NJ Gov. McGreevey

Sam and Ray said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Sam and Ray

Maybe not such a proud moment. From the abcnews story about his resignation:

"Even as he made the announcement, a lawsuit was expected to be filed by
his former homeland security adviser, Golan Cipel, in Mercer County,
N.J., Court, sources told ABC News."

Sexual harrassment in the workplace s/b treated no differently no matter
what the parties' sexes are.

We're proud for him, but we see your point. Infidelity, regardless or
orientation, is wrong.

Sam and Ray

Brian said:

Maybe not such a proud moment. From the abcnews story about his resignation:

"Even as he made the announcement, a lawsuit was expected to be filed by
his former homeland security adviser, Golan Cipel, in Mercer County,
N.J., Court, sources told ABC News."

Sexual harrassment in the workplace s/b treated no differently no matter
what the parties' sexes are.

"Sam and Ray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Brave? Naw, cowardly to have to come out under duress.

Quoted message said:

Sam and Ray

I couldn't figure out why a married governor with children who has an
affair with a man and comes to terms with his sexual orientation would
choose to resign. However, the sexual harassment charge makes it
understandable.

Brian said:

Sam and Ray said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Sam and Ray

Maybe not such a proud moment. From the abcnews story about his resignation:

"Even as he made the announcement, a lawsuit was expected to be filed by
his former homeland security adviser, Golan Cipel, in Mercer County,
N.J., Court, sources told ABC News."

Sexual harrassment in the workplace s/b treated no differently no matter
what the parties' sexes are.

"Sam and Ray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Sam and Ray

How will he come to terms with his wife? He announced he is gay!

Not sure it is a brave act considering he is about to get hit with a sexual
harassment suit. If he had announced this when he made the realization
before he cheated on his wife or before entering into an affair with a guy
(he admitted that part), then it would be a brave act. In this case he is
like the athletes who get caught doping and "come clean" only after they
were caught.

McGreevey should resign effective now rather than November 15. When the CT
governor was under fire, there were calls for him to resign immediately from
Democrats. I would if those same Democrats will call for McGreevey to do
the same. Of course, they fear the mayor of Newark becoming governor (a
Republican with some libertarian ideas).

"Jack" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Sam and Ray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Brave? Naw, cowardly to have to come out under duress.

Quoted message said:

Sam and Ray

Okay, for a minute I thought the above read "Brave? Naw, cowardly to have to
come out in a dress." I am sure that is some subconscious homophobic
thought from my Southern, white, straight upbringing.

Quoted message said:

I couldn't figure out why a married governor with children who has an
affair with a man and comes to terms with his sexual orientation would
choose to resign.

He WHAT????????? I thought he balled a chic? You mean he "went queer" on us?
Dammit...

Quoted message said:

He WHAT????????? I thought he balled a chic? You mean he "went queer" on us?
Dammit...

How sad we lost another one from our side.

Quoted message said:

I am sure that is some subconscious homophobic
thought from my Southern, white, straight upbringing.

I bet you have dreams of your mommy spanking you, while dressed in leather
laungerie too?

There's a difference between Rowland (ct. gov.) and McGreevey. Rowland's
wrongdoing was directly related to his duties as governor, and ethical
issues such as bribery/kickbacks, etc. A governor having an extramarital
affair (and really, can't we get over the gay part?) should have nothing to
do with his ability to stay in office.
--But that's just me, I'm also pining for the days when the most serious
lies told in the White House were about blowjobs.

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Sam and Ray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Sam and Ray

How will he come to terms with his wife? He announced he is gay!

Not sure it is a brave act considering he is about to get hit with a

sexual

Quoted message said:

harassment suit. If he had announced this when he made the realization
before he cheated on his wife or before entering into an affair with a guy
(he admitted that part), then it would be a brave act. In this case he is
like the athletes who get caught doping and "come clean" only after they
were caught.

McGreevey should resign effective now rather than November 15. When the

CT

Quoted message said:

governor was under fire, there were calls for him to resign immediately

from

Quoted message said:

Democrats. I would if those same Democrats will call for McGreevey to do
the same. Of course, they fear the mayor of Newark becoming governor (a
Republican with some libertarian ideas).

1) McGreevey has been under investigation for illegal activities that I
believe surround his fundraising. One story I heard is that he has frequent
poker games where donors come to his house and "lose" money. This skirts
the campaign finance laws. Again, no indictment yet.
2) In case you missed it, his lover was given a state job(s) for which he
was not qualified.
3) The said lover is about to file a sexual harassment lawsuit.

As for the lie about the BJs, remember that lie denied a woman her day in
court under a law the Bill Clinton signed and made a big deal over. Utter
hypocrisy.

Also, Bush did not lie. When one knows what he/she is saying to be false,
that is a lie. When one says something he believes to be true based on the
information available, that is not a lie.

"Harry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:S_VSc.17032$gd1.1744@trndny05...

Quoted message said:

There's a difference between Rowland (ct. gov.) and McGreevey. Rowland's
wrongdoing was directly related to his duties as governor, and ethical
issues such as bribery/kickbacks, etc. A governor having an extramarital
affair (and really, can't we get over the gay part?) should have nothing

to

Quoted message said:

do with his ability to stay in office.
--But that's just me, I'm also pining for the days when the most serious
lies told in the White House were about blowjobs.

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Sam and Ray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Sam and Ray

How will he come to terms with his wife? He announced he is gay!

Not sure it is a brave act considering he is about to get hit with a

sexual

Quoted message said:

harassment suit. If he had announced this when he made the realization
before he cheated on his wife or before entering into an affair with a

guy

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(he admitted that part), then it would be a brave act. In this case he

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

like the athletes who get caught doping and "come clean" only after they
were caught.

McGreevey should resign effective now rather than November 15. When the

CT

Quoted message said:

governor was under fire, there were calls for him to resign immediately

from

Quoted message said:

Democrats. I would if those same Democrats will call for McGreevey to

do

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the same. Of course, they fear the mayor of Newark becoming governor (a
Republican with some libertarian ideas).

No, I have dreams of your mother doing that.
"TheBillRodgerz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am sure that is some subconscious homophobic
thought from my Southern, white, straight upbringing.

I bet you have dreams of your mommy spanking you, while dressed in leather
laungerie too?

Well, Pretty - I think the other foot is about to fall, so to speak.
There's obviously a lot to this story. Governor McGreevey obviously
felt that it was important and the right thing to do. Although we
supported our man Clinton in the 90's, his behavior about the Lewinsky
affair was deplorable. He should have come clean about that, too.

Sam and Ray

On 12 Aug 2004 20:47:15 -0500, J Golden <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I couldn't figure out why a married governor with children who has an
affair with a man and comes to terms with his sexual orientation would
choose to resign. However, the sexual harassment charge makes it
understandable.

He didn't "go queer" William, he is queer. Did you hear what he said
in the press conference?

Sam and Ray

On 13 Aug 2004 02:00:08 GMT, [email hidden] (TheBillRodgerz)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I couldn't figure out why a married governor with children who has an
affair with a man and comes to terms with his sexual orientation would
choose to resign.

He WHAT????????? I thought he balled a chic? You mean he "went queer" on us?
Dammit...

Sam (nice name by the way) we think he's brave because he's coming out
before the other foot falls and he's not hiding or lying about it.
That doesn't mean what he did is okay - he obviously regrets the
infidelity, but he's not wasting taxpayer time and money lying about
it. It will be interesting to see how this pans out. We're proud of
him for saying what he did - not for doing what he did. make sense?

Sam and Ray

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:51:18 GMT, "Sam" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Sam and Ray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Governor McGreevey is also a great runner. We hope he can come to
terms with his wife. His announcement today was a very brave act.
Way to go, Guv!

Sam and Ray

How will he come to terms with his wife? He announced he is gay!

Not sure it is a brave act considering he is about to get hit with a sexual
harassment suit. If he had announced this when he made the realization
before he cheated on his wife or before entering into an affair with a guy
(he admitted that part), then it would be a brave act. In this case he is
like the athletes who get caught doping and "come clean" only after they
were caught.

McGreevey should resign effective now rather than November 15. When the CT
governor was under fire, there were calls for him to resign immediately from
Democrats. I would if those same Democrats will call for McGreevey to do
the same. Of course, they fear the mayor of Newark becoming governor (a
Republican with some libertarian ideas).

Quoted message said:

Also, Bush did not lie.

OMG, you are a grade A [censored]! That [censored] lil' weasel lies before his
morning coffee, repeatedly, deliberately! He is a lieing, degenerate, scumbag,
draft-dodging coward! Even assuming he didn't know, it is his responsiblity to
MAKE SURE HE KNOWS WHAT THE F*** HE'S TALKING ABOUT before he illegally, and
immorally invades a soverighn nation.
Published on Tuesday, August 10, 2004 Misuse of Strength
At Camp Pendleton last week, [censored] Cheney stated that “terrorist attacks are
not caused by the use of strength. They are invited by the perception of
weakness.” Nonsense! If that were true, the 2001 attacks would have happened
anywhere else but here. The US was and is the strongest nation militarily and
financially; the targets were the very symbols of that strength. It is not
weakness, but the heavy-handed misuse of strength that invites attacks.
Strength can be used to empower others and build them up, inspiring partnership
and mutuality. Or it can be used to bully others and control them, which
inspires hatred and revenge. The first use of strength builds hope, the second,
hopelessness. And hopeless people do desperate things.
At the time of the 2001 attacks, Middle Eastern hostility toward the US was
primarily based on US support of Israel’s right to security over and above
Palestine’s right to an unoccupied sovereign state. That continues to be a
core issue. Bush’s support of Sharon, as he bulldozes Gaza, adds to his
illegal settlements and walls off other parts of the Palestinian West Bank, is
deepening the resentment among Arabs and Muslims.
In the background are decades of US employment of puppet bullies (the Shah,
Saddam), no matter what they did to their people, in order to control Mideast
oil.
The average US citizen has no grasp of what US actions and policies in the
Middle East mean to those who suffer from them, and no grasp of the hatred they
inspire. We need to know this: as long as our government uses strength in a
heavy-handed, bullying way, that strength will continue to spread hatred and
hopelessness. And it is hatred and hopelessness in response to a bully that
breed vengeful suicidal attacks.
After the 2001 attacks, the US had a choice: we could have used intelligence to
find and bring to trial those who planned and subsidized the attacks (they are
still free) while reaching out to the larger Arab and Muslim community, people
who were not responsible, to deal with their justified grievances. We could
have used our strength to apologize for past harm, to heal old wounds, and to
empower the peoples of the Middle East to work toward their own
goals—dialogue without bullying, sovereignty without occupation, and control
of their own resources. That use of strength could have eventually led to
respectful cooperation, could have built hope.
We could have joined with all the other nations that shared our shock and
grief, acknowledged that we are all in this together, reaffirmed the treaties
we had just (since January 2001) renounced, and invested our billions in
attacking hunger, disease, and other causes of despair. That use of strength
could have built hope.
Instead, we repeated the kind of bullying that inspired hatred in the first
place. We invaded a country that posed no threat but had enviable oil reserves.
We killed twelve thousand civilians (a new study says 37,000) , imprisoned tens
of thousands, most without reason (Red Cross), permitted a systematic pattern
of torture and abuse (Taguba report, Red Cross, civil rights groups). We have
co-opted Iraqi oil, dictated their constitution, shut out opposing views, and
are digging in with several permanent military bases.
Now the US has appointed another longtime CIA-backed strongman (with similar
credentials as Saddam Hussein had when he was hired), widely distrusted by the
Iraqi people, as prime minister. A week before he took office, Mr. Allawi is
reported to have shot dead 6 alleged but as yet untried insurgents. Is this
democracy? Does this herald the dawn of human rights and the rule of law in
Iraq? Or does that matter as long as he answers to us?
"Sixteen months ago, Iraq was a gathering threat to the United States and the
civilized world. Now it is a rising democracy, an ally in the war on terror and
the American people are safer for it," or so claims [censored] Cheney.
That may be all we see in the mainstream media; what does the rest of the world
see? Before the 2003 US invasion, Iraq was not a threat to anyone. Now it’s a
puppet state pretending to be a democracy, a cash cow for US corporations
policed by a hired thug who will protect their interests.
The Iraqi people still have only sporadic electricity and sewage in the
streets, but they have, thanks to KBR contracts, several growing US military
bases, and the world’s largest US embassy. A strong majority of Iraqis think
of the US as occupiers, not allies. Any Iraqis who want their country to be
free from US military and corporate control have no voice, no place, and no
hope.
Middle Eastern Arabs and Muslims, and other peoples around the world, see the
“preemptive” war policy to mean that whenever the US government wants a
country, for its resources or strategic advantage, it can label that country a
threat and use milita

You know our country is in the crapper when the price of gas goes down only 1
cent, and it makes BIG news on TV. Sorry there dumb-dumber, but you'll lose in
november, know why? Because Bush is the very worse president this country has
ever seen. He has shattered all records on overspending, loss of jobs, record
high unemployment, record high gas prices, record high inflation, record high
lines at soup kitchens and food pantrys, he's quadrupled our national debt,
he's dragged us into a idiotic war, changed us from the envy of the world to
being one of the most hated countrys on earth, he wants to quit the UN, bring
back the draft (he'll need lots more people to die for him in his next war),
and in a recent poll of the worlds leaders GWB was voted the top threat to
world peace today. Every decision he has made has been a disaster. There is no
question his judgement is the worse we've ever seen. There really is only
reason you'd still vote for him, you just can't stand the thought of dems
taking power again. We need somebody new, ANYBODY but Bush. You know that
really is too bad, because on nov 2nd when we hand the chimp his butt on a
platter, you'll be a very, very unhappy (more than usual) man. So if I were a
republican I'd whine too, but only because I wasted my vote on such a FU as GWB
in the first place, and I sure as hell wouldn't vote for Bush again. Nobody
anywhere, in history, has ever done the kind of damage that this jerk has done
in 4 years. How many buttknobs can bankrupt TWO oil companys in oil-rich Texas?
After taking over the country with billions in surplus, it took him 6 short
months to bankrupt the country. I mean I could go on, but it is very plain that
NOBODY, ANYWHERE, EVER, did anywhere near the damage he has done, and nobody
could possibly do a worse job. He's the worse president this country has ever
had in our entire history, only possibly topped by his idiot father.
http://www.thousandreasons.org/listB.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0514-14.htm
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushresume.htm
http://www.totse.com/en/politics/political_spew/awarmongerexpl169226.html
http://www.cafeshops.com/votebushout
Use your brains, vote for http://www.johnkerry.com/
http://www.awolbush.com/
Here are three reasons to vote for someone other than Bush.
1. His overly optimistic, "my way or the highway" foreign policy has alienated
us from the rest of the world and the strategy has proven a failure. He needs
to listen to his more diplomatic advisors, such as Powell and Rice, rather than
Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Will he do this? I do not see it happening.
2. Civil liberties. Bush has strongly supported the flawed, knee jerk reaction
to terrorism known as the Patriot Act. His unwilligness to relent, despite
proven Constitutional offenses this Act has caused, is simple irresponsible. He
also continues to push for DOMA and other legislation which would make law the
continued inequality for gays and lesbians, not to mention trying reinstate the
draft.
3. Fiscally irresponsible. Bush has allowed for and contributed to, the largest
spending spree on both foreign and domestic policy. It is simply bad economic
policy to cut taxes while also increasing spending, even in a recession.
Government is getting bigger and more intrusive under Bush, supposedly a
conservative, than it did under the more liberal Clinton.
My vote will go to the Democrat candidate who supports civil liberties, smaller
government and free enterprise, John Kerry. Nobody, even if they tried, could
possibly do a worse job of leading our country than Bush has.
1. 2,250,000 missing jobs
2. 700+ Billion dollar deficit
3. 1900+ dead Americans in Bush's wars

Quoted message said:

No, I have dreams of your mother doing that.

I'm not surprised, she's been dead for years and years, and must be pretty
nasty by now, so I now know necrophelia is your thing now. Sicko!

Quoted message said:

Did you hear what he said
in the press conference?

Why would I want to listen to a [censored]?

It's too bad that you're a homophobe, William, because we actually
share the same concerns as you regarding Dubya. You are a mystery -
quite paranoid and mean-spirited, but a mystery nonetheless.

Sam (Ray is still at work).

On 13 Aug 2004 18:21:57 GMT, [email hidden] (TheBillRodgerz)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also, Bush did not lie.

OMG, you are a grade A [censored]! That [censored] lil' weasel lies before his
morning coffee, repeatedly, deliberately! He is a lieing, degenerate, scumbag,
draft-dodging coward! Even assuming he didn't know, it is his responsiblity to
MAKE SURE HE KNOWS WHAT THE F*** HE'S TALKING ABOUT before he illegally, and
immorally invades a soverighn nation.
Published on Tuesday, August 10, 2004 Misuse of Strength
At Camp Pendleton last week, [censored] Cheney stated that “terrorist attacks are
not caused by the use of strength. They are invited by the perception of
weakness.” Nonsense! If that were true, the 2001 attacks would have happened
anywhere else but here. The US was and is the strongest nation militarily and
financially; the targets were the very symbols of that strength. It is not
weakness, but the heavy-handed misuse of strength that invites attacks.
Strength can be used to empower others and build them up, inspiring partnership
and mutuality. Or it can be used to bully others and control them, which
inspires hatred and revenge. The first use of strength builds hope, the second,
hopelessness. And hopeless people do desperate things.
At the time of the 2001 attacks, Middle Eastern hostility toward the US was
primarily based on US support of Israel’s right to security over and above
Palestine’s right to an unoccupied sovereign state. That continues to be a
core issue. Bush’s support of Sharon, as he bulldozes Gaza, adds to his
illegal settlements and walls off other parts of the Palestinian West Bank, is
deepening the resentment among Arabs and Muslims.
In the background are decades of US employment of puppet bullies (the Shah,
Saddam), no matter what they did to their people, in order to control Mideast
oil.
The average US citizen has no grasp of what US actions and policies in the
Middle East mean to those who suffer from them, and no grasp of the hatred they
inspire. We need to know this: as long as our government uses strength in a
heavy-handed, bullying way, that strength will continue to spread hatred and
hopelessness. And it is hatred and hopelessness in response to a bully that
breed vengeful suicidal attacks.
After the 2001 attacks, the US had a choice: we could have used intelligence to
find and bring to trial those who planned and subsidized the attacks (they are
still free) while reaching out to the larger Arab and Muslim community, people
who were not responsible, to deal with their justified grievances. We could
have used our strength to apologize for past harm, to heal old wounds, and to
empower the peoples of the Middle East to work toward their own
goals—dialogue without bullying, sovereignty without occupation, and control
of their own resources. That use of strength could have eventually led to
respectful cooperation, could have built hope.
We could have joined with all the other nations that shared our shock and
grief, acknowledged that we are all in this together, reaffirmed the treaties
we had just (since January 2001) renounced, and invested our billions in
attacking hunger, disease, and other causes of despair. That use of strength
could have built hope.
Instead, we repeated the kind of bullying that inspired hatred in the first
place. We invaded a country that posed no threat but had enviable oil reserves.
We killed twelve thousand civilians (a new study says 37,000) , imprisoned tens
of thousands, most without reason (Red Cross), permitted a systematic pattern
of torture and abuse (Taguba report, Red Cross, civil rights groups). We have
co-opted Iraqi oil, dictated their constitution, shut out opposing views, and
are digging in with several permanent military bases.
Now the US has appointed another longtime CIA-backed strongman (with similar
credentials as Saddam Hussein had when he was hired), widely distrusted by the
Iraqi people, as prime minister. A week before he took office, Mr. Allawi is
reported to have shot dead 6 alleged but as yet untried insurgents. Is this
democracy? Does this herald the dawn of human rights and the rule of law in
Iraq? Or does that matter as long as he answers to us?
"Sixteen months ago, Iraq was a gathering threat to the United States and the
civilized world. Now it is a rising democracy, an ally in the war on terror and
the American people are safer for it," or so claims [censored] Cheney.
That may be all we see in the mainstream media; what does the rest of the world
see? Before the 2003 US invasion, Iraq was not a threat to anyone. Now it’s a
puppet state pretending to be a democracy, a cash cow for US corporations
policed by a hired thug who will protect their interests.
The Iraqi people still have only sporadic electricity and sewage in the
streets, but they have, thanks to KBR contracts, several growing US military
bases, and the world’s largest US embassy. A strong majority of Iraqis think
of the US as occupiers, not allies. Any Iraqis who want their country to be
free from US military and corporate control have no voice, no place, and no
hope.
Middle Eastern Arabs and Muslims, and other peoples around the world, see the
“preemptive” war policy to mean that whenever the US government wants a
country, for its resources or strategic advantage, it can label that country a
threat and use milita

You know our country is in the crapper when the price of gas goes down only 1
cent, and it makes BIG news on TV. Sorry there dumb-dumber, but you'll lose in
november, know why? Because Bush is the very worse president this country has
ever seen. He has shattered all records on overspending, loss of jobs, record
high unemployment, record high gas prices, record high inflation, record high
lines at soup kitchens and food pantrys, he's quadrupled our national debt,
he's dragged us into a idiotic war, changed us from the envy of the world to
being one of the most hated countrys on earth, he wants to quit the UN, bring
back the draft (he'll need lots more people to die for him in his next war),
and in a recent poll of the worlds leaders GWB was voted the top threat to
world peace today. Every decision he has made has been a disaster. There is no
question his judgement is the worse we've ever seen. There really is only
reason you'd still vote for him, you just can't stand the thought of dems
taking power again. We need somebody new, ANYBODY but Bush. You know that
really is too bad, because on nov 2nd when we hand the chimp his butt on a
platter, you'll be a very, very unhappy (more than usual) man. So if I were a
republican I'd whine too, but only because I wasted my vote on such a FU as GWB
in the first place, and I sure as hell wouldn't vote for Bush again. Nobody
anywhere, in history, has ever done the kind of damage that this jerk has done
in 4 years. How many buttknobs can bankrupt TWO oil companys in oil-rich Texas?
After taking over the country with billions in surplus, it took him 6 short
months to bankrupt the country. I mean I could go on, but it is very plain that
NOBODY, ANYWHERE, EVER, did anywhere near the damage he has done, and nobody
could possibly do a worse job. He's the worse president this country has ever
had in our entire history, only possibly topped by his idiot father.
http://www.thousandreasons.org/listB.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0514-14.htm
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushresume.htm
http://www.totse.com/en/politics/political_spew/awarmongerexpl169226.html
http://www.cafeshops.com/votebushout
Use your brains, vote for http://www.johnkerry.com/
http://www.awolbush.com/
Here are three reasons to vote for someone other than Bush.
1. His overly optimistic, "my way or the highway" foreign policy has alienated
us from the rest of the world and the strategy has proven a failure. He needs
to listen to his more diplomatic advisors, such as Powell and Rice, rather than
Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Will he do this? I do not see it happening.
2. Civil liberties. Bush has strongly supported the flawed, knee jerk reaction
to terrorism known as the Patriot Act. His unwilligness to relent, despite
proven Constitutional offenses this Act has caused, is simple irresponsible. He
also continues to push for DOMA and other legislation which would make law the
continued inequality for gays and lesbians, not to mention trying reinstate the
draft.
3. Fiscally irresponsible. Bush has allowed for and contributed to, the largest
spending spree on both foreign and domestic policy. It is simply bad economic
policy to cut taxes while also increasing spending, even in a recession.
Government is getting bigger and more intrusive under Bush, supposedly a
conservative, than it did under the more liberal Clinton.
My vote will go to the Democrat candidate who supports civil liberties, smaller
government and free enterprise, John Kerry. Nobody, even if they tried, could
possibly do a worse job of leading our country than Bush has.
1. 2,250,000 missing jobs
2. 700+ Billion dollar deficit
3. 1900+ dead Americans in Bush's wars