portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

government selection 2004

Kerry will nominate antiabortion judges - screw it, I'm voting for Bush

Kerry and Bush - no effective difference.
This really seals it - Kerry announced at a rally yesterday that he would be willing to nominate antiabortion judges to the federal bench. He's previously indicated that he'll keep the troops in Iraq, that he supports the death penalty, opposes gay marriage, and on and on.

That's enough for me. The Dems are done. I'm casting a protest vote FOR Bush. If the Dems want different they need to nominate a Dem.
Old news 04.Jun.2004 09:17

Crucified Ego

This was a huge misunderstanding if I recall. The point was that the Judge's personal views on something don't matter, only their impartiality while on the bench. He DID say that he wouldn't nominate anyone to the supreme court that would overturn Roe v. Wade, so, I'm fairly comfortable. And if it gets too bad, Canada is a pretty country, no?

-J

NADER 04.Jun.2004 09:42

raider

why vote for either tweedle's? Go with nader.

Because... 04.Jun.2004 10:02

duckie

I'm fairly comfortable in the assumption that Kerry is the lesser of two evils. As bad as Bush is, something tells me that if he gets re-elected, Cuba, Lybia, Iran, North Korea, and Canada all need to watch their backs. Kerry though, I see taking a prolonged pullout from Iraq (which, honestly, is the best option. If we're truly humanitarians, we need to understand that shrub broke it and we need to fix it.) And Kerry won't go starting any more wars.

No more Bush 04.Jun.2004 10:06

wake up

I am not a fan of the two party system but I am less a fan of George Bush. The US can not afford Nader, personally I think people are short sighted when they say that there is no difference between Kerry and Bush (that is just plain Nader propaganda).

Nader has every right in the world to run and you have every right to vote for whom you please. If you want to throw away your vote, go for it. But do not bitch about the Bush adminstrations second term (if he wins, I pray he does not). Did you pay attention in 2000? Voting for Nader is a luxery and after the two Bush wars we must come together and support the only real chance we have to defeat Bush.

Nadar isn't serious, and he's not that great 04.Jun.2004 10:41

Kucinich supporter

I've seen Nadar twice. I value his perspectives, his passion. But he's also not that progressive. He came out against medical marijuana during the 2000 cycle. And he's never in my mind been a truly serious candidate. I think he just likes to come out against the D and R but doesn't seriously campaign. Kucinich is far more progressive and serious.

Nader interviewed by Pat Buchanan 04.Jun.2004 11:15

James

It's refreshing to see articulate discourse in politics, but Nader has once again proven he's a nut in this interview w/ Pat Buchanan, in Buchanan's new bi-weekly American Conservative.

Ralph Nader: Conservatively Speaking
 http://www.amconmag.com/2004_06_21/cover.html

PB: Let me move to the social issues. Would you have voted against or in favor of the ban on partial-birth abortion?

RN: I believe in choice. I don't think government should tell women to have children or not to have children. I am also against feticide. If doctors think it is a fetus, that should be banned. It is a medical decision.

PB: Between the woman and her doctoró

RN: And whoever else, family, clergy.

There you have it. Nader supports banning abortion after 8 or 10 weeks (when the embryo becomes a fetus), basically outlawing abortion for many women, since many will never know they're pregnant before the 8th week.

Kerry's position is exactly correct. No litmus test should be applied to federal judges other than their ability to understand and uphold the principles of the Constitution.

Nader, on the other hand, is nutty.

Kerry 04.Jun.2004 15:12

Jason

Wanna bet a million dollars Kerry starts at least 1 war? Oh please, I could put the money to good use. It is a no brainer.

Kerry is an imperialist and will start wars.

That is the truth. Read his own words. Face the situation

Boys & Girls 15.Jun.2004 02:15

A Pragmatist

The REALITY in America on November 2, 2004, will either be dubya or Kerry. That's simply the choice, end of story, and dubya is scary as hell. Honestly, it's babes in wonderland talkin' about votin' in protest for dubya, Nader, et al., that'll end up stickin' us with dubya for four more years. Did we learn nothing in 2000? What'll it be, folks? This ain't a game, so get real at the polls. Please vote for Kerry, or our beloved America may be lost to us forever. This is THE election of our lives, so let's not blow it!

"pragmatist" Learned NOTHING in 2000 18.Jun.2004 02:02

-

and what specifically was it that you "learned"?

that Democrats rolled over and played dead while Republicans used the Supreme Court to install their candidate?

that 'votes' were accurately tallied and counted in the pResidential Selection?

that ALL CITIZENS were given EQUAL OPPORTUNITY to CAST their votes in the 2000 election?

polls show that Bush's approval rating has climbed back over 50% in the wake of Reagan funeral propaganda, and that 57% of Americans approve of the illegal invasion of Iraq. 14 US military bases are being constructed in Iraq.

what's the difference between Bush and Kerry, again?