Well, Kerry accepted the Nomination for the Presidency. He has a tough road ahead of him. He somehow has to convince people that he is a better alternative than George W. Bush. You would think that would be an easy task, but it isn't. Republicans prefer GW Bush even when they agree the man is a moron and that the war in Iraq was botched by his administration. And the people in the hinterland often prefer the devil they think they know over an unknown -- and then are often too preoccupied with other things to pay attention enough to find out about the new guy. But I think he set the right tone. For all his wonderful qualities, I don't think the guy will get elected for them, but simply because of the nightmarish errors and attitudes of the current administration.
He has my vote for a list of primary reasons:
1. The Bush Administration's willingness to try to abrogate human rights and to use deceit and deception in doing so. Abu Gharaib is only a symptom of a much bigger scandal involving "Ghost Detainees" and gross disregard for traditions of rule of law or due process.
2. The intentional alienation of our allies. For instance the disdain directed at the French and Germans.
3. The neglect of human rights issues in other countries. And the woeful example posed by point 1 in this effort.
4. The efforts to give tax cuts to rich people during a time of budget stress.
5. The lies and deceptions involved in deciding to invade Iraq, and the failure to provide for the occupation -- and the lies and deceptions about that.
6. The gross favoratism towards "old boy" companies like Halliburton.
7. The efforts to defeat sunshine laws and make cover ups easier.
8. Gross incompetance.
9. Gross hatred of the Constitution Bill of Rights.
I can think of a list of other complaints, but these are the ones I feel are important enough to fight about. Expecially number 9.
Posted by cholte at July 30, 2004 06:08 AMChris -
I am interested to see how the Republicans respond to the Democratic Convention and the issues raised. I think the Democrats tried to redefine the interaction between the parties with almost everything they did, and it will be fascinating to watch this play out.
Namaste, Engyo Mike Barrett
Well, the issue that has made me, a lifelong Republican, decide to vote against Bush didn't make your list, somehow. It is the simple fact that a Bush win will solidify the status of the Republican party as a wholly owned subsidiary of the social conservative Christian Right. Send these crackers back to the Dixiecrat party. - Brian
Posted by: Brian Holly at July 30, 2004 10:01 AMYes, that objection (that the Republican party is transforming into a subsidiary of the religious right) for the simple reason that I don't think a win or a loss will have any effect on reversing that trend. Literalism and Fundamentalism have an emotive strength, drawn from the breakdown of the "Naturalist" perceptions of the past Century. Realism is no longer what it was cracked up to be. And the various materialist religions no longer have a hold on ordinary folks the way they once did. That is, fantasy, and "a-priori" -- proofless -- belief hold sway even on otherwise intelligent minds. For them faith means believing something even when it is demonstrated by events as a lie. Higher truth means rejecting mundane truth, and even trying to suppress or step on it.
And people are more confused and disturbed than ever. What they have is half the way to real enlightenment. They mistake the fire and brimstone of the vision for the real thing. They forget the lesson of Ezekiel; to listen to the "still quiet voice" which remains after all the thunder and lightening have passed. The voice of faith is the voice of the God/Buddha within. And all the representations of "Him", manifestations, or the Law without -- are means for us to awaken that voice.
Hence, many of the rich and powerful who, liberal thinkers think are pandering, may well really believe a good portion of the propositions of the religious right. And this makes them more dangerous than ever.
Posted by: chris at July 30, 2004 07:30 PMIf the Democrats elevate the dialogue to anything remotely resembling civil, Bush shall start to pull away. In a civil, sober atmosphere, the hysterical charges about W and Cheney began to sound ... hysterical.
A few notes: Barak Obama gave a dynamite speech. I fully expect this young man to change Party affiliation, after some time in DC. Barak needs to talk to Dr. Walter Williams, and beware of Julian Bond types.
He talked way over the heads of that audience. I will likely vote for him for Senator from the People's Republic of Illinois.
Edwards has a lot of energy. But his "help is on the way" slogan did not resonate. Help for what? People are not drowning. I am doing fine. Please, do not help me Oby-John. My adult children want to keep their tax cuts.
Kerry's speech did not cut it. His was the weekest performance of the lot. Maybe he will get some sympathy votes? No bump in the polls. That spells t-r-o-u-b-l-e. He struck me as a 60's era has been who never quite was.
Does Therezzzza Heinz-Kerry have a balance problem? Or did she just feel out of place?
da rube
Posted by: robin in momence at July 30, 2004 07:46 PM
Well Robin, if you approach politics like horse racing or a Redskins game, then it is just a game. But sometimes once you get past the hysterics there are still real issues to be dealt with. And in this election there are real issues that are facing the American people and which Bush with his Corporate style is just not cut out to address honestly.
It's not any one thing. I made my list. Anyone can make their own. To me the survival of the nation is at stake. I know you don't see it in such stark terms, but something has to be done to prevent a world run by a few companies with no conscience or restraint.
Posted by: chris Holte at July 31, 2004 11:11 PM