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 : Proof that John Kerry is Unfit for Command -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (3825)	8/28/2004 4:23:15 PM
From: American Spirit	Respond to of 27181

Bush has a 28% approval rating in New York City. Back after 9-11 he promised them 40 billion reparations money and never delivered. He stonewalled the 9-11 commission and tried to stop it from happening. He has been good for Wall Street not no one else. The cops and firemen back Kerry. The GOP is playing up protesters as "evil" because they know how unpopular Bush is in that city and area of the country. The GOP may even try to stir up things itself. Any democrats protesting there will be completely peaceful and use humor instead of violence to get across their point. GOP moderates only will be allowed to speak at the convention, along with Zell Miller who will tell us how "weak" Kerry is on defense despite having the exact same defense budget voting record. In the 90's, Zell Miller made speeches praising Kerry and blasting the Bush family. Now he has flip-flopped. And speaking of flip-flops, expect Bush to finally pretend to embrace global warming as a concept, anything to lie and fool people in an election year.

To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (3825)	8/28/2004 4:24:20 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27181

Former Bush newspaper endorses Kerry: Lead Editorial The Seattle Times Friday, August 27, 2004, 01:16 P.M. Pacific Four years ago, this page endorsed George W. Bush for president. We cannot do so again — because of an ill-conceived war and its aftermath, undisciplined spending, a shrinkage of constitutional rights and an intrusive social agenda. The Bush presidency is not what we had in mind. Our endorsement of John Kerry is not without reservations, but he is head and shoulders above the incumbent. The first issue is the war. When the Bush administration began beating the drums for war on Iraq, this page said repeatedly that he had not justified it. When war came, this page closed ranks, wanting to support our troops and give the president the benefit of the doubt. The troops deserved it. In hindsight, their commander in chief did not. The first priority of a new president must be to end the military occupation of Iraq. This will be no easy task, but Kerry is more likely to do it — and with some understanding of Middle Eastern realities — than is Bush. The election of Kerry would sweep away neoconservative war intellectuals who drive policy at the White House and Pentagon. It would end the back-door draft of American reservists and the use of American soldiers as imperial police. It would also provide a chance to repair America's overseas relationships, both with governments and people, particularly in the world of Islam. A less-belligerent, more-intelligent foreign policy should cause less anger to be directed at the United States. A political change should allow Americans to examine the powers they have given the federal government under the Patriot Act, and the powers the president has claimed by executive order. This page had high hopes for President Bush regarding taxing and spending. We endorsed his cut in income taxes, expecting that it would help business and discipline new public spending. In the end, there was no discipline in it. In control of the Senate, the House and the presidency for the first time in half a century, the Republicans have had a celebration of spending. Kerry has made many promises, and might spend as much as Bush if given a Congress under the control of Democrats. He is more likely to get a divided government, which may be a good thing. Bush was also supposed to be the candidate who understood business. In some ways he has, but he has been too often the candidate of big business only. He has sided with pharmaceutical companies against drug imports from Canada. In our own industry, the Bush appointees on the Federal Communications Commission have pushed to relax restrictions on how many TV stations, radio stations and newspapers one company may own. In an industry that is the steward of the public's right to speak, this is a threat to democracy itself — and Kerry has stood up against it. Bush talked like the candidate of free trade, a policy the Pacific Northwest relies upon. He turned protectionist on steel and Canadian lumber. Admittedly, Kerry's campaign rhetoric is even worse on trade. But for the previous 20 years, Kerry had a strong record in support of trade, and we have learned that the best guide to what politicians do is what they have done in the past, not what they say. On some matters, we always had to hold our noses to endorse Bush. We noted four years ago that he was too willing to toss aside wild nature, and to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. We still disagree. On clean air, forests and fish, we generally side with Kerry. We also agree with Sen. Kerry that Social Security should not offer private accounts. Four years ago, we stated our profound disagreement with Bush on abortion, and then in one of his first acts as president, he moved to reinstate a ban on federal money for organizations that provide information about abortions overseas. We disagree also with Bush's ban on federal money for research using any new lines of stem cells. There is in these positions a presidential blending of politics and religion that is wrong for the government of a diverse republic. Our largest doubt about Kerry is his idea that the federal debt may be stabilized, and dozens of new programs added, merely by raising taxes on the top 2 percent of Americans. Class warfare is a false promise, and we hope he forgets it. Certainly, the man now in office forgot some of the things he said so fetchingly four years ago. seattletimes.nwsource.com.