Usama Bin Ladin goes to bat for John Kerry. Why?

Way to go PDiddie. I have not been following this argument closely, because those defending Bush are being so lame. I didn't see bin Laden's speech as pro Kerry at all, but an attempt to present his own side of the 911 story. It would take a pretty weak mind to decide on whom to vote based solely on what that man said anyway.

Usama don't need no help. He's got Bush.

I may indeed be being obtuse, Nimh, but I assure you it isn't deliberate. It seems to me, every one of your arguments could be applied to Howard Dean, or the General or even Kucinich for that matter. That's why I deemed them ABB. Why deny it? Many people believe George Bush is profoundly unqualified for the job. Some are better at articulating their arguments than others, but that doesn't make the summary of their criteria any different.

Yes Nimh; it is. It's one of the better, more compelling ABB arguments I've heard, but it's an ABB argument nonetheless. I don't know why that leaves such a bad taste in your mouth. Lots of my favorite people proudly declared themselves ABB a long, long time ago. Based on your argument, who wouldn't you prefer in charge? (DeLay, Nader and Osama Bin Ladin don't qualify as the Democratic Party Representative.)

We knew where our core disagreements were before I asked you what Kerry would do different. I don't understand your position any better today than I did two days ago… do you mine? The summary of your arguments seems to be that Kerry won't be as inept as Bush. I don't agree, but I think the time has past for my opinion to change.

I've looked very hard for a reason to like Kerry. I was going to name my conversion confession thread "OCCOM Flip Flops". I'm neither blind nor stupid. I can see the majority of Bush's shortcomings as clearly as you can. Certainly, his actions fit my politics better than yours, but that doesn't mean I like him.

The problem with Kerry is that there is nothing I can hang my hat on. Flip flopper isn't some clever smokescreen invented by the GOP. It is the inevitable nickname for someone's who's actions it defines so well. Unlike you, I have no idea what John Kerry will actually do, in any situation… and I find that less palatable than my expectations of Bush. I agree that he will carry himself with more grace, poise and that he'll be a much better diplomat. To what end, I have no idea… and that's why I can neither vote for him nor understand endorsement from anything but an ABB perspective.

I have been reading along Nimh, and I have a word of advice for you. Just drop it. I have given up on trying to explain my opinions to Bill. I think that Cheese on his head prevents any and all new information from getting through. You can explain it until you're blue in the face, and he will still come back with, and then go on to tell you that what you're really saying is exactly what he thinks you're saying.

It ain't worth the aggravation.

Wise words oh purveyor of cheese...I for one am on a sabbatical of the pol threads til Wednesday.

Joe...my admiration for Poppy as I've said on countless threads ...keeps growing.

this is the feeling of virtually every person i know that opposes a 2nd bush term. including myself.

so what's wrong with that?

I don't understand what you mean Bill. Could you explain that to me again? And again? And again?

The first time I read that George W. had said he wasn't like his father I said "Uh oh". And he was right and I was right.

There's not much to be said to those who continue to claim that they don't know what John Kerry would do as President. He's been as clear as a man can be be in his speechs, in the information on his website, during the debates and in the many interviews he done during this long campaign. The people I know personally, as opposed to those on this site, who continue to deny that John Kerry has the vision and ideas to correct the errors of this present administration are those who have not spent one day examining the candidate but rather have let others do that and to tell them what to think.

Then there are those who believe that, thus far, this administration has been error-free, that would include the present office holder; in other circumstances such a stance might be grounds for consideration of a cursory mental health exam, our present circumstance is graver than that and ought to placed in the hands of someone with a better grasp of reality, that would be John Kerry.

Joe

A small triumph: My g/f, a registered Republican was polled by the local Repubs yesterday. When they told her to remember to vote for Bush Tuesday she told them she was voting for Kerry...they hung up.

Pan - That may qualify for TWO CHEESECAKES!!

one small step for the panz

Well sure I could, Kicky. But since you seldom add to or take anything away from these discussions, I don't see the profit in it.

Yes, I do think Wesley Clark, too, would be a better President and would succeed better in fighting terrorism than George Bush. In fact, I think Howard Dean would, too. (Not Kucinich though.)

Does that make me an ABB poster?

No.

It makes me a poster who tends to agree more with Democrats than with Republicans.

Can I do a "duh"? Just for this time? Pretty please?

See, I can't argue why someone who would otherwise consider a Republican better fitted should this time vote Kerry instead. Because thats not me. I'm a leftist. I don't subscribe to the Republicans' world view. I'm for social equity. I'm for the UN. I'm for higher taxes. It is only by extreme exception that I'd come across a Republican I'd like better than a mainstream Democrat. So it's not about Bush, himself, though he's obviously been spectacularly inept even according to conservative standards. It's about my values, my world view, my opinions, and how they contrast with that of the right wingers of this world.

I agree more with Dean than with Bush, yes. More with Gephardt than with Bush. More with Kerry than with Bush. More with Edwards than with Bush. "See - you're ABB!", I hear you yelling now. But nope. Because I also agree more with Dean than with Giuliani. Or Schwarzenegger. Or DeMint. Or Cheney. Or Rumsfeld. And I agree more with Wesley Clark than with Giuliani. Or Schwarzenegger. Or DeMint. Or Cheney. And I agree more with Gephardt than with Giuliani. Or Schwarzenegger. Or Cheney. Need I go on?

Thinking either Kerry, or Dean, or Clark, or Gephardt would do a better job than Bush doesnt make me ABB. Because supplant Bush's name with any other prominent Republican of the moment (McCain excepted, perhaps), and you'll get the same answer.

I'm not ABB. I'm simply a leftist. Big surprise.

Yes - Bill - as I see it, Nimh is being perfectly clear, and seeing his position t as ABB is simply being unable to see the world from any POV than a Bushian one.

What we see as positive values, you appear merely to see as NOT being for Bush, Bill - this is only so from a Bushocentric universe point of view.

I cannot understand what you cannot understand - so this is the only way I can conceptualize the problem.

Excellent retort, Bill. And it is exactly the point I was making earlier about you. I recommend you look in the mirror every night before you go to bed and repeat those words. It may take months, or even years, but I'm hopeful that with this repetition, you'll begin to understand the frustration of those who make the mistake of trying to explain their point of view to you.

This is where the flaw in your argument is, Bill:


You're saying, if I can't find a Democrat I'd like less than Bush, I am an ABB voter. Ergo, according to your logic, anyone who would generally prefer "Democratic Party Representatives" over someone like Bush becomes an ABB voter. But how so? If I, or anyone of my ilk, generally prefer a Democrat over a Republican, why would that need to be a negative vote against the Republican? Why couldnt it equally much be a positive vote for the Democrat? Simply because we tend to agree more with the Democrats than with the Republicans?

Again: this is me. A Dutch Green Left voter, son of strident social-democrats. I favour additional regulation to protect the environment. I'm for the right of gays to marry. I insist on stringent gun control. I want to tax wealth not work. And raise those taxes for the upper class. In order to pay for better education, public education, and provide everyone with health insurance. And yes, I favour the International Criminal Court. I prefer any international intervention to be done under the flag of the UN, if at all possible. I believe any prisoner we hold, whether or not he wore a uniform when he was locked up, should have the right of legal review/appeal. I favour diplomacy over bullying, and I don't believe there's only ever one right way to do things, or that it's a sign of weakness to acknowledge you've been wrong. So of course I'm going to prefer most Democrats (minus the isolationist, Kucinich brand) over most Republicans. Thats nothing to do with any personal dislike of Bush, though I share that too. It's to do with ideology, with a set of opinions, with a system of personal values that spans a range of political subjects.

You, I know, have switched from Republican to Reform to Green and back to Republican. To you, politics is to a large degree a question of personality. "Which guy do I like better? Kerry or Bush? Hmm, Kerry is a flip-flopper. Bush seems more straightforward. I'll choose Bush this time." But me, I couldn't give a rat's arse, in the end, whether Kerry is haughty or occasionally opportunistic. What I know is that for twenty years, he's worked to further positions that I generally share. Even if I don't like him as a person, I know that he's firmly on the left half of the American political spectre, and that that means that I can pretty much trust him to do more of what I think is right than your average Republican would - on anything from fighting the greenhouse effect to raising the minimum wage. Thats a positive agenda. Those are that many reasons to support him, like I would support him if his opponent were Chuck Hagel or Bob Dole too.

ABB voters? Those are voters who vote Kerry simply because they are against Bush. Because they hate the guy. I would vote Kerry because I support the American left (however wishy-washy a half-baked, centrist left it is), any day, over the rabid rightwingers who rule the Reps. To my mind, they're simply better.

Perhaps put this way,
(putting on my Bushocentric rose-colored glasses): NO one other than Bush can keep us safe. Only he understands how this country is unique in the world and thus can preserve the peace only through the prosecution of war and not by toadying to other so-called sovereign nations for needless assistance. We shall not entertain the idea that any other person could possibly find the way and believe that any day now the Iraqi people will come to their senses and hug us around our necks, scour their neighborhoods for flowers and terrorists to present to us. And the filthy rich will disgorge billions of investment dollars that will offset the gigantic deficits so far incurred. We know this to be so because God has delivered the message Himself to George and we trust him with our lives, our futures and the fate of our children. Amen. And should any rise to challenge George thus we shall all jeer, make jokes, tell great lies and otherwise divert our ears and eyes from any messenger except that of God and declaim all thus opposed as Anybody But Bushers hopefully rendering them mute.

(glasses removed)

Had George Bush not performed the same filthy politics against John McCain, he might have become President. I, for one semi-middle of the road semi-pinko, would have voted for him, especially if Al Gore had run the same inept campaign against him as he did against GWBush. This campaign ought to be being fought between an incumbent John McCain, and John Kerry as challenger. Then we would have had two statesmen standing for the office, instead of one against a self-deluded failure.

Joe

You gotta stop holding back, Joe.

Why not tell us how you really feel? :wink: