« Howard Dean in London this Thursday | Main | Ashcroft = Vader? »

June 15, 2004

Comments

j.j.

every week, Der Spiegel has a number of analysts try to guess the likelyhood of Bush being re-elected. At his max, they gave him an 80% chance of success back in January. This week, he hit his all-time low so far, they gave him a 25% chance of beating Kerry. That is great news to me. See, who says I can´t see the positive side of things?

Chrish

J.J.,

I say you can't see the positive side of things
unless, of course, when you think things are going the way you think they should.

Elections are still some months away and a lot can change during that time. "Don't count your chickens before they hatch."

Pete

Uh, J.J. was making a joke.

You sure you're a democrat Chrish?

j.j.

Crish,
of course you are 100% right that a lot can happen and I still expect the race to be a tight one, though I do see the possibility of Kerry winning as much more likely nowadays. Even with new job numbers on the increase, I think Bush will have to bust his butt if he wants to have a chance.
Though I would just as soon impeach him. It blows me away that the same Republicans in Congress who impeached Clinton for lying about sex refuse to do anything about Bush and his immoral and, most likely, illegal war. Sad.

Chrish

Was he now Pete? Yes Pete I am a Democrat I'm
just one who doesn't adhere to the "My party right or wrong" gig, nor do what the party
leaders tell me to do just because they say so.

It's like this Pete, I see the positive that both sides have and I also see the negatives of both sides. The Democracts, or at least the controlling few and their handlers for too long they have pushed the idea of big government on us
while not really saying they're doing it. They have diminished or eliminated as much as possible the idea of individual responsibility and accountability and replaced it with some flawed
concept as "moral relativism". Which, simply stated, we are all responsible for the individual's situation, behavior, or conduct and
therefore the individual is not guilty, accountable, nor responsible for their own actions.

Do you really believe that all of those so-called
social programs they've shoved onto the backs of the taxpayers are really helping anybody or are they really helping themselves and their friends, acquaintances, and Special Interest buddies?

Consider that here in California between 6 - 8 Million Dollars, taxpayer money, has been spent on the support of illegal aliens. Now that there is no more money and we are suffering a budget deficit directly attributable to the overspending of taxpayer money by Democratic politicians what do you think was the first thing they wanted to do? Increase our taxes, dump the consequences of their incompetent actions on our backs. Don't get me wrong I am all for helping people out but,
we cannot afford to take care of the whole world.
This is especially true when there seems to be more concern and help for the illegal aliens than there is for the citizens of our country. What gives there? They have already had to close several trauma centers in LA because of their budget deficits all directly related to illegal aliens.

The latest scam by those bottom feeders is pushing, once again, drivers licenses for illegal aliens. Never mind that the majority of the people do not want that to happen the Democratic politicians are going to continue their effort and to hell with what the people want.
Even Bush and his don't call it an amnesty program was shut down because the people do not want it. What part of "No!" do these alleged servants of the people not understand?

Yes Pete I am still a Democrat but, not happy with the direction the party has taken. There are too many Special Interest Groups who own, lock, stock and barrel members of the Democratic party. Heck those guys can't take a leak unless they've gotten permission from their handlers.

I could go on about my party but, I would only get angrier about them and their activities. I think you get my drift.

I guess in this instance, like Jeff, I am cynical and suspicious of them but, still have some hope they'll get their heads out of their arse and really start working for the benefit of all the people and not just for the Special Interest Groups and themselves. I would also hope the Republicans also get a clue and get their heads out of their arses and really start working for the benefit of all the people not just their Special Interest Groups. Let's face it they both have Special Interest Groups they serve which doesn't coincide with the interests of the people.
Call them trial lawyers, unions, corporations, big business, immigrant rights groups (illegal immigrants), pharmaceutical, oil, Gay Rights, Anti-Gay rights, atheists, religious, so-called
self proclaimed guardians of the constitution
and other groups are the ones dictating to the politicians what they will or will not do. How?
$$$$$$$$$ donations (bribes, payoff's).

Chrish

J.J., "bust his butt".... LOL!! Me thinks he's going to have to do more than that if he hopes to win.

I agree with you on that whole Clinton affair. I
don't excuse the guy for what he did but, it's a far cry from what the initial "investigation" was supposed to be about. While I found Clinton's actions disgusting and inexcusable it still was
a matter between he and his wife, not the world.
And hardly an impeachable offense. The Republicans were acting like asses over that whole tawdry affair. Their actions were equally offensive as Clinton's was. At least for me that's how I felt about it.

Who's to say J.J., you know as well as I do the Republicans, for that matter neither the Democrats, would ever admit to such a thing. For politicians to admit to making a mistake, for making bad decisions, or for being flat out wrong is like oil and water; they don't mix.

Whether Bush wins or loses is, at this time, not important to me. What is important is a successful handover in Iraq, they take control, they decide their future, and our people come home safe.

Besides what do you have to worry about? Considering the problems with not just this war but, also the economy, energy, education, and the
looming environmental disaster we might be facing
in the near future Bush may just have already unelected himself for a second term in office.

We have serious problems in our environment; our world. We can't go anywhere else, we're stuck right here on this planet. I read today in the paper how more and more of what was once arable land is being swallowed up as the deserts grow.
They're saying that more and more of Africa is unlivable, more and more of China is becoming desert. Some of it natural, most of it man made,
or would that be person made for the politically correct challenged, and a lot to do with "Global Warming", which Bush&Co reject and renounce.

We mustn't cut into the profits of the oil industry now must we? There it is again, that word "oil". Seems like it's the cause of a whole lot of problems in our world wouldn't you say?

Luke

Whoops. I don't like this. They've amended it:

Bush 276
Kerry 258

It's going to be a fun ride from here folks...

j.j.

prior to Luke posting this last update, it had occurred to me that the number of electoral votes that were "barely Kerry" were much greater than the number that were "barely Bush." That means that one or two states changing would also give a change in lead! This is the perfect example and I think will happen repeatedly until November. Any way you look at it, it will be a close one, I think.

Chrish

Isn't it exciting??

Jim

I wouldn't even bother voting. It looks like Kerry has it locked up.

Chrish

Now Jim, if there is anything that we, as a people, should have learned from the 2000 elections is that everybody's vote does count.

That applies whether one is Republican, Democrat,
right wing, left wing, pro-Bush, pro-Kerry, or
whatever.

You are kidding, right? If not then consider this
post a slap up side yo' head. There, now don't you feel better now... :o)

Anybody else taking on an attiude of "why bother to vote?"?

j.j.

I'm not sure, but I think Jim was being sarcastic. Or were you?
This will likely piss you off, Crish, but in my state, it won't matter whether I vote or not. I'm sorry to say so. But Bush will carry North Carolina anyways, so if you think about it, my vote (or someone's in Massachussetts) is worth a hell of a lot less than someone who votes in a swing state. Just look at the way all candidates target the swing states and ignore everyone else.
Having said all that, I will still vote because:
1. I have been bitching for almost 3 years now, it would be hypocritical of me not to vote.
2. I can!!!! (the most important reason)
3. Black South Africans couldn't vote for decades, and now that they can, only about 50% of them bothered to vote. That is sick and I don't want to be like that.
I personally would like to see a sheer majority vote some day instead of this electoral college thing and I would also like to see more credible parties to break this 2-party system crap that we have. I realize I will probably not see either in my lifetime, but it would be nice.

Chrish

J.J., Whewwww, I thought I was gonna have to slap you up side the haid too... :o)

While I tend to agree with you and Jim's position
regarding "why bother to vote", I believe that was also the excuse given the last election and look how bloody close it was. Realistically, we never really know how people are going to really vote, at least not for the majority. Yeah, there's all of the poll's, this poll, that poll with a number of them having different results from one day to the next. The results of those polls also depend upon the wording of the questions and where the questions were taken. If
predominately a Democratic or Republican then you know what the results will be, on and on and on.

You know the old addage "It ain't over till the fat lady sings". Same goes for this election it ain't over till all of the ballots are counted.
All the more reason that we who are raising all the stink, bitchin, complainin, angry, and or upset for or against have to vote, must vote.
You never know what will happen. Kerry could win or Bush could win but, at least you've made your vote. On the other hand J.J., if you don't vote it would be of such great benefit to Bush.. LOL!!
Now wouldn't that just "Make your day"? heh heh.

I wholeheartedly agree with you, surprise surprise surprise, that it would great to see a sheer majority of people vote rather than that electoral college crap. And YES, absolutely more credible parties rather than the entrenched 2-party system we have. Parties that are more concerned with the welfare and prosperity of the people rather than the good ol' boys and Special Interest Group controlled bunch that we currently have; Republican or Democrat.

j.j.

I´ll be honest with you, any other year, I would not vote for Kerry or probably not even for the Democrats.

Jim

Ya, don't bother voting. Especially if you're reading this and you're registered in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Iowa, etc. It's not worth it.

If it was a pure popular vote Bush would not have won in 2000, but Kennedy would not have won in 1960. I think in both cases we ended up getting the better person. Frankly I used to be down on the two party system too, but when more parties spring up, like in Canada, they don't seem to be able to do much good. I also don't like the idea of voting for a party rather than voting for a person. It's nice on those rare occassions when an independant wins an office, but unfortunately Jesse Ventura ended up making a farce of the governorship after he was in a while.

READ THIS (by JJ)

While the Bushies are busy denouncing Kerry, Soros, Moore and anyone else who dares to think critically, 48 Nobel Prize winners openly criticie Bush and endorse Kerry! Following is the text of the letter.

ENDORSEMENT LETTER

An Open Letter to the American People

June 21, 2004

Presidential elections present us with choices about our nation's future. We support John Kerry for President and urge you to join us.

The prosperity, health, environment, and security of Americans depend on Presidential leadership to sustain our vibrant science and technology; to encourage education at home and attract talented scientists and engineers from abroad; and to nurture a business environment that transforms new knowledge into new opportunities for creating quality jobs and reaching shared goals.

President Bush and his administration are compromising our future on each of these counts. By reducing funding for scientific research, they are undermining the foundation of America's future. By setting unwarranted restrictions on stem cell research, they are impeding medical advances. By employing inappropriate immigration practices, they are turning critical scientific talent away from our shores. And by ignoring scientific consensus on critical issues such as global warming, they are threatening the earth's future. Unlike previous administrations, Republican and Democratic alike, the Bush administration has ignored unbiased scientific advice in the policy-making that is so important to our collective welfare.

John Kerry will change all this. He will support strong investments in science and technology as he restores fiscal responsibility. He will stimulate the development and deployment of technologies to meet our economic, energy, environmental, health, and security needs. He will recreate an America that provides opportunity to all at home or abroad who can help us make progress together.

John Kerry will restore science to its appropriate place in government and bring it back into the White House. He is the clear choice for America's next President.

Signed,

Peter Agre, Chemistry, 2003

David H. Hubel, Medicine, 1981

Sidney Altman, Chemistry, 1989

Louis Ignarro, Medicine, 1998

Philip W. Anderson, Physics, 1977

Eric Kandel, Medicine, 2000

David Baltimore, Medicine, 1975

Walter Kohn, Chemistry, 1998

Baruj Benacerraf, Medicine, 1980

Arthur Kornberg, Medicine, 1959

Paul Berg, Chemistry, 1980

Leon M. Lederman, Physics, 1988

Hans A. Bethe, Physics, 1967

T. D. Lee, Physics, 1957

Gunter Blobel, Medicine, 1999

David M. Lee, Physics, 1996

N. Bloembergen, Physics, 1981

William N. Lipscomb, Chemistry, 1976

Leon N. Cooper, Physics, 1972

Roderick MacKinnon, Chemistry, 2003

James W. Cronin, Physics, 1980

Mario J. Molina, Chemistry, 1995

Johann Deisenhofer, Chemistry, 1988

Joseph E. Murray, Medicine, 1990

John B. Fenn, Chemistry, 2002

Douglas D. Osheroff, Physics, 1996

Val Fitch, Physics, 1980

George Palade, Medicine, 1974

Jerome I. Friedman, Physics, 1990

Arno Penzias, Physics, 1978

Walter Gilbert, Chemistry, 1980

Martin L. Perl, Physics, 1995

Alfred G. Gilman, Medicine, 1994

Norman F. Ramsey, Physics, 1989

Donald A. Glaser, Physics, 1960

Burton Richter, Physics, 1976

Sheldon L. Glashow, Physics, 1979

Joseph H. Taylor, Physics, 1993

Joseph Goldstein, Medicine, 1985

E. Donnall Thomas, Medicine, 1990

Roger Guillemin, Medicine, 1977

Charles H. Townes, Physics, 1964

Dudley Herschbach, Chemistry, 1986

Harold Varmus, Medicine, 1989

Roald Hoffmann, Chemistry, 1981

Eric Wieschaus, Medicine, 1995

H. Robert Horvitz, Medicine, 2002

Robert W. Wilson, Physics, 1978

The comments to this entry are closed.

February 2005

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28          

Blogs

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 10/2003