Bush vs McCain A no brainer.

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

McCain was one of the Keating five. Remember the S&L scandal that cost taxpayers billions. Being a war hero does not equal making the right decision.

Bush did CRACK. Well not CRACK actually. The upscale kids always get the powder stuff.

So what's the no brainer? Why, Bush and McCain of course. Neither of them is worth the time of day.

That brings me to the Democrates. The next sound you will hear is me vomiting. Every time I think about the prospects for the USSA for the next 5 years, I hug my wallet and reach for the TUMS.

If the major parties can't earn your vote, don't give it to them. For the last 40 years we have been voting for the lessor of two evils. What have we gotten, just what we voted for.

-- older and wiser (not for sale@anyprice.com), February 23, 2000

Answers

You know, this is sort of like the census problem. I have a friend who refuses to participate because he found out that non-citizens and people with felony conviction are being hired as census takers. But O&W, if we drop out, doen't that sort of turn it over to the Evil Empire? I think Ruby Ridge was a warning to those of us who just want to be left alone. The whole business is terrifying, but we can't just sit by and do nothing on the way to the slaughterhouse. Sorry, but you really struck a nerve. I'm old enough to know how we got here and be really scared of what's happening.

-- mike in houston (mmorris67@hotmail.com), February 23, 2000.

There is something out of kilter about a Father being president, and now his son being a possible shoo-in. Kinda makes me think of a "Closed Society".

-- Not Most (le@rnedperson.com), February 23, 2000.

I feel so torn at some elections. We had PA senate race a while back between not so great and ghastly and I voted third party. The results started coming in and it was soooooo close, the numbers going back and forth, and finally not so great won. But I felt such regret that I had essentially given my vote to ghastly.

Same thing here....I want to vote for Keyes. And in the finals I may go third party. But then I feel like I am actualy voting for the one I like least, by taking the vote from the other guy.

I guess in the eyes of God, I am responsible to choose who best represents me, and who seems the best- do what is right and leave the results with Him.

I wish Bush and McCain would both throw in the towel and stand behind Keyes. Oh well, enough dreaming.

-- carolyn (arolyn@luvmy.hub), February 23, 2000.


I predict that the name "Shrubya" is going to become so popular over the next few months that Bush will lose the election.

Everyone will be too embarrased to admit that they voted for someone called Shrubya, so it will be between Gore and McCain.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 23, 2000.


It would appear that TPTB are quite frightened of a Keyes candidacy. From the press coverage of the primaries, it would be hard to tell if he is still a candidate.

I wonder why Jesse Jackson isn't protesting the media's snubbing of Alan Keyes. I guess if anyone wants to find out why some of us are such enthusiastic supporters of a man the talking heads never notice, he will have to visit the Keyes2000 website. Anyone who bothers to listen to him will not be disappointed.

gene

-- Gene (ekbaker@essex1.com), February 23, 2000.



There is still another candidate...Keyes. If he's still on the ballot in Hawaii, I'll certainly consider him...

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), February 23, 2000.

You might also check out www.michaelmoore.com regarding Keyes too. Remember what Shrubya actually said during the New Hampshire debate: "Hey folks, I'm not big oil, I'm little oil." Keep flyin Hawk! :>)

-- Sally Hemmings (286yrsinUSA@slavery.com), February 23, 2000.

Lol Sally! d:o)

So the little shrub says he is just little oil eh? Yeah, that's the reason he wants the presidency to get the power to be big, big oil.

I think that's pretty cool that Keyes jumped in the mosh pit. I'd rather have him or Michael Moore as president than any of the others.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 24, 2000.


Older and wiser,

I certainly can't say it any better than you did. And ditto on the tums comment.

Mike in Huston,

I've come to the point of believing that we've 'left it alone' waaaay to long. 'We' referring to U.S. citizens per se, both those of us who vote and those who never do. Also referring to those of us who occasionally contact our elected north-ends-of-mules-headed-south to make our positions known, as well as those who never have.

Regarding the Bush's, we're talking budding dynasty-time. If we let it. W's daddy has awfully deep roots in both the clandestine and the one-world elements. It may be interesting to see what surfaces about Gore and his past -- and his daddy's past. Probably the press would not let it make any difference anyhow.

Re. McCain, there was a post hereabouts not long ago which led into an Arizona Republic article about McCain's wife's family's huge Budweiser business in AZ, and basically how he and they used that money and those connections climbing the ladder. "McCain Financial Background"

No matter the back and forth recently about who stole Michigan or who did not, I have to consider that Bush may yet take the nomination. And then not be able to beat Gore. McCain may actually be able to beat Gore; heck of a 'better of two godawful choices'. Keyes? I wish he had a chance; he doesn't.

Yeah, this topic and the discussions hit a nerve. I too am not happy at all about where this seems to be heading. A friend of mine occasionally reminds me that the end times are upon us, and that they are not going to be fun.

Right now, I am mostly interested in helping position mine to ride through the gales to come. Which starts with scoping out the likely near-term events, and making our choices accordingly.

-- redeye in ohio (not@work.com), February 24, 2000.


May we should write in Jessie

-- hd5574 (hd5574@hotmail.com), February 24, 2000.


>> Keyes? I wish he had a chance; he doesn't. <<

Upfront disclaimer: I do not support Keyes.

However, I do strongly believe that the only possible way to get a *representative* government in Washington DC is for voters to vote for the candidate who *best* represents their views. This includes voting for candidates who may not win in the current election.

There is only one way to build a better party, whether it is a third party or revamping an existing party, and that is to take a long view of your votes. If you don't provide a base of support today for the eventual rise of your candidates and views, they will remain mired in the depths, out of sight and out of mind of the public. Get them 5% of the vote today, and you can hope for 8% next time out.

Get 8-10% of the vote in a Congressional election and you *will* have the attention of the power brokers, believe me. They will open up on you with every nasty negative trick in the book. But you'll have people's attention. From there it is only a matter of how savvy you are at getting the rest of the way.

Expect to spend at least 16-20 years to build a party to the point where you have a tiny Congressional caucus. But, the alternative is giving all your power to people you despise, either actively or by default. Votes have been selling at a discount to their true value for about 30 years now.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), February 24, 2000.


Redeye, you have expressed my thoughts perfectly. From the non-stop and heavy topic reading I have been doing in recent months, I know that only the candidates hand-picked by the hidden government (of the world!) are the ones that get to even run against one another, and almost always they are the ones to win. When an anomaly occurs and an outsider wins, he is dispatched historically, as has happened with all previous presidents, who've supposedly been killed by "a lone assailant," usually with a "mental problem."

In a recent reading someone wrote that only McCain is strong and tough enough to even run the full course against both Bush in the primaries and Gore in the general election. I believe that they are correct.

I once ran an election campaign for a man running for state senator, and only did it because I truly believed that he would do well for the neglected lower portion of our county, which was inhabited mainly by blue collar and some white collar workers, versus the incumbent, who was wealthy and favored his neighbors up county.

Near the end of the campaign, in which I tirelessly did above and beyond the call of duty, I learned what a scoundrel he really was, and the intrigue between his own party and that of the incumbent, to run him for the office because they knew he couldn't win, and then in return, the incumbent's party would grant other scapegoats to this party. This scoundrel also wiped out his savings, even his wife's little stash for a dining set, in the mistaken belief that he really had his party's backing and could win.

When I had seen under the rock so much that I wished I'd never left my job to take over this campaign HQ, I couldn't bail out until it was over. The night before the election I told the candidate I'd "mothered" all over the county for months, "Let me tell you my one satisfaction. I am so disgusted with both candidates that until I drop that lever tomorrow, I don't know which one I am going to vote for." (Wish you could SEE the reaction!) I voted for the lesser of the two evils, sadly. And never told which one that was, in my opinion. I am afraid that this is what we face at each election.

However, this time we cannot just sit home or give our precious vote to someone we greatly admire but who cannot possibly win. We have to try to discern who is the lesser of two evils, both in the primary, and in the general election. For me, I am hoping mightily for McCain, since Keyes doesn't have a chance whatsoever, unfortunately.

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), February 24, 2000.


Pray for you leaders, obey your laws, and pay your taxes. That is all that is required of Christians. Human governments will not solve our problems.

The 'prince of the power of the air' is in charge on earth. Haven't you noticed?

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), February 25, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ