Th\e Vote : LUSENET : Countryside : One Thread

Please ig\nore th\e slash\es my keyboard is h\aving\ a problem. I wanted to pass th\is along. It was forwarded to me today and says wh\at I believe so well, except for th\e reference to Howard Ph\illips.

Little Bit Farm

Why I Am Voting For Bush

by Liz Michael,

(For immediate release, Copyright 2000,, All RIghts Reserved. Permission to reprint granted nonexclusively so long as the author and web page are referenced.)

One vote can mean a lot. It gave Thomas Jefferson the presidency, saved Andrew Johnson's presidency, gave Marcus Morton the Massachussetts governorship, and in 1993 approved the largest tax increase in history. That vote belonged to Al Gore, interestingly enough. On November 7, a small number of Americans who care will go to the polls and cast a vote in probably the closest Presdiential election in 40 years. Who gets that vote, and who gets your vote, could prove to be critical. I am voting for George W. Bush. And it isn't even a hard decision for me.

Why DO People Vote?

Why DO people vote, and how do they vote? People vote almost always for one of four reasons. Those reasons would be:

1. Because the candidate (or proposition) represents their views about 80% or more.

2. Block voting. This includes party lines, racial lines, gender lines, union orders, whatever.

3. To vote the lesser of two evils, or

4. To oppose a great evil.

Now, I need to clarify that voting the lesser of two evils, and voting against a great evil, are two different things. I think one of the problems certain people have understanding those of us who will vote for Bush is because they see Bush as another evil, and they THINK we're voting the lesser evil. I want to address that question last, and it will become crystal clear that I don't see George W. Bush as the lesser evil in this election.

Firstly, I will frankly admit that I am not voting for Bush because he represents 80% of my political world view. I am a small government, conservative libertarian, and Bush is certainly not small government or libertarian, and he frankly isn't all that conservative as Republicans go.

Secondly, I do not engage in block voting. Never have, never will. I am too independent thinking to ever vote anyone's party line. Albeit I will frankly admit that whenever I have voted for a Democrat, I have usually lived to regret it.

Al Gore, the Great Evil

So let's document the primary reason I am voting for Bush. Bush is the only man who can beat Al Gore and Al Gore is the Great Evil in this election to be avoided at all costs. Now, I frankly don't like Al Gore. But I don't like most politicians. I think Al Gore is as big of a liar as Bill Clinton, but then again, most pols are. What precise IS so evil about Al Gore?

1. Al Gore wants to shred the Constitution. He will lead an all out assault on our civil liberties, on our first amendment and our fourth amendment rights. And also, and most importantly our second amendment rights. A victory by Al Gore will be a message to both American politicians and the American people that the Second Amendment is dead, and the government can feel safe in riding roughshod over all civil liberties including gun rights.

But an Al Gore win will be more than just a message. Al Gore will undercut the ability of the American people to rebel against the government. You see, the second amendment is not about hunting ducks and deer. The second amendment is about preserving arms ownership in private hands so that the people may thwart the enemies of this nation. Every intrusion you have witnessed under the Clinton administration you will see tenfold under a Gore administration.

The militia clause of the second amendment is clear. The founders knew two things. Firstly they knew that domestic tyrants would abound, and would have to be put in their place. This is why the Revolution was fought. This is why the Civil War, or as some of us unreconstructed Southrons would say, the War of Northern Aggression, was fought. It is why the next Revolution shall be fought. The advocates of gun control are in reality fighting against the next American Revolution in advance, through a crazy quilt of laws that make firearms sales and ownership difficult.

But it wasn't just domestic tyrants that the founders had in mind. They also envisioned a day when Americans would probably have to fight a war on this soil against foreign invaders. In such an invasion, having arms only in the hands of the military would prove disasterous. But having arms privately owned among the whole populace would be a great asset to a nation, and may well save a nation from conquest. The advocates of gun control know this, too. The advocates of gun control seek to weaken this nation so that foreign invaders may easily conquer it. They may deny it all they want, but 90% of the time, you scratch the surface of a gun controller, you find someone anxious to weaken the ability of this nation's people to defend themselves in the event of a foreign invader.

Isn't Bush As Bad As Gore On Guns?

The concept that Bush-Cheney would be as bad as Gore Lieberman on guns is laughable on its face. Bush has an established record of granting the right to concealed carry of firearms in the state of Texas, and Dick Cheney has one of the most pro gunowner records EVER for a U.S. Congressman. The National Rifle Association nearly brags about the Bush-Cheney White House and the leverage they would have in it.

Should the need for a Revolution arise, I feel we will be in better position to conduct it after a Bush Presidency than after a Gore Presidency. Should this country be invaded by hostile foreign forces, we can better avert those forces locally under a Bush Presidency than under a Gore Presidency. This is a no brainer, in my opinion. Is Bush perfect on guns? No. But the difference between Bush and Gore on guns is so stark that it cannot be lightly dismissed.

2. The economy. Under Al Gore's proposed agenda, the so-called reinventor of government would nearly triple its size, and undoubtedly increase taxes drastically to pay for his pet programs. You will have less money to spend of your own. Moreover, Al Gore's environmental agenda will result in increased govenrment power and bureaucratic terror over anyone who conducts a business or owns property. Even your freedom of movement is jeopardized, if Al Gore gets his "Earth In The Balance" wishes fulfilled: your automobile with its internal combustion engine, is on his hit list. It is his desire that gasoline taxes skyrocket: conveniently, these higher taxes will help to feed his vision of expanded government. Fewer businesses. Greater unemployment. Less freedom.

Economically, Al Gore is a depression waiting to happen. But even THAT'S not the worst of it. With increased taxation and increased regulation will come increased persecution of the innocent taxpayer by the IRS, and more Americans in prisons. Clinton's record of using the IRS to punish his political opponents is notorious. And Clinton is, in Gore's eyes, "one of our greatest Presidents". You do the math.

3. Educational freedom. Gore's war on vouchers is actually only a key strategy of a bigger plan. Namely the National Education Association, and other teachers' and school administrative unions, inflicting their omniscient will over every American family and every American child. Nevermind that 72% of black Americans support vouchers: Gore and the NEA don't give a rat's ass about something as vital as a black child's education.

Don't think this will stop at the public schools. Private schools, parochial schools, and homeschooling are also on the hit list of these monopolisitc megalomaniacs. If you are a homeschooling parent, these people will have you hauled into court and have your children taken away from you. And these people are Al Gore's best friends.

4. The Supreme Court. This reason is the one the Libertarian Party discounts as a wash. Again, this is laughable on its face. Gore will appoint justices who believe, as he does, in a "growing Constitution". In other words, his appointees will shred the Bill of Rights, and leave you will less freedom. I am more optimistic about Bush's choices, who at least have a good chance of being strict constructionists like Clarence Thomas, who will halt this cancer upon the American republic known as the "Evolving Constitution".

5. Foreign policy and the military. Gore is, like Bill Clinton, sold out to the Communist Chinese. Do I need to even remind people of the Chinese financing of the 1996 Democratic campaign, which Gore was a key and instrumental part of, and of the subsequent sale of nuclear secrets, of which the Los Alamos affair was but the tip of the iceberg? Furthermore, using the connections his father developed with Occidental Petroleum's Armand Hammer, he is sold out to the Russians, and should we ever have to fight the Russians, with its nuclear arsenal quite intact, this is the wrong man to be running our government.

How bad will Gore be for the American military? Gore sold his 1991 Gulf War vote to the highest bidder. According to former Senator Alan Simpson, Gore offered to support whichever side "would offer him the most and the best speaking time." The night before the vote, he barked at the GOP Senate secretary, "Dammit, Howard! If I don't get 20 minutes tomorrow, I'm going to vote the other way."

What is the Clinton-Gore military record that we can expect more of under Gore? Eight years of magnificent neglect. Sorties over Yugoslavia funded by cannibalizing operations and maintenance accounts. A burgeoning inventory of increasingly capable Third World coastal submarines vs. a naval budget for subs scheduled to be reduced to zero by 2005. The reduction of the military budget to two-thirds of what it was in 1985. Twenty percent of carrier-deployed F-14s which do not fly. Forty percent of Army helicopters rated insufficient to their tasks. Army gas masks with a 50% failure rate. Insufficient flying times for pilots. Brigade officials pressured to falsify readiness ratings. I don't think our military could be in any worse shape if the Soviets had been running it for us, willfully sabotaging it. Of course, Moscow is no longer the Soviet capital: apparently Washington is.

What if the eventuality I mentioned earlier in the gun control segment, came to pass, and foreign troops managed to set foot on our soil? Who will compromise the government more? Who will compromise the people more? Even Ralph Nader in the White House wouldn't be nearly as dangerous as Al Gore under these circumstances. I'm no globalist seeking a Pax Americana maintained with American military might. But can't you plainly see the erosion of the American military under Clinton-Gore is not by accident but by design?

Now some will argue that Bush and Cheney are beholden to the New World Order .. my response... even if that is so, I would rather have the Bush NWO right now, with the US somewhat on top and in control of it, than have the Clinton-Gore NWO that would likely bring us Chinese and Russian troops marching down our streets.

However, consider the following. George W. Bush professes to be a very religious man. As a religious man, I consider his heart may just be open to a divine message to do what is right for his country, and not what is right for some of his financial backers. I see no other candidates open to such a concept. And while I do not presume to be the judge of Albert Gore Jr.'s soul, I just don't sense in him anything remotely approaching a willingness to follow a divine call.

The Best Shot At Beating "The Great Evil"

In short, to oppose the great evil, we must vote for the candidate who has the best shot at taking out that great evil. No other candidate but Geroge W. Bush even remotely has that capability. In short, with Bush, far from being "a lesser evil", most of our problems will either be stopped in their tracks or moved in the opposite direction, as opposed to Gore, where they will pick up momentum like an oncoming freight train.

Additionally, I know that the big media machine will help move Gore's evil agenda. I don't think Bush gets the same bounce, so if he's pushing something evil, the media probably won't be all over themselves trying to help him do it. Bush represents a better balance of power from our standpoint.

What About The Third Party Candidates

Now, lest any of you say that I'm a GOP loyalist, so of course, I'm saying that, in the Massachussetts Senate race, I am saying completely the opposite. The only way remotely possible to defeat Teddy Kennedy is with the Libertarian, Carla Howell. I believe EVERY REPUBLICAN and EVERY conservative Democrat, and ANYONE who cares about civil liberties AT ALL should vote for the Libertarian there. Am I a Republican loyalist? Not by a long shot. I think half the GOP Congress deserve to be thrown out on their traitorous asses. I just don't think they should be replaced by Democrats.

However, let's look at the third party field this year. In my opinion, it's the worst that it ever has been. Ralph Nader, who is getting most of the third party play, is not as much of an outright danger in government as Gore, and perhaps, would instill a touch of honesty to Washington, but is still a liberal, and would still inflict disasterous economic liberal policies upon us.

Patrick Buchanan is a dangerous megalomaniac, who in a zeal to get $12.5 million conducted a scorched earth campaign upon a minor party, virtually destroying it: we should not even entertain the concept of Buchanan anywhere NEAR the White House, giving how he has shown his true colors.

Harry Browne isn't seriously running for President: rather, he and his party hacks in the national Libertarian Party are raiding sympathetic libertarians and pocketing the money, a repeat of the most disgraceful display the so-called "Party of Principle" has ever had. Does it surprise us that it is headquartered in the Watergate Hotel?

John Hagelin thinks our national problems can be alleviated by all of us chanting "OHM" and being brainwashed into Transcendental Meditation. 'Nuff said.

Howard Phillips, although I think he is a legitimate good guy, has forgotten that the purpose of the founders was a free country, as opposed to a Christian one. And as such, I fear he would unknowingly lead us into the very kind of government the historical New World Order has always been: a Christian theocracy. Having seen the Holy Roman Empire and the Church of England, I can confidently say I want none of that.

Sending a Message

Sending a message is fine, when the election is a foregone conclusion. For example, in the Feinstein-Campbell California Senate election, we all know that Feinstein is going to roll. So voting for Gail Lightfoot is a strong option to consider. And let me say that I know Gail Lightfoot, and she is a friend of mine: trust me, Tom Campbell is no Gail Lightfoot and is no libertarian. John Kyl, in Arizona, faces no Democrat on the ballot: message-sending isn't a bad idea there either. And Presidential elections go state by state. If you live in Texas, for instance, Bush will win Texas. So sending a message by voting for someone else causes no harm there. And if I had a candidate I could vote for among the third parties, maybe I'd think about sending a message.

But looking at the third parties this year, why bother even thinking that way? George W. Bush is in my opinion, the clear moral superior of them all anyway. Is he perfect? No. No man is. Does he agree with me 100%? Not even close. Would I completely trust him as President? I don't think I would even completely trust MYSELF as President. Could he betray us? Yes he could. But Al Gore and Bill Clinton already HAVE. And as such, I think Bush stands head and shoulders above all Presidential competition in 2000.

President Gore

One more thing. Many of you know that I rather shamelessly advocate the "Time Honored Tradition" of the founding fathers, namely violent revolution when necessary. But in truth, I would much prefer this country be restored by ballot box rather than cartridge box. And that is my final reason for supporting Bush: to avoid the Revolution.

Mark these words carefully. A President Bush may delay the need for the Revolution. Should the deity decide to utter the right words to President Bush at the critical time, there is a chance that a President Bush will heed the wisdom, and make a Revolution not necessary. I can envision a President Bush heeding the divine.

I cannot envision President Gore doing any such thing. With President Gore, a full revolution, in all its bloodiness, is inevitable. Even if it does not happen on his watch, President Gore will oppress us with policies that will leave freedom loving Americans with no recourse but violent revolution against the federal government, and no successor will be able to prevent it, in all its stark bloodiness. I don't simply predict it. As one of those freedom loving Americans, I can guarantee it.

With that in mind, have a pleasant November 7th, and choose carefully.


========================================= Liz Michael (Confederate-American) - Political Activism For The Liberation Of The World CEO, Analon, Inc. - Computers, Real Estate, Salvage, Security, Web Design P.O. Box 546, Glendale CA 91209 Join the Unorganized Militia e-group - BONNIE BLUE BEATS U.N. BLUE

-- Little bit Farm (, October 27, 2000


I cannot envision G.W. hearing any utterances other than his daddy's and Cheney's. Shrub ain't that smart. Gore is a disaster waiting to happen all right. The third parties aren't as good as they might be. I'll still have to vote for Buchannan. He promises to stem the flow of illegals across the border, support gun rights, and strenghten the military. These are all important issues. Some of you on this forum live far away from the southern border and don't see the threat of illegal aliens. I live in an area that is awash in them. They register to vote because it does not require any proof of residence, social security number or anything else to do so. Not that it should require numbers to register, but still they should be citizens and most are NOT but still vote anyway. They are changing the entire legal set up in the areas they have invaded. The influx of illegals that don't speak English has made it so that it is difficult for us natives to get a job unless we are fluently bi- lingual. They are swelling the food stamp rolls and increasing taxes. If something isn't done to stop them, they will eventually make the entire country a third world nation.

As for the guns, there are really too many already out here with us and the government will play hell taking them. I know too many folks who will give them the guns OK, ammo first. We (southerners) will NOT be disarmed.

As for Gore being a depression in the making--the entire economy is a depression in the making. World wide, there are very few thriving and stable economies. We cannot stand alone. Eventually we will be pulled down also. Our mission, should we choose to accept it, is to be as self-sufficient as possible.

This post will undoubtedly be viewed as negative by some, as I have been accused of being negative in the past. I am sorry if I see things in a different light than some. As for some of you, I really, really wish you would turn your lights ON and just look around. Life isn't always just pretty landscapes and nice warm fuzzies. (This comment is not aimed at you, Little Bit.)

-- Green (, October 27, 2000.

I can appreciate your view, my only concern is it looks like the Republicans are going to win the senate, house of reps and the balance check system in place......I am a bit concerned.

-- Carleen (, October 27, 2000.

Now you see, this is where I have a problem. Why was it Ok to have democrats control the house, senate and presidency, but not the Republicans. As far as I am concerned we have haven't tried it in recent history, so why not? The democrats had their chance to get all that they wanted to do. Some of it happened some of it didn't. I honestly don't think this country is better off for it. In fact, I am sick of the not so Great Society and ready for a new one thank you. How about we give it the old college try. If they don't do what we want we can always revamp congress in two years. Honestly I feel sorry for who ever is in office next because Clinton has set us up for an economic nightmare, and there is bound to be trouble. Most of that big tax package from the early 90's has yet to hit, and when it does watch for a big economic downturn. I'd honestly like to see the republicans get a chance to make some law without clinton there vetoing and calling them names. If they do a bad job then we'll once and for all know that the bleeding heart liberals are the right way to go. Then we can all go down our merry way toward nirvana and sit among the grasses that we won't be able to walk for fear of hurting them, and live in peace and tranquilty forever an citizens of the state.

Little Bit Farm

-- Little bit Farm (, October 27, 2000.

I don't understand your point about Democrats controlling Congress and the Presidency, LBF. By my recollection, the Dems controlled Congress while we had Republican Presidents (Reagan, Bush), and the Reps took control of Congress at the same time Clinton was elected. If I am in error, please show me your reference. Thank you.

-- Joy Froelich (, October 27, 2000.

Little is sooooooooooooo nice to have you back! God Bless.

-- Lesley (, October 27, 2000.

Actually the most recent time that the democrats were in control of all three was from 1992- 1994. The republican upset did not take place until two years after Clinton took office. Before that change over it was something like thiry years since the republicans had office in both houses of congress. I will double check that number and post it later.

Little Bit Farm

-- Little bit Farm (, October 27, 2000.


...who's elected president, because the rep / dem balance in Congress is so tight, we can look forward to 4 more years of legislative nothingness. Without a clear majority, there is no clear mandate. Unless the congressional clowns are willing to work out what is best for the people instead of their party, then it will simply be business as usual.

P.S. on the military. Stop wringing your hands about foreign invasions. I believe if you check the "score card", Osama bin Laden has gotten more U.S. military personnel and embassy staff killed then the best efforts of all the rest of our enemies, combined. Remote control murder from Afghanistan. Best of luck to the next Commander in Chief. What 'cha gonna do? Fire some more 3 million dollar missles at 3 dollar mud huts?


-- Craig Miller (, October 27, 2000.

GO! Little Bit! Green - you confuse me! I am basically a Libertarian, but Gore scares the bejesus out of me, so I have to forsake Harry and support George. I fear that Algore will not only rape the 2nd Amendment, but then attack several others and lead us into his chosen system of Socialism, followed soon by Communism. If you think this is an extreme position, look at the "man". He lies like Marx and Clinton, he is as stupid as Khadaffi (sp?), and as ambitious as the man from Iraq, with the blind fervor of the Ayatollah! Do you really want the hero of Love Story trying to lead the free world while trying to tickle his wife's tonsils? I think not! GL! Your meek and obedient servant -

-- Brad (, October 27, 2000.

Atta girl Lil bit! It is a two man race like it or lump it. The time to institute a third party with vigor, is the day after the election. The need to boot that treasonous crack-pot out is now! It is the immediate need that must be dealt with. Well-spoken!

-- Ed Weaver (, October 27, 2000.

But what if, by some miracle of personal insight and enlightenment, the currently non-voting segment of our population, which is roughly 60% of all eligible voters, suddenly decided to vote Libertarian, or Green party, or Natural Law? It is never just a two person horse race, occasionally the long shot wins, and I refuse to prostitute myself to either the Republicans or to the Democrats just because everyone "assumes" that only one or the other can possibly win. You have to start the revolution somewhere, it doesn't just happen overnight. Annie in SE OH.

-- Annie Miller (, October 27, 2000.

As an added thought to this post I would like you think of the sitiuation here in missouri as many of you may be aware our govenor who was running for the U. S. Senate was killed in a plance crash. The then democrat Lt. Govenor has stated that if Carnahan wins he will appoint his wife as interm senator until the next general election. Now as I see it as the race was close anyway if Jean decides to accept the seat if her dead husband wins she will probabley get elected. I believe this as the sympathy vote will be tremendous and could even give Gore missouri. I don't see how Ashcroft can really campaign as anything he says will not be to a politition but a grieving widow who also lost one of her sons in the plane crash. I hate polls but they do tend to indicate where things may go and many of the races in this state are dead heats and with the error with them could easily go either way. I am thinking of voting rep. for president, us senate, and the govenor any other race that has a libertarian running will get my vote as a vote for change in what I hope will be a better direction. gail

-- gail missouri ozarks (, October 27, 2000.

Please don't waste your vote, VOTE for the candidate that best represents your beliefs. Even if that candidate is a third party candidate with no chance to win. Well that has always been my moto. I've never voted for the winner of an election yet and proud of it, but this time the thought of Al Gore in office scares me to death. So, I will have to vote for George Bush.

Having to vote for such a poor candidate to stop Al Gore sickens me. But I'm prolife and pro gun ownership,making Gore unacceptable. Maybe next election I can Vote my true beliefs again. Maybe!!

-- Del (, October 27, 2000.

I heard something funny the other day---"The thot of Al or George in the white house makes me wanna RALPH!"

Funny yall should say that about Gore tho (the thot of him bein pres scaring the ---out of you) I feel the same way about GW. He's so grossly underqualified. He's an empty suit filled with straw thats gonna dance to the tune of the ultra wealthy and the peons be damned.

-- john leake (, October 28, 2000.

Well, I guess I'll go RALPH too!!! He is the only one that makes one iota of sense to me....Gore may talk the talk, but he doesn't walk the walk. Bush on the other hand, is, those would be construed as fighting words...okay, I'll say it anyway, Bush is a rapist. Or he wants to be one. Open up the Arctic Wildlife refuge to oil drilling that will be slurped up by America's SUV craze in an eyeblink? Designate Alaska as a Free Taking zone to 'appropriate' what is needed to keep up consumption at it's present hell bent for the horizon level? I think not.

I have been trying to find where I saw the figure about Geo. Shrub having spent a figure that i seem to remember was in excess of $475 MILLION dollars on his campaign?!?! Can this be true? Someone else told me that the amount exceeds that. (Jesse Ventura could run a successful campaign out of a Winnebago and win, for crying out loud!) WHO put up that money? It sounds to me like there are special interest groups in the henhouse who are expecting a LOT of fat, juicy kick-back hens for their support. Gore ain't much, and Bush may not really be the anti-christ, but I think they're cousins.

Clinton wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the butt, Gore sure seems to be reality-impaired. I see that Ralph Nader is lagging behind them in the 'beauty contest' on the web (was it CNN? I read so many sites I start to forget. Anyway, they had a poll of 'Who is the best looking candidate' on it. Talk about trash>) -- he may not be a handsome man, but I'm not looking for another salesman, I'm looking for someone who has been HONEST his entire life. I don't think that Gush and Bore have any concept of the word.

-- Julie Froelich (, October 28, 2000.

P.s. Annie Miller -- you go, girl!!!

-- Julie Froelich (, October 28, 2000.

My problem is as follows: I don't believe anything that the candidates say about themselves, but I'm afraid that I do believe everything that they say about each other!

-- Soni (, October 28, 2000.

They're all liars. They'll tell you anything to get your Vote. They don't care about you or me they only care about number one. The country has eroded to such a point that the Constitution is more valuable to an antique collector. Not voting does not throw your vote away, but, not voting for the same old,same old makes them worry. The reason behind this thought is because, after another party receives so many votes then that party whom ever they will be will receive federal monies (ours) to help fun their elections. The republicans and democrats want you to beleive the other side is the worst of the two evils, when in fact they feed upon each others weaknesses. Its' a game! Its' not meant to be fair. The down fall of Russia wasn't because of the Democracy movement, It was because of the American political movement and our leaders ways of always being able to keep a wolf in the hen house weather it be Republican or Democrat. In plain english Our government is going to show the world how to control its' people and at the same time alow (mother may I) us to work to pay taxes to feed the big bad wolf. Slowy surely they will erode all our rights away and give us privileges. (mother may I) So vote for some other party tell them your fed up. If your voting because of gun issues or abortion issues your silly because its' already in their plan and its' comming for you maybe not this time around but down the road its' a comming> We need to change the parties, because as long as you have the two coperating behind closed doors as they do we will never be a free people again.

-- Richard V.Miller (, October 29, 2000.

Oops'" Not voting does not throw your vote away" Should read. Not voting does throw your vote away. Sorry.

-- Richard V. Miller (, October 29, 2000.

May God bless and keep you Little Bit and all your family. Thank you for trying to save America. These are truly the last, shameful days of freedom.

I have said elsewhere, and I will repeat it here because it is so pertinent to this November's election, this, my motto: "When you vote for a liberal democrat, you spit on the grave of America."

There is no place for "opinion" in this election: there is just right and wrong--Al Gore is wrong, deeply wrong, darkly wrong, fatally wrong.

-- Rags in Alabama (, October 30, 2000.

Probably going to step on a few toes here, oh well. This election is about a simple choice for America. The choice is between right and wrong, good or evil. Forget 3rd party, it's bush or gore now.

Clinton and Gore are evil. Period. They have no respect for God, Law, Life, Family, Liberty, Truth, the Constitution, personal or civil rights. These are unarguable facts. Reported widely and ignored by many. They have a record that proves this. If anyone argues w/ this they are decieving you or are decieved themselves. Or, they also have no respect for the above mentioned.

I do not believe that Dubya is the Messiah come to save us. No, I think that there are probably people out there that are better qualified. But they aren't a choice.

If you believe in a country where the government controls the people- vote for gore.

If you believe in a country where the people control the government- vote Bush.

If you believe that the constution no longer is a valid document- Vote for gore- and have your guns ready for turn in.

If you believe that it is ok puncture the skull of a full term,healthy baby and suck it's brains out- then vote for gore.

If you believe it's ok to trade donation money from the communist chinese army for missle technology that helps them target our kids- vote for gore.

If you believe in a country where the rule of law only applies to some- vote for al.

If you believe "doing it for the welfare of the children" includes, burning them alive w/their families or yanking them out of the arms of loved ones at gun point (in contempt of an ongoing court case)or shooting their mothers in Idaho- vote for al.

If using the powers of the IRS and multiple other government agencies to harrass your critics is ok w/ you- vote for al.

If you think it's ok to portray yourself as a staunch environmentalist, while the zinc mine beneath your house dumps heavy metal waste into the Columbia river basin- vote for al.

I can go on, but you either care for the truth and what's right, or you care for the socialist ideology and and are willing to tolerate the evil that goes w/ it.

-- John in S. IN (, October 30, 2000.

John, WOW! Well said! God Bless! Wendy

-- Wendy@GraceAcres (, October 30, 2000.

But John, you either are going to continue to be part of the problem, or part of the solution; what do we do to remedy this problem? Both main candidates are equally despised, but what should WE do about it! Solutions please!!! Annie in SE OH.

-- Annie Miller (, October 31, 2000.

We vote intelligently, choosing the lesser of two evils. The day after, we scamper like bats out of h...e... double hockey sticks to form, join, or endorse a legitimate third party. You can't wait, like many do, four years to worry about the next election. A legitimate third party begins at the local level, from the bottom up. School boards and town justices et al. It means someone on this forum may have to run. This means your homework has to be done. a case has to be built to present to the American people.To be successful it would probobly take everyone here to run for something, somewhere. The founding fathers envisioned the house of representatives to be a place for the average landowner to do his four years DUTY and return home to his lands. (House of Commons) The idea that politics is for the corrupt, greedy, and immoral should be disregarded as it will lead to just such a thing. If good people turn away from their duty because of laziness, greed, or false beliefs then it will fall into the laps of lesser folk. Some believe that it is exactly the case now, but I say you have the right to vote, the right to serve on a jury, the right to run for political office the right to write your elected officials, and the right to secede. The last of these is as legitimate as the others but people who do none of these things should not dare run their gums about anything, and lick the boots of whoever's in power, for their lack of interest has put them in. Bill Clinton was elected by 42% in 92 and 49% in 96. That's less than half of those who voted, AND ,less than half of the eligible voted. So I say 75% of Americans put him in. 50% who didn't vote said I'll take whoever wins! All of you I don't cares out there put Bill in. VOTE this Tuesday, and then think about next elections on Wednesday!

-- Ed Weaver (, November 01, 2000.

Very nicely said, Ed. The revolution has to start somewhere, why not now? Annie in SE OH.

-- Annie Miller (, November 01, 2000.

Can anyone tell me what this evil is? A lot of positive things have been done in the last 8 years. I don't care for Clintons bad habits but it seems that Bush and him are very similar. But please don't get God mixed up in this mess. God has all the problems HE/SHE needs. Bush might cause an overload. He claims to be religious but so do many people that are not. By the way john your emotion is showing.

-- Nick (, November 04, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ