"One Vote Away"

[Rick Munroe]

"Just a single seat could give the right wing enormous control over the Senate and the process of confirming the next nominees to the Supreme Court. A Supreme Court dominated by right-wing justices would have a devastating impact on reproductive rights and privacy, environmental protection, civil rights, Social Security and Medicare, corporate accountability, health care, religious liberty, public education, worker rights, and more. And this impact would be felt for generations."

 

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=6008

[trilingual]

That's right. If that happens, I'm applying for political asylum in Brazil, because the damage the fascisti will cause won't be undone during my lifetime. And be prepared for Bush as "President-for-Life." I wouldn't be totally surprised if he declares a national security emergency and suspends the elections in 2004, while our fellow Amurricans sit there slack-jawed, going "duuuh". . . x( But what the heck, having passively swallowed one coup d'etat, why not another one? Then the G.O.P. (Greedy Old Plutocrats) can merrily march the U.S. right into the 19th Century, with laissez-faire capitalism, no income tax, robber barons, manifest destiny, women-as-property, etc. Gosh, they might even bring back slavery! Won't that just frost Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell and Condi Rice?

[FrancoDiSantisxxx]

Dear Abby or Perhaps Ann Landers

 

Would regularly run an article on or around November's election day to remind people of the importance of just one vote, their own. One thing which people born in this country take for granted very sadly is their franchise, given that this country was founded with only white males over a certain age who were property holders being granted said franchise.

 

While voting percentages have declined throughout the industrialized west and it can be said that voting percentages in other countries may be a reflection of a totalitarian regime or other inducements, both political and regressive, the citizens of others nations take seriously the choice of their leadership and government, so that this choice reflects their ambitions, goals and desires. It is indeed unfortunate that the United States, given its prominance and power on the world stage, is run by a select few, elected by much less than a real majority, with the benign complicity of a disinterested populace.

[+ Axiom2001]

RE: Dear Abby or Perhaps Ann Landers

 

These three posts have enabled me to see how some writers at this website feel about VERY IMPORTANT issues which affect ALL OF US AMERICANS. I would like to have been in Washington, D.C. last Saturday when over 200 thousand men and women (and some children and youth) converged on our nation's capital to PROTEST that cowboy's and corporate America's agenda to get us into that "impending" evil, senseless war.

 

When I was in Brazil two weeks ago, one American expatriate told me that the sentiment in that country is anti American govt. not people and that there had been a huge anti principle America at Peace Square in Ipanema a few days before I arrived.

 

A 70 year-old woman friend and political and social activist stated just a few days ago that she'd like to go to Paris during the spring, but she's hesitant "if there is a war." I tried to be optimistic and assure her that there is NOT going to be one. I do hope that my postive view will come to fruition.

 

Thanks Rick and Tri, and Mr. DS..., sorry I didn't want to misspell your name...

[Guest ncm2169]

RE:

 

Rick...first, thanks for losing your "political-post virginity" in your comments about Paul Wellstone this weekend. I never got around to thanking you for your sincere thoughts in that thread. :7

 

Your post here, IMHO, accurately reminds voters of what's at stake in this election. However, let's consider only one item...civil liberties.

 

I'm just a humble Midwesterner ;-) , but I think (hope?) I share a common conviction with other members/posters on this site: KEEP THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR BEDROOMS!! x(

 

Election choices are rarely so clear: The Republicans show every interest in messing with our bedroom choices :-( ; the Democrats seem content to leave us alone }> .

 

Could we EVER have a clearer choice for our self-interests?

 

P.S. Rick, this could be a severe test of your willingness to keep ANYONE out of your and Derek's bedroom. :+

[N.N.]

RE: Dear Abby or Perhaps Ann Landers

 

> ... I would like to have been in

>Washington, D.C. last Saturday when over 200 thousand men

>and women (and some children and youth) converged on our

>nation's capital to PROTEST that cowboy's and corporate

>America's agenda to get us into that "impending" evil,

>senseless war.

 

I'd like to have been there too.

 

There was a great banner at one of the recent D.C. protests,

that read "regime change begins at home".

[Guest wolfman]

As a card carrying member of the Republican Party and a moderate to boot, I could have sworn Al Gore and the Clintons were offering their views on this site.

 

If anyone really believes that Bush would suspend the elections in 2004, maybe they should leave the country, or read the Constitution.

 

By the way, I voted for Bush and I still am not convinced that he is right on Iraq. I like to think for myself, but I will defend the President, as I did for that immoral Clinton. :+

[Guest Fin Fang Foom]

RE:

 

>"Just a single seat could give the right wing enormous

>control over the Senate and the process of confirming the

>next nominees to the Supreme Court. A Supreme Court

>dominated by right-wing justices would have a devastating

>impact on reproductive rights and privacy, environmental

>protection, civil rights, Social Security and Medicare,

>corporate accountability, health care, religious liberty,

>public education, worker rights, and more. And this impact

>would be felt for generations."

 

This was meant as a Halloween post, right? You're attempting to scare everyone with imaginary fears.

 

Why weren't you at the Jennifer Holliday concert Rick?

 

Eerily yours,

 

FFF

[N.N.]

RE:

 

>This was meant as a Halloween post, right? You're attempting

>to scare everyone with imaginary fears.

 

Not imaginary.

Bush has said Scalia is his favorite justice on the court.

[taylorky]

as I did for that immoral

>Clinton. :+

----------------------------------------------------------------------- ROFLMFAO.......whoa talk about calling the kettle black....i would guess far more people in this country would consider YOU far more immoral than they would president clinton. of course i don't consider you immoral,although i'm sure the right wing moral police sure as hell do......president clintons BIG crime.............he got head and lied.......whoa go figure,i guess every married guy here that makes it with an escort tells the truth to his employer and spouse........ummmmmmmmm yea sure they do taylor@00:31-10/29/02

[Rick Munroe]

RE:

 

>i would guess far more people in this country would consider

>YOU far more immoral than they would president clinton. of

>course i don't consider you immoral,although i'm sure the

>right wing moral police sure as hell do

 

Right on, kid! I thought that was pretty funny, myself. Of course, you know, nothing Bush does is considered "immoral" because it doesn't involve blow jobs. I guess he's just lucky to have a vagina (no offense, Tina).

[Rick Munroe]

RE:

 

>Rick...first, thanks for losing your "political-post

>virginity" in your comments about Paul Wellstone this

>weekend.

 

Hey, thank you for starting the thread in the first place. Now all I'm thinking (aside from "I want dick") is "Please, Walter Mondale, say 'Yes'!"

 

>P.S. Rick, this could be a severe test of your willingness

>to keep ANYONE out of your and Derek's bedroom. :+

 

Hmmm...let me see...Ashcroft, Lott, or Bush in my bedroom...I think I could definitely stop that bedroom revolving door from spinning (or at least, spin it in the opposite direction). They are scary.

[trilingual]

RE:

 

>Bush has said Scalia is his favorite justice on the court.

 

And that's not just idle talk. Has anyone been paying attention to the ultra-conservative activists he's been nominating to the courts? Not to mention the kinds of people he's been naming to critical advisory groups? Or to regulate the corrupt accounting industry? All more or less below the radar while everyone's attention has been deflected by 9/11 and then the Iraq war talk. With all that smoke and noise they've also managed to steer people's attention away from Bush and Cheney's own disgusting (not to mention probably illegal) business practices. Isn't that just too special?

 

If anyone thinks this unelected administration exists to serve any interests other than those of their buds back at the Petroleum Club in Houston, and the religious right, they're not paying close attention to what's going on.

[Rick Munroe]

RE:

 

>Has anyone been paying

>attention to the ultra-conservative activists he's been

>nominating to the courts?

 

Yes, and each time he does I've sent emails to & called my Representatives & Senators...thankfully they've been able to vote them down. Scary to think what could happen if they could just push these fanatics through.

[Guest Bitchboy]

RE:Ashcroft is an Ass

 

One especially frightening part of George Bush's political appointments was installing that arrogant, intrusive, Christian-controlled, gay-hating weasel Ashcroft as Attorney General. Given the chance, he will have all of us carted off to never-never land. The horrific events of 9/11 have thrown this man and his right wing elves off course a bit, but don't ever think they won't be back in full force to rid the country of those who think and live differently than themselves. I always thought it was supposed to be the Republicans who were against government intervention into our lives, but I've come to realize that applies in cases of church-going fake christians who hold a woman's right to choose somewhere beneath the right to tote guns. Tuesday, November 5, 2002 will find me at my polling place casting my vote to protect my rights as well as those of the millions of underemployed, underinsured citizens. I'm proud to be a Democrat; it took me a long time to put aside my selfishness but it feels good to have gotten here :-)

[Guest flibbits]

RE: Dear Abby or Perhaps Ann Landers

 

When faced with a choice between a hitler-like character, Hussein, with a history of murdering his own people, violating UN treaties for over 10-years, invading his neighbors and threatening the world oil supply, sponsoring and supporting terrorism that is aimed at the purposeful death of innocents vs your own country that has done it's share of wrong, but also is the number one exporter of aid to other countries, has a democratic system of government in which YOU get a chance to decide leaders, and does not purposely plan to maximize the deaths of innocents - you select Hitler.

 

What if one country, just one, had the guts to stop Hitler while he was violating every part of the WW1 treaty?

 

Democrats threaten the freedom of Americans. Name one civil liberty that has been lost...the right to carry out terrorism? Why is giving money back to those who earn it a bad thing? Why can't people decide for themselves what and where to invest?

 

The liberal democrat message appeals to people looking for something for nothing.

[Guest flibbits]

RE:Ashcroft is an Ass

 

Name one specific thing Ashcroft has done to violate your civil liberties.

 

As you scream for protection, and yell that Bush has not done enough, and blame his administration for 9/11, name one thing he has done to jeopardize the freedoms of innocent people:

 

- Increased the ability of law enforcement to investigate possible terrorist activities - you'll blame Bush on one hand for letting it happen, then fight tooth and nail every effort to stop it.

 

- Held enemy soldiers, in conditions far better than called for by the geneva convention, after their fight against america. Remember, their leaders and ilk treat our people by cutting off their heads.

 

- Working with the UN to increase resolutions and create penalties for non-compliance against a leader who has disobeyed inspection orders for over 10 years. The goal isn't inspections, the goal is keeping Hussein from the ability to dominate the region by force.

 

I'm sure you all support the palestinians who use their children as weapons to murder people as they ride a bus or eat lunch or pray.

[Guest flibbits]

RE:

 

The Bush administration won the election. No posturing, late night plans or schemes could steal the election for Gore.

[Guest 7Zach]

There was a state of emergency during the civil war; civil rights suspended - no habeas corpus, no bail for certain defendants, but the election was held, albeit, with a Republican presidential nominee and a Democrat for vice-president. Ran under a national unity ticket, and probably would have lost but for the fact of the then recent union victories. Even the north was not going to vote for Lincoln. However, like you, I would much prefer a liberal appointed to the court, and the Patriotism Act is more invasive that I would have preferred.

 

Bush is not a despot; even Nixon wasn't, though I think that was a closer call. :)But what about Roosevelt? When he couldn't get his first term legislation passed, he came up with the idea that for any justice over the age of 70 years, the administration would have the right to appoint one additinal justice to the court. His court packing plan didn't work, and wasn't supported by either the conservatives or liberals in Congress. But that's as despotic as you can get. Oh, wait, unless:

 

Roosevelt again and a liberal Supreme Court that interned the Japanese during WWII. Different era then, I hope.

 

To say that Bush would cease elections is just another way of saying that you think he's a Nazi, conservative, a despot. And there's nothing to back that up - he hasn't done or said anything of the sort. And there's nothing in his political past to suggest that. I don't always agree with him, but his record in Texas was one that routinely sought out opposition support for whatever he wanted. He really did seek to compromise rather than simply push forward an agenda that he was not able to get majority support.

[Guest 7Zach]

well, he lied under oath to keep from having to pay potentially millions in a civil lawsuit. After being caught, he settled the lawsuit for close to a million. So big deal, it was just a deposition, huh, over sex.

Maybe so, but the Arkansas Supreme Court, a majority of whom were Democrats, thought it serious enough to disbar him for that act alone. And the judge in the civil case was a student under Clinton and appointed to the bench by him.

It's not just Clinton, it's people at the top of the game in either party- they all are used to a sense of entitlement

[Guest 7Zach]

RE:

 

yours is an intelligent post. Your thought, that freedom in the bedroom is the most important issue, and based on that, you will support that candidate who most likely deliver that freedom.

To me, that is not the overiding policital issue of the day.

[Guest 7Zach]

RE:

 

and let's really let it rip on this one.

 

Just because people in Dade and Brevard and other counties couldn't read a butterfly ballot, the state was supposed to throw out the whole ballot and the state election? It's so silly; the ballot was published in the newspaper; both parties signed off on the ballot prior to the election. And as it turns out, Buchanan carried certain precincts that were heavily Jewish. Too weird to be true, but it happened. The problem wasn't the ballot, but the idiots who were voting.

 

The real problem was that there wasn't sufficient time to recount all the ballots and still make the deadline imposed for the Secretary of State to forward to the feds the results of the electors. That's not theft, that's just the way it works. And for all of the NY liberals in here, I say that the most important issue for you to be for is that of getting rid of the electoral college, and instead having a simple majority of votes cast win the election. That way, you could easily win, as Gore would have done, based on the total numbers of votes cast.

 

The downside, Hilliary and Sharpton, or others could easily be elected on the platform of simply increasing government entitlements to unprecedented levels: That would guarantee the votes of large numbers of people in the largest urban markets in the country, plus the standard democratic faithful. And that's essentially what Gore did in 2002, capture the large urban markets, plus California.

 

The downside is that you could be elected simply on such a platform, appealing only to the large urban markets, and forget about the rest of the country. Hence, no real consensus on anything, which the electoral college, at least in theory, requires.

[Guest Ruben]

RE:Ashcroft is an Ass

 

If I could make John Ashcroft Attorney Gereral for the next twenty years, I would do so.

 

If I could clone Robert Bork a hundred times and "pack" State Supreme Courts, the federal bench and the Supreme Court in Washington, D. C., I would do so.

 

If I could remove every one of the judges on the New Jersey State Supreme Court, I would do so. Better to have no court than to have a court withour law.

[Guest Bitchboy]

RE:Ashcroft is an Ass

 

>If I could make John Ashcroft Attorney Gereral for the next

>twenty years, I would do so.

>

>If I could clone Robert Bork a hundred times and "pack"

>State Supreme Courts, the federal bench and the Supreme

>Court in Washington, D. C., I would do so.

>

>If I could remove every one of the judges on the New Jersey

>State Supreme Court, I would do so. Better to have no court

>than to have a court withour law.

 

But you can't, thank God. Ashcroft can't be AG for the next 20 years and thus he can't spread his own unique brand of hate against gay people who he said (at a rally I attended when he was attempting to be a senator in my native Missouri) will go to hell because of their sinful ways. Bork will never be a Supreme Court Justice so a woman's right to choose how she protects her body will not be set aside by him at least. As far as removing the New Jersey State Supreme Court Justices, that perhaps is the one thing that could prove beneficial to us all.

:D

 

Thank God you're not in charge.

[Rick Munroe]

RE:

 

>The Bush administration won the election.

 

Yes, by a vote of 5-4.