Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Bush intel?
In article , Larry Blanchard
wrote: In article , says... Nope, I don't see it a a choice between Kerry and Bush. I see it as a choice between ALL the candidates on the ballot. I prefer neither of those choices. In a close election, which this promises to be, that's called throwing away your vote. Voting the way OTHERS insist you vote before they will acknowledge that voting even matters is tantamount to not voting. If voting is EVER not a waste, then it's also not a waste for those who didn't win. That presumes value to the system. If voting is a waste, that presumes worthlessness to the system. Let's hope those who parrot "waste your vote, waste your vote" are wrong, & every vote is good for something, even if it isn't for your candidate or the winning candidate. If someone wants to vote for a dorky third party, that's their right, & for others to parrot that to exercise one's right is "a waste" is just another way that politicians lie, & it's sad to hear honest activists parroting the lie. It translates "Vote for me or you're a dumb ****er." It is galling that I will vote for Kerry because I'd rather have a useless turd than a dangerous psychopath for president. But how much greater this nation would be if we could vote for something anyone other than the usual insider millionaires who pretty much collectively got us in the sorry pickle our national has gotten to. You & I may think that this of all voting years, a major-party vote, in particular a major-party vote for Democrats across the board, matters more than ever. Instead of the usual choice between a lesser of two evils, we have a choice between a flat-out psycho who loves only his fellow oil millionaires, or a boring turd whose foul-odored mouth spews milquetoast wishiwashiness & two-faced cliches at every bend -- afraid to be in favor of gay rights because that's "a state issue" & gay rights are my rights, so the most I can hope for from Kerry is when he takes a baseball bat to this minority, he'll bare down less murderously than Bush is doing. Hardly a wonderful choice. But he'll never get us out of any wars, he'll just insist on being nicer to the French about it. He'll always be afraid of women's reproduction right because already his church, which is VERY important to him, has told him he will be denied communion if he takes an effective women's right stance. He may have some surfacy-nice things to say for black america, but he's never made a decision that included black voices in policy design, whereas oddly enough Bush has throughout his creepy career AT LEAST had room for more minority involvvement, at every level, than any national politician Democrate OR Republican in history, so Kerry talks the talk but in actions he displays a clear belief in the Great White Burden to make these decisions without ******s & spics getting in the way. Even his "tax the rich" stance is an old ploy & no president promising to tax the rich has failed to make the rest of us pay more way more taxes too, so that's just oldest cliche kissing-babies ploy & means nothing real. Bush has not rolled back any taxes, he's merely shifted tax burdens to states that raise the taxes. When Kerry restores the federal tax rates & then some, it will not mean a role-back of the higher state & city taxes imposed on us by Bush policies. We'll merely have, in all, super-heightened tax loads on ordinary citizens. It was Kerry's decision that Senator Clinton not be given prime-time speaking time at the Democratic Convention. Democratic voters keep saying they want Kerry to restore the so-called good times of the Clinton years, meaning I suppose further support for the World Trade Organization for which we have Bill Clinton to blame. But I'm afraid it isn't Bill's conservative economics that Kerry is repudiating, but the Clintons' collectively failed liberal idealism. And yes they were liberal idealists who WANTED a single-payer plan for medicine who doomed us to HTMOs, who WANTED gay equality in the military but made things vastly worse with don't-ask-don't-tell. As a Democrat, Clinton was a bad president who achieved very little, but as a man willing to compromise with the devil, he furthered conservative agendas by bending over to receive group-sex from republican congressmen. But symbolicly, Hilary's presence stands for the liberal agenda that never got off the ground, rather than the conservative achievement; she symbolized Bill's eradicating of a national debt. And Kerry wants no part of it. He intends to raise taxes, period, on people whose local taxes have already been maxed out. On every issue that matters, Kerry is NOT a good candidate, has NEVER presented a credible plan. What's his "plan" for improved health care access? Less paperwork! I kid you not. He promises less paperwork, & that's all. This man is a piece of shit with nothing worthwhile up his sleeve. But laid up alongside Bush, who despises the Constitution that is the only thing restraining these millionaire politicians, a dog's pecker in a straw hat would be an improvement. So give Kerry the hat & vote for him. A president Congress stymies is better than a president Congress fast-lanes for the oil-tycoon agenda. BTW, I'm wondering if Bush is going to engineer a "crisis" in October to ensure his re-election. Or "postpone" the election. This week the whitehouse was "outed" for pressuring Pakistan to "kill Osama before election day." It will not matter after the election, because Bush now believes his best chance of winning is if he can get a timely photo-op next to Bin Ladin's severed head. His second best chance is if Osama's scattered crew does something big enough to scare the bejabbers out of Americans to get most of us "behind our leader" as seems to happen in such crises, but not so big a scare as to make everyhone realize Bush is as much the cause of it as any single person ever can be. I'm sure there's barely enough humanity left in Bush that he'd rather be photographed holding up Osama's head than wearing a fireman helmet for the photo-op atop the corpses another Twin Towers catastrophe. But either choice will do the job for him, & he'll be grateful for either. -paghat the ratgirl I think it was Will Rogers who said "The Republicans want to take my money and give it to the rich. The Democrats want to take my money and give it to the poor. I'd like to keep it myself, but if those are the choices I'd just as soon it went to the poor." -- "Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher. "Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature. -from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers" Visit the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Bradley method bush regeneration | Australia | |||
Planting new rosemary bush/shrub | Gardening | |||
Chilean Fire Tree/Bush Embothrium coccineum | Gardening | |||
Bush plan eases forest rules | alt.forestry |