[geeks] just to stir things up, a few predictions

[Patrick Giagnocavo]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 06:34:29PM -0500, Jonathan C. Patschke wrote:
> Is it proportionally longer?  Kerry has had a lot more time to screw
> things up than Bush, but has spent most of his Senate time doing nearly
> nothing.  We need more people in Washington that will do less, so that
> maybe we'll have time to recover from all the crap they've pushed
> through in the last 100 years.

There was Kerry's voting against helping out the Montagnards, one of
the biggest allies of the USA in South Vietnam.  The Vietnamese govt
is still hard on them and would gladly shoot each of them dead, except
it would look bad.

> >so, please tell us the *real* reason you are supporting "waffle house"!
> 
> I've already told you.  If you didn't believe me last time, what good
> will it do for me to tell you again?

I intend to vote for Bush, but for other offices will vote third-party
(as I did in 2002 when I voted Repub state governor but 3rd party for
other offices, considering the rights-trampling of private property
rights even the Repubs here in PA are guilty of).

My take is that Bush at least represents:

a serious attitude towards terrorism; 

understands that lower taxes are a good thing;

kept us out of the disastrous/stupid Kyoto protocol (though it was
dead in the Senate anyways)

and further, has a better team in place (Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc; though
I would like to see Ridge and Mineta at a minimum tossed out)

Do you remember Maddie Albright being confused for a cleaning lady?

The do-nothing talks with North Korea?  

The bombing of civilians in Kosovo?  The support of the KLA?

The pardoning of the FALN terrorists so Hitlery could have her Senate
seat?

Clinton and his "Amerika-sux" administration never met a dictatorship
they didn't coddle or a democracy they didn't alienate.  Vote for
Kerry or help him get elected, and it will be like a darker, more
twisted version of the Clinton years.

--Patrick