by It’s interesting, thinking about the upcoming Presidential election and who to vote for. I’ve heard and read of many people on all sides of the issues bemoaning the fact that the two major candidates are either fuzzy about who they are as a ploy to get the center votes. Either that, or the idea that certain promises and stances that the hearer believed the candidate really had were not followed once elected.
A relative of mine believes that she should vote her conscience and is voting for Peroutka of the Constitutional Party. She believes it’s not an option to just vote for the lesser of two evils.
Along this line, Allan Wall states in his recent column that the evangelicals are big enough that they shouldn’t just roll over or capitulate to the Republican party because he’d be better than Kerry.
On the other hand, there are a multitude of articles talking about how Kerry is being anything other than himself during this campaign.
Robert Novak states that one of the biggest things for the Dems is judicial selection in the next term, even though it isn’t mentioned much. There is a lot of people out there that believe that the Supreme Court gave President Bush the victory in 2000 and believe that if Bush has his way that he will get anti-abortion, anti-gay rights people on the bench who will immediately begin imposing their will on the people. Kind of like the way the courts are doing it now.
Then of course is all the commotion caused by accounts that Kerry reenacted some of his war footage, that he doesn’t know where he stands on issues– standing in the grey as much as he can.
So, who to vote for? The important thing is to vote because your voice must be heard. They question of who is best decided by you. Conscience? Best chance to win? What would happen if all voted conscience? It’s an interesting question.
I’m voting for the president for the following reasons:
-All in the U.N. security council had information saying Saddam did have WMD. Did they do anything about it? No. But the President did.
-The Senator spoke up last night and said he’ll make our military strong. Did his voting record reflect the rhetoric? No. But the President budgeted and supported our troops. Senator Kerry? No.
-For all the hopeful, non-negative plea the Senator gave last night, why has he not reigned in the people who are most responsible for the negativity currently (they were mostly all in the convention)? Those who depict the President as akin to Hitler (MoveOn.org); 9/11 (Michael Moore); Mike McAulife, who questioned the Presidents service and called him a ‘desserter’; Al Sharpton and those at the NAACP who depict Ms. Rice and Mr. Powell as puppets of the administrations (never mind Ms. Rice now holds the highest office for a black woman in any administration).
-Senator Kerry had decades in office. What has he accomplished? …………
Most importanly….Kerry is pro-death. From embryonic stem cell research (adult stem research shows much more promise) to abortion in demand. He has fostered a culture of death for the unborn. As always, he’s personally against it, but votes otherwise. That’s worisome. The man is truly for sale. By using his logic, he may personally be against stealing, but will do so if it’s (politically) expedient.
No. The only candidate I’d urge anyone to vote for is for the President. Those on the extreme left are what’s wrong with our country today. Their hair may look more straigh cut and shorter, but make no mistake the spirit of the ’60’s still drive many in the Democratic party. You can dress them up, but they’re still flower children at heart.
I think I’ll open a forum topic about this! we can discuss it there.