledges that it is necessarily "lopsided, partisan, speculative and incomplete."

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 20, 2004 12:36 AM

Henry,
The great thing about this site is they set you up with a soldier and you mail directly to them. They can correspond directly back to you. I just thought I would share the site with everyone. You can also send them things they need and want, like beef jerky, powder gatorade and tang, liquid soap, boots. Anything a fighting man or woman needs and some things they may want and are not able to get.

Posted by: Wayne at October 20, 2004 08:44 AM

Abel,
First you said you were conservative, then liberal now conservative again.

Second you told me republicans passed the HAVA bill, then it was with some democrats and I found out that every democrat in the senate voted this way.

These are the two lies. Either you are liberal or conservative or modarate, but you can't be both. The other was a overstatement on your part but none the less a lie.

Posted by: Wayne at October 20, 2004 08:46 AM

Henry,
Thanks for the info on Edwards pin. I did not know his son died, very sad and tragic. I couldn't imagine going through something like that. I wish that info was better known, it shows what kind of man he is. This is meant in a positive way.

I hope the Yankees pull it off for you. If they do it should get them on their toes for the big game(s).

Posted by: Wayne at October 20, 2004 04:47 PM

Abel,
Here are a few posts of yours. I hope everyone enjoys them. I will repost this every day on different parts of this site. Hopefully everyone will get involved finding your lies and reposting them. This is going to be fun, after all the months you have called everyone here a liar, unless they see you point of view as their own.

JM,
The truth is that I'm still a conservative but what George W. Bush has been doing to our country is completely unforgivable.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at September 26, 2004 02:58 AM

As for the "Liberal" label, I'm now a proud Liberal myself and I proudly admit it.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 12, 2004 10:32 PM

You got it wrong. It's George W. Bush who shot himself in the foot. You're also wrong in thinking that George W. Bush is a Conservative. I'm a Conservative and George W. Bush is no Conservative.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 18, 2004 09:55 PM

Which one is it Abel? You have been found for the liar you are.

I can't wait to see what people dig up on you on these posts.

Posted by: Wayne at October 20, 2004 04:47 PM

Wayne,
Henry is right about the pin. His son, Wade, died at age 16 when his jeep fipped over.
About capital punishment:
I know that you would want revenge on the murderer of a loved one. But, there should be some restrictions. I don't think it is a good idea when maybe the death was from a car accident or something. I really can't say I would support it even if it was a murder either though. This is a very hard question for me to answer. I just don't know yet...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 20, 2004 05:06 PM

FL,
I can't imagine the pain Edwards must have felt.

Which brings me to my point of agreeing with you about no capital punishment for car accidents and things like this.

The capital punishment I support is for vicious acts of violence to unsuspecting people, innocents if that is a better word. When a person just kills to kill. Like the mother that drove her children in the lake and watched them die. She deserves capital punishemnt. What about the unibomber? Jeffery Dahmer? Charlie Manson? I am talking herdcore murderers. When you are older and have chosen a life for yourself and have children, assuming this is what you want, you will protect your kids at all costs. I didn't understand this until I had my son. Then you truly know the meaning of sacrifice. I would sacrifice all, even my life, for my son(s). One is unborn, due around Christmas. I would do the same for my wife as well. I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror knowing I could have done something to either save them or ease their pain. This is only my feelings, they may not be for everyone.

Posted by: Wayne at October 20, 2004 07:20 PM

"George W. Bush is no conservative."

Abel, of course George W. Bush is a conservative if he wasn't then we wouldn't be talking about a gay marriage amendment now would we? Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not endorsing gay marriage it is immoral but I also think that amending our Constitution for that is unnecessary.

Posted by: Henry at October 20, 2004 07:22 PM

I forgot to congratulate Wayne on his new child. Wayne there is no better Christmas gift than a new child to cherish and love. I congratulate you and I am sure that you will be a wonderful father. If I may ask, is it a boy or a girl? Of course, it's none of my business so I will understand if you want to keep it a secret. I hope your wife is still ok now that she is nearing the end of her pregnancy. I know that this is too early but Merry Christmas to the both of you.

Posted by: Henry at October 20, 2004 08:09 PM

Wayne,
I understand that having kids and a spouse can definitely change your views on these sorts of things. I believe my parents are for capital punishment in some cases as well. I'm sure it changes your views and you start to think more about what would happen if something like this ever happened to your kid. It's terrible. I just can't bring myself to be so general as to say anyone that murders should be killed. I would have to take it case-by-case. Maybe you're right, maybe my opinion will change when I grow up and have a family (and am a famous novelist... lol). We'll see...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 20, 2004 09:46 PM

Yeah...

CONGRATULATIONS, WAYNE! Henry's right. There truly is no greater gift than a child!

I wish you the best of luck,
Flaming Liberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at October 20, 2004 09:48 PM

I have a very political question...
Has anyone ever tried using flea collars on their dogs? Do they work?
HAHA! I know that wasn't political at all, but my poor puppies are having flea problems, and I was wondering if anyone knew of anything I can do to help them. It's so sad watching them scratch...
Thanks!
~Flaming Liberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at October 20, 2004 09:50 PM

Henry,
We are expecting a boy. This will be our second child, both will be boys.

I guess I will have one democrat and one republican. Nah, two republicans. lol

Thank you for your kind words, you and FL have both made me feel welcome on this site, and it's never too early for Christmas. Merry Christmas everyone. My favorite time of the eyar.

Posted by: Wayne at October 20, 2004 10:15 PM

Henry,

I'm afraid that it takes more than being against gay marriages and proposing a Constitutional Amendment to be a Conservative. Find out the true meaning of being a Conservative and you'll see that George W. Bush is no Conservative. I don't know what he is, other than a liar, but he's no Conservative.

Your condensed POST follows:

"George W. Bush is no conservative."

Abel, of course George W. Bush is a conservative if he wasn't then we wouldn't be talking about a gay marriage amendment now would we? Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not endorsing gay marriage it is immoral but I also think that amending our Constitution for that is unnecessary.
Posted by: Henry at October 20, 2004 07:22 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 20, 2004 11:05 PM

Wayne,

I hate to tell you this but you are very narrow and closed minded as well as everything else I have said that you are. It's common knowledge and a self evident truth that humans are many things at once and it's perfectly acceptable for me to be a Liberal, a Progressive, a Moderate and a Conservative all at the same time. Only an Idiot would question that. Frankly, I am all those things and people who really know me accept me as being all those things at the same time. That's why we never put too much value in labeling people.

My Hispanic nature makes me a Conservative which means, for example, that I don't like to owe people money, as a matter of fact, I'm very frugal with my money. I thoroughly enjoy good spanish music and culture. It usually takes me a good while to accept new friends and so I'm also very careful with people whom I don't know well. When I attend Catholic Mass, I miss the Latin that is no longer being used, etc., etc., etc.. All these things make me a true Conservative.

I'm a Moderate because I am very tolerant of others who are different from me. I totally accept others and never question their right to be here. I think people are basically good and not like others who think differently of strangers. I think humans have just as much a right to be here and everywhere else just as the birds that fly in and out without having borders to contend with.

I'm a Progressive because I always think that I can do better. I have always tried to improve myself. I never think that I'm already as "good" as I can be. By the same token, I think of others being the same way. I think that we can all still learn from each other and I try to make it a practice to learn something new every day from others. For example, I learn a lot from "illegal" migrants who don't scare me. I welcome them into our country if all they want is to better themselves by working hard at jobs that Americans don't care to do. It has never been the nature of "illegal" migrant workers to be terrorists.

Finally, I'm a Liberal because of my nature to love others as I would have them love me. I think that we should always do everything we can to help the less fortunate but I'm a Liberal in that I believe we should build institutions to help accomplish these good worldly objectives. I believe that "we the people" are the government of our country and so when I say our government should ...whatever, what I'm really saying is that "we the people" should...whatever, etc.

I'm not ashamed to be called a Flip-Floper. I admit that I sometimes change my mind. That's all Flip-Floping is, changing our minds. I change my mind when I learn something new and find out that I've previously been mistaken. What's wrong with that?

The problem with George W. Bush and his pro-Bushites is that they never admit to making mistakes. George W. Bush Flip-Flops all the time but we Democrats don't look at that too closely or even care about that.

You pro-Bushite hypocrits are different because you think that Flip-Floping indicates a weakness. But it doesn't indicate that and we are not weak. You pro-Bushites are the weak ones because you think and believe that Flip-Floping is always wrong. You fail to understand that Flip-Flops can also serve to make us stronger.

One final word, we won't put up with pro-Bushite Republicans stealing this Presidential election from Americans again. Try it and you'll find out the problems that you'll have this time around. That's not a threat, that's a promise. As Americans, we expect that all our votes will be counted this time around and we'd better see that happening or else there will be trouble. Big time trouble.

Become Smart and Vote the KERRY/EDWARDS Ticket!

Your POST follows:

"Abel, Here are a few posts of yours. I hope everyone enjoys them. I will repost this every day on different parts of this site. Hopefully everyone will get involved finding your lies and reposting them. This is going to be fun, after all the months you have called everyone here a liar, unless they see you point of view as their own.
JM,
The truth is that I'm still a conservative but what George W. Bush has been doing to our country is completely unforgivable.
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at September 26, 2004 02:58 AM
As for the "Liberal" label, I'm now a proud Liberal myself and I proudly admit it.
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 12, 2004 10:32 PM
You got it wrong. It's George W. Bush who shot himself in the foot. You're also wrong in thinking that George W. Bush is a Conservative. I'm a Conservative and George W. Bush is no Conservative.
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 18, 2004 09:55 PM
Which one is it Abel? You have been found for the liar you are.
I can't wait to see what people dig up on you on these posts."
Posted by: Wayne at October 20, 2004 04:47 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 21, 2004 12:40 AM

Abel,

give it up, you stuck your foot in your mouth and now you can't get it out!

Posted by: David Lowery at October 21, 2004 02:07 PM

Hey everyone!
Someone stole our Kerry-Edwards sign last night. Isn't it horrible that people do things as low as taking signs? It's horrible. I wish we lived in a world where people had more dignity than that. My mom put out a sign that says, "Thou shalt not steal." Haha...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at October 21, 2004 03:51 PM

Oh my word.
Someone just stole the "Thou shalt not steal" sign. It's been out there for about ten minutes too. What has our world come to?

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at October 21, 2004 04:10 PM

Abel, just because you are frugal with your money and listen to Spanish music doesn't necessarily mean you're a conservative. You said so yourself that you're a proud liberal - my good friend Wayne pointed that out.

I'm white but I am half Spanish too. I'm Spanish from my mother's side and I'm Austrian from my father's side. To tell you the truth, I don't speak Spanish very fluently but since I'm also half Austrian (not Australian), I know how to speak a little German. However, my Spanish is much better than my German.

Posted by: Henry at October 21, 2004 04:22 PM

Abel,
Your love of people has comes across on this site in droves. I have never felt as loved as I do right now. The only other time I felt so loved was when I had a banana shoved down my pants and someone let loose a rabid monkey.

Thanks for the love.

See you at the polls, or if Kerry doesn't win, I guess I will see you at the supreme court.

Posted by: Wayne at October 21, 2004 04:30 PM

FL,
About the fleas, you can try the drops that you put on the dog's back. I think it is called frontline. It works very well.

As far as the capital punishment, I don't want to kill everyone that commits murder. It should be looked at case by case. I jsut don't want o ban it. It should be reserved for the likes of a Dahmer, Manson or McVeigh. You know what I mean?

Thanks for the congrats on the new baby boy! I'll send you and Henry a cigar.

Posted by: Wayne at October 21, 2004 04:35 PM

Lol, make sure that cigar is of high-quality. Auf wiedersehen und guten nacht.

Posted by: Henry at October 21, 2004 10:21 PM

FL,
You know what? The fact that your Kerry/Edwards sign was stolen really p****s me off. I don't like to look at signs I don't agree with, but to stoop to the stealing level? I just don't get it. I am sorry that it was taken and if someone really took the Thou shalt not steal sign, chances are it is someone from your neighborhood, and regretfuly it is probably a Bush supporter. I too wish we did not live in a world where people act like animals.

How are you making out with your flea problem?

Posted by: Wayne at October 21, 2004 10:22 PM

"My Hispanic nature makes me a Conservative which means, for example, that I don't like to owe people money, as a matter of fact, I'm very frugal with my money. I thoroughly enjoy good spanish music and culture. It usually takes me a good while to accept new friends and so I'm also very careful with people whom I don't know well. When I attend Catholic Mass, I miss the Latin that is no longer being used, etc., etc., etc.. All these things make me a true Conservative."

Translation, he likes Ricky Martin and is not a welcher. If he borrows money he will return it.

Abel, this is the idea behind borrowing.

"I'm a Moderate because I am very tolerant of others who are different from me. I totally accept others and never question their right to be here. I think people are basically good and not like others who think differently of strangers. I think humans have just as much a right to be here and everywhere else just as the birds that fly in and out without having borders to contend with."

Translation=He is for illegal immigration and shows his tolerance to all people. Let me show you an example of his tolerance;

"First, about Wayne, I know Wayne and he's a liar. Right now he's playing a game with you although you may not realize it but I know that he's a liar. Don't be concerned about Wayne as he is completely close minded not unlike George W. Bush who is also a liar."

"I'm a Progressive because I always think that I can do better. I have always tried to improve myself. I never think that I'm already as "good" as I can be. By the same token, I think of others being the same way. I think that we can all still learn from each other and I try to make it a practice to learn something new every day from others. For example, I learn a lot from "illegal" migrants who don't scare me. I welcome them into our country if all they want is to better themselves by working hard at jobs that Americans don't care to do. It has never been the nature of "illegal" migrant workers to be terrorists."

"Why don't you discuss the economy and what George W. Bush is doing to improve it? Why don't you discuss the lack of jobs available to the American worker? How about Iraq, why don't you discuss what George W. Bush is going to do to bring our boys home? How about discussing what George W. Bush is doing to improve our Port's Security? How about discussing our Nuclear Power Plants and their lack of security?'

Here is the proof of the illegal immigration.
Let me guess Abel, you are for outsourcing, yet you don't mind if companies in the US outsource jobs to illegals. Just as long as the jobs stay here. So what if American citizens are out of work. Or is it that they only take the bad jobs?

Another example of how Abel wants both sides of an issue.

"Finally, I'm a Liberal because of my nature to love others as I would have them love me. I think that we should always do everything we can to help the less fortunate but I'm a Liberal in that I believe we should build institutions to help accomplish these good worldly objectives. I believe that "we the people" are the government of our country and so when I say our government should ...whatever, what I'm really saying is that "we the people" should...whatever, etc."

Heres an example of his nature to love people;

"I know how you "Close Minded Brainwashed Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republicans," (CMBLHHPBR) work. I know that you first "Demonize" a word like "Liberal" and then begin to use it against people that you want to hurt or fool. If any reader really wants to know you, I suggest that they visit the other boards on this BLOG to read your POSTs. Do you now deny that you've been using the "demonized" version of the "LIBERAL" word?"

The person I said that sounded liberal was Henry, the Kerry supporter that I talk to here everyday. Not just about politics, but sprots, my family and his life.

If any of you have attacked Henry you will have recognized tha name because I have been the one who has fired back first. Not Abel or d.jones. Me a Bush supporter sticking up for a Kerry supporter. Is this really such a strange idea?

Abel, you are obviously very smart, but intelligence does not automaticaly mean you are right. All you need to do is apologize to me for starting the name calling, I WILL follow suit and return the apology. If not, I will continue to point out your contradictions, lies, whatever you want to call them.

This is your decision.

All quotes were from;
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 21, 2004 12:40 AM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 17, 2004 01:06 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 19, 2004 02:07 AM

On the blog"Free George Bush & John Kerry Political Cartoon"

Posted by: Wayne at October 21, 2004 10:46 PM

Wayne,
Thanks for the advice about the flea problem (my dogs, not me... lol).
I understand where you are coming from on the capital punishment comment as well.
As for the signs, there has been a car going around at night that takes off its license plate and it steals signs. It's a shame people have to do this.

Henry,
I speak some German too! I have to admit, the phrases I do know aren't all that useful ("I have an ape on my head." and other phrases like that wouldn't be considered useful...). But, I still know some, and that's all that matters, right? Haha... I am taking a high school Spanish course this year too, so I know some Spanish. I know more Spanish than German...

~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at October 22, 2004 03:50 PM

Lol, there's a Halloween cartoon on cnn.com that portrays Kerry as Frankenstein and Bush as Freddy Krueger.

Frankenstein (Kerry):
"RRRRRR...must...raise...taxes"
"RRRRRR...terrorism...is...a...nuisance"

Freddy Krueger (Bush):
"I've come to CUT your social security...and DRAFT your grandkids!"

Posted by: Henry at October 22, 2004 07:35 PM

Who do you think is going to win the 2004 World Series? The Boston Red Sox or the St. Louis Cardinals? These two teams played each other before in the 1946 and the 1967 World Series, with St. Louis winning both. I think the Red Sox are finally going to win their first championship Title since the end of the First World War. But first, they have to break the Curse of the Bambino. If not, then's it 86 years and counting...Tick tock, tick tock.

Posted by: Henry at October 22, 2004 11:10 PM

http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_14579.shtml

From YubaNet.com

Op-Ed
9/11 Mom: An Open Letter to George W. Bush
Author: Donna Marsh O'Connor,Liverpool, NY, Mother of Vanessa Lang Langer, WTC Tower II, 93rd floor
Published on Oct 22, 2004, 06:43

cc: Senator John Kerry

Sometimes, Mr. Bush, it's the smallest of details that makes everything click. The smallest of details. Right now, Mr. Bush, I am looking at your watch. It's an item of clothing accessory and, unlike your other costumes, it is one that is particularly revealing.

On Halloween my daughter would be thirty-three years old. Her child would be almost three. Seven weeks before her twenty-ninth birthday, Vanessa, four months pregnant, ran from the falling towers of the World Trade Center. She did not make it. Her body, and in it the small body of her unborn child, was pulled from the rubble of the fallen towers on September 24th, just ten feet from an alley between towers IV and V. It is important for me to tell you that she was on the phone to her uptown office five minutes after the first plane hit tower I, explaining how she and others in tower II were "safe."

Here is what you did regarding specifically the events of that morning: You vacationed before, during and after August 6th, the day you were handed the presidential daily briefing that said very clearly Vanessa Lang Langer and many other Americans were not safe. After the first plane hit tower I, the fact of the PDB did not click in your mind, did not cause you to act, to turn on a television, to contact the Pentagon. You sat so that you did not frighten a group of children. You did not worry about Vanessa�s brothers, or the young children who would certainly be directly affected by that event. You did not, like her fourteen year-old brother, rush from your seat and head for a phone, desperately trying to reach out, to fix, to save. You sat. You said, two weeks to the day before the general election of 2004, that you would protect Americans; that is, according to you, your primary responsibility as Commander-in Chief; no terrorists would get us, no terrorists would attack us (you said this with your arm extended), and I you said and I quote, on your watch. You said this with no sense of irony, no sense, no indication of how that text would sound to those you failed miserably to protect. You never notified officially the airlines, flight schools, persons who lived or worked in our tallest structures. You failed in your watch and on it.

Help me to understand this, because I was looking so closely at your watch. Five minutes, Mr. Bush. Five minutes. In that five minute space my sons lost a best friend, a future that included a loving sister and her future family. And my daughter lost the only thing in life I ever knew she really wanted. In fact, you stood on September 13th, on the rubble that covered my child's bones and you began your move to have the war you had been planning since the beginning of your term in office. You, Mr. Bush, used my daughter's murder to perpetrate the most hideous example of racism with the direst of consequences and you did it standing literally on her bones.

I am going to be very honest with you, Mr. Bush. I suspect that your culpability does not begin with your failures that day. It may be imprudent to mention this now because evidence is difficult to produce, but I am one of those pragmatists that rely on some basic fundamentals in crime solving. So let me say, when a crime is committed we are to find suspects by exploring motive, by looking at who had most to gain. You did, Mr. Bush, you and your friends at Halliburton and your friends in Saudi Arabia. And you have never answered for this. Don�t you think with all that has happened it would be in order for you to explain all you have come to gain, now and in the future, in terms of both money and power?

On September 11th, I was in Canada. When I heard the news I was walking in the street, enjoying what was to be the last of the purely beautiful sunny mornings of my life. My cell phone rang. And every second after that call was a mix of panic, dread, calm because this couldn't be happening, and utter, absolute need to touch my daughter. What would you have done, Mr. Bush? What would your instincts have been? As a parent? I ask this because Senator Kerry during the second debate mentioned you are a "good father." Are you? Have you made Americans, including your own daughters safer? Let me tell you what I wanted that morning. I wanted to fly to New York, to put my feet on my home soil as fast as humanly possible. I wanted to get to an airport and get home. Not an option for me, Mr. Bush. My husband and I just made it over the border before it closed. And on that morning, when no American citizen was allowed to fly in our airspace, on that morning and the mornings to follow, Americans were grounded. But bin Laden's family flew. They flew home to Saudi Arabia. Before they were vetted by the F.B.I., by the C.I.A. And worst of all, you never were made to tell the truth about why that was so. I'm sorry, Mr. Bush. I will never understand this. Never. But still: your responsibility was then and is now to explain it. And to explain while that watch of yours leading up to the election is still ticking.

Right now there is a report from the C.I.A. that names explicitly your administration�s culpability regarding those events. Bipartisan leaders have requested, even demanded that those reports be turned over now to congress. You, according to reports, have refused to allow the C.I.A. to release them, just as you refused to testify under oath before the 9/11 commission. Now, Mr. Bush, release them. Before the election.

Right now, Mr. Bush, there are wide-spread rumors of vote tampering all over this country. And let me be clear about this: the rumors are that Republicans are benefiting from this tampering. Instead of enumerating our safeties, perhaps you could show some leadership, Mr. Bush, and demand that it stop now. Demand, Mr. Bush, that in this country our right to vote is protected. Because without that, we are not safe. Wouldn't you agree?

After the 2000 election, where there were in Florida widespread problems with voting, Mr. Bush, voting in African American communities, you also did nothing. Absolutely nothing. You did nothing to counter the rumors that your brother handed you Florida. Nothing to smooth over what must have felt to African Americans (even if this was just rumor) the painful and the absolute, clear enactment of racial prejudice, not encoded in the ordinary acts of ordinary citizens, but in the very structure of the government that must be protective of all citizens of this country and the world. Why, Mr. Bush, did you fail to go to Florida and demand that these persons' rights were protected? Or, at the very least, to apologize and guarantee that this would never happen again? What does America mean to you? In August of 2001, the United Nations hosted a conference on racism and Colin Powell, your Secretary of State wanted to attend. You did not allow this because, you said, we don�t have problems with racism in America. Do you see the pattern I am pointing at, here, Mr. Bush? In each case, the problems in this country have been enacted and exacerbated by you and you have attempted to cover them up. How could you do that to Colin Powell? How could you do that to another man?

When your children are young, Mr. Bush, they are often rebellious. They often admire you, but buck you at the same time. One way a mature parent feels this love is sometimes in the very ways in which your children buck you-by using the very part of your example they most admire. Vanessa confronted me every day of her life, especially on the days when she acted most loving. Parent/child things. The kind of things that all someday are made into family jokes when the child becomes a parent and sees that the very methods of touching and teaching and learning come from actions the parent used without thought. I never had that fully with Vanessa, the day when she consciously, because she was parenting herself, used my methods on another generation. But one day, almost there, Vanessa said to me, "Mom, you always made Christmases at home so beautiful�" and then she said, "And you taught us how not to be racist. You have no idea, Mom, how much racism there is and white people don�t always see it."

I cannot tell you in shorthand, Mr. Bush, how important it was that she said those words before I lost her because unless she did, I would always have wondered, was I in any way that mattered a good enough parent to a woman who would die so young. I can tell you some of the methods I used with Vanessa and her brothers, but let me show you what you did that I had to explain and counter with all three of them:

You refused, when you met face-to-face with James Byrd's daughter (You remember him, I am sure. He's the African American man whose head was ripped almost off of his body in Texas by three white men who tied him to their pickup and dragged him along a Texas road.), you refused to sign a hate crimes bill as she begged you, crying. You didn't even, as Molly Ivins reported, offer her a tissue. In that sense, Mr. Bush, you functioned as a very hostile branch of government, one that we might have predicted would not care if persons of color or persons of the other party were denied the right to vote.

But then, Mr. Bush, you used this tendency of yours, this refusal to get behind most Americans� desires to eradicate racism by pretending Osama bin Laden is the embodiment of Saddam Hussein and vice versa. One man equals the other. They are both Arabs. Do you own a globe, Mr. Bush? Do you know where Afghanistan is? Do you know where Iraq is? Have you been there since the war began to examine what you have done to the civilians you were going to protect? Interesting detail (and perhaps a warning from G-d): Vanessa, when she got one of her first jobs, bought me a daily planner with a map on it. The map on this particular piece of canvas has in its center Afghanistan. To the right of this small country is a larger country-Iran and to the right of that-Iraq, also small, even smaller (geographically and metaphorically speaking) of Afghanistan. Just under Iraq, writ very large on my daily planner is Saudi Arabia. You know, Saudi Arabia, Mr. Bush. I know you do because the families of 9/11 who got together to bankrupt terrorism, those people who are bringing suit against the Saudis got no help from your administration. None. Though you should know that a coalition of the willing, including France, Spain, Great Britain and Germany have offered help to the families of 9/11 as they try to connect the events of 9/11 to the real perpetrators. There are connections between the Saudis and the terrorists, the terrorists who, no doubt, now that you have opened up a haven for terrorism in Iraq, are growing in number and resources. How much time do you have left, Mr. Bush? What is on your watch? Am I taking too long?

What costume will you wear on Vanessa's birthday this year, Mr. Bush? Will you dress up as the head of the military or a foot soldier of Prince Bandar or Dick Cheney? Will you wear a white sheet with a cone head, Mr. Bush? Will you pretend you�re a plain speaking, Texas cowboy, with your shirt sleeves rolled up, proclaiming happily how safe you'll keep us as you point to your watch? Will you dress up again as a good Christian? Will you dress up as a Republican? You are, you know, not a Republican. You have shamed Republicans. I know one thing, Mr. Bush: I am going to try very hard not to have you dress up anymore as Commander-in Chief. In more ways than I have articulated here, that costume does not fit you. I am a proud American citizen, Mr. Bush, who is disgusted that you try to portray yourself as patriotic. You have trampled every value of decency America ever held dear.

Do you believe in G-d, Mr. Bush, really? Really? Because, to me, as a flawed parent, flawed person, flawed citizen, I ask G-d to help me fix my flaws, to forgive me my trespasses. And here's what I hear Him telling me:

Don't let him speak for Me. If you do, it is you who fail to watch over your children. You.

Copyright 2004 by YubaNet.com
Send your letters to the editor to news@yubanet.com

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 23, 2004 05:11 AM

Henry,

I am a proud "Liberal" but, at the same time, I'm also a proud "Conservative."

Conservatives would rather not change and I have to confess that I'm that way too. They like to stick with the old ways of doing things and I'm very much the same way. They also enjoy the good music of the old days and I can't blame anyone for that considering what passes as music now-a-days. That's me too. Things like that make me a true Conservative.

Don't pay too much attention to Wayne---he needs to get an education too. Maybe he will when he gets older but he's currently completely closed minded. I'm afraid he has been brainwashed and transformed into a complete liar. Can you believe that he hates American heros? On top of that, he thinks that George W. Bush has been a successful President. Because of that, one has to conclude that he's blind too. I tried to help him in the beginning but he never was able to open his eyes to see. It's sad but I finally gave up on him.

Just don't give him the power to make you feel frustrated. Wayne and his co-horts try to do that with all the good people who don't agree with them. They'll come at you all at once and try to pressure you into becoming like them. Just don't ever feel frustrated and give up your own unique feelings about the truth. That's all I ask---to continue being yourself.

Your POST follows:

"Abel, just because you are frugal with your money and listen to Spanish music doesn't necessarily mean you're a conservative. You said so yourself that you're a proud liberal - my good friend Wayne pointed that out.
I'm white but I am half Spanish too. I'm Spanish from my mother's side and I'm Austrian from my father's side. To tell you the truth, I don't speak Spanish very fluently but since I'm also half Austrian (not Australian), I know how to speak a little German. However, my Spanish is much better than my German."
Posted by: Henry at October 21, 2004 04:22 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 23, 2004 04:52 PM

Talk about an enigma.
Read carefully what Abel wrote, as quoted by Wayne above...
"I know how you "Close Minded Brainwashed Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republicans," (CMBLHHPBR) work. I know that you first "Demonize" a word like "Liberal" and then begin to use it against people that you want to hurt or fool. If any reader really wants to know you, I suggest that they visit the other boards on this BLOG to read your POSTs. Do you now deny that you've been using the "demonized" version of the "LIBERAL" word?"

I've been exploring the symptoms of the Liberal mystique over on the 'Up in election' blog and here is a great example of guilt by accusation. Abel here seems to be unable to aggrandedize his contempt for conservatism (the ideal rather than the fellow blogger, although it may be both). So, to emphasize, highlight and punctuate his own righteous opinion, of which God himself fears to tred upon, he pronounces judgement and creates new terms to aggrandedize the event, as if he were the first to discover that and wanted to copyright it as his own. Liberals are very tactile, meaning that matters of spirit are translated to more physical manifestations and forms of expression. Therefore ideas must be taken credit for just as house bills have their sponsors. Every bill that is signed must have a ceremony accompanying it, as if it were the Hand of God clapping with itself. The perfect example is in the 'crisis management cycle' in their creating, publicizing, legislating and taking-credit-for-solving various ills in society. It is an utterly fascinating to watch this at work. First, by 'creating' a crisis, this refers to capitalizing on an existing problem. Perhaps it would be more accurate to 'proclaim' a crisis. By proclaiming it, they 'take ownership' of the problem so that it becomes their stewardship to solve. Then, the machinery really gears up. First, a media campaign is assembled, that extends to every available outlet from the 'Letters To the Editor' through PAC's (Political Action Committees). PACs are the Holy Grail that sees worthy issues through to becoming law. They in turn 'adopt' the issue like a street urchin and see to its care and feeding until it becomes law. Every step along the way, there are bill signing ceremonies, there are press conferences, there are task forces, there are media campaigns. Liberals are also very "into" symbolism. Ever since the Iran Hostage Crisis under Carter's watch, ribbons have been the touchstone of symbolic ownership of crises. Begging John Walsh's pardon, I feel the Code Adam program that announces lost or missing children in Wal-Marts around the country diminishes Adam's memory. Why? Because Wal-Mart has co-opted Adam's name and his tragedy. That sounds pretty cold, but Wal-Mart seems to be pretty satisfied with itself by taking a tragedy and trying to claim intellectual property rights to it. The same goes for any medal or ribbon program out there. They symbolize real tragedies, real issues, real soldiers- but they are reduced to symbolic bits of bright cloth. But this is the twisted logic of liberals- they can only solve a problem after they claim ownership for it, and ownership is signified by trademarks. Amber Alert, Code Adam, those are the trsdemarks. Liberalism- when reality becomes too much.

Posted by: Dave at October 23, 2004 07:48 PM

Abel, I don't have time to read all that you might as well write a book on this blog. Just get to the point.

Posted by: Henry at October 23, 2004 09:59 PM

I am a proud "Liberal" but, at the same time, I'm also a proud "Conservative." - Abel P. Ochoa

That's equivalent to somebody admitting to be a homosexual and a heterosexual at the same time. Of course, I'm not calling you gay, I don't think you're gay, I'm just saying that you can't be both simultaneously.

Posted by: Henry at October 23, 2004 10:05 PM

Conservatives would rather not change and I have to confess that I'm that way too. They like to stick with the old ways of doing things and I'm very much the same way. They also enjoy the good music of the old days and I can't blame anyone for that considering what passes as music now-a-days. That's me too. Things like that make me a true Conservative.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 23, 2004 04:52 PM

5 monkeys in a cage. They are hungry, the cage is closed in with a hatch in the top. The hatch opens and a bannana drops in on a rope. As soon as one monkey reaches for the bannana, the walls drop and the monkeys get hosed down with ice cold water. After a couple of days of this, when the monkey reaches for the bannana, the others beat the c*** out of him.

The bannana monkey is replaced with a monkey that knows nothing about the hose, when he reaches for the bannana, the others beat the c*** out of him.

After a while all the monkeys have been replaced so that the 5 monkeys in the cage have never experienced the hose. When the newest monkey is added, the drop ion the bannana. As soon as he reaches for it the others beat the c*** out of him. He turns to another monkey and asks "What was that for?" To which the monkey replies "I don't know, it's the way we have always done things."

Abel, are you saying you are one of the monkeys?

Posted by: Wayne at October 23, 2004 11:45 PM

Henry,
I think the RedSox have a huge obstacle to overcome. I am no baseball fan, but let me explain. They have come back from being down 3-0, this seem like a problem to me. They may feel like they have accomplished thier goal.

I am still rooting for them.

How have you been anyway? What did you think of Kerry's hunting trip?

Oh, by the way, have I pressured you to change your mind about who you are voting for? If I have, as Abel suggests, I do apologize. I think the only way Abel will be happy is if I change my mind. He confuses me with his one way mind set.

Take it easy Henry, talk to you soon.

Posted by: Wayne at October 24, 2004 12:06 AM

To Wayne

I do not believe you have tried to pressure me into voting for someone else so no apology is needed. Frankly, I think Abel is an insult to all Kerry supporters since I noticed that he puts words in other people's mouths. Just because we're supporting the same candidate doesn't mean I have to agree with everything Mr. Ochoa says.

So Kerry went on a hunting trip? I didn't know that. If he did then I have no comment on it. I bet he's giddy after watching his hometown baseball team make MLB history with an unprecedented 3 to nothing comeback.

Although they defeated my Yankees, I'm rooting for the Red Sox because they haven't won a World Series in a LONG while. Thus, they deserve to get their hands on a Championship Title. They just beat the Cardinals in Game One 11-9 at Fenway Park and I hope they keep up the good work. Because of star pitchers like Curt Schilling, Pedro Martinez, Tim Wakefield, and MVP David Ortiz, Boston will be tough for St. Louis to vanquish.

You take it easy too, Wayne. You are fun to talk to.

Go Red Sox!
Reverse the Curse!

Posted by: Henry at October 24, 2004 01:16 AM

There is a possibility that Bush could suffer the same fate in this election as Al Gore. I call it "Gore's Revenge." Bush could win the popular vote but he loses to Kerry in the electoral college. I'd say anything is possible in a race this tight.

Go to this website:

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/5458ae42-2490-11d9-a110-00000e2511c8.html

Posted by: Henry at October 24, 2004 01:52 PM

If Bush does win the popular vote and lose in the electoral college, then it will be the Republicans, not the Democrats, who cry foul. The GOP will then know how their Democrat rivals felt four years ago. But this only happens if "Gore's Revenge" actually occurs in this election.

Posted by: Henry at October 24, 2004 02:18 PM

Although Bush's approval ratings are in the high forties, a danger sign for an incumbent running for reelection, I think he will win the election. Many voters, including myself, are unhappy with Bush and are ready to replace him with a new president. Unfortunately, many of these voters have some doubts about Kerry. I think this presidential election proves that disapproval of the current officeholder does not necessarily translate into votes for the challenger. In the last stages of a presidential election, the undecided voters usually side with challenger, giving Kerry a potential boost. But will that boost be enough for him to defeat Bush? This race is so close that we may not even know who the winner is on November 3rd. Sorry to disappoint any Kerry supporters but I predict a Bush reelection. However, my prediction could be wrong of course. Let's wait and see what happens next week.

Posted by: Henry at October 24, 2004 05:47 PM

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101041101-733760,00.html

Sunday, Oct. 24, 2004
Beyond the Call of Duty
A whistle-blower objected to the government's Halliburton deals�and says now she's paying for it
By ADAM ZAGORIN & TIMOTHY J. BURGER
In February 2003, less than a month before the U.S. invaded Iraq, Bunnatine (Bunny) Greenhouse walked into a Pentagon meeting and with a quiet comment started what could be the end of her career. On the agenda was the awarding of an up to $7 billion deal to a subsidiary of Houston-based conglomerate Halliburton to restore Iraq's oil facilities. On hand were senior officials from the office of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and aides to retired Lieut. General Jay Garner, who would soon become the first U.S. administrator in Iraq.

Then several representatives from Halliburton entered. Greenhouse, a top contracting specialist for the Army Corps of Engineers, grew increasingly concerned that they were privy to internal discussions of the contract's terms, so she whispered to the presiding general, insisting that he ask the Halliburton employees to leave the room.

Once they had gone, Greenhouse raised other concerns. She argued that the five-year term for the contract, which had not been put out for competitive bid, was not justified, that it should be for one year only and then be opened to competition. But when the contract-approval document arrived the next day for Greenhouse's signature, the term was five years. With war imminent, she had little choice but to sign. But she added a handwritten reservation that extending a no-bid contract beyond one year could send a message that "there is not strong intent for a limited competition."

Greenhouse's objections, which had not been made public until now, will probably fuel criticism of the government's allegedly cozy relationship with Halliburton and could be greeted with calls for further investigation. Halliburton's Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) subsidiary has been mired in allegations of overcharging and mismanagement in Iraq, and the government in January replaced the noncompetitive oil-field contract that Greenhouse had objected to and made two competitively bid awards instead. (Halliburton won the larger contract, worth up to $1.2 billion, for repairing oil installations in southern Iraq, while Parsons Corp. got one for the north, worth up to $800 million.) Halliburton's Iraq business, which includes another government contract as well, has been under particular scrutiny because Vice President Dick Cheney was once its CEO. The Pentagon, concerned about potential controversy when it signed the original oil-work contract, gave Cheney's staff a heads-up beforehand. (TIME disclosed that alert in June.)

Greenhouse seems to have got nothing but trouble for questioning the deal. Warned to stop interfering and threatened with a demotion, the career Corps employee decided to act on her conscience, according to her lawyer, Michael Kohn. Kohn, who has represented other federal whistle-blowers, last week sent a letter-obtained by TIME from congressional sources-on her behalf to the acting Secretary of the Army. In it Kohn recounts Greenhouse's Pentagon meeting and demands an investigation of alleged violations of Army regulations in the contract's awarding. (The Pentagon justified the contract procedures as necessary in a time of war, saying KBR was the only choice because of security clearances that it had received earlier.) Kohn charges that Greenhouse's superiors have tried to silence her; he says she has agreed to be interviewed, pending approval from her employer, but the Army failed to make her available despite repeated requests from TIME.

"These charges undercut months of assertions by Administration officials that the Halliburton contract was on the level," says Democratic Representative Henry Waxman. As the Corps's top contract specialist, the letter says, Greenhouse had noted reservations on dozens of procurement documents over seven years. But it was only after she took exception to the Halliburton deal that she was warned not to do so anymore. The letter states that the major general who admonished her, Robert Griffin, later admitted in a sworn statement that her comments on contracts had "caused trouble" for the Army and that, given the controversy surrounding the contract, it was "intolerable" and "had to stop." The letter says he threatened to downgrade her. (As with Greenhouse, the Army did not make Griffin available.) When the Pentagon's auditors accused KBR of overcharging the government $61 million for fuel, the letter says, the Army bypassed Greenhouse. Her deputy waived a requirement that KBR provide pricing data-a move that looked "politically motivated," the letter says.

The Pentagon maintains that it awarded Halliburton's Iraq contracts appropriately, as does a Halliburton spokeswoman. A senior military official says the Army "has referred the matter to the inspector general of the Department of Defense." As for Halliburton, it has faced alleged cost overruns, lost profits and seen at least 54 company contractors killed in Iraq. Greenhouse, meanwhile, has requested protection from retaliation. But her career�and reputation�are on the line.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 24, 2004 09:28 PM

Henry,
Yeah, Kerry went goose hunting. I suppose it was to get the hunter vote in Ohio. He said he shot one but would not carry it, I suppose it was to not insult the animal rights people. I feel bad for him, and all politicians for that matter. It must be hard to live your life under constant scrutiny. I guess this is another reason I am voting the way I am. I don't think Bush reacts the same way.

It will be something if the Sox win it. The Eagles had a close call today, it had to go to overtime. I was really sweating it.

Thanks for always being understanding and not coming down on me just because I support someone you don't agree with. You have helped me to better understand why some are voting for Kerry as I hope I have maybe answered some of your questions as well.

Talk to you soon.

Posted by: Wayne at October 24, 2004 10:16 PM

Abel,
Not many of us read your unauthorized copy and paste jobs.

Posted by: Wayne at October 25, 2004 08:14 AM

IS BUSH A CONSERVATIVE?
By Tom DeWeese
February 8, 2004
NewsWithViews.com

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom2.htm

The great problem affecting Americans these days is a mixture of apathy and anger over the growing realization that nothing they say or do matters. It is a growing sense of hopelessness as government spirals out of control and beyond their reach.

What they see is a White House that (1) wants to loan $1.2 billion to the United Nations to renovate its headquarters in New York, (2) that signed agreements with India to accelerate the export of jobs, (3) that has proposed that Mexicans, here illegally, who take jobs from Americans, be granted a status that will lead to amnesty, (4) that has signed off on a profligate Medicare prescription drug plan that balloons this massive social program, (5) that offered a budget so packed with pork it promises an ever-growing deficit, and (6) that thinks it is the federal government's job to encourage marriage.

It is a White House that (7) has totally taken control of education from states, cities and communities, and (8) is requesting more than $1.3 billion?up $$22.6 million than last year---to underwrite still further efforts to "conserve" more land, taking the power of communities and owners of private property to determine what to do with their land. It is a White House so seriously out of tune with its political base one wonders how it can think it will be re-elected.

These are just a few examples of how totally off the rails the Republican train has become in the eyes of its own Party members. Many of its leaders, meeting in Philadelphia in early February, spent a behind-doors session grilling Karl Rove, President Bush's political advisor, telling him "our constituents are upset." At an earlier gathering of GOP big whigs, the former chairman of the Party, Haley Barbour, warned them that the November election was going to be close. Just to make sure they understood what he was telling them, he repeated himself.

A President and a Party get elected and reelected based as much on what they are for as what they are against. A lot of Republicans and independents who lean in their direction are against Big Government and Big Spending. Since 2000 that is all the Bush administration has given them and many are in a state of insurrection, desperately trying to get the White House to understand this is not what they voted for.

Does the White House need to be reminded how narrow their last victory was? Do they need to be reminded that they are in office only because the Supreme Court gave them an Electoral College victory, not a victory by the popular vote?

Instead, the entire tone of the White House since taking office has been one of hubris and secrecy. Were it not for 9-11, this President would have long since been abandoned by his constituency and, even with that awful event and all it portends for national security, it may not be enough for a second term.

Still, the White House argues that the economy is on the rebound and, if one looks at events on Wall Street, housing sales, and other economic indicators, such a case can be made, but what is being ignored is (1) the huge debt Americans, old and young, have individually as they struggle to pay rising property taxes, (2) meet the demands of an income tax that takes more than forty percent of their earnings, and (3) pay the countless hidden taxes on everything that affects their daily lives.

As (4) jobs disappear to nations where wages are so much lower than ours, (5) as our manufacturing base decreases, as (6) our agricultural interests reap more government financial support, as (7) more and more jobs in America become "service", i.e., low-pay Mac-jobs, and (8) as the most important segment of our economy, entrepreneurs and small retailers, are strangled with endless mandates, ordinary people who vote are asking themselves if this White House understands or cares about their problems.

If the economy, despite all the talk of its health and growth, isn't enough to still the fears of Americans, the nation's education system hits every home where children are passing through it. The Bush administration signed off on "Leave No Child Behind", a huge, socialist plan designed by arch-liberal, Sen. Teddy Kennedy, that is now being criticized for its one-size-fits-all mandate that requires the same tests for urban or rural schools, large or small. Neither school administrators, nor teachers, joined by a growing chorus of citizens saddled with huge property taxes, deem this program appropriate to the need to reform an educational system that fails to provide adequate instruction in even the most basic skills.

Worse yet, the Bush administration is now sponsoring a United Nations curriculum designed to deny the sovereignty of the United States, teaching a "citizen of the world" philosophy. In another social area, schools continue to ignore an "abstinence" message in favor of lessons in sexuality that grants equality to all forms of sex. The use of drugs like Ritalin to control children continues unabated. Schools are no longer safe zones and even the daily pledge of allegiance is disputed in the courts.

While most Americans grasp the need to fight the worldwide Islamic Jihad threatening our nation and the West, concerns about nation-building in Afghanistan and Iraq will continue to worry them despite our evident successes in regime change in those nations.

In a nation that remains sharply divided, the Republican Party and the White House, however, have abandoned the very principles that drew people increasingly to its ranks. Half or more of all Americans no longer even bother to vote and, if disaffected Republicans and Independents stay home on Election Day in November, George W. Bush will become, as his father before him, a one-term President.

Are there differences between the Republican and Democrat Parties? Yes, but the line has been so blurred by the policies and actions of the White House, a rising tide of distress is being expressed from within the Party and may well be reflected in a new administration in January 2005, one that will win because too many are asking, "Is Bush listening? Is Bush a conservative?"

2004 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 25, 2004 08:19 AM

Wayne,

Since when do you think you have the right to speak for everyone who visits this BLOG? I, for one, like to read and learn. In any case, learn to speak for yourself.

Your POST follows:

"Abel, Not many of us read your unauthorized copy and paste jobs."
Posted by: Wayne at October 25, 2004 08:14 AM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 26, 2004 12:38 AM

Abel,
Since when is many of us ALL? I am speaking for myself by the way.

Thank you for your input copy and paste king.

Posted by: Wayne at October 26, 2004 07:51 AM

Abel

I have to agree with the others. Please shorten your posts. I don't have time to read them all. Post a brief paragraph along with the link so we can decide whether or not to pursue the topic.\

Thanks

Posted by: Calamity Jane at October 26, 2004 03:11 PM

Calamity Jane,

Be assured that I already know that you, being another blind Close Minded Brainwashed Lying Hero Hating Pro Bushite Republican (CMBLHHPBR), have absolutely no intention of reading my POSTs. My intention is to offer my POSTs to open-minded "undecideds" who visit our BLOG from time-to-time in the hope that they'll be open to new information. If you read my posts you'd see that I do offer links for you to visit.

Your POST follows:

"Abel I have to agree with the others. Please shorten your posts. I don't have time to read them all. Post a brief paragraph along with the link so we can decide whether or not to pursue the topic.\
Thanks"
Posted by: Calamity Jane at October 26, 2004 03:11 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 27, 2004 04:07 AM

Anyone that is interested in a good cause that benefits the American soldier please visit the site linked to my name.

Posted by: Wayne at October 27, 2004 04:13 PM

Hey, everyone!
It's been a while since I last posted.
Anyway, I just wanted to answer your question about the goose-hunting (Wayne). I think it is ridiculous that people freaked out about this. So, Kerry has a life outside of campaigning, don't all politicians? How did you feel about it?
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 27, 2004 09:49 PM

Wayne,

Since when do you think you have the right to speak for everyone here? Furthermore, I for one, never pay any attention to labels. In any case, learn to speak for yourself. "...I think I speak for everyone here, we love you," doesn't cut it!

Your POST follows:

"Abel, Is this the love of the liberal side of you? Maybe the tolerance of the moderate side of you. Whatever side of you Abel, and I think I speak for everyone here, we love you."
Posted by: Wayne at October 22, 2004 09:00 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 27, 2004 10:10 PM

FL,
I don't care if the goose hunts. It just seemed a little too set up is all. Not genuine. No big deal.

Posted by: Wayne at October 28, 2004 07:12 PM

Hey, FlamingLiberal, been a while. At least there's ONE thing I agree with Kerry about... the taste of crackling roast goose.

Posted by: Dave at October 28, 2004 08:30 PM

FL,
I wanted to fully address your question about the goose hunting and I have time now.

I do not have a problem with anyone hunting, fishing, sail boarding, any sports that they may enjoy.

My problem falls with the fact that it seems that Sen. Kerry does these things in order to get votes. Why be someone you are not? I think he would get more votes if he were himself and was true to himself. I know I would respect him a lot more. I am not saying he does not enjoy any of these things, I am just wondering if these are things he does when not running for office. Why would an intelligent man enter a store and say "Where can I get me a hunting license?" this is not an exact quote, but he did say get me. This is not how he talks, the man is extremely intelligent and does not need to talk like a moron to get the "uneducated vote".

I know politicians do and say things when running for office, it just is my opinion that Sen. Kerry will do ANYTHING or say ANYTHING to win this election, which includes not being himself.

I hope I have cleared up any questions about my comment.

And Abel, I speak for myself now, I love you man.

Posted by: Wayne at October 28, 2004 10:04 PM

Wayne,
I sometimes say things that are out of character. We all make mistakes. I know of some times that I have had things I have said that maybe didn't sound so intelligent. It's not like I was just trying to get the less intelligent group to like me or something. We all make mistakes... even--- especially--- politicians...

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at October 29, 2004 05:56 PM

Wayne,
I forgot to add something.
Unfortunately, he does need to dumb his speeches down a little to get the votes of the less intelligent. Unfortunately, people have labeled him a "flip-flopper" because he is so much smarter than the majority of America. He says something, and they completely hear the other...
~FL

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at October 29, 2004 05:58 PM

That new Osama bin Laden tape was totally unexpected. This serves as a reminder that this nation is at war and that we must defeat these terrorists. Bin Laden is trying to intimidate the people of the free world and I'm hoping that President Bush captures this son of a bitch before he attacks us again. If we can get Saddam Hussein, then we can get UBL.

Posted by: Henry at October 29, 2004 08:23 PM

FL,
It has been reported that he has an IQ of 120. Is this really that intelligent? It may be above average, but he is no rocket scientist.

For the record, I have taken several IQ tests and my scores range from 130 to 135.

Posted by: Wayne at October 29, 2004 10:18 PM

FL,
I have been thinking about your comment of "dumbing his speeches down". Do you really think Americans are dumb? Is this your view of America? We have complained for years that we want a politician to not make decisions based on poll numbers and Bush is that politician. Now that we have one we don't like it.

If Kerry is so smart, why does he keep getting caught in lies? He stated all his military records are released, then when Charles Gibson informed him someone did a study on his and Pres. Bush's IQ based on military records he said he didn't know how that was possible being that hie records are private. The list of lies goes on and on, yet you give Kerry a pass. Why?

Posted by: Wayne at October 30, 2004 08:02 AM

Wayne,

Wayne, when are you going to learn to speak for yourself? Repeat after me, "I do not read your copy and paste articles." I did not include the word "unauthorized" because they are "authorized" as long as appropriate credit is given when POSTed and I always give appropriate credit.

Your POST follows:

"Abel, Not many of us read your unauthorized copy and paste jobs."
Posted by: Wayne at October 25, 2004 08:14 AM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at October 30, 2004 01:32 PM

After watching that new video of UBL, I'm hereby switching my vote to Bush. I trust Kerry on handling jobs, taxes, and other domestic issues but that ominous tape was enough to change my mind about the president. Because of this chilling reminder that we are still engaged in the war on terrorism, I'm switching my endorsement from Kerry to Bush.

Posted by: Henry at October 30, 2004 03:13 PM

Wayne,
I was unaware of John Kerry's IQ. I would love to know what George Bush's is. But, honestly, what does an IQ really say of one's intelligence? Intelligence isn't all about statistics and facts. It's also about applying those facts to everyday life. That is one of the many skills John Kerry has.
Where can you take IQ tests? I'd love to know mine.
I wonder what the average American's IQ is...
~FlamingLiberal
P.S. Congratulations on your IQ.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 31, 2004 02:07 PM

Abel,
I am now speaking for myself. I do not read your lengthy posts, I do not put much weight into your opinions, I do not agree with anything you say. I am glad Bush is going to win on Tuesday. I am gald I do not have Kerry as my Senator. I do not care what you think.

I am also glad that this will be over in a few days and I will not have to read another one of your posts again. I think that when Kerry loses, you will not post another thing here again.

I say it was not nice knowing you and I hope that in the future our paths never cross again.

Posted by: Wayne at October 31, 2004 04:30 PM

Abel and d. jones

Ditto for me what Wayne said.

Posted by: Calamity Jane at October 31, 2004 05:24 PM

I'm now voting for Bush because of UBL. However, this tape provides evidence that Bush took his eye off Osama bin Laden, the real threat, for Saddam Hussein, the phony threat. Just because I'm voting for Bush now does not mean I'm a Bush supporter there are some policies of his that I still don't like.

Wayne, it looks like Bush will win. But...how would you react if Kerry won instead, surprising everybody including you and myself? A Kerry victory now looks improbable but it's not impossible. If Bush wins, I would be a little relieved because of his strong anti-terror tactics but I still have reservations on his economic handling. If Kerry wins, I wouldn't be as relieved right now as with a Bush victory because he may handle domestic issues better than Bush, but I do have some concerns about Kerry's anti-terror strategy.

Posted by: Henry at October 31, 2004 07:48 PM

FL,
The same guy that did the study on Kerry's IQ being 120 did one on Bush and came up with 124 for Bush.

There is a web site called "tickle me", I think that is the site I used. I also did the IQ test when it was on TV about a year ago. They filled the audience with groups of people, like doctors, college students, plumbers, things like this and I think the highest IQ came from a doctor at 127. Somewhere around there. When I did my score on TV I received a 132.

I do not hold much value in the IQ scoring department, but I find it funny how people like to say Bush is stupid and we come to find out he has a higher IQ than Kerry. I would like to see them both take a real test, just for fun.

Let me know what you get if you find the web site. When I took the test on the site I received a 134.

Talk to you soon.

Posted by: Wayne at October 31, 2004 08:29 PM

Henry,
If Kerry wins, and that is if, I will support him as our commander in cheif. I feel if we do not support him that this is what will eventually tear America apart.

What happened to the days of supporting our president? I am afraid that they are long gone. It makes me sad to think that our country will not get behind either candidate fully. If Kerry wins, I will be one of the first republicans to support him FULLY! I suggest that other Bush supporters do the same.

We need to band together to fight terror as a nation and put aside our partisan differences.

I hope Kerry supporters will feel the same way.

Posted by: Wayne at October 31, 2004 08:33 PM

Wayne,
I found a website that does age-divisional scoring. Everyone takes the same test, but depending on your age, they come up with a score. I scored a 146.
Congratulations on having an IQ greater than the president's! Haha...
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 31, 2004 09:24 PM

To Wayne

That's why I really like you. You are very honest.

I find it funny that some people are calling Bush "Dumbya." I would say that Kerry was much more thoughtful and knowledgeable in the debates so I could see why some voters think that Kerry is smarter than the president. I only have an IQ of 105 - it's not as impressive as 130 or 135 but at least it's considered "average."

Posted by: Henry at October 31, 2004 09:24 PM

I have to wonder why everyone is saying Bush is going to win. Right now, the polls are saying the race is split 49-49. I have a good feeling about John Kerry. I feel confident that he will win on Tuesday, and that he will do a great job in office.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at October 31, 2004 09:26 PM

Henry,

I was wrong about you. I thought you were a smart independent and intelligent man. In Spanish the saying goes, "No tenia cerebro (He didn't have a cerebrum)." I guess you needed someone to talk to, and I'll give credit to your buddy Wayne.

So you're now going to vote for Bush, the lying failure and you think that he'll do better in Afghanistan. Hell, he can't even handle Iraq so why do you expect that he'll do better in Afghanistan?

As much as I hate to see what's going on in the Middle East, this is just the beginning. How many Muslims do you think there are? Well, at least we'll kill more of them than they'll kill of us---that's for sure. Frankly, the way things are going, we may not be a world power for too much longer---we're quickly becoming a Third World country---thanks to George W. Bush.

For example, read:

"Colin Powell Believes U.S. is Losing Iraq war
Salon.com

Sunday 31 October 2004

Secretary of State Colin Powell has privately confided to friends in recent weeks that the Iraqi insurgents are winning the war, according to Newsweek. The insurgents have succeeded in infiltrating Iraqi forces "from top to bottom," a senior Iraqi official tells Newsweek in tomorrow's issue of the magazine, "from decision making to the lower levels."

This is a particularly troubling development for the U.S. military, as it prepares to launch an all-out assault on the insurgent strongholds of Fallujah and Ramadi, since U.S. Marines were counting on the newly trained Iraqi forces to assist in the assault. Newsweek reports that "American military trainers have been frantically trying to assemble sufficient Iraqi troops" to fight alongside them and that they are "praying that the soldiers perform better than last April, when two battalions of poorly trained Iraqi Army soldiers refused to fight."

If the Fallujah offensive fails, Newsweek grimly predicts, "then the American president will find himself in a deepening quagmire on Inauguration Day."

Your POST follows:

"After watching that new video of UBL, I'm hereby switching my vote to Bush. I trust Kerry on handling jobs, taxes, and other domestic issues but that ominous tape was enough to change my mind about the president. Because of this chilling reminder that we are still engaged in the war on terrorism, I'm switching my endorsement from Kerry to Bush."
Posted by: Henry at October 30, 2004 03:13 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at November 1, 2004 01:05 AM

I offer the following POST for educational purposes only. I realize that Close Minded Blind Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republicans (CMBLHHPBR) will refuse to read it so please don't feel that you need to excuse yourself for that.

Regular Republicans are, of course, welcome to read the article. The article follows:

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Eric_Margolis/2004/10/31/694068.html

It's the war, stupid

By Eric Margolis -- Contributing Foreign Editor

A broad majority of people around the globe share the same feeling about next week's American elections: Better the devil you don't know than the one you do.

The George Bush-Dick Cheney partnership has been the most radical presidency in memory. Their re-election in next week's tight election will likely produce an even more aggressive U.S. foreign policy driven by religious fundamentalists and the military-petroleum interests.

Secretary of State Colin Powell, humiliated and sidelined, is expected to resign and be replaced by one of Bush's neocons.

Scott McConnell, editor of American Conservative magazine, accurately sums up the Bush Doctrine: "His international policies have been based on the hopelessly naive belief that foreign peoples are eager to be liberated by American armies -- a notion more grounded in Leon Trotsky's concept of global revolution than any sort of conservative statecraft."

Recently, former U.S. National Security chief Brent Scowcroft, the dean of Republican foreign policy experts and adviser to Bush's father, warned of the baleful influence of Israel's far right over Bush. "(Ariel) Sharon has got him wrapped around his little finger," said Gen. Scowcroft.

A second Bush term could bring U.S. attacks on Iran and Syria, as Israel's PM Sharon has urged, and widening Mideast conflict. More troops and money will be poured into the Iraq quagmire. A military draft will almost certainly become necessary.

Neither Bush nor his opponent, John Kerry, are telling Americans two hard truths: First, the principal cause of anti-American terrorism is the oppression of Palestinians, and U.S. support for dictatorial regimes across the Muslim World.

Second, Bush's wars in Iraq -- which has caused 100,000 civilian deaths, according to a Johns Hopkins University study -- and Afghanistan are already lost. Not on the battlefield, but on the strategic level.

War is the extension of politics by other means, as Karl von Clausewitz postulated. Bush's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan must be judged defeats because no viable solution is remotely in sight in either nation now run by unpopular U.S.-imposed puppet regimes. Soviet-style rigged elections will not legitimize them.

Kerry's plans for Iraq are specious, too: No important nations are likely to help the U.S. colonize Iraq. Kerry's biggest failings have been his spineless support for war in Iraq, and his pandering to special interests over the Mideast.

The best President Kerry could do is talk tough while finding a way out of Iraq. But he will be harassed by Republicans and neocons crying "treason," and forced to wrestle the huge budget mess Bush left behind.

In Asia, Bush is on a collision course with nuclear-armed North Korea. His neocons are pressing for a confrontation that could ignite a major war. Kerry will be far likelier to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the Korean crisis.

The pro-war neocons around Bush are also pressing a hard line against China that risks a clash over Taiwan. China will not allow itself to be bullied by anyone. Kerry has rightly called for co-operation rather than ideological antagonism towards China.

Europeans are dismayed and frightened by Bush and his aggressive polices. If Bush wins, Europe, led by France and Germany, will speed up its growing alliance with China, an entente that can quickly become an anti-U.S. pact.

Kerry would quickly restore relations with Europe and return America to its former course of internationalism.

Bush's entente with Russia's Vladimir Putin has tacitly encouraged restoration of dictatorship in Russia. It will be too late for Kerry to do anything about this grave development.

Unless the next U.S. administration imposes a just peace on Israelis and Palestinians and ends the occupation of Iraq, anti-U.S. terrorism will intensify.

Bush has debauched America's finances by his $290-billion US wars and $521-billion deficit. Whoever wins, the global economy will be hit by waves of inflation caused by Bush's ruinous spending.

Kerry is a weak candidate with a lacklustre record. But at least he is a sensible, educated man who will bring in a team of moderate advisers that do not want to launch catastrophic foreign crusades or spend like drunken sailors. Kerry is a cautious internationalist; Bush an unapologetic Bible-belt imperialist.

Most non-Americans believe the U.S. under Bush has become a dangerous rogue state that threatens world stability and peace. For them, anyone is better than George W. Bush.

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at November 1, 2004 02:53 AM

I offer the following article only for educational purposes. Only good and honorable Republicans are encouraged to read it.

Other Republicans who consider themselves Close Minded Blind Lying Hero Hating Pro-Bushites are warned not to read this article as it'll make them sick. If you insist on reading it, please don't say that you were not warned.
---Abel

Republican Desertions Could Cost Bush by Jim Lobe

http://www.lewrockwell.com/ips/lobe144.html

While the vast majority of Democrats who voted for Green Party candidate Ralph Nader in 2000 are now lining up behind Senator John Kerry, Republicans unhappy with President George W Bush are having a much harder time deciding what to do next Tuesday.

While a relatively small number have apparently decided to take the Nader option, others believe the prospect of four more years of Bush is just too horrible to contemplate and are thus opting for the only candidate who has a chance to defeat him, John Kerry.

Most of the deserters hail from what remains of the "moderate" wing of the Republican Party – that which since 1952 was identified with the multinational interests of big Wall Street companies, the corporate-welfare state and civil rights.

Indeed, the son of former President Dwight D Eisenhower – whose victory over isolationist Robert Taft in the 1952 Republican National Convention sealed the domination of the so-called "Rockefeller Republicans" over most of the next 25 years – announced his endorsement of Kerry in September in a commentary first published in the extreme right-wing Manchester (New Hampshire) Union Leader.

"The fact is that today's 'Republican' Party'," wrote John Eisenhower – who noted that he changed his lifelong party registration to independent after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq – "is one with which I am totally unfamiliar." He went on to assail the current administration for its profligate spending and its "hubris and arrogance" in foreign affairs.

Perhaps less surprising was an offhand remark of a sitting Republican senator, Lincoln Chafee, who suggested Monday he will write in a candidate on his ballot rather than vote for Bush.

With control of the U.S. Senate up for grabs Tuesday, his statement was taken by some to mean that the Rhode Island Republican, who is not facing reelection, may abandon his party if Democrats get within one vote of controlling the upper chamber, just as former New England colleague, Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, did in May 2001. The current Senate breakdown is 51 to 49.

The diminishing Republican moderates have also been joined by self-described "conservatives," many of whom say they voted for Bush in 2000 in the mistaken belief he would pursue what he called a "humble" foreign policy and remain loyal to the "small-government" principles at the core of US Republican conservatism since World War II.

"(Bush's) continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations," wrote Scott McConnell, executive editor of The American Conservative magazine, in an article titled "Kerry is the One." "George W Bush has come to embody a politics that is antithetical to almost any kind of thoughtful conservatism," he added.

The erosion of Bush's Republican or conservative base appears to be part of a national phenomenon best illustrated by the fact that Kerry is securing considerably more newspaper endorsements than the president.

Historically, local newspaper publishers have been Republican. Bush, for example, scored more than twice the number of endorsements as then-Vice President Al Gore in the 2000 election.

But according to the latest count by the trade on-line journal, 'Editor and Publisher', Kerry is now leading Bush by 162 to 129, although most of the incumbent's support comes from the dailies of smaller towns. In terms of circulation, readers of Kerry newspapers account for 18.4 million households; for Bush, the number is 12.8 million.

Particularly notable, 38 newspapers that supported Bush four years ago have switched to Kerry, while only six newspapers that backed Gore have moved to Bush. Ten other newspapers – half of them in key swing states, Ohio, Michigan, Florida and Pennsylvania – that endorsed Bush in 2000 have declined to back either candidate. Most of them have endorsed Republican contenders for decades.

Of course, most right-wing factions, especially those that make up the coalition behind Bush's aggressive unilateralism following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks – the "assertive nationalists" identified with Vice President Dick Cheney and Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld; the neo-conservatives who back Israel's Likud Party; and the Christian Right – are lining up in strong support of the president.

And even some who have been outspoken and relentless in their attacks, particularly on the administration's foreign policy – notably paleo-conservative Pat Buchanan – still intend to vote for Bush, in the desperate hope that a second term would be substantially different from the first.

In their view, the president was manipulated by neo-conservatives and others into adopting policies that do not reflect his core values. In this view, Bush has now seen the light and will thoroughly purge his administration, something he could not do until after the election given his refusal to admit to voters that he was wrong.

But that opinion is discounted as wishful thinking by others on the right, such as supply-side guru Jude Wanniski, who exercised considerable influence in the early years of the Reagan administration.

"Because Mr. Bush has told us repeatedly about how he is strengthened by his faith in God, with that faith sustaining him through tough decisions, it goes without saying that if he is reelected he will be filled with the spirit of vindication," he warned his newsletter subscribers Wednesday.

"There not only would be no changes in the team's view of how the world must be dealt with," Wanniski added in explaining why he will vote for Kerry on Tuesday. "There would also be less restraint in George W Bush's willingness to shape the world to his divinely inspired vision."

But the most important defections are likely to come from the more-moderate elements that, in any event, have been emigrating from the Republicans as the Christian Right, in particular, has consolidated its control of the party's machinery.

That is why the traditionally Republican New England states, Maine and New Hampshire, could very easily move into Kerry's column Tuesday, while former Republican state officeholders in the upper Midwest, another stronghold of moderate Republicanism, are now speaking out against Bush.

"The truth is that President George W Bush does not speak for me or for many other moderate Republicans on a very broad cross-section of issues," said William Milliken, who served as Michigan's governor from 1969 to 1983, earlier this month.

He noted that Bush has created "the largest deficit in the history of our country" and "rushed us into a tragic and unnecessary war." Michigan is one of ten critical swing states that went narrowly for Gore in 2000.

Another prominent Michigander, former Chrysler chairman and management guru Lee Iacocca, has also switched. Earlier this year, Iacocca, who was a vocal supporter of Bush in 2000, said he intended to vote for Kerry.

November 1, 2004

Jim Lobe is Inter Press Service's correspondent in Washington, DC.

Copyright 2004 Inter Press Service

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at November 1, 2004 03:06 AM

Abel, you can say whatever the hell you want about me I couldn't care less. Do you know you could be breaking copyright laws with your copy and paste masterpieces?

Posted by: Henry at November 1, 2004 01:50 PM

FL,
What was the web site that you took your test on. I would like to test on an age divisional scoring site. Sounds like fun.

Let me know where to go and I will let you know how I do.

Posted by: Wayne at November 1, 2004 04:47 PM

Henry,

Did I hurt your feelings by telling the truth? About you, all I said was "Henry, I was wrong about you. I thought you were a smart independent and intelligent man. In Spanish the saying goes, "No tenia cerebro (He didn't have a cerebrum)." I guess you needed someone to talk to, and I'll give credit to your buddy Wayne.

Well, I guess the truth does hurt, sometimes.

Oh, and don't worry about me breaking copyright laws. I gave appropriate credit to the writer(s). I wouldn't want anyone to think that I wrote the articles. I do hope you read them. Just when you began to start making sense, you had to go ahead and believe the liar Wayne.

Keep it up and you may yet make the grade. You know, become a full pledged Close Minded Lying Blind Hero Hating Pro-Bushite Republican (CMLBHHPBR). Good luck to you!

Your POST follows:

"Abel, you can say whatever the hell you want about me I couldn't care less. Do you know you could be breaking copyright laws with your copy and paste masterpieces?"
Posted by: Henry at November 1, 2004 01:50 PM

Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa at November 1, 2004 06:08 PM

Okay people. Tomorrow is THE day. This is the most important election of our lifetime so I have one clear message for all of you. Whether your vote is Republican or Democrat or Independent or whatever:

GET YOUR A** OUT THERE AND VOTE.

Posted by: Henry at November 1, 2004 06:42 PM

Abel,
Show me some of my lies. I have shown 3 of your lies. Here they are AGAIN;

1. HAVA was not a right wing republican ploy to enfringe on voters rights. It was voted on in the senate and only one person voted no, a republican. Every democrat voted yes including Kerry and Edwards.

2. You can only be one, not conservative, liberal, progresive and moderate. You may have different views about different issues, but for the most part you are a liberal as I am conservative. I take that back, you are much more liberal.

3. Slaves were not all grown men. In fact some slaves were women and had slave babies. The babies were slaves as well, since a baby cannot do work they had to wait until they got older. At that time the slave owner would have gotten a FREE slave. This is because the slave was born into slavery making the fetus that he/she was a slave.

Now, do you think you can dig up one lie on me? Just one? I seriously doubt it.

Abel, the only one liying here is you. Now you bash Henry because he doesn't agree with you? Two weeks ago you were praising him and ordering me to leave him alone. Do you see the hypocrite that you are? When Henry was voting for Kerry I still talked to hims and respected his decision, now he is leaning towards Bush and I still have not treated him differently.

You need to really look at the way you treat others. You do your cause absolutely NO GOOD!

Thankfully when Bush wins you will probably never show yourself here again. Then it will be nice and peaceful here, as long as you take d.jones with you.

Posted by: Wayne at November 1, 2004 08:10 PM

Wayne,
The website was IQTest.com. You have to give them an e-mail address at the end, so they can send you your results. Good luck!
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at November 1, 2004 08:10 PM

I just voted for Bush. I don't think it will count because I live in New York, a solid Kerry state. Oh well, voting for Bush in New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, or California is the equivalent of wasting your vote on Nader. If Kerry wins this election by some miracle, I won't be too upset.

Posted by: Henry at November 2, 2004 11:11 AM

Genesis 12

1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Posted by: Christian Warrior at November 2, 2004 11:14 AM

Wayne, Flaming Liberal, how did you come up with a link to go with your name? I tried doing that once but I had no clue.

Posted by: Henry at November 2, 2004 02:55 PM

Henry,
You type the web address to whatever link you want in the URL part of the comment form. Sorry. I know these aren't the best directions... good luck!
~FlamingLiberal
P.S. Why do you think it will take a miracle for Kerry to win? I think he has a great chance...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at November 2, 2004 04:25 PM

Henry,
Put the web site in the URL box. Type the full site.

Posted by: Wayne at November 2, 2004 04:31 PM

Ooooooooohhh. I wondered what that URL space was for. I'm kind of embarrassed that I overlooked something as simple as this.

Posted by: Henry at November 2, 2004 08:49 PM

FL,
I went to the site you suggested and received a 138. Not too bad, huh?

Posted by: Wayne at November 2, 2004 09:57 PM

May the best candidate win...

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at November 3, 2004 08:33 AM

I feel very sorry for Mr. Kerry, he was so close with only one state away. He is a good man with a heart and I think he deserves a round of applause for running a strong campaign. Bush's second term better not be a repeat of his first term or this country is going down the drain. And he better keep his pledge not to reinstate the military draft. I doubt this would happen, but maybe Kerry could try again in 2008. We'll see what happens.

Posted by: Henry at November 3, 2004 12:52 PM

I guess it goes to show that lots of money and even more lies won't win an election. The American people are starting to see through it, so maybe the Democrats and the biased media will realize this and try telling the truth for a change.
Oh, and Henry, the draft rumour came from the Democrats, but was outvoted. I guess if Kerry had won there might be a draft, but it shouldn't happen now that Bush won.

And what a win too !! (Kinda like the Red Sox in the World Series.) According to stats, this win by Bush is the largest Presidential win since his father won in 1988. Amazing ! The country must be less divided than the media said.

Posted by: John at November 3, 2004 02:22 PM

Although most voters thought that Kerry was qualified to be president, he was unable to gather enough electoral votes to win because they were reluctant to change leaders in a time of war. They were too concerned about Iraq and the war on terrorism that changing presidents right away seemed too risky. I was right when I said that Bush would win and I am not surprised this happened.

I'm very sorry that the candidate of your choice didn't pull through this time, Flaming Liberal. But at least Wayne, you and I made some new friends on this blog and I intend on continuing posting here as long as this website is in business.

There's a possibility that Kerry could run again, bu that's only if the Democrats give him a second chance which I doubt.

Posted by: Henry at November 3, 2004 02:35 PM

Looks like character counted for more in this election than Kerry would have hoped.
That, my friends, says it all.

Posted by: Dave at November 3, 2004 03:55 PM

Wayne and Henry,
Your IQ is mighty high! Congratulations! I also want to congratulate your candidate on winning the election. I hope you are right about this one. I hope these four years will be much better than the last. After all of the taunting I got at school, it is nice to finally talk to someone mature enough to understand the pain one feels after their candidate loses an election. It's sad how immature kids can be. Honestly, it's not like a football game we lost or something; not something to brag about. This is reality, and it should be taken seriously. Anyway, I'm sorry to find myself lecturing you when you've done nothing wrong. Well, I better get going now.
~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at November 3, 2004 03:56 PM

As for Kerry trying again in 2008, I'm thinking more along the lines of Hillary Clinton. Either candidate would be great to have though. ~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at November 3, 2004 03:57 PM

John,
Thanks for calling me and my fellow democrats liars. It is much appreciated.

Posted by: FlamingLiberal at November 3, 2004 08:57 PM

I've never seen you on this blog before, John, but the military draft will come up again maybe not right away but eventually if there's still not enough troops in the reserves to handle all the insurgency within Iraq. And our men our dying over there with over 90% of the casualties American. So never truly rule out the draft depite the killing of a bill before the election. That was just a stunt by both parties to get votes it's politics.

Posted by: Henry at November 3, 2004 08:59 PM

Flaming Liberal, you're speaking too kindly you can show a little, but not a lot of, anger in your posts at least once in a while. I don't think Hillary Clinton would run for president, and if she did, I don't know about supporting her.

If Bush's second term is like his first term (another recession, a terrorist attack, more job losses, higher deficits, another controversial war), then he will certainly go down as one of the worst presidents in US history.

Posted by: Henry at November 3, 2004 09:28 PM

I previously tried to post something on this site but my computer froze, so I'm not sure if it worked. I didn't want to let John's post go unanswered, so I will repost what I said...

John,
Thanks for calling me and my fellow democrats liars. It is greatly appreciated. I'm so glad you have taken the time to educate yourself since you are voting for me as well as the other people my age that cannot vote. Your statement was SO intelligent. *If you were hearing me say this to you, you would be able to since the sarcasm in my voice.*
~FlamingLiberal
P.S. You can ask Wayne and Henry, I am not one to get angry so easily, but people like you put me over the edge...

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at November 3, 2004 09:36 PM

John,
When you are attacking the democrats, keep in mind that some of them are truly nice people. Like FL and Henry, although I don't think Henry is a democrat. An independent is more like it. FL is one of the nicest people on this site and she is a true liberal. She has not once been negative or mean spirited in amy way.

Keep this in mind or you will make Bush supporters look as bad as the bad Kerry supporters.

Posted by: Wayne at November 4, 2004 08:01 AM

Henry,
When you say that you don't think Hillary Clinton would get much support, do you mean that you wouldn't support her, or that most Americans probably wouldn't? As for me, I think she would be an amazing president; so strong and intelligent.

Wayne,
Thanks for your kind words! Again I must tell you how much I hope you are right about this election. I didn't sleep well at all last night due to depression. It is especially hard with all of the kids at school.
Thanks again!

~FlamingLiberal

Posted by: Flaming Liberal at November 4, 2004 04:08 PM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:
Remember Me? YesNo

Comments: