Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 07-30-2004, 11:11 AM
Sonnet Sonnet is offline
Reluctant Messiah
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: CLXXVIII
Images: 2
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantonac
...go ahead and vote for Kerry. I hope the manipulative, self promoting bastard wins.

From your mouth to God's ear, as they say.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-30-2004, 03:31 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Pro choice? Who cares? Abortion is legal and that isn't likely to change. The partial birth abortion ban failed to pass constitutional muster. That was the last hurrah of the religious nuts. Abortion isn't going to become illegal in the US regardless of who is president, the populous simply won't tolerate an anti abortion police state anymore than it will tolerate a reincarnation of slavery. It is an old issue, not a modern one. I don't blame you for remaining vigilent, but the war is over and has been won.
I care. Under Reagan and Bush 1, doctors were not allowed to counsel women on how to obtain an abortion, they couldn't even mention abortion as an option. They can't make abortion illegal, but they sure as hell can make it difficult to obtain.

I live in Las Vegas, that strip club was already under investigation, the Patriot Act was used to further it, but not the basis of it. And in that case there was widespread political corruption in our most powerful governing body, the County Commission. Our Senator, Harry Reid, also voted for the Patriot Act, but then spoke against its use in this case. Hell almost everyone voted for the Patriot Act. I hate the piece of shit too, but like you, they trusted people...they thought that it would be used to fight terrorism.

Now, I was somewhat tongue in cheek in my first post to you, and you came back at me, well, like a dick. You got snookered and trusted Bush, now all the sudden you are Mr. Politics and know everything about everything? As for asset forfeiture, etc, yes sometimes bills that look good on the surface are used inappropriatelly. I agree there needs to be something done...but the Presidential election is too late to make any difference. If you want better candidates, you need to start working now at your local and state levels to get people of character in places of power not get hysterical with me because I am voting "not Bush"
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-30-2004, 04:02 PM
dave_a's Avatar
dave_a dave_a is offline
This space is for rent
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: DCIV
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
Now, I was somewhat tongue in cheek in my first post to you, and you came back at me, well, like a dick. You got snookered and trusted Bush, now all the sudden you are Mr. Politics and know everything about everything? As for asset forfeiture, etc, yes sometimes bills that look good on the surface are used inappropriatelly. I agree there needs to be something done...but the Presidential election is too late to make any difference. If you want better candidates, you need to start working now at your local and state levels to get people of character in places of power not get hysterical with me because I am voting "not Bush"
Yes I was something of a dick, I apologize and have editted my unnecesarily harsh comments (before your post, not that it matters much).

However I hope that my abrasiveness didn't result in your missing my central point. It was a direct response to your statement that you liked Kerry on account of his being pro choice and pro civil liberties.

John Kerry is *not* pro civil liberties. He has a worse senate record on civil liberties than John Ashcroft. He wrote a book where he proudly advocated trashing civil liberties in the name of security just as Ashcroft is doing. Ashcroft and Kerry have stood in opposition to one another while both were senators. Usually Ashcroft was defending civil liberties that Kerry was voting to trash.

You can and will vote for whomever you wish, but if you vote for Kerry please don't do so under the impression he is pro civil liberties.

I *ignorantly* voted for Bush because I believed the hype and didn't take the time to actually investigate his record.

On the subject of civil liberties it is my hope you can no longer *ignorantly* vote for Kerry believing him to be a civil liberties champion.

I don't use the term ignorant as an insult. I am not Mr. Politics and certain don't know everything. But I made a huge mistake by casting my vote in 2000 on the basis of a perception created by the Bush campaign and didn't investigate to see if the hype matched the reality. If one intends to vote for Kerry, that's fine, but vote for him with both eyes open and informed as to the reality of the man rather than the carefully crafted hype.

John Kerry has a 30 year track record as a senator and it got no more than a passing mention in the entire convention. There are reasons why that is and they aren't flattering to Kerry.

As an aside, I understand your position on abortion. Yes, even though it isn't going to be outlawed, there is still much that can be done to try and interfere with abortion rights. However the flip side is that democrats go too far in the other direction. That children can get abortions when referred by their public school without any parental notification is just absurd. When I was in school I couldn't even get an aspirin from the school nurse without parental consent and now kids can have medical procedures performed without even parental notification? That's nuts.
__________________
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others --- Thomas Jefferson

Last edited by dave_a; 07-30-2004 at 04:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-30-2004, 04:09 PM
Adam's Avatar
Adam Adam is offline
Vice Cobra Assistant Commander
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA
Posts: XMVDCCXLIX
Images: 29
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Kerry does have something of a mixed voting record. Still, by my math (and I'm not sure why they didn't do the math for us...), he has about a 72% rating from the ACLU, based on their scorecard for the last four Congresses. The most disturbing note on that socrecard is the fact that he's missed voting on four critical pieces of recent legislation. To put that in some sort of rough perspective, the far more liberal (and, coming from me, that's a compliment) Dennis Kucinich only scores 62%, at least by their scorecard and my math.
__________________
"Trans Am Jesus" is "what hanged me"
ARMORED HOT DOG
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-30-2004, 04:21 PM
dave_a's Avatar
dave_a dave_a is offline
This space is for rent
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: DCIV
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam
Kerry does have something of a mixed voting record. Still, by my math (and I'm not sure why they didn't do the math for us...), he has about a 72% rating from the ACLU, based on their scorecard for the last four Congresses. The most disturbing note on that socrecard is the fact that he's missed voting on four critical pieces of recent legislation. To put that in some sort of rough perspective, the far more liberal (and, coming from me, that's a compliment) Dennis Kucinich only scores 62%, at least by their scorecard and my math.
Agreed, but the most rabid drug warrior Congress ever had was Bob Barr and he now works for the ACLU. In many respects Barr is a champion of civil liberties and in other ways he trashed them with impunity. The problem with scorecards is they treat every piece of legislation equally rather than weight each one according to the damage potential. So if Kerry has a favorable record on abortion and religion he gets points. If there are more votes on those issues than issues of privacy (anti encryption laws) or property rights (the heinous asset forfeiture laws that regard property as capable of comitting a crime rather than a person) then folks who are radically anti civil liberties in these areas end up with a high score.
__________________
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others --- Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 07-30-2004, 05:05 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

What I worry about dantonac, is that you appear to be an idealist. Idealism is great, except that for the most part it's all we can do to hold the line. I have seen too many idealists get burned out and frustrated by the lack of forward movement and give up, making our line a little weaker, allowing it to be pushed back a fraction.

I am not voting naively, I am simply standing here, adding my strength to hold the line as I have always done.

Quote:
That children can get abortions when referred by their public school without any parental notification is just absurd. When I was in school I couldn't even get an aspirin from the school nurse without parental consent and now kids can have medical procedures performed without even parental notification? That's nuts.
Some parents cannot be trusted to help their pregnant teenager. I couldn't get an aspirin from the school nurse either, but I did have an abortion when I was 16. My parents would have been supportive, but I chose not to dissapoint them. Some kids parents would beat them, throw them out on the streets, send them away and/or otherwise ruin their future. I can't agree with you here.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-30-2004, 05:27 PM
dave_a's Avatar
dave_a dave_a is offline
This space is for rent
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: DCIV
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea
What I worry about dantonac, is that you appear to be an idealist.
I am an idealist, but also a realist (or I like to think so). I have ideals and I vote for the person I believe best represents those ideals. I am a realist in that I don't expect any candidate to support my ideals 100%.

Quote:
Idealism is great, except that for the most part it's all we can do to hold the line. I have seen too many idealists get burned out and frustrated by the lack of forward movement and give up, making our line a little weaker, allowing it to be pushed back a fraction.
I agree to a point, but you appear to view Kerry as holding the line. On some issues I would agree. What it boils down to though is that all the candidates are line pushers, not holders. There is some variance in which parts of the line they push hardest on, but they all move that line further toward a cliff.

Quote:
I am not voting naively, I am simply standing here, adding my strength to hold the line as I have always done.
As I have said, I don't care if you vote for Kerry. I might end up doing so as well. I can't blame you for voting for Kerry when in my view there isn't a good candidate and that includes the greens and libertarians. (I lean libertarian, but Badnarik is a nutjob).

My central point is that you viewed Kerry as being pro civil liberties. If you are solely talking about abortion then I agree. However Kerry isn't taking a pro stand on gay marriage, and I have already given examples of his being rabidly against some civil liberties.

To me calling Kerry pro civil liberties on account of his position on abortion is like calling Ashcroft pro civil liberties because he says supports the 2nd amendment. There's more than one amendment in the bill of rights.

If you say Kerry is pro abortion/choice(which you did) I will agree with you and respect that abortion is a hot button issue for you. But if you imply that Kerry is pro civil liberties/civil libertarianish then, well... I disagree and will state why I disagree.


Quote:
Some parents cannot be trusted to help their pregnant teenager.
I agree, but the ability of schools to provide for kids to have medical procedures performed without parental consent or notification isn't limited to those with violent/abusive parents. There is no oversight (as in a court) where such a condition has to be shown to exist. Here is where I think you have tinted lenses on. Abortion is a huge issue for you and it appears to me that it colors your perceptions. If the law says schools have the right to provide kids with free medical procedures (abortions) without parental notification and no requirement for the school to prove to anyone that it's necessary because of really bad parents what precedent does this set?

The justification for this overbroad legislation can be applied to other medical procedures and practices as well.
__________________
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others --- Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-30-2004, 05:36 PM
lisarea's Avatar
lisarea lisarea is offline
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: XVMDVII
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 3
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantonac
Seriously you folks who intend to vote for Kerry need to wake the fuck up. He is not a better choice than Bush in terms of civil liberties. In some respects he is an even worse choice than Ashcroft, the man who lost to a dead man.

Quit with your blind sheep, anybody but Bush mantra, the guy is just as bad, if not worse than Bush in many areas.

Yeah, I know, you don't believe me.

So, go ahead and vote for Kerry. I hope the manipulative, self promoting bastard wins. Then democrat leaing voters can understand what many republican leaning voters now understand. The 2 major parties don't give a shit about us and they employ highly paid, morally vacant people to inform them of what they have to say to win elections which are controlled by sheepole.
OK. What do you intend to do? What do you propose we do? Watch our 'protest votes' click up from 2 to 3% if we're lucky?

What difference does that make?

I'm no Democrat, and I've never been one. I'm sick of 1) Democrats coopting my vote, assuming I would vote for whatever they hork up, were it not for third parties, and 2) Everyone else trying to get me to defend fucking Clinton because I've said I'm voting Democrat this time around. I hated fucking Clinton, and I could probably produce electronic records to prove it. I still hate Clinton, just a little less now in context.

My reason for voting for Kerry is really pretty simple, when it comes down to it. Politicians are liars. I've known this all my life. I thought everyone already knew this. They lie and manipulate and distract voters with trivialities. Always have, and they probably always will.

What is naive is to think that protest votes matter. They don't. Like it or not, the American public has resoundingly agreed that this is the level of discourse they'll tolerate. They want to stay ignorant. They want to stay lazy. They want to pick a color--red or blue--and trust a fucking committee to tell them what they think. That is just the way it is.

So, pragmatically, what are the real choices? In 2004, your choices are a sitting president in his lame duck term, or the other guy. Said president has already led us to war. Said president has said that God speaks to him. So, is he actually hearing voices, or is that just a set up for something? Which explanation is less horrifying? I can't decide. He has a completely non-viable VP, so not only would he, in his second term, not be concerned about his own reelection, but he wouldn't even be concerned with promoting his VP. He will literally have nothing to lose.

The other guy, though. The other guy, if nothing else, knows that his success hinges largely on a grumbling consensus among those who want Bush out of office. He knows who his constituents are, and for the most part, they don't really support him. Kerry's demographic is a very different one from Bush's. Kerry's demographic doesn't think he's divinely appointed. Kerry's demographic wanted to vote for Dean and Kucinich and Nader and maybe McCain. Kerry was picked as a viable candidate, nothing more. He was chosen because he can appeal to the demographics that need appealing to. He's a politician. He's a figurehead, a spokesmodel, and he was chosen to be a viable candidate to overthrow Bush. If he's elected, he'll watch his step because his constituency will be watching his step--every one--and if he wants a second term, or if he wants to pass the torch to Edwards at some point, he'll probably at least make some effort not to piss off the people who put him in office.

What I think is naive is believing that this is somehow a choice between two roughly equivalent evils. It is not. This is politics, and politics works in certain observed ways. First term presidents are more compliant than second term presidents. Politicians focus on their core demographics. Which do you want? A first-term president, or a second-term one? (And let me reiterate, the second-term president does NOT have a viable VP to run for the term after that.) Which demographic do you want your candidate answering to? The uberwealthy and the ignorant fundamentalists who believe that their God actually appointed their candidate? Or the malcontents who decided they wanted the other guy out so badly that they'd compromise?

People are stupid, and they vote for candidates based on completely irrelevant, superficial things, including their spouses, their children, their height (look at all the reasoned discourse over the short guys like Lieberman and Kucinich), and how well their political philosophies fit onto bumperstickers. That is reality. It sucks, but there it is. IMO, it's naive to think that ignoring that reality will make it go away.

So right now, I care how the candidates' wives come across. I care what little catchphases they pick, I care whether the fucking balloons come out of the ceiling, and I care which celebrities endorse them. Because I know who I don't want to win, and I know the only way that is going to happen.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-30-2004, 05:48 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

I am not going to get into an abortion debate here dantonac, I cannot even fathom where you are coming from with this parental notification thing, so it's best if we drop the discussion if that's okay.

It is a hot button issue for me, in fact, abortion rights is number 1 for me, Church State Separation is 2, civil liberties is 3 but that includes a whole host of other issues....so if Kery's voting record looks pretty good to the ACLU as Adam demonstrated, then I can live with it.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-30-2004, 05:58 PM
dave_a's Avatar
dave_a dave_a is offline
This space is for rent
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: DCIV
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

In rereading my posts I don't feel I am doing a good job of communicating what I want.

LadyShea, I am not trying to be a hardass toward you at all even though it may seem that way.

In 2000 I was underwhelmed with my choices for president. I listened to the candidates and voted for what I perceived was the lesser of the evils and voted for Bush.

Based upon what Bush *SAID* I still believe I made the best choice. Based upon what Bush has actually done I believe I would have been better off voting for Mickey Mouse or just staying home.

I don't have very many powerful regrets in my life, but voting for Bush is 1 of them. The reason I kick myself for it is that Bush had a past and I ignored it in favor of listening to what he said. Bush appealed to me on the basis of a couple hot button issues and so I overlooked the rest.

This is what I see some doing with Kerry. In the end I don't care who anyone votes for, it's none of my business really, but I am extremely sensitive to buying the pre election hype of the candidates because I made the mistake of doing it. So you all get punished for my mistake :D

In Kerry's case I find it almost unfathomable that the convention spent 3 days talking up Kerry, but his years as a senator were just glossed over since those years are far more relevant to what he will do as president than his experience on a swift boat which seemed to be a primary focus.

I have yet to meet a person (I walked around my office this morning :D ) who knew Kerry wrote a book called "The New War". book

The man's book and his senate career are far more important than his wife, kids and Vietnam service are in determining what kind of president he will make.

It isn't being talked about. To my cynical mind that means it is being hidden. If I had decades as a senator and wrote a book about something I felt passionate about I think I would spend some time talking about that in my bid for election. That the Kerry camp isn't talking about it strikes me as being a major problem.

I think that some of those voting for Kerry this year are going to find themselves in the same position I found myself in last election. Being shocked at what the person they vote for actually does.

Anyone who says they believe Kerry is a civil liberties champion, in my opinion, is a person likely to find themselves in that position because they don't know the man's actual record, they are believing the hype or following him on the basis of a couple/few hot button issues.

I am not saying don't vote for Kerry, I am saying please do so with both eyes open and don't represent him as something he clearly is not, a pro civil rights type. If you define gender, race and reproductive issues as the entirety of civil rights then he is decent. Otherwise he is horrible.

I don't see that his drug warrior position is doing much for blacks, I don't see that abortion is all that critical an issue anymore given the change in societal attitudes toward outlawing it and I don't see women's rights issues as being terribly important at this point so those are not hotbutton issues to me. Women have the right to vote and do as they please just as men. The substantial work in gender equality is complete. Women have the right to an abortion for any reason they wish so the substantial work in that area is complete.

The new civil liberty battle ground is in the area of privacy and the increasing police state. In that arena Kerry is *at least* the equal of Bush and Ashcroft, quite possibly worse. Just read his book or look at his voting record - those things his campaign aren't talking about.

Again, I don't care if someone votes for Kerry and frankly I don't care if someone votes for Bush or Mickey Mouse or just stays home. I just get easily agitated when I see real people whom I like and respect make claims or statements about a candidate that are patently false.

Calling Kerry "pro civil liberties" is just not accurate, his record shows it to be demonstrably false.

My pointing this out makes it appear I am picking on LS, and for that I am sorry.
__________________
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others --- Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-30-2004, 06:05 PM
Nil Desperandum's Avatar
Nil Desperandum Nil Desperandum is offline
Resurrected!
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Phoenix. It's hot as fuck here!
Gender: Male
Posts: CCLI
Images: 5
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

I'm curious, how is Badnarik a nutjob?

As mentioned on HH, I'm having a hard time figuring this out. Every time I get to one candidate, there is a reason to not vote for him.

Coming from a libertarian (with whom I'm sure I share a LOT of values), can you justify this classification of Badnarik.

I was going to go Kerry, but he's a slightly-more-intelligent-looking (ie, charming) fuckwit than Shrub.
I was going to go Nader (for about a day), and his egomania and towing the line with the Michigan/Republican debacle made me go a big wet one.
I was going to go Dobb, but realized the Green Party is purposely NOT going to campaign in swing states so that Kerry gets elected. Pussies.
Yesterday, I started to read up on Badnarik, and now the only libertarian I know (and respect, thus far) says he is a nutjob.

Fuck, help me out.
:pout:
:ferret:
Chris
__________________
It could be said that what's said needs saying;
Or at least this is what I'm told.
I'm not satisfied to be sold a cold tale told twice on diseased lover's borrowed time.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-30-2004, 06:22 PM
dave_a's Avatar
dave_a dave_a is offline
This space is for rent
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: DCIV
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
OK. What do you intend to do? What do you propose we do? Watch our 'protest votes' click up from 2 to 3% if we're lucky?
Your post was excellent, Lisarea. I have nothing to add to it, I just wanted to address this quoted portion of it.

I am not proposing you or anyone else do anything in terms of whom you ultimately vote for or the reasons you vote as you do.

I went off when I saw Kerry being referred to a pro civil liberties. In my opinion I find the statement to be totally ignorant and uninformed.

Unfortunately I worded my post in a manner that was way too abrasive and it offended LS so here we are.

I am not suggesting you vote for Bush, I am not suggesting you stay home, I am not suggesting you vote 3rd party, I am not suggesting you vote any particular way or even at all.

I have no solution to politics in America.

I am just extremely sensitive to candidates not simply misrepresenting themselves, but hearing other people, real people, unintentionally selling them on thier strong points when those strong points are actually weak points.

When I see Kerry's lips move I know he is a liar. When I see the lips of an intelligent person whom I respect move I don't think they are a liar. What I think they are doing is unintentionally selling a candidate as something they are not. Word of mouth advertising is powerful. I can't stand seeing people ignorantly or carelessly doing it. I did it and resent the hell out of myself for having done it. Now I get easily agitated when I see others doing it.

Abortion may be LS's #1 hot button issue, but lying manipulative candidates who effectively persuade people they are something they are not is my #1 issue. Actually my number #1 issue is when sincere, good people buy into the lies to the point that they unwittingly "sell" a candidate within their sphere of influence on the basis of things that aren't true.

Had I not looked into Kerry's record on the bill of rights or if I didn't know about his book I would have just agreed with LS's assessment that Kerry was generally pro civil liberties.

The guy is to the bill of rights what Ashcroft is to the bill of rights. A supporter of some of it, and an accomplished, unrepentant trasher of the rest.

He may still be the best choice for your vote though, unfortunately.
__________________
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others --- Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-30-2004, 06:39 PM
dave_a's Avatar
dave_a dave_a is offline
This space is for rent
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: DCIV
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nil Desperandum
I'm curious, how is Badnarik a nutjob?

As mentioned on HH, I'm having a hard time figuring this out. Every time I get to one candidate, there is a reason to not vote for him.
<snip>
Coming from a libertarian (with whom I'm sure I share a LOT of values), can you justify this classification of Badnarik.
Chris
Badnarik is a libertarian of the insane variety. The type that doesn't want to reform taxation, but abolish the IRS and income tax on his first day in office. The type that doesn't want to reform national drug policy, but end the drug war in it's entirety on day one with no thought for how to regulate things effectively. The type that believes open immigration is the best policy with no thought to border security or the consequences of such a policy.

In these ways I share some of his ideas, but there has to be a plan to get from a to z in a controlled manner. He doesn't appear to think well enough to have any concept that steps b,c,d... might be called for.

But he is even worse than that. The guy says he doesn't use zip codes because they are unconstitutional. Unfortunately the man is filled with similarly zanny nonsense ideas.

The reason Badnarik is the lib candidate is shameful. Going into the lib convention nobody was giving him much attention. There were several candiates for the nomination including one blind guy who was possibly the most looney person I have ever seen. The delegates literally laughed at him during his entire speech. The guy favored to win the nomination was Gary Nolan, a guy I would vote for.

Badnarik was able to take advantage of his being little known at the convention and in a debate amongst the candidates said exactly what every libertarian wanted to hear. He came out of nowhere and impressed the heck out of the convention delegates. He snowballed them like Bush did to me in 2000 and like Kerry is doing to some folks in 2004.

He got the nomination on the basis of an incredibly strong debate performance and the libertarian party cut it's own throat and set itself back tremendously in my book because I lost all respect for the "party of principle" that let itself get duped so easily.

If Badnarik actually won the presidency he would be the first and last to do it because the party would disappear in shame.

Amazingly most libertarians don't know what a nut job Badnarik is. At the present time he has removed all references to his insane ideas from the public view and because he was such an unknown going into the convention there isn't much to be seen about him outside of what he is presently showing.

So, I am either going to vote libertarian as a protest vote because I know there is no danger of this lunatic winning or I will vote for Kerry or I will for the first time since I was old enough to vote, just stay home.

I can't really say that any of those choices strikes me as being better than the others.
__________________
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others --- Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-30-2004, 09:54 PM
viscousmemories's Avatar
viscousmemories viscousmemories is offline
Admin
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Gender: Male
Posts: XXMXXCIV
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 9
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantonac
... or I will vote for Kerry or I will for the first time since I was old enough to vote, just stay home.

I can't really say that any of those choices strikes me as being better than the others.
I've never voted for anything or anyone in my life, but I might vote this time around just to add a single digit to the anti-bush tally. I have to say, though, that the idea of researching issues, registering to vote, going to a polling place, etc. is a lot more effort than I prefer to put toward something that is very possibly going to be an utter waste of time.

As with you guys, I know that even if my vote isn't nullified by hijinx, all politicians are liars that can and will do whatever they want regardless of their promises. It didn't matter that I didn't vote in 2000. I was in Chicago at the time, and IIRC Gore won Illinois. So he didn't need my help. And even if he had gotten my help, he still would've had the victory stolen from him. So all things considered I'm glad I didn't waste my time with that election.

The first time I ever seriously considered voting was during last year's Gubenotorial race here in Cali, because I saw a few debates and Camejo (the Green candidate) struck me as an immensely calm, rational, intelligent and knowledgeable person. Arnie, of course, came across as an ignorant nutjob. Camejo got 3% of the vote, Arnie won. Once again I'm glad I didn't actually spend any of my money on gas to drive to the polls.

Anyway I've learned a few things in this thread, so thanks for that. I didn't know that Kerry was lame on encryption and asset forfeiture or that he had authored parts of the patriot act. I get Adam's point that he has a good score from the ACLU, but I also get yours that he can suck hard on some civil liberties and be good on others and still get a good score. FWIW I think those liberties you mentioned are very important, too.

I will say that I don't think women's rights or abortion are dead issues. Last I heard (and I could be wrong...) women were still making less than men for the same jobs, and with the strong anti-abortion sentiment still alive in millions of voters, I don't think we're quite out of the woods on that yet.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-30-2004, 10:32 PM
lisarea's Avatar
lisarea lisarea is offline
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: XVMDVII
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 3
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by viscousmemories
I've never voted for anything or anyone in my life, but I might vote this time around just to add a single digit to the anti-bush tally. I have to say, though, that the idea of researching issues, registering to vote, going to a polling place, etc. is a lot more effort than I prefer to put toward something that is very possibly going to be an utter waste of time.
I will make you a crib sheet, in the form of a sample ballot listing the correct answers, PLUS I'll send you a dollar, if you'll go vote.

I will make you a paper hat. I will send you a picture of the ODB sleeping with his mouth open. I will write a power ballad or a rock anthem about you.

What do you want, boy?
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 07-30-2004, 11:29 PM
Adam's Avatar
Adam Adam is offline
Vice Cobra Assistant Commander
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA
Posts: XMVDCCXLIX
Images: 29
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
So, pragmatically, what are the real choices? In 2004, your choices are a sitting president in his lame duck term, or the other guy. Said president has already led us to war. Said president has said that God speaks to him. So, is he actually hearing voices, or is that just a set up for something? Which explanation is less horrifying? I can't decide. He has a completely non-viable VP, so not only would he, in his second term, not be concerned about his own reelection, but he wouldn't even be concerned with promoting his VP. He will literally have nothing to lose.

The other guy, though. The other guy, if nothing else, knows that his success hinges largely on a grumbling consensus among those who want Bush out of office. He knows who his constituents are, and for the most part, they don't really support him. Kerry's demographic is a very different one from Bush's. Kerry's demographic doesn't think he's divinely appointed. Kerry's demographic wanted to vote for Dean and Kucinich and Nader and maybe McCain. Kerry was picked as a viable candidate, nothing more. He was chosen because he can appeal to the demographics that need appealing to. He's a politician. He's a figurehead, a spokesmodel, and he was chosen to be a viable candidate to overthrow Bush. If he's elected, he'll watch his step because his constituency will be watching his step--every one--and if he wants a second term, or if he wants to pass the torch to Edwards at some point, he'll probably at least make some effort not to piss off the people who put him in office.
Eloquently put. This, to my mind, is one of the most important reasons to vote Kerry in 2004. He has much more to lose by misbehaving in office.

Honestly, my reasons for voting Kerry are more strategic than they are indicative of any real approval of Kerry himself. The Republicans and their allies, in the last 25 years or so, have put together a far more effective effective political machine than the Democrats have. Right now, they control all three branches of the federal government, and they're ruthless when it comes to holding onto power. Hell, look at the way they spent eight years hounding Clinton, probably the most conservative Democratic president in history. I'm not saying that the Democrats wouldn't like to do the same thing, given the chance, but they're not organized for it. At this point, they need all the help they can get, which is why, reluctantly, I've come to consider myself a Democrat. If I'm going to live in a nation where those who govern are inevitably drawn from just two parties (and, barring Constituional changes to the way we elect or leaders, or my becoming a mail order husband for some lonely woman somewhere in Europe, I am going to live in such a nation), even if those two parties are nearly indistinguishable on many key issues that matter to me, then I'm going to be damned sure that the party playing the role of Opposition is powerful enough to do so. I think the Republicans have become powerful enough that they need to be knocked down a few notches so I'm going to hold my nose and throw my lot in with the Democrats.

Now, one good thing, to my mind, about American politics in the last year or so is the way that, however sincere they are about it, the Democrats have had to reacquaint themselves with their base demographics and, in part, that means that things like Edwards' "Two Americas" speech have brought progressive economics and the real class warfare being waged against the working classes back into the public discourse. This is a vital opportunity, IMO, for those of us who have criticized the Democrats all along for being Republicans-Lite to keep these things in the public discourse, to remind our leaders of all the pretty things they said while they were running for office in 2004, to remind them that they lost much of America once by refusing to take a stand against the very wealthy on economic issues amnd can't afford to do so again, and to hold them to it. As lisarea said, most of Kerry's base wanted to vote for someone else, but they're willing to play ball in order to dethrone Bush. Kerry needs to be reminded of that, and that they're all very willing to dump his Frankenstein-looking ass for someone whose values are more in line with their own once the danger of a second Bush term has passed.

Oh, finally, I agree with LS and vm...abortion rights is not a dead issue, as it should be. Look at the stealth legisltaion that's been passed over the last couple of years to lay the groundwork for defining a fetus as an individual with rights (I'm too lazy to go look it up right now, but let me know if you don't know what I'm talking about and I will).
__________________
"Trans Am Jesus" is "what hanged me"
ARMORED HOT DOG
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 07-30-2004, 11:31 PM
Adam's Avatar
Adam Adam is offline
Vice Cobra Assistant Commander
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA
Posts: XMVDCCXLIX
Images: 29
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
I will make you a crib sheet, in the form of a sample ballot listing the correct answers, PLUS I'll send you a dollar, if you'll go vote.

I will make you a paper hat. I will send you a picture of the ODB sleeping with his mouth open. I will write a power ballad or a rock anthem about you.

What do you want, boy?
Hmmm...I just made a similar speech to my brother, sans the offer of ODB pics. Hell, I even told him I'd register him.
__________________
"Trans Am Jesus" is "what hanged me"
ARMORED HOT DOG
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-30-2004, 11:58 PM
Clutch Munny's Avatar
Clutch Munny Clutch Munny is offline
Clutchenheimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Gender: Male
Posts: VMMMLXXXV
Images: 1
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

You can almost always carve up faults in a way that lets you find as many in one choice as in another.

Sometimes the Big Picture is right one: Hate Democrats if that pushes your buttons, hate the Clintons if that warms your viscera. But who habitually puts the deficit on steroids; who tells your citizens that dissent is unAmerican; who sincerely believes that they are following the orders of God Himself? You can find craziness in both parties, but which party lets the crazies run the show? Pair Ashcroft off with Sharpton, say... but will Sharpton ever be AG?

That all politicians are liars and scum may be true, but it's too dangerous a truth, since it papers over real distinctions nevertheless. The Dems, it seems to this non-American, are so obviously the superior choice that the only meaningful discussion is how to improve the party, and not for which party to vote.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-31-2004, 12:00 AM
viscousmemories's Avatar
viscousmemories viscousmemories is offline
Admin
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Gender: Male
Posts: XXMXXCIV
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 9
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
I will make you a crib sheet, in the form of a sample ballot listing the correct answers, PLUS I'll send you a dollar, if you'll go vote.

I will make you a paper hat. I will send you a picture of the ODB sleeping with his mouth open. I will write a power ballad or a rock anthem about you.

What do you want, boy?
I'll be living in Texas by then. :hide:
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-31-2004, 12:08 AM
dave_a's Avatar
dave_a dave_a is offline
This space is for rent
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: DCIV
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

yeah, upon further reflection I guess I don't view abortion as being a done deal yet either. I think it is going to take another Supreme Court challenge to put it to bed.

I think I would rather see Kerry appoint the SC justices during his first term than have Bush do it during his 2nd.
__________________
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others --- Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-31-2004, 01:18 AM
lisarea's Avatar
lisarea lisarea is offline
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: XVMDVII
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 3
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by viscousmemories
I'll be living in Texas by then. :hide:
Still.

The offer stands. I'm serious, except that I can't afford to send out money to everyone. I have made crib sheets for people in the past, and I will do so for anyone who is wants me to. I will research all of the issues and candidates, and I will tell you how to vote. I have done it before, and I will do it at every opportunity.

Unless I go getting a JOB or something rash like that, of course.

I don't care if you're in the reddest of red or the bluest of blue states. I don't care if every single ballot issue is a total shoo-in. I still think you should vote, and I will help, if you want. For the stickers. You know you get a sticker, right?

If that doesn't convince you, how about this angle? If you do NOT vote, I will express interest in Ponzi schemes and no money down real estate using your name, then I will break into your home, clean your toilet with your toothbrush, hide fish and cheese in your ceiling tiles, and spray possum pheremones on all your doors and windowsills.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-31-2004, 01:26 AM
viscousmemories's Avatar
viscousmemories viscousmemories is offline
Admin
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Gender: Male
Posts: XXMXXCIV
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 9
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
possum pheremones
Okay, okay. You got me at possum pheremones. I simply can't handle the emotional confusion that would generate in me about now.

I'll definitely have to be told who to vote for, but y'know what if you're wrong? How do you know what hair color, nose size and sexual proclivities are most offensive to me? Will the crib sheet include a brief explanation of why to vote for that person? If so I think that'd make a good post. :P

I don't need the dollar, though. I'm independently wealthy, according to an independent survey of independent sources on the subject.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-31-2004, 12:43 PM
HelenM's Avatar
HelenM HelenM is offline
Indecisive - or maybe not
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: DCCXXII
Images: 29
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisarea
Said president has said that God speaks to him. So, is he actually hearing voices, or is that just a set up for something? Which explanation is less horrifying? I can't decide.
There are other explanations than the two you gave.

Anyway, Kerry is a theist too.
__________________
www.mildenhall.net

Last edited by HelenM; 07-31-2004 at 02:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-31-2004, 12:57 PM
livius drusus's Avatar
livius drusus livius drusus is offline
Admin of THIEVES and SLUGABEDS
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: LVCCCLXXII
Images: 5
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

I'd like the ODB pic. :snore: (And possibly the rock anthem.)
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-31-2004, 01:42 PM
Ronin's Avatar
Ronin Ronin is offline
What would Hüsker Dü?
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: MDCLII
Images: 127
Default Re: Anybody Watching the Convention?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenM
Kerry is a theist too.
And, being Catholic...the only true theist.

:wink:
Reply With Quote
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.72757 seconds with 13 queries