2 1/2 Days to Go...& Still Undecided

POSTED BY: BrownShirtsRock
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 3, 2004 21:20
VIEWED: 10757
PAGE 6 of 7

I will vote for Bush.
MY Reasons:
1.) I do not think that public health care is a good idea. As a partial owner of a medical facility I can tell you that the reason health care costs have gone up so much in the past couple of years is because of insurance companies. They do not pay the entire bill only a percentage and trying to get them to pay that is unpleasant. Medical facilities have responded by raising the prices of procedures in attempt to cover their costs even though costs have increased the profit margin in most practices have fallen. (Elective surgery excluded it is what the market will bear)
Public health care is not free it is paid by all the taxpayers. I do not often get sick and I really don't want to be forced to pay everyone else’s hospital bills. If I want to give I will I just don't feel like being forced to pay more taxes.
2.) Kerry’s eliminating tax cuts and incentives for businesses as a good fund raising idea. He says that he also wants to eliminate the outsourcing of jobs. Well I have to say that taxing corporations more will only encourage outsourcing. If a job can be done overseas for less it is in the companies best profit making interest to move the job. I know that this hurts most people to hear but it is true. Tax incentives have helped keep some jobs here. As for bringing lost jobs back to he US it is really not going to happen unless you can make doing the job cheaper here than to where it was outsourced to.
3.) The tax cuts for the rich. People get rich originally because they are successful. So it is a tax on the successful. (If they want to pass it down to their offspring well that is their choice. I believe most people would if given the chance.) The rich already pay a larger percentage of their earnings in taxes than the middle class even with the tax breaks.
4.) Bush did not ban stem cell research. He just did not federally fund it. Even Mr. Reeves' widow said at a Kerry rally that she believes that it should be taken care of in the privet sector.
5.) The Economy their has been steady growth in every thing but jobs. The US acceptable unemployment rate is much lower than most other countries.
Also the president really can't affect the economy much even in the slightest ways. The only good thing a president can do is realize this and stay out of the economy it will sort its self out. I realize that Bush does not do this but Kerry's plans and comments on the matter frankly frighten me.
6.) The Veterans that served with "Quick John". They are not all Texans and Oilmen and are in fact from all over the country. Kerry was in Vietnam for four months and then came back and profaned those he served with. He claimed that they had committed many atrocities but when asked to bring up any specific incidents that he had witnessed he admitted that he had never seen any.
After beginning his political career he begin to fall back on his Vietnam "buddies" for support having previously denounced them. Which made many of them very upset but as long as he stayed in pretty much inconsequential offices they tried to ignore him.
7.) The now infamous flip flops he plays to his audience when at the auto plant in Michigan he talked about how wonderful SUV's are and how his family owned one and loved it. At the EPA stop he discussed the horrid SUV's and what super polluters they were when asked about his recent stop and praise of the SUV he said that his family had once owned an SUV but upon discovering the polluting horrors had gotten rid of the car. And is voting record is all over the map.
8.) Kerry’s statements about terrorism and the War in Iraq I find disturbing. His statements regarding bringing terrorism back to a nuisance level appalled me. Because when people get blown up it is only a nuisance to those around them. Thinking of any sort of terrorism, as a nuisance is frightening to me for one thing it was never just a nuisance.
He was against having troops in Iraq and talked about pulling them out. Now he talks about waging a harder,

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:
Liberals are all about speech, just don''t say anything they disagree with or format it in a manner they disaprove of...

---

I think this topic has reached its generalization quota.

"You've just gotta go ahead and change the captain of your brainship, because he's drunk at the wheel."

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

For Hero, Jasonzzz and Waddledoodle, especially Waddledoodle. My consulting company was on the 78th floor of tower 1. My client was in WTC 7, so believe me when I say I know where you are coming from.

Here's what your boy George has to say about 9/11.

George Bush forfeited this election when he openly declared the war, the recession, and the deaths on 9/11 to be his lucky trifecta, joking on fourteen occasions about the good fortune those tragedies had brought to him and his wealthy supporters.

The evidence? His own words, published on the White House website.

Two speech transcripts there show Budget Director Mitch Daniels reporting that shortly after 9/11, while discussing the recession, the war, and 9/11, Bush turned to him and said, "Lucky me! I hit the trifecta."

A trifecta, of course, is racetrack jargon for the big payoff you get for picking three winners.

After 9/11 Bush took his trifecta joke on the road, using it as a laugh line at thirteen Republican fundraising events in the winter and spring of 2002. You can find all thirteen speech transcripts on the White House website. Just search "trifecta."

So why did Bush think his audiences would find the recession, the war, and 9/11 so funny? The answer lies in his tax agenda. In the summer of 2001, rising federal deficits caused pressure to rescind the tax cuts. Wealthy contributors were worried. The trifecta joke reassured them.

Bush had promised to never run a deficit, he said, unless "we had a war, or a national emergency, or a recession." Now, to their relief, he would be free to fund the tax cuts with borrowed funds.

That's why the White House transcripts always show the strange notation (Laughter) whenever he lists the three events that others read as tragedy. They knew the punch line in advance. "Never did I dream we'd get the trifecta. (Laughter.)"

For four months he repeated the joke to more than a dozen elite audiences who laughed because they understood the equation. War, recession, and national emergency excused the deficit. Deficit financing made their tax cuts possible. Good luck for all. Funny to some.

Bush's shockingly egoistic response to 9/11 cannot be dismissed as "old news" when his chief political strategist Karl Rove begins the final weekend of the 2004 campaign defending the use of 9/11 families at a New Hampshire campaign rally by saying: "9/11 is one of the great unifying moments, whether we like it or not, for America."

"Lucky me!" The president's own words establish a premeditated intention to turn that unifying moment into a divisive campaign weapon. Time and again Bush positioned himself beside the widows and children, and even the coffins, of 9/11 victims. What will those families feel when they discover how often he left their sides to joke about the deaths of their loved ones?

You've probably seen the emotionally charged commercial with George Bush hugging Ashley, a young woman who lost her mother on 9/11. What will Ashley feel when she learns how often Bush laughed about the event that took her mother's life? How do you feel about that?

In the first presidential debate Bush told of his efforts to console the widow of a brave man who died in Iraq. Can she now trust that those consoling words were offered in good faith?

Leadership depends on trust. Can we now trust the judgment of a Commander-in-Chief whose first response to war was "Lucky me! I hit the trifecta?"

Bush has often insisted that the campaign is about character. Please take him at his word. Go back and read the White House transcripts. I don't believe that anyone, Republican or Democrat, can read those tasteless jokes and see the frequent notations of laughter without concluding, as Bush once said of 9/11, that "this changes everything."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/103104L.shtml

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Well, since I refuse to spread the 3000 American deaths over the world wide daily total like any other statistic, those Americans lives mean more to me than you. That's fine. You most certainly are in the minority on that point. Even John Kerry isn't as nutty as you are on that issue. To sum up, and I need to be clear:

---

My opinon, maybe in the US but *not* in the rest of the world.

And I wasn't trying to minimize the impact of the deaths. I was trying to bring some perscpective. ie terrorism isn't a constant horide thread that has personally impacted millions of american lives since 9/11. I mean, how many attacks has the US suffered from outside forces, *1*.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

"The war on AIDs, hngaer and cancer are more important than the war on terror"

Is that an accurate statement? If so, you're advocating we subvert our freedom to terrorists. We would have to, otherwise they would threaten terror evertime we expressed a desire that wasn't approved by them.

---

You generalize past the point of even being close to acurate. They are all noble causes, but when it comes to urgency, the sheer fact of the matter, is that terrorism comes *after* these things.

You say that american death (3000) and world wide deaths from the rest of the world over the past *3* *years* 1000, demand more attention (violent) attention than the millions that die each year from these other issues? Who's nutty now?

Perspective.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Then the spectre of terrorism is an acceptable way of life to you.

---

I haven't, nor have I ever, even to date, lived in the specture of terrorism. My country has a resonable forgien policy (ie we don't go around the world dropping bombs all the time). We call it DIPLOMACY.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

[snip a bunch of moot questions]
Certainly there are other civilized countries working on these problems, but many of their talented minds come here, to live free and work.

---

Actually, when it comes to scientist going to the US to work, it is because of one thing. There are jobs there (it pays to have a Physicist for a wife).

It has nothing to do with freedom. The government has removed civil liberties from you slowly over the past decades, all in the name of protecting you. Perhaps you should look at what was legal in 30 years ago and see how much of that is illegal now. Perhaps you should do the same when it comes to civil liberites. Your own groups (ie www.eff.org, etc) have noted many, and have been *screaming* for the past few years and *no-one* listened, because it's all in the name of security.

"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin 1706-1790

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Furthermore, I DEFY YOU to find a more generous country in the world than the United States.

---

Canada.

Every hear about that treaty that people signed that removes landmines from the field of play in war. There is a reason why it's called the Ottowa Treaty. You know that whole idea of soldiers making peace instead of war (the idea of the peace keeper), yup, a Canadian.

We disproprotionally contribute music, actors, comedians, peacekeepers, diplomats... The list goes on and on. It's called being a peace loving nation that realizes that peace can *rarely* be won by the sword and actually living that philosophy.

There are other countries to be sure. I know that Germany has contributed a lot in the past number of decades. How about the UK?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

We feed the world. Have you ever travelled abroad? Ever see the prices people pay for food? Do you know that other countries come nowhere NEAR our capacity to feed.

---

Indeed, I've left my country. Have you? Or have you just read about these prices?

I must also note here

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

I find it interesting that you could comment on any of my actual points.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

Well Bush says that in this post 9/11 world we can't wait for others to approve of how we express our opinions. So if you believe you can quote other posts in whole or in part as YOU choose, then vote Bush.

---

Again, it's about being polite. If everyone did what Jasonzzz does, these threads would be unreadable for those with dial-up. Be a dick if you want to, I'll be polite to those with a lesser internet connection than mine. After all, if we're all in together, why not play nice?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hero:

But if you want JFK and his liberal buddies submitting your opinions to some "global neteqette" test (ie French) then vote for Kerry.

---

I find this "French test" of yours absolutely ludicrous. No-one wants nor wishes to dictate the US's security policy. We just know that if you are going outside your border to do things *not* in your country in becomes an international issue. Thus we have a say.


Your twisting of my words is amusing none-the-less. I will trust in my fellow browncoats to see through such things and laugh at it as I do.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Maybe you could point out that in "fact" *ALL* AMERICANS EAT LIKE FUCKING FAT PIGS, and *ALL* FUCKING AMERICANS ARE GROSSLY OVERWEIGHT AND FAT.

you are making at least two huge assumptions that are so completely ignorant that it borders on prejudice.

1. there are a huge segment of the American population that are health conscious and do not injest the average amount hamburger patties, french fries, and sugar laden beverage every single moment of the day.

2. not everyone who has obesity issues are a result of a complete lack of mental discipline - and I am not even talking about folks who cannot truly have a mental defect where they cannot stop themselves from eating. There are many many folks I know who's bodies are simply out of whack no matter how little food they put into their body.

and just b/c a segment of the country are really brainless heifers doesn't mean that we are all glad to have our rights shredded. Thanks.

and why continaully badger American way of live and politics and economy when you are given up on it? You have a nice comfortable life where you believe that turning a blind eye to the problems facing the entire world will effectively solve the entire problem. Why why why? Why continually inject your opinion into a wasted effort?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Well, since I refuse to spread the 3000 American deaths over the world wide daily total like any other statistic, those Americans lives mean more to me than you. That's fine. You most certainly are in the minority on that point. Even John Kerry isn't as nutty as you are on that issue. To sum up, and I need to be clear:

---

My opinon, maybe in the US but *not* in the rest of the world.

And I wasn't trying to minimize the impact of the deaths. I was trying to bring some perscpective. ie terrorism isn't a constant horide thread that has personally impacted millions of american lives since 9/11. I mean, how many attacks has the US suffered from outside forces, *1*.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

"The war on AIDs, hngaer and cancer are more important than the war on terror"

Is that an accurate statement? If so, you're advocating we subvert our freedom to terrorists. We would have to, otherwise they would threaten terror evertime we expressed a desire that wasn't approved by them.

---

You generalize past the point of even being close to acurate. They are all noble causes, but when it comes to urgency, the sheer fact of the matter, is that terrorism comes *after* these things.

You say that american death (3000) and world wide deaths from the rest of the world over the past *3* *years* 1000, demand more attention (violent) attention than the millions that die each year from these other issues? Who's nutty now?

Perspective.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Then the spectre of terrorism is an acceptable way of life to you.

---

I haven't, nor have I ever, even to date, lived in the specture of terrorism. My country has a resonable forgien policy (ie we don't go around the world dropping bombs all the time). We call it DIPLOMACY.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

[snip a bunch of moot questions]
Certainly there are other civilized countries working on these problems, but many of their talented minds come here, to live free and work.

---

Actually, when it comes to scientist going to the US to work, it is because of one thing. There are jobs there (it pays to have a Physicist for a wife).

It has nothing to do with freedom. The government has removed civil liberties from you slowly over the past decades, all in the name of protecting you. Perhaps you should look at what was legal in 30 years ago and see how much of that is illegal now. Perhaps you should do the same when it comes to civil liberites. Your own groups (ie www.eff.org, etc) have noted many, and have been *screaming* for the past few years and *no-one* listened, because i

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME