Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The TRUTH About John Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (179)	2/27/2004 2:47:19 PM
From: JakeStraw	Respond to of 1483

GP, See you read stuff like that on Kerry and it tells me that he's just another politician who says one thing and does another!

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (179)	2/27/2004 3:01:17 PM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1483

Babies blurring the party lines The Democratic Party is a big baby. Not in a petulant, whiny sort of way, but in a cowardly sort of way. Now that I have your attention, I encourage you to see beyond the name-calling and actually consider this argument. With the distinction between both parties getting smaller with each campaign contribution, it's no wonder people have become so disenchanted with politics. There was a time when one could clearly distinguish between the Democratic and Republican parties. But now special interests control them both, and the distinction between the two is invisible. The way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if both parties decided to join together and form a party of the people - a party of the people with power and money. Now it may be strange to say both parties are the same, especially during an election year. Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) is emerging as the future Democratic presidential candidate, but how different would he be from Bush if he were elected? Kerry voted for the USA Patriot Act (the law passed after Sept. 11, 2001 that gives the government the right to violate the rights of people who are under investigation once they are labeled a "terrorist"), and he says he fights against the special interests that "dominate Washington." Yet The Washington Post reports that he takes large amounts of money from some of the same special interests as President Bush. It is obvious the Democrats are gutless political opportunists. When the issue of the war came up, few Democrats in Congress had enough conviction to stand up to the president and question his actions. The vote on the Iraq resolution pointed out that Congress is the president's yes man. And even after officials said there was no possibility of finding weapons of mass destruction and that the president lied to the American people, the Democratic Party sat idly by, afraid of the consequences of attacking the "war president." From all this an essential question must be asked: Why do we have only two parties, which are inching closer to one another every day, to choose from? In most other developed democracies, the existence of parties outside the main two is very normal. Multiple parties are often required to form a government. The advantages of this is it forces governments to refine whatever policy they make, and it also calls for cooperation so progress can be made. If there were more options to choose from in the political sphere, people would become more politically astute, as there would be more parties representing specific interests. It is distressing that people limit themselves to the small box that is the current state of American politics. The ability to think outside that box might allow for fresh new solutions for the problems that continue to plague us. Don't get me wrong; there are good Democrats out there. But the classic quote "Cash Rules Everything Around Me" from the Wu-Tang Clan seems to perfectly describe politics today. Both parties are taking money from the rich and serving their interests. Because of that, they are denying the American people their right to a choice and hence their right to a democracy. inform.umd.edu

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (179)	2/27/2004 3:07:24 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1483

Bushies should never mention corporate soft money or special interest money. It's really a shameful thing they way they go around the country sucking up the bundled corporate dough of the Pioneers and Rangers. Sure, Kerry knows how to raise money too, and the Chairman of Paramount is a big supporter. But at the Paramount party I went to there were no bundled checks, just whatever individuals wanted to show up and pay. Besides the boss and one other in fact I didn't meet anyone else from Viacom or Paramount. I went down the ist and didn't see any others. So that amounts to $4000 plus a lot of invitations.