captJack88
A Buckeye in the land of wolverines
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
- Messages
- 275
Island_Laurie, very nice post, that had to take you a while to cut and paste all that, Rokkitsci, nice rebuttal. Both were thought out well, I commend you both
George Bush
- Thread starter caitycaity
- Start date
Island_Lauri
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- May 30, 2000
- Messages
- 983
Rokkitsci & captJack88,
I am not as well versed as Rokkitsci. The list of accomplishments come from the website listed at the bottom of the post. It included links to support the individual items posted.
I don't know everything there is to know about John Kerry. I was a Wesley Clark supporter to begin with. But for me, the more research I have done on John Kerry, the more impressed I have become. Just because his name is not on a Bill does not mean he didn't put his time and engery into it.
The quick bio of Kerry is he went to Yale, then enlisted and served in Vietnam. Upon his return from active duty in Vietnam, he spoke out about injustices that he saw and heard about during this war. (Horrible things did occur in Vietnam and some POWs feel that his speaking out about them caused them more suffering). And John Kerry along with John McCain ALSO fought very hard to make sure the remaining POWs & MIAs were accounted for.
He became a lawyer and then a politican in order to work within the system. He has put his time and energy into many worthwhile causes. He has strong personal religious beliefs but he is not looking to legislate or mandate his religious beliefs on others. His plans to bring an end to terrorism by bringing countries together. I personally do not beleive that you can kill every terrorist without making more terrorists and feel that the answer must be within the bigger community.
A very interesting bio on John Kerry can be found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry
"Operation POW
Kerry's prominence also made him a frequent leader and spokesman at antiwar events around the country in 1971. One of particular note was Operation POW, organized by the VVAW in Massachusetts. The protest got its name from the group's concern that Americans were prisoners of the Vietnam War, as well as to honor American POWs held captive by North Vietnam.
The event sought to tie antiwar activism to patriotic themes. Over the Memorial Day weekend, veterans and other participants marched from Concord to a rally on Boston Common. The plan was to invoke the spirit of the American Revolution and Paul Revere by spending successive nights at the sites of the Battle of Lexington and Concord and the Battle of Bunker Hill, culminating in a Memorial Day rally with a public reading of the Declaration of Independence.
The second night of the march, May 29, was the occasion for Kerry's only arrest. When the participants tried to camp on the village green in Lexington. At 2:30 a.m. on May 30, local and state police awoke and arrested 441 demonstrators, including Kerry, for trespassing. All were given the Miranda Warning and were hauled away on school buses to spend the night at the Lexington Public Works Garage. Kerry and the other protestors later paid a $5 fine and were released. At the time, Kerry's wife kept $100 under her pillow in case she needed to bail her husband out of jail if he were arrested at a protest. The mass arrests caused a community backlash and ended up giving positive coverage to the VVAW.
Despite his important role in Operation POW and other VVAW events, as time went on Kerry found that VVAW was becoming more radical. Kerry was trying to moderate the group, to push it in the direction of nonviolence and working within the system. Other members, however, were more militant. Kerry eventually quit the organization over this difference in approach. Some have raised questions about exactly when Kerry left VVAW; see John Kerry VVAW controversy for a full discussion."
Rokkitsci, you asked "Had YOU ever heard anything about him before he began running for president?" I put this question back to you. What did you know about George Bush before he began running for president?
I am not as well versed as Rokkitsci. The list of accomplishments come from the website listed at the bottom of the post. It included links to support the individual items posted.
I don't know everything there is to know about John Kerry. I was a Wesley Clark supporter to begin with. But for me, the more research I have done on John Kerry, the more impressed I have become. Just because his name is not on a Bill does not mean he didn't put his time and engery into it.
The quick bio of Kerry is he went to Yale, then enlisted and served in Vietnam. Upon his return from active duty in Vietnam, he spoke out about injustices that he saw and heard about during this war. (Horrible things did occur in Vietnam and some POWs feel that his speaking out about them caused them more suffering). And John Kerry along with John McCain ALSO fought very hard to make sure the remaining POWs & MIAs were accounted for.
He became a lawyer and then a politican in order to work within the system. He has put his time and energy into many worthwhile causes. He has strong personal religious beliefs but he is not looking to legislate or mandate his religious beliefs on others. His plans to bring an end to terrorism by bringing countries together. I personally do not beleive that you can kill every terrorist without making more terrorists and feel that the answer must be within the bigger community.
A very interesting bio on John Kerry can be found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry
"Operation POW
Kerry's prominence also made him a frequent leader and spokesman at antiwar events around the country in 1971. One of particular note was Operation POW, organized by the VVAW in Massachusetts. The protest got its name from the group's concern that Americans were prisoners of the Vietnam War, as well as to honor American POWs held captive by North Vietnam.
The event sought to tie antiwar activism to patriotic themes. Over the Memorial Day weekend, veterans and other participants marched from Concord to a rally on Boston Common. The plan was to invoke the spirit of the American Revolution and Paul Revere by spending successive nights at the sites of the Battle of Lexington and Concord and the Battle of Bunker Hill, culminating in a Memorial Day rally with a public reading of the Declaration of Independence.
The second night of the march, May 29, was the occasion for Kerry's only arrest. When the participants tried to camp on the village green in Lexington. At 2:30 a.m. on May 30, local and state police awoke and arrested 441 demonstrators, including Kerry, for trespassing. All were given the Miranda Warning and were hauled away on school buses to spend the night at the Lexington Public Works Garage. Kerry and the other protestors later paid a $5 fine and were released. At the time, Kerry's wife kept $100 under her pillow in case she needed to bail her husband out of jail if he were arrested at a protest. The mass arrests caused a community backlash and ended up giving positive coverage to the VVAW.
Despite his important role in Operation POW and other VVAW events, as time went on Kerry found that VVAW was becoming more radical. Kerry was trying to moderate the group, to push it in the direction of nonviolence and working within the system. Other members, however, were more militant. Kerry eventually quit the organization over this difference in approach. Some have raised questions about exactly when Kerry left VVAW; see John Kerry VVAW controversy for a full discussion."
Rokkitsci, you asked "Had YOU ever heard anything about him before he began running for president?" I put this question back to you. What did you know about George Bush before he began running for president?
Originally posted by WDSearcher
Totally off topic here, jrydberg, but I have to ask. What is your daughter (I'm assuming it's your daughter in the picture) doing?
I can't decide if she's eating something, talking on a CB radio, singing or yawning. Not that it makes any difference -- she's adorable -- but I was just wondering.
She's eating popcorn at an Orioles game
An agonizing choice
Conservatives have plenty of cause to abandon Bush
BY BOB BARR
Voting for president used to be so easy, at least for a conservative. There was the Republican candidate. You knew he generally stood for lower taxes, less government spending, giving fewer powers to the government, lower deficits and a zealous regard for individual privacy.
Then, there was the Democrat. You knew he generally stood for higher taxes, more government and deficit spending, and a zealous regard for civil liberties.
Throughout my own presidential voting history, the choices have rarely, if ever, been agonizing. Nixon vs. McGovern? Carter vs. Reagan? Reagan-Mondale? Dukakis, a Massachusetts liberal? Clinton? Al Gore? Ah, the good ol' days. Each of those races presented clear choices, easily resolved.
Now we have the election of 2004. For the first time in my voting life, the choice in the race for president isn't so clear And, among true conservatives, I'm not alone.
What's making the contest so difficult? It's certainly not that both candidates are so conservative that we have a choice of riches. It's not even that John Kerry is sort of right wing compared to George W. Bush. The incumbent clearly is the more "conservative" of the two.
But the concerns for many conservative voters -- concerns that may cause them not to vote for Mr. Bush on Nov. 2 -- fall generally into three categories: fiscal, physical (as in the physical security of our nation) and freedom (as in protecting our civil liberties).
When Bush became president Jan. 20, 2001, he inherited an enviable fiscal situation. Congress, then controlled by his own party, had -- through discipline and tough votes -- whittled down decades of deficit spending under presidents of both parties, so that annual deficits of hundreds of billions of dollars had been transformed to a series of real and projected surpluses. The heavy lifting had been done. All Bush had to do was resist the urge to spend, and he had to exert some pressure on Congress to resist its natural impulses to do the same. Had he done that, he might have gone down in history as the most fiscally conservative president in modern times.
Instead, what we got were record levels of new spending, including nearly double-digit increases in nondefense discretionary spending. We now have deficits exceeding those that the first Republican-controlled Congress in 40 years faced when it convened in January 1995.
The oft-repeated mantra that "the terrorists made us spend more" rings hollow, especially to those who actually understand that increases in nondefense discretionary spending are not the inevitable result of fighting terrorists. It also irritates many conservatives, whether or not they support the war in Iraq, that so much of defense spending is being poured into the black hole of Iraq's internal security, while the security of our own borders goes wanting.
That brings us to the second major beef conservatives have with the president. He's seen as failing to take real steps to improve our border security. In many respects, because of his apparent desire to appease his compadre to the south -- Mexican President Vincente Fox -- Bush has made matters worse. More people are entering our country illegally than ever before, more than 3 million this year alone -- and most of them are stampeding across from Mexico.
It seems as if every time an effort is made to implement measures that would crack down on illegal immigration, Fox complains, and the White House tells our enforcement folks to back off. Perhaps that is why intelligence reports indicate al-Qaeda is actively recruiting in Central America.
At the same time, here at home, many law-abiding citizens accurately perceive that their own freedoms and civil liberties are being stripped. They are being profiled by government computers whenever they want to travel, their bank accounts are being summarily closed because they may fit some "profile," they are under surveillance by cameras paid for by that borrowed federal money, and, if the administration has its way, they will be forced to carry a national identification card. That skewed sense of priorities really rankles conservatives.
Those are but three tips of the iceberg that signal the deep dissatisfaction many conservatives harbor against the president. Thus far, however, with Bush's political gurus telling him he's ahead and to just lay low and not make any major gaffes, he seems unwilling to recognize the problems on his right flank. Or he seems to have concluded that he doesn't need to address those concerns because the ineptitude of the Kerry campaign hasn't forced him to.
But the race appears to be tightening again. It's likely to remain tight until Election Day. Those dissatisfied conservative voters will become increasingly important, but it's going to be impossible for the president to pull them back in with hollow, last-minute promises.
Bush's problem is that true conservatives remember their history. They recall that in recent years when the nation enjoyed the fruits of actual conservative fiscal and security policies, a Democrat occupied the White House and Congress was controlled by a Republican majority that actually fought for a substantive conservative agenda.
History's a troublesome thing for presidents. Even though most voters don't take much of a historical perspective into the voting booth with them, true conservatives do.
Hmmm. Who's the Libertarian candidate again?
Lifelong Republican Bob Barr represented parts of Cobb County and northwest Georgia in Congress from 1995 to 2003.
http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/2004-10-07/news_flankingaction.html
Conservatives have plenty of cause to abandon Bush
BY BOB BARR
Voting for president used to be so easy, at least for a conservative. There was the Republican candidate. You knew he generally stood for lower taxes, less government spending, giving fewer powers to the government, lower deficits and a zealous regard for individual privacy.
Then, there was the Democrat. You knew he generally stood for higher taxes, more government and deficit spending, and a zealous regard for civil liberties.
Throughout my own presidential voting history, the choices have rarely, if ever, been agonizing. Nixon vs. McGovern? Carter vs. Reagan? Reagan-Mondale? Dukakis, a Massachusetts liberal? Clinton? Al Gore? Ah, the good ol' days. Each of those races presented clear choices, easily resolved.
Now we have the election of 2004. For the first time in my voting life, the choice in the race for president isn't so clear And, among true conservatives, I'm not alone.
What's making the contest so difficult? It's certainly not that both candidates are so conservative that we have a choice of riches. It's not even that John Kerry is sort of right wing compared to George W. Bush. The incumbent clearly is the more "conservative" of the two.
But the concerns for many conservative voters -- concerns that may cause them not to vote for Mr. Bush on Nov. 2 -- fall generally into three categories: fiscal, physical (as in the physical security of our nation) and freedom (as in protecting our civil liberties).
When Bush became president Jan. 20, 2001, he inherited an enviable fiscal situation. Congress, then controlled by his own party, had -- through discipline and tough votes -- whittled down decades of deficit spending under presidents of both parties, so that annual deficits of hundreds of billions of dollars had been transformed to a series of real and projected surpluses. The heavy lifting had been done. All Bush had to do was resist the urge to spend, and he had to exert some pressure on Congress to resist its natural impulses to do the same. Had he done that, he might have gone down in history as the most fiscally conservative president in modern times.
Instead, what we got were record levels of new spending, including nearly double-digit increases in nondefense discretionary spending. We now have deficits exceeding those that the first Republican-controlled Congress in 40 years faced when it convened in January 1995.
The oft-repeated mantra that "the terrorists made us spend more" rings hollow, especially to those who actually understand that increases in nondefense discretionary spending are not the inevitable result of fighting terrorists. It also irritates many conservatives, whether or not they support the war in Iraq, that so much of defense spending is being poured into the black hole of Iraq's internal security, while the security of our own borders goes wanting.
That brings us to the second major beef conservatives have with the president. He's seen as failing to take real steps to improve our border security. In many respects, because of his apparent desire to appease his compadre to the south -- Mexican President Vincente Fox -- Bush has made matters worse. More people are entering our country illegally than ever before, more than 3 million this year alone -- and most of them are stampeding across from Mexico.
It seems as if every time an effort is made to implement measures that would crack down on illegal immigration, Fox complains, and the White House tells our enforcement folks to back off. Perhaps that is why intelligence reports indicate al-Qaeda is actively recruiting in Central America.
At the same time, here at home, many law-abiding citizens accurately perceive that their own freedoms and civil liberties are being stripped. They are being profiled by government computers whenever they want to travel, their bank accounts are being summarily closed because they may fit some "profile," they are under surveillance by cameras paid for by that borrowed federal money, and, if the administration has its way, they will be forced to carry a national identification card. That skewed sense of priorities really rankles conservatives.
Those are but three tips of the iceberg that signal the deep dissatisfaction many conservatives harbor against the president. Thus far, however, with Bush's political gurus telling him he's ahead and to just lay low and not make any major gaffes, he seems unwilling to recognize the problems on his right flank. Or he seems to have concluded that he doesn't need to address those concerns because the ineptitude of the Kerry campaign hasn't forced him to.
But the race appears to be tightening again. It's likely to remain tight until Election Day. Those dissatisfied conservative voters will become increasingly important, but it's going to be impossible for the president to pull them back in with hollow, last-minute promises.
Bush's problem is that true conservatives remember their history. They recall that in recent years when the nation enjoyed the fruits of actual conservative fiscal and security policies, a Democrat occupied the White House and Congress was controlled by a Republican majority that actually fought for a substantive conservative agenda.
History's a troublesome thing for presidents. Even though most voters don't take much of a historical perspective into the voting booth with them, true conservatives do.
Hmmm. Who's the Libertarian candidate again?
Lifelong Republican Bob Barr represented parts of Cobb County and northwest Georgia in Congress from 1995 to 2003.
http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/2004-10-07/news_flankingaction.html
Actually - I lived in Texas while Bush was governor, so I had heard of him.
HOWEVER - I was NOT a Bush supporter during the 00 campaign. I did think he was a lightweight. I was a McCain supporter during the primaries.
When Bush won the primary, I then had to choose between Bush and Gore. It was my opinion then, as it is now, that Gore was the dumbest human being I had ever seen. He was a great example of a wasted education.
Aside from my belief that Gore was incredibly dumb, I disagreed with almost everything he said and had done.
So - in the 00 election I make no secret of the fact that I voted AGAINST algore. I think it is perfectly OK to vote based on the "lesser of two evils"
However, I have been tremendously impressed by Bush in office. He has DEMONSTRATED leadership, calm resolve, great instincts - he has turned out to be a good a president as I have ever seen. I have seen and evaluated every president since Harry Truman.
I wish he was better with words. He is not a great rhetorical artist. But, rhetoric is not what moves me.
Ideas, integrity, and action are what get my attention.
Bush has it - Kerry doesn't.
Share this page
-
How To Plan Disney on a Tight Budget Without Missing Out
-
2026 V.I.PASSHOLDER Summer Days Announced at Disney World
-
New Disney Cruise Funnel Collectibles Come With a Frustrating Catch
-
NEW Winnie the Pooh Dress (and More!) at EPCOT's UK Pavilion
-
The Perfect Special Gift for a Disney Fan Going on Vacation
-
NEW Reveal: 2026 runDisney Virtual Series Medals Go Retro
-
Disney Just Revealed NEW Endor Merch for May the 4th
Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts.
Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
