My final thread on John Kerry, I promise. Options

[*CrackedRearView*]

This is a formal challenge to all who plan on voting for John Kerry. I know this is going to be hard, because it's a 12 minute documentary created by the Republican National Committee, and I understand that that's an immediate turn-off. But just follow me on this.

http://www.kerryoniraq.com/

Go there and watch the documentary. What's special about this documentary is that it's Kerry's words over time, on not only this Iraq war but the last as well, taken directly from newscasts. There's a clip of Howard Dean and some news footage from various stations, but it's almost exclusively Kerry talking. It follows his stances from 1998, as one of the only men in the Senate urging a war on Iraq, to 2004, where he considers himself an "anti-war candidate," and a possible (almost certain) motive for his policy reversal.

So my challenge is to watch this video. Its hard to consider yourself fully informed about your candidate without understanding where he's voting and why, and this gives very interesting information about his thought process and voting records through the years.

Now, I know there are lots of reasons to vote for Kerry. You like what he'll do with the economy, you like paying taxes, you like an unpredictable government, you think he might actually do this health care thing like he says he will. But if you honestly think he's a good man to run our foreign policy, watch this, and then tell me why you think that. And if you can still wave your "UnBush 2004" sign and tell me he's our best option for commander-in-chief, then there's nothing else I can say to change your mind on the fact that this man is a complete idiot when it comes to foreign policy.

And that, my debate colleagues, will be my final topic on John F. Kerry.

[ComradeRed]

You do realize our government is broke right? Not as in broken, but as in no cash. Bush's 1 point something trillion dollar tax cut was so f***ing retarded that many supports of Bush in the economic community have shied away.

Actually, most supporters of Bush in the economic community shied away because HE RAISED SPENDING -- Bush raised spending more than any other President since FDR ... Of course the deficit is going to go up.

The tax cuts themselves aren't bad, it's just when you cut taxes AND raise spending at thes ame time that math doesn't work out.

I'd sure as hell be willing to pay higher taxes if I knew that I'd be helping the government out of debt.

Then mail Bush a check. 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC. Nobody's stopping you. Don't want to? Then I guess you aren't willing to pay higher taxes after all -- you are just willing to force others to pay higher taxes.

We had a f***ing surplus in the government before Bush stepped in. People in government were actually running around going, where am I gonna spend money now.

That's the problem -- we spent too much money.

We had a yearly surplus -- but we still had a deficit overall.

Then Bush steps in and out sprouts the red ink. I'm not saying Kerry is any better since Democracy sucks, but this is exactly what happens when you put power in the hands of the masses. I mean look at China, 9% growth in the first fiscal quarter, that is f***ing amazing, the US would be lucky to get even close to that in a whole year. China is actually trying to SLOW down it's growth, wouldn't it be great if we could say that in the US?

Fact: Third-world countries grow faster than first-world countries.

The Soviet Union in the early 1930s had the fastest growth rate of any country in history. But now they're toast. Why? Because they couldn't sustain it -- because their economic growth was based on fiat -- much like China's today, only to a much greater extent. Moreover China has no income tax and only a low-rate corporate tax ... but I thought you wanted MORE taxes?

If you will notice, all the rich countries today are Westernized [fairly] capitalist democracies [more or less]. Even in other parts of the world, the richest countries are places like Japan, South Korea, Bahrain, etc. -- all of those places got rich not by 9% economic growth a year, but by a slower sustained rate supported by a fairly high degree of capitalism and the rule of law.

But whoever wins this election, the losers are gonna be us, the common (wo)man. So let's just sit back and let the "voters" decide.

Now that I can agree with. Michael Badnarik for President!! www.badnarik.org