Press Action

Trusting Democrats: A Familiar Trap

Posted 02/24 |

You must register to comment.

“I’d rather vote for something I can tolerate and get it than vote for something that seems ideal and get something I can’t stand.” -Me

That’s my version. The problem with the comment made by Eugene Debs is that he doesn’t just not get what he wants. He might end up getting the polar opposite of what he wants. And let’s not concern ourselves only with the things that the candidates are saying and who we like the best on those grounds but let’s also consider who may or may not do the best job. Nader might talk a good game but, for a variety of reasons, he might also make a terrible president. Ass it turns ot, Bush’s bite is worse than his bark (yes, read that again--he’s less than meets the eye), and perhaps Kerry, once past the election, would prove the opposite--that he is a more capable president than it appears he would be. Don’t forget that he is still that guy who ran around the country for three years after his term in Vietnam to help facilitate the end of it. I’m not backing off my support of Ralph to run, but anybody who, in an effort to bolster Nader, paints Kerry as the proverbial sell-out choice, loses credibility with me right away.

Posted by Tom from on 02/25 at 11:52 AM

I don’t see why. I don’t see where Kerry would be even as good as Clinton - pathetic enough as far as I’m concerned. In addition to the encyclopedia of reasons Mickey has enumerated above - and incidentally Mickey, I’d be interested to know how you are able to call all that up. Is that all in your head? Or do you go to the files? In all seriousness, I would really appreciate your answering this. About Clinton i.e. Kerry. Take Iraq. Clinton was even worse than Bush I in my book, because he presided over a greater proportion of slaughter in Iraq in his administration. Bush I 130,000 in the war, and then 2.5/10ths of the fatalities attributed to sanctions - some 1.7 million or so, half of them children under five. This doesn’t speak to the misery of the survivors. In other words the so-called lesser evil is the same evil in spades. Same blood-thirsty power-maniac parading as a democrat, small “d.” I agree totally with the argument Mickey makes here, and Mark before and wish I could write them. Thanks Mickey. And as to Debs, he did get the polar opposite of what he wanted. A ten year jail term for opposing WWI. But he ran for President from jail, garnering some absurdly high percentage of the vote.

Posted by Tracy McLellan from on 02/25 at 12:30 PM

How is it possible for anyone to say anything good about Kerry based on his remark that Vietnam was only a “mistake,” and that the horror inflicted upon that country was not representative of U.S. military activity abroad?
Isn’t that enough to tell anyone that he must not be allowed to serve us, that his so-called efforts to end the Vietnam war are about as noteworthy as his stance against Bush’s escalation of atrocities in Iraq?
Sleep well, Richard Oxman

Posted by Richard Oxman from on 02/29 at 12:02 AM