Enlighten Me...Enter at your own risk

lnelson

WHY would I vote for Kerry v.s Bush?
What has Kerry done that would swing my vote?
What does Kerry stand for?

I have yet to figure out any of these from his political platform.

I know where Bush stands on most issues and although some of his ideals are not mine I trust him more than Kerry to lead our country but please enlighten me.


JMO,
Lisa

ray a

OK, here's a starter. If you believe the UN and Kofi Anan should have more influence in our foreign policies, then vote for Kerry.

pollypop

If you believe patients should be able to sue doctors and HMOs with no limits, vote for Kerry.

Parabeagle

If you prefer using twenty-five words when two will do, vote for Kerry - who refers to a spade as a manually operated earth redistribution device.

System

You can pretty much ignore both candidates' platforms, since they're doublespeak trying to appeal to the same moderate/independent voters. After the election, Bush will act like a Republican and Kerry will act like a Democrat.

Kerry's main qualification is that he's not Bush. I'm voting for the Anti-Bush because I think Bush misled the American people about his reasons for invading Iraq without dealing with more tangible threats like North Korea. That's just my opinion, and other people are entitled to my opinion, too. x:D

James Sokolowski
HRhero.com

ray a

James, the real test will be if Don is convinced and shares your opinion.

Whatever

No, the real test will be if Don & I agree on this.
In any case, I too am voting for Kerry because he is not Bush. I do not recall being this concerned about a president and the people advising him since Richard Nixon was president.

mrbill

Being from Massachusetts, one would think that I would be head over heels with Kerry, but I'm not. The stance has been that if one needed something done from the Feds - Call Kennedy: He'll help. Call Kerry, No response.
I am not voting for Kerry, in that I am voting against Bush. He has lied to us, he has his own agenda, is against the environment, is for big business, does not seem to care about the loss of American soldiers (How many Funerals has he attended ?), and he has turned the whole world against us. So, I guess you can add me to the ABB group (anybody but Bush).

Don D

The comment about Nixon is hollow since nobody was fearful of Nixon until he lifted his arms and left on the helicopter and by then it was all over for him.

The crap about Bush lying is hollow since it makes no difference, even if he did, which he did not. He stated his reasons which appear to have been based on wrong intelligence. Even ole long-face supported invasion based on that same intelligence. Voting against Bush because he beat up a bully when there was a bigger bully over in North Korea doesn't make much sense.

I'm for big business too. What person who wants to prosper is not? Is the converse being for little business, or being a socialist and thinking all business should be dumbed down to an equal footing and redestributing wealth?

That's the entire bottom line. If you are for Socialism and redistribution of wealth, vote the Democrat ticket, straight. If you want your taxes to stay at 36 or 50% and higher, go with Heinz-Kerry and the Kennedy ticket. If you've had enough of the endless growth of the great society of Lyndon Johnson, grit your teeth and vote for 'W'. It's as simple as that.

ray a

And where did Kerry and his socialist friends get their wealth? Oh yeah, big business. But Don, I'm sure Kerry will set an example of wealth distribution once in office. If you believe that, there is another reason to vote for Kerry.

Parabeagle

Although I like some of what John Kerry proposes (drugs from Canada, etc.), he scares me more than Bush does. We've had four years to become acclimated to Bush's way of doing business and have pretty much adjusted accordingly. We don't know what Kerry's response to any given provocation will be or what kind of chaos will develop from his policies. Bush is predictable. Better the devil you know than the inherent instability and gridlock resulting from two or three one-term presidencies. (JMO)

safety

For two months in a row now a teamster magazine has appeared in front of my office door. Both issues are all about Kerry being pro labor. If you are a union supporter then he is your ticket.

HRGirl

Vote for Nader!!! Hell at this point, he couldn't do any worse.

Don't know who I'm voting for...I guess I'll have to shut my eyes and pull which ever lever my hand falls on. I like W for some things and on others I don't...I like Kerry but he reminds me too much of Herman Munster...and he has some good and bad points too. Which brings me to Ralph Nader.

Don D

I know you were in a hurry; but, you omitted the good things you like about Mr. Kerry. What is his FIRM position on one thing,not counting socialism?

ritaanz

I do not consider his position on socialism as "firm". Sounds to me that he just thinks the idea is neat.

HRGirl

Let me preface this with....

I'm HRGirl and I approve this message.


Ummmm...let me watch a few more Kerry commercials and maybe I can find something he is firm on.

I guess one good thing about Kerry...he didn't come stompin threw my town...but George W did. George has been to Pennsylvania more often than not.

JudyT929

I've seen what Bush stands for and it scares the heck out of me. I don't want to see any more of our young men and women sent to die for a "cause" based on misinformation. A mistake was made get out of there. I don't know that Kerry would be any better than Bush but I have to believe he can't be any worse. I probably won't even vote because I live in Texas and since it's the electoral votes that matter my little punch card for Kerry won't make any difference at all. If I had the money I'd move to some deserted island and live my life as a hermit off the land, screw the politicians and all the havoc they cause.

But wait a minute...just what are these "drugs from Canada"??? maybe they could help ?? smile

Parabeagle

"But wait a minute...just what are these "drugs from Canada"??? maybe they could help ??"

Bush has done nothing to forestall the profiteering and price gouging the pharmaceutical industry is engaged in here in the US. At least Kerry would allow people to import the same drug, at significantly lower prices in most cases, from Canada.

lnelson

>I've seen what Bush stands for and it scares the >heck out of me. I don't want to see any more of >our young men and women sent to die for a
>"cause" based on misinformation. A mistake was
>made get out of there.


In response to this one issue would you rather continue to have Saddam Huissan in power and torturing his people because they were not conforming to his regime. Then I say to you,

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke

When someone is in trouble do you sit and watch or do you help. I would hope we would all help.
Granted the reason for us being in Iraq was misinformation but KNOWING what was happening there do you turn your head and ignore it because it is not happening in your backyard?

Our soldiers have made it THEIR choice to defend our country and the less fortunate be it in our country or abroad.

And I will defend and support all who have served our country for their honor and bravery until the day I die. During times of war or peace it makes no difference to me they are all heroes for the sacrifice they are willing to make for my freedoms.

This is just my opinion and not those of other formunites.

Lisa

Parabeagle

"Granted the reason for us being in Iraq was misinformation but KNOWING what was happening there do you turn your head and ignore it because it is not happening in your backyard?"

We ignored it in Rwanda. We're ignoring it in Sudan. We ignored it in just about every war- and famine-torn country in Africa with the exception of Somalia. We ignore it whenever it is against our self-interest to intervene.

Your point is thoughtful, logical and well-said. But it should also be pointed out that with Saddam Hussein in power, we could control him and keep his activities in check. Now, he is out of power and we are trying to juggle two different factions who are at each other's throats as well as ours.

Whirlwind

Beagle,

Your position on Irag is exactly like mine and you've articulated it very well, just as you've done in a previous post or two. But I just can't reconcile it with your decision not to vote against Bush. You're breaking my heart! Can't Iraq + drugs from Canada + stem cell research equal a vote for Kerry??

Parabeagle

Whirlwind, as much as I like all of the Kerry bullet points you mentioned, I just don't feel I can vote for the man. My wallet is generally a little fatter when Republicans are in power (except when the People's Republic of Portland pickpocketed me for a bunch of school kids last year) and I feel like the government is more hands off than when the Democrats rule.

Sorry, I'm rambling. Time to go home. x:-)

Yahoo

Last time I checked, neither Rwanda nor Sudan was nearing the ability to lob a nuclear or biological weapon at our interests/friends nearby. You don't think Saddam would have?

Parabeagle

In one way, you've just illustrated my point. It was in our self-interest to intervene because of the possibility that Hussein may have had WMDs (personally, I think we would have made a better job of it if we had just sent in some mercs or assassins to take him out, but that's another story).

However, as compassionate a nation as we think we are, we seldom act in areas really needing our help because there's nothing in it for us - Africa is a case in point. Either that or we're gun shy - last time we intervened in Africa we got our collective butts kicked.

Whatever

Agreed. But our good buddies, India and Pakistan are quite capable of lobbing nuclear weapons (probably at each other).

jmcaa

Tell the people of Iraq that "we could control him and keep his activities in check." What about the pain and suffering caused by his sons? I don't think the people of Iraq believe 'we could control him and keep" him in check.

Yes, there was misinformation involving the weapons of mass destruction. Kerry voted for the war based on that information also. Do people hold him "personally responsible" for the war? I don't think so.

Also, people prefer to forget that the United Nations had given Saddam 12 chances.....most of them "last chances." But Saddam would not let the inspectors do their jobs without interference. If you were personally given "12 chances" to change your behavior "or else," why would you change! At least the United States of American had the courage to actually back up this "last chance" when NO ONE ELSE would. Saddam had NO RESPECT for the United Nations, but he now knows that the US stands by their word.

A former employee of ours has been activated and of course we are all praying for him, but we are also VERY PROUD that he will be fighting for freedom of the Iraqis and for Americans everywhere.

Kerry supporters also choose to forget that Kerry voted for war using the same misinformation given the President Bush. Would Kerry have voted differently if he were the President....I don't think so.

George Bush is the man who will get the job done.....not Kerry.

JudyT929

I also support and defend all who serve our country and always will. I just don't think that they should have to give their lives for the wrong reasons or for misinformed reasons. My father served in WWII, Korean War, and Vietnam and I respect and honor him greatly for his service; but I still don't think we should have been in Vietnam any more than we should be in Iraq. The wars in the middle east are religious wars that go back to the beginnings of time, we can offer help, but we can not change those people.

LindaE

There is just something about Kerry that I find unsettling. I can't put my finger on it, but he has a sleazy, patronizing aura I can't stand. I'm just waiting to hear ONE of them outline their plans regarding illegal immigration. Bush was on the O'Reilly factor discussing it, and the satellite went out! Did anyone see it?
Linda Emser

deniseE

I've not seen anyone bring up North Korea yet. There is a VERY crazy person in power there...and he'd been in check for nearly a decade...but all bets were off when the Bush admisistration went in... now they are realizing that the country IS a real threat and trying to quietly deal with it.

Kerry's problem is that he's overly complex. We, as Americans, like our positions short and simple. Things are either good or bad, right or wrong. Unfortunately, it's just not always that simple.

Staying the course is admirable, when you're on the right one. Since declaring "success" in Afghanistan, we've learned that we really weren't done there yet...and were well into Iraq and just didn't have the resources to do both. Unfortunately, this is a big job and I don't know that it's weakness to admit or ask for help from our international allies. That's what the UN is for, we are a global community. Usually it works pretty well.

I also have difficulty with the belief that I cannot both support the men and women serving in the armed forces AND still ask hard questions about what they are doing there. I rather think this shows greater support of their interests and well being.

Bush was very clear during the last election that Iraq was a project of his. Saddam was going down, it was just a question of when and how.

Finally, the federal deficit is a reality. It has grown monumentally in only 3 years. Where will we be after four more years of Bush? Yes, Kerry will raise taxes..but a balanced budget is important to the health of our country.

Don D

There is nothing 'complex' about John Kerry except the frequent shifting he insists on balling himself up in. In that regard, unravelling his true self might be 'complex'. I heard a pontificator last night, forget which one, say that Kerry will have no chance unless in very short order he makes himself appear 'less congressional'. This guy defined Kerry as 'an orator'. He wasn't being critical. Just saying that Americans are not particularly energized by listening to an orator drone on and on and never answer the questions. And pointing that long finger and saying "GEORGE BOOOSH", isn't getting him very far.

It's not that I want short and simple yes or no answers. I do though want to reach a point, when the sentence's commas stop and I think the question has been answered. Kerry has not been able to do that.

As to the borders, Oreily asked Booosh about military on the border and Bush said absolutely not, he would not do that. Oreily said, "You know that's not the answer Americans will be happy with", and Bush replied, "Well, it's an honest answer." I personally am very alarmed that nobody will control our borders. It's going to lead to our next 'twin towers'.

deniseE

MSN has a great issue by issue summary of the candidates positions on the front of it's homepage. You read each and select the one that aligns most closely with your political beliefs...

this may help undecided voters see the candidates more clearly--through all the partisian rhetoric...