Why I won't vote for Bush - Part 1

[jj]

It's simple. He's the biggest, best recruiter for Al Qaida there is, and he's turned all of Iraq, now, into a hunting grounds for new terrorists. In one stupid move, he took them from a diminishing bunch of lunatics with no home in Afghanistan to a bunch of popular fanatics with a good part of a large population behind them.

Nice move, George.

Part 2 has to do with the fact that he wants to quite traitorously usurp the line between religion and government, and set aside some of the most important rules that the founders included in the constitution for the simple purpose of getting himself elected. His intermingling (and his appointees worse intermingling) of religion and government are exactly opposite everything that the founders knew, though, and believed. See "enlightenment" in your favorite dictionary.

Part 3 would be the deficit he's created, the oil shortage that's coming about, and the stagflation that we are obviously in the initial stages of.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Are the parts in order of importance? I agree with all three, but I put the second one first.

 

[jj]

Are the parts in order of importance? I agree with all three, but I put the second one first.

They're in order of proximity to the top of my head, mostly. The second and third ones are the ones, I fear, that have the biggest chance of doing serious harm in the long run. The first probably has more chance of doing harm in the short run.

 

[Grammatron]

Since you won't be voting for Kerry, who are you voting for?

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

Notwithstanding your valid reasons for not choosing GWB, according to the various polls, there's a lot of folks out there who think he's "hunky-dory".

IMHO, your part 2 reason (religeon and govt), is very motivating for the teeming millions of god-boys and girls.

Charlie (keep your pulpit out of the constitution) Monoxide

editted to add this great line that Richard Cohen (Reno-Gazette Journal) editorial talks about why he is neither Blue (GOP) or Red (Dems): "I was only briefly enamored with GWB who I now consider to be a divder .... I am referring here to an entire neoconservative foreign policy agenda in which violence plays too prominent and casual a role. ..."

 

[jj]

Since you won't be voting for Kerry, who are you voting for?

Once again, your attempt at mind-reading fails. You need to go stand in the reactor a bit more, Homer.

 

[Grammatron]

Once again, your attempt at mind-reading fails. You need to go stand in the reactor a bit more, Homer.

Well Kerry supported 1 and 2, maybe not 3 but still most of your reasons. Seems like you wouldn't want him as a president either.

 

[jj]

Well Kerry supported 1 and 2, maybe not 3 but still most of your reasons. Seems like you wouldn't want him as a president either.

Well, I don't quite agree with you on 2).

And to be honest, I'd rather have a Barry Goldwater, Millicent Fenwick, or, well, h**l in this election I think I'd have to seriously consider almost anyone who isn't in a federal prison, well, I might consider Martha anyhow, sadly enough. Sheeesh! At least she can run a business.

But Kerry and Bush are running, and to me the choice between them, who are the only two meaningful candidates, and the only two who don't appear to be COMPLETELY beyond the bounds of reality, is clear, it's Kerry. (And Kerry and Bush's nearness to reality needs to be called into question, certainly.)

You notice, I presume that while this is some sense a ringing endorcement of Kerry (MUCH BETTER THAN BUSH) in some sense it's a very limited Hobson's choice.

Who would I vote for willingly? Well, very few of the politicians presently available.

Christie Whitman was once attractive (as a candidate, that is), but she showed a serious lack of wisdom in associating in any fashion with the Bush administration, as did Colin Powell. McCain is blunt, honest, and frankly a touch nutty. Tom Kean might be a possibility, except that he appears to be wise enough to "not touch any of this".

We don't need to even seriously discuss Hillary, or Al Bore, I trust. I mean, like I'm almost longing for the days of Jesse Ventura and H. Ross Pirot. Even Dennis the Menace is starting to look good to me again. Maybe Malcolm Forbes?

 

[Meadmaker]

I am referring here to an entire neoconservative foreign policy agenda in which violence plays too prominent and casual a role.

This quote struck me as quite interesting, only because of my experience talking with my wife. I'm a political junkie. She barely watches the news.

I analyse facts. She observes people.

But four years ago, watching a Presidential Debate, we flipped in in the middle of it. Al Gore was talking, and she said "He's lying." I thought that was odd, but it turned out she was right. But later, George Bush talked, and she said, "This guy is scary. If he is President, there will be a war."

Then, early this summer, I was talking to my mother. She follows politics closely, but doesn't talk about it much. I wasn't sure who she voted for last time, and I wasn't sure who she thought she might this time, but she said, "I don't think I could vote for Bush. I don't think he has a conscience."

There are an awful lot of people in the country, apparently besides my wife and mother, who think that Bush and his crowd have that "casual" attitude towards violence. I'm not sure they are 100% right, but they are definitely on to something.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

There are an awful lot of people in the country, apparently besides my wife and mother, who think that Bush and his crowd have that "casual" attitude towards violence. I'm not sure they are 100% right, but they are definitely on to something.

See also: Karla Faye Tucker as well as others on Texas' death row past and long passed.