It's time to vote in tommorrow's mid term elections. I don't care who you vote for (Democrats), I only care that you vote (for Democrats). Just remember when you get to the voting booth to ask yourself a few questions.
1. Who lied (Republicans) about Iraq and who died (my brothers and sisters in uniform) since 911?
2. Who(Democrats) will fully execute the 911 Commission's recomendations and who (Republicans) has failed to pass legislation and fully fund the Commissions recomendations?
3. Who (Republicans) have aided and abetted a congressional pedophile?
4. Who (Republicans) invoke's Providence (God) but attack's the poor, the sick, and the elderly?
5. Who (Republicans) claims the power of Christ but forsakes his teachings?
6. Who (Republicans) claims to want smaller goverment but has increased the size of the Federal Government?
7. Who (Republicans) seeks to divide us by race, religion, sexual orientation, economics?
8. Who (Republicans) hate fags and uses them as a wedge issue but then turn out to be homosexuals?
9. Who (Republicans) hate brown undocumented people unless they can use them for cheap labor or cheaper campaign ads?
10. What political party (Democrats) can change the direction of our country, defend our Constitution, care for the least amongst us, and fully equip and arm our millitary?
No, it doesn't matter to me who you vote for. I only care that you vote.
Gratias Tibi Ago Deus
Wonko's Bud
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I understand why you say Republicans grow government too much; I agree. They say they are for small government, but they clearly spend taxpayers' money foolishly. I don't think you can argue Democrats do better, though. Except for Libertarians, politicians spend our money very foolishly.
Also, I agree that intelligence was wrong about WMDs. Remember, however, that we invaded Iraq because Saddam would not allow the weapons inspectors in. That was an act against the UN, not just USA. They dragged their feet, so we went in alone. Bad idea in retrospect? Maybe. But the UN said that's what we should do.
You say Republicans don't care about the elderly and disenfranchised. This is your weakest argument, in my opinion. Many Republicans do, very much, care for them. They just don't think that the government is better than charity. I think the government's spending record proves that truth.
I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I think they both waste taxpayer money and make horrible policies that fleece the public's resources. But I agree--vote your conscience, but just vote.
Pfft. Vote Libertarian!
First, I want to thank you for commenting and I want to also appologize for posting comments twice. Depending on the person I will tend to post your comment without reading them first. Stephanie I don't know what pfft meant but ok. Cole I will respond to part of your comment at this time. The following were found online in about two minutes. Paul Wolfowitz was a senior administation official and Bush advisor. He is considered one of the main archatechs of the Iraqi war.
MAY 9, 2003: Paul Wolfowitz: We agreed on WMD rationale for bureaucratic reasons
The truth is that, for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason [to go to war]. [Wolfowitz, 5/9/03]
From Wikspedia:
Specifically, the stated justification for the invasion included Iraqi production and use of weapons of mass destruction, alleged links with terrorist organizations, and human rights violations in Iraq under the Saddam Hussein government. Bush and his cabinet repeatedly linked the Hussein government to the September 11th attacks, despite the fact that there was no convincing evidence of Hussein's involvement.[39] Saddam Hussein refused to allow weapon inspectors to search for weapons of mass destruction and prove that Iraqi government had nothing to hide.
At the end of 2002, UN inspection teams returned to Iraq. At the time of the invasion, they had searched for alleged weapons for nearly four months without finding them, and were willing to continue.[40][41] However, further delay in military action would have posed problems for an invasion due to seasonally rising temperatures, which would have made use of chemical protection gear unbearable as early as April and risen to around 48C (120F) in the summer.[42] President George W. Bush stated that Saddam's weapons of mass destruction needed to be disarmed, and that the Iraqi people were to have control of their own country restored to them.[43][44]
However, 18 months after the invasion, in an interview with the BBC "From our point of view and from the Charter point of view it (the war) was illegal."
--Kofi Anan, BBC, September, 2004. U.N. Secretary General
I do not deny for one moment that Bush used the rhetoric of the Twin Towers to justify the war on terror. I also do not deny that there have been no WMDs found, and that the Republicans supposed they would be there. Again, I am not a Republican and don't support them as a party.
My argument is that the UN, of which we're a part, told Hussein "If you do not allow weapons inspections--regardless of what we find there or do not find there--we will attack you." He kicked them out, and the UN sat there. The USA felt it was time to act, and I agree. Have we stayed too long? Yes, I believe. But our primary reason for going in was justified.
Professor Cole,
I thought libertarians were supposed to be opposed to the U.S. involvement with the United Nations. "Get us out of the U.N.", is a rallying cry that I have mostly heard from Libertarians.
The war on Iraq was not justified. It is a criminal interprise. While I would not like to see G.W.B. sent to the Hague to stand trial he should be held accountable in the United States under the auspices of the Constitution which he and his supporters hold in such disdain.
Wonko's Bud
Post a Comment