Two Faces of Senator John Kerry

[Ron Lambert]

Dennis Roddy, a columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, tells the story of how one of Senator John Kerry's senatorial colleagues gave a speech in which he mocked Kerry at a Republican Party dinner on March 20, 1991, at the William Penn Hotel.

At the time the first George Bush was still flush with victory in the Persian Gulf, and dinnergoers chortled over a videotaped presentation of assorted senate Democrats backpedaling in the wake of a war they'd opposed. Ted Kennedy was shown. News clips were shown. But for Kerry, the speaker simply read two letters written by Kerry to a constituent nine days apart, to everyone's amazement.

The constituent, Wallace Carter of Newton Centre, Mass., had written to Kerry asking him to support military action to expel Saddam Hussein's troops from Kuwait. Carter faxed his letter to the office of John Kerry and, just to be sure, sent a copy of the same letter by regular mail as well. He got these two replies:

Jan. 22, 1991: "Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition . . . to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war."

Jan. 31, 1991: "Thank you very much for contacting me to express your support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian Gulf."

The speaker who read these two letters at the Republican dinner was Senator John Heinz. Two weeks later, he would die in a plane crash. Four years after that, Kerry would marry his widow.

Here is a link to the original article by Dennis Roddy:
http://www.post-gazette.com/columnists/20040229roddycol1.asp

[Ron Lambert]

This brings to mind the devasting ridicule President GW Bush heaped on Kerry a couple of days ago, just prior to the Super Tuesday primaries, when he said: "The other party's nomination battle is still playing out. The candidates are an interesting group with diverse opinions: for tax cuts and against them; for NAFTA and against NAFTA; for the Patriot Act and against the Patriot Act; in favor of liberating Iraq and opposed to it.--And that's just one senator from Massachusetts."

[Ron Lambert]

Here's a cute picture comparison that many describe as an uncanny resemblence.

You can also find this online at:
http://www.bobrivers.com/news/images/kerry_big.jpg

The real question, of course, is which one is the good twin, and which one is the evil twin?

[Eveningstar]

...

[Ron Lambert]

Here is another amusing comparison, just for the fun of it, no point intended, that shows John Kerry next to Stan Laurel of Laurel and Hardy fame.

[Eveningstar]

He looks so permanently inebriated...

[Doma]

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37577

Kerry camp hiring 'assassin'?

Man who plotted murder of congressmen offered job

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 15, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

A Vietnam veteran who plotted to kill members of Congress in 1971 is reportedly ready to accept a position working in the presidential campaign of John Kerry.

Leaders of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, including John Kerry, debated a plot to assassinate congressmen in November 1971, according to a report in the New York Sun.

The Kerry campaign denies the senator and presidential candidate was present at the meeting, saying he quit the organization prior to the heated session in Kansas City, Nov. 12-15, 1971.

However, Randy Barnes of Missouri Veterans for Kerry, disputes that account. Barnes participated in the meeting and he says Kerry, then 27, was at the meeting, voted against the plot and then resigned from the organization. According to the Sun report, another Vietnam vet who attended the meeting, Terry Du-Bose, agreed that Kerry was there.

That the VVAW debated killing members of Congress is not a new revelation. The plot was reported in Gerald Nicosia's 2001 book, "Home To War," that one of the key leaders of the organization, Scott Camil, "proposed the assassination of the most hard-core conservative members of Congress, as well as any other powerful, intractable opponents of the antiwar movement." The book reports on the Kansas City meeting at which Camil's plan was debated and then voted down.

In a cover blurb on the book, Kerry said it "ties together the many threads of a difficult period." Kerry hosted a party for the book in the Hart Senate Office Building that was televised on C-SPAN, according to the Sun.

Camil, never prosecuted for the plot, plans to accept an offer by the Florida Kerry organization to become active in the presidential campaign, according to the report. Camil's plot, involving eight to 10 Marines, targeted the Southern senatorial leadership including John Stennis, Strom Thurmond and John Tower.

Kerry's service in Vietnam and his activities after the war have become a major source of controversy – especially with other Vietnam veterans.

Last week, one of his crew members accused him of cowardice and making strategic mistakes in battle. The testimony of Steven Gardner, a gunner's mate on the first patrol boat commanded by Kerry in the Mekong delta, contradicts accounts of the senator's military career that depict him as a brave and aggressive lieutenant who won three Purple Hearts.

"He absolutely did not want to engage the enemy when I was with him,'' Gardner said in an interview with the Boston Globe. "He wouldn't go in there and search. That is why I have a negative viewpoint of John Kerry."

Gardner has refused to join the tight-knit group of Vietnam veterans who are passionate supporters of their former comrade's White House bid.

Kerry is said to be "angry'' about the slur.

[Eveningstar]

"John Kerry, in his macho way, told Rolling Stone, apropos the Iraq war, that he never expected President Bush to f*** it up so much. In fact, Mr. Bush didn't asterisk it up at all. It's one of the least asterisked-up operations in history." --Mark Steyn

[Ron Lambert]

Amazing how anyone could say that the most decisive military victory in history was F'd up. Here two divisions of U.S. ground troops conquered the sixth largest army in the world, obliterating the vaunted Republican Guard armored divisions, and suffered under 100 casualties while doing it. Compare that to any other war in history. In World War II, during the invasion of Normandy, only three men survived the first wave at Omaha Beach.

The occupation since then, to rebuild Iraq and help the people establish a stable democracy that is fair to all ethnic groups, has been made difficult by the continued efforts of terrorists, mostly imported from outside the country, to stir up all the trouble they can. But Iraq has been largely rebuilt despite this, and progress is being made toward establishing a democratic government, an Iraqi police force, and an Iraqi army (the new Iraqi army already has 200,000 soldiers).

Virtually any other nation in history would simply have pulled out after conquering Iraq and left the people to fend for themselves.

What, precisely, is Kerry trying to say Bush did wrong?

That Kerry would claim that such a successful and proud and worthy effort has been F'd up by Bush, shows how unfit Kerry is to be president.

[Eveningstar]

I do not know that I would go THAT far, Ron.
The Bush adminstration supplied the Iraqis with their weaponry and it was seriously wanting. Imagine fighting off a SMART missile with a slingshot.
Saddam wanted at least a fair fight, but Bush was unwilling to grant him even that.
Saddam was a threat to America simply because he was unwilling to play by America's ignoble serpentine rules, not because he was noble or right, but because he was a different species of asp.

As for rebuilding Iraq, it has been asterisked-up because we are doing it for the wrong reasons and acting as if we are doing it for right and noble ones.
We're just more clever.

Maybe that will change, but it will change faster under Bush than under Kerry.
Kerry speaks for the Left which is infantile and egocentric about matters of government wherein there is no place for ego or childlike reasoning.

[Eveningstar]

Kerry speaks for the Left which is infantile and egocentric about matters of government wherein there is no place for ego or childlike reasoning.

Unless, of course, that Child is God's Son. :)


Isa 11:1-16 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.
And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.
And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.
And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.
But they shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west; they shall spoil them of the east together: they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon shall obey them.
And the LORD shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make [men] go over dryshod.
And there shall be an highway for the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria; like as it was to Israel in the day that he came up out of the land of Egypt.

[Ron Lambert]

Eveningstar, The USA supplied some arms and munitions and other aid to Iraq during its eight-year long war with Iran 16 years ago (1980-1988), because of the two, Iran represented the greatest evil, trying to export its Islamic fundamentalist tyranny. Remember, it was Iran that took our embassy staff prisoner for 444 days. By all international conventions, that was an act of war, and there was tremendous anti-Iran feeling in America. At that time, Saddam Hussein had not yet made the series of choices that would make him our enemy.

The Iraqi Republican Guards units had Russian-built tanks. Their missiles, especially surface-to-air types, and main weapons systems, were Russian-made. The Russians, by the way, gave us the frequency codes for the SAMs, that enabled the U.S. Air Force to detect and knock them all out in the opening rounds of the first Gulf War.

[Eveningstar]

Eveningstar, The USA supplied some arms and munitions and other aid to Iraq during its eight-year long war with Iran 16 years ago (1980-1988), because of the two, Iran represented the greatest evil, trying to export its Islamic fundamentalist tyranny. Remember, it was Iran that took our embassy staff prisoner for 444 days. By all international conventions, that was an act of war, and there was tremendous anti-Iran feeling in America. At that time, Saddam Hussein had not yet made the series of choices that would make him our enemy.

The Iraqi Republican Guards units had Russian-built tanks. Their missiles, especially surface-to-air types, and main weapons systems, were Russian-made. The Russians, by the way, gave us the frequency codes for the SAMs, that enabled the U.S. Air Force to detect and knock them all out in the opening rounds of the first Gulf War.


I stand somewhat corrected... ;) Thanks.

[Eveningstar]

"But what may become the enduring exemplar of the Kerry style was his spontaneous expletive on the ski slopes when his Secret Service guard bumped into him by accident (while guarding him): 'I don't fall down. The S.O.B. knocked me over.' To instinctively say that about the man who is sworn to put himself between Mr. Kerry and a bullet, paints a lasting and contemptible character portrait. Contrast that with what Ronald Reagan said shortly after he was shot: 'Honey, I forgot to duck.' It was at that moment that 60 percent of the American public fell permanently in love with the Gipper. As Ernest Hemmingway put it in another time, that is grace under pressure -- and Mr. Kerry doesn't have it." --Tony Blankley

[Eveningstar]

I think it's fairly obvious, no one involved in American politics can be or should be trusted.
They play off one another to set up exactly what they desire. The whole situation is scripted and nefariously orchestrated beyond our wildest imaginations, and it's sad that so many people fall for it all, and enjoy it more than the Righteousness that living under a Godly Reign might bring to the world.

Alas...

Jhn 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.


But rejoice!


Jam 2:5 Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?

[Ron Lambert]

But politicians are not all equally bad, any more than individual people are. All humans on this earth have a sinful nature, but some look toward God with varying measures of faith, and seek to do good according to the best wisdom that they have. When the people have the power to choose among more than one candidate, those who would serve God must do the best they can to choose wisely among the candidates. If we are loathe to say that any candidate is really good, let us at least choose the least evil among them. To do any less would be irresponsible. Those who would serve God cannot ever be neutral and indifferent when moral choices must be made. God counts such indecision as treason against Him. We can only be on one side or the other in the conflict between Christ and Satan in this world. And every choice we make in anything is a part of that conflict--most especially political choices.

[Eveningstar]

Whose servants are fighting though? And who is commandeering those servants?

Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

What has been more readily had and for sale than anything else in the States? Righteousness or sin in a million flavors with new flavors added daily?

Bush using the law of man and repression of Spirit will rid us of sinfulness on the surface but will it still be underneath doing more damage than if it were out in the open? Kerry would have us accept it and usher it in under freedom of choice.
Neither will rid it with holiness.

The fact that Bush can say all the right things when moved to does not make him any more worthy than Kerry.
It is the people who must lead and that is why I choose Bush because he's a tyrant and everyone knows it.
I'm much more happy living under a right wing tyrant than under a left wing liberal schmoozer, because I know I am going to obey the laws of the land when I am able.
It's when the laws of the land start to conflict with the Law of God that I can't live under that government, and it's becoming increasingly difficult for Christians to do so, unless they sell themselves out, which means, at the last day they will be condemned as hypocrites...
I want to believe as much as anyone in our government and I know it's much more difficult than you or I realize governing the American Freedoms people enjoy now. But the liberties most Americans enjoy are not and have nothing to do with the Liberty that is of God.

The Left ought never to lead in politics, and ought to have nothing to do with them whatsoever, but only enjoy the freedoms that are found under the Government of the Republic. The Left who wish to reign will and have always corrupted unto death much speedier than the right in error has, because they lack a political kind of nobility of mind. They are creative but ought to keep their creativity out of the governental sphere/arena. Government ought not be a Circus and ought remain stoically tedious and matter-of-fact, so that we who live under its laws and demands are never surprised but comfortable and safe. Safe to live our lives as freely and creatively as godly possible, again KNOW YOUR OFFICE. What we do otherwise is incredibly stupid and that is give Politics an Ego which means ruin at a conceptual level is sure to follow, which may be exactly what we need but no one wants to do THAT much work.

Almost everyone in America has been thinking so wrongly and backwards for so long they don't even realize righteous judgment on simple ordinary everyday issues and decisions, what makes anyone think Kerry can be trusted to govern and entire nation of these?
Bush may have some hardcore neanderthals on his side, but at least they have a creed. "Spare the flock."
Kerry and his ilk have no creed or virtue and would not spare a single lamb because they don't think about them, all they think about is their grotesque desires for "society."
All their so-called "civil liberties."
They don't even feign to think from a righteous point of view.
They belong to the Whore more so than Bush.
Bush or whoever is behind his whole campaign and the governing that has gone on since he took office is nothing short of genius both militarily abroad and domestically here at home.
I stagger at the genius of it all sometimes.
I was as baffled as anyone and I'm embarrassed to admit it...

But I, as a servant of God must ask for more. I must ask for perfection from myself, my household, my brethren and my country and forgive myself and others when we fail, but never stop striving for it.

Isa 58:6 [Is] not this the fast that I have chosen? to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke?


We have failed as a nation to do this and it is because we have failed to take advantage as a whole of the redeeming sacrifice of Christ.
Instead we fulfill...

Isa 1:4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward


It is not fair and it is evil to entreat "lambs" to sin and I cannot forgive the individuals who have or do. Until they change and many are...


Mat 7:11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?


How in "hell" can anyone who is expected to slave in sin acheive the calling of this verse? How can anyone even desire good gifts if they must be slaves to sin to survive...
Impossible!

Debts need to be forgiven, time to heal needs to be provided, temples cleansed, wills arighted.
Unless we heed the Scriptures and fulfill Isaiah 58, we are destined for failure.

And very sadly, more than any other people in the world, so-called Christians are to blame for most of the iniquity and inequity in America. Conversely, real Christians are also to thank for any good, mercy and liberty that this country enjoys.

"Irony, shackles of the youth."


Hbr 3:10,15 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in [their] heart; and they have not known my ways.
While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.

Gal 4:1-31 Now I say, [That] the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.
Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.
Brethren, I beseech you, be as I [am]; for I [am] as ye [are]: ye have not injured me at all.
Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, [even] as Christ Jesus.
Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if [it had been] possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.
Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?
They zealously affect you, [but] not well; yea, they would exclude you, that ye might affect them.
But [it is] good to be zealously affected always in [a] good [thing], and not only when I am present with you.
My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,
I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you.
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
But he [who was] of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman [was] by promise.
Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
For it is written, Rejoice, [thou] barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him [that was born] after the Spirit, even so [it is] now.
Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.


Uh, amen?

[Eveningstar]

"Fear is the foundation of most governments; but it is so sordid and brutal a passion, and renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and miserable, that Americans will not be likely to approve of any political institution which is founded on it." --John Adams

[Eveningstar]

The Non Sequitur :p

[Eveningstar]

"Seeing seven sides to an issue is useful in the study of metaphysics. But men of action -- and world events always have required American presidents to be men of action -- must be capable of decisive action. A candidate for president who is incapable of clearly expressing a single principle or goal he will fight for is inevitably going to be an ineffective candidate. And if he can't even decide what to say with clarity, he is unlikely to be able to act as president under the crushing pressure of world events." --Tony Blankley

[Eveningstar]

"But just as millions of Americans were flat-out wrong about the urgency and necessity of fighting the Cold War, today there are millions of good and decent Americans who do not want to look the current enemy in the eye. They cling to polysyllabic professors who find clever ways to say the same dumb things over and over again. They look to America-detesting Europeans, mistaking cynicism for sagacity. And they look to politicians like John Kerry who proudly shift their opinions based upon the most convenient way of avoiding tough decisions, calling their zigs 'nuance' and their zags 'sophistication,' promising to 'stay the course' only if it's plotted as a U-turn." --Jonah Goldberg

[Eveningstar]

"If George Bush wants to ask me questions about that through his surrogates, he owes America an explanation about whether or not he showed up for duty in the National Guard. Prove it... I'm not going to stand around and let them play games." --John Kerry




"It's six months until the election, and Democrats are already having buyer's remorse... Some liberals are so frantic that they want to pull the plug. That's not going to happen... John Forbes Kerry has wanted to be president ever since he hung around the Kennedy family compound as a teenager. He's not going to let any of the same pooh-bahs who only last December wrote him off as a primary contender drive him from the race now... But that doesn't mean that the worries about John Kerry's electability are going away... The few times that Mr. Kerry decides to abandon his nuanced reserve and programmed responses he can become argumentative and hectoring. ABC's Charlie Gibson asked him last Monday on "Good Morning America" to reconcile his inconsistent stories about whether he had flung his medals or merely his combat ribbons over the White House fence during a 1971 antiwar protest. After Mr. Gibson pointed out that he had covered the demonstration and had personally seen Mr. Kerry throwing medals away, the candidate replied: 'Charlie, Charlie, you're wrong! That is not what happened. I threw my ribbons across. And all you have to do is go back and find the file footage.' ... Liberals know they are stuck with Mr. Kerry, but that's not preventing them from worrying about his tendency to appear to take both sides of an issue. The irony is that Mr. Kerry has wanted the White House so badly, and for so long, that he has become almost a caricature of an opportunistic, programmed candidate. The resulting image turns off many voters who sense that not much is motivating him beyond blind ambition... It is traditional for party activists to grumble about their prospective nominee between the time he wraps up the primaries and when he is actually nominated. But the doubts about Mr. Kerry go beyond campaign kvetching. At times, they seem to verge on quiet panic." --John Fund

[Eveningstar]

Discarded Decorations - There is an obvious discrepancy between what John Kerry said before and what he is saying now when it comes to chucking his military decorations. While it's clear that he was intentionally misleading people before when he said he threw his medals over the fence, as opposed to his ribbons, as he now says; there is a bigger issue here that goes straight to Kerry's dishonest nature. The point is that Kerry wants to have his cake and eat it, too. He threw his decorations (whether they be medals or ribbons, the act was symbolic) away, but today he demands to be regarded as a decorated military man as he runs for president.



http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Politics/Investigation/kerry_vietnam_medals_040425.html

[Ron Lambert]

What kind of family values would John Kerry bring to the White House?

[Ed]

I have watched this thread, but have not replied because I'm totally disgusted with the political process. Republicans stand for righteousness and deficit spending and running the country into the ground (economically).

Democrats are crooks who will save the country economically because they are conservative spenders (just the opposite of Republicans, in case you didn't know).

The Republican Party thrives on getting involved in wars.

The Democrats try to stay out of global conflicts because they are too expensive.While I am a registered Republican, I must ask: Should I vote for a crooked Democrat or a Republican who will run the country into the ground? I no longer even bother with national politics. :rolleyes:

However, I'm leaning more towards the Democrat Party, due to their spending habits. :cool:

[Eveningstar]

"John Kerry fell off his bicycle on Sunday in Massachusetts and put in for the Purple Knee." --Argus Hamilton


Jay Leno... "John Kerry will soon be taking a bus tour of some of the swing states. Kerry said he didn’t wanna take the bus, but his bike was much too dangerous! .... Thankfully, Senator Kerry was not seriously injured. In fact, when the police arrived, Kerry was well enough to give conflicting reports to the officers about what happened. .... Political experts are saying that this presidential race could be the country’s first billion dollar political campaign. And that doesn’t even include the $875 raised by Ralph Nader..."


:lol:

[Ron Lambert]

Watch out, there is an outside possibility that Kerry could name Nader as his vice presidential running mate. He would not announce it before the convention, but he could have made that promise to Nader when they met today. Of course, that would give the Republicans another "target rich environment."

[Ed]

At this point, I'm ready for another Democrat president so we can pull our troops out of Iraq and so this country won't be "spent into the ground" by the Republicans. :eek: :snicker:

[Stan Laurel]

You make some valid points, Ed. That's why I joined the Libertarian Party. (Yes, I'm a card-carrying Libertarian!) I think voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. But I'm really in a bind. If I vote Libertarian, I lose. Libertarians don't win elections. However if I vote Republican or Democrat, I am signifying support for their policies, most of which I don't support.

[WhatisGod2You]

Libertarians don't win elections. However if I vote Republican or Democrat, I am signifying support for their policies, most of which I don't support.

Ditto. Despite the fact the Libertarians do not win elections, I'm still voting Libertarian because I can't honestly say that I agree with either the Democrat or Republican platforms.

[cdhale]

At this point, I'm ready for another Democrat president so we can pull our troops out of Iraq and so this country won't be "spent into the ground" by the Republicans. :eek: :snicker:


Do you really believe that Kerry will pull them out? No way.

I will be voting for Michael Peroutka (http://www.peroutka2004.com) who is a standup, unashamed Christian. Go check out his website, you will be impressed.

clint