do you guys really think there is any difference between Kerry and Bush?
Between the actions either will take in the war on Terror?
you don't elect people you elect handlers and cabinets
no one voted for George Bush last election... they voted for Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Rice and Powell. Those are the people making decisions, not 91 IQ George Bush.
as for Kerry - both he and Bush are Billionare Yale grads and both are a member of the nation's most exclusive secret society, with only 800 living members
to hear you fools fight about it you'd think there was some sort of difference between these guys.
both are in bed DEEP with corporate interests, both are corrupt as the day is long
the only difference between Kerry and Bush is that when Bush acts like a member of the populace, takes off his suit jacket and says things like "Buenos Dias mis amigos!" people actually believe he gives a crap. Not the case with Kerry which is why he will lose.
both men are worthless meat puppets who will use this country's resources (soldiers, money, etc) for their personal agendas and both have no real idea how to defeat terror.
people compare the war on drugs to the war on terror - well let me tell ya folks the war on drugs was an absolute failure - more people use drugs now than ever before... so it goes with terror - we might catch or kill some terrorists but every day new ones are created.
but who wants to listen to the truth.
i'll let you guys get back to hating each other, fighting out stuff that doesn't matter.
There is alot of truth in what you are saying Bit, but I disagree with one statement:
It DOES matter, but mostly on issues important to YOU (or ME).
-HOW to fight the war on terrorism/Iraq
-And numerous other issues.
The two candidates ARE very similar in the fact that they are corrupt, corporate lackeys interested only in their own well being and power. BUT, their views on the above issues (and what they would do about them) IS very different, and that is where people would have to pick one or the other to vote for.
Or, if both are equally abhorant to your beliefs, then vote for a third party (like Nader) or simply choose not to vote.
Sadly, MY problem is that both sides go to extremes in the important issues:
-ALL or NO Abortion (No middle Ground)
-LEt um All in or, er, Let um all in on Immigration (DOH, not too different here, but equally bad)
-More Taxed of the Mid Class for the Rich or More Taxes on the Middle Class for the Poor (again, both equally bad)
-By Any Means Neccessary (i.e Kill'um All) or Internationalize and Let Germany Decide (to me, both wrong, with Bush only slighty "right-er").
So, with no moderate option this year (and Nader being almost as wacko as Bush and Kerry), I don't feel I have a "Lesser Evil" choice, and I will abstain.
Give me a break Kerry is the most transparent joke I have ever seen in politics. He doesn't have a platform to run on except appease to whatever crowd of monkeys are sitting in front of this clown. It's downright laughable that this is a guy whose might be leading our country.
Bush has his flaws but atleast the man takes a stance and sticks to it. I don't see Hanoi John putting together a cabinet better than the one Bush has, who will Kerry have a Secretary of defense? Ted "The Woman Killer" Kennedy or will be go with the Clinton holdovers who did such a great job on terrorism for those 8 years? :rolleyes: