Debate aftermath

From around the globe..

Published on October 14, 2004 By Draginol In Politics

Stephen Green is pretty ticked off with how Democrats are trying to undermine the US election with their shenegans. Read it for yourself. And here's a running tally of voter fraud.

Slate has some interesting views on the whole Cheney's Daughter is gay thing. My own point is fairly succinct: If Cheney's daughter were suffering from Parkison's disease, would it have been acceptable for Kerry to bring her up as a reason to fund fetal stem cell research? Perhaps you would think that's okay but I wouldn't necessarily want people so lacking in tack and class to be in my home. Talk about an inappropriate time and place to bring up personal family business.

The election will be close. Whoever wins Ohio is going to win the election. Simple as that. So I won't be staying up too late. I'll just wait to see who wins in Ohio.

My wife is going to vote for Bush. I'll probably be reluctantly be voting for Bush. I'm more of a Kerry detractor at this point than a Bush supporter. I really dislike class warfare bullshit. And Kerry seems to be all about that. It really gets under my skin every time he talks about "the tax cut for the rich". Especially from guys who pay little in taxes relative to their wealth because they hardly earn any taxes. Hey Kerry, how about we start taxing idle, unearned wealth more. Where's that proposal? I'm busting my ass earning money, creating jobs, etc. and you want to raise my taxes?

It's also hard to take the foreign policy views of anyone who voted against the 1990 gulf war resolution seriously. I have no doubt that he would return us to the pragmatic, Clintonian foreign policy that led to 9/11. In fact, Kerry's so pragmatic that he's not going to bother to try to do something about Social Security. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that if we don't dramatically change the system soon, it's going to collapse when those baby boomers retire.

I've known guys like Kerry. He's the guy who doesn't propose very much but just sits back and bitches about the guys doing something. The Democrats should have nominated Howard Dean. At least he has principles.

Comments (Page 2)

Madine

on Oct 15, 2004

Bush could win without Ohio if he gets both Wisconsin and Iowa and holds all his 2000 states except New Hampshire. I don't expect that to happen though.

Panu

on Oct 15, 2004

Do you count yourself into the 1% of US. richest?

eieio

on Oct 15, 2004

After reading a lot of articles, blogs, etc. about Kerry's reference to Cheney's daughter, I am a bit amazed at the left's seeming insistence on making this into a gay issue.

Bullhorn turned on - IT'S NOT ABOUT BEING GAY! - Bullhorn off

Sorry if that hurt your ears.

It's about the common courtesy of not using your opponents family as a political tool. It is and always has been considered impolite and bad form to do so.

Interestingly enough, whether intended or not, Draginol makes a relevant segue from the issue of Democrats using whatever means necessary to win, noted in Stephen Green's blog, to the uncouth tactic used by Kerry in bringing up Cheney's family for political gain.

The latter being an example of the former?

Bungy32

on Oct 15, 2004

What do you call a genetic condition that causes humans to be attracted to members of the same sex?

A gift from God. A blessing. Hope for the future of the planet. (Oh, I know what YOU probably call it, but since you asked us I though I might enlighten you that yours is not the only opinion on the matter.)

abnormal by definition (affects less than 5% of the population).

Aside from being unsourced, this number is highly contested. But nevermind that. Let's just ASSume for the moment that this percentage might be accurate. Kind of amazing that you need a Constitutional Ammendment to "protect" marriage from the even smaller percentage of that 5% who want to pursue some state recognition of their partnerships. Straight marriage must be a really delicate and vulnerable institution if it needs constitutional protection from this but not, say, the 50% divorce rate.

Kerry sound-byted the issue. Edwards and Cheney did a better job. Edwards elaborated one of the Dem/Left positions on this issue -- that the FMA is election year tactics to shore up Bush's support with his conservative religious base. The ammendment doesn't have a chance in hell of passing with this congress or even with the most conservative projections of what it is likely to be after the Nov 2 election. Nonetheless, the President chose to make the FMA an election year issue. Nevermind that a family member of his running mate who also campaigns for him happens to be gay and OUT OF THE CLOSET. In response to Edwards, Cheney referenced his support for the president's policies and his acknowledgement of Edwards kind words about his daughter -- and then sacrificed the bulk of his 90 second response -- time he could have used to shift to other rhetoric and other issues.

The Dems didn't bring this issue to the table. But when the GOP does, either in defense of FMA or through questionable flyers, I think it is absolutely justified to note that this is an issue that affects all of is and that gay people can be found in ALL of our families.

As for homosexuality "by definition" being abnormal or analogous to a genetic desease -- I think I've learned a lot more about diseased thinking and abnormality listening to what some of the more rabid conservatives have to say on JU.

sgsmitty

on Oct 15, 2004

What do you call a genetic condition that causes humans to be attracted to members of the same sex? I could care less about the sexual preferences of someone but it is abnormal by definition (affects less than 5% of the population).

Bold statement, but true. May not be a sickness, but certainly abnormal.

- funniest thing I have read all day. Full of mirth.

Not delicate, just that the so called 5% are supported by a liberal media. For the record, Kerry does NOT support gay marriage.

As for homosexuality "by definition" being abnormal or analogous to a genetic desease -- I think I've learned a lot more about diseased thinking and abnormality listening to what some of the more rabid conservatives have to say on JU.

How original. Let's think for just a minute. A lot of people believe evolution, for the sake of argument let's say evolution is the answer. How does homosexuality play into that? Answer, it does not. Homosexuality is doomed to extinction. Unless of course we all start budding or something.

Grim Xiozan

on Oct 15, 2004

Ask a Psychologist if Homosexuality is Genetic?

Logically it could not be genetic because if it was, face it, they would have all died off centuries ago.

I will post more later with sources

- Grim X

Deference

on Oct 15, 2004

The Democrats should have nominated Howard Dean.

...and we are at 100% aggreement Drag. .

Bungy32

on Oct 15, 2004

Hey Bungy, "Hope for the future of the planet"?..Technically it would be bad for mankind if same sex was prevalant since..well..it takes one from each sex to continue life.

Shall we open the "population explosion"can of worms? We should/should not be worried about the carrying capacity of the planet and the 6 billion of us (and growing) that are consuming unrenweable resources at alwarming rates? Nah, let's not go there.

Look, my position is not that everyone must now take the blow-job pledge of allegiance for a queer planet. Unlike (some) conservatives, I don't see this as a gays vs. straights issue. There can be both (all?) forms of sexual orientation on the planet. Thankfully, straight breeders have been successfully populating the planet with gay people (as well as straights, bis, intersexed, etc.) for millenia. I am happy to note that the Cheneys have done their part on this point. Also, thanks to artificial insemination (of both high and low tech varieties) and the fact that being gay doesn't render you incapable of procreation, gay folks can and often do produce children to carry on the procreation function of the human species. Moreover, they don't necessarily produce gay children -- just tolerant and open minded ones (according to some studies -- citations upon request if you're interested). And this, folks, is why I argue that (some) gay people offer

Hope for the future of the planet.

The fact that some people will continue to try to argue from a place that says, "If everybody is gay then there will be no more children" (and the like) really indicates the prevalent shoddy level of thinking on this topic. Make the issue as black an white as you can, I guess. Spread fear of a declining population (despite all the evidence and reasoning to the contrary). Whatever. Of course, these are the same folks who are made uncomfortable by the fact that their VP has an openly gay daughter. And isn't that really why members of the Bush administration are calling "foul" when the Dems keep reminding us that gays are everywhere, even in and connected to the Bush administration?

Forget the analogies. Forget the "it would be like" bullshit. If one of Kerry's daughters was gay, the GOP couldn't get much mileage out of pointing it out. Because while Kerry does not support gay marriage (but does support recognition of gay partnerships) this is not the sort of information that would alienate much if any of his base. That is an important difference between these candidates, and one that Bush and the GOP bring to the table by supporting an unwinnable FMA act and campaigning with homophobic mass mailings.

GreenReaper

on Oct 15, 2004

That's an interesting definition of abnormality there. How about left-handed people? That's about the same percentage - and there may be a Link between left-handedness and homosexuality!

And heck, so what if it is abnormal? I'm perfectly willing not to be normal in various ways myself - it's rather abnormal to sit in a darkened room for eight hours a day peering at a screen, but it seems to be something people want . . .

Daiwa

on Oct 15, 2004

This seems like the only appropos article for this. The liberal media are in high gear today trying to swamp us with both propaganda and selective bad news.

Many commentators say that because U.S. foreign policy affects everyone on the planet, world citizens should have a say in who wins the White House.

Jonathan Freedland, a columnist and former U.S. correspondent for the left-leaning British newspaper The Guardian, wrote recently about being summarily dismissed by Bob Dole while covering the Kansas Republican’s failed White House bid in 1996. “No votes in Liverpool,” Dole said curtly upon hearing the Briton’s accent. He then took a question from an American reporter.

But, Freedland argued, that is no longer a sufficient response. “For who could honestly describe the 2004 contest of George Bush and John Kerry as a domestic affair? … Shouldn’t the men who want to be president win the support of Liverpool and Leipzig as well as Louisville and Lexington?”

This is from an article on MSNBC.COM today by Daniel Strieff titled, "Kerry widely favored abroad, polls show."

Whether he's favored elsewhere or not, we're electing our President, not theirs. It used to be that it was the Republicans who were allegedly behind the globalization of politics (remember the Trilateral Commission hysteria?). Now we know better. Scary stuff.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Peter the great

on Oct 16, 2004

we need to think long-term, and i think some of you are trying

1. are we better off now, than we were 4 years ago [be intellectually honest] ?

a. there are more "active " terrorists now, than before we invaded Iraq
this means things are worse off right now.
you can argue how the world wil be better off 10-20 years from now, with a crystal ball

b. the tax cuts are great; a republican thing; but it's offset by higher gas prices, invasion costs, etc
Bush seems to have gotten his credit card out and went on a spending spree; a democratic thing?

just a few thoughts
pete

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!